Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1980-02-12 CC MIN• • A lis 1 -11 has r COUNCIL CHAMBERS Stillwater, Minnesota February 12, 1980 7:30 P. M . REGULAR MEETING The meeting was called to order by President Junker. The Invocation was given by the City Clerk. Present: Councilwoman Bodlovic Co Junket H. Peterson, R. Peterson, Powell and Absent: None Also Present: Finance Director /Coordinator, Kriesel; Cuty Clerk, Schnell; City Attorney, Magnuson; Public Safety Director, Abrahamson; Director of Parks & Recreation, Blekum; Building Official, Snelson; Consulting Engineers, Elliott and Van Wormer; Press: Stillwater Evening Gazette, Liberty WAVN - Gary Larson Free Press -May Joe Jones Citizens: Dr. Duane Nelson, Mr. & Mrs. Jack Lux, George Kutz, Ron Schoen- born, Bob Farrar, Jeff Peterson, Charles Pozzini, Robert Sabes, Ken Lokkesmoe, Bill Fierke, Vincent Turnblad, Bill Hahn, Dr. Edward Kiolbasa, Richard Jacobson, Mr. & Mrs. Ray Kirchner, Mr. & Mrs. Steven Roettger, Brooks Thompson, Michael McGuire, Julie McGure, Ray Roemich, Lyle Anderson, Mrs. Bud Jagusich, Bob Tennant, Dick Jeans, Lloyd Anez, Harry Giltner, PUBLIC HEARINGS This was the day and time set for the informational hearing on the proposed Lily Lake Level Control. MR. DUANE ELLIOTT cited the various reports regarding the lake levels involved for Lily Lake and McKusick Lake for the Council and the citizens. The current level of Lily Lake is 846.5 feet and the current level of McKusick Lake is 853. He showed a number of drawings on the screen and explained them in detail. (See information Data in Local Improvement No. 125 File) MR. ELLIOTT stated that the water sheds for the two lakes are quite different -the watershed tributary to Lily Lake is 700 acres and there are about 485 acres tributary to McKusick Lake and each lake is about the same in size which is about 46 acres. The plan for pumping in 1974 was estimated at $72,000 and today this plan in its modified form would cost $121 000 There is a dike at the north end of McKusick Lake which is there to prevent the overflow of that lake into Brown's Creek - the overflow from the lake will flow easterly to a structure under Owen Street and this would drain down the Mulberry ravine and the rate of drainage would be about 1,000 to 1,500 gallons per minute which is not an excessive amount of flow for an open ditch. They hae and McKusick v Lake suggested the elevation for elevation control ation whichist basis at 842 854. KENT LOKKESMOE, representing the DNR, explained how the elevations are determined- they have determined 844.8 as the level for Lily Lake and for McKusick Lake an elevation of 850.7. The elevation on McKusick Lake is subject to question and they are currently in the process of checking that and it could be revised upward with flowage easements. Their regulations allow an elevation up to a foot and a half below the ordinary high water level if it is a land - locked basin rsoithey1 would uld.7 - l ooki n g s at an elevation under their rules for Lily Lake of app Y 1.3 feet higher than what has been proposed for Lily Lake. The elevation for McKusick Lake should be established somewaht consistent with the ordinary high water level and he was here this evening to hear the comments of the citizens that are affected by the levels of both of these lakes. GEORGE KUTZ, 705 South Holcombe Street, gave a history on Lily Lake and its outlets and the levels of the water and also a history on McKusick Lake which is a man -made lake which was taken over by the Water Department. He also informed all present of his involvement in both of these lakes over the years. JEFF PETERSON, 320 West Pine Street, questioned what would happen when the water goes through the old dumpsite and what the silting problems could be. 41 a • • • 1 i • 41 42 February 12, 1980 MR. ELLIOTT again explained the ponding areas for this proposed pumping and the drainage between the two lakes, and the ponds that are currently being constructed to he south of The t property to the east eof to the k Cub a Store drains a to a Lily r Lake h and n the t Park. property to the west drains to Long Lake. JEFF PETERSON asked if the quality of the water has been tested in the area of the old dump and MR. ELLIOTT stated that they have not. HARRY GILTNER, a resident on McKusick Lake, asked if the City would be enfringing on anyone by going down. the Mulberry Street ravine and MR. ELLIOTT stated that it is a natural drainage through this ravine and there is a 36 inch pipe put in there when the Everett Street bridge was removed. This is a very low rate of pumping and should not create a problem. BOB TENNANT, 1031 West Abbott Street, inquired about the ponding to the south of Lily Lake and MR. ELLIOTT explained the ponding and the pond behind Ogren 's would be about two acres in size and with the skimming devioeit will do a considerable amount of clearance and then with the brick pond is the best and most natural place to dispose of the water - there are a lot of acquatic plants that feed on the nutrients that are n water and this the third B