HomeMy WebLinkAbout1980/03/24 - ADMIN - Minutes - City Council - Regularp.{
t -j
�
H
z
C
�
Q)
u
G
3
,�
H
O
a)
4-1
W
�
G
G
O
W
4—I
Im4
C
0
*--�
u
• •
a)
00
ro
+W
U
a•
�4
N
a
b
o
U
�
F=o
ct
a)
�
.�
o�
CD
1
R
3
C4
U
P�4
H�-+
G
�
cCi
r -i
H
u)
G
H
H
�
U
cd
O
h
cn
6
�
ro
H
•
U
H
W
U1]
G�
P-4
•rl
G
V)
V
• •
p.{
t -j
�
H
FE
cd
�
Q)
u
G
3
,�
a
I
0
a)
4-1
�
�
G
G
O
a)
4—I
Im4
C
0
*--�
u
• •
a)
cd
ro
+W
U
a•
�4
N
a
b
o
U)
�
F=o
ct
a)
�
.�
o�
ro
1
R
3
C4
U
cd
�
G
�
r -i
O'
lo4
cn
•�
�
ro
�
G�
.G
•rl
G
P-+
V
• •
.,�
o
r-+
�4
r--�
U
O
ct
U
T
O
V
i✓
4-1
ro
a)
U
p.{
rz
�
H
�
H
�
. b
� •rl rG U
G O'
u v
cn ro co
1J •r -i U�
s -d w
O 41 a)
rl ri �
ct
OH
R cn ct
a
rZ uo 0
•H G 4-j
V J � I4
C
a) u C Q) u ro
,� a + cn •� a) co a)
U Uy U CD 6H b rU >I
p W •� co
v T �4 ao r --j �4 O
r--; O a O cd ct
ro �4 C: •ri do s 4 )*4
O N O U G a G G p
}-4 •ri 5 4-J CO 4-I
N U O •�
G cd U
U C O to
•ri N 1-►
r� N
p.{
a)
G
f•-+
U
�
Q)
u
G
3
,�
aJ
I
0
a)
4-1
�
'Y7
G
G
Io
4—I
O
0
0
*--�
�
a)
o
cd
ro
+W
U
a•
•r1
N
O
b
U)
�
F=o
U
�
�
r� N
M
p.{
U
G
cr
U
�
•n
u
G
o
,�
aJ
I
0
4-1
00
�
G
rn
ro
4—I
.r�
0
0
*--�
a)
E
ro
�>
ro
1J
0
�4
•r1
N
W
b
U)
�
F=o
U
H
P14
M
'G
'L7
•ri
O
G O O A-
+� O r -i
'L7
a) a
co� o c°n
7 a) ctS wr-
O r U U U cd
E u o r; C
U) (1) ,� o
m U
� E 5 Go U
•� `�C a
cn ° 7 •r� ��,
+J N G
u ri) s�
CCIOG ro; o a) E
JO O ✓
o x �D cn E-+ ? G U
p G M cid ro 4-1
OH O H N
a) a) H G O 4--1
or -i
r- (n •
�4 j cn G G
� U I� G G V � •r{ 't)
O 1✓ ,� cid N .0 4-1
tJ •n ro r -i cn ,z U) co G
•� O0 C14
G O Q) r- i Q4 G 1J
i 4 U) 3 4 r� ✓ (1) �1
4-4 I 1= O O - cd
U •rA r—i U �4 O 4-4 r� a)
O rZ) tJ I r—i 0 1 O -T-I ?4
*H G U ul JW O (1) \�D O 4J
U) ro G) cd G Q.
CO r—I •r--) }4 b a) rd O G
G a) O w (1) I4 rz) 41 a1 •r4 �4 O
S 4 o/cn 4-)G) /U� �cn to N .0
C14 U) . > 4 U) Un r0 0 W V J V) ao r"4
•r, s~ P. ry u G •� c� ro ro
rd ro a. 14 cn o o a u u
�-► O U) U U cn td
.0 OH Q)
Qi Q) aJ () ori •• Ub .0 r --i 4J a.)
do G > o a) rC rl� rn 0 ro • r -i "0
G O Un O F G r—I �4 U ori
off U ro �4 o ro (1) Cl)
lo4 a) a) m r--{ (1) (1) G a) �
Q ;Z� H U H U
p.{
U
G
U
U
�
•n
u
G
o
,�
aJ
I4
�
a)
ro
4—I
.r�
0
0
p
'W
pa
4-j
(1)
IE2
r--1
bo
H
G
b
U)
.�
•ri
ro
1
R
C4
U
cd
'G
'L7
•ri
O
G O O A-
+� O r -i
'L7
a) a
co� o c°n
7 a) ctS wr-
O r U U U cd
E u o r; C
U) (1) ,� o
m U
� E 5 Go U
•� `�C a
cn ° 7 •r� ��,
+J N G
u ri) s�
CCIOG ro; o a) E
JO O ✓
o x �D cn E-+ ? G U
p G M cid ro 4-1
OH O H N
a) a) H G O 4--1
or -i
r- (n •
�4 j cn G G
� U I� G G V � •r{ 't)
O 1✓ ,� cid N .0 4-1
tJ •n ro r -i cn ,z U) co G
•� O0 C14
G O Q) r- i Q4 G 1J
i 4 U) 3 4 r� ✓ (1) �1
4-4 I 1= O O - cd
U •rA r—i U �4 O 4-4 r� a)
O rZ) tJ I r—i 0 1 O -T-I ?4
*H G U ul JW O (1) \�D O 4J
U) ro G) cd G Q.
CO r—I •r--) }4 b a) rd O G
G a) O w (1) I4 rz) 41 a1 •r4 �4 O
S 4 o/cn 4-)G) /U� �cn to N .0
C14 U) . > 4 U) Un r0 0 W V J V) ao r"4
•r, s~ P. ry u G •� c� ro ro
rd ro a. 14 cn o o a u u
�-► O U) U U cn td
.0 OH Q)
Qi Q) aJ () ori •• Ub .0 r --i 4J a.)
do G > o a) rC rl� rn 0 ro • r -i "0
G O Un O F G r—I �4 U ori
off U ro �4 o ro (1) Cl)
lo4 a) a) m r--{ (1) (1) G a) �
Q ;Z� H U H U
City Council m�nutes, March 24, 1980
PUBLIC HEARINGS
6a. 3057 Hampshire Avenue; Application of Sun, Wind & Fire, Inc., for
Resolution No. 6516 variance in side yard requirement at 3057
Hampshire Avenue, as described in Notice of
Hearing published March 12, 1980.
Eric Engelveson, 3053 Hampshire Avenue, opposed the request, noting a
number of lots in the neighborhood contain widths of 40 feet and,
therefore, unusual circumstances did not exist. He asked if a variance
would be required if the house were constructed to face Weat 31 Street.
