Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1983-09-20 CC MIN3' • COUNCIL CHAMBERS Stillwater, Minnesota September 20, 1983 4:00 P. M. REGULAR MEETING The meeting was called to order by President Peterson. The Invocation was given by the City Clerk. Present: Councilwomen Avise and Bodlovick, Councilmen Kimble and MacDonald and Mayor Peterson Absent: None Also Present: Finance Director/Coordinator, Kriesel City Clerk, Schnell City Attorney, Magnuson Superintendent of Public Works, Shelton Public Safety Director, Abrahamson Director of Parks & Recreation, Blekum Zoning Administrator, Zepper Consulting Engineer, Meister Fire Chief, Chial Springsted's, Ron Langness Press: Stillwater Gazette, Regan Citizens: Bob Safe, D. J. Morehead, Del Wheeler, Michelle Hueller INDIVIDUALS & DELEGP:^IONS RON LANGNESS, BOND SAL: The City Clerk presented to the Council affidavits showing publication in the official newspaper and the Commercial West of a notice of sale of $745,000 General Obligation Improvement Bonds of 1983 of the City, for which sealed bids were to be received and considered at this meeting in accordance with the resolution adopted by the City Council on August 24, 1983. Said affidavits were examined and found satisfactory and directed to be placed on file in the office of the City Clerk. The City Clerk then announced that eight sealed bids had been received at the City offices prior to 4:00 P. M. pursuant to said notice of call for bids, which bids were then opened, read and tabulated, and the highest and best bid of each bidder was found to be as follows: BIDDER NEW INTEREST COUPONS PRICE COST & RATE Piper, Jaffrey & Hopwood, Inc. 6.25% 1985 $734,570.00 $393,433.34 6.50% 1986 (7,9188%) 6.75% 1987 7.00% 1988 7.20% 1989 7.40% 1990 7.60% 1991 7.80% 1992 8.00% 1993 8.20% 1994 8.40% 1995 Dain Bosworth, Inc. 6.20% 1985 734,570.00 $396,214.17 6.40% 1986 (7.9747%) 6.90% 1987 7.10% 1988 7.20% 1989 7.40% 1990 7.70% 1991 7.90% 1992 8.10% 1993 8.25% 1994 8.40% 1995 Cronin & Marcotte, Inc. 6.25% 1985 $736,060.00 $397,198.33 6.50% 1986 (7.9945%) 6.75% 1987 7.00% 1988 7.25% 1989 7.50% 1990 7.75% 1991 8.00% 1992 8.15% 1993 8.30% 1994 8.50% 1995 (continued on page 38) f U • September 20, 1983 NET INTEREST BIDDER COUPONS PRICE COST & RATE NORWEST SECURITIES 6.25% 1985 $735,687.50 $399,375.8) 83 Moore, Juran & Co., Inc. 6.50% 1986 M. H. Novick & Co., Inc. 6.75% 1987 Norwest Bank of Stillwater 7.00% 1988 0% 1989 7.50% 1990 7.75% 1991 8.00% 1992 8.20% 1993 8.40% 1994 8.60% 1995 MERRILL LYNCH WHITE WELD 6.50% 1985 $733,154.50 $400,874.66) 66 CAPITAL MARKETS GROUP 6.75% 1986 7.00% 1987 7.15% 1988 7.30% 1989 7.50% 1990 7.70% 1991 8.00% 1992 8.10% 1993 8.25% 1994 8.50% 1995 ALLISON-WILLIAMS COMPANY 6.75%6.50% 1985 1986 $734,272.00 $40(,369.66 66) 7.00% 1987 7.15% 1988 7.30% 1989 7.60% 1990 7.75% 1991 8.00% 1992 8.20% 1993 8.40% 1994 8.50% 1995 THE FIRST NATIONAL BANK OF 6.75%6.50% 1985 1986 ST. PAUL First National Bank of Minneapolis First National Bank of 7.00% 1987 Stillwater 7.20% 1988 7.40% 1989 7.60% 1990 7.80% 1991 8.00% 1992 8.25% 1993 8.40% 1994 8.60% 1995 $733,825.00 $404,64. 81728) AMERICAN NATIONAL BANK & 6.50% 1985 $733,452.50 $407,349.1) 16 TRUST CO. OF ST. PAUL 6.70% 1986 Dougherty, Dawkins, Strand & 6.90% 1987 Yost, Inc. 7.20% 1988 Juran & Moody, Inc. 7.40% 1989 Robert S. C. Peterson, Inc. 7.60% 1990 7.90% 1991 8.10% 1992 8.25% 1993 8.50% 1994 8.70% 1995 lution On motion of Councilwoman Bodiovick, seconded edLby Councilman Kimble, a resolutiInS was introduced "AUTHORIZING ISSUANCE, k AND PROVIDING FOR THE PAYMENT OF $745,000 GENERAL OBLIGATION IMPROVEMENT BONDS 01 1983". Ayes --Councilwomen Avise and BodlOViCk.ouncilmen Kimble and MacDonald and Mayor Peterson Nays--None (see resolutions) On motion of Councilman Kimble, seconded by Councilwoman Bodlovick, the Council named Norwest Bank, Minneapolis, N. A., Minneapolis, Minnesota as the Registrar for this bond sale. (all in favor) 2. MRS. MICHELLE HUELLER, 1115 West Linden Street, appeared before the Council regarding the traffic problems on West Linden and Echo Lane - speeding & the high concentration of children under the age of twelve on these two streets. They were requesting two stop signs. ANOTHER RESIDENT (who did not identify herself) reminded the Council of the contour of the street (Echo Lane) and the fact that Linden Street is the access for the homes on McKusick Lane. There are currently two "Caution" signs on this street and they are not very legible due to age. They would also like "Slow" painted on their street. September 20, 1983 39\ • • CHIEF ABRAHAMSON stated that he would recommend the replacement of the "Caution" signs on Echo Lane and also he recommended that before stop signs are installed that there would be a traffic count done on Linden Street. The Council concurred that the "Caution" Signs be replaced that the Police Department do a traffic count on this street before any other signs are installed. 3. DON MOREHEAD AND GREG WASICK made an easel presentation of the USMC Deferred Compensation Plan for City employees. They represented the U. 5. Conference of Mayors Deferred Compensation Program and gave somewhat of a detailed presentation of their plat.. BOB SAFE with State Farm Insurance also made a presentation on their Deferred Comp Plan. et agenThe cies for considerationas bydthected tCnuncilgandprogram from each of these theemployees. STAFF REPORTS PUBLIC SAFETY 1. CHIEF ABRAHAMSON referred to the request for "NO PARKING HERE TO CORNER" at the intersection of Martha and Myrtle Streets and he recommended that the curb be painted at this location along with some signing. On motion of Councilwoman Avise, seconded by Councilman MacDonald, the Council moved to follow the recommendation of the Director of Public Safety and do the necessary marking and signing to permit no parking at the intersection of Myrtle and Martha Streets as requested. (all in favor) ll for the ng the 2. CIF VikiingASh feltery aboute 30,000 herevandltheyfwere themtst type of people that are an asset to the City. PARKS & RECREATION _e their royal 1. MR. BLEKU:a displayed the plans for the Parkhk byhththe wHi-Risehfor theicapprovs of the design concept so that he may proceed about the debris that is being put onto this property