entering Lily Lake - the Oasis Pond, the one by Ogren's and then the Pond. MR. TENNANT wondered if they would be doing anything about the storm drainage from the North and west which tends to destroy the quality of the lake and MR. ELLIOTT stated there is nothing being done in this aspect. COUNCILMAN ROGER PETERSON asked if it would be feasible to cut off the storm sewers coming into Lily Lake and MR. ELLIOTT stated that it would be very costly - there would have to be pumping stations at each sewer outlet or bring them all together to one point and then pump them into the storm sewer system - there is a 48 inch pipe that delivers the water into the Brick Pond and the capacity is about 40 cubic feet per second - 20,000 gallons per minute. He stated that Bill Fierke has suggested the possibility of a pollution control as well as level control and he took a look at the Brick Pond and whether or not it would be feasible to let the Brick Pond to be the depository for all of the water from the green area of the watershed and then pump that water on over into the storm sewer system - the Brick Pond has a very limited capacity - it would rise as the result of a fifty year storm about seven feet and in order to avoid that there would have to be storm water pumps in order to keep that to a tolerable level so that two or three houses on the east side of the pond would not flood and then the second problem is the storm sewer system does not have adequate capacity to the east and you would have to dump it into a ravine or some other location. He did not see a solution with respect to curing the pollution problem of the lake. DR. DUANE NELSON, 607 Lake Drive, asked about the westerly limits of the Brick Street Lift Station and this goes as far west as Pine Tree Trail and this is only about 20 acres of the watershed of this area- there are portions that drain directly into the lake and do not go through this pipe. BILL PIERRE, 724 South Owens Street, was hopeful that the City could come up with some combination to the lake level problem and the water quality problem. MR. ELLIOTT stated that there are separate solutions that will be developed - the level has to be the plan of pumping through Brick Street with the forcemain - the plans for pollution control might come about by getting a Lake Study Grant - it might be a multitude of solutions including the type of fertilizer to be used on the lawns, doing a gutter job on street sweeping -- there are substantial costs that the City is incurring with the cost of pumps and other costs and determination has been made as to who is going to pay for this. MR. FIERKE stated that the lake has a serious water quality problem and felt that the Council is not as aware of this as the citizens who live on the lake last fall afteraaer submitted showed which he had taken of Lily Lake scum on the lake. MAYOR R JUNKER asked sked th Monday, February hearing co eingn continued aat7th0 next regular Council meeting Y THE MAYOR DECLARED A RECESS FROM 8:35 to 8:45 P. M. amendment to Ordinance 383 for t the c rezoning of property 0 on e West Olive oStreet proposed et or Genus Deiss. Mayor Junker reopened the hearing. NNI s Ft • a • • { • 0 February 12, 1980 DUANE ELLIOTT outlined the problems with this property as it relates to utilities - the watermain is on Olive Street and there would be m problem serving it with water for the 2.7 acres but there has been no indication as to where the streets would go for the balance of the property. The sanitary sewer is more difficult because of the depth of the sewer and the topography of this property which is very rugged - the northerly portion of this property would be served from the proposed lift station for the Reliance Development Corporation property and he still holds to that and he felt that if the 2.7 acres is to be rezoned that the whole thing should be considered and what is going to be done with the whole site and how they are going to get a road thru the site - how you are going to get utilities to properly serve the site - he did not feel that any of that data has been presented to the Council - he felt that it would be a bad deal for the owners of the land for one - because the total use of the land has not been thought out and the City's interests are not served by not thinking things out. He recommended against that until more data is presented to the City. BOB FARRAR, representing Mr. Deiss, stated that this was new to him - it was his understanding that it could possibly be served with water and sewer - Mr. Deiss felt that the zoning should come ahead of the topographic and the sketch layout- there are many ponds and vacant areas there that will make that area very difficult to develop into very many home sites and the cost per home site is very high and the double houses or townhouses would be best - he had hoped to get the zoning first. RAY KIRCHNER, 1904 West Oak Street, stated that last week he submitted a paition to the Council with 38 signatures opposing the rezoning because of traffic problems, PO the access of the curve, and would