Loading...
10-29-1984 CC MIN r- . Minutes of the Regular Scheduled Meeting of the Elk River City Council Held at the Elk River Public Library Monday, October 29, 1984 Members Present: Mayor Hinkle, Councilmembers Engstrom, Duitsman, Schuldt, and Gunkel. Members Absent: None 1. The meeting was called to order at 7:30 p.m. by Mayor Hinkle. 2. Agenda COUNCILMEMBER DUITSMAN MOVED TO APPROVE THE OCTOBER 29, 1984 CITY COUNCIL AGENDA. COUNCILMEMBER GUNKEL SECONDED THE MOTION. THE MOTION PASSED 4-0. 3. Open Mike Mr. Cliff Lundberg appeared before the City Council regarding the no parking signs in front of his building at the corner of Jackson and 4th Street. Mr. Lundberg indicated that the no parking signs have been placed in front of his building and further indicated that the City Council has not adopted a reso- lution authorizing those no parking signs. The City Administrator indicated that the state has indicated that the no parking signs can remain on Jackson Avenue as it is a state highway until the necessary resolution has been adopted. authorizing the no parking signs. The City Administrator further indicated that he will follow up with the state regarding the necessary resolution and further indicated that he felt the signs could remain until the state submits the resolution. General discussion was carried on regarding written authorization from the state for the no parking signs. Mr. Lundberg indicated that he did not want no parking signs on Fourth Street and further indicated that he felt a limit of 20 feet from the intersection was all that was necessary. Councilmember Gunkel indicated that she felt the no parking signs should remain as she has received a number of phone calls regarding the visibility at the intersection of 4th and Jackson. Councilmember Schuldt indicated that he felt the no parking signs should remain. Further discussion was carried on regarding the visibility at the Intersection of 4th and Jackson if cars were allowed to park in front of Mr. Lundberg's building. 4. East Main Street Assessment/Public Hearing Mayor Hinkle indicated that the assessment hearing is for the East Main Street Improvement Project. Mayor Hinkle introduced John Gilbertson of Consulting Engineers Diversified to review the project with the public. Mr. John Gilbertson indicated that the assessment hearing is for the East Main Street Improvement project which included street improvements, storm sewer, water main and sanitary sewer. Mr. Gilbertson indicated that the pro- ject was started in conjunction with the Highway #169 signal at the intersection ~ . City Council Minutes October 29, 1984 Page Two of Highway 11169 and Main Street. Mr. Gilbertson reviewed the cost of the project as follows: $12.50 a front foot $524.28 per waited acre $685.54 a unit 1~ inch at $764.19 a unit 6 inch main at $2,872.40 a unit Mr. Gilbertson indicated that the street improvement extends from Railroad Drive across 169 to the intersection of County 12 and 13 and Main Street. Mr. Gilbertson further indicated that approximately 150 feet from Railroad Drive will be completed with the Highway #10 project in 1985. Street Improvement Storm Drainage Sanitary Sewer Water Main Mayor Hinkle opened the public hearing. Mrs. Werner indicated that she was told that a 6 inch would cost the same as a 1~ inch water main, and further indicated that her assessment did not show that same cost. Mr. Gilbertson indicated that the original proj ect planned for ; four connections to the Werner property and something less than that was con- structed at the time of the project. Mr. Earl Hoh1en questioned why he was billed for two water main connections. The City Administrator indicated that Mrs. Werner was originally assessed for four services and that it was agreed that the cost was too much, therefore, Mrs. Werner agreed to two connections; one a 6 inch connection and a water at 6 inch and one at 1~ inch connection. Discussion was carried on regarding the Werner property and the services necessary for the Warner property. Mrs. Werner indicated that she was told the 6 inch water main would cost the same as the 1~ inch water main. She further indicated that she felt the assessment was a great burden to the few commercial properties in the project. Mayor Hinkle indicated that the City Council felt the commercial properties benefited