The Planning Director explained the required side yard on a corner lot
is 15 feet, and the variance being requested was to permit a ten-foot
setback. He continued that many of the area properties had been
developed prior to adoption of the current ordinance code and therefore
had snaller side yards. He said that in the past, such corner loCs had
been determined as having a hardship. He added that the applicant
could place the front door at West 31 Street; however, the shortest
distance on a public street is considered the front lot line, and the
setback requirements would continue to be 30 feet on Nampshire and
15 feet on West 31 Street.�
There being no one further wishing to speak, the Mayor declared the
hearing closed.
It was moved by Councilman Martin, seconded by Councilman Meland, to
waive reading and adopt Resolution No. 6516, entitled "A resolution
granting variance in side yard setback from Section 14-133(3) of the
Ordinance Code related to zoning to permit construction of a single-
family house with side yard setback abutting a street of ten feet
instead of the required 15 feet for property in the R-2, Single-Family
District at 3057 Hampshire Avenue."
The motion passed 6-0.
6b. 4010 Highwood Road
Variance Request
Application of Kenneth Stevens for variance in
side yard requirement at 4010 Highwood Road,
as described in Notice of Hearing published
March 12, 1980.
James Madson, 4004 Highwood Road, summarized his March 26, 1980, letter
(copies presented to Council) addressed to the Board of Zoning Appeals
and containing his opposition to the variance including: confusion as
to exact property line; reduction in air and sunlight; additional
noise and noxious automobile emissions; violation of general Lake Forest
aesthetics; and diminution of market value of 4004 Highwood Road. He
said the applicant had not borne the burden of demonstrating a hardship,
difficulties, etc., as required by the Municipal Code and the granting
of the variance would constitute convenience. He reviewed the cases
referred to in the staff report and suggested they had no
relevance to the application.
��
-77-
U
O
:.t
N
r-4
r -i
c
L
M
c
E
r -i
L�
c
L
cC
M
3
••
t
o
y+
Z
;,r
'r•4
U
cb
C
=�
�
c
r_
r,•
cc
ro
o
c�
U
c•
H
C
•r^i
U
H
OQ
a�
•r�
c
s
ro
1
co
O
/� ro
eli
r-
.c
'U
O
r
r
�
114
H
c
R'
>,
W
a
^
CL
U
O
:.t
N
r-4
r -i
c
L
M
c
E
r -i
L�
c
L
cC
M
3
••
u
n
y+
t.Y
'r•4
U
cb
C
^'
�
b
O
�
U
ro
o
c�
U
c•
H
C
•r^i
U
H
OQ
a�
•r�
c
s
ro
1
co
O
/� ro
U
O
:.t
N
r-4
r -i
c
L
M
c
E
r -i
L�
c
L
�
c
1't
O w
u
c+
y+
t.Y
'r•4
S4
C
C
^'
czOr
O.
N
u
H
�
o
c�
U
♦7J
H
C
tt:.7
H
U
O
:.t
N
r-4
r -i
c
L
M
c
E
r -i
L�
c
r -j
H
ctU
r-4
r-?
0
G
G
L
�
r�
1't
O w
3
3
0
rti
'r•4
S4
C
C
^'
czOr
O.
N
CO
�
o
c�
U
♦7J
H
r -j
H
ctU
r-4
r-?
0
G
G
L
�
r�
•ri
O w
4--J
3
u
�
'r•4
S4
C
�A
^'
czOr
O.
N
CO
�
o
U
♦7J
H
H
A..
•r�
c
s
ro
co
!a
/� ro
eli
r-
.c
'U
O
r
�
�
114
H
Nk
n1
U
•ri
0
w
u
U
L
�
r�
U
O w
4--J
3
C
�
'r•4
c
E
-
^'
U
O.
L
CO
�
o
U
1.r
co
!a
/� ro
eli
r-
.c
'U
O
r
�
�
114
H
c
R'
>,
Nk
n1
U
•ri
0
w
u
U
C
L
�
r�
U
O w
4--J
3
C
�
'r•4
c
=
-
4.{
U
O.
L
CO
�
o
U
1.r
G
'U
O
CT
U
•rte
W
a
^
CL
v
•r�
1%�
a)
.G
Ern
r-1
G
N
rn
•�
d.1
1J
•rr�y
/�
ro
n)
c
O
+
tll
CZ
c�
"o
E
cz
.^
m
r
�
ro
•r;
cU
H
a
=
c'
c
C)
N
0
v
�-o
o
E
N
r-4
-H
N
�,
H
N
►—�
tz
r-4
O
m
r -n
41
c,
a
a
ro
>
G
o
0
o
c.•.
U
E
O
..c
U
E
3
W
�o
cii
G
-w
O
.0
C
U
O
�+
U
Q
al
^
(1?
N
C
L
�
r�
E
O w
4--J
3
C
�
'r•4
c
=
-
4.{
E
O.
C
L
�
r�
E
O w
4--J
3
C
a
c
=
-
E
�
�
o
U
1.r
C
� Q
r�
E
O w
ro
3 0
'7
U
u?
ro
a.
a
H
'd
a1
Vol
cm
CZ
ai
G
ro
E
.r=4 .
U b
G al
c �
U, a)
ro
a�
ro
G
C
U C
a' co
^
U ?,
ro ?4
t0. ro
a
G C
ca ro
E
H
•r� i4
u c
=w
O M
U 7)
G
�, tv
ro
N U
7 ..0
C �
E U
CN >
�
O
H cz
m
r�
0
-
o
'd
a1
Vol
cm
CZ
ai
G
ro
E
.r=4 .
U b
G al
c �
U, a)
ro
a�
ro
G
C
U C
a' co
^
U ?,
ro ?4
t0. ro
a
G C
ca ro
E
H
•r� i4
u c
=w
O M
U 7)
G
�, tv
ro
N U
7 ..0
C �
E U
CN >
�
O
H cz
6e.
City Council minutes, March 24, 1980
The Director of Public Works explained the lights would be placed in the
center of the lot and the lighting would not extend beyond to the
residential properties on West 38 Street.
It was moved by Councilman Elstrom, seconded by Councilman Meland, to
order the improvement and authorize preparation of plans, specifications
and advertisement for bids.
The motion passed 6-0.
Improvement Improvement hearing, Project 80-12, Gorham
Project No. 80-12 Avenue street lighting, as described in Notice
of Hearing published March 12 & 19, 198U.
There being no one present wishing to speak, the Mayor declared the
hearing closed.
It was moved by Councilman :fartin, seconded by Councilman Backes, to
order the improvement and authorize preparation of plans, specifications
and advertisement for bids.
Councilman Elstrom stated that 25 lights in the small area aPpeared
excessive, and she seriously questioned the placement of lights 30Q feet
from one another in commercial areas vis a vis 800 feet apart in
residential areas.