not meet the zoning requirements for street frontage - he is proposing a private street, and this would drastically change ' the character of the neighborhood. The Mayor closed the hearing. On motion of Councilman Roger Peterson, seconded by Councilwoman Bodlovick, based on the information provided by the Consulting Engineer for the City of Stillwater and the objection of the neighbors, the Council denied the request for the rezoning of the property on West Olive Street at least until such a time as the proposer would submit plans for the entire piece of property. (all in favor) MR. FARRAR asked about the plans for the area and he was informed that the developer should go by the Sub- divisbn Ordinance of Washington County which was adopted by the City of Stillwater. COUNCILMAN POWELL indicated that he wanted to amend the motion saying that the request for rezoning be denied and remain single family because that is what the neighbors want and as far as he was concerned it would be fair to Mr. Deiss to let him know this DAVID MAGNUSON stated that he could apply for a PUD which is the logical method of approaching the problem like that and it is within the descretion of the Council to allow any sort of rezoning. NRS. STEVEN ROETTGER indicated that they just recently purchased property in this area and the reason that they did was that it was a single family area and they would like to see it remain that way. -- -This was the day and time set for the public hearing for Local Improvement No. 166 - Downtown Parking Lot and Street Realignment. Notice of the hearing was published in the Stillwater Evening Gazette, the officials newspaper of the City, on February 1, and 8, 1980 and copies were mailed to all property owners proposed to be assessed. The Mayor opened the hearing. DAVID MAGNUSON, City Attorney, explained the reasons for tonite's hearing - (1) the statutes require that the improvement be ordered within six months of the improvement hearing and since we were tied up in this condemnation action involving the purchase of the property for se long and this necessitates another hearing; (2) the overall cost of the project has inflated and is more than be- fore and the nature and extent of the project h -s changed and it was felt that it was prudent to have another hearing in order to allow the manimum number of people to be heard at the maximum number of times. GLEN VAN WORMER described the project and the cost of the project - he explained the concept of the project and there will be 99 parking stalls with permanent curb and gutter around the islands and there are wheel stops which can be moved or adjusted in the future for the expansion of the parking area. The actual cost involved with the parking lot are substantially higher than what was originally estimated - the land costs have almost doubled - now approximately $114,000. The cost of the construction is estimated at $101,000 including an option for lighting at a cost of $9,000 which can be deleted. There are parking meters with a value of approximately $21,000. (continued on page 44) 43' e e 0 • • 4 1 a • • • 44 February 12, 1980 There is the realignment of Main Street in front of the parking area which has been discussed with the Department of Transportation and the proposal will slow down the traffic and which would define the parking areas on the street which would provide a margin of safety for the parking and moving vehicles. This would give the pedestrians better site distance when crossing at Nelson Street and will also add several more parking stalls in the lot. The cost to provide this as detailed by the State is $135,000 and the State will pay a large share of that; however, the City is expected to pick up a portion of the curb and gutter, a portion of the sidewalk and a portion of the wider area which would be used for parking. The City's dare is estimated at $61,000 which is higher than was originally anticipated. There is one other project in the area which the Council requested the engineers to look at and that is the matter of drainage that sits in the street at Nelson Alley and Main Street. When the State went in and overlaid the street, they raised the grade just enough so that the water no longer can get to the channel which went along next to the curb. The proposal to correct this is to put in four catch basins and the sewer itself out in the street which would tie - in into the existing storm sewer system at Nelson Alley - the cost of that is estimated at $26,615 and they will be requesting the State to pick up a share of this and he is hopeful of getting $2,500 out of them. Then there is the matter of the pedestrian crossing at Nelson Street and the City would pay for the cost of a fishing yellow signal and this cost is $1,500. The last project in the downtown area would be associated in some respects with these others and that is of the traffic signals and the revisions that the State is proposing. Those were originally to be funded 90% by the federal govern- ment and 10% on a basis between the State, County and the City. Using Municipal