and an attempt will be made to find the violator and have them discontinue this practice. It was suggested that Mr. Kriesel set up a meeting on this matter with Rod i-wson, and Pastor Johns of Trinity Church. On motion of Councilwoman Avise, seconded by Councilman Kimble, the Council gave concept approval to Mr. Blekum for the Mini -Park. (all in favor) PUBLIC WORKS City's ng house on th 1. MR. SHLON on theEbluffland rthe drainageeliability resultingfrom such fabhome land aMR. MAGNUSON cited Main cited that we have a Water Course Ordinance and they would be fojnd by that ordinance to build on such a location. MR. MAGNUSON was directed to contact Mr. Balfanz who proposes to build a home on such a site. g Lily Lake e has 2 permissionNanased about thedkhe would likeetoe have asmentsthem in writingfor the nand fMR. MAGNUSONhagreedt verbal take care of this matter. er on the 3' old SHELTN informed service station onhSouthnThird hStreet - helhas rdone l some excavating site excavatingandithe the water problems that he has encountered. They have found that this water actually he hendidnnottfhe snitarYeelathat hes scould getewer on hird intosthee stormdsewerould thatl iseto locatedeaththerremedied- hen of the Chestnut Street stairs. There was discussion as to where he could hook in and there are others that are contributing to this water problem - possibly a manhole on the street in front and then go down to the one in front of the Arlington Apartments. MR. MEISTER indicated that he would have to look at. it and check out the elevations and then check to see if there is a stub there - he will also check the sewer separa- tion project maps on this matter. BUILDING OFFICIAL'S REPORT resolution was 1. On motion of Councilman Kimble, seconded by Councilwoman Avise, introduced "EMPLOYING VERNON RYLANDER AS FULL-TIME BUILDING INSPECTOR AT A RATE OF $20,000 PER YEAR AND INCLUDING ALL CITY BENEFITS". AYES --Councilwomen Avise and Bodlovick, Councilmen Kimble and MacDonald and Mayor Peterson NAYS --None (see resolutions) 2. MR. ZEPPER inquired about a permit for Mr. Brass to remodel the Village Shop and — the Laundromat buildings into one building and asked about a Special Permit for same. On motion of Councilman Kimble, seconded by Councilwoman Bodlovick, the • Council granted the Special Use Permit to Mr. Brass since no substantial property rights are involved for the remodeling of the Village Shop and Laundromat buildings. (all in favor) • • September 20, 1983 • et to is as tation 3. MR. ZPPR satedhe isEinEthet floodiplainr- hat M.tthisgrenwouldsbeotoward Myrtlee Street hand g the Council and add twenty Councilfelt that this matter should be referred to the Planning Commission first. to rin 4 thiS would bef arSingleefamily1 residence) inraMCommercial sdistrictgin amobile - hewasinformed that this party did come in to the office today and filed an application for a Special Use Permit. 1. FIRE CHIEF On motion of Councilwoman toisp, seconded by Councilman MacDonald, theCouncil authorized C the Fire Chief to spend funds for the Fire Prevention Elementary Poster Contea for the four schools as detailed. (all in favor) CITY CLERK'S REPORT No report 1 MR. MAGNUSON stated that he has received Ritzercomplaint he isfrom awaitingkawformalho feel CITY ATTORNEY'complaint that she is being discriminated by on on this matter.the2 MR. GNUSONthe ReichoW Plato oed tnatethisncil platthat can be filedhe willneed and askedethat eMr. Meistermcheck c.at the legal description before the Mayor and Clerk sign same. O:, motion of Councilman Kimble, seconded by Councklwoman Avise, the Council authorized the Mayor and the City Clerk to sign the release of the easement for the Wildwood Pinds Second Addition Plat subject to the review of the legal descrip- tion by Mr. Meister. 3. MR. MAGNUSON at this time explained regarding the the Washington County Courthouse wththepermitteduses- they donname mcoues rt- house but he felt that it falls under institutional type thing this proposal not includea jail pxpansion- inthe futureitmight- but there is nothing in this proposal. These types of Special Uses the burden falls on the City rather than the applicant to show that ithesCouncil will havethe t health, findingswelfare atand thesafety time thethe actionarea. Iff t this is turned down, is taken. CITY COORDINATOR'S REPORT a resolution was I. in motion of Councilman HE seconded by CouncilwomanPBod1OVGCk. COMMISSION SECRETARY introduced "INCREASING THE COMPESNATION FOR GWEN MONTY, FROM $5.00 TO $6.00 PER HOUR" Ayes --Councilwomen Avise and Bodlovick, Councilmen Kimb'e and MacDonald and Mayor Peterson (see resolutions) Nays --None 2. On motion of Councilwoman Bodlovick, seconded by Councilman Kimble, a resolution was CITY OFCSTILLWATERIANDMSTILLWATERRTOWNSHIPRATAA RATE OFE$6.00TPER HOUR" PLANNING BOA HE ve September 19, 1983) Councilmen Kimble and MacDonald and Ayes --Councilwomen Avise and Bodlovick, Peterson Nays --None (see resolutions) 3. MR. KRIESEL mentioned the Metro Area Regional Meeting on September 29, 1983 beginning at 2:30 P. M. and continuing on into the evening - it is $12.00 per person and he stated that he would like to go - this is at Raddison Southtin Bloomington and anyone wishing to attend should contact him by Monday, RESOLUTIONS - The following resolutions were read and on roll call were unaimously adopted: 000 G. O. Bonds - Piper Jaffrey 5 Hopwood 1. Awarding the Bond Sale for the $745, 2. Salary Increase for the Planning Commission Secretary 3. Employ Mary PetriS] o for the Joint Planning Board Secretary and Setting the Compensation. The meeting recessed at 5:55 P. M. until 7:30 P.M. Attest: Cityttlerk Ma or • • AIP • COUNCIL CHAMBERS Stillwater, Minnesota RECESSED MEETING September 20, 1983 7:30 P. M. The meeting was reconvened by Mayor Peterson. The Invocation was given by the City Clerk. Present: Councilwomen Avise and Bodlovick, Councilmen Kimble and MacDonald and Mayor Peterson Absent: None Also Present: City Coordinator, Kriesel City Clerk, Schnell City Attorney, Magnuson Director of Public Safety, Abrahamson Superintendent of Public Works, Shelton Building Official, Zepper Consulting Engineer, Meister Planning Commission Chairman, Farrell Press: Stillwater, Gazette, Regan St. Croix