Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1980-09-16 CC MIN• • A r • COUNCIL CHAMBERS Stillwater, Minnesota REGULAR MEETING COMMITTEE REPORTS September 16, 1980 4:00 P. M. The meeting was called to order by Mayor Junker. Present: Councilwoman Bodlovick, Councilmen Harry Peterson, Roger Peterson and Mayor Junker Absent: Councilman Powell Also Present: Finance Director /Coordinator, Kriesel; City Clerk, Schnell; City Attorney, Magnuson; Public Safety Director, Abrahamson; Director of Public Works, Shelton; Fire Chief, Chial; Building Official, Zepper; Director of Parks & Recreation, Blekum Press: Free Press - Julie Edstrom Citizens: None INDIVIDUALS AND DELGATIONS 1 None PUBLIC SAFETY 1. On motion of Councilman Roger Peterson, seconded by Councilwoman Bodlovick, the Director of Public Safety was directed to submit to the Council a list of six potential police officers to Mr. Kriesel to set up interviews in the very near future as recommended by Mr. Abrahamson from the list who took the last State examination which is good for two years. (all in favor) (Officer Rob Daniels has submitted his resignation as of September 30, 1980) (The original motion was for five, but Mr. Richard Ulrich has also applied and he is a licensed officer present.y working part -time in Oak Park Heights) FIRE CHIEF 1. MR. CHIAL informed the Council that the Hi -Rise is seeking some additional park- ing space for their complex and requested the possible use of the land to the south of their building. (no action taken at this time) 2. MR. CHIAL informed the Council that he has received an ambulance study from the Washington County Emergency Service and they are trying to develop a cost for full -time Perimedic Services and Advance Life Service for part of the County - after checking this out he found out that it was their intention to have the Stillwater Fire Department to furnish full -time Advance Life Support for the County and the Stillwater Ambulance will do the transporting. We would have to train these men and there would have to be a new communications system so that the ambulance could talk directly to Ramsey Hospital. This would be a very costly program. (No action was taken on this matter at this time) 3. On motion of Councilwoman Bodlovick, seconded by Councilman Harry Peterson, the Council authorized the attendance of Mr. Chial to the Minnesota State Fire Chiefs Conference to be held in Duluth on October 15 -18 at a cost of $70.00 for the registration. (all in favor) PUBLIC WORKS 1. MR. SHELTON informed the Council that the notices were sent out on September 12th for the October 14th meeting on the Infiltration in the downtown area. 2. MR. SHELTON informed the Council that the bids on the loader will be returned on October 7th. 3. MR. SHELTON had several requests by several citizens regarding the parking by St. Michael's School and Mr. Shelton was directed to send the school a letter about this on- street parking. Ir has created a serious problem with the children coming out from in- between the cars. 4. MR. SHELTON asked the Council for permission not to slury coat the various streets this fall and that this work can be done next summer when school is not in session. 2U1 e • e • • ' (202 • September 16, 1980 PARKS & RECREATION 1. MR. BLKEUM gave the Council some figures for the inprWement of the building at the Ramsey -Grove Park for a warming house. He had received two quotes for this work -- one bid was for $554.02 and that will be about $50.00 for the paint which would be $604.02 - there is a chimney there for the stove - then there will be the lighting and power - he will eliminate all of the windows and there will be two doors - he explained where the power pole could be installed and the only quote that he has received up to this time was from Lipner Electric for $2,475.00. Mr. Blekum was directed to get an estimate from Luc Dupuis of LPD Electric for this work, since they did not feel that they would want to spend this money for the little time that this facility would be in use. Mr. Blekum informed the Coyncil that there is a petition coming in this evening from the abutting property owners to have that building removed from this park. (No action was taken at this time on this matter) 2. On motion of Councilman Roger Peterson, seconeed by Councilman Harry Peterson, a resolution was introduced "EMPLOYING STEVEN FINNEGAN AS ASSISTANT ICE ARENA MANAGER EFFECTIVE OCTOBER 1, 1980 AT A SALARY OF $5.25 PER HOUR ". AYES -- Councilwoman Bodlovick, Councilmen Harry Peterson, Roger Peterson and Mayor Junker NAYS - -None (see resolutions) 3. There was discussion on the painting project at the Ice Arena since the contractor is not performing and they have not been working and unless they put in 15 or 18 hours per day they will not complete the project by October first. MR. ELLIOTT reported on the project - they had a meeting on Monday with the contractor about their performance - at this meeting the ultimatum was given and he felt that the contract should be terminated - he had checked them out on a previous job and he was informed that they performed adequately on that particular job. Mr. Elliott's crew are directing and inspecting the work that is being done there; they are non - union. MR. BLEKUM stated that the contractor has no crew - he sub - contracts the work and the sub - contractor picks up his help. MR. KRIESEL stated that at the time the contract was awarded the Council was very nervous about it and they agreed to try it because of the type of group it was. MR. ELLIOTT stated that they insisted that no painting occur without the inspector approving of the sandblasting operation - he does not want them to paint over rust and then have it come off - there has to be a 48 hour waiting period before the second coat is put on - he has asked that the first coat be tinted so that they can't say that the second coat has already been applied. Jim Fackler is keeping everyone informed as to what is going on. The Council is at a turning point at this meeting - there has been some observation on their part as to the quality of the work and the manner in which they are going to proceed - there is a great deal of concern about the quality of the performance and the performance within the time range and there are a lot of things that have to be done before October 24th when the first time has been rented for ice. If the City were to terminate the contract, there would be some costs in the work that they have done and if the contract is terminated it is too late to get someone else to do the job. MR. MAGNUSON stated there are a couple of things on it - one is the liquidate damage provision in the contract stating that every day that they are not completed after October 1st they forfeit $100 per day which does not come close to compensating the City for the possible loss; the other is the provision that the City or the Engineer can disapprove of the sub - contractor that the person who was awarded the bid had. MR. ELLIOTT AND THE MAYOR stated that they will go out to the arena and check on the progress of the work that is being done there before any action is taken on this matter. BUILDING OFFICIAL 1. MR. ZEPPER informed the Council that the 1979 Building Code went into effect on the 9th on September and he felt that the Council had to adopt it. MR. MAGNUSON stated that they really don't have to - it is automatically in effect - when the first Uniform Building Code was enacted by the legislature they said that this shall be the law in every community that has a Building Code Ordinance at the time that it was adopted it was what we had. Usually what is done - all the various updates in the electrical code, plumbing code, and UBC are all adopted by one enabling ordinance each,so it is information purposes more than anything else. r w • a • • • 1 s p • e - September 16, 1980 Pa 2. MR. ZEPPER informed the Council that Mr. Cummings, 303 North Fourth Street, would like to fix up the carriage house and he is agreeable to a limited Special Use Permit for two years for a caretaker to live in this carriage house and at the end of that time they are -•filling :.o re- convert it back into storage and asked for Council direction on this matter. The Council directed that he bring to the Council a petition signed by the property owners within 300 feet that they do not object to it. MR. MAGNUSON stated that if they wanted to make it permanent and split the property, they would have to make sure that there is enough square footage for each lot and apply all of the standards for two separate parcels. If it is just temporary, there could be some type of contract agreed to. He will have to remodel it according to the code. 3. MR. ZEPPER informed the Council that he will be gone next week and Mr. Doerr will take care of any problems that might arise. CITY ATTORNEY'S REPORT 1. MR. MAGNUSON reported to the City Council regarding the easements for the pumping of the Lily Lake. In 1968 there was an easement sold over the one particular lot to the City for which $2,000 was paid for same. The easement was never recorded and a year later Duane Nelson bought the property, so it did not show that part of his property was covered by an easement until six years later. The fact is that the storm sewer outlet has been placed there and there is a big cement structure there - it is his opinion that the City took this subject to the ease- ment and he is stuck with it since it is visible. The other thing that has to be done is to talk to Bud Jagusch to get an easement over a small sliver of his property because he owns Lot One - the reason that he was talking to the Council about the Duane Nelson property he felt that when we attempt to go in there and work he will probably try to stop us be- cause he maintains that he did not know about this and he does not understand it. He felt that we could work on the Nelson property on the easements that we now own without getting the Jagusch easement. He will talk to Mr. Jagusch about this situation. 