Loading...
010995 CC Reg Min . . , ., CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING MONDA Y, JANUARY 9, 1995 COUNCIL CHAMBERS 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD 7:00 P.M. MINUTES ADMINISTER OATH OF OFFICE City Administrator Hurm administered the Oath of Office to Robert B. Bean as Mayor and to Jennifer McCarty and Douglas Malam as Councilmembers. 1. CONVENE CITY COUNCIL MEETING Mayor Bean called the meeting to order at 7:05 p.m. A. Roll Call Present: Mayor Bean; Councilmembers Benson, Malam, McCarty, and Stover; Administrator Hurm, City Attorney Keane, and Planning Director Nielsen. Review Agenda B. Mayor Bean clarified that a public hearing regarding senior housing is not scheduled at this meeting, howeverthe Council will consider a related matter, but will not take action. Bean noted that agenda item "Matters from the Floor" will henceforth appear near the beginning of the Council agenda for the convenience of the public. . Stover moved, McCarty seconded to approve the agenda for January 9, 1995. Motion passed 5/0. C. Mayor's Presentation of Council Commitments Mayor Bean presented and read the role and commitments of the Councilmembers to be signed and reaffIrmed annually during the term of each member. 2 . APPROVAL OF MINUTES A. City Council Regular and Executive Session Minutes - December 12, 1994 Stover moved, Benson seconded to approve the Regular City Council Meeting Minutes of December 12, 1994, with deletion of the word: "additional" on page 2, paragraph 7, line 4. Motion passed 2/0. Bean, Malam, and McCarty abstained. Stover moved, Benson seconded to approve the Executive Session Minutes of December 12, 1994. Motion passed 2/0. Bean, Malam, and McCarty abstained. B . City Council Regular Minutes - December 19, 1994 Benson moved, Stover seconded to approve the Regular City Council Meeting Minutes of December 19, 1994. Motion passed 2/0. Bean, Malam, and McCarty abstained. 3. MOTION ADOPTING RESOLUTIONS MAKING APPOINTMENTS WITHIN THE CITY FOR THE YEAR 1995 . . . REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MINUTES January 9, 1995 - PAGE 2 A. A Resolution Making Appointments for 1995 Mayor Bean read Resolution No. 95-1 appointing persons to certain offIces and positions within the City of Shorewood for the year 1995. McCarty moved, Stover seconded to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 95-1, "A Resolution Making Appointments to Certain Offices and Positions Within the City of Shorewood for the Year 1995." Motion passed 5/0. B. A Resolution Making Appointments to Various Commissions to Begin in 1995 Mayor Bean read Resolution No. 95-2 appointing persons to the Park and Planning Commissions and appointing the Chair and Vice Chair for the year 1995 for each Commission. Candidates are invited to apply for 2 open positions on the Planning Commission. McCarty moved, Malam seconded to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 95-2, "A Resolution Making Commission Appointments." Motion passed 5/0. 4. CONSENT AGENDA Mayor Bean read the Consent Agenda for January 9, 1995. Stover moved, Benson seconded to approve the Motions on the Consent Agenda and to adopt the Resolutions therein: A. Motion to Approve Change Order #3 for Project #PK-4-94, Silverwood Park Improvements B. RESOLUTION NO. 95-3, "A Resolution Accepting Silverwood Park Improvements, Project No. 94-4, and Authorizing Final Payment." C. RESOLUTION NO. 95-4, "A Resolution Approving Licenses for Tree Trimmer." RESOLUTION NO. 95-5, "A Resolution Approving Licenses for Refuse Collectors." D . Motion to Approve a Water System Analysis Agreement with Orr-Schelen- Mayeron & Associates, Inc. E. RESOLUTION NO. 95-6, "A Resolution Accepting Streets, Sanitary Sewer and Storm Sewer in the Plat of Boulder Ridge Estates." Motion passed 5/0. 5. MATTERS FROM THE FLOOR - None. 6 . PARKS - Report by Representative McCarty reported on actions taken by the Park Commission as detailed in the Commission's December 13, 1994 meeting minutes. 7. PLANNING - Report by Representative . . . REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MINUTES January 9, 1995 - PAGE 3 Commissioner Turgeon reported on actions taken by the Commission and its Study Session discussion at the January 3, 1995 meeting. The Commission scheduled neighborhood meetings on the Comprehensive Plan update for January 30-31 and February 6-7,1995. A. A Motion to Direct Staff to Prepare Findings of Fact for a Setback Variance. Applicant: John Grable. Location: 4720 Bayswater Road. Nielsen reviewed the applicant's request for a setback variance to construct a deck which encroaches into the 50' perimeter setback of the Amesbury West plat and partially encroaches into the common area of the planned unit development (detailed