City Council Minutes 06-25-2001MINUTES
REGULAR MEETING - MONTICELLO CITY COUNCIL
June 25, 2001 - 7 p.m.
Members Present: Roger Belsaas, Roger Carlson, Clint Herbst, Brian Stumpf and Bruce Thielen.
Members Absent: None.
1. Call to Order.
Mayor Belsaas called the meeting to order at 7 p.m. and declared a quorum present.
2. Approve minutes of the June 11, 2001 regular Council meeting.
CLINT HERBST MOVED TO APPROVE THE MINUTES OF THE JUNE 11, 2001 REGULAR
COUNCIL MEETING. BRIAN STUMPF SECONDED THE MOTION. MOTION CARRIED
UNANIMOUSLY.
3. Consideration of adding items to the agenda.
No new items were added to the agenda but Mayor Belsaas pointed out an error on the agenda item
on the audit.
4. Citizen comments/petitions, reauests and complaints.
Doni Newland, 9592 Mill Trail Lane came before the Council to voice her concerns about the
construction value of recently constructed homes being built in the River Mill/River Forest
developments especially those being constructed by C -Mark Builders. Initially there were covenants
in place that put certain restrictions on the size, design and aesthetics of the houses being built in the
development. The covenants have since been amended a number of times resulting in houses being
built in the development that are of lesser value than homes built earlier. The residents in the area
were requesting that the City seek legal counsel as to what can be done to assure that the covenants
remain in place and that there is uniformity in design standards and structure values throughout a
development. The residents felt that the development standards and building codes should be
upgraded so that homeowners are protected from lower valued homes being built in the salve area
which has the effect of reducing their property value. They felt it was the City's responsibility to make
sure the covenants were enforceable.
Jeff O'Neill responded for the City stating that the City was aware of the situation is enforcing zoning
ordinances and the building codes. The restrictive covenants, however, are not regulated by the City.
Because it is an issue between the developer and the property owner, the City has no authority to
enforce the covenants.
Council Minutes - 6/25/01
The Monticello Planning Commission will be looking at amendments to the City's zoning ordinance
that may alleviate similar problem in future developments.
Bruce Thielen stated that he is a little tired of telling residents that the City's hands are tied on this.
The developer had indicated that he would keep the covenants the same for the entire development
and now it appears they are thumbing their noses at the city. He cited a lack of good faith on the part
of the developer. The Council discussed if there was any legal action the City could take and also
whether amendments to the ordinance would address the problem. Clint Herbst asked whether the
City could hold up building permits in the area. Fred Patch responded that they couldn't hold up the
permits but perhaps there were legal steps the residents could take to get the covenants enforced.
The current housing standards are down from the original but do meet the standards set forth i n the
building codes and zoning and subdivision ordinances.
Michel Rietveld, 6493 River Ridge Lane, brought up an example where a building permit was
approved for a certain model house but the builder constructed a different model and she asked how
the City could allow that. Fred Patch responded that a stop work order had been placed on the
construction until the builder could submit revised plans that showed what was actually being
constructed. The builder was required to pay the plan check fee and the plans submitted did meet the
building code.
The Council directed staff to work with the City Planner and City Attorney to review issues raised by
the residents. Once the information is obtained, staff will meet with the residents.
Jason Penaz, 9593 Mill Trail Lane, submitted a petition requesting the installation of a street light on
Mill Trail Lane. Brian Stumpf stated that the Council had discussed this issue and had
directed the Public Works Director to work with X -cel Energy on the street light placement.
Jason Penaz submitted a second petition from some residents in the River Mill area that stated their
opposition to the construction of a connecting pathway behind the lots on Mill Trail Lane. One of
their concerns was that trees would have to be removed in order to construct the pathway and they
didn't want the additional activity generated by a pathway in the area. Jeff O'Neill stated that
construction of an 8'-10' trail would not necessitate the removal of many trees. Brian Stumpf asked if
there were other options as far as the trail. Jeff O'Neill will prepare a report and graphics on this for
the next meeting.
Jeff Jones, 9334 Red Rock Lane, brought up concerns about blights and violations of the nuisance
ordinance on property on Red Rock Lane and submitted pictures of the property to the Council.