2. MR. MAGNUSON stated that on the Firemen's Arbitration Case, the City has brought an action with the District Fourt and the hearing is set for the 22nd of Sept- ember. Mr. Cass and he wanted to meet with Judge Thoreen prior to the hearing to get the ground work straightened out since none of them had handled such a case - at the meeting the judge informed them and Mr. Cass agreed with the Judge and he, that the order that the arbitrator made is ambiguous insofar as the wage increase- the award can be read about three different ways - 1% increase - a 5% increase or a 9% increase depending on how you look at it. What the judge wants to do is send this back to the arbitrator for clarification before he considers this The City brought a motion to vacate the award - to modify or correct it and the judge says before we can do that whether or not it was awarded legally, it has to be clear - he feels that it should be sent back, but before he could agree to do it, he asked for Council direction. This has no effect on the grounds for the appeal - what the statute provides specifically is that if there is a case pending like we have to vacate the award, the judge can send it back to the arbitrator �• ^s with an order to modify or corredt it if it is unclear. If the Council agrees to his signing the stipulation, then on the 22nd they will order this to be done. On motion of Councilman Roger Peterson, seconded by Councilwoman Bodlovick, the Council authorized the City Attorney to sign the stipulation to send back the arbitrator's award for clarification. (all in favor) s r COUNCIL REQUEST ITEMS MAYOR JUNKER asked Mr. Shelton if anyone has been notified about the Existing Business Zoning and the Council felt that Mr. Zepper and Mr. Shelton should contact all of these businesses personally about possible rezoning of their properties, and then action will be taken on this ordinance. CITY COORDINATOR'S REPORT 1. MR. KRIESEL requested a meeting date to meet with Union Representative, Lori Clayton on the AFSCME Council No. 91 contract and it was agreed to meet at 4:30 P. M. on September 29th. 2. MR. KRIESEL informed the Council that there will be a public hearing on Cable T. V. at 7:00 P. M. on September 29th, and he felt that the Mayor and the Council should attend. 3. MR. KRIESEL requested a meeting date on the budget and it was agreed to meet on the 22nd of September at 4:30 P. M. on the budget. 203 e s • • t 1 1 6 '104 • Bid No. 1 Bid No. 2 Bid No. 5 Bid Bond Total Bid Bid Bond Total Bid Bid Bond Total Bid September 16, 1980 4. On motion of Councilman Roger Peterson, seconded by Councilwoman Bodlovick, the Mayor was authorized to sign the contract with Minnesota Housing Finance Agency Home Improvement Grant Program, the year V Allocation with the Metropolitan Council. (all in favor) 5. MR. KRIESEL informed the Council that Mr. Schorr of Bayport has eight docks that he would like to give to the City and after some discussion about the location and the maintenance of same and the permits required, it was decided not to accept them. 6. MR KRIESEL inquired about the use of the old dumpsite for the disposal of elm trees for the citizens of Stillwater to be used for firewood. On motion of Councilman Roger Peterson, seconded by Councilwoman Bodlovick, the Council authorized the starting of the wood project at the old City Dumpsite effective Saturday, September 20, 1980 and that the insurance company be informed about this (all in favor) Mr. Joe Haines will take away the debris that is not taken out - Mr. Shelton and his department will have to take care of locking and unlocking the site. CONSULTING ENGINEER'S REPORT 1. MR. ELLIOTT reported on the Edgewood Ditch project in Croixwood - they have done some sodding at the westerly end of the ditch which should cut down the erosion and there was discussion about the bonds that the City is holding on the various Croixwood projects and these reductions will have to be checked out. 2. MR. ELLIOTT reported that the Department of Natural Resources have contacted him about the erosion control by the drop structure by the Burlington Northern Tracks and the infiltration that is getting into Brown's Creek - they received a complaint and they are responding to such complaints. It was suggested that the railroad be contacted about doing some sodding in this area to take care of the problem. It could be done with Hydro - Mulching. Mr. Elliott will contact Burlington Northern on this matter. 3. MR. ELLIOTT stated that a meeting will be scheduled sometime this week or so with Ken Lockesmoe on several dretnage related claims - one on Lily Lake - nothing urgent, but he will be meeting with them. 4. The bids for the pumping of Lily Lake, Local Improvement No. 181 were opened at 10:00 A. M. on September 10, 1980 with the following in attendance: Finance Director/ Coordinator, Kriesel; City Clerk, Schnell; Superintendent of Public Works, Shelton; Consulting Engineers Dick Moore and Mike Framer and five of the bidders: Advertisements for the bid opening appeared in the Stillwater Evening Gazette, the official newspaper of the City, on August 15 and 22, 1980 and in the Construction Bulletin on August 15, 22 and 29, 1980. The following bids were received: Orvedahl Construction, Inc. 7711 Country Club Drive Minneapolis 55427 Bid Bond Total Bid $150,676.00 Barbarossa & Sons, Inc. Route #3 Osseo, Mn. 55369 Bid No. 3 Shafer Construction Shafer, Mn. bid No. 4 Orfei & Sons, Inc. St. Paul, Minnesota C. S. Mccrossan, Inc. Box AD Osseo, Mn. 55369 Bid Bond Total Bid $179,035.00 $185,395.00 $165,196.67 $215,697.50 w e 0 • A • 1 • • September 16, 1980 MR. ELLIOTT reported that the bide came in somewhat higher than their estimate and part of this is due to the fact that the County is requiring the jacking of the pipe under Olive Street rather than open -cut, and also the long wait for the permits for the job could have accounted for the increase in the bid costs. The last item on the bid was the deduct for the City owned pipe and he recommended that this not be taken since there is so little money there and there are quite a few holes in the City owned pipe. He recommended that the award be made to Orvedahl without the deduct. On motion of Councilman Roger Peterson, seconded by Councilwoman Bodlovick, a resolution was introduced "AWARDING THE BID FOR THE PUMPING OF LILY LAKE TO ORVEDAHL CONSTRUCTION AT THE BID PRICE OF $151,676.00" contingent upon obtaining the necessary permits from the County and Township and that no work be allowed on the dike at McKusick Lake until the permit is obtained from the Corps of Engineers. Ayes -- Councilwoman Bodlovick, Councilmen Harry Peterson, Roger Peterson, and Mayor Junker Nays - -None (see resolutions) MR KRIE EL informed the Council that there will have to be some additional bonding for this project as we are short about $30,000 and this can be tied in witn some other bonding. MR. ELLIOTT was requested to get this work started as soon as the contracts are signed and the contractor is available and definitely it should be started this fall, and Mr. Shelton stated that if they have any idea that it will not be done, he will pump it. MR. MAGNUSON stated that as soon as this property by McKusick Lake becomes a part of the City then we will not have to required the County or Township permits - it is his guess that within two weeks or a month that the City will have that order - the final draft of the order has been prepared and it has been circulated to everybody and they are not waiting for the Municipal Board to set up a meeting where they will sign it. (Johnson Annexation) 5. MR. ELLIOTT felt that there should be a map prepared showing the locations over the properties where the work will be done and a statement what they are planning to do and when - his office will notify these property owners. 