from such improvements and,therefor~ the commercial properties should pay more. Ms. Cathy Swanberg representing Mr. Earl Hoh1en indicated her objection to the assessment hearing. Ms. Swanberg indicated that she felt the water main costs were too high and further indicated that at the time of the sanitary sewer construction it was not constructed properly as the trailer court must pump their sewage twice a day. Discussion was carried on regarding the Earl Hoh1en trailer court and the service of the sanitary sewer to that property. Discussion was carried on regarding the depth of the sewer line. Mr. Hoh1en indicated that he did not need the 1~ inch water service to his property. Mr. Hoh1en further indicated that he did not receive a hearing notice and further indicated that he felt the ~ . City Council Minutes October 29, 198~ Page Three 1~ inch water main was a total loss. General discussion was carried on regarding the Earl Hoh1en property and whether the property was zoned commercial. Discussion was carried on regarding MSA funding and the cost of the $12.50 a front foot for the road improvement. The City Administrator indicated that the East Main Street project was the third MSA project the City Council has authorized in current years. The City Admin- istrator further indicated that the School Street Project and the East Main Street Project were treated identical, and further indicated that the Gates Avenue Project was treated differently as it went into the planned unit develop- ment. The City Administrator indicated that previous to the planned unit develop- ment, Gates Avenue was a dead end road and the residents along Gates Avenue could have been satisfied with the road as it was. The City Administrator indicated that the Gates Avenue Improvement was of no benefit to the adjoining property owners, and further indicated that the planned unit development was assessed $40 a front foot for the road to the planned unit development. Mr. Howard Johnson indicated that he felt the residents along East Main Street did not receive benefit as assessed. Mr. Johnson further indicated that he felt the p.eop1e in the City of Elk River received more benefits than the residents along East Main Street. Mr. Johnson further indicated that he felt the taxes were extremely high in Elk River, and that people are angry and looking for tax release. Discussion was carried on regarding the islands at the intersection of Gates Avenue and Main Street. Mr. Jan McClain indicated that she felt the whole city of Elk River should pay for the Main Street Improvement Project. Discussion was carried on regarding the detour necessary for the improvement of Highway 1110 ill'l 1985. Mr. Larry Farber expressed his objection to the turn lanes in front of his pro- perty for traffic to turn from Main Street onto Gates Avenue. Discussion was carried on regarding the residents problems with the contractors on the construction of the East Main Street Project. Mrs. Werner suggested that the City Council consider assessing the project over a longer time than the ten years as proposed. Further discussion was carried on regarding the inconvenience to the residents and commercial properties during the construction of the East Main Street Project. Counci1member Gunkel indicated that the project was in her ward and further indicated that she did not receive any call of complaints regarding inconveniences in problems with the construction. Discussion was carried on regarding snow removal on the sidewalk along the East Main Street. Mr. Phil Ha1s, Street Superintendent indicated that the people along East Main Street will receive the same service as the downtown area. The r- . City Council Minutes October 29, 1984 Page Four snow will be hauled from the gutter and the property owners are to get the snow off of the sidewalk. Councilmember Duitsman questioned the cost the Utilities are to pay for the insulated water lines and other costs associated with the water lines. Mr. Gilbertson indicated that he would get a breakdown to the Utility Commission for such costs. Further discussion was carried on regarding the 6" water main to the Werner property. Mrs. Werner indicated that she felt the 6" main was unnecessary. ~The City Administrator indicated that if the building were placed on the property, it would require sprinkling