Mayor Belsaas indicated that this matter has been turned over to the City Attorney. The residents
stated that they have been dealing with this for the past four year and they would like to get it
resolved. The residents also questioned the building permits that were issued for the property and the
unfinished construction. Fred Patch responded that some of the issues raised by the residents were
aesthetic and are not covered by the building permit. He indicated that the ordinance does allow
2
Council Minutes - 6/25/01
construction material to be stored in the yard while construction is being done. The Council directed
Fred Patch to investigate these issues and report back to the residents.
Bruce Thielen asked that when residents bring an item up under citizen input he would like to see an
update in the next council packet on the item that was brought up.
5. Consent Agenda
A. Consideration of ratifying new hires for MCC, liquor store, parks and public works.
Recommendation: Ratify the hiring of the employees for the MCC, liquor store, parks and
public works as identified.
B. Consideration of approving a one day charitable gambling license for Monticello Youth
Hockey Associate for July 6, 2001 at Hawks Bar & Grill. Recommendation: Adopt a
resolution authorizing the State Gambling Control Board to issue a gambling license.
Res. #2001-43.
BRUCE THIELEN MOVED TO APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA. CLINT HERBST
SECONDED THE MOTION. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
6. Consideration of items removed from the consent agenda for discussion.
None.
7. Public Hearing to consider appeal of Planning Commission denial of a request for variance
to setbacks to allow construction of driveway - James Herbst.
Jeff O'Neill summarized the item advising the Council that the Planning Commission had voted to
deny granting the variance for a driveway setback from 3' to F for the property at 519 West
Broadway. Under the ordinance there is an appeals procedure in which the Council acts as the
Board of Appeals and that is the role the Council is acting in when they are considering this matter.
In reviewing Planning Commission discussion on the variance request, the Planning Commission
determined there was no hardship demonstrated and therefore denied the request for the variance.
The Planning Commission noted that the property owner could meet the requirements of the
ordinance without a variance. James Herbst, the property owner, submitted a letter to the Council
concerning the Planning Commission action. He indicated that staff led him to believe that there wouli
not be a problem getting Planning Commission approval of the variance. He also felt that removing
the trees and having to back out onto Broadway constituted a hardship and that the variance should
have been granted based on that
finding.
Council Minutes - 6/25/01
Jeff O'Neill stated that other options for the driveway location were looked at by the Planning
Commission and the Planning Commission did feel there were options available that allowed the
applicant the use of his property and met ordinance requirements. Bruce Thielen stated that he did
not feel there was a hardship and he also questioned why the property owner put in the curb cut
before he even applied for a variance. Mr. Herbst stated that he had been advised by Fred Patch, the
Building Official to do that in advance of the variance request.
Clint Herbst stated if the variance is not allowed, the driveway would remain a gravel surface.
Richard Carlson spoke stating that the surfacing of the driveway was not the reason the variance was
requested and that not granting the variance should not impact whether the driveway could be
surfaced or not. Richard Carlson also questioned why the Council would overturn the ruling of the
Planning Commission.
Robbie Smith, representing the Planning Commission, stated that the Planning Commission in looking
at this item could not find that a hardship was demonstrated. They felt the better alternative was to
move the driveway to the right of the trees. Robbie Smith also questioned the approach of the
property owner that if the City doesn't grant the variance, he won't surface the driveway. The
Planning Commission in looking at this variance was trying to determine if there was a hardship and
not whether a surfaced driveway was more aesthetically pleasing than a gravel driveway.
Richard Carlson asked what the current ordinance states as far as surfacing of a driveway. Jeff
O'Neill responded that ordinance calls for surfacing or dust control. Richard Carlson felt that if there
was no hardship, then the City should amend its ordinance to allow it. He felt that a shared driveway
was the best solution. Richard Carlson also asked about the ordinance requirements concerning the
height of fences in the front yard.
Bruce Thielen asked if there is a legal description of what is a hardship. Jeff O'Neill responded that a
hardship would be if conforming to the ordinance would deny the property owner customary and
reasonable use of property. Bruce Thielen felt since the property owner had reasonable use of his
property without the variance, it could not be considered a hardship. Roger Belsaas asked if the
comment was made by city staff that they didn't see a problem with getting a variance, what was this
based on. Jeff O'Neill noted that the need to avoid a large tree could be cited as a finding for the
hardship if so deemed by the City Council. In this case the Planning Commission did not believe the
tree limited the ability of the applicant to meet code.
James Herbst stated that even though they have had a shared driveway for 29 years, he did not like a
shared driveway. He indicated that X -cel Energy would charge him $2,000 to move the power pole
and moving the driveway to the location suggested by the Planning Commission would bring the
driveway thorough his parking area and this is why he felt a hardship existed. The Council discussed
other instances of shared driveways in the City.