6. MR. ELLIOTT stated that the lighting contractor for the parking lot on South Main Street will be coming in this evening to see if it is possible to get some temporary lighting down there due to the vanddism of the meters. 7. On motion of Councilman Harry Peterson, seconded by Councilwoman Bodlovick, a resolution was introduced "ACCEPTING THE FEASIBILITY STUDY AND ORDERING THE HEARING FOR LOCAL IMPROVEMENT N0. 186 - NORTH CENTER STREET SEWER AND WATER ". (Hearing date - October 7, 1980) * AYES -- Councilwoman Bodlovick, Councilmen Harry Peterson, Roger Peterson, and Mayor Junker NAYS - -None (see resolutions) 8. On motion of Councilman Roger Peterson, seconded by Councilwoman Bodlovick, br the Clerk was directed to advertise for bids for Local Improvement No. 185 said bids to be returned on October 21, 1980 at 10:00 A. M. (all in favor) * (There was some discussion on how this assessment should be spread for Center Street and these parties will be contacted about the matter - if the improvement is not ordered then Mrs. Johnson will pay the feasibiliy study in accordance with an agreement that she has signed. This can be done on a unit or footage basis) On motion of Councilman Roger Peterson, seconded by Councilwoman Bodlovick, the meeting recessed at 6:40 P. M. to 7:30 P. M. • b Attest: .j. "� ,A v4.4- InZ-7-L■ J CCity Clerk Mayor • • • • 4 x 06 • COUNCIL CHAMBERS Stillwater, Minnesota RECESSED MEETING The Mayor reconvened the meeting at 7:30 P. M. The Invocation was given by the City Clerk. Present: Councilwoman Bodlovick, Councilmen Harry Peterson, Roger Peterson and Mayor Junker Absent: Councilman Powell Also Present: Finance Director /Coordinator, Kriesel; City Clerk, Schnell; City Attorney, Magnuson; Consulting Engineers,Moore and Elliott; Planning Commission Chairman, Farrell Press: Stillwater Gazette - Liberty Free Press - Edstrom Citizens: September 16, 1980 7:30 P. M. Mr. & Mrs. Leo Dauffenbach, Mrs. Dale Kendall, Mrs. Harold Day, David Johnson, Lori Fouks, Michael Lynskey, Brad MacDonald, John Ogren, Mr. & Mrs. Wayne Wohlers, Mr. Nordland, Keith Carlson, Dennis Carlson, Jack Welch, William Soth, Pete Dupius, Jay Kimble, Jack Lux, Carl Talbert, Ron Schoenborn INDIVIDUALS AND DELEGATIONS 1. MICHAEL LYNSKEY, of the LDL Company, appeared before the Council requesting four permanent loading zone meters on Union Street for the Main Street Square Building. There was discussion about this matter and that due to the fact that the City will be losing all of the parking meters on the west side of Main Street shortly and the general shortage of parking in downtown that it would be impossible to give them the four meters for all day. On motion of Councilman Roger Peterson, seconded by Councilwoman Bodlovick the Council granted the existing two loading zones with the hours of 8:00 A. M. to Noon. (all in favor) 2. LORI FOURS, 728 West Mulberry Street, appearing before the Council regarding a variance for a single carport on the west side of her house - this would just be parking with a roof over it and there will be no cement slab. Miss Fouks was instructed to obtain thestgnatures of the property owners within 300 feet that they are not opposed to this and bring back such a petition prior to September 22nd and the Council will take action at that time and waive the hearing. 3. MRS. MARY KENDALL, 1219 Ramsey Street, appeared before the Council with a petition from the property owners abutting the Ramsey -Grove Park requesting the City of Stillwater to immediately and permanently remove the "warming house" which now stands in the park. There was discussion about the possible improvement of this building depend- ing upon the costs or it will be removed - the people did not feel that they need a warming house for such a small area, but they do want a lighted skating rink. They were informed that this would only be there about three months of the year and would be moved out when it is not in use. PUBLIC HEARINGS 1. This was the day and time for the public hearing for the issuing of Industrial Development Revenue Bonds for the Kinder Care Learning Center on County Road No. 5. Notice of the hearing was published in the Stillwater Evening Gazette, the official newspaper of the City, on August 29, 1980. The Mayor opened the hearing MR. RICHARD J. NORDLUND, First Corporate Services, Inc., Minneapolis informed the Council that they had conducted a study of the economic feasibility if the proposal and recommended that the Project is economically feasible and that the revenue bonds can be successfully issued and sold. This issue would be sold to only one or only a few financial institutions and would not be sold to the public. MR. DAVID JOHNSON, the applicant, was in attendance, but he did not make any comments at this time. R4 opt a a • • t • • • v Members of the City Council and the City Attorney made comments regarding this type of bonding and its effect on the City's bonding rating, etc. The Mayor closed the hearing. On motion of Councilman Roger Peterson, seconded by Councilman Harry Peterson, FACILITIESaDEVELOPMENT introduced "RECITING A PROPOSAL PRELIMINARY APPROVAL TORTH COMMERCIAL PURSUANT TO THE MINNESOTA MUNICIPAL INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT ACT AUTHORIZING THE SUBMISSION OF AN APPLICATION FOR APPROVAL OF SAID PROJECT TO THE COMMISSIONER OF SECURITIES OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA AND AUTHORIZING THE PREPARATION OF NECESSARY DOCUMENTS AND MATERIALS IN CONNECTION WITH SAID PROJECT ". ($325,000 for Kinder Care) AYES -- Councilwoman Bodlovick, Councilmen Harry Peterson, Roger Peterson, and Mayor Junker NAYS - -None (see resolutions) (Councilman Powell was not in attendance at this meeting) 2. UsesPermit the for petroleum for facilityuatrCroixwood Blvd.randpCountyiRoadfNo.S Special Case No. 377. Notice of the hearing was published in the Stillwater Evening Gazette, the official newspaper of the City on September 2, 1980 and copies were mailed to all property owners within 300 feet. The Mayor opened the hearing. The Planning Commission denied this request three to two on September 8, 1980. of requirements, etc. that were that brought orth at lastsatisfied all Council meeting that they attended. JACK WELCH, Scott Builders, 3345 Rice Street, St. Paul, the architect for this proposed project explained in detail the plans as revised at the request of the Planning Commission at their last meeting. The additional parking for the superette is located between the existing building and County Road 5 - indicated the location of the fence and trees - they will not change either of the drives into the site but to increase the transportation flow to the site by adding and extending the frontage road which would hook up to the Kinder -Care frontage road and driveway facilities. They would be adding eight additional stalls in one location and there could be an additional six stalls if required. The pump island location would be moved to the furthest point that they feel they can legally move it and still give traffic flow and visibility to the building. There will be a 25 foot service drive that would go through the parking lot facilities the same as it would on any future expansion for the Kinder Care. This driveway in no way interferes with the parking along side the pump islands and at the same time they are providing additional bypass between the pump islands and County Road No. 5 :.4 so that the traffic circulating around the pumps would obstruct traffic in front of the superette itself. It was the request of the Planning Commission that the py project be given a radius - they have provided a 15 foot radius and they also asked for additional parking spaces which they have provided space for in the future and they point out the fact that this was a sixty foot right -of -way is in fact a sixty foot right -of -way. He has Lhecked with the County and all property dimen -ions are correct as shown on the plan. DEAN MARLETTE, 2137 Hidden Valley Lane, asked if this was the same plan that was lab submitted to the Planning Commission last week and MR. WELCH stated "no" - the radius has been changed and the additional parking has been added and the turning radius to get out of the site has been eased. He also raised some questions about the distance from the right -of -way and MR. WELCH stated that it was drawn in incorrectly on the previous one - the property lines will always remain the same. Mr. Marlette felt that this is the last time that he is going to say some- thing - they have been here many times and they would like the Council to seriously consider that they are going to do with this land - he could see where there is enough space for an island of two gas pumps and parking and a drive -thru from the front of that store to the edge of the roadway. MR. WELCH stated that they