Loading...
112994 CC Reg Min .. ~ . . . CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 29, 1994 COUNCIL CHAMBERS 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD 7:00 P.M. MINUTES 1. CONVENE CITY COUNCIL MEETING Mayor Brancel called the meeting to order at 7:08 p.m. A. Roll Call Present: Mayor Brancel; Councilmembers Benson, Daugherty, Lewis, and Stover; Administrator Hurm, City Engineer Dresel, City Attorney Keane, Planning Director Nielsen, and Financial Director Rolek. B. Review Agenda Daugherty moved, Stover seconded to approve the agenda for November 29, 1994. Motion passed 5/0. 2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES City Council Regular Minutes - November 14, 1994 Benson moved, Daugherty seconded to approve the Regular City Council Meeting Minutes of November 14, 1994. Motion passed 4/0. Stover abstained. 3. CONSENT AGENDA Mayor Brancel read the Consent Agenda for November 29, 1994. Stover moved, Daugherty seconded to approve the Motions on the Consent Agenda and to adopt the Resolutions therein: A. RESOLUTION NO. 94-95, "Application for Conveyance of Tax-Forfeited Lands for Public Purposes." PID Nos. 31-117-23-43-0001 and 31-117-23- 43-0004. B . Motion to Approve a Drug Testing Policy for Commercial Vehicle Drivers and Executive Summary, and to Approve a Drug Testing Service Agreement with Business Health Services, Waconia, MN. C. Motion to Approve Change Order No. 1 Reducing the Amount for Improvements Project No. PK-94-9, Handicap Accessibility. D. RESOLUTION NO. 94-96, "A Resolution Granting Setback Variances and a Variance to Expand a Nonconforming Structure to Howard LerohI." 25585 Birch Bluff Road. . . . REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MINUTES November 29, 1994 - PAGE 2 E. Motion to Approve Tonka Bay Liquor Store Lease and Cooperative Agreement. (For a three year term.) F. RESOLUTION NO. 94-97, "A Resolution Accepting Streets, Sanitary Sewer and Curbs in the Plat of Spruce Hill." G . Motion to Authorize the Hiring of Ms. Marlene HaptonstaII to the position of part-time Clerical Assistant. Motion passed 5/0. 4. PUBLIC HEARING 7:15 P.M. - TRUTH IN TAXATION Mayor Brancel stated public comment regarding the City's 1995 Operating Budget and Capital Improvement Program will be accepted at this meeting, however, Council action will be taken on December 19, 1994 following the final public hearing. Rolek presented a summary of the City's 1995 Budget detailed in the document dated November 29, 1994 "City of Shorewood, 1995 Proposed Budgets and Capital Improvement Program, 1995- 1999." He stated the overall 1995 Budget of $2,390,985.00 is 2% lower than the 1994 Budget. He reviewed each of the revenue and expenditure components of the proposed budget. There is no change in the property tax levy; it will remain the same as in 1993 and 1994. Rolek reviewed the components of the total property tax statement (Truth-in- Taxation Statement). He stated the City's portion is 13% and that over the past 6 years, the City's 'portion has decreased. He explained that the Special District assessment is attributable to Shorewood's dispute with the Metro Council Wastewater Services. Hurm presented the City's 5 Year Capital Improvement Program. He reviewed the 1995 Project Schedule and the costs associated with each project and purchase. Funding for all projects and purchases is included in the 1995 budget. Mayor Brancel opened the Public Hearing at 7:35 p.m. Mr. Dave Frawley, 5635 Covington Road, inquired why his property tax increased 20%. Staff indicated the question will be investigated. Subsequently, it was determined that his property is non-homesteaded. Mr.Gerhard Fritsch, 5920 Hillendale Road, inquired how senior citizens on fixed incomes are expected to meet the increase in taxes. Mrs. Fritsch expressed concern regarding construction in their area. Rolek explained that even though the City's property tax levy will not increase, other components, such as County, Schools, of the total tax statement are increasing, and recommended that residents attend the public hearings of the other taxing jurisdictions to voice their concerns. Staff will investigate construction activity in the area. Mayor Brancel closed the Public Hearing at 7:41 p.m. and continued the hearing to December 19, 1994, at which time the Council will take action on the proposed budget and capital improvement program for 1995. Daugherty stated the special assessment added to Shorewood residents' property tax statements has been added without the City's approval. He explained that the assessment is the result of Shorewood's continuing dispute over sanitary sewer charges levied by the Metropolitan Council REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MINUTES November 29, 1994 - PAGE 3 . Wastewater Service (formerly Metropolitan Wastewater Control Commission-MWCC). Residents are encouraged to comment on the assessment at the Metropolitan Council's public hearing scheduled for December 5 at Mears Park Center, St. Paul. Keane noted, however, that local approval of the levy is not required. 