HomeMy WebLinkAbout1977-11-22 CC MIN1
COUNCIL CHAMBER
Stillwater, Minnesota
REGULAR MEETING
The meeting was called to order by President Junker.
The Invocation was given by the Acting City Clerk, Schnell.
Present: Councilwoman Bodlovick, Councilmen Mahoney, Peterson, Powell
and Mayor Junker
Absent: None
Also Present: Acting City Clerk, Schnell; City Attorney, Kimmel; Superinten-
dent of Public Works, Shelton; Public Safety Director, Abrahamson;
Director of Parks and Recreation, Blekum; Consulting Engineer,
Elliott
Press: Stillwater Evening Gazette, Bob Liberty
November 22, 1977 7:30 P. M.
Citizens: Mr. & Mrs. Charles Berg, Mr. & Mrs. Gene Erickson, Alexander
Decker, Mr. & Mrs. Alex Kraemer, Mr. & Mrs. Wendell Beardsley,
Rod Lawson, John Rheinberger, Owen Thomas, Jim Gannon, Joe
Samuelson, George Thole and members of the Stillwater Ponies
Footbeall team, Mayor of Columbis Heights, Del Peterson, Bob
Hagstrom, Mr. & Mrs. Burgee Amdahl, Mr. & Mrs. Jack Dielentheis,
Stephen Muelberg, Cortzie Downs
INDIVIDUALS - DELEGATIONS
1. MR. DEL PETERSON, President and BOB HAGSTROM, Vice- President of RTR, appeared
before the City Council requesting permission to appear before the City Council
on December 6th with written plans for the Council to review on the proposals
for the development and improvements at the Nelson School Property.
PUBLIC HEARING
- -This was the day and time for the public hearing on Case No. 299 Gene Erickson for
a variance at 1415 Riverview Drive for a front yard setback.
Notice of the hearing was published in the Stillwater Evening Gazette, the
official newspaper of the City on November 10, 1977 and copies were mailed to all
property owners within 300 feet.
The Mayor opened the hearing.
MR. ALEXANDER DECKER, the architect for Mr. Erickson stated that they are request-
ing a ten foot six inch variance from the existing setback with a height of 22
feet as opposed to the allowable 35 feet.
MAYOR JUNKER asked if the 22 fcot height would pose any objection to neighbors
and MR. DECKER responded that the trees are higher than 22 feet - actually it
would benefit the neighbors if they go back at ten foot six inches rather than
the 17 feet.
MR. GENE ERICKSON stated that two of the members of the Planning Commission felt
the lot is very heavily wooded and some of the trees will have to come dawn and
this would add to the view for everyone.
COUNCILMAN PETERSON asked about the height and MR. DECKER stated there is a 45
foot drop coming in from the low point of the lot and a 107, drop which is about
the maximum allowable and the garage would drop down about 10 feet from the
driveways - 16 feet from the road with a total height of 38 feet.
COUNCILMAN POWELL stated that the variances before were determined that they would
be all the same - 17 feet for the setback and 15 feet for the height.
JOHN RHEINBERGER, attorney for the petitioner, stated that when Dr. Kalinoff built
he requested avariance for the 17 feet, but no height restrictions were made at
that time - there is noting in records of the City Council or Planning Commission
that there was a need for height restrictions. Mr. Thornton Simpson agreed that
he would limit the height of his house to avoid objections from the neighbors,
which was in 1970.
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
November 22, 1977
MR. DECKER stated that Mr. Simpson is on the low end of Riverview Drive. The
bais os comparison is actually that all the lots vary.
COUNCILMAN PETERSON stated that the people across the street from where Mr.
Simpson built and Mr. Erickson propose to build have property rights and their
view will be shut off.
MR. DECKER Indicated that they would be happy to abide by the code and build
at the 17 foot setback but felt that the ten foot six inch setback would be of
more benefit to the neighbors.