Press, Landkammer Citizens: Harold Foster, John DeCurtins, Don Swenberg, John and Barb O'Neal, Barry McKee, Leroy Christianson, SallyyrEvyert, Chuck uckdSwanson,Wes Lyle Doerr, Jim Gannon, Tom Cropp, Scheel. APPROVAL OF MINUTES minutes of the follow - On motion of Councilwoman Avise, seconded bucouncilmaflaverKimble, ing meetings were approved: (all iSeptember 6, 1983 Regular Meeting 7:30 P. M. PUBLICHEARINGS 1 portion ofh63rdyStreet and rwhichris betweenctheaproposed of Stillwaterand vacation Oak Park Heights. Oak Park Heights approved the vacation on August 22, 1983 and adopted Resolution No. 82-8-29. The Mayor opened the hearing. No one spoke either in behalf or opposed to this vacation. The Mayor closed the hearing. a resolution On motion of Councklwoman Bodlovick, seconded by Councilwoman Avise, was introduced "VACATING A PORTION OF 63RD STREET". Ayes--Council-women Avise and Bodlovick and Councilmen Kimble and MacDonald and Mayor Peterson (see resolutions) Nays --None 2. This Permitat tdevelophe dayaan expansiontto the Washington Courthouse oComplex oatr aSphe puic hearing for Case ecial 61st Street North.g Notice of the hearing was published in the SllwatercEveningeGaGazette, the all officials newspaper of the City on September 9, ti83 property owners within 300 feet. The Mayor opened the hearing. on ounty, theeEhisERR, irctr of tory andebuilding Fdates tfor the present sfacit fr 1 litiesoftthe Coffice buildingexplained o look at and the court facilities. pr Otheconsulting tofirm the yearas engaged 2000. tThey lookedhinto is needed today and try to 7ect the merits of consolidation or satellite facilities scattered around the coon y and the end results of that study the recommendations indicated that the most cost as The efficiPnt thelvery of centralizationes isw (1)through operatethe more economically; facilities.ntralized provides staff the ability otshare o reducemspaceon aforr ales - varietyvofdpeakl loadrons eonditions, sharing; (3) ability provide direct management communications; especially in the courts; (4) ability to (5) ability to serve the customers in a single facility - in a number of areas peoleerices ith re an one department; savingsain thel rentingsofvotherw facilitiesw for aoparthof the departments -- thecost est y in the new Social Services are proposed to be the largac(l)tyoin savings addition; (7) ce savings in data processing and telephone systems; of one facility; (9) increased productivity with adequate conditions. an Ir they assumebackhperiode in savings £ resulting afrom they above items lwould f million be dollars the pay something like nine years or less. • • September 20, 1983 • The application talks about a building of 85,000 square fret - at the stage that they are in the planning process this square foot number they would expect as the plans are refined that that would probably drop to closer to 75,000 square feet. MR. FRED SHANK, architect, reviewed the site plans with the Council and audience - the expansion will be to the south of the present facility, and the details of the parking. There will be three stores with two stores on the north side and 2-1/2 to 3 on the south side of the structure. The roof line will be no higher than the existing courthouse. The materials will be the same with the exception of the lime- stone - the interior of the building will be very efficient, economical kind of construction - the building will contain administration, central services, community health, social services, the Board Room and associated training rooms - there will be space for job training, planning department, employee lunchroom, a fair amount of document storage and other miscellaneous facilities. The only facilities that will not be located on this site will be the Highway Department, and the Library Offices. This plan incorporates 629 parking spaces on the site. Beyond that the County presently leases 40 spaces from the church across the street and they have determined that parking on the street using only one side of the street they could achieve an additional seventy parking spaces giving them a grand total, including the street parking of 739 spaces. The parking requirements for the City of Stillwater for this kind of function would be one parking space for each office or suite of offices -- 240 spaces; the second part of the ordinance states it is required that you have one space per every four employees or occupant; the total employees and the occupants and divided that by four which gives them 160; the third part states parking spaces as determined by the City Council. What they have done is taken the remaining park- ing spaces that they have not accomodated which would be 481 and probably half of them would be at the site at one time which would be another 240. The bottom line is 640 spaces they are providing on the site 629 plus the capability of 40 across the street. MR. DOERR addressed the traffic concerns - it is important to recognize a couple of things - if they do nothing at all, they still have a traffic problem; the bulk of the traffic to the courthouse is there right now - the addition of the new space will not generate as much in proportion that the space that they currently have be- cause the court facilities will remain there and it will continue to expand and the traffic that goes along with them. The traffic generated by the new addition is significantly less than what is there currently. He reviewed with the Council a survey of traffic that they had done. MAYOR PETERSON indicated for the record that on this date he received a petition with some 200 signatures on it which are in opposition to the construction of the new courthouse. r BARRY MC KEE, resides near the courthouse and he was here as attorney representing Don Swenberg, gave an interpretation of the Stillwater Zoning Ordinance - the zoning covering this land is self-explanatory (RA) subdivision 12 - specifically says what the issues are, specifically when special permits can be issued by the City and he did not feel that it qualifies under any of the plans and the only exception might be subdivision (f) which says other Commercial Uses which are not objectionable to the neighborhood in which they are proposed to be located. If this body finds that