BRIAN STUMPF MOVED TO OVERTURN THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S DENIAL OF
0
Council Minutes - 6/25/01
A VARIANCE REQUEST FROM 3' TO F FOR A DRIVEWAY SETBACK FOR THE
PROPERTY AT 519 WEST BROADWAY. ROGER BELSAAS SECONDED THE MOTION.
MOTION BASED ON A FINDING THAT THE CODE COULD NOT BE MET DUE TO THE
PRESENCE OF A LARGE TREE AND THEREFORE A HARDSHIP EXISTS.
In further discussion, Roger Carlson cautioned that they are not establishing that there is a reasonable
hardship.
UPON VOTE BEING TAKEN, THE MOTION CARRIED WITH ROGER CARLSON AND
BRUCE THIELEN VOTING IN OPPOSITION.
8. Consideration of accepting 2000 Audit Report.
Mr. Rick Borden of Gruys Borden Carlson Associates was present at the meeting and reviewed the
audit for 2000 with the Council. He noted GASB 34 will be in effect in two years and that will
require that all infrastructure would be valued. Currently that is not a requirement of the audit. He
also pointed out the information on the TIF districts, the impact of the lawsuits the City is currently
involved in, debt service fund and enterprise funds. He indicated because the City had received
$500,000 in federal money from a Community Block Grant it required a separate audit. Overall the
fund balances had increased from the previous years, there was no problems with internal controls
and no problems with compliance with provisions of law and regulations.
ROGER CARLSON MOVED TO ACCEPT THE 2000 AUDIT REPORT AS PRESENTED SO
IT MAY BE SUBMITTED TO THE STATE AUDITOR BY THE REQUIRED JUNE 3OTH
DEADLINE. BRIAN STUMPF SECONDED THE MOTION. MOTION CARRIED
UNANIMOUSLY.
9. Consideration of a request for a conditional use permit to allow a 2,500 sq. ft. restaurant in a
shopping center in the CCD. Applicant : Silver Creek Real Estate Development.
Jeff O'Neill summarized the request for an amendment to the conditional use permit for the Towne
Centre development to allow for a restaurant. This request was due to some extent at the suggestion
of city staff that the developer consider this. The Planning Commission considered this item at a
special meeting and asked staff to address the issue of additional parking. Jeff O'Neill reviewed the
report from the planner concerning the amendment to the conditional use permit and presented a
preliminary sketch that showed the parking layout with an estimated 91 parking spaces. City staff in
their review of the site came up with about 85 spaces. Under the ordinance, the combined parking
spaces needed for the Towne Centre site and an expanded library site would be 120 spaces. The
City Planner indicated that because of opposite times of use for the space and due to greater
efficiency resulting from shared use, they could get by with about 65% of the required spaces.
Bruce Thielen asked how they know the restaurant would not have an impact on the library. If the
61
Council Minutes - 6/25/01
restaurant would be open for breakfast, lunch and supper it would affect the library. Clint Herbst
stated that the Planning Commission recommended that signage be placed designating specific sites
for library parking.
BRUCE THIELEN MOVED TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE AMENDMENT TO
THE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR TOWNE CENTRE TO ALLOW FOR A
RESTAURANT SUBJECT TO AN ACCEPTABLE ARRANGEMENT REGARDING COST
SHARING ON THE PARKING IMPROVEMENTS WITH PRIORITY PARKING
DESIGNATED FOR LIBRARY USE, WITH THE DEVELOPER FUNDING THE COST TO
PROVIDE ADDITIONAL PARKING ON WALNUT STREET (OVERFLOW PARKING) AND
THAT THE PROJECT IS REDESIGNED TO PROVIDE A DIRECT ENTRANCE TO THE
RESTAURANT FROM THE NORTH/NORTHWEST SIDE OF THE PROJECT. CLINT
HERBST SECONDED THE MOTION. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
10. Consideration of approving plans and specifications and ordering advertisement for bids for
the Cedar Street Improvement Project No. 2000-18C.
City Engineer, Bret Weiss reviewed the project indicating that there were several items on the agenda
relating to the Mielke Development. At a previous meeting, the developer had questioned the design
of the street improvements. A meeting between the City Engineer and the developer to address the
design concerns has not yet taken place nor has the Council made a decision on the assessment policy
for street reconstruction. Dan Mielke stated that he was hoping the Council would make some
decision on the financial aspect. Bret Weiss questioned whether the developer was ready to proceed
on this.
