Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1981-09-01 CC MIN• 476 • COUNCIL CHAMBER Stillwater, Minnesota September 1, 1981 7:30 P. M. REGULAR MEETING The meeting was called to order by President Junker. The Invocation was given by the City Clerk. Present: Councilwomen Avise and Bldlcvick, Councilmen MacDonald and Peterson and Mayor Junker Absent: None Also Present: Press: Citizens: Finance Director /Coordinator - Kriesel City Clerk - Schnell City Attorney - Magnuson Superintendent of Public forks - Shelton Public Safety Director - Abrahamson Director of Parks & Recreation - Blekum Consulting Engineers - Elliott and Moore BuilditgOfficial - Zepper Bond Consultant - Ron Langness None Mr. & Mrs. George Regis, Bruce Folz, Alice Colombo, Polly Webster, Cleon Carley, Clark Nyberg, Paul Batlett, Jr., Robert Lifton, Dick Ritzer, Josephine Vania, Rod Lawson, Al Holmen, Don Perrenoud, Bob Swanson, John Schoen, David 5. Johnson, Molly Stewart, Joanne Hynnek, Ton Cropp, Mrs. John Welshons, James Nelson, Mr. & Mrs. Lewis Stein. Tom Helejeson, Mr. & Mrs. Rod Richert INDIVIDUALS & DELEGATIONS 1. LEWIS STEIN, 62 Maryknoll Drive, appeared before the Council regarding the fence ordinance - the one foot setback and with his one foot setback and his neighbors set- back they will not have accomplished their problem of keeping the kids from crossing over their property, and he did not feel that the one foot setback was enough to main- tain the fence. MR. MAGNUSON read the section of the ordinance on this matter and that the determination was made when this was passed that the three foot s etback that was originally in there was unreasonable and this one foot would provide that the person could maintain his fenxe without trespadding on someone's property. MAYOR JUNKER asked if an agreement from his neighbor if he put his fence on the property line would the Council grant him a permit for same. MR. MAGNUSLN stated that technically this would be a variance and the Council would have the power to grant this - the Council would have to make a finding that the substantial property rights are not involved. MR. STEIN stated that he wants to put his fence as close as possible to his neighbors and they will block off the ends with another small section of fence to close off the area completely. MAYOR JUNKER requested that Mr. Stein bring the Council a written statement froc, the neighbor that he does not object to the fence being that close and that statement be brought in to the Building Inspector and the Council concurred. MR. SHELTON called the Council's attention to storm sewer easements in this area and the problems that could be created when the water will not drain off their property - `^ he did not know if there is an easement in their backyards and this should be checked out on the plat maps and that the City not be responsible if they have problems. He and Mr. Zepper will check this out before the fence is constructed and inform the property owners. 2. JAMES NELSON, 717 West Pine Street, appeared before the Council requesting permission to construct a garage one foot from the property line and knew that he should be going before the Planning Commission, but he missed their meeting last week and wanted to get the garage under construction before winter sets in - he did have written permission from both of his neighbors with him - this would be a two foot variance. MR. MAGNUSLN stated that it is discretionary with the Council - again it would take a finding that the substantial property rights of others are not involved - it would seem that since three feet is permitted - that is is a two foot variance - the variance is not substantial and the adjoining property owners are not objecting, it is reasonable to assume that there won't be any objection - it does involved a certain risk on the Council's part since the neighbors would not be informed. { • 4 • • • NAyor Junker asked Mr. Nelson to bring in a petition from his neighbors within 300 feet by September 15th that they do not object, then at that time the Council could give him permission. 3. MS. LINDA KLUY, chairman of the Recreation Commission, explained that they had recei ved one proposal for Kolliner Park and she requested the Council to ask any questions and that they would then take it back to the Commission. ROD LAWSON presented the proposal for the development and operation of recreation facilities for Kolliner Park - he represented the Bayport Marina Associates - there is a problem of a shortage of beaching space and in an attempt to help solve that problem and the response to the bids on Kolliner Park and their request is for a lease of the park with the understanding that there would be rental paid of $2,000 per year to the City of Stillwater - the land would be left in substantially the condition that it is in - it would be available as beaching space for boats that would come up from the Bayport Marina and also beaching space available for the general public. It would be well maintained and any access from the mainland would be cut -off and any access would be controlled and the main access would b= from the water. On weekends there would be a considerable number of boats that " would be over there - Stillwater would be readily available to those people bx walking across the bridge and pissibly a great number of them would find their way into the stores and restaurants