exceed all setback requirements that are request by both the County and the City. TOM FARRELL stated that besides the fact that the County setbacks are met, the City Building Official, Mr. Zepper, does not feel that the pump island setback meets the City's Ordinance - the canopy itself is a structure and that canopy itself must setback a certain number of feet from the property and according to the plan that they saw at the Planning Commission last Monday night ib whsiut that way - which means that they would have to move the whole thing back ten feet which would give them only 15 feet clearance between the store parking lot and the beginning of the pump islands. I0 SEPTEMBER 16, 1980 207 a • • • J 1 • • September 16, 1980 MR. WELCH stated that there is 64 feet from the front of the store to the islands. Setbacks refer to the structural elements and not roof overhangs- -the structure elements themselves are the two pilons that come off the end - they would be 34% feet back and 30 feet is the requirement. MR. CHARLES KENNING, 2337 Hidden Valley Lane, stated that it was her impression that it had to be 100 feet from the store before it would meet approval. COUNCILMAN HARRY PETERSON stated that in his discussion on the concern for the adjacency of the pumps to the existing building, he had said that he would feel much more comfortable with it being a separate building - something like 100 feet south of the existing structure and this could be where the 100 feet came in. He has concerns about the pumps being next to the building and he did not like this and he could see it as a separate building. KEITH CARLSON stated that if they do not meet the building requirements for the canopy, they can remove the canopy - it is not a total necessity - it is a very nice convenience for customers and it is a benefit for safety. MR. MAGNUSON stated that it says in the ordinance as far as the canopy is con- cerned - first of all the front yard requirement is 30 feet, but as far as bhe encroachment of the canopy, the ordinance provides "that awnings, sills, cornices, butresses and eaves may not project more than three feet into or over required yards - it is spoken to in the ordinance - you cannot hang over more than three feet- he did not know how far the roof overhangs the pilon. There would be a variance needed, if it does. BETH SCHWINTEK, 2327 Hidden Valley Lane, stated that they have been having a big hassel as far as the safety for the children and at the present time they are allowing only two kids in the store at one time - they have been having a lot of trouble with kids and they have been threatened by kids that have obtained beer that are under age at that store. THOMAS ANDERSON, 2377 Hidden Valley Lane, when he circulated the petition as being opposed to this station that 997. of the people did not want a gas station on that corner and at that time they were turned down and several of the Council members denied it because of the additional traffic - congestion at the corner and also because of the safety hazard with the children and with the addition of the child care center that will add more problems. JOHN OGREN, presenting Croix Oil, stated that when they first proposed this plan they had the station where most of these stations are in relation to a store of this kind, right in front and the reason for it being in front, it is easier for the person handling the money and /or the people coming in and out of there - that is the proper place for it - with it sitting here in front it was felt the cars coming through at a designated place and parking in front and buying gas going in and out would cause some safety hazard to the children and they were requested to move it out and they have - they will put in a bicycle ramp and the cars would not go near it - they put it as far away as they can do it and still run it out of that store - any car having to make a turn can get their gas and pay for it and then drive out. If you put that gas station in a separate unit, a separate building that is increasing the cost and it doesn't function with this building and you are not going to get anything different on the traffic. Here you are forcing that traffic down - if it is moved you are forcing it across and from a safety factor this is to most proper place to put that and that is why they are going it that way. COUNCILWOMAN BODLOVICK, stated that there was concern about backing out from the store that they would interfere with the traffic at the pumps and MR. WELCH stated that to have that happen sommne would have to back clear across the street out front before they would hit a car - there is about 25 feet and this has not been altered since the Planning Commission meeting. COUNCILMAN ROGER PETERSON did not feel that is a major concern - there is the same situation in every parking lot in town - we have the same situation wherever there is someone backing out of his driveway onto a street - the last time this request was made the greatest concern was for the safety of the children and that being because of the canopy or the slab or the pumps being too close to the existing Brooks Store and he believed that it was Mr. Powell that said his concern was more the children on bicycles driving between the canopy and the store because he had observed a lot of bicycles in that area. He felt that by moving it back that far you have eliminated that potential hazard. MR. WELCH stated that the driveway is wider than the situation would be with a parking lot. KEITH CARLSON stated that the Kinder Care Center is completely fenced and the children are not allowed to run at all - they go in the front door and they stay there until they are picked up - they are not going to be running around the parking lot. 1 • • 0 • • • h September 16, 1980 IW !M P• COUNCILMAN HARRY PETERSON asked if there is any change in the north drive entrance - is that being widened in any way or it that the existing driveway off of Croixwood Blvd.? MR. WELCH stated that they are existing drives at that point, there are two there, and they cannot be changed. MRS. TOM ANDERSON, 2377 Hidden Valley Lane, asked if there are going to be turning lanes on the east side of Coun ty Road No. 5 going north and the answer was "no" and that would be up to the County. MRS. BETH SCHWINTEK, asked if this is approved it they intend to hire additional help at Brooks and KEITH CARLSON stated that they do intend to hire additional help to take care of this service. BILL SOTH, a lawyer with the Dorsey Law Firm in Minneapolis, who reviewed the history of the case pointing out the legal issues involved in the discussion of this proposal up to this time. This property is zoned "CA" business district - there was an agreement with Orrin Thompson that this property would be used for a retail business of the "corner store" variety. They would like to questio. the validity of requiring Special Use Permits by the City's Ordinance - on June 17th this Special Use Permit was denied, and the Council members were asked to give their reasons for denying the permit. The reasons were - not adequate space between the store and the gasoline pumps and as seen tonite that condition has been met. The only other stated objection was of the cars turning into the property from Croix - wood that this would somehow cause a traffic problem at that intersection for cars that were turning right and going south on County Road No. 5. If anything, this plan with an additional access thru will relieve that congestion. There was a concern by the residents that cars would be going thru here too fast - there are almost right angle turns in the access road so that cars would have to approach and exit very slowly. He felt that there are not any valid reasons for the denial of this permit - they recognize that there is a lot of public pressure and that there are people in the area that would just as soon see this remain undeveloped - this is commercial property and it should be treated as any other commercial property in the City and the state enabling statute provides that it should be treated as every other commercial property. Minnesota Statute 462.357 which authorizes cities to have zoning ordinances says that the regulations shall be uniform for each class or kind of buildings, structures or land and for each class or kind of use throughout such districts - this means that this property has to be treated like any other commercial property regardless of the fact that there are neighbors in the area who do not want to see gas pumps go in there - that is not a veld legal reason. This was pointed out to the Council at the last meeting - Mr. Magnuson pointed out that this should be treated as other commercial property and that filling stations are permitted as special uses within the ordinance as it is now written - when the use is permitted by a special use permit it has extra privileges as