Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1981-12-15 CC MIN• • 56 COUNCIL CHAMBERS Stillwater, Minnesota December 15, 1981 4:00 P. M. REGULAR MEETING The meeting was called to order by President Junker. Present: Councilwomen Avise and Bodlovick, Councilmen MacDonald and Peterson and Coun Absent: Also Present: Press: None Citizens: Mary Oswald PARKS & RECREATION No report None Finance Director - Kriesel City Clerk, Schnell City Attorney, Magnuson Public Safety Director, Abrahamson onelton Superintendent of Public Works, Fire Chief, Chial Blekum Director of Parks & Recreation, Consulting Engineers, Moore and Elliott PUBLIC SAFETY CHIEF ABRHAMSON reported that Officer Bosse was operated on this week and will be off work for eight weeks and Officer Schreffler will enter the hospital tomorrow. FIRE CHIEF CHIEF CHIAL had received a request from Happy Otte for a fire lane '_n his drive- way to the south of his building on North Owens Street, and it was his recommendation that this be done. After consideration discussion the Council felt that this should be a problem that should be resolved between the owner and the lessor On motion of Councilwoman Bodlovick, seconded by Councilwoman Avise, the Council denied the request from Happy Otte tll by theOv)rtue that it is a private enterprise with multiple uses. PUBLIC WORKS 1. MR. SHELTON informed the Council that Gary Fullerton is working in the garage per doctor's orders that he is no longer able to work in the Sewer Department. He requested permission to post the opening for a man for the Sewer Department. On motion of Councilwoman Bodlovick, seconded by Councilman Peterson, Mr. Shelton was authorized to advertise for a Junior or Senior Sewer Maintenance Man to replace Gary Fullerton. (all in favor) INDIVIDUALS AND DELEGATIONS (out of order) MARY OSWALD, from WARM WORLD, appeared before the Council requesting permission for a Special Use Permit for an after - school program at the Washington Elementary School - it would operate from 2:30 P. M. to 6:00 P. M. - five days per week. They would have the use of the gym and the use of Cherry Knoll Park. The kids would be at Croix Center when there is no school, during vacations and during the summer the months and they are seeking a license to have thatWs Scho - busy playground equipment is for the older children, and it would street. MAYOR JUNKER ASKED IF THE COUNCIL could make a decision on this or would it have to be referred to the Planning Commission. MR. MAGNUSON stated that what the ordinance says "if the substantial rights of others are not involved, the Council can hear and grant these requests" - he did not know if this would cause a hassel with the neighbors the way the others have. COMMITTEE REPORTS • • i f • December 15, 1981 MR. KRIESEL stated that there was a problem with the parking, but since the signs have been put up the problem seems to be alleviated. MAYOR JUNKER asked if the neighbors should be made aware of this before it is granted and MR. MAGNUSON stated that if the Council wanted to, they could grant this if the substantial rights of the neighbors are not involved since it is already a school - this is a little different from a normal neighborhood. COUNCILMAN PETERSON stated that the neighbors that could be influenced would be influenced would be the neighbors to the north and possible to the west. MARY OSWALD stated that these children are taken by the Stillwater Taxi Van from the Stonebridge School to Washington and then there are some who attend Washington. COUNCILWOMAN AVISE felt that since it is already in operation that we would not be holding up anything to have a public hearing on this request. COUNCILMAN PETERSON asked if they could avoid a public hearing by actually making a direct contact with the neighbors that the Council feel are influenced and explain to them what is going on and get the complaints, and keep it at the lowest possible plane and subject to any later complaints that would cause the Council to look at it again. On motion of Councilwoman Bodlovick, seconded by Councilman Peterson, the Council requested that Mary Oswald secure signed statements from the property owners to the north and west of the Washington School and upon receipt of the necessary statements that the City staff members be authorized to issue the Conditional Use Permit. (all in favor) CONSULTING ENGINEER'S REPORT 1. DICK MOORE presented the preliminary layout of St. Croix Avenue right -of -way to the Council for their review. They have established the grade and they will put in a gravel base with a berm and will provide for some grading in the future. The City would have to acquire easements and possibly trading some property with some of these property owners and he will meet with the property owners that are affected and then they will go back to the contracdor, and the City Council. 2. MR. MOORE reported that the Edgewood Ditch is completed but no payment will be made until the contracts are signed and approved by the City Attorney - they still have to inspect the manholes and other final inspections. 3. MR. MOORE reported that the lift station has been installed for the Oak Glen Project and they are going to work on McKusick Road on the sewer that goes along McKusick to the west in the area around the railroad tracks - they will be using two crews on this area for the winter months. 4. MR. MOORE stated that they started to do the inventory for the improvements on South Third Street for utilities, etc. and they were going to look at the side- walks, but it was halted with this last snow and he does not know what disruption the County will do with the sidewalks - if they intend to replace all of the walks or just a portion of them. MR. ELLIOTT stated that they could pull out some old reports and see what they have to say about rhse sidewalks - it is an opportunity if the sidewalks need replacement in that the County pays the major share of the cost - the City pays for the curb, gutter and sidewalk and the County pays for the street. They will be meeting with the County on Thursday morning. CITY ATTORNEY'S REPORT 1. MR. MAGNUSON discussed with the Council the Interlachen Hills Plat and that if the Council is going to turn them down they will have to have some sufficient reasons. One question is the sewer capacity - the Lecuyer annexation is pending and if we do not have capacity and we may have to squeeze to have that capacity - this new plat would be 2.6 times the flaw of the first plan we had. MR. ELLOITT explained the figures that the Metro Council has proposed - they stated that by 1990 there would be an increase of 718 dwelling units in the City - the population would be 850 more - the population increase is based upon an estimated decrease in dwelling unit population of the old City - where it is over three now and by 1990 there will be fewer people per household. The sewa 8' allocation is .25 million gallons per day or 250,000 per day - when they analyzed Oak Glen on the number of units to be built each year in the next ten years, single family was 383 single family homes and the multi- family was 268 - this was giving consideration to Interlachen Hills and there are 1100 r'ilti- family right in Oak Glen. There is also Commercial and Industrial land that is yet to be developed which is estimated at 123 acres at 1,500 gallons per acre per day will use up all of the capacity. The question that will arise this evening is that there is sewage capacity there - there are 158 multi - family units in the General City. Lecuyer's number is not included and if you go on to 1991 and 1992 you have an additional 81 units (single family) by 1992 recognizing that Oak Glen is not 5� • • • 1 • 1 i 4 • • ( December 15, 1981 going to get done by 1992 and some of this will be lapping over into the next decade. The Lecuyer property was considered insufficient in the total flow generation and was not dealt with when Oak Glen was coming in. MR. KRIESEL questioned if the Metro Council will stop the annexation of the Lecuyer property because of this acceptance of these 128 units and MR. ELLIOTT had asked the Metro Council whether this densier use of this land was a