in downtown Stillwater. MAYOR JUNKER asked if this would be a public boat place for anyone and MR. LAWSON stated that there would be no real restrictions on it, but to control it, it would probably be on the basis of advance reservations - there would be a certain number of boat locations that would be reserved for the people from the Bayport Marina, me but it would be open to the general public after that- some of them would be kept open all of the time for the general public. COUNCILMAN PETERSON asked the City Attorney what are the restrictions or limitations on making this use available to someone under a lease arrangement - this was given to the City and under what conditions. MR. MAGNUSON stated that it was given to the City in 1913 by one of the lumber companies on the condition that it be used for park purposes - the conditions of the trust are set out in a letter that it be used for recreation park purposes - as far as this specific use he would have to research it more careully before he gave an opinion on it - this was the only proposal that was received in response to advertisement. I • `-9 September 1, 1981 NS. KLUY asked about meeting families that are already there - there has been in the past great problems with land aceess and asked how they would solve that. MR. LAWSON stated that the gate would not be left open - someone would simply come up there to meet the car and then the gate would be closed - they would have to have advance notice to open up the gate, and there could be some kind of a speaker system at the gate. MS. KLUY asked if they would take responsibility if people parked their cars some place else and had a party there and MR. LAWSON stated that they would plan to police it - have someone in attendance possibly for all of the time and living there during the season - they are aware of some of the problems that have come f=4 up in the past. �+. MS. KLUY asked about the 20 year lease - that if they could not be granted a 2C year term, would that begate their proposal and MR. LAWSON stated not necessarily- he would like to sit down with the Commission to talk about it. - COUNCILWOMAN AVISE asked if they foresee a conclusion to their authorization for the marina in the near future and MR. LAWSON stated that it is getting very close - the status of it at the present time is that there has been a hearing held before healing officer of the DNR and that hearing was continued pending the acceptance of an environmental impac, statement and it is hoped that statement will be effective this month or in October and then a hearing will be resumed - then the hearing officer will make his recommendation to the Commissioner of Natural Resources who basically has the authority to grant the permit on it. MAYOR JUNKER stated that they would steup a meeting within the next month with the bidders and the Recreation Commission and the City Council to work out an agreement and Mr. Lawson acceptable to this arrangement. PETITIONS COUNCILMAN PETERSON presented a petition regarding the dangerous intersection at North Second Street and Wilkins offering two priorities (1) make the intersection a four - way stop; (2) make the intersection a three -way stop. Also there was a request for stricter enforcement of the speed laws on Second Street. (This petition was turned over to the City Attorney for his study and recommendations) 477 • • • • 7 478 • September 1, 1981 -- -MARK SNOW who lives at South First and Willard Streets requested signs at this location "Cuation - Children at Play" and MR. SHELTON was directed to check out this location. PUBLIC HEARINGS 1 This was the day and time for the public hearing on Case No. 423 for Mark Snow, 709 South First Street for a garage separation variance. Notice of the hearing was published in the Stillwater Evening Gazette, the official newspaper of the City on August 21, 1981 and copies were mailed to all property owners within 300 feet. The Mayor opened the hearing. The Planning Commission did not appear at their meeting through MARK SNOW was in attendance and by his neighbor that he was not meeting. The Mayor closed the hearing. ■ MAYOR JUNKER requested that Mr. Snow bring a petition to the Council signed by all of his niehgbors within 300 feet, the Council will review this matter at the nest meeting of the Council on September 15th. 2. This was the day and time for the public hearing on Case No. 424 for Paul Partlett, 224 North Harriet Street for a minor sub - division and lot size variance of 1,200 square feet. Notice of the hearing was published in the Stillwater Evening Gazette, the official newspaper of the City on August 21, 1981 and copies were mailed to all property owners within 300 feet. The Mayor opened the hearing. The Planning Commission approved this request, and were only concerned as to where the water would go from the roof of the house and the parking but there will be a driveway - no reason to oppose it. The variance would be 6,300 square feet for this district. CLARK NYBERG felt that this would be a standard City lot which would have a 50 foot front and the main variance is in the depth of the lot and that accounts for the shortage of the square feet. This will be a single family dwelling that will be put on this lot. The Mayor closed the hearing. On motion of Councilwoman Avise, seconded by Councilman MacDonald, the Council granted the minor sub - division of