The Council recessed for a short break and reconvened at 9 p.m. and continued discussion
of the plans and specifications for the Cedar Street project. Dan Mielke questioned whether all the
street improvements were necessary and whether any could be deferred until other property
developed. Clint Herbst felt that until the meeting between the engineer and developer was set it
was premature for the Council to proceed with this project.
BRIAN STUMPF MOVED TO TABLE UNTIL THE NEXT MEETING THE
CONSIDERATION OF THE PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS, ADVERTISEMENT FOR
BIDS AND SETTING A PUBLIC HEARING DATE ON THE ADOPTION OF AN
ASSESSMENT ROLL FOR THE CEDAR STREET IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
NO. 2000-18C. BRUCE THIELEN SECONDED THE MOTION. MOTION CARRIED
UNANIMOUSLY.
11. Consideration of adopting resolution declaring cost to be assessed and setting a public
hearing on adoption of an assessment roll for the Cedar Street Improvement Project No.
Znnn-1Rc_
I
Council Minutes - 6/25/01
Tabled until next council meeting.
12. Consideration of accepting petition for improvements, ordering plans and specifications,
accepting_ plans and specifications and authorizing advertisement for bids - Dan Mielke.
The City Engineer submitted cost estimates for the utilities necessary to serve the development
including relocation of a 16" water main. The estimated cost, including the water main, is
approximately $90,000 which is construction cost only and does not include indirect costs.
Dan Mielke requested that the City relocate the sanitary sewer lines as well as the water main. While
he agreed that the minutes of previous Council action mentioned only the water main he felt these
minutes were incorrect and that the City should be relocating both sanitary sewer and water main.
The City Engineer indicated that since the existing sewer line serves only the properties currently on
the site a new line will be needed anyway for the development and that is normally part of the
development cost. Bret Weiss indicated that the cost for removing the existing sanitary sewer pipe
would be $1,150 if the City wanted to pay for the removal of the existing pipe and Mielke pay for
installation of the new sanitary sewer line.
Clint Herbst felt there should be something in place to guarantee that construction will actually take
place on the site. Mr. Mielke stated that with the Council tabling action on the plans and
4 specifications and assessments, it not likely that he will be able to get the development done this year.
Clint Herbst noted that Mr. Mielke had wanted to review the plans and specifications with the
engineer and since that had not been done, the Council tabled it. If Mr. Mielke was comfortable with
the plans as they are the City could proceed with approving them.
Dan Mielke stated he was questioning the percentage of cost assigned to his property. He was told
the assessment for his property was more because of the extra lane that was created. He felt the road
was being constructed to handle more traffic than what his property would be generating. Bret Weiss
stated that they have provided the developer with a cost range of $138,000 to $99,000. Bret Weiss
didn't think that a difference of $39,000 would delay the project. Dan Mielke stated that the delay
in getting accurate figures would keep him from getting going on the project. Bret Weiss stated the
estimate provided would allow Mr. Mielke to make the financial projections needed to determine
whether to proceed.
It was estimated, based on the engineers review, that the assessment for the utility work would be
$105,000. Mr. Mielke continued to question why the City would move the water main but not the
sanitary sewer line.
BRUCE THIELEN MOVED TO REMOVE THE SANITARY SEWER LINE AND MANHOLE
AT AN ESTIMATED COST OF $1,150, AND TO AUTHORIZE PLANS AND
SPECIFICATIONS AND ADVERTISEMENT FOR BIDS FOR UTILITIES CONTINGENT
UPON MIELKE SIGNING A WAIVER OF HEARING AND ACCEPTANCE OF THE
ESTIMATED ASSESSMENT OF $105,000. CLINT HERBST SECONDED THE MOTION.
%I
Council Minutes - 6/25/01
/ MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
13. Review Proposal for development of a mixed use residential development at Wildwood
Ponds by Farr Development.
Darrel Farr made a presentation to the Council on a mixed use residential neighborhood (Wildwood
Ponds) proposed for a '38 acre parcel owned by Ralph Hermes. The original concept plan showed a
mix of 27 single family lots, town home lots and five 8-plex structures.
Mr. Farr reviewed with the Council other developments similar in nature that his firm has been
involved in. The concept sketch had been reviewed by the Planning Commission. An issue to be
discussed was the density per acre which would be just less than 4 units per acre.