5. PUBLIC HEARING 7:30 P.M. - CONSIDERATION OF A REQUEST TO V ACA TE A PORTION OF A CONSERVATION EASEMENT Applicant: John Pastuck Location: 20345-47 Excelsior Boulevard Nielsen referred to the staff report dated November 23, 1994 and attachments (including resident correspondence from James and Barbara Martin, Jake Miller, and James Waldo) relative to Mr. John Pastuck's request for partial vacation of a wetland conversation easement. Concerns include buildability of the property in question due to severe topography, wetland setbacks, and vacation of the wetland conservation provides no "interest of the public" as prescribed in Minnesota Statutes. Based on staff analysis, approval of the partial vacation is not recommended at this time. . Mr. John Pastuck reviewed the background to his ownership and subdivision of the property. An easement granted as part of a subdivision left the property approximately 1 % short of further subdivision of his property. He stated that at the time the wetland easement was granted to the City, it was calculated incorrectly during his former partner's hasty preparation for sale of the property. Pastuck stated he was a passive participant in the transaction. A correction to the existing line involves partial vacation of the easement and would give Mr. Pastuck the necessary lot area to create another lot on his property. Pastuck circulated a model showing the location of a home; described the home that could be built; and explained that buildability of the lot is not a problem. He acknowledged that a public interest may not be served by vacation of the easement, however, he pointed out that the correction of the easement under the 1991 Wetlands Conservation Act is the right thing to do and would not affect the wetland or wildlife. While empathizing with concerns expressed by some neighbors, Pas tuck believes in exercising his right to develop his property should he choose to do so. Mayor Brancel opened the Public Hearing at 8 p.m. Mr. Tom Casey, Mound, MN, attorney representing Dennis and Barbara Martin, 20185 Excelsior Boulevard, spoke in support of denial of vacation of the subject easement because of the legal issue. He referenced the Statute regarding the public interest, stated the land owner has not shown that vacation provides a public interest, that the City is bound by the Statute, buildability of the property is not a relevant criteria in this issue, and provisions of the easement state it is to be governed by the survey attached to the easement, and Wetlands Conservation Act guidelines may deem the area as a wetland. Casey recommended that the vacation be denied. Mr. Dennis Martin, 20185 Excelsior Boulevard, referred to his letter dated November 22, 1994, supporting denial of the vacation because of concerns regarding wetland setbacks, buildability of the property, environment, wildlife, and lack of a public good. He detailed wildlife concerns regarding a specific bird. Ms. Teresa Miller, 20207 Excelsior Boulevard, spoke about the doubtful buildability of the property . . Ms. Patricia Beatty, 20145 Excelsior Boulevard, supported the concerns of previous speakers and questioned whether construction is possible on the site. . . . REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MINUTES November 29, 1994 - PAGE 4 Mr. Robert Bean, 5285 St. Albans Bay Road, current member of the Planning Commission and Councilmember-elect, explained that his comments reflect concerns as a citizen of Shorewood. He stated that if the agreement to the current delineation related to the variance is not supported by the Wetlands Conservation District, vacation may be an issue and if the City relied upon the information designating the appropriate delineation line when the easement was granted, no public good can be demonstrated at this time for vacation of the easement. The issue may reside in whether the delineation was done correctly and if its legality can be successfully challenged, further consideration of vacation would be appropriate. Bean pointed out, however, that the ultimate question is the buildability of the lot and raised concerns regarding the safety factors related to the street and traffic in the area. Mayor Brancel closed the Public Hearing at 8: 15 p.m. The Councilmembers discussed the issue. Daugherty requested clarification with respect to contesting the location of the existing delineation. Keane stated the key issue is whether the delineation of the wetland is accurate and that although the Council has broad discretion, there is not sufficient information before the Council to determine that. Stover inquired whether the delineation is consistent with Shorewood's Wetland ordinance. Nielsen replied that the original delineation was determined to be consistent with Shorewood's wetland map, but pointed out that the Wetland Conservation Act was not in existence at that time. Lewis noted that the applicant accepted the delineation at the time the easement and variation were granted and, at this time, there does not appear to be a public benefit to partially vacate the easement. Mr. Pas tuck requested the matter be tabled in order that he may further consider the analysis prepared by the Planning staff and to pursue other legal aspects of the issue. Nielsen stated that if the Council wishes to table the request, additional information should be obtained from the original surveyor. Brancel pointed out that heretofore the Council has sustained its actions and questioned whether additional information would support vacation of the easement. Stover stated the question is whether the Council is willing to grant the partial vacation without a public benefit and pointed out that consideration of a variance to build on a substandard lot would be a separate issue. Daugherty stated he does not support vacation of a wetland, however, the validity of the delineation under wetland regulations should be considered. Stover moved, Lewis seconded to deny the request for partial vacation of a wetland conservation easement received from John Pastuck, 20345-47 Excelsior Boulevard. Motion passed 411. Daugherty voted nay. 6. PARKS - Report by representative - None. 7. PLANNING - Report by Representative Commissioner Pisula reported the Commission completed its review of the Community Facilities Chapter of the Comprehensive Plan and continued consideration of the swimming pool/fencing ordinance at its November 15 and 22, 1994 meetings. At its December 6 meeting, preparation of the Comprehensive Plan Update will continue