question a Comprehensive Plan mchangefwhichvwould have to be and if it was not rezoning. MR. MAGNUSON felt that the PUD that they are asking for could be rezoning. There were questions asked about the rezoning of the Emerson property and MR. ELLIOTT stated that this was considered as Commercial and Industrial and this would be very close to that of single family housing. The City did go on record to have this sewer allocation reconsidered at the time of the Bayport Plant con- sideration and he was told very recently that the Bayport plant going up to the Stillwater plant is very unlikely within the next decade because of the cost and the good job that the Bayport plant is doing. MR. MAGNUSON stated that a PUD is a request for a mix of uses and this can be done in any area and it amounts to a rezoning change when you go from Single Family Residential to that sort of density. He felt that the Council would be in trouble if they would say that they couldn't do this because we do not have the other sewer you always useethe traffic or thee reason. When streets. MR. KRIESEL stated in Carl Dale's plan it is included in there, and he has that specific pice of property titled "Residential PUD" and he did not know how that fits into the plan. MR. MAGNUSON stated that one reason for denial would be the density, and the other would be the traffic in the internal streets and the third reason could be the sewer capacity is questioned by the Metropolitan Council. COUNCILWOMAN BODLOVICK indicated that she had received 32 calls about the increased traffic on Crestwood Terrace, Hawthorne Lane and Maryknoll. MR. ELLIOTT stated that it does increase the density substantially over the previous single family units - it is not know if the Metro Council in its projection of dwelling units growth and the associated propulation growth had the wisdom to predict that the remaining areas in Stillwater would develop at a higher density and, there- fore, allow for such a sewer allocation. Questions were asked as to whether or not Charter Oaks was included in the sewerage capacity, and it was indicated that at the time of the Master Plan it was proposed but not included. MR. MAGNUSON felt that the Council should have good reasonf just in case it was taken to court. no showing that there won't It could be in conflict with the Comprehensive Plan, g be reputable environmental harm, it seriously depreciates surrounding property values, then there is traffic and the density is too much. There was discussion about the exit out on County Road No. 12 and the problems with the previous proposed development for This property, and it was concluded that plat was never filed. MR. MAGNUSON stated that whenever you talk about density it is per acre and you always include the gross area and here they are saying the density when you look at the whole site they are using only about half of it and they are going to leave the other half for private use and that will be park dedication, so the density is six homes per acre which is not dense. If they would want to put earth shelter homes on the hilly area, the City would have to allow him to do that possibly - get all of the reasons in the motion for denial. (Mr. Magnuson was directed to draw up the desirable motion and present same to the Council for their review) CITY COORDINATOR'S REPORT 1. MR. KRIESEL informed the Council of the Police mediation session which will be held on December 21st at the Bureau of Mediation Services for the POLICE DEPARTMENT. He had assumed at the November 13th meeting that they were only discussing the issues that were not settled at the prevbus meeting. Now there is a concern about the language for the seniority and this leaves i• open for management to put an officer on a preferential shift and he felt that this is the only major issues that has to be resolved. SIM • • • • • • Owsffia December 15, 1981 2. MR. KRIESEL presented to the Council the schedule of interfund transfers as recommended by the auditors and budget transfers, which he reviewed with the Council at this time. (The Council will study these and take action at the cleanup meeting which will be held on December 29, 1981 at 4:30 P. M.) 3. On motion of Councilwoman Bodlovick, seconded by Councilman Peterson, the Council set the date of December 29, 1981 at 4:30 P. M. for the Proposed Budget Hearixgfor the year 1982. (all in favor) 4. MR. KRIESEL presented to the Council the data relating to the proposed increases in sewer service rates which will become effective in January of 1982. He explained the detailed sheets that he submitted to them for their consideration. The current minimum charge is $20.00 and the new minimum would be $34.00 per quarter - this would be a $26.00 sewer maintenance charge and $8.00 water minimum charge, plus an overage of 75C for every 1,000 gallons over 10,000 gallons. He also explained the debt service for the City which will terminate in 1986. There was discussion on the I /=I Study and the fact that the Federal monies are being cut out for such projects and that the City of Stillwater is going to being paying more than their fair share of sewage treatment. COUNCIL REOUEST ITEMS 1. COUNCILMAN HARRY PETERSON brought up the issue of the Parking Permits which are issued for downtown and the small charge that is being made for such permits and the areas in which they are permitted to be used. He felt that the City should consider looking to acquire some property by lease or usage and people who are downtown all day long should be able to go more than a block or two from their business place for all day parking for $5.00 per month. He recommended that when we issue these parking permits now that there might be a change in location as to where permit parking will be granted and he felt that the City should look at the cost of ten hour parking. The City cannot maintain the meter heads for these costs and at nine o'clock in the morning the Maple Island lot is full. 2. COUNCILMAN HARRY PETERSON made mention of the problem that Don Swenberg is having with his sewer for his apartment on Cherry Street and MR. SHELTON reported that the sewer was dug up three or four years ago and they have been up there quite often - the sewer seems to become root bound very easily - probably the solution to the whole thing when convenient at the first opportunity - it is a dead -end sewer and when they rebuilt that sewer on Fourth Street from Laurel down to Mul- berry and there is not much sewer on that line and possibly a manhole should be put in that block and it would eliminate his problem and the manhole would cost about $1,500. (Mr. Shelton was directed to get in contact with Mr. Swenberg on this problem) There were questions asked about the TV of the sewer lines and the funds available for this work and Mr. Elliott reported that from the reports that has received that these monies are not available at this time from the Federal Government. He also stated that South St. Paul is experiencing similar problems and felt that the two communities should get together and present these problems to the Metro Council in a joint venture. 3. COUNCILWOMAN AVISE asked about the Lumberjack Days problems and the setting of a special meeting on this problem and COUNCILMAN PETERSON will check with Sandy at the Chamber about setting up a special meeting on this matter. 4. COUNCILWOMAN AVISE asked about the establishing of the rules and procedures for hiring police officers and felt that the Council should get together and proceed with such procedures. 