property at 224 North Harriet Street and the variance of 1,200 square feet. VOTE ON THE MOTION - Ayes - Councilwoman Avise, Councilmen MacDonald and Peterson Nays -- Councilwoman Bodlovick, (Motion carried) 3. This was the day and time for the public hearing on Case No. 425 for Cleon Garley for a minor subdivision for property on West Wilkins "treet. Notice of the hearing was published in the Stillwater Evening Gazette, the official newspaper of the City on August 21, 1981 and copies were mailed to all property owners within 300 feet. The Mayor opened the hearing. CLEON GARLEY did not appear at the Planning Commission meeting due to a death in his family and the Planning Commission tabled the matter to the next regular meeting. He had three forty foot lots and he has plenty of density and he owns the house that is presently there and he would be moving in another house on the other parcel. There will be a common driveway with zero setback. MR. ZEPPER reviewed the proposed lot split and one of them would have only 51% foot frontage and he was requested to make a change on this parcel and the proposed change suggested was 56 x 135 and the other one would be 67 x 135 to satisfy the ordinance and there was no objection on this change in the sub - division. He proposed a ten foot common driveway and the Council requested that the driveway be made at least 16 feet in total width (8 feet width for each driveway) MR. MAGNUSON stated that the ordinance requires or states that this could be approved by the governing body without a bearing if the new parcels are within the ordinance- he will have to file his deed as part of the approval. Would not be mandatory that it go to the Planning Commission. The Mayor closed the hearing. take action on this item since Mr. Snow did not a misunderstanding. stated that he had submitted a statement signed opposed to this request, and did not appear at the • • • • • • September 1, 1981 On motion of Councilwoman Avise, seconded by Councilman Peterson, the Council approved the proposed subdivision of Lots 23, 24 and 25, Block 8 Wilkins Addition based on the restrictions that there be 7,500 swuare feet for the existing house and a sixteen foot driveway. (all in favor) 4. This was the day and time for the public hearing on Case No. 427 for John Schoen, 108 North Fifth Street for a Special Use Permit for on -going garage sale type service. Notice of the hearing was published in the Stillwater Evening Gazette, the official newspaper of the City on August 21, 1981 and copies were mailed to all property owners within 300 feet. The Mayor opened the hearing. JOHN SCHOEN was in attendance at the hearing - the Planning Commission approved this request with four restrictions as indicated in their minutes. MR. ROD RICHERT, 315 West Myrtle Street, presented a petition signed by 18 neighbors who were opposed to this activity and their objections were traffic and their activity is adjacent to the Emergency Shelter which is operated by Richard Anderson; he questioned that it was being called a garage sale as it is continuous and items are being rrucked in at various times - it is very unsightly with things out in the driveway. LOIS WELSHONS, 415 West Mulberry Street, added her objection to this and had she known that there was a petition she would have signed it and she offered her objection to this operation - it is unsightly and looks bad along with all of the traffic problems. f.s ALICE COLOBMO, 215 North Harriet Street stated when she drives up Myrtle Street and s meone sees the sale they put on their brakes and she has almost gone thru her windshield and there is also a school bus stop here and it is really bad. POLLY WEBSTER, 233 North Harriet Street, felt it was unsightly and it is unfair to the businesses downtown - the Consignment Shop and the Off Again /On Again Shop and they should object to someone who is not paying rent for a business establish- ment and is selling off the curb - a lot of people use Myrtle Street since it is a thru street and this does not give a very good image of Stillwater. BROOKS CONLEY, 224 North Fourth Street, spoke in favor of Mr.Schoen's operation - she had to move in a hurry and he took three truck loads of her things and sold them for her - she did not have time for a garage sale - and she was sure that he has done this for other people and for helping her she is giving him some of the proceeds from the sale - if the people on Myrtle Street object to garage sales, then there should be some sort of a law that Myrtle Street should have no garage sales whatsoever. BOB LIFTON, 212 South Sixth Street, stated that there are laws concerning garage sales - it is his understanding that they are allowed two per year and that after that point the business should be collecting state tax if it is functioning as a business so people en Myrtle Street should not be prohibited from having garage sales. I * COUNCILWOMAN BODLOVICK stated that she spoke to individuals that live in the apartment where this continuing garage sale is going on and they greatly opposed 1# it - they were not notified because they are not the fee property owner - there is no one here and there was no one at the Planning Commission objecting - she spoke to five of them - in fact Mr. Schoen has intimidated them and they were afraid to appear at this Council meeting to oppose the on -going business. MR. SCHOEN stated