Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1978-09-26 CC MIN. f 30 • COUNCIL CHAMBER Stillwater, Minnesota REGULAR MEETING September 26, 1578 7:30 P. M. 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, Magnuson; Super- intendent of Public Works, Shelton; Public Safety Director, Abrahamson; Director of Parks and Recreation, Blekum; Consulting Engineer, Ent. Chairman of the Planning Commission, Zoller; Building Inspector, Nistca PRESS- Stillwater Evening Gazette - Bob Liberty White Bear Free Press - Kevin Regan Citizens: Jayne Finnegan Smith, Dr. F. M. McCarten, Dick Balfanz, Jim Gannon, Jim Hunt, Stephen Sweetland, Joleen Waalan, Ronald E. Kranz, Rockwell Hoffman, Mark Clemenson, Rod Lawson, Mark Vierling, Andy Holdolph, Michael McGuire, Howard Harvieux, Ron Hunt, Chris Madsen, Shirley Tibbetts, Maurice Stenerson, Harry D. Peterson, Brad MacDonald, Mr. & Mrs. George Landmark, Mr. & Mrs. Kenneth Kress, David Haak, Charles Pozzini, Sharon Baker, Claire Erickson , Mrs. Douglas Ellison INDIVIDUALS - DLEGATIONS 1. RON HUNT presented to the Mayor and City Council a calendar which RTR has prepared to advertise the City of Stillwater and its history and for the benefit of RTR. 2. STEPHEN SWEETLAND appeared before the City Council regarding a variance to build a 6 foot by 17 foot bedroom addition to a bedroom on the front of his home at 214 Maryknoll Drive. On motion of Councilman Peterson, seconded by Councilman Mahoney, the Council granted a four foot variance to Mr. Sweetland to build a bedroom addition to his home at 2.14 Maryknoll Drive. (all in favor) 3. LYNN WOLF, 9198 St. Croix Trail North, and CY KNOX, 7121 Jocelyn Lane, Stillwater, appeared before the City Council with a proposal to enhance the property which Mr. Aiple is currently leasing from the City of Stillwater. They have been ..r working with some aerial photos of the property since they could not get a real good description of the property to work from. They presented an artist's conception of what they felt could be done with approximately 3,000 feet of this property which would amount to a recreational area consisting of a parking area with a building, a campsite area with a launching ramp with parking and at the extreme top of the property a camping location. This would be a compliment and much more lucrative to the City. Both parties have bee.. in- volved in the marina business and they know what could be done with this property. They had no concept of dollars, but could be in excess of $250,000 or $300,000 to put this program together. They were not asking for the entire parcel - they would be interested in the northern portico of the property which would use for their purpose. COUNCILMAN POWELL asked the City Attorney if something like this were proposed being aware of what has transpired already, would not they have to consult Mr. Aiple to see if he is willing to relinquist the northern portion of the property. DAVID MAGNUSON stated that as of right now we have no right to negotiate with any- body concerning the possible use of the property. Aiple's lease is an absolute option to renew it at the end of twenty years for additional twenty under the conditions of the original lease. That has been done and from a legal point of view there would either have to be a lawsuit to attempt to break the lease or condemnation of a portion of the property - right now the City could deal with him directly because he does have the right to assign or sublet the property with the City's consent. The option has been renewed. It takes no action on the City's part - his notification of renewing it and that is what h^ has done and _. he has exercised his option. • • • • • • • COUNCILMAN PETERSON asked if it would be proper to send a letter to Mr. Aiple indicating that there has been a proposal presented to the City for the north 3,000 feet or whatever and it looks of interest and that the City and /or the developers may be interested - whether or not Mr. Aiple would be willing to relinquis his claim to his 3,000 feet. MR. MAGNUSON felt that this would be in order and COUNILMAN PETERSON felt it was a reasonable proposal and one of the many proposals that may be available for that property and indicate to him that we have received a proposal on that piece of property and that either the City or the developers or both would like to meet with Mr. Aiple concerning his relinquishing his claim to that portion of the property. MR. KNOX indicated that the minimum number of feet that they could work with would be 2,500 feet and the depth varies based on the water level and they did not feel that they cou'd have surveyors go down there since Mr. Aiple does have the right to this property under his lease agreement. "'1 On motion of Councilman Peterson, seconded by Councilwoman Bodlovick, the Acting City Clerk was instructed to send a letter to Mr. Aiple regarding the proposal presented by Mr. Wolf and Mr. Knox and requesting a meeting on this matter. (all in favor) PETITIONS From Reliance September 26, 1978 Development Corporation for utilities for their 46 lot plat. On motion of Cojncilman Mahoney, seconded by Councilman Powell, a resolution was introduced "ACCEPTING THE PETITION AND ORDERING A FEASIBILITY STUDY FOR THE UTILITIES FOR THE RELIANCE DEVELOPMENT PLAT OF 46 LOTS. - LOCAL IMPROVEMENT NO. 151" AYES -- Councilwoman Bodlovick, Councilmen Mahoney, Peterson, Powell and Mayor Junker NAYS - -None (see resolutions) PUBLIC HEARINGS 1. This was the day and time for the public hearing on Case No. 279 for the Greeley Nursing Home for a Special Use Permit to use a residence at 824 West Oak Street as a patient discharge planning center. Notice of the hearing was published in the Stillwater Evening Gazette, official newspaper of the City on September 15, 1978 and copies were mailed to all property owners within 300 feet. The Mayor opened the hearing. JOLEEN WAALEN, Administrator for the Nursing Home, stated that they are plann- ing to put in a discharge planning center which has been ordered by the State Health Department and they would like to carry this one step further. When residents are ready to go back to their own homes, whether it is to their apartment or with some other family member of whatever, they would like to use this residence so that they get the idea of utilizing a home -type residence - so that they will be able to do some meal planning and they also have residents who are at the home because of their spouses - their spouse need 24 hour special nursing care and they are looking for something other than 24 hour institutional type of care that they provide and they are looking for another outlet. The Planning Commission gave them a go ahead for this proposal. They have no plans for remodeling the structure and that is the reason that they purchased it and the setup will remain the same as it was - kitchen as a kitchen, etc. Person will be utilizing the facilities but they will not have people living there as such - when the residents utilize the facilities it will be strictly under supervision. COUNCILMAN PETERSON asked if they proposed any commercial uses for the property and MS. WAALEN stated that it will be an addition to their present facility - it is a pilot program. MATT HANMERSHCMIDT, 816 West Oak Street, residence just east of the property in question. He and the neighbors do not feel that the property should be used anything but residential and according to his understanding this is an extension of their business. He could not understand how the State would ever let the home as it is now function as you way without remodeling - the codes are not up -to -date. MS. WAALEN said that it is not going to be in -house living situation and that is why they will allow them to do this and this has been checked out with the Health Department. • • • 42 September 26, 1978 MR. HAMMERSCHMIDT said that they strongly feel - the list of names that he had on the petition - he had secured a list from the City of those who had received the notice of the hearing - said petition asked that the petition be denied. He had "hear -say" information that the Nursing Home had tried to buy property in other locations at one time or another - it was stated emphatically to one individual that they very strongly need parking facilities if they are to explan the nursing home facilities and thought there was some type of rule that you had to have so much off - street parking. They are very concerned with the commercial ventures - the nursing home, the offices that were put into the clinic area, which they had no knowledge of the Nelson Dairy Store - they feel that it is enfringement on their rights to put anything else in a residential zoned area. He could not understand how they could use that home for any type of public facility - the home is just not in condition to be used for any public type activities. He cited the wiring and the basement that is currently in the home. This came to light that the house was being used by the home when they had their