Loading...
10-19-1988 CC MIN - SPECIAL e SPECIAL MEETING OF THE ELK RIVER CITY COUNCIL HELD AT THE ELK RIVER CITY HALL OCTOBER 19. 1988 MEMBERS PRESENT: Mayor Gunkel. Councilmembers Holmgren. Tralle. Schuldt. and Dobel MEMBERS ABSENT: None ALSO PRESENT: Stephen Rohlf. Building and Zoning Administrator 1. Pursuant to due call and notice thereof. the meeting of the Elk River City Council was called to order by Mayor Gunkel at 10:00 p.m. 2. Consider Multi le Principle Use Buildings on a Lot (Seven-l6 Unit Apartments by CHW Properties e Stephen Rohlf. Building and Zoning Administrator. briefly explained the proposal and went through the details of the 25 recommendations for approval of this project by the Planning Commission. Mr. Rohlf indicated that the developer complied completely with 24 of the 25 Planning Commission recommendations. The one condition that the developer did not fully comply with was the elimination of building #6. Mr. Rohlf explained that the Planning Commission's concern with building #6 was that the three story side of the building with balconies faced the single family homes adjacent to the property. Mike Podawiltz. representing CHW Properties. explained that instead of eliminating building #6. they turned it around so the two-story side faced the single family dwellings and moved it another 30 feet from the property line. making it a total of 49 feet from the property line adjacent to the single family homes. Councilmember Holmgren asked questions regarding the tot park showed on the developers site plan. He asked if it would be hard to place people with children in units next to the tot park. The developer indicated that it would be hard and that initially it could be done. but as vacancies occurred. you cannot discriminate against people with children. It would be unlikely that they could consistantly keep the tenants with children in units adjacent to the tot park. Councilmember Schuldt questioned th~ developer as far as how many caretakers would be staffed in the complex. Mr. Podawiltz indicated that there would be two caretakers for the entire complex. plus one key person per building who would vaccuum and keep an eye on the general condition of the buildings. e The Council and add more basically the apartments. asked Mr. Podawiltz why he could not eliminate building #6 units on the other buildings. Mr. Podawiltz indicated that problem with that would be a totally new design for the e e e Page 2 City Council Minutes October 19, 1988 Counci1member Holmgren questioned the developer on how he would eliminate the onsite parking from being taken up by junk cars, snowmobile trailers, etc. Mr. Podawi1tz indicated that the lease the tenants enter into to move into this complex would eliminate that problem. He further went on to say that the lease would also limit excessive amounts of people in one unit. The Council further questioned the developer on what else was in their lease agreement. The developer indicated that the lease agreement would allow cats, dogs, birds, but they would be limited to 30 pounds in weight. COUNCILMEMBER TRALLE MOVED TO APPROVE MULTIPLE PRINCIPLE APARTMENT BUILD INGS ON THIS SITE REQUESTED BY CHW PROPERTIES WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: 1. THAT THE WATER- SERVICE BE LOOPED IN A MANNER ACCEPTABLE TO THE CITY ENGINEER AND FIRE CHIEF. 2. THAT THE PETITIONER'S PROVIDE THE FOUR FIRE HYDRANTS AS RECOMMENDED BY THE FIRE CHIEF. 3. THAT THE STORM DRAINAGE CALCULATIONS BE REVIEWED AND APPROVED BY THE CITY ENGINEER. 4. THAT FINAL PLANS AND SPECS (WORKING DRAWINGS) FOR THE SEWER, WATER, AND STORM DRAINAGE BE REVIEWED AND FOUND ACCEPTABLE BY THE CITY ENGINEER, FIRE CHIEF AND SEWER SUPERINTENDENT. 5. THAT EACH BUILDING WITHIN THE PROJECT BE PROVIDED WITH STAND PIPES IN EACH STAIRWELL FOR FIRE PROTECTION. 6. THAT TRASH RECEPTACLES BE ENCLOSED AND ARE DESIGNED ARCHITECTURALLY HARMONIOUS WITH THE DESIGN OF THE BUILDING. 7. THAT THE LIGHTING ON THE SITE BE WITHIN THE STANDARDS OF THE CITY ORDINANCE AND THAT OVERFLOW LIGHTING TO ADJACENT PROPERTIES ALSO MEET THE CITY ORDINANCE STANDARDS. O. THAT THE SIT! SHALL CONFORM TO CITY CODE FOR SIGNAGE. ~. THAT THE APPLICANT VERIFY WHETHER THERE IS AN EASEMENT FOR THE SANITARY SEWER LOCATED ON THE PROPERTY.. 10. THAT II' THERE IS NOT AN EASEMENT FOR THAT SEWER LINE, THAT THE PETITIONER GRANT SAID EASEMENT TO THE CITY. 11. THAT PRIOR TO ANY CONSTRUCTION, THE DEVELOPER WILL NEED TO PROVIDE DETAILED PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS CERTIFIED BY A PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER FOR REVIEW BY THE CITY STAFF. 12. THAT THE PAlUCING AND DRIVES WITHIN THE PROJECT BE HARD SURFACED AND DUST FREE WITH CONCRETE CURBING AND THE PARKING STALLS STRIPED. Page 3 e City Council Minutes October 19. 1988 13. THAT THE NORTH ACCESS ORIGINALLY SHOWN ON GATES AVENUE BE ELIMINATED. THAT BUILDINGS 3 & 4 BE MOVED TO THE WEST TO ACCOMMODATE ADDITIONAL GREEN SPACE ON ADJACENT EVANS AVENUE AND THAT BUILDING fl6 BE MOVED TO 49 FT. OFF OF THE WESTERN PROPERTY LINE. THESE AND ALL OTHER SETBACKS SHOULD CORRESPOND TO THE REVISED SITE PLAN PRESENTED BY THE DEVELOPER. 14. THAT A 7 FT. HIGH OPAQUE FENCE MADE OF CEDAR WITH CRUSHED ROCK BENEATH IT BE LOCATED ALONG THE PROPERTY LINE BETWEEN THE APARTMENTS AND ADJACENT FAMILY DWELLINGS IN THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF THE SITE. 15. THAT THE DEVELOPER INSTALL A SIDEWALK ADJACENT TO HIS PROPERTY ALONG GATES AVENUE. 16. THAT THE DEVELOPER PLANT OPAQUE EVERGREENS ALONG THEIR COMMON PROPERTY LINE WITH AL HOPPER'S NORTHERN PROPERTY LINE AND IN FRONT OF EVANS AND GATES AVENUE TO HELP SCREEN CAR LIGHTS FROM THE PROJECT FROM BEING A NUISANCE TO ADJACENT PROPERTY. 17. THAT THE DEVELOPER CONSTRUCT A 3-4 FT. HIGH BERM ALONG GATES AVENUE. e 18. THAT NO PARKING BE ALLOWED ADJACENT TO THIS SITE ALONG GATES AVENUE. 19. THAT A THREE HOUR PARKING LIMIT BE POSTED ON EVANS AVENUE. 20. THAT AS MUCH EXISTING VEGETATION AS POSSIBLE BE MAINTAINED ALONG THE SITE'S COMMON BOUNDARY WITH AL HOPPER'S NORTH BOUNDARY. 21. THAT THE DEVELOPER BE CHARGED $200 PER UNIT FOR PARK DEDICATION EXCLUDING ONE UNIT THAT COULD BE BUILT WITHOUT A ZONING APPROVAL NEEDED FOR A TOTAL OF 26 UNITS OR $19.200. COUNCILMEMBER HOLMGREN SECONDED THE MOTION. THE MOTION CARRIED 5-0. 2. Other Business 2.1 Recycling Task Force Stephen Rohlf. Building and Zoning Administrator indicated that recently he had put in a lot of time studying recycling. He further indicated that he felt recycling is a must and that Elk River should do whatever possible to encourage it. He asked the Council to approve a task force to develop a study on recycling. The Council was unanimously in support of Mr. Rohlf's proposal to create a task force to develop a study on recycling. The Council wanted Mr. Rohlf to place an ad in the paper to have people apply for this task force. e 2.2 School Board Levy Referendum Mayor Gunkel brought up the topic of the School Board's Levy Referendum. She indicated that she would like to see a united Council show support for the referendum. Page 4 e City Council Minutes October 19. 1988 Councilmember Tral1e indicated that he was in support of the referendum and felt that it was not just a school district concern but a community concern. Councilmember Schuldt disagreed and felt that governmental agencies should not get involved with the dealings of other governmental agencies. Mayor Gunkel felt that if the total Council could not support the referendum that she would support it individually as Mayor. She felt that it was in keeping with other activities initiated by the City to better the community. Councilmember Dobel could see both sides of the issue. Counci1member Holmgren was opposed to City support although he personally favored the referendum. Councilmember Holmgren felt it was not the City's place to oppose or support a School Board Referendum. 3. Adjournment e There being no further business. COUNCILMEMBER TRALLE MOVED TO ADJOURN THE MEETING OF THE ELK RIVER CITY. COUNCIL.COUNCILMEMBER HOLMGREN SECONDED THE MOTION. THE MOTION CARRIED 5-0. The meeting adjourned at approximately 11:20 p.m. Respectfully submitted. ~/3-1# ~ Stephen Rohlf Building and Zoning Administrator e