5. COUNCILWOMAN AVISE reported that she had heard complaints and charges against some of the police officers and felt that there should be some kind of procedures and they need guidelines - she feels real uncomfortable not knowing who is right and who is wrong. CHIEF ABRAHAMSON stated that they have procedures; however, a lot of times people when they have complaints they are incomplete and if they are not coming to him firstand then he should bring it up to the Council - it would take a lot of heat off the Council if they would come to him first. MR. MAGNUSON stated that has some information on this and he could make up a package for the Council on this matter - with the Charter the Mayor has the power and control of the Police Department - he will proceed with such a procedure list. The meeting recessed at 5:55 P. M. until 7:30 P. M. Attest Attest:4,177dt,, Ci4aj Clerk Mayor 5O‘ • • • ■ • • •I • i COUNCIL CHAMBERS December 15, 1981 7:30 P. M. Stillwater, Minnesota RECESSED MIETING The meeting was reconvened by President Junker. The Invocation was given by the City Clerk. Council/omen Avise and Bodlovick, Councilmen MacDonald and Present: Peterson and Mayor Junker Absent: None Also Present: Finance Dire/C0 rdinator, Rriesel Schnell City Clerk, Moore and Elliott Consulting Engineers, Press: St. Croix Valley Free Press, Jeanne Landkammer Stillwater Gazette, Bob Liberty Marvel Old, Mr. & Mrs. Tim Cowen, James Gannon, Thomas Farrell, Citizens: Charles Margos, Bruce Folz, Leighton Johnson, John Easton, Jack Lux, Jim Bain, Dianne Storbakken, Brian Crombie, Monty Brine, Leonard Feely, James O'Brien, Ray Roemmich, Jean Delaney, Joan Sprain, Stewart Bosworth, Jack Rider, Mark Cusick (there were about 150 people in attendance at this meeting) INDIVIDUALS & DELEGATIONS 1. CHARLES MARCOS appeared and he the the Valley Dental Arts, and the audience. MR. thatUheNhas stated reviewed all the resolutionsrandrthe the forms find t_hat Margos they are all in order. On motion of Councilwoman Bodlovick, seconded by Councilman Peterson, a resolution URSUANT TO CHAPTER 474 MINNESOTA NSTATUTES, TOSPROVI E OF FOR THE DE LOANED BONDS PURSUANT CHARLES N. AND ANGELINE MARCOS FOR COMMERCIAL /INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT PROJECT ". (The amount of the bonds are $350,000). MacDonald and Peterson AYES - -Co and Mayor and Bodlovick, Mayor Junker NAYS - -None (see resolutions) 2. JOHN owntow alown RetaildCouncil and other ouncil dividualseregarding the insmllationrof of some of the the ciw a Municipal transient rdthesCityhCouncil - hevdistributede finadrl the do not t ouy did wtht to irp oach foundla location south of thetoldfCarp Wash iand Park they Alley building which is out of the way but very appropriate for docking facilities like these. It would dock up to 18 thirty foot boats or numerous 16, 18, 22 foot thoSe at i t a would only would transient boatsnthat wantltoicomertooStillwatert- there Marina- o be overnite facilities if so requested. He felt that Stillwater is the nicest City the St. Croix and Mississippi Rivers and they have a lot to offer, but there is no themlupenorthidurings the winterwmonthssandrbring themkbackr these s and pull sure that they are installed and built right. They are looking at $75,000 to $100,000 for the facilities that sh shown retail the drawing - they are contacting local foundations in the area, Council and it will be of no expense to the City. They feel that they can arrange to raise the money needed. Once they have them bought and paid for and installed they would sell them back to the City for a "buck" and the City now owns them and they can lease them back to the Downtown Retail Council and they will run them - they will then get the insurance and liability off of the Downtown Retail Council. ting He felt that there would be no trouble with the DNR - they are in transient boat docks whereby it keeps people from speeding up all day long - there would be no dredging involved and this would be the perfect place for it. COUNCILMAN PETERSON asked what the authority would be that they would have to have from the Corp of Engineers and MR. EASTON stated that they will have to talk to the Corps of Engineers, the Park Service and the DNR and other agencies that have Attorney to with felt these contracts, nice to have the City contracts, etc • • • • 1 • • December 15, 1981 MAYOR JUNKER suggested that they apply for the permit even though the docks were not installed this summer - they would have to contact Maureen Sullivan •• with the Corps of Engineers, and then the DNR. would JOHN work forTtipst - that the standardeprocedure some who this would they help tie up the boat and watch it while you are uptown - they have a little house with a telephone and radio in it and it is an information bureau for the City. Questions were asked about any charges and the response was that possibly for now there would be no charge - definitely overnite dockage would have to be reservations and that would be $12 to $15 for overnite dockage. Questions were asked if this was an alternative plan for the docks that Captain Griffith has there or if this would be more docks over and above what he has there. MAYOR JUNKER stated that his dock is a permanent one and this would be one that would be moved and relocated, and he was advised to keep in contact with Mr. Kriesel on the progress on this proposal. 3. MONTY BRINE appeared before the Council requesting an On Sale Liquor license knowing that all of the licenses for the City are spoken for, but the reason that he applied at this time is that he questioned if one of them is in use at this time, referring to the Grand Garage License and if that would be availavle at the first of the year as they have not put this license into use. 1.se location that they have applied for is on the north end of town at the old Staples Mill Building - this would be the detached building which is the kiln at the old sawmill just before you go across the railroad tracks. They have created a new interest in the north end of the Main Street in some of the renovation of the buildings and a lot of their tenants and future tenants would like to see a restaurant at this end of town. A liquor license is a vital possession to have - since there are not any more available, they feel that all should be utilized - they are not asking for Industrial Revenue Bonds - they are going to put a building back on the tax rolls and they would upgrade it and with the hope that it will benefit the downtown area. MR. MAGNUSON stated that the final stamp of approval is put on by the Liquor Control Commission after a location has been inspected and completed and ready to go. The Council has committed to the owners the last several years to the Grand Garage in anticipated that they would use it and they have spent a lot of money in trying to renovate it and they are this evening asking for some Industrial Revenue Bonds for the completion of this project - he felt that the City is legally committed as long as they continue to show good faith and progress to let them have the license. The second problem is the Council has previously committed to the Oak Glen Development that if a license becomes available, they will have the first shot at it. They are scheduled to be completed within three years. MONTY BRINE asked if they are honoring the agreement with the City by not putting in a restaurant that will be using this license. COUNCILMAN PETERSON asked if the Council would be within bounds to set a time limit in which they must function and put this license to use and MR. MAGNUSON felt that would be reasonable and the City has never tried to pin them down as to what their timetable is. The other thing would be a referendum which has failed twice, and there is very little interest in the public eye - possibly if something like that were promoted propertly it could pass without any problems. MONTY BRINE asked if the City Council could transfer this to somone else and MR. MAGNUSON stated that they could and if asked if that could be the situation now or in six months since they did not use it for the restaurant that is currently there. They have a building and the financing available to go ahead and to put this into use - they would generate tax dollars for the City - they have an opportunity to supply their own parking - he felt that they were a better customer for the license right now. 4. JIM BAIN, representing Nelson Jonnes of American Polywater Company, appeared before the Council - he is the developer for this firm and they are hopeful of building in Stillwater a 12,000 square foot manufacturing firm on a piece of property in the Joint Powers area on County Road No. 5 and Highway 36 (Croixgate property) - they would create 15 new employees in the area - 54 new people - 14 school children - 15 new households - one new retail estabiishment - 15 non manufacturing employees - $35,000 new in bank deposits - $49,650 in new retail sales and $106,500 in personal incomes. American Polywater is non- competitive around the country - much less will it injure a firm now existing in the community. They make a grease and lubricant for the national domestic and international market. They will increase employment and help the tax base that goes into Stillwater. Stillwater allows forty percent of the floor area ratio which is how much floor area to how much land - it gives a company like Nelson Jonnes a better land. Council allows forh$450,000. proceed, the 61` • • • December 15, 1981 MR. MAGNUSON stated that the property would come under the zoning jurisdiction of the Joint Powers and by granting this preliminary approval the City cannot withdraw without being liable for damages - will have to make sure that it is all right with the zoning people out there before the Council gives preliminary approval. They should go to the Joint Powers and then come back to the Council. JIM BAIN stated that they hope to have the hearing on January 5th and their concern is that if they delay rates may or may not be comfortable but the supply of money may be not just there for firms like them. He was not concerned about the project, but he was conarned with the delay that it could be abandoned not by the owner and the administrative head, but by the lenders. There was discussion about the time table of meetings for the City Council and the Joint Powers and the necessary meeting notices, and he has been talking with Nile Kriesel, Mr. O'Donnell and Mr. Lockyear. If they have to wait until late January, both the lender and the company will have to abandon it - the rates are changing very drastically. MR. KRIESEL stated that when they were talking about setting the hearing for the Industrial Revenue Bonds, the assumption that he made was that everything had been taken care of with the Joint Powers people - the City has the authority to issue the Industrial Revenue Bonds providing that everything has been taken care of with the Joint Powers Commission. MR. MAGNUSON stated that the preliminary resolution that the public hearing would call for - set the hearing to be 15 days from now - that jreliminary resolution is the most important resolution - once the Council takes that step you cannot turn back - you have to give them the final resolution when it comes along - if you don't, you would be putting the Joint Powers in a shape that they would have to let this project go and did now feel that they should take that chance. There was further discussion about the different time tables and the problems involved. JACK LUX asked if it was not right that the County Planning Deparment can issue a building permit for an industrial building on. an Industrial Zoned Lot without a hearing before the Joint Powers - they were told that it could be issued administra- tiv without a hearing. COUNCILMAN PETERSON asked Mr. Lux if the County Planning Department issued that permit and he responded- not the permit, but all of the papers and they are satis- fied and it is has met more than what it had asked for. MR. ELLIOTT did not feel that an on -site sewer would be allowed for that operation and it was agreed that COUNCILWOMAN BODLOVICK would call the attorney for the Joint Powers and get a ruling on this matter. MR. MAGNUSON stated that they could set the hearing date for January 5th and if everything is not in order then the Council could deny the request - it is dis- cretionary so just setting the hearing would not jeopardize the Council's decisions at all. MR. ELLIOTT stated that this area has been assessed for a trunk sewer but there is not sewer in the general area - -it has to be 500 to 600 feet away - this area will be serviced along County goad No. 5. On motion of Councilwoman Bodlovick, seconded by Councilwoman Avise, a resolution was introduced "CALLING FOR THE FUBLIC HEARING PURSUANT TO MINNESOTA STATUTES, SECTION 474.01, SUB. 7b FOR THE AMERICAN POLYWATER COMPANY AND THE DATE OF THE HEARING IS TO BE JANUARY 5, 1982 AT 7:30 P. M." AYES -- Councilwomen Avise and Bodlovick, Councilmen MacDonald and Peterson and Mayor Junker NAYS - -None (see resolutions) PUBLIC HEARINGS This was the day and time for the public hearing on the proposed assessments for the construction and installation of roadway lighting for the Stillwater Industrial Park and adjacent areas. Notice of the hearing was published in the Stillwater Gazette the official newspaer of the City on December 1, 1981 and copies were mailed to all property owners proposed to be assessed. The Mayor opened the hearing. The City Clerk indicated that the City had received one objection from Charter Oaks on this proposed assessment in writing. MR. MOORE explained that the low bid for the project was $97,569.76 - the feasibility study estimate was $252,110.00 which included the engineering. MR. FE.ELY asked when the project would start and he was informed not until spring and he asked when the assessment would be levied. • • • • ry December 15, 1981 • • MR. MAGNUSON stated that the reason for proceeding this way and the reason e why we have to wait 30 days from tonite to award the contract is that the City has been plagued with assessment appeals - there have been about twenty appeals in the last several years and the one way around that is that it is permissable and done in many cities, is to assess the cost before the project is ever awarded or the contract is awarded and we know that we will be able to recover the money for it before the Contract is signed otherwise the general public has to pay for some of the work - it is just a safe way to proceed and the Council e lectxd to do it this way on this particular project. MR. KRIESEL stated that we could not certify to the County until October 10th of next year. The Mayor closed the hearing. On motion of Councilman Peterson, seconded by Councilwoman Avise, a resolution was introduced "ADOPTING THE ASSESSMENT ROLL FOR LOCAL IMPROVEMENT NO. 191 AND SETTING THE INTEREST RATE AT 127, AND THE TIME PAYMENT FOR TEN YEARS ". AYES -- Councilwomen Avise and Bodlovick, Councilmen MacDonald and Peterson and Mayor Junker NAYS- -None (see resolutions) "1 THE MAYOR DECLARED A RECESS FROM 8:30 TO 8:40 P. M. 2. This was the day and time for the public hearing on Case No. 438 for the PUD for Interlachen Partnership. Notice of the hearing was published in the Stillwater Evening Gazette, the official newspaper of the City on December 4, 1981 and copies were mailed to all property owners within 300 feet. The Mayor opened the hearing. JAMES W. O'BRIEN, of the Interlachen Partnership, appeared before the Council explaining their PUD - they are proposing twenty single family homes and 108 townhouse structures. They have designed over 2,000 multi - family, single family homes and they have been involved in planning in over a thousand developments. The prices of the single homes range from $75,000 to $400,000. The reason thst they want to use a PUD on this site is that it provides for flexibility and variety in the way of sites and plans to avoid building on the entire site and concentrate the buildings in certain areas of this site and still arhieving what they consider to be an acceptable and desirable density leaving the green areas which represent open area which would not be assigned to dwelling units - these would be semi- public, semi - private open spaces assockted with the Planned Unit Development - it is not their intention that single family homes is part of the Planned Unit Development - the Planned Unit Development which consists of the Town Homes area by itselfand the single family homes would be independent of the Planned Unit Development or the Condominium Association. The ability to make better use of the site in terms of preserving the natural character of the site slopes as much as possible, the water areas and further develup some of the water areas - they hope to enlarge the small pond - they will talk with the DNR about the possibility of clearing out part of the area - another good reason for the