the building is not objectionable to the neighborhod, then they can go ahead and issue the permit under that particular subdivision. He felt that the Council had not only a duty to the people of Stillwater but also to the people of Oak Park Heights who live in the boundary line between the two municipalities - it is their opinion that the current zoning ordinance does not in fact authorize the proposed use as proposed by the County. MR, MAGNUSON stated that the ordinance specifically provides that certain uses are permitted in the RA district with a special use permit such as hospitals, sanitariums, nursing homes, rest homes, convalescent homes, orphanages, homes for the aged, che - table institutions, and other similar institutions - it is very similar to school in providing the traffic and as far as commercial uses found not to be objectionable to the neighborhood. The sort of an objection would have to be a substantial objection and the objections of the neighbors standing along is not sufficient reason to turn down a permit and it is not the number of people who object - it is the quality of the objection and not the quantity who object - in his view, the proposed courthouse expansion is an institutional use and, therefore, by implication is a use that is permitted by a Special Use Permit in this Zoning District. MR. MC KEE stated that the language is quite specific - it talks about hospitals, sanitoriums, nursing homes, rest homes, etc. - in his interpretation and the under- standing of a governmental office building is not a charitable institution and does not come within the meaning of Subdivision (A) - he was not proposing that they not alter the zoning ordinance - the County has a problem and they are asking certain citizens to bear the brunt of solving that problem for the rest of the community -- the Council should obey what the law is and the law says what the people who are concerned about what is happening here should happen in their community - what uses are authorized on their land - some of the people have to suffer when the rest of the community prospers and he felt that numbers has something to do with it - the Planning Commission has denied it for parking and traffic purposes. JOHN O'NEAL, 6215 Panama Avenue,failed to see where there has been reference to the trua large picture and the parking spaces - what they have done is increased their facility and taken away 150 parking spaces - they are relying on the church facility to provide 40 and who is to say that those spaces won't be used by the church - where are the cars going to park for the courts - is this in the best safety interests to allow this traffic in a school area where there are young children and he did not feel (continued on page 43) • • September 20, 1983 4 3\',. eleN • • that this should be allowed. He questioned the cost savings in personnel to maintain this facility and other facilities and also the data processing items. He made further comments about the long range plan for the "secure outside recreation facility" for hardened criminals which is in a residential area, and the bnguage which is used by these people. CHARLES SWANSON stated that Washington County has been the sole owner of that property since it was annexed to the City of Stillwater - at the time it was purchased it was located in the Township of Oak Park and because of the State Statute requiring that the courthouse be located in the City of Stillwater that particular site as shown there right now where the facility stands was annexed to the City of Stillwater and this zoning was on the property when it was annexed to the City. He further made reference to the traffic and that all of these streets were designed as 44 foot streets and they can hold two lanes of traffic and parking on both sides - they should handle 10,000vehicles per day. Washington County has done some background work as far as future needs and the article did show a courts and jail facility -it is a preliminary cut as to what may be needed in the future - the time will tell as to what will be happening to our sentencing and jail space needs and court needs and are going to continue to address that problem - the application that they have submitted is only for the office expansion on the south side of the building and does not include the area to the north - they will again have to apply for a Special Use Permit at such time in the future that facility would be proposed and the parking required for that expansion. DON SWENBERG, 14990 - 60th Street North, was concerned about the traffic problems and that he made up the petition with the some 200 signers opposed to this proposal. He felt that this is going to depreciate their property values and originally this was to be a buffer zone. This is a residential area - he does not deny the fact that they need the expansion, and he asked why it could not be located in another area. COUNCILWOMAN AVISE inquired about the future expansion and MR. DOERR stated that the architect did go through the whole process and they came up with a square foot projection - the County in its previous negotiations with OPH withdrew its application in order to preserve options and the County is not foreclosing its options with the long term future on the eleven acres adjacent to the site - he did not feel that it was appropriate to consider that at this time in conjunction with the application that they have submitted at this time since they have not had the opportunity to go into the details and would not do so until they got closer to the time when the building would be apprpriate. There is no attempt being made to hide the fact that they had to do some long range planning - the mistake is to think that the plan that appeared in the paper is what is being proposed - it was simply to show graphically in relation to the rest of the buildings what kind of space would be occuppied if they were to build that today based on what they know today - when that time comes wherever it is posed to go the County is fully committed to making the application and the proposal consistent with the ordinances that exist. The County is looking at what the next required potential would be and at this time they are not prepared to submit such