that there are 11 tenants in the apartment and over half of them have either sold or bought things at his sales and there are tenants that he does not speak to and they do not speak to him. COUNCILMAN PETERSON felt that they were dealing with a situation other than a garage sale - there is a continuous business venture for profit and he felt that it belongs in a commercial area which is predominately downtown- the consignment shop and the other shops pay rent and state sales tax and that this is also a consignment operation that should be operated from a commercial establishment and not from a private residence - he recognized that the traffic maybe a problem and unsightliness maybe a problem but he objected mainly because of a continuous retail venture here that should be dealt with in a retail atmosphere. COUNCILWOMAN AVISE stated that the Planning Commission was concerned as to whether or not the notices were sent out since no one appeared except Mr. Schoen - they do not like to do things that way - she was there and at that time things did not look that bad because tnere was no one there to object. She asked Mr. Magnuson if we have anything on the books regarding garage sales or any over - riding state law that covers this. 479 • • • • • '480 September 1, -1981 MR. MAGNUSON stated that the local ordinance does not deal with this - it is up to the Council to determine whether something is a commercial activity - it would be a fair assumption that a garage sale once a year would not fall into that category - it is a determination that the Council has to make - if they deem it to be a con- tinuous operation and a commercial activity, then it would be prohibitive in this zoning district - there are certain commercial uses that are permitted if they are found not be objectionable. The Mayor closed the hearing. On motion of Councilwoman Bodlovick, seconded by Councilman Peterson, the Council denied the request for the Special Use Permit for John Schoen to operate an on -going garage sale at 108 North Fifth Street. (all in favor) B OB LIFTON stated that it was a little upsetting to him since he had quite a few code restrictions when he applied for his Special Use Permit to make sure that neigh- borhood approved of his business. Here there is an example of a business operating and then getting a permit - he questioned why the business was not closed down when the complaints were first made since it was operating backwards of the normal proce- dure - he was not allowed to start his "business until the inspections had been made that he had met the code restrictions. MAYOR JUNKER stated that he and the Police Chief two weeks ago went to Mr. Schoen and asked him not to run the garage sale during the week and he agreed to conform with that and he was surprised to see that he continued to operate after that time, and two weeks ago he was suppose to have appeared before the Council on this matter. MR. MAGNUSON stated that in this case there was no specific violation except that the ordinance prohibits conduting a commercial business in a residential neighborhood- first of all you determine that it is a commercial business rather than just an occasional garage sale - secondly, the police are not concerned with zoning restrictions and there is no official that is really charged with airing out these problems and they do not come to the attention of the City Council unless a neighbor objects - the only remedy really is to (1) charge the person with the crime of violating the zoning ordinance and that is rather harsh and the other one way of legal action to enjoin the activity - there is no power for any official to really go in there and shut the person down -some of these things do take sometime. THE MAYOR DECLARED ' RECESS FROM 9:40 to 9:50 P. M. NEW BUSINESS (out of order) 1. On motion of Councilwoman Bodlovick, seconded by Councilwoman Avise, the Council authorized the payment of $883.93 to Mr. & Mrs. George Regis, 721 South Everett Street for damager caused by a sewer backup and that their claim be sent to the McGarry - Kearney In .trance Agency. (all in favor) UNFINISHED BUSINESS 1. RON LANGNESS, Bond Consultant for the City of Stillwater explained the two proposed bond issuea for the City of Stillwater and the problems that could be encountered with the same. The first issue is $5,900,000 for the Oak Glen Development and he explained the assessment procedures for the new members of the Council - the proposal from the Oak Glen Development that they would like residential property assessed over 20 years, in order to keep the cost down. In a compromise it was agreed upon that the City would put in all of the improvements to the property at one time and that the sewer lines, roads, etc. would conform to the design of the two golf courses and if the golf courses were not completed those lines would not be in the right spot for another developer who would come in to build homes; therefore, they wanted to make sure that the City was guaranteed that the monies would be available to complete the golf courses and the club house so that improvement would be there so that when the lines are put in everything fit together One of the guarantees that the City has with the developer is that monies will be available in hand or at least assured prior to the issuance of bonds or the awarding of the constructi9n bids. Bids were taken in August and