Town Home idea which the Planned Unit Development would allow is that the housing gy would be more affordable. They are talking about single family homes which would be in the vicinity of $80,000 to $130,000 to $140,000 in construction costs and Town Homes would be in the vicinity of $70,000 or $80,000 to $110,000 in con- struction costs. They are not small cheap units - they are adequate family type units. The reason for the Town Homes is that they are the more economical situation - both in terms of construction costs and in the terms of energy - Washington County in 1970 did not have any Townhouses or Town Homes and by 1980 they had 1,170. The construction costs are less since you build less lineal streets to serve a greater number of units - less sewer runs, less curbs, less gutter - in some cases the site development becomes more expensive than single family homes. There is less exterior wall area so there is less heat loss - the Metropolitan Council supports the idea of Townhouses - there is a growing need for Townhouses and condominiums - 407. of the new homes in the Metropolitan area in 1979 were Town Homes. If this area were not planned for a PUD, there would be less control over the space as it develops into single family homes. The buildings would cover 7% of the site - if single family were built it would cover 15 to 20 percent of the sit : - the streets cover 13 percent of the site - if it were entirely single family, the streets would cover 25 =o 30 percent - there is 80 percent open space the way it is is laid out - the best that they could achieve with the strictly single family concept would be about 50 percent. They are aware that there is a concern about traffic - basically there would be a connection to the County Road just across from Boutwell and the connecting street would yo across to Interlachen - they are aware of the concern of the increased traffic on Crestwood Terrace and it is possible and it does not make a lct of difference to them to allow them to connect Interlachen ro Crestwood but it is possible that Interlachen could end and would not have to connect to Crestwood. It is their feeling that if Interlachen connects, there is likely to be as much tr more traffic using Interlachen to Crestwood from Croixwood than there is from this Development. (continued on page 64) 631 • • • • ■ December 15, 1981 The development would be designed and controlled by them - they would actually themhconstructedland superviselthecconstructi e on - construction contract units between the contractor would be with the Interlachen Partnership - they would build the Townhouses as well as the single family homes - they would propose materials s like those in other areas of Stillwater such as brick, stone, stucco, wood, and paint finishes. SIGNE COWEN, 202 Crestwood Terrace, stated that 46 of them were present at the Planning Commission and more than that number are present hare this evening - within the last ten days they have gathered a petition against the proposed development with listed reasons with over 325 names. (She presented this petition to the Mayor and Council). She reviewed the history of this plat - in 1976 PUD townhouses were proposed on this site by Reliance and William /O'Brien Architects - in 1977 homeowners, 500 of the t PUD conceptaandtplat. a Then Councilp and family2andlmaintained pe!tion it. In 1978, 46 and Williams /O'Brieng Architects h and s they were for were pleased with single es- wi th a request for an access road to County Road No. 12. June, 1978 the Council gave preliminary plat approval for 46 homes with the access road to County Road No. 12. opposed to n houses e on s this site forrmany have re reasons - times 1 the Council wisely hundred s chose retain single family homes and they were here to ask the Council to do so again. TIM COWEN , 202 CRESTWOOD TERRACE, stated th15 they had two plat maps that they would like to post - they -were plats of Croff33ff7SSeventh Addition, Fairmeadows and Deerpath, and in the middle is the Interlachen Hills Plat. To their knowledge the Council has never approved a mix of a large number of T_ownhomes in a single family area and never, of course, in their area. The recent development of Oak Glen has 108 townhomes but those are backed up to a golf course -they are not backed up to single family homes. Another one in the boundaries of Stillwater is Charter Oaks - 60 units which are next to a Commercial area. It is their belief that familyuhome change the single ould that does not include the single family homes. The PUD includes only the townhomes - at the Planning Commission meeting of a couple of weeks ago it was stated that the single family homes would serve more or less as r border or z buffer zone for the townhomes - they feel that the 20 single family homes is merely an extension of the existing single family neighborhood and not in any way a "buffer zone ". Deer - path ast year thisdareafhasm19.2 acres in it and they Carecputting 32 February of there s or which is an average on that site of 1.66 homes or lots per acre. in the Croixwood Seventh Addition, which abuts it on the west, there is an average of 3.3 single family homes per acre and in the Fairmeadows Development which goes back about 13 years or so, there are only about three homes per acre all in a single family area. If you look at this new plat, there is a good reason why this tract of land has yet to be developed because it has an extremely difficult terrain and consequently will and should require some very careful well thought out plans and proposals as to how it is to be developed. All of the space is not buildable because of the terrain - because of ponds and outlots and slopes - every proposal which has been before the Council they have only proposed building on about twenty acres - this was the proposal that the Council gave preliminary approval back in 1977 which was 44 single family homes with an access to County Road No. 12, and it has never gone. The pro- posed development that is before the Council tonite there is 1.6 homes per acre in an area, 3 homes per acre in another irea, 3.3 homes per acre in a third location and there are 34 acres in the new plat and if you take all 34 acres and multiply with theoexistingcdensity.up This proposal O like s previous s ones cannot o develop cinc concurrent an come this area because of the tertian, etc. and they are putting an incredible density into this area and in Deerpath they are only building actually on 15 acres of the 19 acres and that comes up which is twenty acres of the k 34 t acres, it three they plan do use here, data from the Counciltpages presented 4and 55 on a the landuuselsurveynandu ome land use distribution. Three of the four streets on their plat dump into small residential streets and not out into major areas. In the handout he called special attention to the fact that the possible development of conflicting kinds of land uses in poor relationship to each other without adequate separation of protective conditions. That is just the density of the buildings, but if you look at the density of the people, the Metro Council they estimate about 3.18 per unit and looking at the Deerpath proposal which would be an addition of about 102 people. Looking at the proposed Interlachen Develop- ment using the 3.18 people per unit times 128 units you are talking 407 people which is three times the building density of what is currently there and four times the population density on basically the same amount of land. They are concerned with the density of buildings, townhomes in a single family area and the increased people. • • • • • • December 15, 1981 RAY ROEM:IICH, 301 Crestwood Terrace, stated three of the streets go into the ,■ existing residential areas. Oak Glen has 116 townhouses and none of those lead out into single family areas and the same is true of the Charter Oaks project. He encelindtheawidth ofuthesen Third streets. He felt the cul- de- sac lonn differ- to drive up the middle of the street. (He cited from page 95, paragraph 5 of would not be fair to Maryknoll Drive and with snow on the streets the cars have the Comprehensive Plan'. JEAN DELANEY, 31 