plans. MR. O'NEAL addressed the planning for the area and the piece of property that the County purchased and it was zoned residential single dwelling and duplex at the maximum yet the County went ahead and purchased this piece of property for future expansion without going ahead and checking with Oak Park Heights or making that purchase contingent upon whether or not that could be rezoned. In 1979 the County came forth asking the City of Oak Park Heights for a Conditional Use Permit and second a permit to have it rezoned to Commercial which was turned down by the City of Oak Park Heights. He questioned the County's ability to do planning and make adequate purchases for expansions that they talk about - this time they elected to withdraw their proposal and Mr. Doerr says that this is an option for them and he questioned that since it was turned down once already - the citizens of Oak Park Heights do not want it as shown by petitions that people in the audience have put together and others. Since May of this year they have the costs for this project going from 3-1/2 million dollars to 12 million dollars. He questioned that the property would be available in the future and how are they doing to continue to expand if there is no more property. He felt that this should be addressed to a long range plan. TOM FARRELL, Planning Commission Chairman, basically the evidence given in both cases was very similar with additions from both aspects - they dened the permit contingent on four basic keys (1) traffic and they used a different report than that given by the County - in their formula there are an avenge of 12 daily trips per employee and they took the employee count as being 410 at the present time and averaged out to 4,920 trips which was roughly about 5,000 car trips in and out of that area - without any signalization on Fourth Street and Sixth Avenue; (2) in the terms of the parking they could not see how they could justify parking on street - they have never considered on street parking and this is one of the primary complaints - they are providing adequate off-street parking; (3) they did not feel that the neighborhood itself was adequate for the traffic load when you consider the number of churches, schools and multi -family dwellings, etc.; (4) they felt that the approval of this stage would automatically allow the second stage which provides even less parking and probably more traffic. The motion for approval was defeated by a two to five vote (two ayes and 5 nays) • • • • •/44 September 20, 1983 COUNCILWOMAN BODLOVICK felt at the first presentation that we did not need an addition to that courthouse for more secretaries and more welfare people and follow- ing that she did some background work - she spoke to a few County Commissioners and they justified to her that combining of a number of services under one roof would be a saving - and the elimination of the Welfare Office on Greeley Street would eliminate one hazardous intersection and would justify her position on the addition. She asked Mr. Zepper if the parking meets the ordinance and MR. ZEPPER stated that it meets the ordinance without the 240 that the ordinance says "as other parking spots the Council deems necessary" and they have allowed another 240 for the Council's wishes. COUNCILMAN MAC DONALD asked how did the Planning Commission deem that it was in- sufficient parking at their meeting - what did they base that decision on and MR. FARRELL at this time explained their formula with 651 required parking spaces and they showed only 520 on -site parking spaces which is 131 short based on the figures used at the Planning Commission. (COUNCILWOMAN AVISE also spoke to this ussue and she stated that it was the feeling of the Planning Commission that it was difficult to look at the one plan presented that they had to look down the road - and down the road there is not going to be enough room to handle the whole facility). COUNCILMAN MAC DONALD inquired about the possibility of traffic lights going in there sooner and MR. SWANSON stated that if the traffic generates to the point that traffic signals are warranted by other developments in the area such as office complexes on some of the Hauge property or some place else, then they would have to install the traffic signals - before that it could be made a four-way stop inter- section and these warrants are given prior to the traffic signals - once they meet warrants for a four-way inter -section they would install that and if the traffic volumes are reached by 1990 by traffic generated from the Courthouse or whatever the County would be in a position to install the signals at that time. DON SWENBERG recommended that an environmental study be done of this area. MR. MAGNUSON stated work sheets could be requested by the signatures of 500 people to get the job done. There was further discussion on the brmulas to determine the parking criteria for such a building which were used in the Comprehensive Land Plan for the City of Stillwater, and the formula used by Washington County. MARY OSEBY, 6283 Paris Avenue North, inquired about the petition that she delivered to the City Clerk's Office and MAYOR PETERSON confirmed the receipt of same - she stated that all of the signatures are of people in the immediate area of the Court- house. She made reference to some of Mr. Lockyer's comments about the wasted space and there is no room for expansion - she questioned possible errors in the current planning and they would be back in the future - the people in the area are the ones that have to live with it - she made reference to the amount of traffic and the savings by not leasing other properties and she posed other questions about the main- tenance of the new building. MR. DOERR stated that the money has been set aside for this improvement and at the time construction starts the money necessary to build it will be available and committed to the project, and this is in accordance with the laws that they have to operate under. They are talking about gross figures and over-all estimates that it is misleading and when they get to the final project they will have figures that include everything. MR. DOERR added that they attempted in this process to indicate their desire to do