State Aid funds they originally estimated the cost would be less than $1,500 for about a $120,000 project. However, the federal government share changed from 907, to about 75% which means that everybody's share is kicked up 6, the City is now looking at a cost of $36,000 out of its Municipal State Aid Funds at $8,100 less anything that we can get from the County for the remainder. He presented to the Council the concept plan for the assessments for these projects. This would be a method of assessing the benefits so that the person benefiting most would be assessed the most. That concept is a two -fold assess- ment - one part of that would be to determine a ring around which there is a maximum benefit which is approximately 300 feet with circles of 300, 600 and 900 feet and square off the remaining downtown area which they feel will have some benefit. The core area which is within 300 feet of the parking area would be assessed a total of 40% of the cost of the parking facility; those in the second area (between 300 and 600 feet) would only be requested to pick up 30 %; those in the third tier (between 600 and 900 feet) would pick up 20% and those in the far end would pick up 10 percent. Compound way of providing assessments for benefits - not only is there a higher percentage but there are less buildings and less square footage in the close -in area. For those who have provided some off - street parking they are proposing that they be assessed 80% in this method and 20% in another procedure where credit is given for spaces already provided. According to the City Ordinance these requirements are set by the Council and rather than to put that burden on the Council they have gone to some general concepts that could be used in establishing parking - such as five parking spaces for every 1,000 square feet of gross floor area, or one space for every three seats or three employees in a restaurant or a bar or a lounge and these would provide a pretty fair indication of the number of stalls that would be required is an establishment were required to provide its own spaces. After you calculate the number of spaces that they should provide if they were to take care of their own needs exclusively, then you can establish a point system and you don't get any points if you need, you get ten points if you don't have a single stall, six points if you meet 40 to 59% of them - it would be a sliding scale. This gives some credit for those who have established their own parking and not used the public parking facilities. They would establish the square footages for this formula. The realignment of Main Street creates some problems in that it would have to be paid for out of the General Fund or there should be some kind of special funding, or a concept the same as the parking lot assessment. He cited several examples for the Council's benefit. There is another problem with the assessing of the storm sewer and find it difficult to assess it to the abutting property or the drainage area which is about a block square. The other problem is the signals and the flasher's share which would be hard to assess and this would need a different formula. The total cost of the five projects is $513,000 and the federal share only for the traffic signals comes to $102,000; the state's share which is still an estimate comes to a total of $97,000; the County originally agreed to share one - fourth of the local cost of the signal at Main and Chestnut which was estimated at $1,600 and now it is $4,500. The State Aid Fund will provide $3,6 °0 because one leg of My.Lle Street is on a State Aid system which leaves an assessible total of approximately $312,000. We do have a potential to take and spend some Municipal State Aid Funds off of the Municipal State Aid System on either Trunk Highway or County State Aid roads - you have to do two things - (1) you have to get approval from the Transportation Department to do so; (2) they slap your hands in the terms of penalty - the penalty is complicated and if we use approximately $10,000 to cover our signal share and our pedestrian flasher, you can subtract $10,000 from your needs which • � a L u • Py • February 12, 1980 0 e 1 would mean the allowment for each year would be reduced by a couple hundred dollars. We are getting in excess of $160,000 per year now so we would lose about $200 per year for the next ten years which would be pretty cheap interest. It is also possible to fund the Main Street alignment share using that and paying the same penalty so that the total penalty would be more like $2,500 per year or $25,000 for a ten year period. That would mean money that would not be available to spend on the rest of the Municipal State Aid System. This would be $71,000 that we can't use right now - they would take it immediately out of your amount of money that is sitting on the City's books which might be a little bit tough for the next year or two to build all of the projects - the matting program and the work in the Industrial Park if they all occurred at one time. Their recommendation would be to give