Maryknoll Drive, cited figures from reports of Pat Pahl of the goneotoo0ak1Glen nd 32 h have to go to r Deerpath and this new which have up ave rohalfiofdthelunis for ord one Metro ,Council had allowed only . ELLIOTT 40 MR provided for stated edch the Oakt Glen Plat there was a single sewer service TIMPCOWEN stated that this is not an emotional concern on the part of a few use of thatt residents Hetfeltethaty concern over the that this proposed a difficult piede of property to develop - their concern and hope is that it will be developed wisely and he made reference to the minutes of 1977 when a planned unit development for townhouses was denied by the Council and he listed the reasons given at that time for the denial that adjoining the parcel that the proposed ed multi-family i y use was not compatible with the single family properties and would l are s; and to te atterns the pi inormatio areas rove information oavailable to the thatddensitypwasla concern dandlty the Counc lutonitemtoodeny the PUDrconceptlrequest and continuetasy asking JOANNE SPRAIN, 109 Maryknoll, stated that they could not afford to live ih this townhouse development at the current interest rates and did not feel that it for oun would provide affordable housing young people or young families. STEWART BOSWORTH, 189 Maryknoll, stated he purchased his home a number of years family homes and hetfeltnthatathismdeveloper behind would that o when it went into foreclosure from the previous developer with the understanding that wold be beudevelopedtecomicallytandnhendidtnot back should beaaskedcould not unis ad to support their error in judgment when they purchased this. Their basic premise of tie area seems to be could yet come out that workableusolution e n - he felt people hat this mwould be a dangerous precident especially when it is closest to a single family housing development. He was also concerned with the developer since he indicated a willingness to work with the oethrou and discuss alternatives, but he knew of no effort being he was very concerned that by them to through some of the concerns that the people have voiced if that is an indication of their willingness tha to be cooperative, that they may plow ahead and do things that aren't in the best interest of the le aroun round there. he was ot about is ahmorenore less a e NO around the outside - he g gesture and they are not really interested in developing those and he has trouble imagining that anybody a ouse want to buy a $1e0, 000 house on that size lot and _ have endhpswlisat across "no the B all theewaylaround thatfdevel daner we re u would end p ith to oll be left to weeds because concerns on and nts to live on it. understand City Council has eff orttthstohasmbeengputrintonthese have theutimesanddefforththat then Council has put in deciding this question once before and it would be a dangerous precident to have a reversal at this point - he questioned developers m uoreiandd tow many other ngero might try the same thing in another area of the community and he would like to see this proposal denied. MARK CUSICK, 2519 Interlachen, stated that in their proposal that they would be willing to make Interlachen a dead -end street and this would dump all of the traffic into Croixwood and if they made the Maryknoll end dead-end that Stillwater with thepaccessfonhCountyfRoadn12 would eonlys service the concerns. He coming into felt that and not the people going into town at all in the winter time - the majority of the traffic coming thru Croixwood and Fairmeadows to get to downtown St. Paul which is where the majority of the people work. JACK RIDER, 159 Maryknoll, was concerned with the traffic problems and one thing that has not been mentioned in parkse andcplaygroundsrand hehrealihzed that the v City en reational developed, they have p units is hard pressed for pe for theseupeople. Hehwasaalsuaconcerneduaboutt water - g with no recreation space e+ drainage if they get a lot of heavy rains, there has been a lot of water movement in this area particularly on the west border of ( this property and drainage • • • 66 December 15, 1981 COUNCILMAN MAC DONALD seconded the motion. could upset the water flow in this area and could possibly flood backyards and de- valuating the property. His backyard will abut this property and his property value and the twin homes seem to be a token to get the residents to get around the objections of the past - he was concerned with the size of the lots and that they are narrower and a shallower depth than the average lot adjoining Maryknoll and they will have little or no yard spaces in most cases. He was concerned that once the townhouses were in those lous would be pawned off to the fastest quick- est builder who just wants to throw up "ticky- tacky" houses. He was concerned what the City would look like fifty years from now and this is the last large tract of land of rolling hills left and it would be a tragedy to convertthis most used park in the City of Stillwater into a townhouse development. MR. O'BRIEN stated that they are not talking about building "ticky- tacky" single family or twonhomes - they are talking avout building dwelling units that cost $70 to $80,000 an up to $130,000 and $140,000. They would not rather build single family homes in the portion that is shown undeveloped - they would rather achieve a reasonable density that they can develop economically and retain as much of the existing site character as possible. The single family homes that skirt the perimeter of this site as just that in relationship to a single family area and that is what it is intended to be, and it dies screen the higher density development from the neighbors in the single family area. 'die figure of 3.3 homes per acre are very near to that - it would be 110 units and they are very near to that. They did after the last meeting with the Planning Commission ask about the possibility of a meeting with the neighbors and he was told at that time they did not want to organi * anything until after the Council meeting They want to develop this in the most responsible way they can and they feel that this is a good site for a PUD - that is what a PUD is for - it is to be able to crowd into a certain area - into a corner so that you do not have to use the entire site and the streets are designed according to the design requirements of the City of Stillwater. A letter from Steve Sweetland, 214 Maryknoll Drive was presented, to the Council which was in objection tc this proposal and requested denial of same. COUNCILWOMAN AVISE stated that this was a really difficult issue for her to decide because she is not totally opposed to multi- family dwellings and that it is the way of the future, but she was concerned about the things that she heard here tonite, mainly the high, high density in that small of an area. She did not feel that it is appropriate to put that high of a density in an area that is totally surrounded by single family dwellings. In talking about the sewer figures she was very confused and she asked Mr. Elliott to clarify sone of the figures. MR. ELLIOTT stated that the 718 figure was cited that the City had approved and the fact of the matter is that it is a Metro (buncil estimate of the number of dwelling ,nits that will be built in this area for the '80's and the City has approved 523 units - 383 single family units in Oak Glen and 108 multi - family and 32 single family units in the Deerpath Addition. He wanted to set the record straight with respect to whether the City had granted 718 - it is a Metro Council estimate as to what is going to happen for this decade. COUNCILWOMAN AVISE was also concerned that the City follow the Comprehensive Plan as closely as possible as this plan was not drawn up lightly by any means, there- fore she moved to deny concept approval of the proposed Flamed Unit Development of Interlachen Partnership and that the following Findings be adopted by the Council as the reasons for the denial. 1. That the proposal is in conflict with the goals of the Comprehensive plan that calls for lower density single family uses for the area. 2. That the proposed density would increase the traffic flows onto interior streets of adjacent single family areas. 