in his December 1, 1994 memorandum.) The Planning Commission and staff recommend denial of the application because a deck can be built without encroachment, the request fails to meet the criteria for a variance, and a building permit was previously approved on the basis of construction of a conforming deck. Nielsen noted that additional information submitted by the applicant has not been reviewed by the staff or Commission. Mr. John Grable, 4720 Bayswater Road, read and distributed a copy of his letter dated January 9, 1995, detailing his position and requesting a building permit for construction of the deck. He believes the Amesbury West covenants allow addition of the 6' x 10' deck as proposed, a variance is not required, the proposal is consistent with the City's ordinances, and similar extensions into the Amesbury common area were granted by the City over the past 21 years. Grable circulated photographs of homes in the Amesbury and Amesbury West developments with similarly constructed extensions into the common area without variances required. Nielsen stated the 50' perimeter setback should be maintained. He reviewed the controversy between the staff and the developer of the P.U.D regarding allowable encroachments into common areas. Details of the City's position and interpretation are stated in Nielsen's letter of October 31, 1990 to Mr. James McNulty, the developer. Because the development's covenants are vague and reasonable encroachment limits into the common area are not specified, the developer was notified that the zoning ordinance provisions will be the enforcement tool applied to this development until such time that the covenants are amended to provide clarification and specificity. Nielsen noted that the City Attorney supports the City's position in this matter. The Councilmembers discussed the matter and reviewed the photographs submitted. Malam inquired whether other apparent encroachments were brought before the City. Nielsen indicated a review has not been conducted, however, he recalled that 2 applications were subsequently withdrawn before action was required. The staff is not aware of any encroachments into the 50' perimeter setback. Stover stated that without schematic drawings and detailed information on lot lines, footprint, etc., it is difficult to determine from the photographs whether encroachments into the common area exist. She assumed that building permits were issued on the basis that variances were not required. Stover pointed out that a hardship for reasonable use of the property does not exist. Mr. Grable explained that as construction began based on the plan submitted with the building permit request, a visual review of the development revealed existing decks built exactly as he originally desired. He noted that a modification was agreed upon at the Planning Commission level with respect to the perimeter setback and the remaining issue is the encroachment into the common area which is allowed by the development's covenants. The Council was concerned that construction commenced on a deck that did not conform to the plans submitted with the building request. In addition, while the developer acknowledged that some ambiguities exist, action has not been taken by the developer in response to the October 31, 1990 letter stating the City's position and interpretation. . . . REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MINUTES January 9, 1995 - PAGE 4 The Council agreed to refer the issue back to the Planning Commission and directed the staff to determine what the actual setbacks are based on the property identified with the information presented to determine to what extent variances should have been obtained and have not been obtained and re-evaluate the request in light of the overall development with specific reference to this property, along with surveys or additional data from the original plans for this development. Benson moved, McCarty seconded to table to March 27, 1995 consideration and action on the setback variance request of John Grable, 4720 Bayswater Road. Motion passed 5/0. B. A Motion to Adopt a Resolution Approving a Preliminary Plat for Jaeger Addition. Applicant: Abingdon Development Corporation. Location: 25655 Smithtown Road and 25725 Eureka Way Nielsen explained that Abingdon Development Corporation's 7-lot Smithtown Meadows plat is delayed by the development moratorium. The corporation requests that 2 lots with existing homes be platted separately as Jaeger Addition, leaving the remainder as an outlot for future development. This platting allows completion of the sale of the home on lot 2 currently being rented by the purchaser and removal of the substandard home on lot 1. The platting does not circumvent the current development