strong consideration to their method of assessing the parking lot that the City give consideration to assessing the approximately $300,000 on the parking lot and the Main Street Realignment based on the radial and the predecessor parking and take the $10,000 out of the Municipal State Aid Fund. COUNCILMAN POWELL asked if there is any way that if the Council decided they could assess 757 of the total and setup a fund of Debt Retirement Fund out of the proceeds of the meters. MR. VAN WORMER stated that they thought of using meter revenues and they could see four problems in trying to set 75% and using the meter revenues to pay off the other (1) you should have some kind of sinking fund or some way of paying for your own maintenance that you will need on those in the future - as you lose parking meters, as you need sealcoat on the bituminous and the City should be able to pay for that out of the meter revenues; (2) if you put that amount of money into the assessments, then if you ever decide to take out the parking meters or if the revenues fall down, you are going to have to come back out of your general tax levies to pick that up which is going to create some problems; (3) they would like to talk in the terms of maximum assessments - the City does have the option each year of taking the revenues and using them against the assessments u the total assessments but could done each booksagainstthe year and that would cut property. JULIE MC GUIRE, of the Brick Alley, inquired if there would still be parking on the Street in this area and MR. VAN WORMER explained where this parking would be located and they would actually be parking bays. There would be no loss of parking in front of the Brick Alley. finish MR. PETERSON asked WORMER how the would and and finished this summer - the Main Street Realignment could be done this summer also and that would be in a State contract along with the traffic signals - the traffic signal work would start this summer but the new equipment would not be totally here until about eight months from the day that it is let but the State indicated last year that they would complete that project in 1980. The plans are complete right now and they are waiting for the engineers to send them the last sheets for the realignment - there are about two or three months of their own sorting time before letting date - that would mean about eight months after they let before the equipment can be turned on. MICHAEL MC GUIRE inquired about the time period for the payment of the assess- ments and he was informed that the time period is set at the assessment hearing which is after the project is completed - generally it is ten years, but it has been extended beyond that in some instances. JULIE MC GUIRE inquired about the radius at the corner of Nelson and Main for the turning of large delivery trucks and MR. VAN WORMER indicated that with the new realignment that situation should be improved. The Mayor closed the hearing. On mtoion of Councilman Roger Peterson, seconded by Councilman Powell, a solution was AND ORDERING THE FINAL introduced "ORDERING PLANS ANDSPECIFICATIONS N LOCAL IMPROVEMENT ANDAUTHORIZ AUTHORIZING THE YMENTNOF 166 THE CONDEMNATION AWARD ". AYES -- Councilwoman Bodlovick, Councilmen H. Peterson, R. Peterson, Powell and Mayor Junker NAYS - -None (see resolutions) INDIVIDUALS AND DELGATIONS None at this point in the meeting. 4 e 9 • • • • •(46 February 12, 1980 PETITIONS -- -From Steven and Barbara Roettger for the vacation of a portion of West Oak Street and South Oakes Street. MR. ROETTGER explained the reason for this is to bring the house forward at an angle to get into the utilities in the area. MR. MAGNUSON stated that if we use statutes we do not have to have a hearing - it can be done at any public meeting - it does not require a hearing. MRS. ROETTGER stated that both parties are here this evening and they are not opposed to it and they are willing to accept the additional 30 feet. MR. MAGNSUON stated that we have always used the charter provisions for the hearings, but the City has the optin of using the short procedure and it does not require that there be any notice - it just requires that it be a public meeting. COUNCILMAN POWELL Moved to introduce a resolution "VACATING PORTIONS OF OAK AND OAKES STREET ". MAYOR JUNKER wanted the rest of the Council to look at the property so that they know that they are ready to do it. (Councilman Powell's motion died for the lack of a second.) On motion of Councilman Roger Peterson, seconded by Councilman Harry Peterson, the Council set the date of February 25, 1980 at 7:30 P. M. for the proposed vacation of a portion of West Oak Street and South Oakes Street. (all in favor) -- -From residents on West Olive Street to place a stop sign on West Olive Street near Grove or Brick Streets. On motion of Councilman Roger Peterson, seconded by Councilman Harry Peterson, Mr. Rriesel was directed to send a letter to the Washington County Highway Department requesting a stop sign on West Olive Street together with the petition from these citizens. (all