3. That a PUD is an accessory zoning of the property from a previously approved plat and the property in this plan is in the best interest of the neighborhood. 4. That the Metropolitan Council has made the City agree to limits as to extension policy because of the lack of sewer capacity in the Stillwater Treatment Plant. This proposal would increase the sewage flows to 2.6 times what the previously approved plat of the area called for, and, therefore, would jeopardize the pending Lecuyer - Reichow annexations that have been previously committed to by the Council 5. The proposed development with its high density would seriously depreciate surrounding property values. 6. That the proposed develop;ent is not in harmony with present single family zoning or with the neighborhood and surrounding properties. VOTE ON THE MOTION - -All in favor (The Mayor did not indirate a vote) UNFINISHED BUSINESS 1. On motion of Councilwoman Bodlovick, seconded by Councilman Peterson, the City Clerk was directed to oper.the one bid for the official Advertising for the City for the year 1962. (all in favor) • • • 4 Pla INDIVIDUALS & DELEGATIONS December 15, 1981 The City Clerk read the one bid from the Stillwater Evening Gazette: r� On motion of Councilman Peterson, seconded by Councilwoman Avise, the contract for the official advertising for the City of Stillwater for the year 1982 was awarded to the Stillwater Evening Gazette. (all in favor) 2. On motion of Councilman Peterson, seconded by Councilwoman Bodlovick the Council directed that the City Clerk open the one bid for the sale of six vending machines. (all in favor) The bid was for $10.00 for the six machines - Bidder's name was Richard Reichow, 412 South Seeley Street, Stillwater. On motion of Councilman Peterson, seconded by Councilman MacDonald, the Council rejected the one bid received on the six vending machines. (all in favor) 3. There was discussion on the Cable TV Joint Agreement and Mr. Magnuson presented a propose d withdrawal clause for this agreement which he took from another community - MAYOR JUN(ER felt that it should be passed without the withdrawal clause. COUNCILMAN PETERSON had in the past Z fei t that we should have a withdrawal clause - however, he is inclined td reconsider his position in view of the fact that the need to withdraw if it is going to be there is just as likely to affect Oak Park Heights and Bayport as it will affect Stillwater and he did not have fears at this moment that we are going to be ganged up on these smaller communities in something that is as important as the operation of a Joint Cable TV system - he is reversing himself and he would be willing to vote for the joint and cooperative agreement in its present form without a withdrawal provision. COUNCILWOMAN AVISE stated that she still feels uncomfortable in getting into a fifteen year agreement that we cannot get out of in any way - she feels that her main concern comes because of the precentage of representation that Stillwater will have in comparison to its number of residents and its potential subscribers as opposed to Oak Park Heights and Bayport. She felt that 18 months withdrawal is certainly sufficient - in that period of time, if she understands the terms properly, we have a replacement of at least one member from each City and it would give them time to work out an agreement if they couldn't work the structure of the commission as it was previously - she would prefer to see a withdrawal in there in this form. COUNCILWOMAN BODLOVICR stated that all along they discussed a withdrawal clause and having a Joint Powers without it would be like flipping a coin - she did not strongly object to a withdrawal clause - it will be a 15 year franchise. On motion of Councilwoman Bodlovick, a resolution was introduced "ADOPTING THE JOINT POWERS AGREEMENT FOR CABLE TV" which was received last week, with the correction that least ore member from the City is notified (Article VIII, Section 2 - Special Meetings ) - there would be no withdrawal clause. pni COUNCILMAN PETERSON felt that the Cowell should be unanimous in their approval or rejection of the Joint Powers Agreement - he did not wart to see them split tee on this issue - and continued to explain his reasons for this. After some discussion (btslcilwoman Bodlovick withdrew her motion. On motion of Councilwoman Avise, seconded by Councilman Peterson, a resolution was introduced "ACCEPTING THE JOINT POWERS AGREEMENT WIll THE (01DITION THAT THE WITHDRAWAL CLAUSE WITH ITS AMENDMENT BE ATTACHEr TO SAME." AYES -- Councilwomen Avise and Bodlovick, (buncilmen MacDonald and Peterson NAYS- -None (Mayor Junker did not indicate a vote) PEW B 15I 7ESS 1. On motion of Councilwoman Bodlovick, seconded by Councilwoman Avise the City Attorney made the first reading of "AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 2).01 OF THE STILLWATER CITY CODE BY INCREASING SEWER SERVICE CHARGES ". (all in favor) 2. On motion of Councilman Peterson, seconded by Councilwoman Avise, a resolution was introduced "DIRECTING THE PAYMEPT OF 1HE BILLS ". AYES -- Councilwomen Avise and Bodlovick, Councilmen MacDonald and Peterson and Mayor Junker NAYS- -None (see resolutions) s None at this point in the meeting. it\ • • • Dec<mber 15, 1981 APPLICATIONS. On motion of Councilwoman Bodlovick, seconded by Cou Av theefol Cigarette Licenses were approved for 1982: ) American Legion Club Stillwater 103 South Third Street, J. Lamont Brine Stillwater 219 South Main Street, Croix Oil Co. - John Ogren 103 North Main Street, Stillwater Cub Food Market 1570 Frontage Road West, Stillwater Eagles Lodge Aerie #94 227 South Main Street, Stillwater Erickson Post, Inc. 2500 West Orleans Street, Stillwater Esteban's Mexican Restaurant 423 South Main Street, Stillwater The Freighthouse Restaurant 305 South Water Street, Stillwater Thomas re st r - Wash Stillwater Office Bldg. 14900 Thomas Greeder, Washington County Court Bldg. 14900 - 61st St. No., Stillwater Virginia Myrtle Stillwater Hooley'S Ibwntown Supermarket 405 East Myrtle Street, Stillwater Jim -Beam Rye (James McGovern 6 Patrick Boemer) 124 North Main Street, Stillwater J. L. H., Inc. - John's Bar 3)2 South Main Street, Stillwater Robert L. Keene - RiverCafe 806 South Main Street, Stillwater Kinsel Ligtor Store Stillwater Second and Chestnut Sts, Had Capper Saloon, Inc. 224 South Main Street, Stillwater Meister Corporation 112 North Main Street, Stillwater E. James Meister 901 South Fourth Street, Stillwater Ridtard Muller - Muller Boat Works, Inc. Stillwater Nelson Dairy Store - Janice Young 920 West Olive Street, Stillwater Perkins fake 6 Steak Stillwater 2050 Frontage Road Wes t, Reed Drug Stare - Milton Krelitz 201 South Main Street, Stillwater St. Croix Boom Co. 317 South Main Street, Stillwater (2 machines) St. Croix hug Co. 132 S. Main St., Stillwater Silver lake Restaurant 241 South Main Street, Stillwater Stillwater Country Club F. Second Street, Stillwater (8 nonths) (con tinut d on page 69 ) • u • • 4 • r� IMM 12ceober 15, 1981 Stillwater Lodge #1 A B. P. O. E. (Elks) 110 South Main Street, Stillwater Stillwater Standard Station 204 North Main Street, Stillwater lbm Thai) Food Market 2501 West Orleans Street, Stillwater Vittorio's - Sondca Gozzi 402 South Main Street, Stillwater Lowell Inn, Inc. 10 2 North Second Street, Stillwater - -- On motion of Councilman Peterson, seconded by Councilwoman Avise, the following Regular On Sale Liquor Licerees and Dram Shop Insurance were approve d for 1982 with the exception of Felson Smith Associates until they make a commitment to the Omen as to wit en they will execute their license: (all renewals - all in favor) Freighthouse, Inc. 3)5 South Water Street, Stillwater Virginia Hughes - Hid& n Valley lounge 231 E. Myrtle Street, Stillwater J. L. H., Inc. - John's Bar 302 South Main Street, Stillwater Lowell Inn, Inc. 102 North Second Street, Stillwater James McGovern & Patridc Boemer - Jim -Beam Rye 124 North Main Street, Stillwater Mad Capper Saloon, Inc. 224 South Main Street, Stillwater Meister Corporation 112 North Main Street, Stillwater E. James Meister - Jim Meister's