ice cream social this summer. He did not feel that this was a building that public access could be provided and he felt that it needed extensive remodeling for such uses. MS. WAALEN stated as far as the parking situation goes when the clinic building was vacated that they obtained a lot of their parking back - they are not planning to add any more employees and she felt that they did not have a parking problem. The Health Department did give them the okay to do this and because it is a place where the residents will not be living 24 hours a day - they will not be utilizing the basement and they will not be utilizing the upstairs. The residents are very "gun -ho" about this project and felt that their patients also had their rights - they are not thinking about the employees - it is for the patients. It is another outlet for the patients and they are looking forward to the project and she did not feel that it is a detriment to the neighborhood. MR. HAMMERSHCMIDT stated that the property owners are going to do everything possible to stop it because there is too much hearsay information going around than what was initially indicated and MS. WAALEN indicated that the building will not be torn down and this property would be used for another purpose since they could not do this. COUNCILMAN PETERSON indicated that they can't just tear this down and put in a parking lot - first of all it takes Council approval and permits issued and it just can't be torn down tomorrow. MAYOR JUNKER indicated that the permit would be given for one year and would be considered in another year. MR. HAMMERSCHMIDT indicated that he has done a lot of remodeling to his home and he will fight this as far as he can go - it might be five years down the line or even ten years down the line - it is a residential home and could see no reason why it had to be anything different - it impairs their rights in that particular area to provide a permit to start something that is an extension of their business. it is residentially zoned property and must remain that way to protect himself and his neighbors and their investments. He asked if the Health Department has seen the building and MS. WAALEN replied "no ". He did not know how they could get approval without a fire alarm system. MS. WAALEN stated that it is not going to be a 24 hour facility. MR. HAMMERSHCMIDT asked for an opinion as to whether or not this building did not have to meet the codes and MR. MAGNUSON replied that it does, but that there are some provisions in the State Building Code for pre- existing structures and they are only required to be brought up to code when they are of a certain type. Whether it is going to be operated as a business with people coming in and out of there, there might be requirements for the handicapped, toilet facilities and other things - if it is not going to be used to attract business, perhaps there would not be this need. MR. HAMMERSCHMIDT said that he had gone through many permits for the remodeling of his home and he had to comply with the codes for this work for his protection and he could not see how these people could do this and have the public and the relatives of these people without any qualifications as to fire situations, lavatory situations and did not know how the Health Department could approve it without seeing the building. He felt that it is ging used for public purposes and the ice cream social was one. COUNCILWOMAN BODLOVICK stated that she has dealings with the Health Department and stated that as long as this residence or whatever building they are presently going to use under supervision, partial, no 24 hour, no overnite stahing whatso- ever they will be allowed to use this without conforming to the handicap code, whatever codes are implimented if you build a new building or any addition to • • • • ■ f • their present facility - they will purpose that they are requesting. requests on that one year permit - they cannot do - at the end of one neighbors, they lose their permit. MR. HAMMERSHCMIDT felt that his protection was to stop it. The reasons for making the change are not all that clear as far as he was concerned and also his neighbors. He was not questioning anybody's honesty, intentions or any- thing of this nature. He felt that everyone on the Council and everyone in the room knew how the course of events goes - that if it is not stopped now and it will not be turned around. He had talked to a number of persons who stated that the owners had attempted to buy up other property and since Fine Point Nursing Home closed there is a need for nursing homes in the area - if the intentiion is to expand Greeley Nursing Home they have the rormn to do so in the front of their property, but they do not have the off - street parking and this is a question in their minds. The property owners do not know what it will be five years from now - granted they can stop it next year - give them a permit and stop it next year - what would happen if he or some of his neighbors were on vacation a year from now when this comes up again - it will go right through and they have nothing to say about it. They firmly disagree with this now and since they received a letter they have a say in this matter and that their say is "NO ". MS. WAALEN felt that they were putting the cart before the horse - that the people's expectations are that they are going to be building a facility alongside- that is a subject granted "yes" - they did go in for a Certificate of Need and they were granted a Certificate of Need - they did not hear any - thing from the neighbors at that time when it was granted - it was in the newspaper for many weeks - they are not asking for this GEORGE LANGMACK, 815 West Oak Street, asked how may patients in the past year have been in the position that you want to use to discharge them - to make them go through the acclamation of whatever you want them to do in this home before they do to their own home - how patients in the last year or in the last two years - is this entirely new? Is this a necessity or is this just an excuse to use the property for something? Wasn't it true that there was a possibility that the supervisor would live there? Was it possible that you wanted to use it for a training center for new employees? Was that true? Have your finally come up with something like this here that you could probably use - but you are getting it in, aren't you - and the Council that is what they are absolutely what they are against - they have legal protection now - this is zoned reisdential - the Council here says that they will give them a permit for one year or they are inclined to - how many of these Council members and Mayor are going to be here a year from now - that is a possibility and those coming in would be of a different mind - members in the past have been in- fluenced by someone that wants a special permit or special consideration - that is always possible - they have no assurance - this Council gives them assurance - they want to stick with their legal protection of the ordinance that the City has - this is zoned residential and have it at that. The Planning Commission has approved it and he questioned why the Planning Commission and the City Council can't get together and establish zones and stick with them so that these don't have to come up - the Council has a responsibility to the people to a business who wants to enfringe on residential property. JOLEEN WAALEN stated that they have 83 residents and they had two discharges that were able to go back to their own facilities - granted that there are not too many discharges, but out of 83 beds and the facility that we do have we only had 26 new admits last year - they retain their residents - this would give another outlay for those who are already in the facility. They are trying to update the total concept of nursing home care is what the Metropolitan Council has been telling them to do. They have been cutting the grass and have kept the residence up - if the house has to be painted or whatever has to be done to the facility they are going to be keeping it up as a residential facility. CHARLES POZZINI, 723 West Olive Street, in reference to the Certificate of Need he recalled that it was in the paper in July of 1977 and the people were to respond and he called the State Department - the fellow he talked to said to save his time - it didn't make any difference any more. He called him on the 12th of July and the closing date was the 20th or 22nd - he said it is cut and dried. He knew that we need 200 more beds but wondered if this is where we need it - he was told that it would eventually have to come back to the Planning Commission - he told that to a couple of his other neighbors and one of them stated that he was going to write over there regardless. He felt that they were watching it. In reference to some of the things that have been mentioned, he understood that the County bought a building that they were to use for some type of training and he understood that the patients were going to be brought in during the day and taught to cook, etc. and after they bought the thing he understood that they had to remodel it with different type of steps September 26, 1978 be allowed to use this for the express Secondly, the City can add complete they can dictate what they can do, what year, if it is not acceptable to the It is the neighbors protection - not theirs. 