The Director of Public �orks explained the project would be similar to
other commercial/industrial areas within the City.
The motion passed 6-0.
6f. Improvement
Project No. 80-05
Improvement hearing, Project 80-05, west
Library Lane paving, curb and gutter, as
described in Notice of Hearing published
March 12 S 19, 1980.
The property owner at 6506 Walker Street favored the improvement but
opposed elimination of head-in parking as would occur with the proposed
street width of 40 feet.
The City Manager explained that prior to the bidding process, the Council
would be presented alternatives related to parking on Walker Street.
Gerald Zucheroni, Library Lane, explained some area businesses are
seasonal in nature and have variable traffic patterns; therefore, the
traffic counts taken during the last several weeks would not reflect
the overall pattern. He did not oppose the project, but preferred a
combination of head-in and parallel parking on Library Lane.
The City Manager explained that when designing past projects the City
E�ad avoided the inclusion of head-in parking. He said adherence to the
req�iest could require a special design anticipating future traffic
volucnea on Flalker Street.
�
_�n_
. ����
City Council minutes, Mar�h 24. 1980
HArcy Dorn, 33�ih BtoWnla+ Avenue, opposed the project and ite asaessment
in thAt m�ny property o++ners vithin the project area are retired and
heve limited incomes•
The City Manager explained that persons over age 65 may contact the
City'a Aegeaeing Department to deter�ine if they are eligible for
deferred aaseeamenta.
At the request of Cour►cilman Hanks, the City Assessor explained that
reeidential corner lote vould be assessed 25 percent of $16 running the
depth of Che 140-foot streets. The balance would be assessed
spproximntely S4•Z� per front fOi�alfmidblockelotrwouldhbeeassessed6
per front foot. !ie »aid the typ
500. Res ondin
approximAtely $1,000; the corner lots approximately $1, p 8
to Councilmfsn H�eetdfrontefootiassessmentn the11980 figure$isw$6_the
rr�ximum eide at
Donald CuetafRor►, 6500 �81ker Street, favored the improvement but
explained he vaa the owner of the vacanc lots at the corner of Walker
and I.ibrery Lane and aished to have the opportunity to work with staff
on euitable curb cuta to the area•
Cathy Radeaiacher, 3321 BraGmlor+ Avenue, opposed the project.
Laurel T.avrence, 3361 Library Lane, favored the paving but opposed replacing
curb, Whir_h he etated contained no cracks nor drops running to the
high echool lot. He said a storm sewer had been constructed in 1972
but draina�e le poor and water collects in front of his property.
Councilmen Heland noted that previous Council policy in certain
projec.te had been to retain existing curb and extend credit to the
property ovner at the assessment hearing.
The City Hanager explained that the area being discussed was installed
in 1951 and vould not, therefore, be vithin the 20-year guarantee period.
The Director of Public Works stated he Would meet with Mr. Lawrence in
t}ie pra�ect area to ascertain the curb quality; however, he explained
that during street reconstruction it frequently becomes necessary to
make grade changes, thus necesBitating new curb.
Lillian Leeeear, 3412 Library Lane, stated that prior to installing
petmanent atreeC, the City should be avare that sewers did not exist
vithin the street.
The f)icecCor of Public Work� explained the existing water line from
West Ja ke Street ia a private line, and prior to construction, the
City aou1J engure that all properties have the opportunity to connect
to Che public water eysten�.
MK, LeARear r�sked if Che properties to be served by the new line would
hc� .�eaesRed ite entire coat.
-80-
City Council minutes, March 24, 1980
The Director of Public Works stated it could be necessary to place the line at th�
center of the street to serve Ms. Lessear's property and the football
field, anticipating a changed use for the field in the future. He
added it would be a prerogative of the Council to assess the school
property.
Francis Schmit, 3370 Library Lane, representing other property owners,
opposed resurfacing Library Lane. He said the street had a substantial
road bed relative to other streets, and the project would also impose
a financial hardship on the property owners.
Robert Bodeen, 3385 Library Lane, oppose� the project stating the
existing roadway was in adeQsate condition.
There being no one further wishing to speak, the Mayor declared the
hearing closed.
It was moved by Councilman Meland, seconded by Councilman Backes, to
order the improvement and authorize preparation of plans, specifications
and advertisement for bids; the plans for on-street parking shall be
returned for Council approval.
The motion passed 6-0.
6g. Improvement
Project No. 80-16
Improvement hearing, Project 80-16, West 35�
Street/Yosemite Avenue street lig}iting, as
described in Notice of Hearing published
March 12 � 19, 1980.
Dan Motzko, 4129 Wooddale Avenue, presented a petition "protesting the
proposed project, since it would in no way increase the value of the
properties and serve no practical purpose." He suggested the project
be limited to intersectional lighting including underground wiring. He
said traffic during the night was quite nominal. He also requested that
the City repair the cracks in the roadway under the terms of the 20-year
construction guarantee.
At the request of Councilman Backes, the Director of Public Works
exhibited a drawing of the proposed lighting spaced approximately 200 to
300 feet from one another and including a light at the north terminus
of Xenwood Avenue.
Mr. Motzko said although he had been informed it would be too costly,
he would prefer that the poles be placed on alternate sides of the
streets.
Mr. Frantz, 3501 Xenwood Avenue, noted there had been many improvements
to the area within the past three years, greatly improving its appearance;
however, he suggested the property owners must have some control over
the spending of their money, and he believed the project cost could be
reduced. He said he had been paying approximately one-quarter of the
cost to the neighborhood properties. He suggested installing the
lights on alternate sides of the streets, in that both sides are
occupied with the exception of the parkins lot. tie asked stafE to
revise the plsn4. -R�-
�..-...V- --.._ - _. �
City Council minutes, March 24, 1980
It was moved by Councilman Backes, seconded by Councilman Elstrom, to
continue the hearing to April 7, 1980.
Councilman Hanks said he would support the motion, if its purpose were
to limit the plan to intersectional lighting.
Councilman Backes did not believe the Council had been presented adequate
information to act upon the project. He requested preliminary drawings,
reasons and costs, as well as alternatives which are popular with the
property owners.
The City Manager explained that on February 25, 1980, at the time the
Council set public hearing on the project, it was furnished a pre-
liminary engineering report containing the breakdown of all estimated
project costs, an assessment report for the project, and the Capital
Improvement Program background. He agreed that drawings of the lamp
placements were not included. Subsequently the Council was furnished
notices of the public hearing and description and following that,
notices of the neighborhood meeting. He said in the future, the
preliminary engineering report could be copied and attached to the report
for the public hearing. •
Councilman Martin noted many areas of the City had requested midblock
lighting; the subject area had not. He said he would oppose midblock
lighting in the area.
The motion passed 6-0.
