Loading...
1990-06-04 CC Agenda/Packet• • '�'' • �' Ii� wll �i ry. a. fmirfriumIV m - Protect Updates b. BINS�iING • - Other Business c. LEGAL - OpdELte on Building di ng Permit Issue - Other Business • MATIO. COUNCIL MINUTES June 4, 1990 The regular meeting of the Albertville City Council was called to order by Acting Mayor Dcn Cornelius, Mayor Gary Schwenzfeier arrived late. Members present included Bob Brain, Don Cornelius, Donates Vetsch and Jim Krystosek. Others present included Maureen Andrews, Bob Miller, Kevin Mealhouse, Jackie Peterson, and Ken Lindsay. -- The agenda for the evening-s meeting was reviewed by the Council. A motion was made by Bob Brun and seconded by Jim Krystosek. All were in favor and the motion carried. The minutes of the May 21st meeting were reviewed and approved. A motion was made by Donatus Vetsch and seconded by Jim Krystosek. All were in favor and the motion was carried. The first item on the agenda was the Park Edge Subdivision. Maureen Andrews informed the Council that Barthel Construction had submitted an application for the rezoning and subdivision of a parcel of land located directly west of the intersection of Barthel and Drive and 52nd Street. The proposal included a request to rezone the property from a "K-8", Mixed Housing District to a Planned Unit Development (PUD) District and for Preliminary Plat Approval of the Parks Edge Subdivision. Maureen. reviewed with the Council the findings of the Planning Report from Northwest Associated Consultants, Inc. Some of the points noted included discussion on the following issues: 1. Land use for the proposed use and its relationship to the surrounding land use. It was noted that the land uses surrounding this property included the following zoning designations: North Single Family R-3 South Public Park R-3 East Industrial I-1 West Single Family R-3 It was also noted that this area serves as a transition between the Industrial Park and the Single -Family Residential land uses. The Comprehensive Plan designated the land use of the said area as high density residential development (10 or more unites per acre) because its location to the Industrial Park, the odd configuration of the site and the difficulty of providing a single family type subdivision within its boarders. The submitted preliminary plat does provide a gradation in land use via varied lot sizes and provides a functionally efficient division of property which minimizes the adverse effects of the adjacent industrial park. It was noted that to allow a deviation from the proposed land use in the Comprehensive plan is a policy decision for the Council to make and should be done prior to approving the rezoning and the preliminary plat. 2. The appropriateness of the use of Planned Unit Development (PUD) zoning. It was noted that due to the odd configuration of the site, the applicant requested a PUD zoning designation to allow a number of lots to lie smaller than typical R-8 requirements. The PUD zoning would allow smaller lots to be situated along the industrial park and the larger lots to abut similar sized single family lots which lie to the west. It was further noted that because of the odd configuration of the site, strict conformance of the sits existing R-8 requirements would impair the reasonable development of the property. It was also pointed out that the City does maintain ultimate control in establishing the performance standards within a PUD District. 1. The size of the lots within the plat. It was noted that the lot size range from 9,600 to 19,161 square PAGE 2 feet in size with an average lot measuring 12, 119 square feet. It was noted that even though the subdivision's average lot size is less than 12,500 square feet typically required within r-8 districts, the proposed lot areas are considered acceptable via the provision of the PUD. 2. Lot setback. The preliminary plat conforms with the minimum R-8 requirements of 25 feet rear yard setbacks. Because of the flexibility allowed in the PUD District the interior yard setbacks do not have to be in as strict conformance with the R-8 requirements. The plan proposed less stringent setbacks than the standard which were commented on by the Planner. Proposed Front Yard- Setback Typical R-8 Front Yard Setback Planner's Hemmmendation Lots 1 & 2 30 feet 35 feet 30 feet Lot 3 25 feet 35 feet 25 feet -- Lots 4-6 30 feet 35 feet 30 feet Lots 7-9 20 feet 35 feet 25 feet It was also rooted that to further improve the aesthetics and improve lot functioning, notably parking that it was being suggested that the single family homes be situated in a manner in which attached garages are setback as far as possible. The report included house footprints to further clarify this matter. 3. Streets size and location. The subdivision is to be accessed via a single cul-de-sw from Barthel Drive which is considered positive because it reinforces an inward neighborhood focus and also minimizes the negative impacts (i.e., noise, views, pedestrian safety) produced by stop -and -go semi -truck trailer traffic. Because of the narrowness of the lot the subdivision is designed with a 40 foot wide right-of-way, with a 37 foot driving surface instead of the normal 60 foot R.O.W. which is required by Ordinance. The plan does show a 60 foot radius on the cul-de-sac to provide for appropriate maneuvering space for emergency vehicles. 4. Site grading and drainage. The plan submitted indicates a significant amount of earthwork needs to be completed on Lots 2, 3, and 4 prior to the construction of homes. The grading plan needs to be modified to PAGE 3 guard. against any adverse erosion upon the adjacent westerly properties. Plans will need to be further reviewed and commented on by the City Engineer. 5. Public Utilities. Plans were submitted for preliminary water and sanitary sewer installation but will be subject to review and comment of the City Engineer. This section of the report dealt with steps needed to be taken to lessen the potential negative impacts of the close proximity of the industrial park and the adjacent high volume roadway (Barthel Drive). It was suggested that both berming and coniferous tree plantings be placed along the subdivision's eastern border within the Barthel Drive right-of-way, which will need to be maintained by the adjacent property owners. �. 