33) • • • • 34 THE MAYOR CLOSED THE HEARING. and everything else - he wondered if there was a correlation between the two. Regarding parking he noticed the past few eays there are signs there "residential parking only" on the right side going north - there were four cars there at one time during the day - three at other times. MS. WAALEN explained that they have home - delivered meals coming out of their facility so during the noon time they have an overload - 11:15 to 12:00 Noon - Mr. Pozzini added that the cars were there at 8:15 and again at 1:10 and Ms. Waalen indicated that would be their problem. MR. POZZINI added that he was told by Mr. Thompson that the manager of the rest home was going to live there - he wants to do everything he can for the old people. MS. WAALEN stated this is the plan at this time - there are many stories that have been going around - none of the people have come to her and asked her what they would be going at Greeley Nursing Home or what they were going to be doing with the Fred Thompson home - she would have told them before they went through the Special Use Permit - she stated that they received letters before the Planning Commiss ion. She was here representing the residents and the families of the residents. (She was informed that they do not receive notices of the Planning Commission - the only notice is in the paper of their meetings). BRUCE KRAMER, 813 West Olive Street, his feelings were the same as the other part ?_s that had already spoken - he felt that the property should stay residential as a residential use and he questioned the actual need as shown by Ms. Waalen that the Nursing Home needs this for this type of facility that they want it for. He could not understand why whatever amount of money was paid for this home was uses to dis- charge two persons in the entire year and for some minor activities throughout the year. MR. HAMMERSCCMIDT stated that they just can't believe that that property is intended to be strictly for this and nothing else because the future is going to bring something different. They have their rights - it is zoned residential and they want it to sew residential. MS. WAALEN stated that it goes back to the Council and to the neighbors as to what we can do with that property - if a Special Use Permit is granted that is what they will have to use it for and they can vary from that and if they do they will have to come back and the neighbors will have every right to come back to contest it - why can't they have a year to utilize it the way we would like to utilize it . . . . MR. HAPMERSHCMIDT indicated that after the ice cream social he had contacted the City regarding this home and they wrote the home a letter with a copy to him indicating that they had to have permits for any remodeling, etc. He indicated that he did not see a permit for the roof that is being put on the garage. MS. WAALEN apoligized for not getting permit for roof on the garage and if there is any remodeling that has to be done they will contact the City for the permits. MARY CLARE HUELSMAN, 401 South Greeley Street, endorsed the statements that have been made by her neighbors and pointed out the fact it is not a personal issue between them and the residents - it has already been zoned residential - that is their protection - and as long as they do not encroach and promise more to the residents than they have already promised them when they enter that nursing home, then you are delivering anything that you have promised, but she did not think that they can turn around and rezone the neighborhood what the people have bought on certain terms. September 26, 1978 • of each of those being they are usually on a they come in with as COUNCILMAN PETERSON asked what the average length of stay discharged? MS. WAALEN stated that it would be six months to a year - rehabili_ation program. It depends upon the illness that to how much they have forgotten. COUNCILWOMAN HDOVLOCK asked about the zoning for the property on which the Thompson home is located and she was informed "two- family" and theh are rezoning even with the Special Use Permit. The question was raised about notices of public hearings and there are no notices for the Planning Commission meetings - there are only notices for the hearings before the City Council and that is what the neighbors received. MR. HAMMERSCHMIDT - this is a Democratic process and you send letters to those that are concerned and all those that were contacted and so. . e were not contacted that live in the area strongly oppose this and in his mind it has to be turned down. • • • • • COUNCILWOMAN BODLOVICK asked the City Attorney if a one year approval is given at any point and time when the neighbors have complained can be withdrawn. DAVID i-1AGNUSON stated that is true - it can be - the City Council could, of course, make that conditions of the Special Use Permit with many different criteria about the appearance of the place,its specific use - could tie it down specifically to actually what is used for and if there were disobedience from the conditions it could be revoked. On motion of Councilman Mahoney, seconded by Councilman Powell, the Council denied the Special Use Permit to the Greeley Nursing Home to use the home at 824 West Oak Street for a patient discharge planning center. AYES -- Councilmen Mahoney, Peterson and Powell NAYS -- Councilwoman Bodlovick (motion carried) THE MAYOR DECLARED A RECESS FROM 8:25 to 8:35 P. M. eat • September 26, 1978 2. This was the day and time set for the public hearing on Case No. 336 - Ronald E. Kranz, for a Special Use Permit for a Chiropractic Office at 215 West Myrtle Street. Notice of the hearing was published in the Stillwater Evening Gazette, the official newspaper of the City on September 15, 1978 and copies were mailed to all property owners within 300 feet. The Mayor opened the hearing. No one appeared in favor or opposed to the request - Dr. Kranz was in attendance and stated that his immediate neighbors have no objection to this request - the Planning Commission approved this request. The Mayor closed the hearing On motion of Councilwoman Bodlovick, seconded by Councilman Mahoney, the Council followed the recommendation of the Planning Commission and granted a Special Use Permit to Ronald E. Kranz for a Chiropratic Office at 215 West Myrtle Street. (all in favor) 3. This was th' day and time set for the public hearing on Case No. 338 - Rockwell Hoffman, 1704 West Oak Street, for a two foot variance and a seven foot variance to build a garage attached to his home. Notice of the hearing was published in the Stillwater Gazette, the official newspaper of the City on September 15, 1978 and copies were mailed to all property owners within 300 feet. The Mayor opened the hearing No one appeared in favor or opposed to this request The Mayor closed the hearing On motion of Councilman Peterson, seconded by Councilwoman Bodlovick, the Council granted the two variances for a garage for Rockwell Hoffman at 1704 West Oak Street, subject to the conditions setforth by the Planning Commission. (all in favor) 4. This was the day and time set for the public hearing on Case No. 339 for Rose Morgan and Mark Clememmn for a variance to construct a garage in the sideyard at 908 South Sixth Street. Notice of the hearing was published in the Stillwater Evening Gazette, the official newspaper of the City on September 15, 1978 and copies were mailed to all property owners within 300 feet. The Mayor opened the hearing. Mr.CEmenson stated that the reason for the request was that he wanted the garage closer to the house as he keeps lots of tools stored there and it would be safer than being in the backyard. No one appeared opposed to this request. The Mayor closed the hearing. 