for consideration at the December 12 joint meeting with the Council. A. A Motion to Direct Staff to Prepare Findings of Fact Regarding Variances to Setback Regulations and Shoreland District Hardcover Regulations . . . REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MINUTES November 29, 1994 - PAGE 5 Applicant: Location: Larry DeWitt 28090 Woodside Road Nielsen explained that in addition to the October 26, 1994 analysis of the request of Lawrence De Witt, the Planning Commission considered several methods to make the project work without variances. Based on the staff analysi~ and the Commission's determination, Nielsen stated that no hardship has been demonstrated to justify the variances and recommended that any addition to the existing home comply with current setback requirements and any increase in hard cover area should be mitigated by removal of hard cover elsewhere on the site. Mr. Larry De Witt, the applicant, reviewed the history of subdivision of the property prior to his purchase of the site. He outlined the problems related to the tennis court and driveway contributing to the difficulties with the design of the project to meet the setback and hardcover requirements, yet maintain the architecture of the existing home. He stated that suggestions made by the Planning Commission involve jeopardizing trees on the site and/or an unacceptable appearance of the proposed addition in relation to the existing home. He stated the neighbors support the project, it would enhance the value of the properties, and contribute additional tax benefits. He stated the request is reasonable and asked the Council to act favorably on the application. Mrs. DeWitt reviewed the plumbing problems that require correction which led to the plans to remodel and construct an addition which will protect their investment. The Council discussed the issues related to the application. Daugherty requested clarification with respect to the trees on the site. Mr. DeWitt explained that construction of the addition to avoid endangering a large maple tree is aesthetically unacceptable according to his architect. Lewis noted that previous variances apparently disregarded a new ordinance and further variances would add to the site's nonconformance. Daugherty stated the impact on trees is a concern. Benson stated that a hardship to reasonable use of the property is not demonstrated and that he could not support expanding nonconformity of the site. Lewis stated that while he supported conformance to regulations, variances were previously granted, and to prevent the applicant from construction of an acceptable addition could be construed as a hardship, given the small encroachment requested. Benson reiterated that a hardship is not demonstrated and suggested that further design work be conducted to construct an addition that would not require variances and fits within the parameters set by the ordinance. Stover stated the applicant has not demonstrated a hardship to reasonable use of his property and does not adequately address minimizing the hardcover on the site. Daugherty moved, Brancel seconded to direct the staff to prepare findings of fact regarding variances to setback regulations and Shoreland District hardcover regulations and to grant the requested variances. Motion passed 3/2. Stover and Benson voted nay. B. A Motion to Approve A Sign Permit for Video Update - Waterford Shopping Center Nielsen stated the sign for Video Update proposed by Schad-Tracy Signs meets the Waterford Shopping Center P.U.D. requirements and covenants with the exception of the extension of 2 neon light tubes to the limits of the store frontage required to reflect Video Update's corporate image. The applicant inquired whether painted stripes on the sign band would be permitted if Council did not approve the neon extensions. Nielsen stated that regulations do not prohibit such painting and that painted striping is included on the Holiday Store sign. Mr. Dave Fredrickson, representing Schad-Tracy Signs and Video Update, stated the striping is a part of the company's national image, lettering is consistent with the ordinance, and requested that some type of striping be allowed. " ' !"" . . . REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MINUTES November 29, 1994 - PAGE 6 The Councilmembers agreed that the neon lighted extensions are not acceptable, and discussed the suitability of painted stripes on the sign band. Daugherty suggested that to maintain sign consistency in the Center, stripes be included. Nielsen explained that consistent signage within the regulations is required, however, some variation is preferred to avoid a lackluster appearance for the Center. Nielsen pointed out that striping is not included in the proposed liquor store sign, but indicated it could be readily included. The Councilmembers considered the details of the painted striping. Daugherty moved, Stover seconded to approve the sign permit, with painted striping on the sign band to replace the neon lighted extensions, for the Video Update store at the Waterford Shopping Center. Motion passed 5/0. C. Report on Comprehensive Plan Update - Refer to Report by Commissioner Pisula. 8. MATTERS FROM THE FLOOR - None. 9. DISCUSSION ON POLICY ISSUES - None. 10. ADMINISTRATOR AND STAFF REPORTS - None. 11. MA YOR AND COUNCIL MEMBER REPORTS Stover requested that the status of stop signs at the intersection of the service/frontage road and Vine Hill Road be investigated. 12. ADJOURN TO WORK SESSION FORMAT SUBJECT TO APPROVAL OF CLAIMS Lewis moved, Daugherty seconded to adjourn the City Council meeting at 8:50 p.m. to a work session format, subject to approval of claims. Motion passed 5/0. RESPECTFULL Y SUBMITTED, Arlene H. Bergfalk Recording Secretary TimeSaver Off Site Secretarial JA ATTEST: