Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1986/07/14 - ADMIN - Minutes - City Council - Study SessionMINUTES STUDY SESSION CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK July 14, 1986 1. Call to Order The meeting was called to order at 1:00 p.m. 2. Roll Call The following mesbers were present at roll call: Ronald Backes, Thomas Duffy, Allen Friedman, Keith Meland, Larry Mitchell and David Strand. 3. Apple Valley Red -E -Mix Representatives of Apple Valley Red -E -Mix were present to state their preference for remaining at the present site or at an alternate site. The representatives stated that they were facing two options: (1) to upgrade the existing facility to make it more state of the art and visually appealing or (2) to relocate the plant. It was stated their first preference was to relocate for the following reasons: (1) it would free up good, developable property at Louisiana Ave. and Gorham; (2) it would allow the company to start with a state of the art facility; (3) economics. Councilman Meland asked if there were any similar plants in the area. It was stated another company owns plants in Colorado Springs and Denver. Councilman Meland asked whether there would be any changes at either location, i.e. deliveries and traffic movement. It was stated that the Cedar Lake Rd. site would allow right turn exits only. This site also provides the opportunity to bring in materials by rail. AVR stated they would not use the morning traffic as most hauling is done during the day. Councilman Meland asked would the late night/early morning traffic continue as that's where neighborhood complaints stem from. AYR representatives stated that traffic would continue, but as the Louisiana Ave. site continues with residential development, the City would probably receive more complaints. Councilman Strand asked how the dust is contained in the new plant compared to the old plant. It was stated that everything is inside and completely covered. The dust is caught on filters. Councilman Backes asked how long AVR would be out of business if the plant were to be constructed on the Louisiana Ave./Gorham site. It was stated they would be out of business for better than a month. Councilman Friedman asked for clarification on that point. It was stated that it was not economical to put the new plant on the Louisiana Ave. site aue to the financial and physical inconveniences. It was stated that if the only option is Louisiana Ave., they will do that, but their first choice is Cedar Lake Rd. Cour`cilsan Friedman asked how they arrange a temporary site. It was stated teat Portable plants are used. City Council study session July 14, 1986 2. Councilman Friedman asked about locations of other Apple Valley p;jr.; the area. It was stated there are two in Apple Valley, two in Bwr i 'S one in Chanhassen, one in Osseo, one in Lakeland one in St. r] in St. Louis Park. Paul The City Manager asked whether or not the Louisiana Ave. plant could coni in operation if improvements were made. It was stated it could, "t t* company would be investing in a cheaper operation, but not a cost-effect, one. Representatives from Apple Valley were thanked and Mayor Pro Ten Melim stated that the Council is not prepared to make a decision at this rt since the full Council is not present. Staff was directed to place 4As item on the July 21 City Council agenda listing the options available ars the pros and cons of each option, the square footages at each site, the economic tests and whether it is permissible for Apple Valley to waive its rights to challenge. 4. Minnehaha Creek Mrs. Lietzke, the property owner at 3201 Hillsboro and Conner F. Schmid, attorney, were present to discuss the flooding situation along Mirner a Creek. Mrs. Lietzke stated it was a terrible tragedy to ruin her house w that it was the first flooding that she has experienced in her 18 years living in this home. She brought four pictures depicting the dirt places by the City to save from flooding and the flooding that has occurred inside her home. The Director of Public Works recapped the history and stated that a berm was proposed close to the creek and plans were prepared; however, the bero was never built due to a disagreement over who should do the work. The City agreed to provide fill through a private contractor and the property ownw would be responsible for the construction of the berm. Mrs. Lietzke stated that that was not her understanding The Director of Public Works further stated that the construction of the berm would be contrary to City ordinances and the Watershed Districtbecause of filling the F-1 flood ; plain. Councilman Strand stated that he remembers that particular yard in the 1960s when the yard extended up to the creek bed. He visited the site over the weekend and 15-100 ft, of the backyard is lost. Councilman Meland stated that the property along 34th St. on Ensign, Decatur and Cavell is facing a similar situation. Councilman Backes asked whether the cause of the problem is a result of erosion of the banks. The Director of Public Works stated it was not, but was a result of high precipatation year after year and the high level of the lake in the fall of 1985. He stated that the issue involved overall management of the area vs. water management at Lake Minnetonka. Councilman Duffy asked the relationship of the day Mrs. Lietzke`s property was flooded to the day the dike broke at Meadowbrook. The Director of Public Works stated that Mrs. Lietzke experienced her problems on the 21st and the dike broke at Meadowbrook un the 22nd or 23rd. He also stated that City Council study session July 14, 1986 2. Councilman Friedman asked about locations of other Apple the area. It was stated there are two in Apple Vall,Valley plants i one in Chanhassen, one in Osseo, one in Lakeland, one Valley, two in Stan Burnsville n in St. Louis Park.Paul and one The City Manager asked whether or not the Louisiana Ave. plant could in operation if improvements were made. It was stated it in c company would be investing in a cheaper operation, but not acost-effective one. Representatives from Apple Valley were thanked and Mayor Pro Tem Meland stated that the Council is not prepared to make a decision at this point since the full Council is not present. Staff was directed to place this item on the July 21 City Council agenda listing the options available and the pros and cons of each option, the square footages at each site, the economic tests and whether it is permissible for Apple Dalley to waive its rights to challenge. 