moratorium. Nielsen noted that some residents were concerned regarding access to the northly lot. The development agreement will provide that a home designed for that lot would initially access Eureka Way, but would ultimately switch to the new road that will be built. Nielsen stated staff and the Planning Commission recommend approval of the preliminary plat subject to preparation of a development agreement addressing future development of the outlot, street, and utilities. Mr. Charles Dillerud, representing Abingdon Development Corporation, had no additional comments on the application. Malam moved, Stover seconded to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 95-7, "A Resolution Granting Preliminary Plat Approval for Jaeger Addition." Motion passed 5/0. C. A Motion to Adopt a Resolution Approving a Final Plat for Jaeger Addition. Applicant: Abingdon Development Corporation. Location: 25655 Smithtown Road and 25725 Eureka Way. Nielsen explained that City Code does not preclude a developer from requesting final plat approval at the same time as the preliminary plat review. Since neither staff nor the Planning Commission recommended any change to the Jaeger Addition preliminary plat, Nielsen recommended approval of the final plat subject to the developer entering into the standard development agreement to address future development of the outlot. Stover moved, Benson seconded to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 95-8, "A Resolution Approving a Final Plat for Jaeger Addition." Motion passed 5/0. D. A Motion to Direct Staff to Prepare Findings of Fact for a Conditional Use Permit for Accessory Space in Excess of 1200 Square Feet. Applicant: Steven Simon. Location: 26710 Edgewood Road. Nielsen stated the staff and Planning Commission recommend approval of the applicant's request for a conditional use permit for accessory space in excess of 1200 square feet, subject to certain . . REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MINUTES January 9, 1995 - PAGE 5 conditions, in connection with a significant remodeling of an existing home and outbuildings on the property (detailed in Nielsen's 12-01-94 memorandum). Mr. Bill Brueggeman, contractor representing Mr. Simon, had no additional comments regarding the application. Stover moved, Malam seconded to direct the staff to prepare a Findings of Fact to approve a Conditional Use Permit for Accessory Space in Excess of 1200 Square Feet for Steven Simon, 26710 Edgewood Road. Motion passed 5/0. E. A Motion to Approve an Extension of Time to Comply with a Notice to Remove. Appellant: Paul Harrington. Location: 5480 Wedgewood Drive. Nielsen stated Mr. Harrington has corrected all but 1 violation to bring his property into compliance (detailed in Nielsen's 01-05-95 memorandum). He recommended approval of the appellant's request for an extension to May 15 for removal of a pontoon boat (detailed in Harrington's letter dated December 19, 1994). Mr. Paul Harrington explained that the pontoon boat on blocks is under repair and cannot be moved without damaging the boat; however repair and removal from the property will be completed by May 1995. McCarty moved, Benson seconded to approve extension, to May 15, 1995, of a deadline to comply with a 12-09-94 Notice to Remove, for Paul S. Harrington, 5480 Wedgewood Road. Motion passed 5/0. F. A Motion to Approve a Sign Permit for the Waterford Shopping Center. Applicant: Identi- Graphics for Career Cleaners. Location: 19905 State Highway 7. Nielsen stated the sign proposed by Identi-Graphics on behalf of Career Cleaners is consistent with a previously approved overall signage plan for the Waterford Shopping Center, therefore approval of the sign permit is recommended. Stover moved, Malam seconded to approve a sign permit for Identi-Graphics, on behalf of Career Cleaners, for the Waterford Shopping Center, 19905 State Highway 7. Motion passed 5/0. The Council agreed that approval of subsequent sign permit requests for the Waterford Shopping Center be placed on the Consent Agenda for action. G. Request for Clarification of Allowable Use of Bank Site - Waterford Shopping Center Nielsen explained that plans are being developed by the First State Bank of Excelsior for construction of a new banking facility at the Waterford Shopping Center on a commercial pad previously approved for such use under the Waterford P. U.D. Design of the building includes a second story to accommodate the bank's future growth. One-half of the second story will be rented out as office space until it is needed by the bank. Staff has taken a narrow interpretation of the Waterford p.u.d. which provides a separate site for an office building. Staff requests the Council's determination as to whether using one-half of the