they were substantially below the estimates and they will now proceed to sell the bonds and the construction bids will be awarded - there is a sixty day clause in the bids and the award date would be the 13th of October - the last date for those construction bids to hold. The bond sale is scheduled for Oxtober 6th. There is one slight problem right now the financing has not been firmed up for the gold course and club house - he has talked to Mr. Johnson and the potential lenders and the delays are more administrative than they are substantial toward the approval of the loan agreement - until those papers are signed he did not want the Council to award any construction bids, but there are some other options that he has discussed with Mr. Johnson. The City's concern is that the City has the money to complete the project, so if by October 5th everything has not fallen together he has the option to put his money - escrow that money aside for the construction of facilities - the City is assured that there is enough money to complete the project - he recommended at this time that the City proceed as if that financing is coming into place and explained the conditions of the current bond market - he felt (continued on page 481) • • • • 1 4 • • September 1, 1981 COUNCILWOMAN AVISE asked what happens if the Oak Glen Development is underfinanced and MR. LANGNESS stated that there are two differences here, the other issues were based on estimates of construction to be undertaken - there were some cost overruns and there were some Change Orders and in this case the City has actual bids on all of these projects. MR. KRIESEL explained that on two of the projects that were underfunded that the costs of the land acquisitions for easements were underestimated and that accounted for the differences. On motion of Councilwoman Bodlovick, seconded by Councilman MacDonald a resolution was introduced "SETTING THE SALE FOR THE $5,9000,000 IMPROVEMENT BONDS FOR THE OAK GLEN DEVELOPMENT FOR OCTOBER 6, 1981 AT 11:30 A. M. ". AYES -- Councilwoman Avise and Bodlovick, Councilmen MacDonald and Peterson and Mayor Junker NAYS - -None (SEE RESOLUTIONS) On motion of Councilwoman Bodlovick, seconded by Councilman MacDonald, a resolution was introduced "SETTING THE SALE FOR THE $390,000 IMPROVEMENT BONDS FOR OCTOBER 6, 1981 AT 11:30 A. M. ". AYES -- Councilwomen Avise and Bodlovick, Councilmen MacDonald and Peterson and Mayor Junker NAYS - -None (see resolutions) 481 that tney should sell within the 127 limit. The developer agreed early on in the event that no further development occurs within the City that $3,730,429 develop- ments costs will be assumed by the developer. If in the course of development additional properties outside of the Johnson Development come into the City, they would assume the liabilities for these cversizing costs as the City would reimburse to the development. (He explained the other figures on page 2 of the recommendations). The developer upon the sale of every lot pay the assessment in full and if they sold prior to the assess ment rgjl being prepared, they will make up estimated amounts and the developer will put7? 10% of that money to the Cit. The temporary bonds are three years - if lots are sold rapidly, the City will receive substantial pre- payments and when we refinance the temporary bonds we will have a substantially smaller rate of interest - if we do not receive the kind of prepayments we anticipate, this provides for flexibility allowing the Council another shot at analyzing how this development is going to work and arrange financing accordingly. The Council will have a guarantee by the developer which guarantees the debt service payments - he cautioned both the Council and the developer there are alway risks with temporary financing - it tells you that it has to be refinanced with something definitive. In Minnesota a temporary bond can be refinanced with another temporary bond for three years for a total of six years or it can be refinanced with a long term definitive bond and if there is no bond market, the temporary bond can be exchanged with the < bond holder for a one year period of time and at that time the City must levy a tax and the tax would be over $6,000,000. The Developer's Agreement says that they will guarantee the payment of the debt service - it is the only option that the City has as we cannot sell long -term bonds within the 127, rate limit. MR. KRIESEL stated that they will be setting up a meeting with the Council to go s• over all aspects of the financing and the Developer's Agrement and this will come at a time before the actual award of the bids for the developer or the bond buyer. MR. LANGNESS explained the second iss ue for the Deerpath Development and other financing for other projects which totalled $280,000 and on this date Mr. Kriesel added the following projects which were underfunded on previous issues. #166 Downtown Parking Lot $40,000 #185 Curvecrest Blvd. $20,000 #129 Industrial Park $40,000 #186 Center Street $ 9,000 - Total $109,000 and he will add $110,000 to this issue for a total of $390,000. The Deerpath project will be assessed for a ten year period of time. Both of the issues will be offered at the same time and he recommended tot the bids be taken in his oaice with Mr. Kriesel in attendance or any members of the Council that wish to attend and that they be taken at 11:30 A. M. on