4. Minnehaha Creek Mrs. Lietzke, the property owner at 3201 Hillsboro and Conner F. Schmid, attorney, were present to discuss the flooding situation along Minnehaha Creek. Mrs. Lietzke stated it was a terrible tragedy to ruin her house and that it was the first flooding that she has experienced in her 18 years living in this home. She brought four pictures depicting the dirt placed by the City to save from flooding and the flooding that has occurred inside her home. The Director of Public Works recapped the history and stated that a berm was proposed close to the creek and plans were prepared; however, the berm was never built due to a disagreement over who should do the work. The City agreed to provide fill through a private contractor and the property owner would be responsible for the construction of the berm. Mrs. Lietzke stated that that was not her understanding. The Director of Public Works further stated that the construction of the berm would be contrary to City ordinances and the Watershed District.because of fillingthe F-1 flood pplain. Councilman Strand stated that he remembers that particular yard in the 1960s when the yard extended up to the creek bed. He visited the site over the weekend and 75-100 ft. of the backyard is lost. Councilman Meland stated that the property along 34th St. on Ensign, Decatur and Cavell is facing a similar situation. Councilman Backes asked whether the cause of the problem is a result of erosion of the banks. The Director of Public Works stated it was not, but was a result of high precipatation year after year and the high level of the lake in the fall of 1985. He stated that the issue involved overall management of the area vs. water management at Lake Minnetonka. Councilman Duffy asked the relationship of the day Mrs. Lietzke's property was flooded to the day the dike broke at Meadowbrook. The Director of Public Works stated that Mrs. Lietzke experienced her problems on the 21st and the dike broke at Meadowbrook on the 22nd or 23rd. He also stated that tr. : - . a .,- , a ao . City Council study session July 14, 1986 3. the dike was filled within 72 hours. Councilman Strand asked whether anyone had consulted Dick Koppy regarding the agreement that was made. The City Manager stated he was at the City at the time and that the agreement was only to provide fill for Mrs. Lietzke. Councilman Friedman asked whether there was potential for a similar problem to other properties. The Director of Public Works stated there was. Councilman Friedman asked Mrs. Lietzke what her understanding was regarding the agreement. She stated that she understood the City would provide fill and build a dirt berm. She would be responsible to provide the necessary sodding to complete the project at a cost of $2900+. Councilman Duffy asked would the construction of the berm have prevented the water coming into the basement on the 21st. The Director of Public Works stated that had the berm been constructed, the event of the 21st would still have taken place. Councilman Strand asked for more information regarding the agreement made with Dick Koppy. Councilman Meland stated that the City Council may want to see the Sept. 14, 1984 City Council report. Councilman Mitchell asked whether or not the City was prepared to confront the Watershed District and what would the City ask them to do. Councilman Strand stated that it was important to find out what was going on, express a statement of concern and let them know that St. Louis Park has a problem and that we want them to act on it. It was moved by Councilman Strand, seconded by Councilman Backes to implement a coordinated approach and appear at the Watershed District meeting in August and to ask the City Manager, Director of Public Works and a Council representa- tive/Mayor to be present at the August meeting. It was further moved to place this item on the July 21 City Council agenda for formal action. 5. Alley assessments Councilman Friedman stated that there is no equity in the current assessment Policy for alley improvements. He stated that the current policy was not good public policy and that the alley is available for everyone should they choose to access it and therefore everyone should be assessed on an equal basis. Councilman Duffy stated that if everyone was assessed equally, no further alleys would be permanently constructed in the City. Councilman Meland stated that the reason for the current policy is a result Of a court case that stated we must assess on the basis of benefit. Councilman Friedman asked how many alleys in the City are left to permanently construct. The Director of Public Works stated that 25% of the alleys are left. City Council study session 4. July 14, 1986 Councilman Backes stated that not that many of the property owners would be involved in the situation Councilman Friedman referred to and that a problem is going to develop in any