second floor as office space until needed by the bank is a substantial departure from the Waterford p.u.d. agreement. A substantial . deviation requires a public hearing to amend the existing plan. REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MINUTES January 9, 1995 - PAGE 6 . Following discussion, the Council concluded that both uses, office and banking, are clearly within the uses approved for the Waterford commercial sites, therefore, the proposal to construct a banking facility with some second floor rental office space at the Waterford Shopping Center should proceed through the customary site plan review process. H. Consideration of Peter Boyer's Request to Reduce Age Restriction for Seasons Development Mayor Bean explained that consideration of this agenda item does not include a formal public hearing, however public testimony will be heard and the Council will discuss and provide direction to the staff, but specific action will not be taken with respect to Mr. Boyer's request to reduce the age restriction for occupancy from 62 years to 55 years of age at The Seasons development. Nielsen noted that while Mr. Boyer indicated additional information would be provided relative to his request, none has been received therefore the staff has no comments at this time. Mr. Peter Boyer, developer of The Seasons senior housing development, made a presentation supporting his request to reduce the age limit for occupancy at The Seasons from 62 to 55 years of age. Details are included in his December 22, 1994 letter to the City of Shorewood and 2 undated documents distributed at the Council meeting. One document describes how The Seasons qualifies for the age 55 exemption under the Federal Fair Housing Act and the other lists 8 reasons that seniors have given as to why the age limit should be lowered. Mayor Bean recessed the meeting at 9 p.m. and reconvened at 9:05 p.m. The Council heard public testimony as follows. . Faye Smith, 5283 St. Albans Bay Circle, stated she moved to Shorewood to take advantage of owning a one-level home; supported reducing the age limit to 55 to provide fresh ideas and to provide opportunity for more senior citizens. Larry Buesgens, 20090 Excelsior Boulevard, resides north of the Seasons development. He requested that other related matters be considered in the context of Mr. Boyer's request to lower the age limitation in the development. These include: berm height running parallel with Highway 7, street lighting, location of the entrance to Excelsior Boulevard, wetland on the property, soil erosion, silt flow into Footprint Lake, damage to Excelsior Boulevard from construction vehicles, and the one and one-half story construction. Bernard Miller, 5296 St. Albans Bay Circle, explained he looked a long time for housing such as The Seasons, was one of the first buyers in the development, and is happy with the unit. He strongly supported lowering the age requirement to 55 years to allow more persons to take advantage of the accommodations. Robert Rascop, 4560 Enchanted Point, stated he is 53 years old, his wife has serious health problems that require I-level housing, and they wish to remain in Shorewood. Having looked for I-level housing for some time, Rascop stated single level homes are difficult to find and requested the Seasons' age limit be reduced to 55 years of age. MaIjorie Fleishhacker, 5252 Spring Circle, requested clarification as to why the age limit was set at 62 years when age 55, and even 50, is recognized as a senior, and the development is identified as . "senior" housing. REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MINUTES January 9, 1995 - PAGE 7 . Joe Boyer, Deephaven, commented that the area is not a wetland, but a flooded area damaged by water from Highway 7 and a broken culvert which destroyed trees, etc. Repairs and other work done in connection with Pete Boyer's construction of The Seasons will improve and restore the area. During discussion, Council was skeptical about changing the rules of the development given the accommodations made by the City to enhance construction of this project. Density of the location was re-zoned, park and utility fees were waived, and costs related to drainage problems were mitigated by MNDot and the City of Shorewood. Nonetheless, the Council reiterated the City's commitment to providing economical senior housing in Shorewood. The Council agreed that clarification of an interpretation of the Federal Fair Housing Act be researched by the legal staff in conjunction with Mr. Boyer and HUD to determine its applicability to The Seasons, for future consideration by the Council. . I. Clarification of Sign Permit Approval for Video UpdatelWaterford Shopping Center Nielsen explained that previous Council approval