in favor) UNFINISHED BUSINESS 1. On motion of Councilman Powell, seconded by Councilwoman Bodlovick, the Council authorized Short - Elliott- Hendrickson, Inc. to proceed with the drainage study for the Augustine Plat at an estimated cost figure of $2,800 which will be charged to the developer and if the City proceeds with the project at a later date that this cost would be taken off of the assessments for the improvements. (all in favor) 2. On motion of Councilman Roger Peterson, seconded by Councilman Powell, the Council instructed the City Attorney to consult with Swager Bros. and bring back in writing an agreement whereby they would agree to pay for the costs of constructing a pipe- line on the north side of the house on Lot #5, Swager Bros. Hilltop Addition (708 Pine Tree Trail) from the pond to the existing storm sewer on Pine Tree Trail at a cost of $7,710.00. (all in favor) 3. On motion of Councilman Roger Peterson, seconded by Councilman Powell, the Council set the date of March 11, 1980 for the hearing on the Penthouse Acres Plat at 7:30 P. M. (all in favor) BRUCE FOLZ presented the Council with the copy of the proposed plat and pointed out portions of it to the Council. Mr. Leitte wrote a letter stating that what he would like to do is to dedicate the ditch area for a walkway and ski easement for the public - he is not sure that it can legally be done as this is owned by the State Highway Department and an easement right on it for a purpose and did not know if the owner can do that - if he can grant another easement - Mr. Magnuson is going to have to find out if it is legally allowable; secondly, if it can legally be done, does the Council want to consider it - there are some obligations since there is a drainage way - there is erosion in there from people walking - the purpose of it that interceptor ditch catches the water before it goes over the hill - if there is wear and erosion and somebody damages it, the City is going to be liable and the State will want the City to maintain some liability. Secondly, somebody is going to have to maintain it - it goes close to some houses and he was not so sure how those people would be having a walkway going in there - it may be limited only to the people who live there, but if it is made a City walkway, it is going to be open to the public. (continued on page 47) r r aI P I • 0 • 0 • • • February 12, 1980 r 0 r The other issue to be looked at is one tract of land in the center that is undeveloped - there were three or four parcels before that was isolated prime land that Tony gained ownership of - he has convinced him that he should deed these out to the abuting owners so some of these have been removed. The portion in the center is unplatted and unsold and he still owns it. It is his decision that he would like to get three lots out of that and he would like to have the three lots in the configuration they show on the map - some place there is going to have to be something on paper before we have a hearing. It was indicated at the meeting with the people that Mr. Leitte had some promises to some of these people that a portion of this would not be developed - based on the County soil testing the soil within the circle seems to be good soil and he suggested that some soil testings be made. MAYOR JUNKER suggested that possibly the Council could get Mr. Leitte to agree to one lot and one house on that property and not obstruct the view to the river or valley. MR. FOLZ felt that the people would be comfortable with one house, but that Mr. Leitte would not be happy with this. MR. MAGNUSON stated that everyone with an interest in the land is going to have to sign the plat - which means that everybody is going to have to be happy and this would be the place to effect a compromise. If there is one person who does not sign the plat, then it cannot be accepted and then the City is going to have to bring an action against that person and that is the only thing that can be done. The less people that we have to do that the better off the City is going to be. If the City is going to have to bring an action with anybody, it should be with Mr. Leitte and the City would be in much better shape. MR. FOLZ stated that Mr. Leitte's house is on Lot 10 and two months ago he wanted to sub- divide that lot and put another house in there and he spent quite a bit of time and a quite bit of the City's money that he does not have enough land on a flat enough slope to do that and he has finally agreed that he does not want that other house there - he has come down to where he is going to have five salable lots down to three. The Council agreed that the plat should be left as presented this evening for the hearing and then at the hearing the Council can initiate the compromise. MR. MAGNUSON stated that in 1970 he wanted to plat this property and he wanted to sell lots right away and the City agreed to allow him to sell the lots with- out platting them if he would deposit $7,500 with the City to insure that he would complete the platting - it was never done and he sold various lots and each time the people would come to the Council and the Council would let him go ahead and sell another parcel and the platting was never being done - Art Holm passed away and this further complbated the matter - the people up there have been complaining that they could not get marketable title to their land and they wanted the City to get it platted and then the City obtained Bruce Folz to do it and to pay for it out of the money that Mr. Leitte gave the City. MR. FOLZ called the Council's attention to the fact that there was never any park dedication on this plat and the issue was raised at the first meeting that the property in the center could be used for park dedication and the Council can make that decision. 