opposed to something that is not mentioned as a permitted use and there is a greater burden on the Council to show that it will be dangerous or harmful before they can deny the permit. He felt that with the revised plan there is not a valid reason for the denial. Councilman Roger Peterson indicated at the last meeting that this would fall within the zoning ordinance and that there was no reason to deny this. In spite of the fact that there are many people who are opposed, it is under- standable that people living next to this propety would oppose any development there - that cannot be the reason to deny it - the number of names on some petition - the number of people objecting to it cannot be a valid reason to deny it. This type of operation is common these days - it is almost essential for this type of convenience store to have the self- service gas use with it - over 857, of the new stores of this type have the gasoline going in with it. He stated that two members of this Council who sit on the Joint Powers Commission voted in favor of a similar convenience store with lighted gas pumps at a location fairly near this property which indicates that they felt at least there were no problems with that facility and in that particular site plan there is one access - there is no nice flow of traffic thru such as is provided for here. He felt that the real reason that this one has been denied is that there are many people who live near this prlperty and who are voicing objections to it - that is not a valid legal reason to deny it. The other one is near vacant land and there is no one to object - they should be treated exactly the same and he felt that the law would treat them exactly the same. They recognize that there is a lot of pressures from the residents and they recognize that the easy decision, the poplar decision would be to deny it - he felt that the Council has an obligation to the City, the property owners to abide by the ordinances and to abide by the State laws that stand behind those ordinances - they feel that if this permit is denied that the City ordinances have not been followed and the State enabling legislation has not been followed. If the permit is denied, it would be contrary to the City zoning ordinances and State law and would unfairly prejudice this property as compared to other commercial property in the City - it should be be treated the same. MR. MARLETTE stated that Mr. Ogren was told at the last Planning Commission meeting that the neighbors would be willing if he moved that gas station or pumps to the south of the Brooks store and they felt that this would be the way that it would go - this could eliminate the whole hassel. 209 a • • 1 • SEPTEMBER 16, 1980 MR. MAGNUSON stated that he advise the Council many times about the legal requirements of the ordinance as to what they are doing and what their responsibilities are with regard to the granting of Special Use Permits specifically in this area. He stated that the objedtions of the neighbors standing along is not sufficient reason in itself to deny the permit - on the other hand the arugments of the counsel are not reason enough to grant it iehter - these two things should balance each other lut and the specific facts demonstrated by the plan as setforth in the testimony is what the Council should base their decision on. COUNCILWOMAN BODLOVICK stated that she does sit on Joint Powers and that they did approve the permit for the Tom Thumb - there was nobody to object - nobody did object - that store will never have the foot traffic of the little ones as the Brooks Superette. It would be quite difficult to change that if it is once put up to have it removed when the area is fully developed. COUNCILMAN ROGER PETERSON did not feel that we can say as a statement of fact that one store or one place would definitely have less traffic or more traffic or more children or less children at any point and time - we do not know - there hasn't even been anything submitted to this Council on that Tom Thumb Store - we do not know what it looks like - the Council as a whole has not seen any plans - he did not feel that anyone place will have more traffic or less traffic. THE MAYOR CLOSED THE HEARING. On motion of Councilman Roger Peterson, seconded by Councilman Harry Peterson, the Special Use Permit was granted to Brooks Superette, Jack Welch and John Ogren at Croixwood Blvd. and County Road No. 5. DISCUSSION COUNCILMAN ROGER PETERSON felt that with the changes that have been submitted, the objections that were voiced at prior meetings - basically as to traffic and safety, these objections have been resolved - it falls within the zoning - the location of the canopy can be resolved through the Building Inspector's Office - the traffic turning left or going 55 miles per hour does not have a bearing on it. COUNCILMAN HARRY PETERSON asked for clarification of the layout as to the number of islands and pumps and he was informed that there would be one island with four pumps. He stated that he is reversing his position that he had taken up to this time in connection with this particular petition for a Special Use Permit - he was concerned about the previous plans because they involved a building with the pumps immed +.ately adjacent to the building - he had indicated that he would be more comfortable with a building away from the existing building to the south and it is very evident that the second building is not going to be placed there and it would probably butt into the Kinder Care property. He felt that the planners for this partic lar project have come up with a reasonable alternative to the separate building which was not discussed up to now in going to the east with the separate island and whether the canopy stays or does not stay is unimportant - he felt that the traffic problem that he was concerned about has been resolved as get it can with the people coming to the gas pumps and not being over into the area near the exist- ing building. He felt that as counsel has pointed out that they do have a piece of property that is zoned commercial and he seriously questioned whether the Council can continue forever to styme an additional enterprise in here and that they all know that the convenience stores of the Brooks Superette type it is common to have gas pumps with them - as good a job as possible has been done to provide better safety plan thasn before and he plans to vote for the approval of the Special Use Permit. COUNCILWOMAN BODLOVICK stated that there is another lot between the Kinder Care and the Brooks Superette property and there was also a motion by the Planning Commission at the last meeting to have the property owner come in and find out what his plans are for this center piece of property. VOTE ON THE MOTION -- Ayes -- Councilmen Harry Peterson and Roger Peterson Nays -- Councilwoman Bodlovick, and Mayor Junker (motion failed- request is denied) MAYOR JUNKER stated that three months ago the Council turned down the station and then we put Kinder Care in there and now we are going to give a gas station and this will bring in more traffic than there was in the first place - he felt that the Council should have done this three months ago and COUNCILMAN ROGER PETERSON agreed with him. COUNCILMAN HARRY PETERSON stated that we are talking about a different plan tonite than was talked about in the previous meetings and if there has been a change in attitude, there was a change in his attitude because we are talking about a different plan. a It • • • s • • a 1 • • • September 16, 1980 MAYOR JUNKER stated that the filling station has been turned down and his reason for turning it down was never stated and he did not care where John Ogren or Brooks build their filling station, but he could not believe that we would want to put a filling station there now when we already put Kinder Care in there and congest that corner - he stated that he was not in favor of being against it -- he is against a filling station and he would have been for it if Kinder Care had not been built there. COUNCILMAN ROGER PETERSON stated that this has no bearing on this as it is a totally separate request and MAYOR JUNKER disagreed with him and his vote could change it and the City have gotten by with a filling station three months ago and have nothing else there. He could vote for a filling station there at this time. MR. MAGNUSON stated that the law requires that the Council setforth the particular reasons for their denial and that these reasons be set forth as findings contemper- aneous with their decisions and since the tie vote does amount to a denial, the Mayor and Mrs. Bodlov.:k will have to set forth their reasons for the record. REASONS FOR DENIAL COUNCILWOMAN BODLOVICK stated that her basic objection has always been and probably will always be - she feels that it was specifically zoned one way and as long as that is still on the