HomeMy WebLinkAbout1986/09/15 - ADMIN - Minutes - City Council - Regular1. Call to Order
2. Presentations
3. Roll Call
MINUTES
CITY COUNCIL MEETING
ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA
SEPTEMBER 159 1986
The meeting was called to order
by Mayor Hanks at 7:30 p.m.
None
The following Council
present at roll call:
Ronald Backes
Thomas Duffy
Allen Friedman
members were
Keith Meland
David Strand
Lyle Hanks
Also present were the City Manager, City Attorney, Director of Planning,
Director of Public Works and the City Assessor.
4. Approval of Minutes
2, 1986 City Council meeting.
The motion passed 6-0.
Councilman Mitchell arrived in chambers.
5. Approval of Agenda
September 15, 1986 with the removal
9e, 9f.
The motion passed 7-0.
It was moved by Councilman Strand,
seconded by Councilman Duffy, to
approve the minutes of the September
It was moved by Councilman Strand,
seconded by Councilman Friedman,
to approve the consent agenda for
of the following items to the agenda:
It was moved by Councilman Duffy, seconded by Councilman Friedman, to approve
the agenda for September 15, 1986 with the following additions: 7b. Dominium
Project and llc. National Community Education Association conference
The motion passed 7-0.
PUBLIC HEARINGS
6a. Holzer's Imported Car Services
eso u ion - Special permit for filling in the
floodplain at 1325-1335 Colorado
Ave.
Peter Beck, Holzer's Imported Car Service, showed a drawing to Council of
the proposed site.
-200-
Mr. Holzer said they had addressed the concerns as expressed by the Planning
Commission and had talked with the Watershed District and that they would
be complying with its level of review before any construction begins.
In answer to a question from Councilman Mitchell about the billboard, Mr.
Holzer said one of the conditions of their purchase of the land was that the
billboard remain.
Councilman Strand asked where the billboard was in relation to the proposed
building, and Mr. Holzer said it would be very visible.
In answer to a question from Councilman Strand relative to parking under the
billboard, Mr. Holzer said cars would park under it as there was more than
adequate space.
Councilman Mitchell asked if the three spaces under the billboard were necessary
to meet the ordinance code. Mr. Holzer said they were providing more than
adequate parking to meet ordinance requirements, but that they wanted to provide
as much parking as possible on the site to minimize any off-site parking.
Councilman Mitchell asked for clarification on their conversation with the
Watershed District. Mr. Holzer said they did not give them any specific instruct-
ions, but said there would be an administrative review relative to the erosion
control plan for the construction period.
The Mayor asked about flood storage. Mr. Holzer responded the Watershed District
had reviewed the flood storage plan with no comeient, and asked that an erosion
control plan be submitted separately.
Councilman Mitchell asked if this were in writing, and Mr. Holzer responded
it was not, that Len Cramer had called him to say the plan looks adequate
and to submit their erosion control plan before starting construction.
There being no one further wishing to speak, the Mayor declared the hearing
closed with the right of Council to thereafter reopen and continue it at a
future date.
Councilman Strand said this seemed like another instance of running into a
problem with the Watershed District. He felt the mix of a building and a billboard
on one piece of property was ridiculous and he didn't see how it was going
to have a very good appearance.
Mayor Hanks asked the Planning Director if this were not the Bassett Creek
Watershed District, rather than the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District, to
which the Director said that was correct.
Mayor Hanks said since there was a large storage area at Westwood Hills, the
City has had less problems with the Bassett Creek District.
Councilman Backes asked if he understood Holzer's engineering plan had been
submitted to Bassett Creek District and they had voiced no problems, and Mr.
Holzer said that was correct.
Councilman Backes Commented that erosion control plans are required on all
construction projects, that is hay tales placed around a construction site
to prevent water from entering tt,e storax sewer system until the project is
completed and operating by itself.
-201-
It was moved by Councilman Duffy, seconded by Councilman Meland to waive reading
and adopt Resolution 86-149 entitled "A resolution granting special permit
under Section 14-123.100 of the St. Louis Park Ordinance Code relating to
zoning to permit the placement of fill in the floodplain district for property
zoned B-2, business district, and F-2, floodplain district, located at 1325,
29, 33 and 37 Colorado Ave." with an amendment to condition 6 to read permits
to be issued after written approval is received from the Bassett Creek Watershed
District.
Councilman Mitchell said he would oppose this because of undue accommodation
of a property owner and that the property should either be a billboard site
or a construction site. He said he would support the motion if the billboard
were to be removed.