October 6, 1981. He hopes then to be able to make a recommendation to the Council for their meeting that evening and that all items will checked out. The assessments should be assessed at the maximum legal rate of 13% and in the case of the Oak Glen Development there is a side agreement where the developer will set aside one year of debt service and that debt service reserve will be enough to cover the 57, overley requirement. He has received some feedback from the rating agency that they are concerned about the rating for the City of Stillwater and he is concerned and this time because the rating agencies have taken a different type stance on what they are picking up on municipal audits. The City has over the last several years had negative balances at the end of the year in the General Fund - some of those are pe" due to the fact that the transfers have not been made and other reasons - costs that are paid out of other funds, etc. He is hopeful that they can retain the rating. It may require going to New York to make a presentation - he asked that the Council give authorization to Mr. Kriesel to take that action if they decide that this has to be done. • Y • 482 • September 1, 1981 2. On motion of Councilwoman Bodlovick, seconded by Councilman MacDonald, a resolution was introduced 'APPROVING THE FINAL PLAT OF THE OAK GLEN DEVELOPMENT ". AYES -- Councilwomen Avise and Bodlovick, Councilmen MacDonald and Peterson and Mayor Junker NAYS - -None (see resolutions) 3. On motion of Councilwoman Bodlovick, seconded by Councilman MacDonald, a resolution was introduced "APPROVING THE FINAL PLAT OF THE DEERPATH DEVELOPMENT ", subject to the payment of the park dedication fee of $10,900. AYES -- Councilwomen Avise and Bodlovick, Councilmen MacDonald and Peterson and Mayor Junker NAYS - -None (see resolutions) 4. BRUCE FOLZ explained Outlot C of the Oak Glen Development which is about 20 acres - they are proposing 108 units for this area for multiple housing. The Planning Commission approved this and they have revised the ingress and egress roads to comply with the County's wishes. JOSEPHINE VANIA, a member of the Planning Commission, explained to the Council that she voted "no" on this plat - her "no" vote represented the idea represented in the Master Plan for the City and that is the solar access and she could see that has not been incorporated at all in this plan and at this point it might not be able to be incorporated into this plan; however, she wanted to make her point known here to the Council and Mr. Johnson that this idea can still be incorporated into the develop- ment of the multiple housing but the other single family housing. She felt that the Council should give direction to the developer and the single family home owners to consider this question - one can save 90% if the home is properly oriented for passive solar heat and with certain types of insulation. She felt that this should be considered on future plats the same as sewer lines, roads and these items are considered. DUANE ELLIOTT stated that he will be working with Mr. Folz and the developers for the = easements for the routing of the waternains which are currently planned along McKusick Road. On motion of Councilman Peterson, seconded by Councilwoman Bodlovick, the Council approved the preliminary plat approved for Outlot C of the Oak Glen Development according to the plan given to them with the understanding that con- sideration be given to the comments regarding energy conservation. (all in favor) 5. On motion of Councilwoman Bodlovick, seconded by Councilwoman Avise, a resolution was introduced "ORDERING THE ASSESSMENT HEARING FOR LOCAL IMPROVEMENT NO. 185 FOR CURVE- CREST BOULEVARD ". AYES -- Councilwomen Avise and Bodlovick, Councilmen MacDonald and Peterson and Mayor Junker NAYS - -None (see resolutions) 6. Mr. Kriesel brought up the matter of the assessments on Local Improvement No. 166 and chat there will have to be a re- assessment on that project - the cost ended up being 1 higher than the original assessment was and there were also an error made in the cal- culation of the assessment. There is also the assessment for Local Improvement No. 169 and that the Council should have a special meeting with the engineer and the appraiser and the City Attorney and try to work on some formula that might more equitably assess the parking lot project as suggested by the City Attorney. MAYOR JUNKER set the date of September 8th at 6:30 P. M. for a special meeting on the proposed assessments for Local Improvement Nos. 166 and 169. NEW BUSINESS 1. On motion of Councilwoman Avise, seconded by Councilman Peterson, the Council set the date of September 15, 1981 at 7:30 P. M. for the hearing for Case No. 426 for Norman Davis for a backyard setback variance for a lot in Penthouse Acres. (all in favor) 2. On motion of Councilman Peterson, seconded by Councilman MacDonald, a resolution was introduced "DIRECTING THE PAYMENT OF THE BILLS" with the addition of the claim from George Regis. AYES -- Councilwomen Avise and Bodlovick, Councilmen MacDonald and Peterson and Mayor Junker NAYS - -None (see resolutions) 3. There was d- scussion on the stop sign at Greely and Churchill and since this is a very heavily traveled street it is very difficult for people to get onto Greeley from Churchill, it was felt that it would be wrong to put stop signs for either north or south bound traffic and that this matter be tabled until the next regular meeting. 