7. Park dedication. The plan does not provide for any park. dedication. According to Section A-600.15 of the City Subdivision Ordinance, a cash contribution may be provided in lieu of lazed dedication. Per the Ordinance, a cash contribution of $170.00 per dwelling unit shall be required, which would total $1,530.00. This issue shall be subject further review of the Council. The report reiterates that fact that if the request is approved that the City`s Comprehensive Plan will need to be amended, again noting that the decision of appropriate use is a policy matter to be determined by City Officials. If the City, finds single family development to be an acceptable use upon the subject site, the firm would recommend approval of the requested rezoning from R-8, Mixed Housing District to PUD, Planned Unit Development as well as the submitted preliminary plat. The approvals, however shall be contingent upon the fulfillment of the conditions described later in these minutes. It was noted that at the time of the public hearing the issue of single stall garages were raised. It was pointed out that this discussion had not been part of the original application and therefore had not been formally commented on by the Planner or the Planning Commission. The Council was informed that the Planning- Commission had commented on the matter, indicating that they did not feel that it was appropriate to allow single stall garages when the Ordinance required two stall garages. It was noted that David Licht had commented as well, pointing out that financial justification (FmHA Financing for new construction) is not enough justification to providing for the deviation to the Ordinance. Mayor Gary Schwenzfeier raised the question of what does the P.U.D do for the property? The Council was informed by Bob Miller that the P.U.D allows for more flexibility in handling land that doesn`t meet the normal zoning standards. Ken pointed out that the preliminary plat did not include a walkway from Lansing Circle to the Four Season Park. He pointed out that the other cal -du -sacs adjacent to the park have access provided and suggested that because of the plat's location to Barthel Drive that it might be advantageous to do so here as well. It was that a walk path be located between lot #4 and 5 to access the playground and. eliminate people from walking across property owner's grass. Ion Cornelius expressed concern that the homes on Barthel Drive would lower the value of the adjacent house. He felt that the public might not realize how small and close together the houses will be. Maureen Andrews noted that even though the lots are smaller that they will still allow for standard housing to be situated on the property. She also noted that the Zoning Ordinance requires that a house have a minimum floor area of 960 square feet for a two bedroom home and 1,040 for a three bedroom of main floor living. Bob Miller pointed out that he felt that a declaration be included to not allow access on Barthel Drive, requiring that all driveways access onto Lansing Circle. Don Cornelius questioned who will maintain the berm. After discussion the Council agreed that the residents adjacent to the berm shall be responsible for the maintenance of the berm after purchase of the property, with the stipulation that they do not alter the design or make changes without the City's approval. The berm on the vacant lots would be the responsibility of the builder_. It was further noted that this would be included as part of the Developer's Agreement. There was some discussion regarding the number of lots shown in the preliminary plat. It was pointed out that the original draft of the plat showed two cal -chi -sacs with 5 lots on one and 4 an the other. There was was some concern regarding the size of the lots and it was suggested the maybe the developers should consider the passibility of reducing the plat by one lot to make the lots abutting Barthel Drive a little larger_ L-L Mayor Gary Schwenzfeier asked Dave Wolff if Barthel Construction would be opposed to cutting back one lot to allow for more space between the houses for lawn and walkways. Dave expressed that it would be very difficult to do and still keep this a feasible single dwelling project. Staff noted that the reduction in the number of lots will not likely add a lot to the subdivision because the major problem with the plat is the dept of lots 7, 8, and 9 not the width. Bob Miller noted that because of the constraints due to land configuration there is not much that can be done to add any additional debt to the lots. It was also noted that another problem with reducing the number of lots in the subdivision has to do with the pending and current assessments on the lot. It was pointed out that to make the project cash flow, the subdivision needs to have enough lots to justify the expense of the public improvements. The Council was reminded that the parcel of land in question already has special assessments levied against it for the improvement of Barthel Drive and will have additional assessments levied in the future for the public improvements within the subdivision. Bob Braun noted his concern regarding the downzoning of the property from the R-8, Mixed Housing District designated for multiple housing to the PUD zoning for the single family subdivision. Bob questioned whether it was wise to down zone the property when the City knows that multiply housing is a good transitional zone between the industrial park and the single family housing. He pointed out that there was no assurance that Barthel Construction will not come back to the City to request the rezoning of some of the land that is currently zoned I-1, Light Industrial to multiple when the market will support this housing type. Bob Miller pointed out that the City's Comprehensive Plan provides a guideline for how the land should be developed and used and that the Council will be able to address the issue if it was ever to arise. He also noted that there should be a balance of single family and multiple housing in a City. He pointed out how there has been problems with some older cities having to many rental units and the various problems it causes. He suggested that the City try to keep the multiple housing to a maximum of 25% rental units. With rental units you will have a lot of transient movement of people and that home owners tend to stay and take better care of their own property. Hearing no other questions or comments a series of motions regarding the Park's Edge Subdivision were approved. A motion was made to amend the Comprehensive Plan to reflect the change from High Density Housing to Single family was made. The motion was made by Donatus Vetsch and steed by Jim Krystosek. All were in favor and the motion carried.. A motion was made to approve the rezoning of the R-8; Mixed Housing District to PUD= Planned Unit Development District and to direct staff to prepare the amendment to the Zoning Map reflecting the change. The motion was made by Donatus Vetsch and seconded by Don Cornelius. All were in favor and the motion carried. A motion was made to approve the preliminary plat for Parks Edge with the stipulations recommended by the planners. The recommendations are as follows- 1. A Comprehensive Plan amendment is approved which allows the subject plat to be consistent with the City"s land use plan. 2. Front yard setbacks imposed upon Lots 7-9 of the subject plat are increased from 20 to 25 feet to provide greater visual and functional consistency within the subdivision. 3. Single family homes to be constructed within the subdivision are configured in a manner in which attached garages are setback to the furthest extent possible. Such a configuration is intended to lessen the visual impact of minimal front yard setbacks and visually open the neighborhood Plus Provide more off-street parking. Building design and garage Position on Lots 7, 8 and 9 shall therefore be subject to approval of the City Building Official. 4. The proposed 40 foot street right-of-way is found to be acceptable by the City Engineer. 5. The submitted grading and drainage plan is modified to identify specific erosion control measures. The plan shall be subject to the review and comment of the City Engineer. 6. The utility plan is subject to review and comment by the City Engineer. 7. Both berming and coniferous tree plantings are provided along the subdivision's eastern border within the Barthel Drive right-of-way. Such a barrier will visually and audibly screen negative impacts associated with the adjacent industrial park. The said landscaping is to be maintained by adjacent property owners. That a declaration be added to the Developer's Agreement that no alteration of the berming shall be allowed. 8. The subject plat meets the City`s park land dedication requirements and is subject to review by the City Park Board. And that a walkway will be required from the plat to the Four Season-s Park. It was further stipulated that if it was not feasible to install the walkway to the park within the plats current design that the plat size should be reduced by one lot to compensate for the needed space_ 9. A declaration will be added to the Developer-s Agreement requiring all driveway access shall be on Lansing Circle and no driveways will be allowed to front on Barthel Drive. 10. Other comments as may be made by the City Administrator, City Building Official, City Engineer and City Attorney. The motion was made by Bob Braun and seconded by Donatus Vetsch. All were in favor and the motion carried. The next item of the agenda was Maintenance. Ken updated the Council on the new playground, informing them that it had been delivered and will be installed within the next couple weeks. He also noted that the blacktopping is in the process of being dome for the walkways and the basketball court. Ken informed the Council that he went ahead and added the extra 80 feet to the waterline construction so that the waterline will be looped into the Parks Edge Subdivision. The cost of the extra 80 feet will be picked up under the 429 Improvement Project for the subdivision. Ken also pointed out that the bases and the pitchers mound are missing at the ball park. He expressed concern that there is a problem with the Park Board and that there should be some kind of guideline drawn up for them to follow. Ken asked the Council when interviewing for the new maintenance employee will begin. The Council is trying to schedule time for reviewing the applications and will try to schedule interviews as soon as possible. Ken raised the issue of the water drainage problem, and what can be done to resolve it. Ken and Bob Miller walked the problem areas prior to the meeting to see if they could determine were the problem is and what legal obligation the City,Township Developers and residents in the Green Haven Subdivision have. Bob Miller brought up 3 points that have to be considered. I. We don`t know the history of who installed the drainage tiles. There is the question whether the drainage line is public or private, was the installation of the tile a joint effort by several of the areas` residents and was the City involved with assisting in the financing of the line or was it a private drain tile. Bob noted that without knowing the answers to these questions we may not be able to determine who is responsible for repairs. 2) We may never know the entire history. 3) The City may not have any authority to have the corrections made. • He The Council discussed the possibility of getting some of the long term residents of the town together for a meeting to combine old memories to get the story of what really happened. The point was raised whether or not this information would hold up in a Court of Law- Bob responded that "Old memories are good memories in Court." It was then discussed that if it is determined that the City of Albertville had contributed to the initial installation of the tile then we should share in the cost along with Frankfort Township and the Minnesota Department of Transportation. Bob Miller updated the Council on the discussion regarding the pending Payment of the building permits for Loren Kohnen. Bob informed the Council that he had met with Kevin and they had gone through the permits again. Bob said that he would be preparing a report on his findings. There was discussion regarding a memo received by Northwest Associated Consultants. Inc- regarding adult entertainment. and the possibility of updating the Albertville-s` 'Zoning Ordinances. The memo suggests the Adult Bookstores be restricted from being located within 10H feet of a day-care operation, 3W feet of a church, and 400 feet of a single family residential neighborhood, to prevent future controversy in the City, if an Adult Bookstore wish to locate in Albertville. A motion was made by Jim Krystosek and seconded by Bob Braun. All was in favor and the motion carried. A motion was made to approve the Income Received and Bills to be paid. The motion was made by Don Cornelius and seconded by Jim Krystosek. All were in favor and checks 10536 through 10585 were approved_ There was discussion regarding Kevin Roden`s garage addition. NSP said that he has to have a 9 foot vertical and 12 foot horizontal clearance. Kevin will try to reduce the garage to get the clearance. There was no further discussion �ussion regarding this matter. The Council next reviewed the bids on the purchase and installation of an air conditioner for the City Hall. At the present there are 2 bids in on the Project- Comparing the two, it was pointed out that it was not a fair comparison since one of the bids did not include the duct work installation. The Council felt that the cost of the Air Conditioners were too expensive. A motion was made by Don Cornelius, to have the two bids redone. The bids are both to include the oast of a 2.5 & 3.0 tan air conditioner and duct work needed. Also to get a couple more bids from other companies with the same information. When all the bids are in, the motion is also to accept the lowest cost. The motion was seconded by Bob Braun. All was in favor and the motion was carried. The subject of the driveways that are caving in the Westwind Subdivision. There was discussion as to why this is happening. It was pointed out by Jim Krystosek that it is due to the draught of the past couple years. -, Since the ground is dry it prevents the construction crew from being able to compact the soil ems. After time and rain the soil settles and causes the big holes. Donatus Vetsch and Kevin Mealbouse pointed out that the water shut off valves were placed in bad locations. It was requested that future plats are to be in the middle of the lots. The Council discussed having Kevin Mealhouse do the inspections on the valves since it is part of the housing inspection. Donatus Vetsch expressed his concern regarding the removal of the dead bushes and trees before Friendly City Days. After some discussion it was decided that the maintenance crew had to many other things to take care of before Friendly City Days and that the City would hire V&E Landscaping to clean it up. The Council briefly discussed the problem of what happened to the City, signs. Mayor Gary Schwenzfeier said that they were to bank up by Wednesday. There was also questions as to what happened to the Albertville sign. Someone has been charging the letters around. With no further discussion the Council requested Ken to look into the matter. Jim Krystosek suggested the City run a notice in the paper to inform the residents of the recycling schedule. He pointed out that it was wind the day the containers and notices were delivered to the residents, and that some of the notices may have blown away. A motion was made to adjourn the meeting. The motion was made by Bob Braun and seconded by Donatus Vetsch. All were in favor and the motion carried. CITY OF ALBERTVILLE P. O. BOX 131 ALBERTVILLE, MINNESOTA 55301 PHONE: (612) 497-3384 (X)UNCIL MINUTES MAY 21. 1990 The regular meeting of the Albertville City Council was called to order by Mayor Gary Schwenzfeier. Members present included Bob Braun, Don Cornelius, Donatus Vetsch and Jim Krystosek. Others present included Maureen Andrews, Bob Miller, Thore Meyer, Brad Farnham, Jackie Peterson, Sgt. Bill Correll and Ken Lindsay. The agenda for the evenings meeting was reviewed by the Council. A motion was made by Don Cornelius and seconded by Donatus Vetsch. All were in favor and the motion carried. The minutes of the May 7th meeting were reviewed and discussed. Donatus Vetsch questioned the information regarding the information regarding the purchase of the park equipment. In an effort to clarify the issue the following information should be included in the minutes. The total cost of the equipment was $11,632.00 minus a $442.00 discount if all the items were purchased. This price included some items which were to be purchased by the Albertville Jaycees. The amount of the Jaycee-s items amounted to $2,692.00 minus the discount. The breakdown of the purchase price is as follows: TOTAL COST $11,632.00 CITY'S SHARE OF EQUIPMENT CITY'S SHARE OF DISCOUNT (3.8%) COST TO CITY JAYCEE'S SHARE OF EQUIPMENT JAYCEE'S SHARE OF DISCOUNT (3.80%) COST TO JAYCEES TOTAL PURCHASE PRICE INCLUDING DISCOUNT (This amount includes the Jaycees equipment) 8,670.00 329.49 $ 8,340.51 `. , 692.00 112.51 $ 2,579.49 $11,920.00 Make our City ........ Your Ci(v We invite Home, lndustrv, Business It should be noted that this price does not include the cost of installation of concrete to install the the equipment to safety standards. Hearing no other questions or comments a motion was made by Bob Braun and seconded by Jim Krystosek to approve the quote from FLANNAGAN SALES, INC. for the purchase of the playground equipment plus the concrete. All were in favor and the motion carried. Ken noted that there needed to be a correction made in paragraph 3, page 3. The sentence should read ...A motion was made to accept Ray Varner's letter Of resignation and hire Mike ��tkowski temporarily until a permanent replacement could be hire. Hearing no other comments or questions a n7ition was made by Jim Krystosek and seconded by Don Cornelius. All were in favor and the motion carried. The first item on the agenda was the approval of the appointment to the secretary's position. The Council was informed that the committee had interviewed nine - candidates for the position and had an additional interview with the two finalist for the position. The Council packet included a copy of finalist's resume' for the Council review. The Council was informed that Jackie Peterson was being recommended for the position because the committee felt that she had the most well rounded experience and would really add a lot to the job. There was some discussion regarding salary. It was agreed that Jackie should be started out at $7.25 an hour and in 30 days her job performance would be reviewed and at that time the Council would consider increasing the salary rate. It should be noted that this decision does not supersede the Personnel Policy which requires that a new emp'oy--be on a 6 month probationary period. Jim Krystosek asked if the City could require that Jackie to move to town? It was noted that the City really can not require any employee to live in town, but in the case of an essential service employee (i.e. snow plow operator) can be required to live within a certain travel distance so than they can be assured to get to work on an emergency basis. Hearing no other discussion a motion was made by Don Cornelius and seconded by Donatus Vetsch to hire Jackie Peterson for the Secretary's Position.. All were in favor and the motion carried. A motion was made by Donatus Vetsch and seconded by Jim Krystosek to start the position out at $7.25 an hour for 90 days and then review job performance for a raise consideration. All were in favor and the motion carried. PAGE 2 The next item on the agenda was Maintenance. Ken brought to the Council's attention that there have been some problem with the installation of sewer and water lines in the Westwind Subdivision. It appears that there was not proper compaction around the pipe. Ken suggested that the ordinance be changed to require Schedule 40 pipe and in addition would establish a compaction standard for refilling the trench. It was questioned whether the City was problems with all the contractors installing the sewer and water lines or if it was just one or two contractors that seemed to have the problem. it was noted that most of the problems have been with just on contractor. Kevin Mealhouse consented that he had some concern regarding the two suggestions that, Ken had raised. The first being that if the City establishes compaction standards that then there would need to be some type of compaction testing done to relieve the City of any liability if the compaction was not done correctly. Secondly, he noted that the State Plumbing Code stipa.lates what type of materials must bP used for installation of sewer and water lines and that if the City deviated from those standards that they could be found to be in violation of the Plumbing Code. Bob Miller noted that it was his opinion that the problem was really between the Developer and the subcontractor doing the installation of the lines. It was suggested that; the developers should be made aware of the problem so that it does not arise again in the future. There was a question raised regarding what the City could do to help eliminate this type of problem from happening in the future. It was again stressed that, it is important that, the developers are made aware of the problem so that they can be assured by their subcontractors that the lines will be proper backfilled. There was also discussion regarding the sewer inspection permits and after hour inspections. It, was noted that there have been several instances that jobs are not completed on time and inspections need to take place after the Maintenance Department has finished for the day. It was agreed that the City should not be responsible for the overtime charged for this work. One way around this is that the Council could reinstate the After Hour Inspection fee for these instances. It was noted that common sense should be used for determining when this charge should be enforced. A motion was made by Donatus Vetsch and seconded by Don Cornelius to reinstate the After Hour Inspection fee at $25.00. All were in favor and the motion carried. PAGE 3 Ken next, brought to the Council's attention that there has been additional driving occurring on the dike at the Waste Water Treatment Facility. No action was taken on this matter. The issue regarding the storm water drainage problem in and along the frontage roads in both Albertville and Frankfort Township were discussed. Ken informed the Council that he had been told by the Frankfort Maintenance Superintendent that the Township does not intend to correct the problem and is waiting for the City of Albertville to come in and fix it. It was noted that pictures have been taken of the drainage problem so that there is accurate records of high the water is getting because of the fact that the water has no outlet to drain. Bob Miller was questioned about what was the City"s responsibility in a situation such as this one. Bob noted that there could be some serious problem that arise out of this situation. Some of the points raised included: 1. Did the plat in Frankfort Township include public drai-riage easements or were they private easements and if so were they accepted as part of the plat? 2. Is the drainage system public or private. If the pipe is considered public there could be some recourse to get the problem resolved, bit if the system is private there is no obligation to correct the problem. It was agreed that Bob should look into the matter in more detail to set' if there is some solution to the problem. Bob Miller was asked if the temporary construction easements for the construction of the water line for the Four Season's Park had been completed. Ken informed the CADuncil that the installation of the line was expected to be done by the end of the week or the early part of the following week. There was some discussion regarding how much of an easement the City needed from the two adjoining property owners. It was noted that it would helpful if the City could get 25 feet from Keith Aalderks and 15 feet from Ken Wacker. This wculd allow for enough room to get the line installed and store the extra dirt on the site. It was suggested that a work meeting be scheduled within the next couple weeks to discuss the construction of the Maintenance Facility. No action was taken on setting up a meeting until schedules could be checked to see when time would be available. There had been a request for some additional gravel to be installed in the Park and Ride Lot, Ken said that he would go out and do the necessary work PAGE 4 in the parking lot in the next few weeks. Ken was reminded that they should plan on filling in the hole by the Lamp Post In when the blacktopning is being done in the park. Ken noted that there were some other spot around town that needed some patching done as well. Brad Farnham next made a presentation to the Council regarding the issue of 1st Time Home Owner money. Brad explained to the G:)uncil that it had ibeen his intention to come out and discuss the possibility of financing 1st Time Home Owner's Money for single-family residential housing for 1990, but that some issues had arisen which could have made the fLnancLng impossible for this year. As part of the backgro.,nd information regarding this :natter, Brad informed the Coimcil that ,Duran and Moody had planned orn, putting toget;'ner a consortium of cities to bid -on State of Minnesota Industrial Revenue Bonds that would be turned over for low interest residential housing money later in 'he year. In order to do this this each participating City waald need to prepare a Resolution of Intent to Participate, a housing plan and a housing program, which would then be submitted to various state and regional agencies for review. Brad noted that it appeared that there was between $,110, DDO, 000 . DD to $70,000,000.00 available for this low interest money. The Duran and Moody plan was to have ten of their clients enter into the consortium, which each of these cities submitting a proposal for $1D,DDD,000D each. They then figured that if 3 or 4 of these cities were drawn in the lottery that the money could then be divided ,amongst the entire peel. Other information provided to the C.oimcil was that a Gp� application fee (approximxately $200,000.00 for each application) would have to be deposit at the time the application was made to the State. Juran and Moody had agreed to ;make the deposit of 1.6 million as a loan to participatLng cities until the bond proceeds were made available. it was at this time Brad {plain ed. that after additional consideration it was decided that, the timing was not feasible to get, ail the necessary documentation prepared and reviewed in a timely enough period so that applications could be suY-mitted. The major points of concern centered around the fact the these submittals reed to be presented to the Department of Finance, the Minnesota Housing and Redevelopment Authority and the Met Council for review and at any time, one of these organizations could reach into the process and delay any or all of the applications from completing the process. Brad noted that if this action was to occur that the participating cities would not be able to recover all of the application deposit and for this reason Juran and Moody felt that there was too much risk involve at this time. Brad note-r that he decided to still make an appe-arance before the Council in order tx-) mare them aware of the possibility this type of program may be FADE 5 available for 1991 if the federal government does not sunset the the law on Industrial Revenue Bonds. Brad noted that this possibility has been in the makL-g for several years but that lobbyist groups for the construction industry has work to keep the federal funding available and it appears- that they will be working to keep the financing alive for 1991 funding. If the federal funding is still around in 1991, it is Juran and Moody"s recommendation that the cities prepare the necessary documentation so that they can participate in the program next year. Brad noted that the City would need to direct that a Housing Plan .and a Housing Prr_gram be prepared in much the same manner that the Tax Increment FL-�iarcing Plans were prepared. It was estimated that the cost of such plans would ran the City approximately $4 , 0W . 07 to $8 , 2M.00. At this time Brad answered some questions raised by the members of the Council which included: 1. What would the interest rate be on such money if it was available? Brad noted that the schedules that Jur:an and Moody were running indicated that the rates would be between 8.25 and 8.50% and would be considered fixed rates for a period of 30 years. v. What were the financial limits set for being eligible for this First Time Home Owner Money? It was noted that unlike FHmA housing, the guidelines for 1st time Home Owner Money is as follows: Existing Housing Mew Construction $sW0,000.00 to 95, c�.VX $115 , 2'K?�0 . 00 3. How long does each of the cities have to use the money? The program requires that the money is used within three years of the time of the award. Brad noted that because of the consortium approach. to financing this money would mean that if one city had not been able to use up their allotment that it could be transferred to another city within the group who may have already used their allotment, thereby providing very little risk to any of the cities involved. 4. How does the city making the application get money back? The money involved comes back to the cities in two fashions, the first being from the Housing Finance P.gency and secondly from the bond proceeds. 5. H-s this type of financing be been in the past and if so how" The Counties of Dakota and Washir4ggton Counties have undertaken thi: PAGE 6 type of financing before. They have tapped the developers in their counties for the up front money prior to making the deposit and application to the State. 6. Who loans the money out locally? In this situation there is a master lender which is involved with the local banking institutions who process the loans. It was noted that if the City was to participate in such a financing that the local bank would need to be approach to see if they would be interested in being involved with the project. 7. Is there a risk of default on this money? No, the money is backed by "GINNE MAE" dollars, which is federally backed money. 8. Could the City draw interest on this money? No. 9. Could the City charge a servicing fee for making this money available? Not likely, because of the federal laws governing the money. 10. It was questioned when the money would be made available? Brad noted that the money would come be available at the time of the closing of the bonds. 11. Would there need to be a deposit note prepared? Briggs and Morgan said NO, also noting that there would not need to be a vote of the people for this financing. Brad noted that this type of financing is the most complicated financing behind the advance refunding that the City has undertaken but that the firm felt comfortable in undertaking it if time would permit. It was noted that, each of the cities being asked to participate in this, type of financing have been selected strategically around the state so that the money would be used. Noting that different regions are experienced different types of growth act iviti.es . There was some discussion regarding the home owner interest rates being discussed. Brad noted that the schedules indicated about 8.5% and would include points. These rates could be obtained by having one of the firms AAA rate cities bond for the entire debt. It was estimated that the bond rate would be 6.65% plus points which would take the rates to a 8.25% to 8.5%. PAGE? Brad pointed out that even though it was decided not to undertake a financing of the type this year, that each of the cities should consider the possibility of preparing the plan and program so that the consortium would be in position for the 1991 money. Brad noted that the Council should take some time to consider the financing tool and decide whether or not they want to be involve. He pointed out that the plan and program would need to be prepared by February or early March at the latest and would take some time to prepare. The issue of Tax Increment, Financing was briefly discussed. Brad noted that the new law just about gutted the use of the financing tool for this year and that we can expect that the entire ability to use it in the future will be killed in 1991. It was noted that it is the feeling of those involved with the I obbying for the use of T.I.F. that the legislature did not understand the full impact of the of the regulations adopted. There was no other business for Brad, so he thanked the Council for their time and then left. The next items on the agenda were from Engineering. Bob Sullentrop presented the Council with the final bill on the 1988-3A Improvement Project, for LaTour Construction. The amount of the bill was for $13,506.17, which included reimbursement for the bidding errors in sections "F" and '.I" for Class 5 that had been presented to the Council at the time the contract had been submitted for approval. It was noted that this error would be considered by the Council at the end of the contract and if money was available LaTour would be paid. It should be noted that the error had no impact on who the lowest bidder was. There was some discussion regarding different parts of the pay requesz, which Bob explained to the Council. It should also be noted that at the time - of the submittal of the pay west the final wear courses on the street patches had not been applied so it was the recommendation of Meyer-Rohlin that the Council should approve the request but not send the check until a 'Letter of release was sent from the engineering firm. A motion was made to approve the pay request for the final payment of 1988-3A in the amount of $13,506.17, which includes the extra expense for the Class 5 under Bids"H" and "J", pending the approval of Meyer-Rohlin. The motion was made by Uonatus Vetsch and seconded by Bob Braun. All were in favor and the motion carried. The next issue discussed was the point repair on 55th Street. A letter had been submitted by Meyer-Rohlin regarding the matter for the C,ouncil`s review. There was a great deal of discussion regarding whether or not the problem that was to have been corrected in 1989 was in the same place or in a new section of curb. Bob Sullentrop thought the problem had arisen in a new FAG 8 section of curb, while Don Cornelius and Ken Lindsay felt that it was in the same location as were it had been repair last year. After some additional discussion it was agreed that Ken and Bob should go back out and check the problem area again before the Council took any action on the matter. This issue was tabled until later in the meeting. Sgt. Bill Correll had stopped by to see if there were any questions of the Wright County Sheriff's Office. No comments or questions were raised. The next business on the agenda was Legal. Bob informed the Council that he had been in touch with the State Building: Official as well as 2 other building inspectors to see what they would do in a instance such as the one that has occurred in Albertville. No one had a clear cut answer to our problem. Bob noted, that the Council had the option to pay Loren Kohnen for all the outstanding permits except for the "problem ones". It was decided that, since it had taken Loren so long to bill for the permits that the City could wait to pay him when all the problems had been resolved. The Council next, reviewed two ordinances and a resolution regarding housing maintenance, rental licenses and the processing of demolition orders. OrNinance 1990-4; AN ORDINANCE ESTABLISHING RENTAL HOUSING DWELLING LICENSES AND REGULATIONS AND PROVIDING A PENALTY FOR VIOLATION THEREOF was discussed first. Bob explained the intent of this ordinance was to provide for the ability of the City to preform annual inspections of rental property to assure that the units were up to code. He noted that in checking on this ordinance that, the fees established for this inspection varies, but was recommending that the City follow the Brooklyn Park guidelines because they had just recently updated their ordinance and fee schedule, noting that their fees were an average of what other cities are charging. It was pointed out that if the City of Albertville would use this schedule the following fees would apply: Single family and Uzplex Rentals Tri-plexes and Larger Units PAGE 9 $25.00 for each units $25.00 for units 1 and 2, plus $5.00 for each unit in the building. (i.e. a Tri-plex would be charged $65.00 for the inspection -- $50.00 for units 1 and 2 and $15.00 for the three units rented) It was noted that the purpose of an ordinance such as this one is to provide enough inspections so that properties will not deteriorate to the point that they have to be condemned and demolished. 