HomeMy WebLinkAboutCity Council - 11/19/1985 APPROVED MINUTES
EDEN PRAIRIE CITY COUNCIL
TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 19, 1985 7:30 PM, SCHOOL ADMINISTRATION BOARDROOM
COUNCIL MEMBERS: Mayor Gary Peterson, Richard Anderson,
George Bentley, Patricia Pidcock, and Paul
Redpath
CITY COUNCIL STAFF: City Manager Carl J. Jullie, Assistant to
the City Manager Craig Dawson, City Attor-
ney Roger Pauly, Finance Director John D.
Frane, Planning Director Chris Enger,
Director of Community Services Robert
Lambert, Director of Public Works Eugene A.
Dietz, and Recording Secretary Karen
Michael
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
ROLL CALL: All members were present.
I. APPROVAL OF AGENDA AND OTHER ITEMS OF BUSINESS
The following items were added to the Agenda: IX. A. 1. Pidcock -
Discussion on policy of membership in associations; 2. City anag�er��'s
Review Document; X. A. Review of Board of 8gpeals action of November
14, 1985 re ar in nn's Bake ; X. H.Leaf Rec Tin whin tFie City;
X. C. City Directory with taff an Commission Mem er s ehone numbers; an
T. Q. Aperoved Minutes of the ar s-Recreation & Natural esources om-
mi ss i on for Octo er 1985.
MOTION: Anderson moved, seconded by Bentley, to approve the Agenda and
Other Items of Business as amended and published. Motion carried
unanimously.
II . MINUTES
A. Special City Council/Planning Council/Planning Commission Minutes from Meeting held
Tuesday, December , 1984
MOTION: Bentley moved, seconded by Redpath, to approve the Minutes of
the Special City Council/Planning Commission Meeting held Tuesday,
December 11, 1984, as published. Motion carried with Peterson and
Pidcock abstaining.
Bt Special City Council Meeting held Tuesday, August 13, 1985
MOTION: Anderson moved, seconded by Bentley, to approve the Minutes
of the Special City Council Meeting held Tuesday, August 13, 1985, as
published. Motion carried unanimously.
City Council Minutes -2- November 19, 1985
III. CONSENT CALENDAR
A. Clerk 's License List
B. Approval of Lease Agreement between the City of Eden Prairie and
n epen ent School District No. 272 for the School Aidministration
Boardroom
C. Modification of Kirsch Municipal Industrial Development Bond Document
D. Change Order No. 1, Tanager Creek Improvements, I.C. 52-060
E. Change Order No. 1, Preserve Boulevard Improvements, I.C. 52-071
F. Cooperative agreement with Minnetonka, Mn/DOT and Hennepin County to
construct and maintain signals at the r terminals of Imo- 9� C9AH
62 Crosstown Resolution No. 85-259)
G. Final Plat a roval for Coachman's Landing Third Addition. Location:
north of Village Woods Drive, west of Hiawatha Reso ution No. 85-
260)
H. Final Plat approval for Datasery Business Center. Location:
southeast corner of 78th Street and Prairie Center Drive Best.
(Resolution No. 85-261)
I. Final Plat Approval for Primeland 3rd Addition. Location: in City
West Development, Hagen Systems. Resolution No. 85-262)
J. 1st Reading of Ordinance No. 38-85, Revisions on the Unclaimed
Property Ordinance.
K. Revisions to the Park Use Ordinance
L. 1986 Softball Field Improvements
M. Approve plans and specifications for Technology Drive between
Purgatory Creek and Prairie Center Drive and authorize bids to be
received, I.C. D (Resolution No.
MOTION: Anderson moved, seconded by Bentley, to approve items A - M on
the Consent Calendar. Motion carried unanimously.
IV. PUBLIC HEARINGS
A. ALLSTATE DISTRICT CLAIMS OFFICE by Opus Corporation. Request for
Zoning District Change from Rural to Office, and Preliminary Plat of
2.62 acres for the construction of an insurance claims office.
Location: Highway 5 and Prairie Center Drive. (Ordinance No. 39-85 -
zoning from Rural to Office and Resolution No. 85-256 - preliminary
plat)
_. _
City Council Minutes -3- November 19, 1985
City Manager Jullie stated notice of this Public Hearing had been
published and property owners in the property vicinity had been
notified.
Bob Worthington, Executive Director of Governmental Affairs for Opus
Corporation, addressed the request. Worthington also asked the
Council if Opus could have an early grading permit; he noted this
would be at their own risk since it would be prior to 2nd Reading,
should 1st reading be given.
k
Planning Director Enger stated this request had been reviewed by the
Planning Commission at its meeting on October 28, 1985, at which time
the Commission voted to recommend approval subject to the
recommendations included in the Staff Report of October 25, 1985, and
the plans dated October 25, 1985. Enger said that a variance has been
requested regarding the parking; this issue needs to be resolved prior
to 2nd Reading. Enger indicated Staff has suggested a separated
parking area and would recommend a 5' median as the solution.
There was no review of this request by the Parks, Recreation & Natural
Resources Commission.
Redpath asked if the bank to the west of the property would pose a
problem. Enger said it would not. Worthington said there would not
be a need for retaining walls either.
C Peterson asked if there would be a pedestrian walkway on the Prairie
Center Drive side of the proposal . Worthington stated they planned to
install a sidewalk in front of the building.
Bentley asked what the property owner, Walter Carpenter, had in mind
for the outlot. Carpenter said he did not have any specific proposal
in mind at this time; but he said he would like to see a night club or
a good restaurant in that location.
Bentley questionned how the parking issue might be resolved.
Worthington explained how the matter was complicated because of the
driveway to the south. Enger reviewed the various parking plans which
had been looked at in connection with this request and possible
solutions to the problem.
Pidcock asked if any junk cars would be stored on the property. i
Worthington explained the procedure used by Allstate in processing
claims and noted this facility would be used by those cars which are
able to be driven in to this-. location so that an estimate could be
made; they would not be left here.
Carpenter said he strongly supported Opus's plans.
MOTION: Anderson moved, seconded by Pidcock, to close the Public
Hearing. Motion carried unanimously.
City Council Minutes -4- November 19, 1985
MOTION: Anderson moved, seconded by Pidcock, to give 1st Reading to
Ordinance No. 39-85, rezoning. Motion carried unanimously. `
MOTION: Anderson moved, seconded by Bentley, to adopt Resolution No.
85-256, approving the preliminary plat of Allstate District Claims
Office for Opus Corporation. Motion carried unanimously.
MOTION: Anderson moved, seconded by Pidcock, to direct Staff to
prepare a Developer's Agreement per Commission and Staff recom-
mendations and to direct Staff to work with the proponent on the
resolution of the parking issue.. Motion carried unanimously.
MOTION: Pidcock moved, seconded by Anderson, to grant the proponent
an early grading permit with the knowledge that was being done at the
risk of the proponent. Motion carried unanimously.
B. PARKWAY OFFICE/SERVI_CE CENTER by The Brauer Group, Inc. Request for a
Comprehensive nsive Guide Plan Amendment from Medium Density Residential to
Neighborhood Commercial on 3.67 acres, rezoning from Rural to
Community Commercial on 2.75 acres, rezoning from Rural to Office on
0.92 acres, and preliminary plat of 3.67 acres into two lots.
Location: northeast corner of Anderson Lakes Parkway and U.S. Highway
No. 169/212. (Resolution No. 85-257 - Comprehensive guide Plan
Amendment, Ordinance No. 40-85 - rezoning from Rural to Communit
Commerical and to Office and Resolution No. 85-258 - preliminary plat
City Manager Jullie stated notice of this Public Hearing had been
published and property owners within the project vicinity had been
notified.
Don Brauer, President of Brauer and Associates, represented the owners
of the building and addressed the proposal.
Planning Director Enger said this request had been reviewed by the
Planning Commission at its meeting on October 28, 1985, at which time
the Commission voted to recommend approval subject to the
recommendations included in the Staff Report dated October 25, 1985.
Director of Community Services Lambert noted this had been rciiewed by
the Parks. Recreation b Natural Resources Commission at its meeting on
November 4, 1985, at which time it voted to recommend approval subject
to the recommendations included in the October 25. 1985, Planning
Staff Report.
Bentley asked it this had been reviewed by the Public Safety I
Department; he expressed concern regarding the single entrance and the
fact that there were gas pumps on the site. Brauer said safety
factors were the reason for locating the gas pumps in the southwest
corner of the property. Bentley asked how the location of the gas
pumps affected the aesthetics of the proposal as well as the setback
requirements. Enger said did not know how this would look; the
I
:a
City Council Minutes -5- November 19, 1985
a
Nsetback requirements were met. Brauer stated there are many locations
in the metropolitan area where there is only one entrance/egress.
Peterson noted the present MultiMedia building has a large area which
is all wood; he wondered if the new structure would be built in a
similar fashion. Brauer stated the new building would be of brick and
glass with the end sections having some wood.
Redpath questionned the interior circulation. Brauer explained the
circulation pattern and said it would work best due to the location of
the gas pumps; he also explained how this might be changed should the
location of the gas pumps be changed. Enger asked about the location
of the gas tankers while servicing the facility. Brauer said they
will be on the south side and stated they service the facility at off-
peak hours. Bentley asked if the gas pumps were critical to this
project. Brauer said he did not know for sure whether or not this was
a critical point; they did not have a specific operator in mind for
this at this time. Bentley expressed concern over the safety factors;
he stated he would feel much more comfortable with the project if
there were no gas pumps there. Pidcock asked how often a tanker truck
would have to service the facility. Brauer said about twice a week
and this would depend on volume of sales.
Redpath asked if this could be dealt with in two parts. City Attorney
Pauly suggested the Public Hearing be continued should the matter be
separated. Bentley asked if the Council could divide the rezoning
into two parts. Pauly said that could be done and action could be
taken on only that portion which is designated to be office.
There were no comments from the audience.
MOTION: Bentley moved, seconded by Redpath, to adopt Resolution No.
85-257, amending the Comprehensive Municipal Plan. Motion carried
unanimously.
MOTION: Bentley moved, seconded by Redpath, to give 1st Reading to
Ordinance No. 40-85, rezoning from Rural to Office for 0.92 acres.
Motion carried unanimously.
MOTION: Bentley moved, seconded by Redpath, to adopt Resolution No.
85-258, approving the preliminary plat of Parkway Office/Service
Center for The Brauer Group, Inc. Motion carried unanimously.
MOTION: Bentley moved, seconded by Redpath, to continue the Public
Hearing on consideration of the rezoning from Rural to Community
Cotmercial on 2.75 acres to December 3, 1985. Motion carried
unanimously.
Brauer stated he would like the Council 's permission to begin grading
on the site.
7 n, ,
City Council Minutes -6- November 19, 1985
MOTION: Anderson moved, seconded by Pidcock, to grant a grading
iP
permit for the 0.92 acres prior to 2nd Reading of the Ordinance with
the knowledge of the proponent that this is done at the proponent's
risk . Motion carried unanimously.
C. EASEMENT VACATION BRYANT LAKE OFFICE TECH CENTER (Resolution No. 85-
269)
City Manager Jullie said notice of this Public Hearing had been
published.
Director of Public Works Dietz stated this was a housekeeping item.
There were no comments from the audience.
MOTION: Bentley moved, seconded by Anderson, to close the Public
Hearing and to adopt Resolution No. 85-263, vacating of drainage and
utility easements on Outlot A, Bryant Lake Office Tech Center. Motion
carried unanimously.
D. STREET NAME CHANGE - CONSIDER RENAMING WEST 66TH STREET TO TANAGER
LANE (CAST OF MANCH T R LANE - Ordinance No. 41-85
City Manager Jullie said notice of this Public Hearing had been
published and sent to six residents in the vicinity who would be
affected as well as to utility companies.
Director of Public Works Dietz addressed the reason for the change.
Anderson noted that the issue of continuity of street numbers had not
been raised as an issue.
Lewis Kinne, 6617 Manchester Lane, stated he lives on the corner of
West 66th Street and Manchester Lane. He said that people who are
"lost" have been able to orient themselves when told they are on 66th
Street.
Redpath noted there are many situations in the metropolitan area where
street names are mixed (there are both named and numbered streets.)
MOTION: Redpath moved, seconded by Anderson, to give 1st Reading to
Ordinance No. 41-85, renaming West 66th Street east of Manchester Lane j
to Tanager Lane. Motion carried unanimously.
f
E. REQUEST FOR HOUSING REVENUE BONDS IN THE AMOUNT OF $4 235 000 FOR
'PRESERVE LAC Resolution No. -
c
City Manager Jullie stated notice of this Public Hearing had been
published and noted Finance Director Frane's memorandum of November
14, 1985 in which this issue was addressed.
City Council Minutes -7- November 19, 1985
1. There were no comments from the audience.
MOTION: Bentley moved, seconded by Redpath, to close the Public
Hearing and to adopt. Resolution No. 85-265 as revised, giving
preliminary approval to a multifamily housing development revenue bond
project under Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 462C. Motion carried
unanimously.
r
F. RE VEST FOR HOUSING REVENUE BONDS IN THE AMOUNT OF $7 865 000 FOR EDEN
IN Resolution No. 85-266)
City Manager Jullie said notice of this Public Hearing had been
published and noted Finance Director Frane's memorandum of November
14, 1985, in which this matter was addressed.
There were no comments from the audience.
MOTION: Bentley moved, seconded by Redpath, to close the Public
Hearing and to adopt Resolution No. 85-266, relating to the issuance
of revenue bonds or notes pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Chapter
462C, for the purpose of financing a multifamily housing development;
adopting a multifamily housing program; and authorizing submission of
the housing program to the Minnesota Housing Finance Agency for
review and approval . Motion carried unanimously.
G. RE VEST FOR HOUSING REVENUE BONDS IN THE AMOUNT OF $64 000 000 FOR CSM
Resolution No. 85-267)
City Manager Jullie indicated notice of this Public Hearing had been
published. Jullie noted the proponent is seeking housing revenue
bonds for a property which has not been zoned for this type of
development. He said the Council , if it should choose to adopt this
resolution, should modify the Resolution to be effective only after
the City Attorney has approved a written understanding that the
proponent or other interested parties will not take action against the
City if it does not grant the necessary zoning approvals.
Finance Director Frane explained the situation the City is being put
in is similar to what happened last year --everyone is attempting to
get financing in place before the end of the year when the tax laws
are scheduled to change.
Planning Director Enger said the Planning Staff has met with the
proponent; the density of this proposal, is 40 units per acre with the
buildings being 3 - 10 stories in height. He said the Planning Staff
is not sure that 800 units are proper for this site. Enger noted that
the City is giving some incentive to the developer by passing the
inducement resolution. Gary Holmes, President, CSM Corporation, said
they do not view passage of the resolution as an inducement.
77
City Council Minutes -8- November 19, 1985
Anderson asked if there would be any legal entanglements if this were
adopted. City Attorney Pauly said it would be with the condition that
ultimate approval would be based on obtaining proper zoning. He asked
if the proponent was willing to accept those conditions. Steven
Schumeister, attorney for the developer, stated he had spoken with
Rick Rosow of the City Attorney's Office, and they realize they must
be in proper compliance with City procedures. Frane asked if the
proponent understood he was at risk and that the City might not grant
the zoning necessary for the request. Schumeister said that was
correct.
Bentley asked what kind of obligation was being placed on the City by
commiting to a certain dollar amount. Frane explained it becomes a
question of mechanics. Tom Maple, Miller & Schroeder, said there was
one significant change which becomes effective on January 1, 1986.
That involves the 20% set aside and involves the family income by
number. Maple said there are further modifications under consider-
ation by various committees in Washington, D.C. at this time which
will have further effects on the housing revenue bond programs. These
could severely limit what has gone on during the past several years.
Maple explained that the Minnesota Housing Finance Agency must have 30
days to review applications such as this; that is one of the reasons
for the "rush". The review must be completed prior to final
resolutions being adopted by the cities.
Redpath asked what would happen if not all of the $64,000,000 in
revenue bonds was not needed. Maple said they would go to market and
sell the securities subject to the credit enhancement required by the
City of Eden Prairie; only that amount would be sold and the remainder
would be redeemed. Bentley said he had a different understanding as
to what was going to happen. He thought the preliminary inducement
would only set aside an option for a potential future bond issue in
the event that proper zoning, etc. was received. John Larson, bond
counsel with Holmes and Graven, explained the ramifications of what is
proposed. He noted the bonds would be sold before the end of the
year; the bond proceeds would be escrowed subject to completion of all
of the City reviews necessary to begin the project. Pidcock asked who
would purchase the bonds. Larson said they would be sold to an
institution which would then hold them as a short-term investment. He
explained the bonds would be subject to a call if the project does not
go forward.
Bentley said he felt the purpose of these bonds was to help finance
projects which had validity. He said he did not think these bonds
should be used for speculative cash investment and he did not feel it
was the intent of the law that they be used in this manner. Larson
said that concern was shared by bond counsel . Larson said that there
must be a reasonable expectation that the project will be built and
that had been determined to be so by bond counsel. Frane explained a
i
City Council Minutes -9 November 19, 1985
�r similar type situation had occurred before with another project. The
proponents in that case were told they would have to go to the Federal
Reserve and purchase "slugs" which is a type of security which pays
the same interest rate as the bonds so there is no arbitrage. Paul
Ekholm, Miller & Schroeder, said the costs (such as architects
contracts, engineering contracts, planning reviews, bond commissions
etc. ) of the project can be "charged" to the bonds and may or may not
come out of the arbitrage earnings; it depends on how long the bonds
are in escrow. Bentley said he had concerns about the process used;
he noted he has always had a problem with bonds which are based on
actions not yet taken. Bentley also expressed concern that this
supports an inducement to build 400 units; he said he felt the Council
had to take into account what had been said by Staff. Pidcock
concurred. Redpath said he would feel more comfortable had the
proponent come in with a proposal to build 250 units. Redpath said he
could understand the problem with not knowing what action was going to
be taken by Congress.
Peterson said he could support this with the understanding that the
City is not obligated to look at 800 units and with the condition that
there be no arbitrage. He noted that the City stands to loose nothing
and the proponent is taking a big risk.
MOTION Redpath moved, seconded by Anderson, to close the Public
Hearing and to adopt Resolution No. 85-267, relating to the issuance
of Revenue Bonds pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 462C, for the
�... purpose of financing a multifamily housing development; adopting a
multifamily housing program; and authorizing submission of the housing
program to the Minnesota Housing Finance Agency for review and
approval ; with the understanding this resolution would only be
effective after review by the City Attorney and with the inclusion of
the necessary riders and conditions as outlined by the Council this
evening. Motion carried with Bentley and Pidcock voting "no."
H. REQUEST FOR HOUSING REVENUE BONDS IN THE AMOUNT OF $10,080,000 FOR
R.D. INVESTMENTS
(Resolution No.
City Manager Jullie said notice of this Public Hearing had been
published. Jullie noted this property is zoned properly for this type
of development.
David Carland, Vice President of H.D. Investments, stated they have a
purchase order for this property.
Planning Director Enger said this property has been zoned for about 15
years, and according to the City Attorney, conditions of approval can
be placed upon the proposal.
MOTION: Redpath moved, seconded by Anderson, to close the Public
Hearing and to adopt Resolution No. 85-268, relating to the issuance
of Revenue Bonds pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 462C, for the
C
^.
}
City Council Minutes -10- November 19, 1985
purpose of financing a multifamily housing development; adopting a
multifamily housing program; and authorizing submission of the housing
program to the Minnesota Housing Finance Agency for review and
approval ; and with the provision that there be renewed site review by
the Planning Commission in the form of a site plan review.
City Attorney Pauly asked the proponents if they were agreeable to the
site plan review provision of the motion. Carland said they would
agree to that. Pauly pointed out that there are not provisions in the
City Code which would require this, but the City would like to be
assurred that this proposal would go through the process. Carland
said they were agreeable to that.
Bentley said he had similar concerns with this proposal as he did with
item "G" on the Agenda and he intended to vote "no" on this.
VOTE ON THE MOTION: Motion carried with Bentley voting "no."
1. REQUEST FOR HOUSING REVENUE BONDS IN THE AMOUNT OF $10 000 000 FOR
CHIMO CARDINAL CREEK) (Resolution No. 95-299)
City Manager Jullie said notice of this Public Hearing had been
published and that the property currently has PUD Concept approval but
not zoning approval .
Craig Kallenberger, Chimo Development, addressed the proposal .
Bentley noted the Council had had a considerable amount of review on
this proposal . He questionned the equity position of the applicant.
Finance Director Frane said he was comfortable with it.
MOTION: Anderson moved, seconded by Redpath, to close the Public
Hearing and to adopt Resolution No. 85-269, relating to the issuance
of Revenue Bonds pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 462C, for the
purpose of financing a multifamily housing development; adopting a
multifamily housing program; and authorizing submission of the housing
program to the Minnesota Housing Finance Agency for review and
approval; and with the condition that approval of this Resolution does
not imply any consent or approvals whatsoever with respect to any
subsequent rezoning or development activities related to this project.
Motion carried unanimously.
V. PAYMENT OF CLAIMS NOS. 23719 - 24016
MOTION: Redpath moved, seconded by Anderson, to approve the Payment of
Claims Nos. 23719 - 24016. Roll call vote: Anderson, Bentley, Pidock,
Redpath, and Peterson voted "aye." Motion carried unanimously.
VI. ORDINANCES & RESOLUTIONS
( There were none.
1.
City Council Minutes -11- November 19, 1985
VII. PETITIONS, REQUESTS & COMMUNICATIONS
A. LION'S TAP - Review of excessive fill (beyond permit approval) , from
Lion's T—ap grading operation deposited on Sever Peterson's land.
Location: northeast corner of U.S. No. 169 and County Road 4.
City Manager Jullie indicated Staff would review the history of this
situation and then the developers would be given time to state their
case.
Zoning Administrator Jean Johnson reviewed what had taken place
regarding the permit which had been issued by the City. Johnson gave
a slide presentation which showed the encroachment. Johnson stated
the Planning Commission had reviewed the fill request at its meetings
on August 26, September 9, October 7, and October 28, 1985. At the
October 28 meeting the Commisison recommended that the Council approve
the request for fill subject to the recommendations of the Minnesota
Department of Natural Resources, the conditions of a proposed landhold
agreement, and the condition that fencing or some other barrier be
located at the right-of-way line of the property along County Road 4
so to prevent parking on the fill area by patrons of the restaurant to
the west. It was also noted that the Parks, Recreation & Natural
Resourc�cs Commission had reviewed this item at its meetings on
September 16 and November 4, 1985. The Commission voted to recommend
approval of the fill request with the condition that the fence be
installed to eliminate safety hazards and parking on the. site.
Bentley asked Sever Peterson, proponent, if fie agreed with the
recommendations of the Planning Commission. Peterson said he would
agree to the fence and would like to keep the Rural zoning.
Mayor Peterson asked how the filling in of this area would affect the
realignment of County Road 4. Director of Public Works Dietz said the
County has decided it would not be of general benefit to realign that
intersection; the County does not see any purpose in it if it has to
pick up the cost of the project.
Bentley asked if there was an agreement between City Staff and the
proponent as to what should be done. Planning Director Enger said the
Planning Commission is requesting more restrictions on the property
than the Code allows in a Rural zoning district. The Planning
Commission suggested that these restrictions be put in place.
Director of Community Services Lambert stated the Parks, Recreation &
Natural Resources Commission had reviewed this and decided the fill
should remain with the only restriction being that a fence be
constructed. Sever Peterson said he would like to have the area zoned
Rural . He said he did not want to park there but wanted to retain the
ability to park something there on a short-term basis; he would like
to turn this into pasture. He stated that most of the restrictions
are covered in the zoning ordinance.
C
City Council Minutes -12- November 19, 1985
Anderson asked what City ordinances had been violated by this fill .
Johnson said the Shoreland Code, Land Alteration Code, and the
Floodplain Code. Anderson asked if any tags had been issued.
Johnson said no tags had been issued, but the landowner had been
notified of the violations. Anderson said the Council should take a
good 'look at what has happened in this area: the bluffs were
disturbed and the floodplain has been filled. He said he did not
think the Council would have voted to approve the expansion of the
Lion's Tap had it known this was going to be the result. Anderson
said he was very concerned by this and the fact that no tags had been
issued. He expressed great concern about the fact that this had been
allowed to happen as the result of an expansion which had to be
approved by the City. Mayor Peterson said he concurred the process
had been transgressed; but the City has no punitive or legal recourse.
City Attorney Pauly said the City has the option of citing the
proponent for a misdemeanor of the Code; a court injunction; or the
process which is before the Council presently. Anderson said he felt
this was a blatant disregard for the City's Ordinances. Bert
Noterman, owner of the Lion's Tap, said he took offense with
Anderson' s statements. Noterman said he felt the bluff is twice as
nice now as it was prior to the expansion. Noternan said his engineer
had gone before the Watershed District and did not realize he should
have come before the City to have the plans revised regarding the
fill .
( Pidcock asked when Peterson was aware of the fact that the property
` had been filled beyond what it should have been. Johnson said the
fill was put in place in December of 1984 and had been in place for
two or three days when the City became aware of the situation;
authorization from the Watershed District came "after the fact'%
Sever Peterson said he acknowledges the fact that he did not come
before the City to request its approval ; he said he has been told by
the Watershed District that, with or without its approval, he was not
in violation of any of their restrictions.
Bentley said he felt there were two issues before the Council : 1)
leave the fill or remove the fill ; the Planning Commission's
recommendation does not mention anything about the zoning; and 2) the
question of whether or not citations were issued or should be issued;
these questions must be raised with Staff. Anderson suggested perhaps
the proponent should be given two or three years to remove the dirt;
he would like to see the dirt removed, but had no problem with when.
Mayor Peterson asked if Sever Peterson had requested a year and a half
ago to fill this area and had demonstrated it would make good pasture,
would the Council have been forced to agree if the Watershed District
had stated there would be no adverse impact on the area. City
Attorney Pauly said that is the issue which the Council has to decide
now. Pauly said that if the applicant complies with the various
standards which were shown in the Code and if no harm is demonstrated
C regarding the Code provisions then there is no reasonable means to
T
City Council Minutes -13- November 19, 1985
deny the permit. Pauly said the Shoreland, Floodplain, and Land
Alteration portions of the Code are designed to protect against
migration of soils, erosion, aesthetics, etc. The City would have to
demonstrate that one or more of those conditions existed and was not
mitigated by the proponent. Pauly stated the violation which occurred
was really filling without the necessary permit. Bentley asked if the
City could have justifiably withheld the permit. Pauly said it would
have been hard to do.
Pidcock asked if Sever Peterson's position could be upheld in court.
Pauly said in order to not grant a permit the City must show some harm
and that must consist of the fill encroaching on the floodplain,
siltation, erosion, etc. Pauly said the other agencies had already
looked at those issues and did not feel it was a significant
encroachment. The City would have to prove to those other agencies
that their approvals were incorrect.
Mayor Peterson said he could not find a good reason to request Sever
Peterson to remove the fill .
MOTION: Redpath moved, seconded by Pidcock, moved to allow the fill
to remain on the site with a land agreement to be executed between the
proponent and the City stating the land is to be used only for crops
and with no storage on the site for more than two weeks; there is to
be no parking on the site; and a fence is to be installed per
recommendation of the Planning Commission. Motion carried with
Anderson voting "no."
Anderson said he hoped the Council would act with consistency when a
situation like this occurs again.
VIII . REPORTS OF ADVISORY COMMISSIONS
There were none.
IX. REPORTS OF OFFICERS, BOARDS & COMMISSIONS
A. Reports of Council Members
1. Pidcock - Discussion on policy of membership in associations:
Pidcock said she would a to see a policy whereby the dues of no
more than two department heads were paid by the City for membership in
any one organization. Redpath said when action was taken by the City
Council to pay for dues to various organizations, this was expressly
done to get the department heads out into the community. Redpath said
he felt that any service organization is of great benefit to the City;
the department heads input is invaluable both to the organization and
to the City. He did not feel department heads should be assigned an
organization; this should be left up to the individuals.
Anderson asked if tax monies should be used to pay for memberships
which were exclusive.
City Council Minutes -14•• November 19, 1985
Pidcock said she believes strongly in service clubs but her point was
that she did not think the City should be paying for five memberships
in one organization. Peterson said the City is presently paying for
two memberships in one organization. He noted this decision had been
made by a previous Council and must have been done with deliberation.
Peterson said this might be more of a budget issue and that might be a
more appropriate time for this type of discussion.
Anderson again expressed concern about the use of public funds for
clubs and organizations which exclude others because of gender.
Peterson said he felt this was an ethical question and an important
one. He suggested the Human Rights and Services Commission might be
the proper place to study this. Bentley asked if this might be
referred to the City Attorney for his review. City Attorney Pauly
said there might be two questions: a legal one and another dealing
with policy.
MOTION: Redpath moved, seconded by Anderson, to refer the policy
question to the Human Rights b Services Commission with the Commission
to come back to the City Council with its report by April 1, 1986.
Motion carried unanimously.
MOTION: Bentley moved, seconded by Pidcock, to refer the issue as to
the number of memberships paid for by the City to City Manager Jullie
with a report back to the Council during the first part of the year
(sometime in January) . Motion carried unanimously.
2. City Manager' s Review Document: Peterson asked all Council mem-
bers to forward to him any and-a and-31T suggestions and revisions to the
Review Document.
B. Report of City Manager
City Manager Jullie stated the proposed Resolution No. 85-270 would
put a cap on the interest accruing on deferred assessments for the
Carmel Addition and Eden Road projects.
MOTION: Bentley moved, seconded by Anderson, to adopt Resolution No.
85-270, revision to final assessment roll as revised by the City
Attorney. Motion carried unanimously.
MOTION: Bentley moved, seconded by Pidcock, to set 6:30 p.m.,
Tuesday, December 10, 1985, as the date and time of a Special Meeting
of the City Council at which time the Opt-Out Transit Study and City
Hall Referendum will be discussed. Motion carried unanimously.
C. Report of City Attorney
City Attorney Pauly stated the Council will meet in a closed session
following the meeting to discuss litigation pending against the City.
f
i
I
I
City Council Minutes -15s November 19, 1985
~ D. Report of Director of Community Services
1. Round Lake Treatment Program
Director of Community Services Lambert addressed his memorandum of
October 9, 1985, in which this program was discussed.
Anderson said he would like to ask the Watershed District to
contribute 50% of the cost of this project.
MOTION: Anderson moved, seconded by Bentley, to authorize the
expenditure of no more than $4,500 per year for 1986 and 1987 to
conduct a monitoring program for Round Lake and to request the
Watershed District to contribute 50% of the cost. Motion carried
unanimously.
X. NEW BUSINESS
A. Review of Board of Appeals action of November 14 1985 regarding
McGlynn's lakeU
Anderson noted that McGlynn's Bakeries had originally been before the
City Council and had asked for a building with a mansard roof and now
wants to go through the variance process to eliminate that style roof.
{ MOTION: Anderson moved, seconded by Bentley, to place review of the
Board of Appeals action of November 14, 1985, regarding McGlynn's
Bakery on the City Council Agenda for the December 17, 1985, City
Council Meeting. Motion carried unanimously.
B. Leaf Recycling within the City
Anderson said there has been a problem this Fall with garbage haulers
not willing to pick up leaves largely due to the raise in tipping fees
at the Landfill . He suggested perhaps the City might get involved in
some way since there is a leaf recycling facility within the City.
Bentley said this could be referred to the Recycling Committee.
MOTION: Bentley moved, seconded by Anderson, to refer this matter to
the Recycling Advisory Committee.
Assistant to the City Manager Dawson said the Recycling Advisory i
Committee has decided it has completed its charge and it does not want
to meet any more.
Anderson said he felt the Council should appoint another Committee.
The motion was withdrawn by Bentley with the consent of Anderson.
MOTION: Bentley moved, seconded by Anderson, to refer this matter to
Staff and to have Staff report back to the Council at the next regular
meeting of the Council . Motion carried unanimously.
r x -
City Council Minutes -16- November 19, 1985
C. City Director with Staff and Commission Member' s Phone Numbers
MOTION: Anderson moved, seconded by Pidcock, to direct Staff to
prepare a City Staff Directory listing the home phone numbers of Staff
and Commission members. Motion carried unanimously.
D. &proved Minutes of the Parks Recreation & Natural Resources
Commission for October ,,
Pidcock said in reading the Minutes of the October 21, 198 , meeting
of the Parks, Recreation & Natural Resources Commission she was
surprised to read the City Council did not support an underpass on
Baker Road. She said she did not have knowledge that the City Council
had given any direction regarding this matter.
Director of Community Services Lambert said he was not at the Council
Meeting when that was discussed. Lambert said the Commission would
support the underpass.
The consensus was that care should be taken in reporting to the
Commissions the actions of the Council.
XI. ADJOURNMENT
The meeting was adjourned to a closed session at which time pending
_ litigation was discussed.