4. On motion of Councilman Roger Peterson, seconded by Councilman Powell, a resolution was introduced "ESTABLISHING A DEFERRED COMPENSATION PLAN ". AYES -- Councilwoman Bodlovick, Councilmen H. Peterson, R. Peterson, Powell and Mayor Junker NAYS - -None (see resolutions) (The Council consented to a maximum of four companies on this program) NEW BUSINESS 1. On motion of Councilman Powell, seconded by Councilman Roger Peterson, the City Attorney made the first reading by title of an ordinance entitled "AN ORDINANCE ADOPTING A REVISION AND CODIFICATION OF ORDINANCES, TO BE KNOWN AS TEE STILLWATER CITY CODE: PROVIDING FOR THE REPEAL OF CERTAIN ORDINANCES: PROVIDING FOR THE PRESERVATION OF CERTAIN RIGHTS AND PROVIDING FOR NOTICE OF THE ADOPTION THEREOF PURSUANT TO MINNESOTA STATURES SECTION 415.021." (all in favor) 2. COUNCILMAN POWELL made the comment that our engineering firm received a very special award from the Consulting Engineer's Council of Minnesota naming them for excellence in engineering and they are one of the five companies in Minnesota that received that and he stated that indicates what a fine firm we have working for us and he congratulated them. 1 47\ • 0 • • ,. 1 P5 • Bluff Oasis Service Station 806 South Main Street, Stillwater J & D Bluff Bait - Jack L. Myers 806- South Main Street, Stillwater February 12, 1980 3. On motion of Councilman Powell, seconded by Councilman Roger Peterson, the following claims were directed to be sent to McGarry- Kearney Insurance Agency: 1. Lucille Carlson for an accident with a City of Stillwater vehicle. 2. Mark Holsten for an accident at a toboggan slide located on the west side of Lily Lake. 3. Judith Roettger for an accident at the Lily Lake Ice Arena. (all in favor) 4. On motion of Councilwoman Bodlovick, seconded by Councilman Harry Peterson, the Council authorized the payment of the $1,500 on the St. Croix Riverman Drum & Bugle Corps. (all in favor) 5. The Public Safety Committee recommended that Mr. Kriesel work out a couple of different ways to assess the Townships and come back in two weeks with some different proposals. On motion of Councilman Powell, seconded by Councilman Roger Peterson, the City Coordinator was directed to proceed with the recommendation of the Public Safety Committee. (all in favor) 6. On motion of Councilman Powell, seconded by Councilman Harry Peterson, a resolution was introduced "DIRECTING THE PAYMENT OF THE BILLS ". AYES -- Councilwoman Bodlovick, Councilmen H. Peterson, R. Peterson, Powell and Mayor Junker NAYS- -None (see resolutions) INDIVIDUALS OR DELEGATIONS None APPLICATIONS On motion of Councilman Powell, seconded by Councilwoman Bodlovick, the following Contractor's Licenses were approved: (all in favor) Capp Homes, Inc. 3355 Hiawatha, Minneapolis, Mn. 55406 Robert Hagstrom - Woodview Corporation 3390 Lake Elmo Avenue North, Lake Elmo 55042 New Hope Water Control,Inc. 310 North Snelling, St. Paul 55104 Richert Decorating 1123 South Fifth Street, Stillwater General Renewal General Renewal Water- Proofing New Painting Renewal - -- On motion of Councilman Harry Peterson, seconded by Councilwoman Bodlovick, the Council approved the following Cigarette Licenses for 1980: (all in favor) Renewal Renewal COMMUNICATIONS From the League of Minnesota Cities - Legislative Action Conference on Wednesday, February 20, 1980. On motion of Councilman Powell, seconded by Councilman Harry Peterson, that the Mayor and the City Coordinator attend this meeting. (all in favor) (Councilwoman Bodlovick will also attend if time permits) CITY CLERK'S REPORT 1. The Council was asked if they wish to submit a nomination for the Ludwig Award for the League of Minnesota Cities and they indicated that they have no desire to do so. CITY COORDINATOR'S REPORT 1. On motion of Councilman Harry Peterson, seconded by Councilwoman Bodlovick, a resolution was introduced "EMPLOYING LA DONNA STICKAN AS A CLERK /TYPIST IN THE CITY CLERK'S OFFICE ". AYES -- Councilwoman Bodlovick, Councilmen H. Peterson, R. Peterson, Powell and Mayor Junker NAYS- -None (see resolutions) • • • • • • • r r February 12, 1980 2. Mr. Kriesel reminded the Council that they will have the interviews for the Building Official applicants at 4:30 to 6:00 P. M. tomorrow - February 13, 1980. 