Bar 6 Grill 901 South Fourth Street, Stillwater National Restaurants, Inc. ( Estebans) 423 South Main Street Stillwater St. Croix Boom Co. 317 South Main Street, Stillwater Vittorio's 402 South Main Street, Stillwater - - -On motion of Councilman Peterson. seconded by Councilwoman Avise, the following Sun &y On Sale Liquor Licenses and Dram Shop Insurance were approved with the exception of the Nelson Smith & Associates until they make a commitment to the Council as to when they will execute their license: (all in favor - all renewals) Freigh thouse, Inc. 3)5 South Water Street Stillwater Virginia Hughes - Hidden Valley Lounge 231 E. Myrtle Street, Stillwater J. L. H., Inc. M2 South Main James McGovern 124 North Main Lowell Inn, Inc. 102 North Second Street, Stillwater National Restaurants, Inc. (Estebans) 423 South Main Street, Stillwater Mad Capper Saloon, Inc. 224 South Main Street, Stillwater �. St. Croix Boom Co. - John's Bar Street, Stillwater and Patrick Boemer - Jim -Beam Rye Street, Stillwater 317 South Main Street, Stillwater (continued on page A) s� • • • • g writhe 15, 1981 Vittorio's 402 South Main Street, Stillwater - -On motion of wuncilwoman Bodlovick, seconded by (buncilwoman Avise, the following 3.2 On Sale Beer Licenses were approved for 1982: (all in favor) J. Lamont Brine - Brine's, Inc. Renewal 219 South Main Street, Stillwater Lin Chu - Silver Lake Restaurant Renewal 241 South Main Street, Stillwater ---On motion of Councilwoman Avise, seconded by Councilman MacDonald, the following Off Sale 3.2 Beer Licenses were approved for 1982: (all in favor - all renewals) J. Lamont Brine - Brine's, Inc. 219 South Main Street, Stillwater Cub Food Market 1570 Frontage Road, Stillwater Hooley's Supermarket, Inc. 405 East Myrtle Street, Stillwater Tom Thumb Food Market 2501 West Orleans Street, Stillwater - -On motion of Councilwoman Bodlovick, seconded by Councilman Peterson, the following Gambling License was approved for 1982: (all in favor) Stillwater Aesie 494 - Eagles 227 South Main Street, Stillwater GMR4UNICATIONS None Renewal APPLICATIONS (continued) - - -On motion of Councilwoman Bodlovick, seconded by Councilman Peterson, the following Contractor's Licenses were approved: (all in favor) Carl Bolander & Sons 2933 Pleasant Avenue, Box 8558 Lake Street Station Renewal Minneapolis 55408 Buttweiler's Do all Renewal R. ({3, Alexandria, Mn. 56308 General Gordon Jackson Renewal 812 West Abbott Street, Stillwater Cement Work - Masonry Miller Excavating, Inc. Excavators Renewal 3636 Stagecoach TY., Stillwater Mulcahy Drywall Renewal 2576 East Seventh Street, North St. Paul Suburban Lighting, Inc. c/o Ed Larson Renewal 6077 Lake Elmo Ave., N., Stillwater Swager Bros., Inc. Renewal 5898 Omaha Avenue North Stillwater General CONSULTING ENGINEERS REPORT MR. ELLIOTT explained to the Council something that he had received from Oak Park Heights relating to a drainage problem in the south part of the City afStillwater - he explained the drainage maps to the City Council and that there are some areas in the City that contribute to this drainage - it would be the Cemetery property and Oak Park Heights Elementary School - there is roughly 16 acres of the City into their 65 acre drainage area and they are asking that the City join with them in the sharing of the costs. He felt that if there was a joint hearing that these people would like to have their participation denied in this project in the sharing of the cost - it would be about $18,000 for that area in the City. The hearing will be held in January on the project and they would like the Stillwater input prior to that hearing date. MR. MAGNUSON felt that it would be difficult to assess anybody for that work even though it might have benefits to them since they have contributed water to the • • • • • December 15, 1981 7 watershed - it is a developed area and it is hard to come back and assess these people - it is a question as to whether or not the City wants to participate from the General Fund in the project. Looking at the other side he knew that the City would like to have Baytown participate in our downstream improvements and we felt that it would be reasonable for them to participate in it as they had 230 acres and they turned the City down. This is something for the Council for future con- sideration and the water does go in there. This is policy question - if we were looking at it on the other end we would be asking for cooperation from somebody that contributes to our problem. MR. ELLIOTT felt that this project would be very difficult to assess and to prove a beneift to these people, and the letter from their engineer indicated a cost of $26,000.00. He explained exactly how they had calculated this and how he felt it should be calculated, and the maximum they came up with was $18,000.00. There would have to be a joint improvement hearing like the City had with the Township for the lift station for Oak Glen. On motion of Councilman Peterson, seconded by Councilwoman Bodlovick, that the Council notify Oak Park Heights at this time we do not wish to participate for the reason that the assessment for the supposed improvement would be impossible to relate to an improvement so to speak because we are talking about the long established drainage problem and we are not financially able. (al in favor) CITY CLERK'S REPORT 1. On motion of Councilwoman Bodlovick, seconded by Councilwoman Avise, the Council set the hearing date of January 5, 1981 at 7:30 P. M. for the following Planning Commission Cases: (all in favor) I'6 Case No. 436 - Dallager Estates Plat - preliminary approval and rezoning Case No. 439 - James E. Wilkins for a variance to construct two townhouse buildings. 2. On motion of Councilwoman Bodlovick, seconded by Councilwoman Avise, a resolution was introduced "VACATING AN EASEMENT ON THE OAK GLEN GOLF COURSE ". 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 Peterson, a resolution was introduced "CALLING FOR A PUBLIC HEARING ON A PROPOSAL FOR A COMMERCIAL FACILITIES DEVELOPMENT PROJECT PURSUANT TO THE MINNESOTA MUNICIPAL INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT ACT AUTHORIZING THE PUBLICATION OF A NOTICE OF SAID HEARING" (Grand Garage and Gallery). AYES -- Councilwomen Avise and Bodlovick, Councilmen MacDonald and Peterson and Mayor Junker NAYS - -None (see resolutions) MOO • •, 1 CITY COORDINATOR'S REPORT 1. On motion of Councilwoman Avise, seconded by Councilman MacDonald, the Council authorized the closing of the City offices at noon on December 24 and December 31, 1981. (all in favor) • 2. On motion of Councilman MacDonald, seconded by Councilwoman Avise, the Council authorized Short - Elliott- Hendrickson to review the Washington County Comprehensive Plan as recommended by Mr. Kriesel. (all in favor) COUNCIL REQUEST ITEMS COUNCILWOMAN AVISE asked if there was a joint meeting with Stillwater Township scheduled and MAYOR JUNKER stated that he was waiting to hear from them on this matter. QUESTIONS FROM PRESS REPRESENTATIVES None • • 7 November 17, 1981 November 17, 19 81 Ibvember 24, 19 81 Ihce*er 1, 1981 ORDINANCES December 15, 1981 APPROVAL OF MINUTES On motion of Councilwoman Bodlovick, seconded by Councilwoman Avise, minutes of the following meetings were approved: (all in favor) Regular Meeting Recessed Meeting Special Meeting Regular Meeting 4 :30 P. M. 7:33 P. M. 6:3) P. M. 7: 3) P. M. First Reading - Amending Section 29.01 - Sewer Service Rates RESOLUTIONS The following resolutions were read and on roll call were unanimously adapted: 1. lirecting the Payment of the Bills 2. Rearing for Industrial Bonds - Grand Garage and Gallery - January 5th, 1982 3. Hearing for Industrial Bonds - American Polywater Company - January 5, 1982 4. Sale of Bonds for Margos Valley Dental 5. Vacation of Easements in Oak Glen Golf Course 6. Adopting the Assessment Roll for Local Improvement No. 191. ** 7. .* Adopting the Cable T. V. Agreement . * lb not publish ADJOURNMENT Attest- d1... eP Ci Clerk ** (repassed on February 2, 1982 and published per the City Attorney) On motion of Councilman MacDonald, seconded by Councilwoman Avise, the meeting adjourned at 10:35 P. M. Mayor • • • •