The motion for approval passed 4-3 (Councilmen Friedman, Mitchell, Strand
opposed).
6b. Rogers: Signage Amendment to a special permit to
modify the sign plan at 5430 Minnetonka
Blvd.
Ron Erickson, vice president and general manager of Rogers asked for a continuance
of this item to October 20, 1986
It
the
was moved by Councilman Friedman,
public hearing to October 20, 1986
seconded
by Councilman Strand, to continue
The
motion passed 7-0.
6c.
Variance: 3750 Colorado
Variance in lot width, lot area,
lot
area per family, front yard,
side
yards and ground floor area
ratio
at 3750 Colorado Ave.
Steven Thall, attorney for Mr. Miller, the applicant, referred to the letter
in front of Council which addressed their concerns.
There being no one further wishing to speak, the Mayor declared the hearing
closed with the right of Council to thereafter reopen and continue it at a
future date.
It was moved by Councilman Meland, seconded by Councilman Friedman, to authorize
preparation of a resolution of approval containing a condition limiting the
variance to the existing building so long as such a condition would bear a
real and substantial relation to the public health, safety and general welfare
and would otherwise be in compliance with the zoning ordinance.
The motion passed 7-0.
6d. Assessment hearing: Proj. 84-20 Assessment hearing, Project 84-20,
paving of TH 7 frontage road, Webster
to Wooddale
Jim Davis, 3416 Xenwood, said he had had two estimates on his assessment:
one for $595 and another of $800 which was made by the mortgage company when
he applied for refinancing. He stated he received a letter in the mail calling
for an assessment of $2,000. He said he has been opposed to this project since
the beginning because of trafficroblems. He said at one time it was ropsed
that the road be closed, but that many residents had come forward in oppositio
n.
202-
Mayor Hanks asked the City Assessor to comment on Mr. Davis' comments.
The Assessor displayed an overhead showing the frontage road and the assessment
area in which each parcel was to be assessed $400. He said that subsequent
to that, at Council's direction a study was conducted determining which properties
were assessed for street improvement during 1974. All those properties had
received direct and indirect benefits when the streets were put in. He said
the only property not getting a direct assessment was Mr. Davis'. What happened
was his frontage of 145 ft. x $16/front foot with no indirect assessment came
to $2,300. He ended up being the only one assessed for the entire project.
The City Manager asked if the original estimate was not area wide, and the
Assessor responded that was correct originally, but was changed three times.
The City Manager asked where the figure came from the mortgage corpary quoted.
The Assessor said it would have been picked up by Assessing staff from a previous
assessment. He said that figure was in error as it was given prior to the
current assessment roll being prepared and prior to the implementation of
the policy on how the roadway was to be assessed.
There being no one further wishing to speak, the Mayor declared the hearing
closed with the right of Council to thereafter reopen and continue it at a
future date.
It was moved by Councilman Meland, seconded by Councilman Backes to waive
reading and adopt the resolution reducing the assessable cost of Mr. Davis'
property to $1,200, which does not include driveway cost.
Councilman Friedman asked how that figure was arrived at. Councilman Meland
said the City picked up the cost for this project minus the four driveway
aprons. At said it seemed fair if Mr. Davis' assessment be reduced to $1,200
which represents that amount held in escrow.
Councilman Friedman said he'd prefer to defer action on this item until Council
could get additional information about who gave Mr. Davis those figures, what
other residents in the area have paid for street assessments and see if a
more equitable figure can be arrived at.
Councilman Meland withdrew his motion.
It was moved by Councilman Friedman, seconded by Councilman Strand, to continue
the public hearing to October 6, 1986.
The motion passed 7-0.
Councilman Strand asked to see some comparison figures from the past for a
similar situation.
6e. Assessment: Project 85-07 Assessment hearing, Project 85-07,
Resolution 86-15D paving of W. 36th St., Wooddale
Ave. to Brunswick Ave.
There being no one wishing to speak, the Mayor closed the hearing with the
right of Council to thereafter reopen and continue it at a future date.
It was moved by Councilman Duffy, seconded by Councilman Meland, to waive
reading and adopt Resolution 86-150 entitled "Resolution adopting assessment
- Improvement No. 85-07, paving, curb and gutter, railroad crossing closure,
-203-
Mayor Hanks asked the City Assessor to comment on Mr. Davis' comments.