COUNCILMAN PETERSON asked about the 15 foot height and MR. DECKER indicated that
it is unbuildable at the 15 foot level.
MR. RHEINBERGER stated that they met before the Planning Commission and they
heard all of the arguments and they voted 4 to 5 to grant the variance. The
only reason that this matter of height comes into the picture is because of the
request for a vairnace - he could build 17 feet back as that limit has been
established by two builders and he would be restricted by the ordinance insofar
as the height is concerned. Whether or not the variance should be granted, whether
or not there should be any objection to the height - this lot is not restricted
insofar as height is concerned. He questioned how the Council could impose a
height restriction.
COUNCILMAN PETERSON felt that legitimate rights were brough up and it is a
.W - little different from where most people live, and Mr. Erickson wants to build
up there for :he same reason that these people have built there and that is for
the view - the property owners have the right to keep their view.
MR. RHEINBERGER stated that the trees are about 20 feet higher than the proposed
height of this home and they can see over the building when the trees are cut
for the building site. At the present time it is only in the winter months that
they can see through the trees and really see the river. The residents have been
for years requesting Dr Kalinoff to cut the trees, but the Council has no
jurisdiction over that matter. He did not feel that the Council could limit the
height in that there is no good legal objection for same.
COUNCILMAN PETERSON asked the City Attorney if the Council granted the variance,
could they restrict the height and MR. KIMMEL stated they would have to take
into consideration whether or not it has a harmful effect to the property owners -
determine whether or not it is going to cause a problem.
MR. RHEINBERGER did not see why the height has to be restricted since the ordinance
allows for 35 feet for 2% stories.
ROD LAWSON representing the property owners as requested by Alex Kraemer showed
the Council pictures of the existing homes in the area on Riverview Drive. He
explained that homes have been going into this area since the 1960's and that
none of the lots on the river side would be buildable without a variance and all
of them have come in for such variances. Dr. Kalinoff obtained a variance from
the Council without a public hearing and without notice to the neighbors. The
terms of his permit gave him a height of 12.9 feet bbove the center of the street
and the first of the 17 foot setbacks. The next thing someone else came in to
build on the site where Thorton Simpson wanted to build and want to build there,
but wanted to build to a height that was objectionable to the neighbors. Thorn-
ton simpson realized the problems and presented his plans for 13 feet above the
street level. There were the legal public hearings and he was granted a variance.
At this point there is a request to be allowed to build 22 feet above the center
of the street and a request for a ten foot 6 inch setback. Mr. Beardsley has made
some drawings that vividly show the effect on the entire neighborhood. This home
would be twice as high above the street level as Dr. Kalinoff's and each owner
would be affected somewhat differently. He stated that Warren Bowe viewed the
property and expressed an objection to the structure if such is going up there.
AT THIS TIME THE MAYOR DECLARED A RECESS IN THIS PUBLIC
HEARING IN ORDER TO PRESENT THE MAYOR OF COLUMBIA HEIGHTS
(7:55 P. M.)
MAYOR BRUCE NORWOSKI presented the key to the City of Columbia Heights
to Gregg Thompson, the Captain of the Stillwater Ponies Football Team.
The team members that were present and the audience were served refresh-
ments at this time.
The Mayor called the hearing to order again at 8:15 P. M.
331
■
4
•
•
November 22, 1977
ALEX KRAEMER, 1410 Riverview Drive, said that Mr. Lawson has given the history
of the building in this area. He stated that the purchaser of this lot should
have been aware of the difficulties of the area and come to the neighbors about
he came the CounciltonhOctobera4th with a letter c on t h are. He the matter. In 1961 Dr.
Kalinoff said that he would cut some of the trees if he wanted them cut, but be- are caue
and s the developers didnnotb dtriment that there. The
been all of
this restrictive activity going back to 1970. Thornton Simpson did comply with
the variances to the best interests of everyone.
chairman the PianningCoSmissionrthey stated t
get a therpla the
plans of
the home that is to be built here.