35 • • • September 26, 1978 On motion of Councilman Mahoney, seconded by Councilman Peterson, the Council granted the sideyard variance for the construction of a garage at 908 South Sixth Street as recommended by the Planning Commission. (all in favor) 5. This was the day and time set for the public hearing on Case No. 340 for John Ogren for a Special Use Permit for a service station at 103 North Main Street. Notice of the hearing was published in the Stillwater Evening Gazette, the official newspaper of the City on September 15, 1978 and copies were mailed to all property owners within 300 feet. The Mayor opened the hearing. JOHN OGREN informed the City Clerk this afternoon that he was dropping the case because of a change in plans and he will have to appear before the Planning Commission with a different set of plans. No one appeared in favor or opposed to this request. On motion of Councilman Peterson, seconded by Councilman Mahoney, the hearing on Case No. 340 was continued to October 10, 1978. (all in favor) 6. This was the day and time set for the public hearing on Case No. 337 - Rod Lawson, 906 South Greeley Street for a variance for a deck to the south of his home - five foot variance. Notice of the hearing was published in the Stillwater Evening Gazette, the official newspaper of the City, on September 15, 1978 and copies were mailed to all property owners within 300 feet. The Mayor opened the hearing COUNCILWOMAN BODLOVICK indicated that Mr. Lawson did not appear at the Planning Commission and that no decision was made at that time. JEFF ZOLLER informed the City Council that Mr. Lawson received his notice of the meeting the day after the meeting and that is the reason that he did n.t appear. MR. LAWSON explained to the Council that he has talked to the neighbor on the south which is the one that is affected by this and she has no objections to it. The point of the deck would come within five feet of the property line on the south - the Bergen home is located much closer to the street - they have a double garage between the house and the lot line. No one appeared opposed to this request. The Mayor closed the hearing On motion of Councilwoman Bodlovick, seconded by Councilman Mahoney, the Council granted the five foot variance for a deka to Rod Lawson at 906 South Greeley Street. (all in favor) 7. This was the day and time set for the public hearing on Case No. 324 - Swager Bros. to divide Lots 4, 5 and 6 Sabinp Additun to front on Meadowlark Drive. Notice of the hearing was published in the Stillwater Evening Gazette, the official newspaper of the City on September 15, 1978 and copies were mailed to all property owners within 300 feet. The Mayor opened the hearing MARK VIERLING, representing Cecelia Bergen stated that Mrs. Bergen has been advised of the proposed re- subdivision of the property and she is in agreement with it - as her understood it, this property would 'e re- subdivided into two buildable lots abutting Meadowlark Drive. He also understood that the Planning Commission had not heard the matter and thought it would be advisable to defer the matter and conditionally grant the application pending the Planning Commission's hearing. COUNCILMAN PETERSON questioned why the Planning Commission hasn't heard this and he was informed that Swagers did not appear at the meeting - they withdrew their case and the letter for this request came in the mail the same date as of that of the meeting date of the Planning Commission, and the next time it was on the agenda the applicant did not show up and there are no plans available as to what they are proposing. • • • • • • mom MR. MAGNUSON stated it depends in this community as to whether or not it is public water as defined by the Statutes - McKusick Lake would be public water in the jurisdication of the DNR- that parcel of land was ever a part of the lake, that parcel would be a part of the public waters and it would require State approval. In the City's case it might be something to consider, we have no Wetlands Ordinance that applies to waters that are not public waters, so little tiny swamps in our City that are not part of public waters could be filled without requiring any additional permits - this is probaby something that the Planning Commission should make a study on. In this case there could be a part that could be public waters and the State would be involved. COUNCILMAN POWELL asked Mr. Magnuson if there was not something in our ordinance which states that you are not to deflect the natural flow of water and if this was filled in it would flow upon some else's property and MR. MAGNUSON concurred that it is under the ordinance and the common laws it is prohibitive to case damage to another - sometimes we are not talking about flow, but water standing. MR HAAK stated that there is a two block area that naturally drains into this swamp - the storm water there is run -off from the snow in the spring, :.tc. and it settles in that particular spot. QUESTIONS were raised about the ownership of the property and it was clarified that Mrs. Bergen is the fee owner of the property and Swager Bros. presently own same on a contract for deed. September 26, 1978 DAVID HAAK, 504 North Owens, stated that his land abuts this property on the east. He has lived in the area for 43 years and the land in question is just a swamp there is no possible way that he can fill that land in without covering up the swamp and driving the water upon his land - he has a garden down there he has another neighbor who has a big garden in there and his garden would be completely flooded out. It was his understanding that there is a State Law that you cannot cover up a swamp and cause water to come up someone else's land. When he is talking about filling,that total area was only fill in the approximate north one -tenth of the land -- depth of eight to ten feet. Orig- inally that area was a part of a lake and the street car company came in and filled in to run the streetcar tracks - about 15 years ago when they put the sewer in that area they did put a sewer out in that particular piece of road and they redid the road - about five years ago when they separated sanitary sewers and storm sewers, someone - it is questionable who- possibly the City gave the contractor permission to fill in a great deal more there - the City claims that they did not have anything to do with it, but when he talked to the supervisor of the contrcution job they stated that they had permission to do this 37 • MR. MAGNUSON stated that either party could request the sub - division and it is appropriate under the sub - division code incidential or prior to the grant- ing of the permit to get reasonable assurances on the drainage and without question that can be tied into looking at the sub - division. This matter should be resolved first and any questions about public waters then the DNR should also be resolved before any ddcisions are made about the sub - division. It was clarified that the contract for deed is contitioned upon Swager Bros. obtaining building permits for the property. MR. VIERLING stated that Swager Bros. have problems obtaining building permits because there are drainage problems on the lots and that is another problem. The sub - division itself of the land into two buildable sites in his opinion sholld be separate from the building permits and would have to be resolved before anyone could build on them. MR. MAGNUSON stated that the Sub - Division Ordinance is pretty clear on a lot of different things - one is that the drainage should be adequately explained and be taken care of when the application is made for sub - division. COUNCILMAN POWELL felt that it would be proper to continue the hearing and instruct the Planning Commission to view the property and also the City Council members because it seems reasonable to know what you are talking about - if there is anything that can be done that is reasonable it should be done - if it is a swamphole or something, then they should know that too. COUNCILMAN PETERSON said that he had checked the property and the fact that this has been scheduled twice before the Planning Commission neither time the party has appeared for one reason or another or contacted anyone . . JEFF ZOLLER stated he did say he would come the first time, the second time he did not show up. KENNETH KRESS, 403 North Sherburne, stated that his property abuts on this and one thing he felt was a sink -hole and everytime you fill one in you get more pressure. It probably won't hurt here in Stillwater too much as you can probably drain it into the river, but somewhere along the line somebody is going to get caught up when we are a suburb of St. Paul and there are houses from here to St. Paul, which is going to happen and you fill in everyone of these pools on 36 the same thing is going to happen - there is only one place for the water • • • 1 • • 38 September 26, 1978 to go and that is down the blacktop or the concrete and into somebody's basement. He felt that nobody has built there in the past. If you fill that one in, someone along the line is going to get water into their basement. He made reference to problems in Rochester. WILBERT MONSON stated that we can go up on West Wilkins Street and see some of the results of building flows and water tables and questioned how long before some ofthese homes are going to sink - he did not feel that we had to look at Rochester. MR. VIERLING stated that there may well be substantial problems there and he felt that was something that the City Engineer or some professional in this area should look into - denying the request right off the bat effectively what you are doing is condemning the property. Mrs. Bergen will havc' no use for it. It should be looked into and make sure if the condition of the property is such that it cannot be built on - have an expert look at it - if it