6h. Improvement Improvement hearing, Project 80-17, West 36
Project No. 80-17 Street lighting, as described in Notice of
Hearing published March 12 & 19, 1980.
There being no one present wishing to speak,
the Mayor declared the hearing closed.
It was moved by Councilman Meland, seconded by Councilman Backes, to
order the improvement, authorize preparation of plans, specifications
and advertisement for bids.
The City Manager stated that if the Council had no objection, staff
would schedule an assessment hearing prior to awarding the contract on
the project.
The motion passed 6-0.
6i. Improvement Improvement hearing, Project 8Q-08, north and
Project No. 80-08 south Virginia Circle, paving, curb and gutter,
as described in Notice of Hearing published
?tarch 12 & 19, 1980.
-82-
6j.
City Council minutes, t�(arch 24, 1980
Jack Holmberg, 8213 Virginia Circle South, favored the project; however,
he would oppose the 26-foot street width if it would not permit parking
on both sides of the street. He continued he had determined it would
not be necessary to remove trees if the street width were increased to
30 feet.
The Director of Public Works explained the 26-foot width would permit
parking on each side of the street.
Norman Silver, 8212 Virginia Circle South, also opposed parking on one
side only. He asked an eaplanation of the assessment for a corner lot,
including driveway apron.
The City Assessor stated he would meet with persons desiring an
explanation of the estimated assessment, following the public hearings.
The property owner of 2401 Xylon Avenue asked if the paving must include
curb. �
The Director of Public Works explained the Council policy related to
permanent street construction is to include curb and gutter enabling
a 20-year guarantee.
Betsie Slock, 8218 Virginia Circle, opposed the project.
There being no one ftirther wishing to speak, the Mayor declared the
hearing closed.
It was moved by Councilman l7artin, seconded by Councilman Meland, to
order the improvement, authorize preparation of plans, specifications
and advertisement for bids, specifying a 26-foot width and authorizing
parking on both sides of the street.
Councilman Elstrom noted the staff report indicated bids would be sought
on concrete as well as asphalt; she asked the cost of concrete per
front foot.
The Director of Public Works explained that including concrete and
asphalt alternatives in the bid specifications was a method of bidding
the projects to obtain the lowest cost, and staff would recommend the
lowest bid to the Council whether it be for asphalt or concrete.
The motion passed 6-0.
Improv.ement Improvement hearing, Project 79-50, Flag
Project No. 79-50 Avenue sewer, as described in Notice of
Hearing published March 12 & 19, 1980.
Lyle Eakins, 2048 Flag Avenue, believed he had long since paid for the
north trunk line and upon project approval he now would have ita access.
He said the proposal was not a good solution to the problem but he
despaired of any good solution. In that the project would require the
�--
— ---- _ ''s'1�
�
L !
City Council minutes, March 24, 1980
homeowners to install individual grinder pumps to connect the line, he
suggested it would be appropriate that they be assessed no more than
that amount assessed to their neighbors at the time their lateral
was installed, adjusted Co inflation. He noted alternatives included
running through backyards or gravity pumping stations; however, he said
the City did not wish to own, maintain and operate the pumping station,
and neither did he.
Erik Olson. 2054 Flag Avenue, concurred with Mr. Eakins.
Responding to a question from Councilman Hanks, the Public Works
Director explained the line could not be placed under Olson's lawn
because right angles in sewer lines are avoided,and also the line had
been elongated to allow future connections without problems. He said
the plan would place a manhole into the boulevard to minimize street
excavation. He added that the purchaser of Lot 27 would be responsible
for connecting to the line.
It was moved by Councilman Hanks, seconded by Councilman Meland, to
continue the public hearing to April 21, 1980, to allow the property
owners an opportunity.to discuss alternatives with staff.
24r. Olson said he was not opposed to the project and would like sewer
in the atreet;'however, he believed the City should accept some
responsibility in the matter.
The motion passed 6-0.
6k. Bernie's
Zoning Change
Application of Bernard Horovitz to change
zoning to B-2 at 4212 Minnetonka Boulevard
(continued from February 4, 19a0).
Leo Stock, 2814 Huntington Avenue,and Leonard Getzkin, 2912 Glenhurst
Avenue, opposed rezoning for reasons stated at past meetings.
There being no one further wiahing to apeak, the Ma.yor declared the
hearing closed.
It was moved by Councilman Hanks, secanded by Councilman �lstrom, to
deny the request. .
The motion passed 4-2 (Councilmen Meland and Martin opposed).
PETITIONS, REQUESTS AND COA�AiUNICATIONS
7a• Bingo A notice of Intent to Conduct Bingo, The
Eagles at the American Legion Club, Was
orde�red filed by conaent.
-84-
City Council minutes, March 24, 1980
RESOLUTIONS AND ORDINANCES
8a. Fund Depository; Depository for City funds.
Resolution No. 6517 �
By consent, the Council adopted Resolution
No. 6517, entitled "Resolution redesignating
depository for City funds."
8b. Securities; Securities for collateral.
ResoluCion No. 6518
By consent, the Council adopted Resolution
No. 6518, entitled "Resolution approving
securities.for collateral from First Plational Bank of Hopkins, Hopkins,
Minnesota."
8c. Ethics
First reading of Ordinance Code amendment
related to ethics.
It was moved by Councilman Backes, seconded
by Councilman Meland, to waive first reading of the ordinance and set
second reading for Apri1�21, 1980.
It was moved by Councilman Martin, seconded by Councilman Backes, to
change the word "raember" to "officer" on page 78.3, Section 4-602,
line 6.
It was moved by Councilman Martin, seconded by Councilman Elstrom,
that the contribution referred to in Section 4-603(1) shall be $1,000
per person or $2,000 per couple.
Councilman Backes noted that former drafts of the document had indicated
$100, although he would be comfortable with 5200. *iayor McQusid agreed.
It was moved by Councilman Hanks to defer first reading to April 21, 1980.
Councilman Backes withdrew the original motion setting second reading
for April 21, 1980.
It was moved by Councilman Hanks, seconded by Councilman Martin, to
table the item.
The motion passed 4-2 (Councilman Backes and Mayor McQuaid opposed).
8d. Gottstein IR Bonds; Resolution related to Leland Gottstein
Resolution No. 6519 industrial revenue bond request.
By consent, the Council adopted Resolution
No. 6519, entitled "A resolution providing for the issuance and sale
of industrial revenue bond pursuant to Chapter 474, MSA, to provide
funds to be loaned to Leland E. and Mary Gottstein for industrial develop-
ment project and approving loan agreement, pledge agreement, construction
loan agreement combination mortgage, security agreement and fixture
financing statement, lease assignment, guaranty agreement and buy and
sell agreement." -85-
City Council minutes, Harch 24, 1980
REPORTS OP OFFICERS B�AitDS Al�D C�tITTEES
4a. Planning The �1.nutes of the Planning Coawission
Commission meetings held Pebruary 27 and Harch 5, 198p,
and ainutes of the Streets and Highvaqs
Subco�ittee �eeting held February 27, 1980,
vere ordered filed by consent.