Questions were raised as to how the plans got into the hands of Mr. Beardsley
since they were given to Mr. Zoller of the Planning Commission and he in
turn was going to give them to the City Engineer.
MR. • d Mr. Zoller t ask t the ownerkifnit has
was about
okay to $12,000 invested in
themhavethe splan.
MR. • ke down somecoft that Kalinoff to
cut
down when Dr. Kalinoff built his home. At a previous meeting of the Planning
Commission the architect was asked to make some profiles of the lot to show the
relative heights of the various buildings which was done.
(At this time he presented to the Counc profiles which he prepared of
the area.)
toegarageseto home are for a two
the house. Hecaskedrife basement
the Councilhad p
viewed
area and were familiar with and saw
ali the beautifulivie. w hich isia ailable
s area of the boomsite, , the high coming
expressed concern for thelhousestto the a west of Riverview Drive o and also on
the west in front of view which they have long enjoyed and to
and make
see a home here
and mresssing room onethecnorthlwitht balconies t out of each floor in order to bedroom
take
th ey would nottrhavevthat view h and the rest of the people on the other side the
homes
have it. According to the announcement which they got the petitioner is asking for
a setback of 10 feet 6 inches and if you would examine the plans, this setback is is feet which in reality makeseitr4.3 the ion • wht the
homes in this area have walkout basements and this would block their views and he
requested that the Council deny the variance.
COUNCILMAN PETERSON asked if the neightbors would object to a 10 foot 6 inch setback
to tsee foot builtrthere said if
acceptyanythi reasonable
anything.
CHARLES BERG, 1408 Riverview Drive, said it would have been to the best interest
of all concerned if he would have contacted the people which is what he did before
he built his home and restrictions were put on Mr. Simpson in U
1970 and felt from foot cheightome
was obstrusiv. the precidentesetHon the 15 objection to the 17 foot
should also setback. He further felt that e had adhered t
and the ordinance was5relied Street, time. he built to t house
the17 foot
setback and wanted the house no higher than Dr. Kalinoff's. There is one lot left
in front of his.
MRS. JOYCE AMDALH, 1421 North First Street, stated that they o.erlook this home and
her concern
like a sorethumbuandnfelt the home should r be t built h similar b to Dr. would conform Dr. Kalinoff's
look
and Mr. Simpson's.
STEPHEN MUEHLBERG, 1414 North First Street, who lives on the west side of North
First Street said he wgs somewhat above the Beardsley and Kramer's and c oncurred
with objections that were filed rngfthelview the theeriverhand the atmit would
g
mean a reduction in the property values
area.
MR. RHEINBERGER stated that we have listed to those opposing the variance and the
main objection seems to be the obstruction of the view of the river, and questioned
what a hut the question
People rnaturallygare going to
their stop is robstructcd building his ooh.
is a legal reason - how you can go ahead and deny the variance or not deny the
AS
•
•
•
• j •
•
•
wovemoer LL, lY //
ALEX KRAEMER, 1410 Riverview Drive, said that Mr. Lawson has given the history
of the building in this area. He stated that the purchaser of this lot should
have been aware of the difficulties of the area and come to the neighbors about
the area. He said that when he was aware of the fact that the lot had been sold
he came to the Council on October 4th with a letter on the matter. In 1961 Dr.
Kalinoff said that he would cut some of the trees if he wanted them cut, but be-
cause the trees have not been a detriment they are are still there. The architect
and the developer did not seem to be aware of the fact that there had been all of
this restrictive activity going back to 1970. Thornton Simpson did comply with
the variances to the best interests of everyone.
WENDELL BEARDSLEY, 1412 Riverview Drive, stated only last night that through the
chairman of the Planning Commission they were able to get a copy of the plans of
the home that is to be built here.