3. On motion of Councilman Roger Peterson, seconded by Councilwoman Bodlovick, Mr. Kriesel was authorized to work with Carl Dale on acquiring grant monies for park acquisition for the City and in particular for the Benson property (all in favor) 4. On motion of Councilman Roger Peterson, seconded by Councilwoman Bodlovick, the Council authorized the flat fee of $25.00 for the permits for the weatherization program through the CETA PROGRAM. (all in favor) 5. On motion of Councilman Powell, seconded by Councilman Roger Peterson, the date of the second regular Council meeting for the month of February was changed to Monday, February 25, 1980 due to the political caucuses. (all in favor) CONSULTING ENGINEER'S REPORT 1. On motion of Councilman Roger Peterson, seconded by Councilman Powell, the Council requesting that the storm sewer improvement on Main Street be included with the Main Street project and the parking lot project. (all in favor) COIMfITTEE REPORTS PUBLIC SAFETY 1. On motion of Councilman Roger Peterson, seconded by Councilman Powell, the Council followed the rec_mmendation of the Public Safety Committee to enter into a Mutual Aid Fire Contract with the City of Somerset, Wisconsin. (all in favor) 2. On motion of Councilman Powell, seconded by Councilwoman Bodlovick, the Council authorized the attendance of two firemen at the Fire Conference at St. Cloud in June. (all in favor) 3. Mr. Abrahamson informed the Council that the Fire Department will be putting on a demonstration of the Hearst Tool for the Council members at seven o'clock at the first meeting in March and the Council members were requested to be present for same. PUBLIC WORKS None PARKS AND RECREATION 1. On motion of Councilman Roger Peterson, seconded by Councilman Powell, the Council requested Mr. Van Wormer to give the City an estimated cost of doing a survey for the work to be done at Pioneer Park by the River Valley Lions Club. (all in favor) 2. On motion of Councilman Powell, seconded by Councilman Harry Peterson, Mr. Blekum was authorized to purchase from Cushman Motor Co., Minneapolis, Minnesota - One National Triplex Mower at a price of $3,330.00 and One Snowco Loading Trailer at a price of $1,185.00. (all in favor) 3. On motion of Councilman Powell, seconded by Councilwoman Bodlovick, the Council authorized the attendance of Mr. Blekum and four of his employees to attend a shade tree and bedding seminar at the University of Minnesota on February 26, 1980 the cost of same which is $75.00. (all in favor) BUILDING OFFICIAL 1. Mr. Snelson requested that the Council do something about cleaning out If the stairways in the Municipal Building and that the City secure quotes for the construction of a stairway on the north end of the lower level and Mr. Kriesel was directed to take care of this matter. 2. Mr. Snelson thanked the Council members for their cooperation and he was given permission to terminate his employment on Friday, February 15, 1980 rather than the following Friday. On motion of Councilnan Roger Peterson, seconded by Councilwoman Bodlovick, the Council authorized Mr. Kriesel to contact Washington County to do inspections for the City until a new Building Official is hired. (all in favor) COUNCILMAN HARRY PETERSON express his appreciation for Jesse's work and MAYOR JUNKER also express his thanks to him. 49" e c 1 • • February 12, 1980 CITY ATTORNEY'S REPORT 1. Mr. Magnuson stated that he and Nile had talked to Bill Schwab and he has indicated willingness, if the City would like, he would work as a consultant for the City on zoning and planning matters - he would work by the job - charge $25.00 per hour plus his expenses - the Council could pick and chose the projects - the Council was agreeable to this. 2. On motion of Councilman Roger Peterson, seconded by Councilman Powell, the Council authorized Mr. Kriesel, David Magnuson, and Ron Langness to investigate different avenues of private placement for the money that is needed to finance Local Improvement No. 177 - Burlington Northern Tunnel. (all in favor) COUNCIL REOUEST ITEMS 1. Mr. Abrahamson asked for permission to attend the Suburban Police Board meeting on Wednesday, February 20, 1980 and permission was granted. 2. On motion of Councilman Powell, seconded by Councilman Roger Peterson, a resolution was introduced "CHANGING THE DATES OF THE CITY COUNCIL MEETINGS TO THE FIRST AND THIRD TUESDAY OF THE MONTH EFFECTIVE APRIL 1, 1980 ". AYES -- Councilwoman Bodlovick, Councilmen H. Peterson, R. Peterson, Powell and Mayor Junker NAYS - -None (see resolutions) OUESTIONS FROM THE PRESS REPRESENTATIVES None ORDINANCES First Reading - Ordinance for Codification - Ordinance No. 581 RESOLUTIONS The following resolutions were read and on roll call were unanimously adopted: 1. Directing the Payment of the Bills. 2. Ordering Improvement and Making Condemnation Award - L. I. No. 166 - Parking Lot 3. Establishing Deferred Compensation Plan 4. Employing LaDonna Stickan as Clerk- Typist 5. Change in Regular Council Meeting dates. ADJOURNMENT On motion of Councilman Roger Peterson, seconded by Councilman Powell, the meeting adjourned at 10:25 P. M. Attest: ,ht Ci y Clerk Mayor A • e • •