can't that is fine, but if not . . . The Mayor closed the hearing. COUNCILMAN PETERSON stated that he disagreed about the fact that if we deny the permit that they are condemning the property because the property has been there for years and years and Mrs. Bergen may or may not have owned it for this period of time - the fact that it hadn't been built on and it had been a swamp and it still is, it is concluded that you can't build on it and Mr. Swager has been scheduled twice for hearing and has not appeared and moved that the request be denied. COUNCILMAN MAHONEY seconded the motion. (all in favor) 8. This was the day and time set for the public hearing on Case No. 334 - Reliance Development Co. for approval of a preliminary plat on Boutwell Road. Notice of the hearing was published in the Stillwater Evening Gazette, the official newspaper of the City on September 15, 1978 and c 'es were mailed to all property owners within 300 feet. The Mayor opened the hearing MR. ANDY HOLDOLPH presented the plan to he City Council indicating that the property is on the north side of County Highway No. 12 - be divided into four lots - 27,000 square feet per lot. There is essentially one access to the property through old Boutwell Road where the road comes down the grade. COUNCILMAN PETERSON stated that according to the way it is platted Lot No. 3 has only 25 feet of frontage and MR. HOLDLPH said this would be a long driveway. COUNCILMAN PETERSON stated that according to the Building Code on the requirements - where there is an odd shaped lot as he understands it they take the average depth where you have 25 foot frontage that extends back for 125 feet what does that do for your building requirements? The only access is off Boutwell Court and it appears that the frontage on that lot which is Lot No. 3 is 25 feet. It goes back 125 feet and what does that do for the setback? JEFF ZOLLER stated that he would have to get a variance and MR. NISKA stated that in the ordinance it states that no lot shall have less than 30 feet on the front or back, so he would need a five foot variance here. MR. MAGNUSON stated that Section 903 of the Sub - Division Ordinance applies here. The model sub - division requires 300 feet on a public street for the sub - division of coral land and the change when we adopted the ordinance was not made. MR. ZOLLER stated that when they approved this they were aware of that narrow lot because of the fact that he was going to have the buildable part of the lot at the very end, that would become a long drive -way and he would have to have a turn- around to facilitate emergency vehicles - that was their main concern on a long driveway. MR. MAGNUSON stated that the basis for requiring frontage on a public street is the need to have reasonable access for emergency vehicles - that is why long driveways are discouraged and even long cul -de -sacs under the sub - division code are discouraged. The Planning Commission had recommended water and sewer and that is the sensible way to go. MR. ELLIOTT stated that the problem would be solved along with their petition for utilities for their other development and run the mains under County No. 12 and there would be some problems in getting long services back to some of these lots and it is solvable and they would not need a pump. • • • • 4 1 • • September 26, 1978 MR. MAGNUSON stated that this is a preliminary plat so the next time the Council sees it, it will be a hardshell and at this stage the engineer should look into it and be given property opportunity study it and make his recommendations and this should be done before the Council passes on it. COUNCILMAN PETERSON asked how much would be necessary to put Boutwell Court in - it is a cut -off part of a cul -de -sac and MR. HOLDOLPH stated that it would take relatively little grading to accomplish this. The Mayor closed the hearing. On motion of Councilman Peterson, seconded by Councilwoman Bodlovick, the Council directed that the Reliance Development Preliminary Plat of property north of County No. 12 be referred to the Consulting Engineer for his study and recommendation and report back at the next regular meeting. (all in favor) UNFINISHED BUSINESS 1. This was the day and time set for the bid opening for the electrical work for the Croixwood Seventh Addition Park. The advertisement for bids was published in the Stillwater Evening Gazette, the official newspaper of the City on September 11 and 12, 1978. On motion of Councilman Mahoney, seconded by Councilman Peterson, the Acting City Clerk was directed to open the one bid received from Linner Electric Co., Stillwater for the electrical work at the Croixwood Seventh Addition Park. (all in favor) Total Bid - Bid Bond - $12,470.00 On motion of Councilman Powell, seconded by Councilman Mahoney, the Council accepted the bid of Linner Electric Co., Stillwater in the amount of $12,470.00 for the electrical work at the Croixwood Seventh Addition Park, subject to the approval of the City Attorney regarding the property discrepancy with Washington County. (all in favor) 2. On motion of Councilnan Powell, seconded by Councilman Peterson, the Clerk made the second reading of an ordinance entitled "AN ORDINANCE PROHIBITING CONSUMPTION AND POSSESSION OF INTOXICATING LIQUOR AND NON- INTOXICATING MALT LIQUOR IN LOWELL PARK AND WASHINGTON PARK AND ESTABLISHING A CURFEW IN PARKS WITHIN THE CITY ". The ordinance was read section by section followed by roll call after each section 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 adcpted. 3. On motion of Councilman Peterson, seconded by Councilman Powell, a resolution was introduced "CHANGING THE NAME OF TWO STREETS IN THE STILL - WATER INDUSTRIAL PARK ". AYES -- Councilwoman Bodlovick, Councilmen Mahoney, Peterson, Powell and Mayor Junker NAYS - -None (see resolutions) 4. The City had received a quotation from Giebler - Jahnke for the repair of the band shell at Pioneer Park in the amount of $500.00. HARRY D. PETERSON felt that the City would be making a mistake in taking down the cover on the band shell because it does provide a shade for the lighting when there are musical groups in there and also it gives pro- tection to the people using the park during a rainstorm. He did not feel that the damage was as much as was expected over the number of years. MR. BLEKUM stated that we will see how much money we get from the insur- ance company and then proceed with the work. There is a lot of dry -rot in that superstructure. COUNCILMAN PETERSON felt that when we do the work, if the City does decide to do the work, as long as they are there, they could possibly replace some of the dry -rot at the same time at an additional cost, but it would be less than having to come in to just remove the dry -rot. 5. LAND CONDEMNATION FOR PARKING PURPOSES - DOWNTOWN STILLWATER CLAIRE ERICKSON stated that he would like to ask the Council not to condemn the property - they have made their position fairly clear - that it is unfair to them to take their property - they bought it in 1970 - he felt that the paking lot would benefit very few businesses in town - it is certainly is not something that will benefit most of the businesses in downtown - it will help the ones right next door and there are very few there. He felt that most • 3 • • • September 26, 1978 businesses today when tye do go into a b sin ss they are required to have off - street parking - they do in all of the places they build and do business. When Mr. McGuire went into his project he was very much aware that he did not have adequate parking for his establishment there and he felt it was unfair for the City to take nis lot for his parking lot - he thinks it is even more unfair for the City to take it off the tax rolls and have the City's citizens pay part of the bill for the parking lot for private business. He realized that some of the merchants want to pay half of the cost of the lot, but he feels it is certainly unfair. COUNCILWOMAN BODLOVICK agreed with Mr. Erickson that her complaints were that the citizens of Stillwater "us people living on the hill" do not want to pay for a parking lot downtown and she can almost sympathize with them - have an avenue so that we can "yes" that we can have this parking "without everybody in the City paying for it" if there is a group that is willing to buy half what we hear the downtown retail merchants - is the revenue generating by that pay for the other half. COUNCILMAN PETERSON stated that we have received pledges for the cost involved in the condmning the property and in spite of Mr. Erickson's letter in the paper, I had no adverse calls on that by his drawing attention to that in his letter - there has been a drive underfoot b y the retailers - a very large number not only located down at that end of town, but all ends of town to raise the money necessary - the City has an estimate of the value of that piece of property from a certified appraiser and felt that we should proceed first of all with an offer to Mr. Erickson to