Questions were raised as to how the plans got into the hands of Mr. Beardsley
since they were given to Mr. Zoller of the Planning Commission and he in
turn was going to give them to the City Engineer.
MR. RHEINBERGER stated that Mr. Erickson has about $12,000 invested in these plans
and Mr. Zoller did not ask the owner if it was okay to let them have the plans
MR. BEARDSLEY continued that the fact that someone had requested Dr. Kalinoff to
take down some of the trees was not true as they refused to let trees to be cut
down when Dr. Kalinoff built his home At a previous meeting of the Planning
Commission the architect was asked to make some profiles of the lot to show the
relative heights of the various buildings which was done.
(At this time he presented to the Counc profiles which he prepared of
the area.)
The proposed plans for the home are for a two car garage in the basement as opposed
to garages to the north side of the house. He asked if the Council had viewed the
area and were familiar with it and saw the beautiful view which is available from
this area of the boomsite, the high cliffs and the piers. With this proposed
structure coming up to this ehgith he has an unobstructed view over the trees. He
expressed concern for the houses to the west of Riverview Drive and also those on
the west side of North First Street. In order to see the river they would have to
see a home towering in front of their view which they have long enjoyed and make
them suffer. On the second floo-• there are the bedrooms with the master bedroom
and resssing room on the north with balconies out of each floor in order to take
advantage of the river. If they were down to the height of the rest of the homes
they would not have that view and the rest of the people on the other side would
have it. According to the announcement which they got the petitioner is asking for
a setback of 10 feet 6 inches and if you would examine the plans, this setback is
not what is shown on their plot plan. At the front of the house there is a projection
of six or seven feet which in reality makes it 4.3 feet from the road. All of the
homes in this area have walkout basements and this would block their views and he
requested that the Council deny the variance.
COUNCILMAN PETERSON asked if the neightbors would object to a 10 foot 6 inch setback
with a 15 foot height requirement and MR. BEARDSLEY said if they had been reasonable
to see what was being built there he would be willing to accept anything.
CHARLES BERG, 1408 Riverview Drive, said it would have been to the best interest
of all concerned if he would have contacted the people which is what he did before
he built his home and then he got a Special Use Permit from the City Council. Some
restrictions were put on Mr. Simpson in 1970 and he felt that the 22 foot height
was obstrusive. He had no objection to the 17 foot setback. He further felt that
the precident set on the 15 foot height should also be adhered to.
JACK DIELENTHEIS, 1505 North First Street, stated that he built his house in 1965
and the ordinance was relied upon at that time. He was opposed to the 17 foot
setback and wanted the house no higher than Dr. Kalinoff's. There is one lot left
in front of his.
MRS. JOYCE AMDALH, 1421 North First Street, stated that they o'arlook this home and
her concern was it would not conform with the rest of the neighborhood and it would
look like a sorethumb and felt the home should be built similar to Dr. Kalinoff's
and Mr. Simpson's.
STEPHEN MUEHLBERG, 1414 North First Street, who lives on the west side of North
First Street said he was somewhat above the Beardsley and Kramer's and concurred
with objections that were filed regarding the view to the river and that it would
mean a reduction in the property values of all of the homes within the immediate
area.
MR. RHEINBERGER stated that we have listed to those opposing the variance and the
main objection seems to be the obstruction of the view of the river, and questioned
what property rights these parties had to stop Mr. Erickson from building his home.
People naturally are going to objedt if their view is obstructed, but the question
is a legal reason - how you can go ahead and deny the variance or not deny the
•
•
•
■
f
•
•
•
variance or agree to the variance whether there is a limitation between the
height and its proximity to the street is a question whethere or not you can
restrict the height. It is still going to obstruct property owner's view of
the river whether it is built 17 or 10 feet six inches - Mr. Simpson agreed to
the 15 foot height and they were self- imposed and did not feel that the Council
could restrict the height of Mr. Erickson's home since the ordinance provides
for 35 feet in a one - family district.