and a 6" line would be necessary. The City Administrator reviewed the amended costs for the assessment of the Werner property. The City Administrator indicated that the property was orignially assessed $3,636.59 for the water main and proposed that the property be assessed $2,336.59. COUNCILMEMBER SCHULDT MOVED TO FOLLOW ASSESSMENT FOR THE WERNER PROPERTY TO MEMBER DUITSMAN SECONDED THE MOTION. ENGSTROM OPPOSED. THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION AND AMEND THE $2,336.59 FOR THE WATER MAIN. COUNCIL- THE MOTION PASSED 3-1. COUNCILMEMBER Further discussion was carried on regarding the assessment of the Werner property. IMrs. Werner indicated that the property was underdeveloped and further indicated to develop the property would cost a tremendous amount of money based upon the current assessments to the property. Discussion was carried on regarding the l~ times charged for weighted acres. Councilmember Duitsman indicated that the City Council has used weighted acres in the past and further indicated that he believes there is a greated benefit to the commercial properties and,therefore,supported the 1.5 times residential cost for commercial. Further discussion was carried regarding the commercial zone and the assess- ment rate for a commercial zone. COUNCILMEMBER DUITSMAN MOVED TO AUTHORIZE THE ASSESSMENT TO THE COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES AT l~ TIMES THE RESIDENTIAL COSTS FOR THE STREET IMPROVEMENT. COUNCILMEMBER SCHULDT SECONDED THE MOTIDN. THE MOTION PASSED 4-0. Further discussion was carried on regarding the Hohlen property. Further discussion was carried on regarding the street improvement project and assessing of the turn lanes on the East Main Street. Mr. Larry Farber indicated that his property had lost value based upon the fact that the turn lanes were placed in front of his property. COUNCILMEMBER GUNKEL MOVED TO CHANGE MR. FARBER'S STREET ASSESSMENT TO $400.00. COUNCILMEMBER SCHULDT SECONDED THE MOTION. THE MOTION FAILED 0-4. r . . . City Council Minutes October 29, 1984 Page F;i\n~ Discussion was carried on regarding the comparison of the East Main Street Project and the proposed West Main Street Project in the future. Councilmember Schuldt indicated that he felt if Mr. Farber received a re- duction in his street assessment it would be unfair to all other residents along East Main Street and it would cause a negative precedent to the future assessment of the West Main Street Project. Further discussion was carried on regarding the Earl Hohlen property and the 6" line versus l!z" line. Mr. Hohlen indicated that a 6" line would have been more benefits than the l!z" line placed to his property. Councilmember Duitsman indicated that he felt Mr. Hohlen had a legitimate complaint if he had not received notice of the assessment. COUNCILMEMBER DUITSMAN MOVED TO ACCEPT THE ASSESSMENT ROLE AS PROPOSED WITH THE AMENDMENT OF THE ASSESSMENT TO THE HOHLEN PROPERTY AND TO THE WERNER PROPERTY. COUNCILMEMBER GUNKEL SECONDED THE MOTION. THE MOTION PASSED 5-0. 5. Varner and Hommes Administrative Subdivision - Continued Public Hearing The City Administrator indicated that at the October 15th City Council Meeting and the October 22nd City Council Meeting, the City Council voted to continue public hearings for Mr. Howard Hommes and Mr. Donald Varner respectively as each request involved an administrative subdivision and a private road extending off the City owned gravel road. The City Administrator indicated that the issue is a concern regarding the nature and density of development on City owned gravel roads and the impact that development has on the quality of the road and the maintenance cost to the City. The City Administrator indicated that he discussed the issue with Mr. Phil Hals, the Street Superintendent and Mr. Rick Breezee, the Building and Zoning Administrator, with the consensus that it is hard to determine what the fine line is between how many parcels do not create a problem, and when does that additional parcel create a problem. ' The City Administrator indicated that currently the city allows 2!z acre parcels on a gravel road with no restrictions as to the number of private ,roads, off from City owned gravel roads. The City Administrator indicated that the City's Attorney suggested the City Council change the