purchase the property at that price - if that is not acceptable with Mr. Erickson, if there is a reasonable counter- offer on his part, but if not the City should proceed with condemnation. SHARON BAKER, 1019 Nightingale Blvd., asked how much in pledges and COUNCILMAN PETERSON did not know off hand, but he did know that it was over the appraised value and MAYOR JUNKER stated that we are under the $100,000 figure. She further stated that it was her understanding that the parking meter business was a losing business operation. COUNCILMAN PETERSON felt that it is a service that is provided not only for the shoppers who do go downtown to assure them of a place to park by turning the traffic over and feels that if we do not have a viable downtown section you be- come a bedroom community - you won't be a free - standing community, which Stillwater is in every sense of the word, and there are not many of them left. He was informed by Mrs. Baker that the loss was $200 per year and he did not feel that was a very great loss. JAMES GANNON asked if this would mean free parking at night for McGuires or would there be a charge a night too, and COUNCILMAN PETERSON stated that a decision has not been made on tnis and they would have to be fed. MR. ERICKSON stated that he could not understand how the stores that are down by the drug store and down by Kolliners and that part of town and further north and that is where all the business is - there isn't really too much south of the lot that they have - can't see where people are going to park in that lot by the Brick Alley and walk a block or two to do their shopping north and that part of the problem that we are having here is that in addition to having gasoline we are merchandisers and complete with quite a different number of merchants in town and it is very unusual to have the Chamber of Commerce in town go on record opposing a new business coming into town and it certainly looks to him that they are getting pledges here to keep a competitor out. COUNCILMAN PETERSON - in all of the discussion that there has been over the months and years that Mr. Erickson had the permit which was taken out in 1972 and did not elect to exercise for many years and there never ever has been to his knowledge been one word mentioned about the fact that you are a merchandiser other than gasoline; and secondly, in his statement that people won't walk one or two blocks - if he were to come to Stillwater he would see people walking from not only the south end all the way to the north end, but the reverse - they will walk many, many blocks, not one or two blocks. COUNCILMAN POWELL - the businesses that have developed there recently have invested a lot of money - we have the Freighthouse who might compete with Mr. McGuire's establishment and they need parking - they have their own parking but they need more, Vittorios need parking - it is a facility that we need and we have none down there - he felt that it was improper to say that we are trying to keep you out of business because we are afraid that you might compete with our other stores - we have the Mall that was at one time considered a threat to the downtown and it has proven to be an asset. We have four very excellent restaurants in town that do bring in a lot of people and they go to places like the Poor Butterfly and some of the other ones and the money that they are investing and the money that they are willing to put into this parking lot indicates the need for parking. DICK JEANS from Reed Drug - it is true he would not benefit from that parking lot but it will relieve some of the pressure on his parking lot in his area - • • • • • • September 2E, 1978 he felt that the fillirg station would further compound the problems in downtown - we can't get a new bridge and we are strangled with traffic and that a filling station would back the traffic up further than it is at the present time. JIM RUNT, 1009 South Fourth Street, stated that he is one of the people on the hill - in Red Wing they are taking some of the historical buildings to put in parking and he felt this is a detriment to their historic character - he felt that the health and economy of the downtown is vitally important to everybody in Stillwater - if we do not have a viable downtown we are a bedroom community - as a community we must support the downtown and it brings it back to use is taxes. MONTY BRINE, Brine's Meat Market, this will not benefit them directly, but it will relieve the traffic problems behind their business - people do park at both ends of town and walk from one establishment to another - as far as parking at the front door of a business they would not be building places like Maplewood Mall. Another consideration of the Carl Dale study was that there be no more gas stations in downtown Stillwater - all of the financial commitments that have been made in downtown Stillwater - should consider how the entrance to the City will look with the gas station there - with the property landscaping it would not just look like a parking lot and it would get rid of the "velvet painting dealers" that park there. BILL HAHN, 209 South Main Street, the support to the parking lot is sort of a team effort - the downtown is coming on very strong - the First National �. Bank with a couple of million dollars invested here - Dr. Standafer's new clinic, apart from the NSP building, Vittorio's and Perkl's - people are investing large sums in downtown Stillwater and we have to protect their investments by providing as much parking as we possibly can and felt that they are going to operate as a team downtown and it is going to be good for all of them - the continuing of the investments in downtown is going to benefit us all and bring our tax valuation up and make this a very solid business venture. M.R. SHELTON stated that the cost of the meters would be about 5115.00 each which would be roughly $10,000. WILBERT MONSON asked about the cost to the taxpayers in town and he was not interested in putting in parking lots for the Boom Company - he was informed that there would be an estimated total cost of $134,000, and there are pledges received in excess of the appraised value. DAVE MAGNUSON stated that there is a statute that authorizes municipalities to acquire and develop parking lots because the legislature senses the need that the community has for these things - the one requirement that they do state in the Statute is that if the bonds, the General Obligation portion of the financing, is going to be done without a vote, that is without a refer- endum, then the improvement has to be done by special assessment. Because we will not know the cost of the improvement until we pay the final court award on Mr. Erickson's property, our appraisal is just what our man thinks it is and the jury in the case could award more than that - we would not only have to have an agreement with a specific amount from the specific individuals who have agreed to this assessment, but we would need their agreement that they could be re- assessed on a pro -rated share - fifty percent or more as a special assessment. Perhaps the amount they have now is enough but there is no way that we can be absolutely sure. In order to have our bonds be marketable we have to have more than fifty percent by special assess- ment. The revenues generated from the meters would be pledged to retire the debt. QUESTIONS were raised as to the cost to the general public and MR ELLIOTT stated that the matter of assessing parking lots - there are many methods of assessments relating co the proximity of the business to the lot - getting credit for the fact that the business may have some on -site stalls and some- times a portion is also on general taxing. The estimated cost of the lot is $52,000 for the lot with some beautifucation, but does not include the cost of the meters. MIKE MC GUIRE, stated that the plans that he presented to the City they indicated parking for sixty cars but that was based on the removal of the NSP transformers which are suppose to be moved out of there in 1980. Not only the Brick Alley but the whole downtown is doing so much better in the past year. MAYOR JUNKER stated that he is not in favor of a filling station at the south end of Stillwater but he questioned whether they were being fair to Mr. Erick- son by condemning and taking this property to put in a parking lot which we need, but if we look back - we have ten places including Mr. McGuire's - let • • `42 • • September 26, 1978 them be established and never once have we said to them - where is your parking? Now Mr. Erickson comes and wants to build a station, which is not the greatest thing on the south end of town, but is the City being fair as a Council taking his land through condemnation to put a parking there now with 80 stalls and he did not feel that Bob Thompson is not going to get any hard- ware business from people parking down there. He felt that the City was being unfair. COUNCILMAN PETERSON asked for his alternative and MAYOR JUNKER