the proper kind of a job - they feel that they have qualified under the ordinance for the issuance of a Conditional Use Permit and the County is going to continue to be cooperative with the local units of government in resolving problems - they recognize that there are parking and traffic problems - they are not going to get any better if they don't do something to improve their parking facilities - they will get worse if nothing is done at all. COUNCILMAN KIMBLE stated that the planning for the current facility was done in the sixties — would it be fair to say in regard to the planning and projections for the future that there are better ways to making these determinations and MR. DOERR felt that it will be easier to make valid projections even though they are bound by State Statutes - he made reference to the old facilities and the current facilities that they are operating out of - there were brief discussions on future explansions at the time the present facility was planned and constructed. MR. MC KEE felt that the question of planning is really an issue - the County admits that they are going to be back here very shortly for something for a new jail and court building - they may have purchased the land twenty years ago - they should have at that time got the proper zoning and what the County is trying to do is to let the City of Stillwater rectify their mistake at the expense of the neighborhood. COUNCILMAN MAC DONALD asked Mr. Magnuson to state for the record the reasons that the City should turn down a Special Use Permit. • . • • September 20, 1983 • • MR. MAGNUSON stated that the reason that the Council grants or denies a Special Use Permit has to be found in the testimony and all other exhibits and evidence that has been presented here tonite - when there is a use that is permitted by a Special Use Permit in a district if you determine that this one is, then the burden is on either the opponents or the government to show where the use would be harmful to health, safety and welfare - in other words the burden is not on the applicant to prove that it is not dangerous or harmful - that is the test - it is different from a variance where the burden is clearly on the applicant - you are going to have to find in the evidence that there is legal sufficient reason to do it - that can come from the testimony, the different people, the exhibits that the Council has seen, the plans and records. THE MAYOR CLOSED THE PUBLIC HEARING. On motion of Councilwoman Bodlovick, seconded by Councilman MacDonald, the Council approved the Special Use Permit for the County at this time. (see vote DISCUSSION COUNCILWOMAN AVISE personally feels uncomforLable even though the evidence before the Council for his specific requests appears as though the area will handle the expansion that they can look at the area alone in two, three or four years down the road as to what is going to happen - she felt that they would be somewhat remise in approving it without further investigation of those plans to have some feel as to what is coming up. She would have a hard time approving it - she would much rather see the Council sit down with Oak Park Heights and with the County and get some detail and background as to what is going to be happening in the next couple of years in reference to this specific plan. She did not want to see the City in a position of having a difficult time rejecting the next request for expansion on the same area of ground and not being able to handle it because the first stage was approved. Rather than approving or denying this tonite she would much prefer to see the conversations extended and investigation to include Oak Park Heights and the County in more details, before a decision is made. COUNCILMAN KIMBLE asked that the fact that a Special Use Permit was granted to the County both for the original construction and the later expansion of the current facilities that has no bearing on the Council's decision for this Special Use Permit and if that is correct this approval would not have a bearing or forcing the Council to be locked into approval of a later request that should come in the future for additional expansion. MR. MAGNUSON responded by saying that if there is another request this would be the fourth time that it has been and he did not think it would lock the Council into absolutely to accept the next proposal because the only one that can establish a precedence is the Supreme Court - the law recognizes that the City's role is a more flexible one and circumstances change and from time to time the Council changes. In addition, the next time that the question comes, if it is just a jail, the County will be faced with a different burden because the ordinances excepts from these permitted institutional uses institutions established primarily for correctional purposes - you can argue that a jail is not a correctional facility, it is a detention fadity as opposed to a prison - the issue might be a little different there because it is a different proposed use - he did not think their action one way or the other would bind the Council in future actions. MAYOR PETERSON stated that it would be easy for him as the fifth member of the Council to wait and see whether or not if there is a need to cast a deciding vote if there were to be a tie vote here - he feels that Stillwater is the County seat and he believes that everything should be done to make it a strong "County Seat" - he would hate to see the operation so splintered by satellite operations or locations as to make it ineffective. He felt that the economics of the centralized operation is something that cannot be ignored a.id certainly have the administration under one roof has its great advantages and even here in the small City of Stillwater we have some problems in that we have a department, the Parks E Recreation Department, which is not located within the complex here as we have it and it causes unnecessary travel and unavailability of the personnel to have to or be contacted by our Coor- dinator or be contracted by any other of the local people. The Administration of any establishment is better when it is under one roof and in terms of the adverse effect of the proposed expansion on the neighborhood is one that meets his sympathy, but that we have to recognize that whenever we have highways, hospitals, schools, churches or any sort of public buildings built somebody is adversely affected and it is unfortunate that the individuals that are most affected by this and have expressed themselves strongly and he respected them for having done so, that they are going to be imposed upon by added traffic or noise or a larger building or complex which may expand in the future - that is one of the unfortunate things but somebody is going to be adversely affected unless the entire seat of County govern- ment is planted out in the middle of Baytown Township where there is nothing around it, and yet you would find soon there would be people moving close to it and then saying "don't expand anymore because we don't want any further expansion" - he stated that he was strongly in favor of the expansion program - he leaves it to the good judgment of the County Board Officials to determine how the Courthouse addition is funded and how it is furnished and that all of the space is utilized. • • September 20, 1983 COUNCILWOMAN AVISE stated that she did not want her hesitancy to indicate that she was not for the County and she hoped that she had made that clear at the Planning Commssion meeting - she did not want to see the door closed but she did think right now that approval is maybe hasty - she did not feel that we can ignore the traffic problem - we can't ignore the parking situation - she feels that more information is required. She made reference to the letter from Oak Park Heights requesting that the Council sit down and meet with them and she feels that it would be inapprpriate not to respond to that - it is a situation that involves three governmental units and felt it was only appropriate that those three units sat down in order to discuss the situation and make sure that all of the alternatives are addressed that are possible. MAYOR PETERSON did not feel that further conversation would help them to find the complete answer to this delemma that we are in, other than to suggest or end with a proposal for satellite courthouse or addition - he did feel that the only thing acceptable to Oak Park Heights would be the satellite operation. VOTE ON THE MOTION AYES-- Councilwoman Bodlovick, Councilmen Kimble and MacDonald and Mayor Peterson NAYS --Councilwoman Avise (motion carried) THE MAYOR DECLARED A RFCESS FROM 9:15 TO 9:25 P. M. INDIVIDUALS & DELEGATIONS None at this time UNFINISHED BUSINESS 1. The following bids were opened on September 9, 1983 by Ken Meister, Mayor Peterson and the City Clerk: Bid No. 1 National Power Podding Corp. 1000 S. Western Ave., Chicago Total Bid $131,776.50 Bid No. 2 Plaunt & Anderson Co., Inc. 5322 Grand Ave., Duluth 55087 Total Bid $84,410.02 Bid No. 3 Visu Sewer Clean & Seal, Inc. N. 59W. 14397 Abaolink Ave. Menomonee Falls, Wi. 53051 Total Bid $66,363.25 Bid No. 4 Solidification, Inc. 7233 Winnetka Ave. N. Minneapolis, 55428 Total Bid $149,526.50 On motion of Councilwoman Bodlovick, seconded by Councilwoman Avise, the City Coordinator was directed to open the bid for Insuitiform as recommended by the City Attorney. (all in favor) (This bid was received after the September 9th deadline) MR. KRIESEL read the cover letter that accompanied their bid. 18 Inch - 1,500 lineal feet $108,000 ($72.00 per lineal foot) 27 inch - 700 feet - $108.00 per lineal foot $76,032 847 Lineal feet of 30" - $120.00 per lineal foot $101,640 2,609 Lineal feet - 36 Inch $144.00 per lineal foot $375,696 30 - Manholes at $300 each $ 9,000 Total cost $670,368.00 There was discussion about this bid and the other bids that were received foL this project - there would be a seven to ten year longevity with the Chemical Grouting Process and they would not have to dig in the City streets. MR. MEISTER explained the bids for this project, and the work that is to be done on this contract. On motion of Councilman Kimble, seconded by Councilwoman Avise, a resolution was introduced "AWARDING THE CONTRACT FOR THE REMOVAL OF I/I VISU SEWER CLEAN AND SEAL, MENOMONIE FALLS, WISCONSIN ON THE CONDITION THAT THE PROPER CONTRACTS ARE DESIGNED TO MAINTAIN OUR INTERESTS". AYES --Councilwomen Avise and Bodlovick, Councilmen Kimble and MacDonald and Mayor Peterson NAYS --None (see resolutions) Prior to the motion there was discussion on contacting the Metro Council about assistance in this project and also other related areas for the treatment of our sewage and the possibility of again looking at the roof drains in the downtown area that drain or are pumpted into the sanitary system. • • September 20, 1983 4'71 • • 2. MR. MAGNUSON stated that the Charter requires the reading of new Ordinances by sections but the proposed Flood Plain Ordinance is simply the renumbering of sections of the ordinance without any change in a new format and it was his legal opinion that only the sections that were changed would have to be read. The City Attorney read the various sections which were changed which were followed by roll call after same and all members of the Council voted in the affirmative. The chair then put the question, "Shall this ordinance pass?" and on roll call the ordinance was unanimously adopted. 3. The second reading of the Ordinance relating to the "Posting of Signs" was delayed to a future meeting as requested -by the City Attorney. 4. The second reading of the Ordinance relating to "Land Reclamation" was delayed to a future meeting as requested by the City Attorney. NEW BUSINESS 1. On motion of Councilwoman Avise, seconded by Councilman Kimble, the Council set the date of October 4, 1983 at 7:30 P. M. for the public hearing on Case No. 509 for a variance to remodel a single family home into a duplex at 703 West Myrtle Street. (all in favor) 2. On motion ofCouncilman Kimble, seconded by Councilwoman Avise, the City Attorney made the first reading by title of an ordinance entitled "AN ORDINANCE PROHIBITING HUNTING WITHIN THE CITY LIMITS OF THE CITY OF STILLWATER". (all in favor) (Ordinance No. 615) 3. On motion of Councilwoman Bodlovick, seconded by Councilman MacDonald, a resolution was introduced "DIRECTING THE PAYMENT OF THE BILLS". Ayes --Councilwomen Avise and Bodlovick, Councilmen Kimble and MacDonald Nays-- None (see resolutions) INDIVIDUALS s DELEGATIONS (continued) None at this time COUNCIL REQUEST ITEMS 1. COUNCILMAN KIMBLE inquired about the possibility of leasing the property by McKusick Lake to Mr. Gannon for the off-street parking of some of his vehicles which he has restored or repaired and cleaning up this corner. After considerable discussion there were questions about the ownership of this property and Mr. Kriesel was directed to bring a proposition for the lease of this property, and the improvement of same. 2. COUNCILMAN MAC DONALD inquired about the signs for children on Echo Lane and he did not feel that these signs are going to slow down the drivers and there were further questions asked about the effectiveness of such signs - information on these signs will be included in the Newsletter. 