9b. Health
Advisory Committee
9c. Human Rights
Co�niss ion
9d. Community
Relations Commission
9e. Board of
Zoning Appeals
9f. Financial
Report
9g. Parks and
Recreation Co�ission
9h. Traffic Study 223;
Resolution No. 6520
The �inutes of the Health Ad�isory
Cammittee �eeting held Febrl.ar� 27, 1980,
vere ordered filed by consent.
The ninutes of the Huaan Rights C•�eaission
meeting held February 27, 19�,4, vere ordered
filed bq consent.
The ainutes of the Ca�runitq RElations
Co�ission meeting held '�arch 13, 1980, veze
ordered filed by consent.
The ainutes of the Board of 7.oning AQpeals
meeting held March 4, 1930, vere ordered
filed bq consent.
The February, 1980, financial report vaa
ordered filed bq consent.
The sinutes of the Parks and Recreation
Co�ission meeting held tilarch 12. 1980, �eTe
ordered filed by consent.
Traffic Study Ho. 223; 1980 load liaits.
It vas noved by Councilnan Backes, seconded
by Councilsan Heland, [o vaive reading and
adopt Resolution No. 6520, entitled "Resolution authorizing placesent
of signs establishing load linits on certain streets in St. Louis Park,
Minnesota," amended by the addition of Oak Le.af Drive and changiag
the Louisiana Avenue locatioa to Library Lane.
The motion passed 6-0.
9i. CH�S Corporation; Coraunity Housing and Service Corporation
Resolution No. 6521 application for final plat apptoval.
I[ was moved by Councilaan Hanks, seconded
by Councilman Meland, to waive reading and adopt Resolution ?to. 6521
entitled "Resolution giving approval for final pla[ of C.H.S.C.
Addition," and authorize ezecution of aaen,d�rent to easesent related to
City parking rights.
The motion passed 6-0.
-86-
�'"' - -- �
City Council minutes, March 24, 1980
9j. Shelard Park; Shelard Development Companies, Inc.,
Resolution No. 652�2 application for special permit to amend
overall plan (deferred from March 3, 1980).
It was moved by Counciltaan Martin, seconded by Councilman Elstrom,
to waive reading and adopt ResoluCion No. 6522, entitled
"A resolution amending Resolution No. 6505, adopted February 25, 1980,
granting permit under Section I4-195(1)(3) of the St. Louis Park
Ordinance Code related to zoning to permit a Commercial and Residential
Development Unit for property located in the B-2, Business District,
and R-B, Residential Business District in Shelard Park."
The motion passed 5-0-1 (Councilman Backes abstained).
9k. Super-Natural Foods; Application of Super-Natural Foods, Inc., for
Resolution No. 6523 special permit to allaw Class IV restaurant
at 8916 Highway 7.
It was moved by Councilman Elstrom, seconded by Councilman Martin, to
waive reading and adopt Resolution No. 6523, entitled "A resolution
granting pet�it under Section 14-156 of the St. Louis Park Ordinance
Code related to zoning to permit a S00-square-foot Class IV restaurant
for property located in the B-2, Business, District at 8916 Highway 7."
The motion passed 6-0.
9L. Rooney Proposal; Application of V.R. Rooney for special permit
4900 Excelsior Blvd. to constuct six-story concrete office building
containing below-grade parking ramp on the
east of Quentin Avenue; a nine-level parking
ramp on the west of Quentin Avenue,for property located in the Planned
Unit Development District (PUD) at 4900-4916 Excelsior Boulevard.
The Planning Director exhibited graphics of the proposal, summarized
the staff report, described adjacent development and displayed a palate
of construction materials. He stated the developer had reduced its
original plan by 22,000 square feet, and also proposed a skyway over
Quentin connecting the two buildings. He said t}ie projected traffic
associated with the structures would be between 2,000 and 3,000 vehicles
per day, flowing along Excelsior Boulevard, West 38 and 39 Streets
toward Minneapolis or Highway 100; the projections also indicated 100
addition.al trips could be contemplated southbound on Quentin.
The Planning Director continued that at its last meeting, the Excelsior
Boulevard Advisory Committee did not take specific action on the
Proposal but had favored it in the past. He explained the staff
traffic study of the area indicated the capacity of Excelsior Boulevard
less than totally used, and during the morning and afternoon peak
periods all intersections had the capacity to carry additional
traffic vith the exception of the Wooddale/Highway 100 ramp where it
Was determine�3 that signal rephasing would improve the flow.
The Planning Director believed Che installation of a left-turn arrow
at Excelsior Boulevard/Monterey Avenue permitting traffic to travel
east on Excelsior Boulevard would discourage traffic movement into the
residential area, and he recoam�ended a similar signal at the Quentin/
-fi 7-
�
City Counci�l minutes, March 24, 1980
Excelsior Boulevard intersection regardless of whether the subject
request were approved.
The Planning Director explained that a three-day survey of the area
parking lots indicated 41 percent average occupancy--59 percent
vacancy. He said a recommendation prohibiting on-street parking north
of E�:celsior Boulevard would perhaps be made in thP future to encourage
use of the existing parking lots. iie said the proposed ramp would be
for the use of building tenants, and the applicant had submitted a
document atating there would be no fee parking at the ramp. He added
that night-time use by others would be at the discretion of the owner;
however, joint use of property would be encouraged and a matter for
the Council to consider.
J
��
John Miller, attorney for the developer, 4530 Excelsior Boulevard,
explained the revisions to the original plan made to overcome the
Planning Director's objections. He said the Housing Authority,
Excelsior Boulevard Committee and Miracle Mile Merchant's Association
had voted to recoa�end the project; the Planning Commission had not.
He noted that in 1976, the Council hired a consultant to study means of
encouraging development in the area and subsequently designated it a Develop-
ment District divided into six areas. He quoted the District's
objectives: encourage and promote economically sound development,
restore the tax base, and revitalize and improve the area as the
heart of the Ci�ty. For the specific area (Area 3), the goals were to
create an intense, diverse office area. He said that in 1977, the ^
City develOped an illustrative plan setting concepts and proposing
major commercial development on Excelsior Boulevard,with the intensity
to lie between Highway 100 and West 36 Street.
Mr. Miller stated the developer did not request nor require financial
help from the City even though the City had attempted to attract
industry by providing concessions. He said the seven-story Medical
Center was taller than the proposal including its eight-story east
tower. He believed if the area were not developed at the present time
it would become blighted, in that the City had been attempting for four
years to attract development without success.