The Assessor displayed an overhead showing the frontage road and the assessment
area in which each parcel was to be assessed $400. He said that subsequent
to that, at Council's direction a study was conducted determining which properties
were assessed for street improvement during 1974. All those properties had
received direct and indirect benefits when the streets were put in. He said
the only property not getting a direct assessment was Mr. Davis'. What happened
was his frontage of 145 ft. x $16/front foot with no indirect assessment came
to $2,300. He ended up being the only one assessed for the entire project.
The City Manager asked if the original estimate was not area wide, and the
Assessor responded that was correct originally, but was changed three times.
The City Manager asked where the figure came from the mortgage ccmpary quoted.
The Assessor said it would have been picked up by Assessing staff from a previous
assessment. He said that figure was in error as it was given prior to the
current assessment roll being prepared and prior to the implementation of
the policy on how the roadway was to be assessed.
There being no one further wishing to speak, the Mayor declared the hearing
closed with the right of Council to thereafter reopen and continue it at a
future date.
It was moved by Councilman Meland, seconded by Councilman Backes to waive
reading and adopt the resolution reducing the assessable cost of Mr. Davis'
property to $1,200, which does not include driveway cost.
Councilman Friedman asked how that figure was arrived at. Councilman Meland
said the City picked up the cost for this project minus the four driveway
aprons. Hp said it seemed fair if Mr. Davis' assessment be reduced to $1,200
which represents that amount held in escrow.
Councilman Friedman said he'd prefer to defer action on this item until Council
could get additional information about who gave Mr. Davis those figures, what
other residents in the area have paid for street assessments and see if a
more equitable figure can be arrived at.
Councilman Meland withdrew his motion.
It was moved by Councilman Friedman, seconded by Councilman Strand, to continue
the public hearing to October 6, 1986.
The motion passed 7-0.
Councilman Strand asked to see some comparison figures from the past for a
similar situation.
6e. Assessment: Project 85-07 Assessment hearing, Project 85-07,
Resolution 86-150 paving of W. 36th St., Wooddale
Ave. to Brunswick Ave.
There being no one wishing to speak, the Mayor closed the hearing with the
right of Council to thereafter reopen and continue it at a future date.
It was moved by Councilman Duffy, seconded by Councilman Meland, to waive
reading and adopt Resolution 86-150 entitled "Resolution adopting assessment
- Improvement No. 85-07, paving, curb and gutter, railroad crossing closure,
-203-
sidewalk, street lighting, storm sewer and landscaping work."
The motion passed 7-0.
PETITIONS, REQUESTS, COMMUNICATIONS
7a. RAFFLE Notice of intent to conduct raffle
It was moved by Councilman Friedman, seconded by Councilman Meland, tn approve
the request to conduct a raffle by Adath Jeshurun Congregation on November
1, 1986
The motion passed 7-0.
7b. Dominium
Minor amendment to Resolution 86-143
It was moved by Councilman Meland, seconded by Councilman Strand, to modify
Condition 8 of Resolution 86-143 to show construction commencement date of
September 22, 1986 instead of September 15, 1986.
The motion passed 7-0.
RESOLUTIONS AND ORDINANCES rloow
[ 8a. Meyer _property
Or i nance . 1694-86
It was moved by Councilman
reading and adopt Ordinance
` exchange of property between
b Assoc., Inc."
N
The motion passed 7-0.
8b. Home Rule Charter
ordinance 695=86
Second reading of an ordinance re
exchange of property: Meyer
Meland, seconded by Councilman Strand, to waive
No. 1694-86 entitled "An ordinance approving an
the City of St. Louis Park and Robert H. Meyer
Second reading of an ordinance amending
the Home Rule Charter
It was moved by Councilman Strand, seconded by Councilman Friedman, to waive
reading and adopt Ordinance 1695-86 entitled "An ordinance amending the St.
Louis Park Home Rule Charter, Section 1.00, 'Charter Preamble' ".
The motion passed 7-0.
8c, Election judges
eso u ion 86-151
Resolution appointing election judges
and specifying polling places
It was moved by Councilman Meland, seconded by Councilman Duffy, to waive
reading and adopt Resolution 86-151 entitled "A resolution designating polling
Places and naming election judges for November 4, 1986 state general election."
The motion passed 7-0.
8c. Inspections appro riation Ordinance authorizing transfer of
Urdinan_ce T%-T6��'� funds and providing appropriation
to increase housing inspections
It was moved by Councilman 8ackes, seconded by Councilman Duffy, to waive
reading and adopt Ordinance No, 1696-86 entitled "An ordinance authorizing
-204-
City Council meeting minutes
September 15, 1986
the transfer of funds and providing appropriations to increase housing
inspections."