books, she is going to stick to that - a gas station in conjunction with a store is a traffic hazard. fam MAYOR does not stated in that station of t he Stillwater as it does in any other areas. He did not believe that we need tankers and semi- trucks and everything else that runs there to run on that area when we do not have it now. If Kinder Care had not been there, he could have voted for that filling station - but now we put Kinder Care, now we want to put in a filling station - he could not see it in that area - he could not see it with the semi- trucks and we do not need them there at the present time - possibly in twenty years they will need them - he did not know. MR. OGREN asked the Mayor when the last time was that he ever heard of a semi having any kind of an accident at a service station. MAYOR JUNKER stated that the presence of a semi being there . . . . MR. OGREN stated that their safety record is probably as excellent as any as you will ever have - the only accidents with professional drivers are out on the highways under extreme conditions - certainly not in a service station where they are dropping gasoline which is not done at a high traffic point anyhow - it is usually done late at night or early in the morning - middle of the day - those are not safety factors - if every accident that happened today on the highway would happen because of transports you would not have any accidents. is come A out a of a there except are dropped off enclosed kids don't JACK WELCH presented the plans of the Kinder Care site to the Council -there is area of 19 Kindero Care, o therefore, there r will p not t be the r that hha parking been talked about. THE MAYOR DECLARED A RECESS FROM 8:45 to 8:55 P. M. hq • w INDIVIDUALS AND DELEGATIONS MR. LUC M. DUPUIS appeared before the Council regarding his request for an extension of time for completing the Municipal Parking Lot lighting job. On motion of Councilman Harry Peterson, seconded by Councilman Roger Peterson, the Council authorized the extension of time from the first week of September to October 31 for the completion (all the lighting at the new Parking Lot on South Main Street. PUBLIC HEARINGS (continued) 3. ocal No. t 152 (Lux'seMeadowviewaEstates and a nd Addition). The notice of the hearing was published in the Stillwater Evening Gazette, the official newspaper of the City, on August 29, 1980 and copies were mailed to all property owners proposed to be assessed. The Mayor opened the hearing. JAY KIMBLE, 1212 North Owen Street, requested relief in this matter. He stated the reasons - lost the country atrmosphere with the removal of the trees on City property and the street easement for the street (Stillwater Avenue off County Road No. 5); loss of shade which increases the cooling costa and some trees were removed for utility polies - there is a minimal increase in hearing costs due to the loss of the windbreak- he has replanted ten trees on his property. (coned) 211'. • • • • • t 1 p • (12 September 16, 1980 JAY KIMBLE (continued) - The utility poles detract from his landscaping with the "guy wires" - he has a ninety foot lot and he has a power pole on the north- east corner and on his southeast corner which he felt was above average utility poles on a property of that size - the use of water by the various construction workers and he did bear that cost - when the connection was made for the main going off the main line running north and south on Owen Street to the Stillwater Avenue main the sediment was loosened when this "T" connection was made and this result in the rebuilding of his water softener - noise pollution and dust pollution - loss of sleep due to his unusual hours - he has offered his complete cooperation to the developer and he is not opposed to the development and he hopes that the units will sell. He felt that the assessment on his property is done and the provisions for making these assessments is done under Minnesota State Statute 429.051 which states in part that any cost of improvements or any part thereof may be assessed upon the property benefited from the improvement based upon the benefits received whether or not the propertyabuts It specificially states property benefited and he felt that his property has not benefited - further he has three estimates by local real estate firms (all three saying that his property value has decreased by this road being on his side yard) and the decreases are $1,000, $2,000 and $4,000. He has no benefit from the street - his means of ingress and egress is /- off of County Road No. 5 (Owen Street) where he has his driveway - his lot and yard is fenced and it is not such that he has need for any use of that side street, except with auxiliary parking. He attempted to obtain underground phone service and underground electrical service inasmuch as NSP and Northwestern Bell were putting those through - unfortunately the underground phone went on the opposite side of the street and the underground electric service is a primary service which he cannot connect to. The practice has been that abutting property is automatically assumed to increase in values - this has been found and his recited recent case law - 1979 case Buetner vs. the City of St. Cloud in which it was shown and found by the courts that it must be shown when an assessment is made that the property assessed increases in value at least the amount of the assessment - the current figures on his assessment are $2,700 - his property has not increased by $2,700. If he is not provided relief by this Council, he has the right to appeal to District Fourt under law 429.081 Minnesota State Statutes - if he does not get relief, he has no other choice but pursue his rights in this regard and a notice will be served upon the Council within twenty (20) days thereof. MAYOR JUNKER asked what Mr Kimble's assessment was and MR. ELLIOTT stated that it is $2,746■45 - it is for the street and related drainage improvements to his property and being on the corner lot there was a 65% reduction in his sideyard assessment - the 106 foot - east /west dimension of his lot is assessed as though it were 3.71 feet and this is in accordance with Council policy on assessing roadways and the area assessment is for the storm sewers. MAYOR JUNKER did not feel that he should be assessed a nickel for this improvement - that road is of no benefit to him whatsoever - the only benefit that he could receive from that road if there was a driveway cut into his property which would serve his backyard - he cannot even hookup to sewer and water there - he felt that there is no way that we can show a benefit to his property because if he put up a four foot fence within ten feet of the curb, he would never see that street. Lux's property is the only property that is going to benefit from that street. MR. ELLIOTT stated that the Council is not only dealing with Mr. Kimble's property but across the street there is another corner lot and the David and Mary Magnuson property which also are being assessed for portions of the improvement. The assessment was calculated based upon the policy of 12 or 14 years ago. MAYOR JUNKER stated that Mr. Magnuson's property was agreed upon because he can service a lot from the street when it is built upon and he questioned if the Knefelkamp property could put in a driveway on thct street or built on a portion of that property. MR. ELLIOTT stated that whenver there has been an improvement on two sides of a corner lot, one side was always assessed at 35% of its sideyard and he did not set the policy. MR. KIMBLE stated that in addition to himself, there is the new owner listed on the assessment roll and he feels that his complaint would be the same as his and that should it come into District Court a decision such as this would take into account recent case law - he felt that the City's positon would be indispensable. COUNCILMAN ROGER PETERSON felt that it was up to the City Attorney to tell the Council whose case is indispensable and he did not feel that it was up to the property owner who is trying to justify an abatement of his assessment - you can use that same argument with anyone who lives on a corner lot - that he does not need that second street any more than he needs a hole in the head and he did not feel that is an argu- ment against it - every corner you go on they do't need both streets - they only need one. You can't say there are no benefits because he was sure that the appraisers - other appraisers could state that there was an increase in benefit - this to him does not improve anything. tI • • • • i • dith September 16, 1980 OM MR. KIMBLE stated that on City corner lots, not wooded property, of this size in a platted development, the corner lots are harder to sell and thusly are subjected to a lesser value - these opinions are those of the appraisers that have advised him. If the Council decides to relieve him, it has