stated if we want to condemn it we should put a small park on Erickson's property and let the Brick Alley owners put a parking lot in the back for his shops, when Jerry Perkl gets ready he does his, Vittorios does his - nobody buys him a dumptruck to run his business and he has been here 44 years. COUNCILMAN POWELL stated that when the parking lots on Chestnut and Water were put in what they actually did supplied parking for Reeds, for the Coast - to- Coast, Olsons and there was a need for it and it could be that their businesses w,re not specifically designed for that. A Parking Committee established where the sites should be - bought the buildings and put parking lots in and felt that we were doing essentially the same thing now. MAYOR JUNKER felt that the old bus garage should have been condemned and the City paid $50,000 to $75,000 for that and some of the other pieces of property the people were going out of business. COUNCILMAN PETERSON stated that you do pay for land values and that is not only in the buildings but in the land - we paid $75,000 for the bus garage - it was for the land it sat on and many properties that are bought all of the value are in the land not in the buildings that are on the land. COUNCILMAN POWELL - we are not buying expensive property - we are not going to tear down the Cosmopolitan State Bank to put in a parking lot because It is too expensive. The City bought Erickson's property which was going broke (Erickson Furniture) and we needed these parking lots. MAYOR JUNKER - these people can probably buy and sell Stillwater and we are condemning their property so that they can't build a filling station but we are going to supply a parking lot and have supplied it for a year. None of the other parties complained - they wanted out - our parking problems will probably never be erased until we build a three or four story ramp. DICK BALFANZ, stated he was on the Council in 1972 when the City gave the Erickson's a building permit and within that year he put in a foundation and then the energy crunch came and nothing was done and he was issued a permit later and nothing has happened yet and if he had that piece of property he would pay $52,000 for his own parking lot and make a bundle off it. MR. ERICKSON the two- way time was all happen. MR. BALFANZ added that you were to put up the building to comply with the aesthetics of the rest of the town and it was completely changed - the foundation was put up, the tank was sunk in the ground and there were some problems there because of being in the flood plain zone. MONTY BRINE asked why can't we look to the future and take care of the businesses that we have now - if the Grand Garage and Gallery could buy the property behind no place n and y think let's take advantage this property's would also, but there is BLCVICK sked lot. Thetmajorityof residents the money is there. COUNCILMAN POWELL - that would be the most productive parking lot in town and it would not necessarily have to be metered at the same rate as the rest of them are metered at and not necessarily at the same hours - you would have to give some special considers =ion for this one because this is where the people will park to use the facilities that need it and it is conceivable that we could collect money until 8 or 9 at night and when you do this and do generate more business that the whole town benefits and if we kept an accurate record of the revenue from that lot it would be self - sufficient. and th at R is U more centrally than e any v of them w for h l a little tour e and y the y only time that it is filled is when there are people parked there who are taking a boat ride. DAVE MAGNUSON stated that the next step, if you decide to go ahead with it, that someone move that the improvement be ordered - that would include - not have the condemnation separate because you could get the land and nobody to pay for it - you want to tie everything together - have an improvement hearing on the improvement. WAS • • • 1 • • • September 26, 1978 ima r^ The Mayor closed the hearing. On motion of Councilman Powell, seconded by Councilman Peterson, that they proceed with the improvements and either enter into negotiations with Mr. Erickson or if that fails seek condemnation and the date of the hearing was set for November 28, 1978 at 7:30 P. M. (all in favor) (Mr. Elliott and the Acting City Clerk are to check out the parties to be assessed by agreement and there would be no district assessments as such per the City Attorney) NEW BUSINESS 1. On motion of Councilman Peterson, seconded by Councilman Powell, the Council authorized the refund of building permit fees issued directly to the Board of Water Commissioners for two building permits for the construction on the water tanks on the Stillwater Industrial Park, but if same was paid by the Contractor then it is questionable. (all in favor) 2. 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) 3. On motion of Councilman Peterson, seconded by Councilwoman Bodlovick, the Council designated Jeff Zoller to send a certified copy of the Historical Preservation Ordinance to the National Historical Office. (all in favor) 4. Mr. Zoller reported that the Department of Transportation sent a letter to Mr. Abrahamson concerning the traffic problem at the corner of Nelson Street and Main and they stated that they budgeted money for a new stop light at the corner of Myrtle and Main Street, but it will depend upon what the City wants to work out on the traffic problems - he suggested that the Planning Commission, the Downtown Council, Wally and Jack and the City Council get together and see if something can be worked out with the Highway Department. Mr. Zoller was directed to send a copy of this letter to the Retail Council. Discussion was also held regarding the lights on Main and Chestnut. INDIVIDUALS AND DELEGATIONS - continued - - -JIM GANNON appeared before the Council regarding the parking lot which Glenn Wendorff leases from the City of Stillwater and Mr. Wendorff does not wish to continue the lease and he requested permission to pick up this lease. He we- instructed to have Mr. Wendorff send a letter to the City of Stillwater indicating he would like to give up his lease and then Mr. Gannon should send a letter to the City requesting consideration of same. Questions were raised about the number of cars the are parked there and he indicated that business was good - but they keep changing all of the time. He indicated that he and Charlie Salmore keep the grass cut around the property at the present time. - - -MRS. DOUGLAS ELLISON appeared before the City Council regarding a letter that she mailed to the Mayor regarding statements made by Mr. Fierke or a salesman from Orrin Thompson that utilities could be supplied to the Reliance Development property and questioned whether or not a member of the City Council made a statement to Orrin Thompson about this and no one admitted to making such a statement. It was further stated that earlier this evening a petition was accepted for sewer and water for this development and the City Council ordered a feasi- bility study for same. MRS. ELLISON indicated that they had to pay a premium price for their property since there would be no development behind them since the parcels would have to be two or five acres and would be very sparse and they have denied that such statements were made by their salesman. COUNCILMAN POWELL stated that there is a possibility that somebody miscon- strued something because at one time Reliance Development wanted to build low - rent housing there and at that time the Council was opposed to that. The Council took no action on this matter - Mrs. Ellison was seeking clarification from the Council on these statements. • 43 • • • (44 All Construction, Inc. 10740 - 110th St. N., Stillwater September 26, 1978 APPLICATIONS On motion of Councilman Mahoney, seconded by Councilwoman Bodlovick, the following Contractor's Licenses were granted: (all in favor) Jim Burton Carpenter R. #2, Hudson, Wisconsin 54016 Gorco Construction Co. 3384 Brownlow Ave., St. Louis Park 55426 Raymond Haapoja dba Sun -Ray Energy R. 02, Box 179, Mora, Mn. 55051 John M. Harri dba Industrial Roof Maintenance & The Insulation Company New 2321 Oakridge Rd., Stillwater 55082 General Darrell G. Knutson General New 10787 St. Croix Tr. No, Stillwater North Suburban Excavating New 8424 Noble Ave. N., Brooklyn Park 55443 Excavators Pritchard & Sons Contracting, Inc. General New 2037 Novak Ave. N., Stillwater Dick Roby Construction Co. New 7208 James Avenue So., Richfield 55423 General Richard Vanderhoff & Lowell Vanderhoff 2389 Geneva Ave., Oakdale, Mn. 55119 Excavators New Robert Zahler Construction General Renewal 11700 St. Croix Tr. No., Stillwater General General General Insulation New Renewal Renewal Renewal COMMUNICATIONS From the Metro Council on regional water quality management plan - copy in the Clerk's Office. Rom Mark Hud Aerial Surveys - fall flying season. Mr. Shelton was directed to inform them that we will wait another year before we order another aerial survey of the City of Stillwater due to the number of changes to be made during the coming year and we would then have a complete survey. From the League of Minnesota Cities - Regional Meeting - November 1, 1978 - Brooklyn Center. Councilman Powell and Councilman Peterson indicated that they might attend this meeting. From a citizen regarding the use of the property at 518 North Third Street. Mr. Niska and Mr. Abrahamson were directed to check out the complaints. From Wallace Abrahamson to Sheriff Edward Westphal expressing his appreciation for the services rendered by Ike Risenhoover. • • CITY COORDINATOR'S REPORT 1. Passenger Waiting Shelters - Councilman Powell indicated that he was contacted again about putting in a shelter on Croixwood Blvd. and he will be happy to do it if he can get a sponsor and approval of the Council and it would be bigger than the school bus shelters. He will secure a sponsor and come in with a request. The Council did not wish to participate in the Metropolitan Transit Commission's program. 