Mr. Miller continued that the building would provide approximately
1,200 employment opportunities for area residents. He also stated if
the City does not want constructLon in the area because it does not
want additional traffic, it should not encourage development. He
noted, however, the proposal was not a retail establishment but an
office building which would generate traffic twice each day--not at
all hours, 365 days per year. He said the taxes generated would not
solve the City's problems but would help. In conclusion, he reEerred
to past development proposals which generated citizen protest and which
received Council approval because it was the Council's responaibility
to make the appropriate decision for the entire City.
David Pyles, 5050 Excelsior BouTevard, stated he represented approximately
20 residente residing on the south side of Excelsior Boulevard in the
vicinity of Quentin and Weat 40 Street who oppose the project. He
requested a public hearing on the matter, and said the opposition was
mainly due to the bulk of the proposal. He asked if the Nousing
Authority's recommended conditiona were part of the consideration.
-
,,
t
�
� '�
City Council minutes, March 24, 1980
Mayor McQuaid explained the Council reviewed the Housing Authority
report and recommendations in December, I979, and at that time gave
approval for the developer to proceed with final plan preparation.
Mr. Pyles referred to the reduction in the parking requirements for the
development and suggested if on-street parking were prohibited it
would increase parking in the Citizen State Bank parking lot. He
disputed staff's traffic projections and said no study had been con-
ducted of staff's findings. He stated he had not reviewed the staFf
report on transportation and parking and could not obtain a copy of
the Comprehensive Plan. He believed the proposal was not compatible
with existing development. He concluded by stating that financing and
feasibility of the project were critical, and he had not heard whether
the developer had provided financial reports or signed construction
contracts. He also did not believe the developer's letter was a firm
guarantee that fee parking would not be instituted.
Angelo Calienno, 4004 Quentin Avenue, discussed PUD zoning and its
intent and spirit and quoted from the Ordinance. He discussed the
advisory committees' recommendations and asked if the Council's intent
was to relocate all existing businesses. He understood that the Planning
Commission was considering a recommendation that all further develop-
ment cease until a new plan had been developed for the area. He did
not believe the proposal compatible with existing development and was
opposed to its approval.
John Hiner, 4000 Quentin Avenue, was concerned that the additional
parking and traffic in the immediate residential area would be
hazardous to children.
Carol Ham, 4967 West 40 Street, opposed the project due to incompatibility,
precedent and impact upon already congested traffic and parking. She
said West 40 Street, Vallacher and Quentin Avenues have sidewalks on one
side of the street or not at all, and she asked that an environmental
assessment work sheet be filed with the �nvironmental Quality Board.
Roger Asplin, Executive Director of the Medical Center, favored good
development on Excelsior Soulevard, but in his opinion, the proposal was
not. He opposed the proposed reduction in the parking requirements
which he believed could have an adverse effect upon adjacent businesses,
causing fencing and monitoring of lots and increasing parking in the
residential areas. He said a precedent would be established in
granting a reduction in the required parking spaces; for example, he
said the Medical Center has future plans to er.pand and would ask for
the same privilege. He noted that city managers and city councils
change but the businesses and residents remain.
Boyd Slatter, 4979 Vallacher Avenue, stated the size of the proposal
was not compatible with eurrounding development, and he shared the
concerns of the previous speakers. He said the proposal would have
no benefit to the neighborhood and as an alternative, sugges[ed
expansion of the sports and health club for the neighborhood's use.
He also referred to the parking problems experienced on Friday and
Saturday nights and the need for an area ramp.
-89- r"',
....,._,
City Council minutes, March 24, 1980
Robert Arnold, 4065 Toledo Avenue, stated the future intersection
construction at Highway 100 and West 36 Street would require traffic
to be routed through the subject area causing additional congestion,
and he also suggested Byerly's traffic could not have been included
in the staff traffic study. He requested Council ai�thorization of a
meeting among residents, developer and Council; he concurred with
the suggestion of an impact study.
Aonald Hanson, 4228 Toledo Avenue, opposed the pro�ect for reasons
previously stated by others. He thought it ironic that for a project
involving his home he was required to involve his neighbors through
the variance procedure, although for the subject project the neighbor-
hood was not informed of the proposal.
Rod Jenkins, 4824 Vallacher Avenue, opposed the proposal for reasons
stated by other speakers.
Emil Walsh, Steenberg Construction Company, project contractor,
stated he had heard similar arguments with respect to other Iarge
developments such as the IAS Center but noted they have been
successful and more are being constructed. He said the economy is
changing, and as an alternative to $4 gasoline and 510,000 automobiles,
the availability of employment opportunities near residences would
-- become increasingly desirable. He described his involvement with the
reconstruction�of Mankato,which required the razing of four city
blocks, and the currenr rehabilitation of many United States cities.
He said it impossible to build anything compatible with what is
�l� located on E::celsior Boulevard. He believed the existing development
would be razed within several years and rebuilt in magnitude, and it
would not be the neighbors who join and rebuild the Boulevard, but a
private developer.
Phil Pickett, 3755 Ottawa for 25 years stated he witnessed past
removal of houses and the subsequent parking lot construction. fle
described the current parking problems on Friday and Saturday evenings
which he believed would be alleviated through evening use of the
developer's ramp and by eliminating parking on West 38 Street. He
, also favored the proposal because area residents could walk to work if
they chose and because Mr. Rooney was not asking the City for financial
concessions.
V.T. Rooney, applicant, asked Council approval. He referred to the
actions of the aforementioned committees favoring the project and
read a letter from the West Suburban Chamber of Commerce also
favoring the project. He explained that the Steenberg Construction
Company would not proceed with the project if it were not assured it
would be paid for its services.
Councilman !tartin opposed further public meetings on the project,
noting the Housing Authority, the neighborhood, the Miracle Kile
Advisory Committee, the Merchant's Association, the Planr.ing Commission
and the evening's discussion appeared to have been an adequate forum
for all positions on the matter.
It was moved by Councilman Backes, seconded b Councilman hlartin, to
authorize preparation of a resolution granting approval for formal adoPti�°
on April 7, 1980.
-90-
City Council minutes, March 24, 1980
Councilman Hanks stated his concerns related to the setbacks, the
project mass and increased traffic, although he suggested the develop-
menC would create additional development in the area and benefit
Miracle Mile: He asked if shared parking would be permitted.
Mr. Rooney stated he would be pleased to have the opportunity to
provide parking in the evening, subject to City indemmification
from liability, damage, etc.
Councilman MarCin stated the responses to his concerns related to
financing and parking had been satiafactory, and future economically
feasible development would be of the eize propoaed. He supported the
proposal.
Councilman Meland said he was satisfied that the project met the
policies of the Comprehensive Plan and the Urban Renewal Plan and was
desirable for the entire City.
Mayor McQuaid stated that 75 percent of the telephone calls she
received over the weekend supported the proposal, and the Council must
consider long-range goals for the City. She di� not want to see
Miracle Mile decay. She said employment opportunities would be an
advantage; however, the City must work to resolve any problems caused
by increased traffic.
The motion passed S-1 (Councilman Hanks opposed).
It was moved by Councilman Hanks, seconded by Councilman Backes, to
authorize traffic signal adjustments to discourage additional traffic
within�the residential areas as previously described.
The motion passed 6-0.
9m. Zoning Ordinance Study of proposed amendment to Ordinance
Amendment Code to permit bea�lty/barber shops in the R-4
and R-B Zoning Districts.
It was moved by Councilman Elstrom, seconded by Councilman Backes, to
not authorize preparation of Ordinance Code amendment.
The motion passed 5-1 (Councilman Martin oppoaed).
9n. Hannon Lake Preliminary engineering report, Project 80-07,
Paving Project East Hannon Lake neighborhood paving, curb
and gutter.
By consent, the Council set public hearing on the improvement for
April 21, 1980. .
-91-
City Council minutes, March 24, 1980
9a. Lake Forest Preliminary engineering report, Project 80-13,
Street Lightin� Lake Forest atreet lighting.
By consent, the Council set public hearing on the improvement for
April 21, 1980.
9p. Commission Policy; Board and commission appointment policy.
Resolution No. 6524
It was moved by Councilman Martin, seconded by
Councilman Meland, to waive reading and
adopt Resolution No. 6524, entitled "Resolution
establishing policies for the selection of inembers to citizen advisorq
boards and coartnissions; setting application expiration, attendance
requirements and terms as chairman," and authorized the City !�ianager to
notify applicante that their applications expire after one year.
The motion passed 6-0.
10a. Appointments
UNFINISHED BUSItiESS
Appointments to boards and cotmnissions.
It was moved by Councilman Hanks to approve
the Mayor's appointment of Thomas Duffy to an unexpired term on the
Housing and Redevelopment Authority.
The motion passed 6-0.
lOb. Belt Line
Boulevard
Costs and alternatives of improvement to
Belt Line Boulevard to serve property at
3200 Belt Line Boulevard (George DuFour).
��
:,
�
w
George DuFour explained the costs of holding the land were high and
therefore it was important that it be developed. He asked the Council to � I�
approve Staff Alternative No. 1(report dated Harch 24, 1980) and
requested that staff be authorized to prepare an engineering feasibility
report and set public hearing on the matter.
Responding to a question from Councilman Hanlcs, the Planning
Director stated that PUD zoning Eor the area had been discussed in the
past; however, the final change did not occur.
Councilman Backes asked if Minneapolis had agreed to extenaion of Belt
Line Boulevard to its West 32 Street. The City Hanager stated it had
not, and the staff proposal called for the roadway construction to ser�+e
3200 Belt Line Boulevard.
Councilman Hanks suggested a dilemma existed in that Hinneapolie did not
agree to extend West 32 Street. Also, Alternetive No. 1 vould cause
St. Louis Park to be responsible for an assessment of $112,545, and the
railroad most likely would not pay its eatimated ehare of $170,631•
�
-92-
��
In,
City Council minutes, March 24, 1980
Mr. DuFour stated Che street improvement was necessary to serve
future development, in Chat France Avenue was only built to a 30-£oot
width. He said he was surprised at the $400,000 approximate cost
to construct Belt Line Boulevard as a 32-foot roadway, but he suggested
the railroad property could be developed in the near future and the
improved road would be needed.
Councilman Backes suggested it would be appropriate that the City
review construction plans for the site prior to authorizing construction
of a road.
Councilman Hanks asked if a deferred assessment would be permitted on
the railroad property. Ile noted in the past assessments had been
deferred on double lots until such time that the second lot would be
developed.
The City Manager explained that a fairly recent court decision appeared
to favor the railroads in such circumstances.
It was moved by Councilman Hanks, seconded by Councilman Martin, to
authorize preparation of preliminary engineering report, plans, specifications
and advertisement for bids on Alternative No. 1; prior to bid award, an
assessment hearing shall be conducted.
The �otion passed 5-1 (Councilman Backes opposed).
lOc. Personnel Community relations coordinator job
description (deferred from March 3, 1980).
It was moved by Councilman Meland, seconded by Councilman Backes, to
approve the job description as presented.
The motion passed 4-2 (Councilmen Martin and Hanks opposed).
lOd. Remodeling Second floor remodeling (deferred from
February 25, 1980).
It was moved by Councilman Hanks, seconded by Councilman Martin, to
approve Alternative No. 2(Drawings 1& 3) as presented.
The motion passed 6-0.
10e. Pension Pension committee; citizen selection.
Committee
The Council received a letter from the Fire
Relief Association appointing Robert Bolmgren
its representative and Robert Gill its alternative. The Council
deferred appointments of the five citizen positions pending receipt of
additional names.
-93- �
�
—�
City Council minutes, March 24, 1980
lOf. Cedar Lake Road Cedar Lake Road/Natchez Avenue right-turn
Right-Turn Sign sign (requested by Councilman Backes).
Allen Trangle, 4436 Cedar Lake Road, requeated
that the City have the subject sign removed.
Councilman Backes noted that since the Council's t4arch 3, 1980, action
authorizing placement of the signs, one of the signs had been removed
by persons unknown, however, it had been replaced. Ne reviewed the
purpose of the signs and stated that as an alternative, the City could
remove the subject sign to determine whether the City of Golden Valley
would revise its participation of the agreement.
The City Manager explained that Golden Valley staff had been notified
of the possibility that St. Louis Park may remove the subject sign and
hoped the Council would not proceed prior to additional conversations.
Mr. Trangle stated the signs had existed illegally in Golden Valley for
many years.
Councilman Martin suggested the prudent action would be to remove any
signs within St. Louis Park which may be illegal; he said he would
prefer that they be located within Golden Valley. He also did not
believe a high level of traffic would enter the neighborhood, should the
signs be removed; he suggested neighborhood residents could be issued
stickers as an alternative.
The City rianager explained Golden Valley's position was that if St. Louis
Park removes any signs, its will be replaced. He suggested the Council
could authorize the City Attorney to prosecute Golden.Valley or wait
and allow persons receiving citations to challenge Golden Valley in
court.
Responding to a question from Councilman Elstrom, the City Manager
stated the police department had been instructed to issue warning tickets
prior to enforcement via citations.
It was moved by Councilman Meland, seconded by Councilman Backes, to
authorize staff to contact the Golden Valley staff and explain it
appeared the no-right-turn sign at Cedar Lake Road/Natchez Avenue had
limited application to those persons living east of Natchez; therefore,
Golden Valley may not be adverse to ita removal.