The motion passed 6-0-1 (Councilman Friedman abstained).
Be. Excelsior Blvd. widening Purchase of right of way: Excelsior
Resolution - Blvd. widening
It was moved by Councilman Duffy, seconded by Councilman Backes, to waive
reading and adopt Resolution 86-152 entitled "Resolution authorizing purchase
of property for the Excelsior Blvd. widening project."
The motion passed 1-0.
8f. Bor-Son/Plesko project Terry McNellis alluded to his letter
Resolution 86-153 before Council explaining Piper,
Jaffray & Hopwood's request on behalf of
Bor-Son Plesko Development to allow sale of unrated multifamily housing revenue
bonds. The purpose of the sale is to refund the 1985 bonds previously issued
to finance the project.
Councilman Mitchell said that in reading the memo from the City Attorney,
he didn't see where the City's obligation is addressed and therefore he could
not support it.
The City Manager suggested the resolution could be adopted subject to further
review by the City Attorney and incorporating release of any City obligation.
He said otherwise it would have to wait until October, again delaying the
project.
Councilman Friedman asked if the City were aware of the urgency of their proposal
The City Manager said the letter had been received on Thursday afternoon,
and as usual, immediate action was being asked for. He said that as a matter
of courtesy to the applicant, it was placed on the agenda and given to the
City Attorney for review.
Councilman Strand said he would prefer to see language in the resolution relative
to the City havirgno obligation. He said he would be agreeable to moving forward
on this item provided it is approved by the City Attorney.
It was moved by Councilman Strand, seconded by Councilman Meland, to waive
reading and adopt Resolution 86-153 entitled "Resolution reaffirming authorization
of a project and housing program under Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 462C (Municipal
Housing Programs) and giving preliminary authorization to the issuance of
unrated multifamily housing revenue bonds to refund 1985 bonds previously
issued to finance the project and program " with language added indicating
that this bonding does not create any financial epsure to the City and that
the resolution be approved by the City Attorney in form and substance.
Mayor Hanks expressed his concerns over the continual delay in getting this lA
project off the ground and now Council being asked to get involved with unrated
bonds, a whole new category.
Councilman Backes agreed that a considerable period of time had passed with
-205-
- --��•......_�.K�.,_T.,:,.,�,.�....�.... � .-.�...:....-__ ,-..- - . .;�
JLC'. -_.mss �✓•
City Council meeting minutes
September 15, 1986
extensions granted, etc., and that the Housing and Redevelopment Authority
is very anxious to pursue the financing with them since early summer.
Councilman Duffy said a $150,000 letter of credit has been received by the
HRA.
Councilman Friedman said he was uncomfortable with the continual pressure
on Council relative to most of these bonding matters. He felt there never
was enough time for items to be thoroughly reviewed before they're before
Council for final decision and therefore he would oppose this item.
The motion passed 5-2 (Councilman Friedman, Mayor Hanks opposed).
REPORTS FROM OFFICERS, BOARDS, COMMITTEES
9a. Excelsior Blvd. parking bays Traffic study 358: Excelsior Blvd.
Resolution U-154 parking bays
It was moved by Councilman Meland, seconded by Councilman Duffy, to waive
reading and adopt Resolution 86-154 entitled "Resolution ordering the placement
of traffic control signs in parking bays along Excelsior Blvd. and on Brookside
Ave. between T.H. 100 and Louisiana Ave."
The motion passed 7-0.
9b. Risk Management Study It was moved by Councilman Strand,
seconded by Councilman Friedman,
to authorize staff to work with
American Risk Services and surrounding municipalities to conduct a pooling
study and that St. Louis Park be designated lead agency in this project.
The motion passed 6-1 (Councilman Backes opposed).
9c. Homes on Louisiana Ave.
Turnback of 15 residences owned
by CRW Real Estate Investments
It was moved by Councilman Meland, seconded by Councilman Mitchell, to take
Possession of the properties and initiate repairs needed for eventual sale.
Councilman Mitchell felt the phrase "sometime in 1987 for some properties"
was too vague. He asked when a realistic time would be. The City Manager replied
staff would prepare more precise information.
Councilman Mitchell asked what the marketing plan was. He felt taking the
houses back and repairing them for sale without a marketing plan was not the
best way to proceed with this project. He asked how owner -occupancy was to
be promoted.