Mr. Farr explained the types of housing proposed, the price range ($140,000-$170,000) and the
market this housing would appeal to. The Council indicated that in light of the earlier discussions wit]
residents, the Council was concerned that a developer builds what is proposed and they were also
concerned about the 8-plexes included in the development. They felt the layout should be redesigned
to eliminate the lots with narrow frontages (55'). There was some discussion that if this development
proceeds that it go in under a planned unit development then the City would have more control over
some of the aesthetic items of the development.
14. Consideration of adopting joint City/Township agreement establishing MOAA Board.
The Council reviewed the Court of Appeals ruling on the Gold Nugget case. Jeff O'Neill reported
that the court found that the comprehensive plan established by the MORA was not valid because
there was an error in the procedure for establishing the plan. The Court of Appeals ruling was on
the MOAA Comprehensive Plan, however the MOAA agreement of 1998 was based on completion
of the comprehensive plan by July 8, 1999. Since the plan that was adopted by the MOAA Board
was invalid, there is no plan in place and the July 8, 1999 deadline has passed so it is the opinion of
legal counsel that the MOAA Board no longer exists. The City Council discussed whether or not to
adopt a new agreement with the township similar to that of the 1998 agreement. If there is no
agreement the City would operate under the current State of Minnesota annexation statutes.
The Council discussed whether the annexation process had gone more smoothly under the annexation
agreement. Clint Herbst felt that MOAA Board had made recent annexations an easier process.
Roger Carlson felt the dissolution of the MOAA removed one more layer of bureaucracy that the
property owners and developers would have to go through. Bruce Thielen felt it was more
advantageous to work with the state statutes governing annexation. Roger Belsaas emphasized the
need for industrial land for the City and the Council discussed Gold Nugget as a possible area of
industrial use. Bruce Thielen stated he had no problem if the portion of the Gold Nugget property
abutting TH 25 was industrial. Roger Belsaas expressed support for following state statutes and
0
Council Minutes - 6/25/01
i�
expressed confidence that the City Council working together can develop a land use plan that
preserves sufficient land for industrial development. The consensus of the Council is that the City
could reach a resolution to the dilemma of the industrial land designation through negotiation and
compromise.
Jeff O'Neill noted that the Council may wish to consider working with the township on development
of an MOAA agreement similar to agreements commonly found in other communities. Such an
agreement would give full planning authority to the City in exchange for identifying conditions or
criteria for annexation.
The Council discussed what action to take. Bruce Thielen didn't feel it was necessary to operate
under the most recent MOAA agreement and to delay making a decision on development of any
other type of MOAA agreement. He felt it would be preferable for the City to be operating under
state statutes. Brian Stumpf concurred that the City should operate under state statutes given the
problems we have with the township. Clint Herbst felt not continuing with the MOAA was throwing
something of use out the window.
BRIAN STUMPF MOVED TO TABLE ANY ACTION ON ADOPTING ANY MOAA
AGREEMENT AT THIS TIME AND INSTEAD FUNCTION UNDER CURRENT STATE
STATUTES AS THEY RELATE TO ANNEXATION. STAFF IS DIRECTED TO PROVIDE
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION ON VARIOUS TYPES OF AGREEMENTS REGULATING
ANNEXATION FOR FUTURE REFERENCE AND REVIEW. BRUCE THIELEN
SECONDED THE MOTION. MOTION CARRIED WITH CLINT HERBST VOTING IN
OPPOSITION.
City Attorney, Dennis Dalen, asked for Council direction on appealing the Court of Appeals ruling.
Since the City, township and county were all named in the legal action, any one of the parties could
appeal the ruling as long as it was done within 30 days.
ROGER CARLSON MOVED TO INSTRUCT LEGAL COUNSEL NOT TO APPEAL FOR A
REVIEW OF THE COURT OF APPEALS OPINION. BRUCE THIELEN SECONDED THE
MOTION. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
15. Approye payment of bills for June.
BRUCE THIELEN MOVED TO APPROVE PAYMENT OF BILLS FOR JUNE. ROGER
CARLSON SECONDED THE MOTION. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
16. Adjourn.
BRIAN STUMPF MOVED TO ADJOURN AT 10:25 P.M. CLINT HERBST SECONDED THE
MOTION. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
A
ow,t_� �s
Recording Secretary
10
Council Minutes - 6/25/01