'There was some discuss Lon regarding when this inspection should go into effect. It was noted that if Kevin is going going to do the inspection that the best time of the year to do them is during the winter month when there is not as much inspection work going on. It was suggested that the Council adopt the ordinance at this time, notify the land lords of the new ordinance and not enforce the license fee or inspection until February 1, 1991. Heari-ng no other questions or comments a motion was made by Jim Krystosek and seconded by Don Cornelius to approve Ordinance 1990-4; entitled AN ORDINANCE ESTABLISHING RENTAL HOUSING DWELLING LICENSES AND REGULATIONS AND PROVIDING A PENALTY FOR VIOLATION THEREOF and set the fee for the inspection at $25.00 for units 1 and 2 plus $5.00 for each unit in units larger than 2. All were in favor and the motion carried. The Council next reviewed Ordinance 1990-3; entitled AN ORDINANCE ESTABLISHING HOUSING MAINTENANCE REGULATIONS AND PROVIDING A PENALTY FOR VIOLATION THEREOF. The purpose of this ordinance establishes the guidelines for the purpose of inspecting rental property. After some discussion a motion was made by Bob Braun and seconded by Don Cornelius to approve Ordinance 1990-3, entitled AN ORDINANCE ESTABLISHING HOUSING MAINTENANCE REGULATIONS AND PROVIDING A PENALTY FOR VIOLATION THEREOF. All were in favor and the motion carried The Council reviewed and approved Resolution 1990--2. A motion was made by Don Cornelius and seconded by Jim Krystosek to approve Resolution 1990-2; entitled AN RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING A POLICY RELATING TO THE PROCESSING OF DEMOLITION ORDERS BY THE CITY. A11 were in favor and the motion carried. Bob next reviewed with the Council the contract for recycling with Wright Recycling. There were some question regarding the pick up dates, liability and the amount being charged for recycling. It was noted that &-)b had made contact with Ken Kunkel and had clarified these issues and the contract was in order to be approved. A motion was made to approve the contract with Wright Recycling and set, the residential rates at $.25 about the emit charge charged by Wright Recycling and to authorize the Mayor and the City Clerk to enter into the contract with the same. The motion was made by Don Cornelius and seconded by Bob Braun. All were in favor and the motion carried. Bob Sullentrop and Ken Lindsay came back to the (council with the information regarding the point repair on 55th Street. The CA:>uncil was informed that it did not appear that the problem under discussion had any relationship with the repaired last year. PAGE 10 Being informed of this information a motion was made to have point repair made by Independent Curb Contractors, Inc, provided that it did not exceed $300.00. The motion was made by Donatus Vetsch and seconded by Jim Krystosek. All were in favor and the motion carried. Bob Miller next informed the Council that there had been some problems with an old deed for Barthel Industrial Drive. It appeared that no deed had ever been recorded for the 60 foot easement which ran on the Beaudry property. Bob had drawn the necessary documents and had the gotten signatures from the effected property owners. It was noted that the Council needed to accept, the deed and have Mai zreen record. A motion was made to accept the deed and have Maureen record the del for Barthel Industrial Drive. The motion was made by Bob Braun and seconded by Jim Krystosek. All were in favor and the motion carried. A motion was made to approve the Income Received and Bills to be Paid. The motion was made by Bob Braun and seconded by Jim Krystosek. All were in favor and the motion carried. A limited 3.2 Beer License was approved for the Albertville Jaycees for a softball tournament to be held on June 1, 2 and 3, 1990 pending payment. The motion was made by Ion Cornelius and seconded by Bob Braun. All were in favor and the motion carried. The bids for the stucco work were reviewed. The City had received two bids for the work: FETE ROHMF $3,066.00 plus $4.00 a lineal foot for Boards or Arches BILL ZIMMFRMAN.S STUCCO $2,22"0.00 A motion was made by Jim Krystosek and seconded by Bob Braun to accept the bid from Bill Zimmerman`s Stucco for the work on City Hall. All were in favor and the motion carried. Mary Vetsch was at the meeting to discuss his concern regarding the maintenance of the City Park and the problems that had arisen with the liquor license. The points were well taken and the issues were to be looked into. The June 4th Council meeting was changed from 7:00 p.m. to 8:30 so that people could attend the Queen Candidate Dinner. A motion was made by Donatus Vetsch and seconded by Bob Braun to change the meeting time. All were in favor and the motion carried. A motion was made to adjourn the meeting. The motion was made by Don Cornelius and seconded by Bob Braun. All were in favor and the motion carried. PAGE 11 Mio A I I, II C 1 1' IC • U SEWER ACCOUNTS $ 55.84 D.J.'s HEATING & AIR COND. 1772.20 VETSCH SOFTBALL 50.00 LEONARD TAL MAN 26_90 UNITED TELEPHONE 22.20 D.J.`s HEATING & AIR CONID_ 15.50 KEN WA(KER 19.74 MIKE POTTER 29.38 WRIGHT TITLE GUARANTEE CD- 10.00 ALBERTVILLE JAYCEES 26,260.44 DAN DAHLEIMER 33.50 TOTAL $28,311.18 CHECK BE • JIMF,.. 10537 KENLINDSAY• • %7 ► PER208. // • li U.S. SC 10542 KEVIN MEALHOUSE PAUL HEINER 17. 10544 SCHUMM ELECTRIC 120I I // ' • • • • 10547 RECONOMY RP ♦ I //••' i ROi' �r.� • / • ► NSP i 10650 INDEPENDENT CURBCONTRACTOR 300. 10551 r J.D. 10552 1 • t► 10453 IV..r'f#,INARD OFFICE PRODUCTS 5: i 'i'i 0 El TELEPHONE 174.95 1M55 FEED RITE CONTROL 1,351.75 'iti • ALBERTVILLE AUTO PARTS 242.89 10559 PERA • I 056 'UY'S JOHNSONi ASSOC. 