density from 2!z acres to 5 acres on unimproved roads and to not permit an extension of private roads onto gravel roads. The City Admin- istrator indicated that the City Council could change the zoning ordinance to change the density or the City Council could allow private roads off from gravel roads and amend the City's road standards. Mayor Hinkle opened the public hearing. Mr. Howard Hommes indicated that he wanted to subdivide his property to put another house onto the property. Mr. Hommes indicated that he has 9.6 acres and, therefore would not be able to fit into the five acre minimum requirement should the Council change the zoning ordinance. ~ City Council Minutes October 29, 1984 . Page SiX' Mr. Varner questioned the definition of a private road. Mr. Rick Breezee, Building and Zoning Administrator, indicated that a private road could be compared to a driveway but it must fit the standards of the City to allow for emergency access. Discussion was carried on regarding the proposed administrative subdivision for the Varner property. Councilmember Engstrom indicated that people move to the country and buy large parcels of land then want the City and City services, and yet not want to pay for those eity services. Councilmember Engstrom indicated that he felt maybe it was time to increase the minimum size of lots in the northern section of the City. Councilmember Duitsman indicated he felt he could support five acre lots on gravel roads. Councilmember Gunkel indicated that the Planning Commission has looked at the overall plan for increased lot size in the northern part of the City. Council- member Gunkel further indicated that she felt the City Council could consider a change to the road maintenance policy, but further indicated that the problem is that two requests have been received by the City Council for administrative subdivisions and these requests are caught in the midst of a controversy. Councilmember Gunkel further indicated that the two requests should be considered as the City Ordinance states at the time the requests were received. Councilmember Schuldt suggested that the Council consider placing"a moratorium on private roads extending to City owned gravel roads. Discussion was carried on regarding the assessment as proposed for 2l8th Avenue improvement. Mr. Hommes indicated that he would be willing to accept an assessment on the second parcel of property should the City Council approve his administrative subdivision. Mr. Dehn indicated that he would be in favor of the City Council assessing both parcels of Mr. Hommes property should the administrative subdivision request be granted as he accepted an equal portion to the assessment even though he has 2~ acres of property compared to the average 10 acre parcel 0 f property on the 2l8th road improvement. Mr. Rick Breezee indicated that a moratorium would be appropriate until the Planning Commission could consider what would be an appropriate of homes on private roads that could abut gravel roads. COUNCILMEMBER GUNKEL MOVED TO APPROVE THE HOMMES ADMINISTRATIVE SUBDIVISION REQUEST WITH THE CONDITION THAT MR. HOMMES ENTER INTO. A PRIVATE ROAD AGREEMENT WITH THE CITY OF. ELK RIVER. COUNCILMEMBER SCHULDT SECONDED THE MOTION. THE MOTION PASSED 3-0. COUNCILMEMBER DUITSMAN ABSTAINED. COUNCILMEMBER ENGSTROM MOVED TO APPROVE THE VARNER ADMINISTRATIVE SUBDIVISION REQUEST. COUNCILMEMBER GUNKEL SECONDED THE MOTION. THE MOTION PASSED 4-0. COUNCILMEMBER GUNKEL MOVED TO PLACE A MORATORIUM ON ADMINISTRATIVE SUBDIVISIONS INVOLVING PRIVATE ROAD AGREEMENTS TO CITY OWNED GRAVEL ROADS. COUNCILMEMBER ENGSTROM SECONDED THE MOTION. THE MOTION PASSED 4-0. ~ . . City Council Minutes October 29, 1984 Page Seven COUNCILMEMBERENGSTROM MOVED TO ELIMINATE THE J1~ INCH WATER MAIN CHARGE TO THE EARL HOHLEN PROPERTY IN THE EAST MAIN STREET ASSESSMENT HEARING. COUNCIL- MEMBER GUNKEL SECONDED THE MOTION. THE MOTION PASSED 4-0. 