MR. KIMMEL stated that none of the pvoisions of the ordinance are in controversey-
he is asking for a variance of 10 feet 6 inches and the questions is not whether
or not Mr. Simpson's restrictions were imposed upon him by the Council.
MAYOR JUNKER asked if it would be possible to build at the 10 feet 6 inch setback
with a 15 foot height and MR. DECKER stated that the problem they are running
into is with the access to the property and the owners is interested in saving
the trees. The intial plan was for a three car garage and he has made a change
to a two car garage. He stated that he had showed the plans to Dr. Kalinoff
who is the neighbor directly involved and he thought they looked fine.
COUNCILWOMAN BODLOVICK asked how many levels from the river side and she was
informed there would be four, and that the site would be disturbed as little
as possible.
Questions were raised about the portion of the house that e::tended
toward the street as to whether or not there were rooms in that
portion of the house and it was noted that there would be closets
in that area which would be sloser than the 10 feet 6 inches and
the architect agreed to cut this part back.
MR. DECKEF added that when he started to develop this they looked at the code,
but that they were not aware of all of these situations that were going on. He
had talked to the Building Inspector and we are following the code and asked
what they had to do to deviate from the code. He is designing the home for this
family and not for the neighbors.
CORTZIE DOWNS, 1324 North First Street, stated that he had his property reappraised
this past summer and the assessor told him that they have a view and that they are
paying for it. This home at this height would block this vie which he is paying
for.
ROD LAWSON said that it was his understanding that a xale in housing in a
community, anything having to do with architects is pretty important things, and
if the Council will -nce again look at the relative size of Dr. Kalinoff's house
which is a three bedroom house and look again not only at the architectural lines
but at the total mass of the proposed house, they will see quite clearly what this
would do to that whole community up there.
MR. DECKER responded that obviously he designed it keeping in mind the owner -
this is a family of five as ppposed to a retired family in the Kalinoff home.
He felt he was in keeping with the times and with the sight in mind and actually
the area is developing and this is the most economical way to do it.
COUNCILWOMAN BODLOVICK asked about the dimensions of the home and she was
informed that it was 40 feet by 48 feet.
MAYOR JUNKER asked where the height starts and MR. KINMEL added what is a story?
All of these things are subject to litigation or interpretation.
COUNCILMAN POWELL said that it appears to him that all of the houses in the area
are compatible as far as views and location. This one house will not be compat-
ible is that reason enough or a good reason to limit it to a 15 foot height?
MR. KIMMEL stated that the fact that the house is smaller larger is not a legal
matter and aesthetics are not legal considerations. They are here asking for a
variance - they have the burden if they need a variance - that the variance will
not do unreasonalbe harm to the neighbors when you get into that question, I
suppose you have the right to see the way it is proposed, it is all right. The
way it is proposed does it establish that they have a need or they need it and
the way they propose it does unnecessarily and unreasonably harm the adjacent
property and the adjacent neighborhood and I suppose some of the things you
have the right to consider are the bulk of the house, the height of the house,
and the location of the lot - all of those things which are ordinarly not, as
Mr. Rheinberger pointed out, considered I think become proper considerations when
they reasonably or unreasonably affect the adjoining properties in conjunction
with the request for a variance.
COUNCILMAN POWELL asked Mr. Erickson if he feels that he still wanted or could
build the house even though the neighbors are that much opposed to it and he
responded that once the house is up and the trees are taken down that are
necesary to put up the house, it will enhance their views.
The Mayor Closed the hearing at 9.30 P. M.
• f33
•
November 22, 1977
COUNCILMAN PETERSON responded by saying that Mr. Rheinberger stated that the
property owners and the neighbors have no legal property rights in that lot.
He felt that the valid objection to something that would obscure their view
which would reduce their property values as was stated in letters received.
The Council in talking about legal rights, he felt they have other responsi-
bilities in that they have a moral responsibility. The propery owners have
shown through the drawings that Mr. Beardsley presented that this house is
much higher than the existing homes and judging from the elevation levels were
shown on the drawings would obscure some of their views. He also felt that
when the discussions were held in 1970 with Mr. Simpson the limitations that
were placed on the height of his house and whether or not they were self- 'Mposed
he did not know, but Mr. Simpson wanted to build a house at that location.
On motion of Councilman Peterson, seconded by Councilman Powell, that
the rest of Mr. Erickson for a 10 foot six inch variance be denied
and that he be informdd that he would be expected to build with the
17 foot setback with a height elevation not to exceed 15 feet.
Discussion follwed the motion and it was determined that they could not
set the height as this was not part of the request.
COUNCILMAN POWELL withdrew his second and then Councilman Peterson amended
the motion to read:
"That Mr. Erickson be denied the 10 foot 6 inch variance setback requested
to build a home at 1415 Riverview Drive for the following reasons:
1. Property owners brought up valid objections when they opposed the
height of the proposed home wjich would obscure their view to the
river.
2. That the property owners had shown that the height through the
drawings shown by Mr. Beardsley would materially affect their
view.
3. That the developer had indicated during the hearing that he could
easily build the house with a 17 foot setback.
4. That the uniform setback referred to by Mr. Rheinberger on the east
side of Riverview Drive be considered as the uniform setback for the
two existing homes.
5. That because of the unique area, the height of the house was established
by the other two homes.
COUNCILMAN POWELL seconded the motion.
AYES -- Councilmen Mahoney, Peterson and Powell
NAYS -- Councilwoman Bodlovick (motion carried)
THE MAYOR DECLARED A RECESS FROM 9:25 TO 9:35 P. M.
UNFINISHED BUSINESS
1. On motion of Councilman Powell, seconded by Councilwoman Bodlovick, the
Council authorized the payment of overtime to Robert Brothen for the 142
hours of extra time which he worked at the Ice Arena for the 1976 -77 season
at the rate of time and one -half. (all in favor)
2. Discussion was held on the matter of the maintenance contract for the Old
Washington County Courthouse and the City Attorney was directed to inform
Mr. Robert Kelly, attorney for the Washington County, that the City will
be responsible for the snowplowing and grass cutting as their portion of
the maintenance for the old Washington County Courthouse Maintenance
Agreement.
3. On motion of Councilman Peterson, seconded by Councilman Powell, Mr.
Shelton was directed to get quotes for the cost of a new power pole for
the relocation of the street light at the intersection of County Road
No. 5 and Wildpines Lane. (all in favor)
NEW BUSINESS
1. On motion of Councilman Mahoney, seconded by Councilman Powell, the Council
granted the Downtown Retail Council their request for free parking from
December 12th thru 23rd and if they desire stickers for the parking meters
regarding free parking on evenings, holidays and weekends they will have to
pay same. (all in favor)
•
•
•
•
•
0
SIM
F
"4
Me.
INDIVIDUALS - DELEGATIONS - continued
Kinsel Liquor Store
2nd & Chestnut Street
American Legion Post No. 48
103 South Third Street
Fraternal Order of Eagles
227 South Main Street
Stillwater Country Club
North Second Street
November 22, 1977
2. On motion of Councilman Peterson, seconded by Councilwoman Bodlovick, the
Acting City Clerk was instructed to send a letter to the party who is
interested in the old watering trough at the end of Hickory indicating
to this party that the City wishes to retain ownership of same.
(all in favor)
3. The matter of the Installation Permit for the St. Croix Barge Terminal Co.
was information for the Council regarding this hearing and no action was
necessary.
4. On motion of Councilwoman Bodlovick, seconded by Councilman Mahoney, a
resolution was introduced "DIRECTING THE PAYMENT OF THE BILLS ".
AYES -- Councilwoman Bodlovick, Councilmen Mahoney, Peterson, Powell
and Mayor Junker
NAYS - -None (see resolutions)
5. On motion of Councilman Mahoney, seconded by Councilman Peterson, the
date of December 6, 1977 at 7:30 P. M. was set for the Public Hearing
on the following cases:
Case No. 302 - Jerry Mechelke, 809 West St. Croix Avenue - Special
Use Permit
Case No. 304 - Dan Dana, 821 North Fourth Street - Special Use Permit to
convert a duplex into a three -plex
(all in favor)
1. John Rheinberger appeared before the City Council in behalf of the Still-
water Taxi Co regarding a rate increase in their cab fares. He gave to
the City Council copies of the proposed rate increases and also a financial
statement showing their Income Statement from May 19th thru October 28, 1977,
which showed a loss of $4,404.73. They are requesting a 40% increase and
realize that they will lose some customers with such a substantial increase.
Councilman Peterson felt that we should again have an informational hearing
to inform the residents of what appears to be a change from the original
proposal - publicize the rates in the paper ahead of time, and discuss
same at the next regular meeting.
On motion of Councilman Peterson, seconded by Councilwoman
Bodlovick, the Acting City Clerk was instructed to publicize the
proposed rate schedules in the paper during the coming week and
that an informational hearing be held on December 6th on the
proposed increases.
(Councilman Mahoney opposed)
APPLICATIONS
On motion of Councilman Mahoney, seconded by Councilwoman Bodlovick, the
following OFF SALE LIQUOR LICENSES WERE APPROVED TOGETHER WITH LIQUOR LIABILITY
INSURANCE AND BONDS: (all in favor) (Renewals)
John L. Hinz (J.L.H., inc. dba John's Bar)
302 South Main Street
Lowell Inn, Inc. (Arthur Palmer Jr )
102 North Main Street
Meister's Bar, 112 North Main Street
- -On motion of Councilman Powell, seconded by Councilman Mahoney, the following
CLUB ON -SALE LIQUOR LICENSES were approved together with liquor liability
insurance: (all in favor - renewals)
F illwater Elks Lodge No. 179 B.P.O.E.
110 South Main Street
33
•
•
4
(336
November 22, 1977
- -On motion of Councilman Mahoney, seconded by Councilman Peterson an ON SALE
WINE LICENSE together with a bond in the amount of $3,000 was approved for
J. Lamont Brine, 219 South Main Street, Stillwater. (all in favor - renewal)
- -On motion of Councilwoman Bodlovick, seconded by Councilman Powell, a Contractor's
License was approved for Wanless Construction Co., 1169 Rice Street, St. Paul,
Minnesota 55117. (Renewal - all in favor)
COMMUNICATIONS
From Metropolitan Waste Control Commission regarding expiration of the Metro's
Permit for Wastewater Treatment Plant Controls.
(No action - copy sent to Duane Elliott)
From District Court - Judgment on Swager Bros., Inc. vs. City of Stillwater -
Building Permit on Lot 4 Castle Hills Addition.
Mr. Kimmel stated that the Council had two alternatives - issue the
building permit or appeal the matter, and it did not seem to him
that the easement is pertinent to the judge's decision on this matter.
MR. LES CLARK, 1312 Meadowlark Drive, stated that Mr. Eckberg feels there
is an alternative to the situation that the City of Stillwater was ordered
to issue a building permit They feel that the charge is saying that the
City issue a new building permit, and he is not talking about the February
24th permit which was rescinded - that it was taken away and that is the
end of that permit.
He felt that the judge ordered in his judgment that he was ordering
the City to issue a new building permit requiest and that the City deny
the new building permit on the basis of the new ordinance which the
Council just put into effect regarding waterfront properties. The City
has an ordinance now which would not allow a building permit for this lot.
MR. KIMMEL further indicated that the third alternative would be for the
Council to defy the Court Order, but he felt that the court order is to be
obeyed or appealed.
MR. CLARK further indicated and according to the wordking the judge is
not asking the City to re- instate the building permit,but issue a new
permit at this time.
DAVID MAGNUSON, representing Swager Bros., indicated that sewer and water
was put in 1971 to this lot and that the initial permit was granted last
February and the money was never refunded.
MR. CLARK felt that the City Council should refund Swager's their money
for the sewer and water assessments that were put in for that lot.
On motion of Councilman Powell, seconded by Councilman Mahoney,
the Council directed that a building permit be issued to Swager Bros.
to build a home on Lot 4 of Castle Hills Addition.
(Councilman Peterson was opposed because of the problems the City
had in other areas of the City when water was pumped in or out of an
area and especially in view of the fact that the City is proposing to
pump water from Lily Lake to McKusick Lake and felt that we could be
creating problems for that property).
COUNCILMAN PETERSON asked about any possible problems if the lake goes
up to the 855 mark and the level is his basement and MR. KIMMEL stated
that the State Building Code has provisions relative to elevations of
basements adjoining water.
On motion of Councilman Powell, seconded by Councilman Mahoney,
the Council directed that the necessary soil testings be done and
that Swager's be informed of same. (Councilman Peterson opposed)
CONSULTING ENGINEER'S REPORT
1. Mr. Elliott is working with the DNR on the permit to pump the water
from Lily Lake to McKusick - they would prefer that this water be pumped
to the river, but he is continuing to work on same.
• •
•
•
4
4
1
•
•
•
( I N November 22, 1977
COMMITTEE REPORTS
PUBLIC WORKS COMMITTEE
1. Mr. Shelton reported to the Council that he is making a list of the
Claims from property owners against Mr. Johnson, the City's Diseased
Elm Tree Contractor, which will be sent to his insurance company
for action.
2. On motion of Councilman Peterson, seconded by Councilman Mahoney, the
Director of Public Works was instructed to inspect the area by the old
NSP building as to the location of parking meters and bring this matter
to the December 6th Public Works Committee meeting. (all in favor)
PUBLIC SAFETY
1. Chief Abrahamson informed the City Council that the new squad cars had
arrived and with the new regulations on the Police Aid monies there will
have to be a transfer of funds to take care of this item.
PARKS & RECREATION
No report
CITY ATTORNEY'S REPORT
1. On motion of Councilman Peterson, seconded by Councilwoman Bodlovick, the
Council authorized the City Attorney to accept the easement with the
'orrect legal for the Dominium Corporation for the Hi -Rise for Senior
Citizens. (all in favor).
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
On motion of Councilman Peterson, seconded by Councilwoman Bodlovick, the
minutes of the following meetings were approved: (all in favor)
October 4, 1977
October 12, 1977
October 25, 1977
November 2, 1977
November 7, 1977
November 8, 1977
November 16, 1977
COUNCIL REOUEST ITEMS
On motion of Councilman Powell, seconded by Councilman Mahoney, the Council
directed that Jerry Mechelke be notified by the Building Inspector's Office
that he is not to conduct the sale of the stoves until his permit is approved
by the Planning Commission and the City Council. (all in favor)
QUESTIONS FROM PRESS REPRESENTATIVES
None
ORDINANCES
None
RESOLUTIONS:
e o owing resolution was read and on roll call was unanimously adopted:
1. Directing the Payment of the Bills.
ADJOURNMENT
On motion of Councilman Peterson, seconded by Councilman Powell, the meeting
adjourned at 10:55 P. M.
Attest:
Acting City Clerk
Regular Meeting 7:30 P. M.
Special Meeting 7:30 P. M.
Regular Meeting 7:30 P. M.
Special Meeting 6:30 P. M.
Special Meeting 1:00 P. M.
Regular Meeting 7:30 P. M.
Special Meeting 6:30 P. M.
Mayor
337'.
•
•
4