of a sign permit for the Video Up~ate store at the Waterford Shopping Center allowed the applicant to paint stripes on the sign band. The applicant prefers to install a colored aluminum stripe which is considered to be an extension of the sign but would exceed the allowable sign length. The Council also discussed requiring all tenants to stripe if one tenant did. The proposed aluminum stripe is not consistent with the previously approved plans. Painting a stripe is not specifically precluded, however, Nielsen recommended it not be allowed because it is inconsistent with other tenant signage. Stover reviewed the Council's November 29 discussion of this issue. She preferred no striping to provide a cleaner overall look. Benson stated the Council ought not to be in the business of designing signs and recalled that the possibility of including striping in all tenants' signs was only a part of the Council's discussion, but was not made a part of its action. Mr. Dave Fredrickson, representing Video Update, stated he understood a stripe was acceptable, therefore began production on a sign with a stripe. Upon receipt of the sign permit, he discovered that striping was not allowed. At this time, he believes the question to be what type of striping best suits the location. He believes colored aluminum striping is preferred for its low maintenance qualities. Bean stated it appears that striping was approved and a non-lighted stripe of clad aluminum would appear to be acceptable. Benson explained his dislike for the striping, thought the overall signage plan to be restrictive, and preferred some continuity in the signage. Stover acknowledged the lower maintenance aspect of the aluminum stripe, but reiterated a preference for no striping. Malam moved, Benson seconded to allow Video Update to include a non-lighted stripe of a material of their choosing (preferably clad aluminum) on its sign band at the Waterford Shopping Center. Motion passed 4/1. Stover voted nay. 8. CONSIDERATION OF A REQUEST TO WAIVE LATE FEE Hurm referred to Finance Director Rolek's January 5, 1995 memorandum regarding a resident's request for removal of late penalties assessed the utility bill. It is recommended that the late penalty of $8.10, assessed to the account because an honest mistake caused an underpayment of 1994 3rd quarter utility charges, be forgiven. . . . . .. REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MINUTES January 9, 1995 - PAGE 8 McCarty moved, Stover seconded to waive an $8.10 late penalty assessed on the 3rd quarter, 1994 utility bill of Roxanne Lenarz, 5740-42 Wood Duck Circle. Motion passed 5/0. The Council agreed to change its policy to authorize the Financial Director discretion to act on behalf of the Council to waive penalties on utility accounts under an amount to be determined by the staff. The policy change details will be prepared by staff for the Council's review. 9. CONSIDERATION OF A MOTION TO POSTPONE EFFECTIVE DATE OF DRUG TESTING POLICY Hurm requested action to change the effective date of the previously approved drug testing policy for the Public Works Department to January 1, 1996 to conform with the effective date under Federal regulations. Benson moved, Malam seconded to change the effective date of the Drug Testing Policy for the City's Public Works Department to January 1, 1996. Motion passed 5/0. 10. DISCUSSION OF POLICY ISSUES A. Report on 1994 Objectives B . Review of Mission Statement and City Values Hurm directed the Council's attention to the document reporting the status of 1994 objectives and the Mission Statement and City Values. The Council agreed to re-schedule consideration of these issues to the Council's next meeting. 11. ADMINISTRATOR AND STAFF REPORTS Hurm explained the purpose of the Council's role as the Board of Review and suggested that a date for its annual meeting be determined. The Council set the Board of Review meeting for 7 p.m., Wednesday, April 5, 1995. 12. MAYOR AND COUNCIL MEMBER REPORTS Mayor Bean stated information about the scheduled meetings on the Comprehensive Plan update will be disseminated. He encouraged the public to attend the meetings. 13. ADJOURN TO WORK SESSION FORMAT SUBJECT TO APPROVAL OF CLAIMS McCarty moved, Benson seconded to adjourn the City Council meeting at 10:00 p.m. to a work session format, subject to approval of claims. Motion passed 5/0. Following this meeting, the Council met jointly with the Planning Commission to consider the Comprehensive PI~ Update. .t . . . REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MINUTES January 9, 1995 - PAGE 9 RESPECTFULL Y SUBMITTED, Arlene H. Bergfalk Recording Secretary TimeSaver Off Site Secretarial ATTEST: .' ) {)'-1::> () ., (\ . K0'\\_M.;\J\cr\)K.(J'j-~... ROBERT B. BEAN, MAYOR JA