6. Trunk Water Crossing B~rthel Planned Unit Development to Barrington Planned Unit Development Assessments/Public Hearing The City Administrator indicated that construction was recently completed on a 16 inch water main running from Freeport Avenue in the Barthel Planned Unit Development east under Highway 169 and connecting to an existing 12" water main on Dodge Avenue in the Barrington Place PUD. The City Administrator indicated that the total cost of the water trunk project is estimated to be $80,700 and further indicated that the property proposed to be assessed for the trunk water improvement is located exclusively within the PUD. The City Administrator indicated that it is prop.osed to assess the owners of the Barthel PUD for 490 feet of 12" water main and further indicated that the total assess- ment for thePUD would be 490 feet on both sides for a total of 980 feet times $19.20 per front foot for a total of $18,816. The City Administrator further indicated that the owners of the planned unit development would like the City Council to consider the owners paying for a shorter distance, therefore, they are proposing an approximate $4,000 reduction in the assessment. Mr. Dave Wolfe representing the Barthel Planned Unit Development indicated that he felt the property was not getting the benefit as proposed and therefore, submitted a letter of objection to the assessments. Discussion was carried on regarding the length of the water main in the Barrington Planned Unit Development. The City Administrator indicated that the water line went to the McDonald property. General discussion was carried on regarding benefit to the Barthel Planned Unit Development. COUNCILMEMBER DUITSMAN MOVED TO APPROVE THE ASSESSMENT TO THE BARTHEL PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT FOR THE WATER MAIN AT AN AMOUNT OF 20% OF THE COST OF THE PROJECT AT A DISTANCE OF APPROXIMATELY 420 FEET. COUNCILMEMBER GUNKEL SECONDED THE MOTION. THE MOTION PASSED 4-0. The actual assessment of the trunk water main to the Barthel Planned Unit Development was for 841.1 feet at $19.20 a square foot for a total amount of $16,149.12. 7. The City Facilities Referendum Discussion was carried on regarding what the City Council and City Staff could do to provide information to the citizens for the city facilities referendum issue. Councilmember Gunkel indicated that she has gotten five different people to call residents in her ward regarding the referendum issue. r- . . . City Council Minutes October 29, 1984 Page Eight Discussion was carried on regarding how much more information could be pro- vided to the citizens prior to the election. It was the consensus of the City Council that no further action could be taken beyond the newsletter to be mailed on Wednesday prior to the election. 8. Overhead Costs Councilmember Gunkel indicated that she had some problems with the inclusion of legal costs in the Heavenly Hills assessment. Councilmember Gunkel further indicated that she felt she did what she thought was right at the time. Councilmember Gunkel further indicated that she felt the City Council should have anticipated problems as the project was completed because of petitions by the residents. Councilmember Gunkel further indicated that she felt the City Council should consider a policy that a project would not be completed unless 75% of those affected were in favor of the project and further in- dicated that she felt the costs for legal contingency should be built into the project. Councilmember Gunkel further indicated that she felt the City Council should set guidelines for the City Staff. Mayor Hinkle indicated that he felt the right of appeal was taken away from the citizens and felt that the City Council action to add $30,000 for legal contingencies was wrong. The City Administrator indicated that a supplemental assessment hearing has been scheduled and further indicated that at that supplemental assessment hearing the City Council can remove the $30,000 contingency costs. General discussion was carried on regarding the Heavenly Hills issue. 9. Louie's Bowl The City Administrator indicated that the City has not received payment of the liquor license of the operator's of Louies Bowl. COUNCILMEMBER DUITSMAN MOVED TO SUSPEND THE LIQUOR LICENSE UNTIL LOUIES BOWL HAS PERFORMED WITH THE CITY'S REQUIREMENTS AND SHOULD THEY NOT COMPLY WITHIN TWO WEEKS THE CITY COUNCIL SHOULD CONSIDER REVOCATION OF THE LIQUOR LICENSE. COUNCILMEMBER ENSTROM SECONDED THE MOTION. THE MOTION PASSED 4-0. There being no further business, COUNCILMEMBER GUNKEL MOVED. THAT THE MEETING BE ADJOURNED. COUNCILMEMBER DUITSMAN SECONDED THE MOTION. THE MOTION PASSED 4-0. Respectfully submitted, ,Q/J..#/t. V~ Phyllis Boedigheimer City Clerk/Treasurer M PB:st