2. On motion of Councilman Peterson, seconded by Councilman Mahoney, the Acting from City Clerk was directed to send the accident Mildred Karl to the McGarry- Kearney Insurance Agency. 3. On motion of Councilman Peterson, seconded by Councilman Mahoney, the Acting City Clerk was directed to send the Conciliation Court Claim from Kerry D. Brown to the McGarry- Kearney Insurance Co. and Stillwater Insurance Agency. (all in favor) • • f^ September 26, 1978 4. Discussion was held on the problems with the current tree removal and some of the damage that is being done in damaging people's yards. Also Mr. Shelton has received complaints about trouble with the contractors. CONSULTTTING ENGINEER'S REPORT 1. On motion of Councilman Mahoney, seconded by Councilman Peterson, a resolution was introduced "ESTABLISHING MUNICIPAL STATE AID STREETS - 63rd STREET FROM GREELEY STREET TO STILLWATER R ('4D ". AYES -- Councilwoman Bodlovick, Councilmen Mahoney, Peterson, Powell and Mayor Junker NAYS - -None (see resolutions) 2. On motion of Councilman Mahoney, seconded by Councilman Peterson, a resolution was introduced "REMOVING MUNICIPAL STATE AID STREET DESIGNA- TION - GREELEY STREET FROM MYRTLE STREET TO MULBERRY STREET ". AYES -- Councilwoman Bodlovick, Councilmen Mahoney, Peterson, Powell and Mayor Junker NAYS - -None (see resolutions) 3. On motion of Councilman Mahoney, seconded by Councilman Peterson, a resolution was introduced "REMOVING MUNICIPAL STATE. AID DESIGNATION - ORLEANS STREET FROM GREELEY STREET TO STILLWATER ROAD ". AYES -- Councilwoman Bodlovick, Councilmen Mahoney, Peterson, Powell and Mayor Junker NAYS- -None (see resolutions) 4. On motion of Councilman Mahoney, seconded by Councilman Peterson, a resolution was introduced "SETTING THE HEARING DATE OF OCTOBER 11, 1978 AT 7:30 P. M. FOR THE HEARING ON THE PROPOSED ASSESSMENTS FOR LOCAL IMPROVEMENT NO. 129 -1" AYES -- Councilwoman Bodlovick, Councilmen Mahoney, Peterson, Powell and Mayor Junker NAYS - -None (see resolutions) 5. On motion of Councilman Peterson, seconded by Councilman Mahoney, the City Attorney was instructed to contact Vacil Kalinoff indicating that the City has a petition for the improvement of Lookout Drive and request that he get this problem squared away immediately on the Sunnyslope Addition Plat. (all in favor) 6. On motion of Councilman Mahoney, seconded by Councilwoman Bodlovick, a resolution was introduced "ORDERING IMPROVEMENTS AND APPROVING PLANS AND S ^ECIFICATIONS AND DIRECTING THE CLERK TO ADVERTISE FOR BIDS FOR LOCAL IMPROVEMENT NO. 157, SAID BIDS TO BE RETURNABLE NOVEMBER 9, 1978 AT 3:00 P. M." AYES -- Councilwoman Bodlovick, Councilmen Mahoney, Peterson, Powell and Mayor Junker NAYS- -None (see resolutions) 7. MR. ELLIOTT explained the proposed improvement on Nightingale Boulevard for the sewer and water extensions as requested by Mr. Etter and Mr. Armstrong and this project be added in - they have eptitioned the Town Board for the improvement - if the Town Board goes through the hearing procedure it ..J could be assessed by the Town Board and the money could be paid back to the City, if the City elects to include it along with the improvements. There are four property owners - one has a service off the end of the line who is Donald Anderson and it was indicated that the Council had given them permission to hook in - the assessment route is the best route and they will have to have a hearing and three out of the four will petition for it and a hearing would be required and at the hearing it will come out that four property owners are benefited and Mr. Anderson would be included - it is up to the Township to require it. He would rather have it done by private contractors as it has to be approved by the Health Department and he will add it in with Local Improvement No. 157. PUBLIC SAFETY No report PUBLIC WORKS No report COMMITTEE REPORTS 45F • • i • • u • F • • 4 • ADMINISTRATIVE No report PARKS AND RECREATION September 26, 1978 1. Mr. Blekum questioned where the money is to come from for the payment of the Electrical work at the Croixwood Seventh Addition Park for this bid awarded this evening. He was informed that it could come out of the money that was received from the sale of the property on Olive Street - the balance of this money was used for the repair of the lights on the Staples Field Tennis Courts. CITY ATTORNEY 1. Mr. Magnuson reported that Mr. Westphal as completed his fence right on Mr. Vern Andrews property line - it is eight feet high and we actually have no ordinance that applies directly to this fence - the question would be whether it is a nuisance - that it is a reasonable interference with Mr. Andrews and his neighbors because of the heighth - possible safety hazard blocking out light and that sort of thing. Mr. Magnuson stated that there is nothing in the Nuisance Ordinance that would apply. It could be under the State Law or the Common Law - an injunction to abate the nuisance - he didn't feel that he should charge him with a crime which would be pretty strong. On motion of Councilman Powell, seconded by Councilwoman Bodlovick, the City Attorney was directed to get an injunction against Mr. Ervin C. Westphal, 1118 West Myrtle Street. (all in favor) 2. There was discussion on a 16 foot discrepancy by Victoria Villa and Gaughan and Mr. Magnusoricated that this is a problem between two private parties and there is nothing that the City can do in this matter. Mr. Heitmiller should get an injunction against Mr. Gaughan. Jeff Zoller felt that if there is a 16 foot discrepency it seems to him that the Planning Commission and the Council should have the right to call P. J. Gaughan back to reconsider this matter. MR. MAGNUSON stated that the City has no way of knowing how is right. MAYOR JUNKER asked that Mr. Magnuson contact Mr. Gaughan's attorney and tell him that the City Council does not like the letter that the people received on barracadirg this street and that possibly that his site plan was in error that was presented to the City Council. COUNCIL REQUEST ITEMS 1. COUNCILWOMAN BODLOVICK indicated that she had talked to Mr. Keller of the Washington County Assessor's office and he explained the formula that they use in assessing - $2.50 per parcel is what they charge for assessing pro- perty and figuring the City's total number of parcels came up to the rate that they are proposing to charge. Previously they were charging us $2.00 per parcel, but now we are paying the same rate as everyone else. 2. COUNCILWOMAN BODLOVICK stated that about two months ago we had a Joint Powers request where the money that is collected for a dedicated park fund from the Industrial Park area - they requested that the City put it in the Escrow Park Fund to be used out there some where and the Council felt that this was a reasonable request. 3. JEFF ZOLLER asked that the Council fill out their questionnaires on the Master Plan and return same to him. ORDINANCES First reading - Prohibiting Liquor and Beer in Lowell and Washington Parks RESOLUTIONS The following resolutions were read and on roll call were unanimously adopted: 1. Directing the Payment of the Bills. - -- • • • • 4 1 • • • U /'.‘ September 26, 1978 2. Transfer of Croixwood Construction Funds (repass) 3. Transfer of MSA Funds (repass) 4. Accept Petition and Order Feasibility Study for Reliance Development Interlachen Addition 5. Changing names of streets in the Stillwater Industrial Park 6. Re- designate State Aid Street - Orleans to 63rd 7. Re- designate State Aid Street - remove part of North Greeley 8. Re- designate State Aid Street - remove part of Orleans Street 9. Assessment Hearing for Local Improvement No. 129 -1 10. Advertise for Bids for Local Improvement No. 157 - Phase II for the Stillwater Industrial Park ADJOURNMENT On motion of Councilman Mahoney, seconded by Councilwoman Bodlovick, the meeting adjourned at 11:05 P. M. Attest: .J _, � ,e �, -J Acti Clerk Mayor • •