The City
Manager said staff's plan is to
start taking the homes back and fixing
teem up
said
for sale, during which period a
marketing strategy
would be developed.
91ven its
it seemed premature to develop
a marketing plan
until Council had
approval.
Councilman
Mitchell asked if the motion
could be amended
to stipulate taking
Thi, prior to April I, 1981 and
s was
development of a
marketing strategy.
agreeable to Councilman Meland.
-206-
��.
City Council meeting minutes
September 15, 1986
Councilman Friedman asked if the properties had been viewed. The City Manager
said they had and staff has figured $3,000-15,000 will be required per property
which includes landscaping.
Councilman Strand asked if it were possible to covenant that these homes will
remain owner -occupied or to at least look into that possibility. Heldlike the
City to avoid what happened last time around with most of the properties ending
up as rentals.
The motion passed 6-1 (Councilman Friedman opposed).
9d. August financial report
The August 1986 financial report
was ordered filed by consent.
9e. HRA minutes Councilman Strand asked if there
was going to be a joint meeting
between the Council and Housing
and Redevelopment Authority.
It was moved by Councilman Strand, seconded by Councilman Mitchell, to arrange
a joint meeting between the Council and HRA.
After discussion, the date of September 22 at 7:30 was agreed upon.
The motion passed 7-0.
9f. Planning Commission minutes Councilman Strand referred to the
item from the Planning Commission
minutes, item 4c., Study of Burlington
Northern property at Virginia Ave.
He said it seemed the process was somewhat backward in that the study being
done includes the development of goals and policies with respect to the develop-
ment of that piece of property. He felt it would be appropriate for Council
to discuss goals and policies re development and receive input from the Planning
Commission as they proceed through this process. He felt it would assist the
Planning Commission in doing its technical review of the site and give them
input for direction. Also, it would give any potential developer input as
to whether Council wants the site developed and what it feels might be an
appropriate development for the property.
Mayor Hanks questioned that until an inventory was completed, would not a
lot of questions be asked that Council would not have the answers to.
The Planning Director said it was advisable to wait until an inventory is
completed and then review a tentative section on goals and policies.
Councilman Strand clarified his comments stating the process currently is
that a developer pops up and asks to develop a certain piece of property.
A study is then commenced and the Planning Commission goes to work. He felt
it might make sense that early on in that process, Council sit down with the
developer and ask what it is he has in mind, where is he headed. Is he contemplat-
ing zoning changes, changes in the Comprehensive Plan or what. He felt it
would be valuable to have Council involved in the earliest steps in the process.
-207-
ERMA-
City Council meeting minutes
September 15, 1986
9g. Board of Zoning Appeals minutes The minutes
consent.
UNFINISHED BUSINESS
10a. Boards and Commissions None.
10b. Indihar claim
Mr. Indihar referred to
photos of the furnace
in the heat exchanger.
furnace had occurred a
as a health hazard, he
for the installation of
were ordered filed by
Indihar claim for reimbursement
the letter from an independent heating firm and displayed
upon its dismantlement showing the holes and cracks
He said the firm's opinion was that the damage to the
number of years ago. Because of the attendant potential
was reiterating his request for settlement of his claim
a new furnace.
It was moved by Councilman Mitchell, seconded by Councilman Strand, that this
item be deferred to the October 13, 1986 study session for further discussion.
Councilman Strand asked if Mr. Indihar was now replacing the furnace and the
question remains whether or not he is to be reimbursed. Mr. Indihar said that
was correct.
The motion to defer passed 5-2 (Councilman Backes, Mayor Hanks opposed).
10c. HRA This item was an update on the
HRA's scheduled meetings for review
of proposals relative to the Excelsior Blvd. redevelopment project. No action
was required.
Ha. Aquila ballfield fence
NEW BUSINESS
Bid tabulation
It was moved by Councilman Meland, seconded by Councilman Duffy, to designate
Crowley Company as the lowest responsible bidder and authorize execution of
a contract not to exceed $25,782.
The motion passed 7-0.
Ilb. Bunny's Liquors
Gambling violation: Bunny's Liquors
It was moved by Councilman Meland, seconded by Councilman Duffy to set an
administrative hearing on November 3, 1986 at 6:30 p.m.
It was requested more information on the incident be provided to Council, i.e.,
could management have controlled this situation, to
involved and more information on the actual individ alswrinvolved extent were employees