two alternatives - one of re- assessment of all properties involved to recover the cost or to assume that from the general revenues of the City. He is not against being assessed the amount of the assessment which is for drainage- his lot does have run -off, the house has run -off, you have to have some place for this water to go and that part of the assessment that is for water run -off, which is a responsibility to him as a property owner within the City and .thin the watershed area he is not against and he would freely pay the entire amount of the assessment that is for the water run -off which is $483.00 in round figures. MR. MAGNUSON stated that prior to 1979 in regard to assessments it is like the last century because of the Buetner case that he talked about turned the whole business around and made it a very different ballgame - there was a time when any improvement that tounched upon your property the court said benefited it and, therefore, could be assessed and it was legal fiction that justified the placing of assessments against properties many times were benefited, but the Buetner case has changed it completely and drastically and it provies that there must be an increase in market value, at least equal to the assessments and the City Council can weight what he has brought forward tonite - if he does appeal and it does go to District Court that is the issue that would be before the District Court and the City will bring appraisers to satisfy our side and it is up to the judges to decide - he is right about that - that is what the law says about it. It would be up to the Council that either it would have to pay this portion out • of the General Fund or adjust it here tonite to provide that it would be treated in a different way - either the whole city will have to pay it or have a re- I 0 assessment hearing to spread it differently among the various parcels. MR. ELLIOTT at this time read the figures on the assessment roll to the Council. If the Council would relieve the assessments to the two properties, there would be a total of $5,350 for the street which would be borne by the other properties if that were the Council's choice. MAYOR JUNKER asked Mr. Elliott several questions regarding the drainage from these two properties and he was informed that there was natural topograpy of this area. MR. ELLIOTT stated that everyone in the City has to share in the total drainage coat and this is their first opportunity - they did not share in the sewer separation project many years ago because their drainage was not received by any of the storm sewers in that project. MAYOR JUNKER asked Mr. Kimbel if there is any fiture that he would agree upon over and above $400 for the sewer that he would agree to pay the City of Stillwater. MR. KIMBLE stated that there might be, but an effort on his part to pick an arbitrary amount he was afraid later, if the matter does reach District Court, this would severely limit his case in the courts. 14 MR. ELLIOTT explained the various assessments made to Mr. Magnuson's property 1ee which totalled $7,767.13, and MR. MAGNUSON made no comments on his proposed assessment. There was discussion with Mr. Lux about his 18 buildable lots. Mr. Lux expected that the improvements would run somewhere in the neighborhood of $135,000 and now they are $168,000. He had already projected his selling price for these units with that figure and this makes it very difficult for him. MR. ELLIOTT stated that the plans were changed three tim.., after taking the bids and he felt that they were ludcyto get the thing built without having to go back and dig up the services in the street, and put in more services. The contracts are running higher. Be will pay his assessments off when the units are sold. He did not feel that he should be treated any differently from any other project and did not feel that the corner lots should be treated any differently than if this were a new plat completely out in the country. The street has always been platted and because that street did not go until now should have no bearing as to whether or not they should have an improved street there. They have access to their backyards which they did not have before and one of them has a pretty good sideyard and they could build a garage there which he could not do before. He wondered if there would be some relief if the Outlets were assessed - he had requested that they not be assessed for these improvements - the outlets belong to the 16 townhouse units and they belong to another party - if a part of this assessment on the outlets and the home owners association would pay for those with the taxes andthat might give some relief. These are the two corner lots- 0s 213` • 0 • • • 7 • (214 September 16, 1980 southeast and southwest corners of Stillwater Avenue - they will ultimately belong to the association - he will have to check that out with the owner which is the Washington Service Corporation - they will pay taxes over the years - assess the outlots and that portion of the taxes would be paid with the assessments. He would have to take this up with them to see if it is agreeable. He will just have to ajust his selling price - that is the way that it has to be and he did not expect the Council to make any special rules on this assessment roll. MR. ELLIOTT stated that perhaps the street and the storm sewer could be con- sidered a benefit to the outlot even though they are not going to be built upon - sewer and water certainly could not be considered a benefit - in the Special Use Permit one of the requirements was that Outlot B would not be built upon and Outlot A is not a good lot to build on. MR. MAGNUSON stated that there was a development proposed here for eighteen single family units or duplexes because the zoning required it and there was concern about a development of that nature in the neighborhood - they were opposed to it - all the neighbors were - so Mr. Lux came around with a petition if you people all agree to allow him to build four plexes in there he would dedicate this land to its natural state as an open area - that way the density of this development would be the same as if he had not done the multiple family and all of the neighbors agreed to it and he proceeded with this without objection. This should be recorded with the deed when the final approval is given to the covenants and restrictions - the preliminary one did not have this on it. THE MAYOR CLOSED THE HEARING. On motion of Councilman Roger Peterson, seconded by Councilman Harry Peterson, a resolution was introduced ADOPTING THE ASSESSMENT ROLL FOR LOCAL IMPROVEMENT NO. 152 SETTING THE PAYMENT PERIOD FOR TEN YEARS AND THE INTEREST RATE AT 7$L ". AYES -- Councilwoman Bodlovick, Councilmen Harry Peterson and Roger Peterson NAYS- -Mayor Junker (see resolutions) 4. This was the day and time for the public hearing on the proposed assessments for Local Improvement No. 167 for sewer and water services and street construction and other appurtenances on Lookout Street from Birchwood Drive to its terminus. Notice of the hearing was published in the Stillwater Evening Gazette, the offieial newspaper of the City on August 29, 1980 and copies were mailed to all property owenrs proposed to be assessed. The Mayor opened the hearing No one was in attendance as being opposed to these proposed assessments. The Mayor closed the hearing. On motion of Councilman Roger Peterson, seconded by Councilman Harry Peterson, a resolution was introduced ADOPTING THE ASSESSMENT ROLL FOR LOCAL IMPROVEMENT NO. 167 SETTING THE PAUMENT PERIOD FOR TEN YEARS AND THE INTEREST RATE AT 7%7.. AYES -- Councilwoman Bodlovick, Councilmen Harry Peterson, Roger Peterson and Mayor Junker NAYS- -None (see resolutions) on the proposed assessments MSAS AND CSAN AND RESIDENTIAL 5. This was the day and time for the public hearing for Local Improvement No. 175 (street matting on STREETS). Notice of the hearing was published in the the official newspaper of the City on August 29, to all property owners proposed to be assessed. The Mayor opened the hearing. No one appeared opposed to these proposed assessments. The Mayor closed the hearing. On motion of Councilwoman Bodlovick, seconded by Councilman Harry Peterson, a resolution was introduced 'ADOPTING THE ASSESSMENT ROLL FOR LOCAL IMPROVEMENT NO. 175 SETTING THE PAYMENT PERIOD FOR TEN YEARS AND THE INTEREST RATE AT 7k7, ". AYES -- Councilwoman Bodlovick, Councilmen Harry Peterson, Roger Peterson and Mayor Junket NAYS - -None (see resolutions) Stillwater Evening Gazette, 1980 and copies were mailed 11 • • a • • • 1 • • • • r M September 16, 1980 PETITIONS From Shamrock Construction Co. for a watermain to serve Brown Creek Heights Addition and abutting properties. On motion of Councilman Roger Peterson, seconded by Councilwoman Bodlovick, a resolution was introduced "ACCEPTING THE PETITION AND ORDERING THE FEASIBILITY STUDY FOR THE WATERMAIN TO BROWN CREEK HEIGHTS ADDITON ". UNFINISHED BUSINESS 1. Zoning for Existing Businesses was held over for a futun; meeting. NEW BUSINESS 1, 2 and 3 were taken care of under committee reports at the 4 o'clock meeting. 