policy. Councilman Strand stated that it was good public policy to encourage permanent alley construction and asked whether the current policy encourages permanent alley construction. The City Manager stated that it did. Councilman Meland stated an experience in his neighborhood where for a number of years petitions were circulated and, at best, 40% of the property owners signed the petition. Once the new alley assessment policy was adopted, almost everyone on the alley signed the petition. It was moved by Councilman Friedman, seconded by Councilman Strand to place the alley assessment policy on the July 21 City Council agenda so a vote on the policy can be taken publicly. Councilman Strand asked whether staff has any administrative changes to the present method they would like to see instituted at this time. The City Manager said he did not believe so. The motion passed 4-2 (Councilmen Duffy and Meland opposed). 6. Legal services Councilman Strand stated he was uncomfortable with hiring an in-house attorney " since it creates more legal costs ultimately and would not provide the breadth of expertise and that the City would ultimately go outside for counsel. He did support examining what other firms provide and recommended starting with the prosecuting attorney. Councilman Meland stated that according to the City Charter, the City Attorney works for the City Council. Once an attorney is in-house, the attorney becomes staff and not directly responsible to the City Council. He recommended that the Police Dept. be consulted to determine the needed areas of expertise and required qualifications and recommended that staff prepare a scope of services for a prosecuting attorney. Councilman Backes requested that the scope of services not be advertised but rather be distributed on an invitation basis. He also recommended that this be placed on the July 21 City Council agenda. Councilman Friedman asked what the City would do about the civil attorney. He was concerned about the level of expertise and the variety of different people present at City Council meetings. Councilman Backes stated that it would be appropriate to discuss this at budget time. Councilman Friedman asked about the interim, i.e., could Council require I someone with more expertise be present. Councilman Mitchell stated that this was a decision for the City Council only and should be discussed before or after the July 21 City Council meeting. City Council study session July 14, 1986 5. Since Councilman Meland would not be present at that meeting, he stated his problem with the civil attorney is the amount of money the City is paying for their services. It was recommended to discuss the provision of civil legal services at 6:30 P.M. on July 21 with just the City Council present. 7. I-394 The City Manager stated that the purpose of the study is to ask a consultant to create different scenarios regarding the impact of I-394 on neighborhoods and the traffic in neighborhoods as a result of different levels of development. Then, the City can decide the level of development intensity it wishes to choose. This ensures that the City can control the development rather than the Metropolitan Council controlling development. Councilman Mitchell stated that the study assumes the choice of more intense development. It was recommended that staff prepare a report studying the City's Comprehensive Plan and -how if development were to occur according to the Plan, it would impact I-394, the neighborhoods and the traffic in neighborhoods. This item will be placed on a future study session agenda. 8. Twin Lakes Councilman Friedman stated that the neighborhood agreed to meet to discuss how they could participate in the Twin Lakes improvement and whether they should participate monetarily and if so, the area that should be included. He stated that lakes are a community asset and that the recommendation in the report basically included two recommendations: (1) dredging; (2) control algae growth. It was recommended that staff prepare plans, solicit prospective consultants and dollar amounts and report back at the August 4 meeting. 9. Hwy. 7/Minnetonka Blvd. intersection Plans were presented for the Minnetonka Blvd./Hwy. 7 interchange and were revised as follows: at Glenhurst/Minnetonka Blvd. there would be a right -in only turn with a trumpet island (like along Louisiana Ave.) with two thru-lanes on Minnetonka Blvd. It was moved to place this item on the July 21 Council agenda. 10. Budget discussions/CRC decision packages The City Council recommended to present the decision packages to the Community Relations Commission as listed with the exceptions of Nos. 3, 6 and 8. 11. Zoning ordinance Councilman Friedman stated that it was his understanding that the City Council would be apprised of any information going out to the public regarding a zoning ordinance. He stated that he wanted to be informed of what changes City Council study session July 14, 1986 6. are proposed in the zoning ordinance, how and why they would to field questions from constituents prior to the airing of the zoning In order show on cable tv. 9 ordinance 1 Councilman Strand recommended that staff spend an evening to educate City Council on this issue. tF; by Councilman Duffy, seconded by Councilman Backes, It was moved/to allow the airing of the show since it was purely educational on what a zoning ordinance is. The motion passed 4-2 (Councilmen Friedman and Mitchell opposed). 12. House Doctor Program The City Council stated it was a good program for the City to adopt and recommended a resolution be prepared for the July 21 City Council meeting, 13. Adjournment The meeting adjourned at 0:00 p.m. JU"4) Carmen J. Kapla Recording Secretary