3. COUNCILMAN MAC DONALD inquired about having sidewalks on Oakridge Road because of the children in that area coming from school at 2:30 P. M. each day. 4. COUNCILWOMAN AVISE inquired about the City's participation in the gravel improvement on Neal Avenue from McKusick Road to Highway 96 - the City's sharing in this cost with the Township; and the City's share would be one-third of $7,500. On motion of Councilman Kimble, seconded by Councilwoman Bodlovick, that the City indicate to Stillwater Township that they will participate in the cost of the Neal Avenue improvement. (all in favor) 5. MAYOR PETERSON recommended the appointment of Carol Paukert to the Port Authority to replace Chris Madsen who has moved away from Stillwater. On motion of Councilwoman Bodlovick, seconded by Councilman MacDonald, the Council confirmed the appointment of Carol Paukert to the Port Authority. (all in favor) 6. MAYOR PETERSON asked the Council to consider names fo. appointment to the Park Board and according to the Ordinance there are to be three members, and possibly the number could be expanded. CITY COORDINATOR'S REPORT (continued) 1. On motion of Councilwoman Bodlovick, seconeed by Councilwoman Avise, a resolution was introduced "CHANGING THE INTEREST RATE ON LOCAL IMPRDVEMENT NO. 201 FROM 11-1/28 TO 8.758" Ayes --Councilwoman Avise and Bodlovick, Councilmen Kimble and MacDonald and Mayor Peterson Nays --None (see resolutions) • • 4 September 20, 1983 2. MR. KRIESEL asked Council permission for a Mobile Van for the VA and Social Society to be parked in the Parking Lot behind City Hall and there was no objections from the Council. 3. MR. KRIESEL requested a special meeting of the City Council to work on the Tax Levy and the date of this meeting was set for 5:00 P. M., Monday, September 26, 1983. 4. MR. KRIESEL informed the Council that he had a request from Julie McGuire toii.ant two trees in the sidewalk on Second Street in front of their building and the Council was not in favor of same and he was direct?d to inform Mrs. McGuire of their decision. 5. MR. KRIESEL discussed with the Council and Chief Abrahamson about the full time employ- ment of Craig Johnson as the CSO Officer to take care of the Parking Meters and the collection of the monies and related duties. (Action was delayed until the September 26th meeting) APPLICATIONS On motion of Councilman Kimble, seconded by Councilman MacDonald, the Council approved the following Contractor's Licenses: (all in favor) Action Remodelers 77 East 9th St., Winona, Mn. 55978 Best Construction 16595 - 4th St., N., Lakeland, 55043 East Central Builders P. O. Box 144, Zimmerman, Mn. 55398 General New General New General New Hoffman Enterprises 4525 Northbrook Blvd, Stillwater Roofing, Plastering, TLee Trimm s, Landscapers, Insulation, Fencing, Cabinet Makers, Qxnbination Windows, Painting New Industrial Roof Maintenance 6 Insulation Co. 2321 Oakridge Rd., Stillwater 55082 Kuckler Construction 14258 Oldfield Court, Stillwater Martin V. Kvaas 1115 S. Third Street, Stillwater Rivard Masonry R. #1, Box 414, St. Joseph, Wi. 54082 St. Paul Utilities, Inc. 6415 Joyer Lane, Hugo, Mn. 55038 Donavin L. Schmitt - St. Croix Excavating R. R. #2, Somerset, Wi. 54025 General Renewal General New General Renewal Masonry 6 Brick Work Renewal Excavators New Excavators Renewal Valley Landscaping - Thomas Huninghake 924 North Fourth St., Stillwater .Excavators -Landscapers Renewal Lowell a Richard Vanderhoff 2389 Geneva Ave., Oakdale, Mn. 55119 Excavators Renewal ----On motion of Councilwoman Bodlovick, seconded by Councilman MacDonald, the following Beer Permits were granted: (all in favor) Steven Randy Gibson - Labor Temple - October 1, 1983 - 7:00 P. M. to Midnite - Stag Party - to consume beer Shanan Mahoney (Evelyn's Coiffeur's) Pioneer Park - October 1, 1983 - 5:00 to 9:00 P. M. - Company Party - to consume beer Fran Patterson, St. Mary's Softball Team - Pioneer Park - September 25, 1983 - Noon to 6:00 P. M. - to consume beer COMMUNICATIONS None QUESTIONS FROM NEWS MEDIA None • September 20, 1983 49\ • CITY ATTORNEY'S REPORT (continued) ---MR. MAGNUSON explained at this time the matter of the Labor Contract deal -there was an agreement in the labor contract that the City would file a lawsuit asking for a declaratory judgment by the first of September - prior to the 1st of September he called Larry Bastian asking if he would mind an extension for a few days on the dealine which is a common courtesy among lawyers - he did not return the call until after the 1st of September - Mr. Kriesel is concerned but there is no legal significance as we can ask for a declaratory judgmentat any time whatever - it is not going to affect the rights or a bar to bringing the action - and action is also with AFSCME and this should have preference on the calendar preferably before the first of the year. ORDINANCES Second Reading - Flood Plain - Ordinance No. 613 First Reading - Hunting Within the City Limits - Ordinance No. 615 RESOLUTIONS The following resolutions were read and on roll were adopted: 1. Directing the Payment of Bills. 2. Employ Vernon Rylander as Full -Time Buildi0g Inspector 3. Vacation of 63rd Street 4. Award for the Contract for the Sewer Rehab - Visu-Sewer 5. Change Interest Rate for Local Improvement No. 201 Adjournment On motion of Councilwoman Bodlovick, seconded by Councilman Kimble, the meeting adjounred at 11:10 P. M. Attest:g City Clerk i