4. On motion of Councilman Peterson, seconded by Councilman MacDonald, the Council approved the installation of a street light at a location near 1402 South Greeley Street. (all in favor) • • • • • September 1, 1981 5. On motion of Councilwoman Bodlovick, seconded by Councilwoman Avise, the Council ordered the date of September 15, 1981 at 7:30 P. M. for the proposed use hearing for the Revenue Sharing Funds. (all in favor) INDIVIDUALS & DELEGATIONS 1. TOM HELGESON, Washington County HRA Acting Executive Director, appeared before the Council regarding the grant programs that they will be involved in - there will be three programs that will be all put together and operated by them. Washington County passed a resolution this date authorizing the HRA to apply and if the state accepts them they will deliver the program in the county. The allocation for the City of Stillwater is $27,900 :.ased on their population in Washington County. They will reserve that amount of money to be used exclusively for Stillwater and 12% of that is administrative funds - there will be about $24,500 available for people who are qualified for the maximum loan of $6,000 which would be enough for four loans. The City would become invdved in building inspections and will do inspections to see if the home qualifies and then there are inspections to make sure that the work is done, and the permits will be pulled from the City of Stillwater. They have to have approval from the State before they can proceed with the program and the program would be finished up by the end of next summer. If the City runs it own program' and wants the Metro Council to run it, then there would have to be a resolution, but if the City would like the County HRA to run the program, then no resolution is necessary. MR. KRIESEL felt that it would be better to have one agency to handle all of these programs that are related and would be more efficient - he was concerned that the money that is earmarked for the City of Stillwater goes to the people of the City of Stillwater. COUNCILWOMAN AVISE asked what happens if they do not get approval from the State and MR. HELGESON stated that it is highly unlikely, but if it should they would probably look at going back to Metro or going back to Anoka and find another delivery - HRA would handle the requests and they will start in January to take applications and then award the loane by March. COUNCILWOMAN AVISE asked what the City's experience has been on funds and he (Mr. Kriesel) stated that they are going down - it was about $40,000 in 1979, $36,000 in 1980 and down to $26,000 which was on the Home Improvement Grant program. On motion of Councilwoman Avise, seconded by Councilman MacDonald, the Council appointed Washington County HRA to administer the City of Stillwater funds. (all in favor) APPLICATIONS On motion of Councilman Peterson, seconded by Councilwoman Bodlovick, the following Contractor's Licenses were approved: (all in favor) Petroleum Maintenance Co. 3172 Spruce St., St. Paul 55117 Installing fuel storage tanks New Richard E. Winhold dba Aluminum Window & Door Mart 2633 Stillwater Road, Maplewood 55119 General Renewal - - -On motion of Councilwoman Bodlovick, seconded by Councilwoman Avise, the following On -Sale Wine Lince and Bond was approved; (all in favor) Silver Lake Restaurant 241 S. Main St Stillwater New - - -On motion of Councilman MacDonald, seconded by Councilwoman Bodlovick, three additional taxi -cab licenses were approved for Valley Taxi, Inc., 1504 South Greeley Street, Stillwater. (Councilwoman Avise opposed) COMMUNICATIONS - -From Cub Foods thanking the Police Dept. for their support in helping to maintain order around their supermarket during Lumberjack Days. (no action) - -From M. Neal Erdahl, County Administrator commending the Stillwater Police Officers in conjunction with the County deputies on the manner in which they handled the situation in downtown Stillwater during Lumberjack Days. (no action) - -From the League of Minnesota Cities regarding policy on the percentage of votes to adopt or amend a charter. On motion of Councilman Peterson, seconded by Councilwoman Bodlovick, the �. Council requested that the present law requiring 51% of those voting on the amend- ment to adopt or amend a charter was the one that they preferred. (all in favor) - -From Joseph Marty for Senator David Durrenberger regarding the abandonment of rail lines in Minnesota. • J � J 483 • • 1 e '484 • September 1, 1981 The Council had some discussion about these tracks being used for Engine 328 trips when it is in Stillwater and it is possible that the engine will be placed here permanently - they also did favor use of same for bike trails or to let the tracks remain. - -On motion of Councilwoman Avise, seconded by Councilman MacDonald, Mr. Kriesel was directed to write a letter to the DNR that the City would be interested in a bike trail or something similar to that in the event that the train does not come back to Stillwater for the use of the tracks. (all in favor) - -From the League of Minnesota Cities and Carson Young, Jr. regarding Cable T. V. On motion of Councilwoman Bodlovick, seconded by Councilman MacDonald, a resolution was introduced "RESOLUTION SPONSORED BY THE CITY OF STILLWATER RELATING TO CABLE T. V. ". AYES -- Councilwomen Avise and