4. On motion of Councilwoman Bodlovick, seconded by Councilman Roger Peterson a resolution was introduced "DIRECTING THE PAYMENT OF THE BILLS ". AYES -- Councilwoman Bodlovick, Councilmen Harry Peterson, Roger Peterson, Mayor Junker NAYS - -None (see resolutions) 5. There were no Planning Commission items. 6. On motion of Harry Peterson, seconded by Councilwoman Bodlovick, a resolution was introduced "ACCEPTING THE WORK AND MAKING FINAL PAYMENT FOR LOCAL IMPROVEMENT NOS.171 AND 173" 1 a AYES -- Councilwoman Bodlovick, Councilmen Harry Peterson, Roger Peterson and Mayor Junker NAYS- -None (see resolutions) 7. On motion of Councilwoman Bodlovick, seconded by Councilman Harry Peterson, a resolution was introduced "ACCEPTING THE WORK AND MAKING FINAL PAYMENT FOR LOCAL IMPROVEMENT NO. 152" AYES -- Councilwoman Bodlovick, Councilmen Harry Peterson, Roger Rterson, and Mayor Junker NAYS - -None (see resolutions) INDIVIDUALS AND DELEGATIONS CARL TALBERT, the sub - contractor for the painting of the Ice Arena, appeared before the Council on their contract. MR. ELLIOTT explained that they met at the job site with Mr. Magnuson and Mr. Wilson and there is a concern on the part of the City to the ability to perform within the time frame that is available and they are very concerned whether or not they can perform. MR. MAGNUSON stated that one option which might be a viable option and one which they discussed with Mr. Talbert and Mr. Wilson both as to whether or not the City would consider just a mutual release - pay Mr. Wilson and Mr. Talbert for the value of the work for the time that they have on the job and the materials and in return for a lease and any further obligation to them and release their bond from any obligation - this isrway to minimize a lawsuit and wait until next spring to relet the contract for the painting. This is not one that would suggest, but one that the Council should consider. MR. TALBERT felt that a commitment is a commitment - they did get started late and there were problems on how to do the job, and he felt that they could do the job. If they are release, that the City would have it done next spring - he suggested that they still have time to possibly do part of it - could they go as far as they can - get it done and then complete it next spring at the same price. MAYOR JUNKER asked if by October 1st would they have some of the beams painted and he responded that they could go a certain distance - have it blasted and painted - possibly get half of it done - if they pushed they could get the whole thing done. MR. ELLIOTT stated that one point that he is touching upon is that the specifi- cations call for a nominal $100 per day liquidation damages after Octob er 1st and in discussing this plan the City would be waiving that liquidation damage and we will allow you to get half -way through and they would have to keep the bond in force for that period of time. MR. TALBERT stated that when they do a job, they want to do a job, etc. He was not asking for something that they were not already giving - the long part of it was getting started - learning what to do to protect the ceiling which was the major part of it and that they have finally figured out. 21 ' • a b • • r • September 16, 1980 MAYOR JUNKER asked the City Attorney if legally the Council could give them to October 1st to do what they can and then could we continue on with them next spring and waive the $100 - would that be legal? MR. MAGNUSON stated that they could do that. MAYOR JUNKER asked Mr. Elliott if he could accept that and MR. ELLIOTT stated that he hoped that he could be the spkesman for Jim Wilson and Stockbridge Construction who is the prime contractor. MR. TALBERT stated that he is the one that is basically responsible - anything thar goes down he has to live up to in the contract - $100 penalty per day is nothing - COUNCILMAN HARRY PETERSON asked what they would expect in payment up to October 1st and he replied whatever Mr. Elliott figures out, and he would handle that. MR. ELLIOTT stated that the October 1st date has been used as a prime date and by working with Mr. Blekum and Mr. Fackler this could be completed in early October. On motion of Councilman Harry Peterson, seconded by Councilwoman Bodlodck, that the contract with the painting firm be continued past the last possible date to be in the arena (to be set by Dick Blekum) with the understanding that we pay the amount that Mr. Elliott feels is due on the percentage of the job completed with the balance of the job to be picked up and completed next year as soon as the arena is available. AYES -- Councilwoman Bodlovick, Councilen Harry Peterson, Roger Peterson and Mayor Junker NAYS- -None (see resolutions) APPLICATIONS - - -On motion of Councilwoman Bodlovick, seconded by Councilman Roger Peterson, the following Contractor's Licenses were approved: (all in favor) Fred Deutsch (D & D Cement & Masonry) 635 West Shryer Avenue, St. Paul 55113 Masonry and Brick Work Renewal Industrial Roof Maintenance & The Insulation Company 2321 Oakridge Road, Stillwater General Renewal - - -On motion of Councilman Harry Peterson, seconded by Councilman Roger Peterson, the Council granted a 3.2 Off Sale Beer License to Brooks Superette, 215 North William Street. (all in favor - renewal) COMMUNICATIONS From the League of Minnesota Cities - Local Government Day - Tuesday, October 21, 1980. (no action) COMMITTEE REPORTS (continued) CITY CLERK'S REPORT 1. On motion of Councilman Roger Peterson, seconded by Councilman Harry Peterson, the Council accepted the canvass of the Primary Election held on September 9, 1980 which nominated the following candicates for the Council members for the November 4, 1980 election as indicated: ( *) *Barbara Avise 674 *Walter Carlson 583 Gary Fuuke 361 *James B. Gannon 706 Gordon Gunderson 370 *Brad MacDonald 1,180 Norman Webb 394 (all in favor) 2. On motion o' Councilman Harry Peterson, seconded by Councilman Roger Peterson, the was directec. to send the claim from Mrs. Freda Wildsmith for an accident at the Public Library to the McGa - ry- Kearney Insurance Co. (all in favor) V • a • • • 1 • 7 • • 4 September 16, 1980 INDIVIDUALS AND DELEGATIONS (continued) im -- -WAYNE WOHLERS requested that there should be lights at the Ramsey -Grove Park and that there should be some kind of a warming shack for the children. There was discussion about what the Council talked about this afternoon and questions were raised about what other activities could possibly be put on this site. Also there were complaints about what is happening late at nite in this location and they felt that the area is not being utilized as it should be and that with some lighting this could help the situation. The neighbors inquired as to whether or not they will be notified when this will come up on the agenda again so that they can appear on the matter. - - -RON SCHOENBORN, 514 South Hemlock Street, inquired about the pumping of Lily Lake and he was inform-d that the contract was awarded at the 4:00 P. M. meetting and that it will be started within a week - in case the contractor cannot start immediately, then the City will go in and pump the lake this fall. oto NIP APPROVAL OF MINUTES On motion of Councilwoman Bodlovick, seconded by Councilman Roger Peterson, minutes of the following meetings were approved: (all in favor) August 5, 1980 August 19, 1980 August 20, 1980 September 2, 1980 None ORDINANCES None ATTBST:_ _ TA F ✓ �-�a�� City Regular Meeting Regular Meeting Recessed Meeting Special Meeting Regular Meeting COUNCIL REQUEST ITEMS None OUESTIONS FROM PRESS REPRESENTATIVES 7:30 P. M. 4:00 P. M. 7:30 P. M. 5:00 P. M. 7:30 P. M. RESOLUTIONS The following resolutions were read and on roll call were adopted: 1. Adopting the Assessment Roll For Local Improvement No. 152 (Mayor Junker Opposed) 2. Adopting Che Assessment Roll for Local Improvement No. 167. 3. Adopting the Assessment Roll for Local Improvement No. 175 4. Accepting the Petition and Ordering the Feasibility Study for the Watermain for the Brown Creek Heights Addition 5. Awarding the Contract for Local Improvement No. 181 (Pumping of Lily Lake) 6. Accepting the Work and Making Final Payment for Local Improvement Nos. 171 and 173. 7. Accepting the Work and Making Final Payment for Local Improvement No. 152. 8. Employing Steven Finnegan for the Ice Arena 9. Directing the Payment of the Bills. 10. Industrial Bonds for the Kinder Care 11. Ordering the Hearing for Local Improvement Nol 186 - North Center Street Sewer and Water. ADJOURNMENT On motion of Councilman Harry Peterson, seconded by Councilman Roger Peterson, the meeting adjourned at 10:05 P. M. Mayor 2 7 e • • • • 1