Councilman Martin said he would oppose removing the subject sign, in
that he believed all of the signs should be removed.
The motion passed 5-1 (Councilman Martin opposed).
-94-
City Council minutes, March 24, 1980
lla. Bus Plaza; Bus plaza at 4201 Minnetonka Boulevard
Resolution No. 6526 (M. 6 C. No. 8Q-18).
By consent, the Council adopted Resolution
No. 6526, entitled "Resolution authorizing acquisition of property for
easement for bus plaza shelter."
llb. 1980 Tree
Removal
Bid tabulation - 1980 tree removal.
By consent, the Council designated Clark
Landscaping lowest responsible bidder for
Areae A� B and authorized execution of contract at 541,925 for each
area.
llc. Sewer Lift
Station
Bid tabulation - sewer lift station.
It was moved by Councilman Meland, seconded by
Councilman Elstrom, to designate ACG Mechanical,
Inc., lowest responsible bidder and authorize execution of contract at
$56,875. �
The motion passed 6-0.
lld. Liquor Application of the Mediterranean Cafe
License Hearing Corporation for on-sale intoxicating wine and
on-sale nonintoxicating liquor licenses at
8930 Highwaq 7.
By consent, the Council set public hearing on the application for
April 7, 1980.
lle. Planning Board; West Hennepin Human Services Planning Board;
Resolution No. 6527 amendment to joint powers agreement.
It was moved by Councilman Meland, seconded
by Councilman Martin, to waive reading and adopt Resolution No. 6527,
entitled "Resolution approving a change to the joint powers agreement
of the West Hennepin Human Services Planning Board."
The motion passed 6-0.
llf. Sidewalk; Sidewalk right-of-way acquisition; Lake Street/
Resolution No. 6528 Library Lane (M. � C. No. 80-17).
I[ was moved by Councilman Martin, seconded by
Councilman Meland, to waive reading and adopt Resolution No. 6528, entitled
"Resolution authorizing purchase of property for sidewalk right of way."
The motion passed 6-0.
-95-
llg. Dum
G�tY Council minutes, March 24, 19A0
Bid tabulation - 19�30 dusap tr�lck.
Truck Counciln�an Llstroa�, eeconded
It vas moved by
by Councilman Hanks, to dessi�nate Boyer Ford
Trucks lowest responsible bidder and authorize execution of contract at
$16,258.30.
The motion passed 6-0.
llh. 3056 Ed ewood Requeat to place fence in public right of vay
Avenue Fence at 3056 Edge�►ood Avenue (req�se�sted by
Councilman Meland).
It was moved by Councilman Meland, seconded by Councilm.zn P.ackea, to
defer the matter to April 7, 1980, request Council to inapect the
property prior to that time and authorize preparation of agreement
for consideration on April 7.
The motion passed 6-0.
lli. Traffic Study of area traffic: West Lake Street
Study Request intersections with Cambridge, Rhode Ialand
the Woodland Drive (requested by Councilman
Meland).
It was moved by Councilman Meland, seconded by Councilman Backes, to
authorize a traffic study of the above area.
The motion passed 6-0.
llj. Traffic
Study Request
Walker Street/Quebec Avenue area (requested by
Councilman Meland).
It was moved by Councilman Heland� aeconded
by Councilman Elstrom, to authorize a traffic atudy in the vicinity of
Walker and Quebec to determine if additional signs are Warranted at the
intersection.
The motion passed 6-0.
12a. Damage
Claims
MISCELIANEOUS
Damage claima
Jar�es Schrneichal� 3603 Rupont Avenue No.
Gerald J. Goz�la, 6412 West 34 Street.
The Council filed the above claims with the City Clerk for proper action
by the City Manager and City Attorney, by consent.
-96-
City Council minutes, March 24, 1980
12b. Communications Highway 12 - Mayor McQuaid stated that during
from Mayor a television interview, Senator Stern had
said the people of St. Louis Park and Golden
Valley desire a light rail corridor. She
continued that perhapa the Council may wish to take a position on the
matter.
12c. Communications 1) Park Tavern;
from City Manager Resolution No. 6529
It was moved by Councilman Flanks, seconded
by Councilman Backes, to waive reading and adopt Resolution No. 6529,
entitled "A resolution amending Resolution No. 6295 granting special
permit under Section 14-124.101 of the Ordinance Code to permit con-
struction of a restaurant/bowling alley and Class I restaurant located
on Lot 1, Block 6, Oak Park Village, also known as 3451 Louisiana
Avenue in a Planned Unit Development District," contingent upon Houaing
Authority concurrence.
The motion passed b-0.
2) Resignation of It was moved by Councilman Hanks, seconded by
City Manager Councilman Elstrom, to accepC the resignation
of�the City Manager effective May 2, 1980.
The motion passed 6-0.
It was moved by Councilman Hanks, seconded by Councilman Meland, to
publish notice of the vacancy in the ICMQ NewsleCter.
Councilman Backes reco�ended that the Council retain the services of
a consultant to assist the Council in filling the vacancy.
Councilman Hanks said publishing the notice would not negate future
action of the Council, should it agree to engage a consultant.
The City Manager stated if the Council agreed to use a'consultant, the
staff could forward applications to the consultant, or the notice could
request that applications be mailed directly to the consultant.
The motion passed 5-1 (Councilman Backes opposed).
It was moved by Councilman Meland, seconded by Councilman Hanks, that
a committee of Council members last involved in the city manager
selection process shall provide available options to the entire Council
on April 21, 1980.
The motion passed 6-0.
The Council agreed to discuss options related to the city manager
selection process at 5 p.m., March 26, 1980.
-9 7- �r,...
City Council minutes, March 24, 1980
3) Cardinal Glass; During a closed session due to pending
Resolution No. 6525 litigation, it was moved by Councilman
Hanks, seconded by Councilman Meland,
to waive reading and adopt Reaolution
No. 6525, entitled "A resolution authorizing the withdrawal of certain
easementa previously tendered to eminent domain respondents."
The motion passed 6-0.
CLAIMS APPROPRIATIONS AND CONTRACT PAYMENTS
13a. Verified On motion of Councilman t•feland, seconded by
Claims Councilman Elstrom, the list of verified
claims prepared by the Director of Finance
and directed to the City Council dated
March 24, 1980, in the total amounts of $554,899.75 for vendors and
$7,500.82 for payroll, were approved and the City Manager, City Clerk
and City Treasurer were authorized to issue checks in the same amounts by
a vote of 6-0.
13b. Contract
Payments
None.
14. Adjournment On motion of Councilman Martin, seconded
by Councilman Elstrom, the meeting was
adjourned at 1:15 a.m. by a 6-0 vote.
Attest:
� � v
�2
Beverly F1 agan �
Recording Secretary
�'� � ,
Phyll McQuaid
Mayor
�
�,,� -9 8-