Bodlovick, Councilmen MacDonald and Peterson and Mayor Junker NAYS - -None (see resolutions) CITY CLERK'S REPORT 1. On motion of Councilman Peterson, seconded by Councilwoman Avise, the Council directed that the complaint and summons from Lucille Clark vs. the City of Stillwater be sent to the McGarry- Kearney Insurance Agency. (all in avor) 2. There was a request for a street light on North Harriet Street between Mulberry and Rice which was referred to the Public Works Committee for their study and recommendation. CITY COORDINATOR'S REPORT 1. MR. KRIESEL asked the Council for action regarding the memo on hospital /medical costs for 1982 and there was discussion about whether the Council wished to be coordinated or uncoordinated and the City Attorney explained the no -fault insurance provisions. The Council chose to continue on the uncoordinated program as we have had in the past. CONSULTING ENGINEER'S REPORT MR. ELLIOTT stated that it would not be wise to vacate the right -of -way for Inter - lachen Drive at this time - some day it may be deemed appropriate - there is Deerpath adjacent to it and Reliance and the route of Interlachen may provide a route around this whole facility for a bike path - is a right -of -way is there it is better to keep it for awhile until you have all of the development that is going to occur and then you can talk about things that you do not need - he does know that the Deerpath Development does have a drainage structure that comes out to Interlachen and an access to which the City may need from time to time to clean it - it does not have to be a street right -of -way - it can be an easement for access and felt that it was unwise to vacate something that you do not have any development next to it. MAYOR JUNKER asked that he give the Council a written report on this matter. BUILDING OFFICIAL No report PUBLIC WORKS COMMITTEE REPORTS 1. MR. SHELTON presented the quotes for the surfacing for Orleans Street by Tom Thumb and Erickson Post by County Road 5 and on St. Croix Avenue between North Broadway and North Third Street - both sections are about 300 feet long and thirty feet wide - there would be a four inch mat with a three inch base and one inch wearing course and on St. Croix there would be curb formed with the paving machine. These would have to be assessed - Orleans - $4,031 - - - St. Croix Avenue - $7,396. These were quotes from Tower Asphalt as the County no longer does this kind of work. Mr. Shelton explained that two of the property owners on Orleans have petitioned for this work to be done - Tom Thumb and Erickson Post, but on St. Croix Avenue there are many sideyards and this would made a difference in the assessments. MR. MAGNUSON stated that in order to assess them you would have to have a regular improvement hearing. MAYOR JUNKER directed that Mr. Shelton and Mr. Zepper contact these people to see if they are willing to sign an agreement to waive the hearing on the improvement on St. Croix Avenue. • • • n • 2. MR. SHELTON had a request for two hour parking on the north side of Linden Street between North Third and Fourth and he will check out three or four locations for such parking, but the problem is the enforcement of such signs. PARKS & RECREATION 1. MR. BLEKUM explained the problems with the wall on the south end of Pioneer Park and he has been in contact with the architect at Park Nursery and they are willing to do the wall at no cost. There were comments about making the wall that high on each of the terraces, and these should not be more than four feet high on each of these terraces. 2. MR. BLEKUM explained the problems ct the headquarters building with leakage and lack of insulation and he received a quote of $1,500 to correct the situation, but he does not have such an item in the budget. He does have $2,300 left for Miscellaneous Park Improvements and he requested permission to use that money to get this job done. On motion of Councilman Peterson, seconded by Councilwoman Avise, Mr. Blekum was authorized to make the improvements at the headquarters building using the funds from the Miscellaneous Park Improvement Budget. (all in favor) 3. MR. BLEKUM inquired again about the policy for memorial trees for the parks and MAYOR JUNKER stated that they will have an answer by the next meeting. CITY ATTORNEY'S REPORT No report COUNCIL REOUEST ITEMS AND MISCELLANEOUS 1. MAYOR JUNKER has received a complaint from Ed Schell at 102 North Owens Street that Haines had not cleaned up the remains from removing a tree and MR. SHELTON was directed to check into this matter. 2. The Township has requested that two members of the Council serve on a joint Town/ City Planning Board - Councilwoman Avise and Mayor Junker will serve on this board. QUESTIONS FROM PRESS REPRESENTATIVES None ORDINANCES None September 1, 1981 RESOLUTIONS The following resolutions were read and on roll call were unanimously adopted: / 1. Directing the Payment of the Bills..; O0 2. Bond Sale for $390,000 * 3. Bond Sales for $5,900,000. 4. Accept the Final Plat for the Oak Glen Development 5. Accept the Final Plat for the Deerpath Development 6. Cable T. V. Resolution J 7. Order Assessment Hearing for Local Improvement No. 185 Attest: / B. City Clerk Aayor 485'; * Repassed on September 8, 1981 • ADJOURNMENT ' 4 On motion of Councilwoman Bodlovick, seconded by Councilman Peterson, the meeting adjourned at 10:40 P. M. • •