625.00 i •1 FEED --RITE CONTROL ri• '/9 10565 1 BEATING r AIR CONDITIONING 'i • • MINNEGASCD 41.37 10567 PER . '11 • : KEN LINDSAY IM70 MAUREENn JACKIE • € eE•r. • 1M72 JIM :act . E' IM73 DONATUS VETSCH IM74 DON CORNELIUS 10575 BOBBRAUN M• JIM KRYSTOSEK IM77 GARYCl Ei E' 10578 NORWEST BANKS 'iti • MONTICELLO ANIMAL CONTROL 67.50 10580 D.J.'S TOTAL HOME CARE CENTER 333.37 10581 R:ESONS 4.43 10582 AME 166.80 10583 .. TOTAL Northwest Associated Consultants, Inc. U R B A N PLANNING • DESIGN • MARKET R E S E A R C H PLANNING REPORT TO: FROM: DATE: RE: FILE NO: EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Background: Maureen Andrews Robert Kirmis/David Licht 23 May 1990 Albertville - Parks Edge Rezoning - Preliminary Plat 163.06 - 90.05 Barthel Construction Company has submitted a request to rezone and subdivide a parcel of land located directly west of the intersection of Barthel Drive and 52nd Street. The applicants request follow their intention to develop 3.0 acre parcel of land into nine single family lots of varied size. The applicants are seeking to rezone the subject property from "R-81', Mixed Housing District to PUD, Planned Unit Development District. Attached for reference: Exhibit A - Site Location Exhibit B - Detailed Site Location Exhibit C - Preliminary Plat Exhibit D - Grading and Drainage Plan Exhibit E - Water and Sanitary Sewer Plan Exhibit F - Street Grade Details Exhibit G - Building/Garage Design Lots 7-9 Recommendation: Because the proposed single family residential use lies in contrast to the proposed high density residential development suggested within the Comprehensive Plan, it is our view that a decision regarding the appropriateness of single family development is a matter of City policy and a final determination 4601 Excelsior Blvd. • Suite 410 • Minneapolis, MN 55416 • (612) 925-9420 • Fax 925-2721 of use acceptability should rest upon City Officials. If the City finds the proposed single family use acceptable, our office recommends approval of both the requested PUD zoning designation and preliminary plat subject to the following conditions: 1. A Comprehensive Plan amendment is approved which allows the subject plat to be consistent with the City's land use plan. 2. Front yard setbacks imposed upon Lots 7-9 of the subject plat are increased from 20 to 25 feet to provide greater visual and functional consistency within the subdivision. 3. Single family homes to be constructed within the subdivision are configured in a manner in which attached garages are setback to the furthest extent possible. Such a configuration is intended to lessen the visual impact of minimal front yard setbacks and visually open the neighborhood plus provide more off-street parking. Building design and garage positioning on Lots 7, 8 and 9 shall therefore be subject to approval of the City Building Official. 4. The proposed 40 foot street right-of-way is found to be acceptable by the City Engineer. 5. The submitted grading and drainage plan is modified to identify specific erosion control measures. The plan shall be subject to the review and comment of the City Engineer. 6. The utility plan is subject to review and comment by the City Engineer. 7. Both berming and coniferous tree plantings are provided along the subdivision's eastern border within the Barthel Drive right-of-way. Such a barrier will visually and audibly screen negative impacts associated with the adjacent industrial park. The said landscaping is to be maintained by adjacent property owners. 8. The subject plat meets the City's park land dedication requirements and is subject to review by the City Park Board. 9. Other comments as may be made by the City Administrator City Building Official, City Engineer and City Attorney. CASE ANALYSIS Rezoning: Land Use. As mentioned previously, the applicants propose to subdivide a 3.0 acre parcel of land into a nine lot single family subdivision. As a means of determining the appropriateness of the proposed single family use, it is beneficial to examine surrounding land uss. The following is a listing of neighboring land uses and their associated zoning designations. Land Use Zoning North Single Family R-3 South Public Park R-3 East Industrial I-1 West Single Family R-3 Recognizing the fact that the subject plat provides a transition in lot sizes, the proposed single family development does appear generally compatible to neighboring uses. While the proposed single family use does appear acceptable, some concern exists in regard to the site's suggested use as depicted in the City's Comprehensive Plan. According to the Comprehensive Plan, the subject site has been designated for future high density residential development (10 or more units per acre). The high density designation upheld within the Comprehensive"Plan recognizes the need to provide a transition of uses between the industrial park and western lying single family development. In addition, the high density designation acknowledges the odd configuration of the site and the difficulty of providing a single family type subdivision within its borders. Because the submitted preliminary plat does provide a gradation in land use via varied lot sizes and provides a functionally efficient division of property which minimizes the adverse effects of the adjacent industrial park, our office finds the proposed single family land use to be acceptable. Because the proposed single family land use lies in contrast to the proposed high density residential development cited within the Comprehensive Plan, however, it is our view that a decision regarding the appropriateness of single family development is a matter of City policy. As such, City Officials should determine the acceptability of the proposed single family land use. 3 If the use is found to be acceptable, a Comprehensive Plan amendment will be required to allow the subject plat to be consistent with the City's Land Use Plan. PUD, Planned Unit Development. Due to the odd configuration of the site, the applicant has requested a PUD zoning designation to allow a number of lots to lie smaller than typical R-8 requirements. It should be noted that the R-8 standards are identical to the R-3 standards imposed upon neighboring residential properties. A PUD zoning designation will allow smaller lots to flank the industrial. park and larger lots to abut similar sized single family lots which lie to the west. Due to the site's odd configuration, strict conformance of the site's existing R-8 requirements would impair the reasonable development of the property. If the City finds the proposed single family uses to be acceptable, our office feels that a PUD zoning designation is appropriate. It should be emphasized that the City does maintain ultimate control in establishing the performance standards within a PUD District. Preliminary Plat: Lots. As shown on the preliminary plat, lot sizes range from 9,600 to 19,161 square feet in size with an average lot measuring 12,119 square feet in size. While the subdivision's average lot size is less than 12,500 square feet typically required within R- 8 districts, the proposed lot areas are considered acceptable via the provisions of the PUD. Setbacks. In accordance with ordinance standards, all proposed periphery setbacks meet the minimum R-8 requirement of 25 feet for rear yards. Under the provisions of the PUD, the site would be provided some flexibility in its interior yard setbacks. According to the preliminary plat, the following front yard setbacks have been proposed: Proposed Front Typical R-8 Front Yard Setback Yard Setback Lots 1, 2 30 feet 35 feet Lot 3 25 feet 35 feet Lots 4-6 30 feet 35 feet Lots 7-9 20 feet 20 feet 4 While the proposed setbacks respond to innate site restrictions, some concern exists in regard to the 20 foot front yard setbacks imposed upon Lots 7, 8 and 9 of the subdivision. As a means of minimizing visible setback inconsistencies, consideration should be given to increasing the front yard setback upon Lots 7-9 to 25 feet. To further improve subdivision aesthetics and improve lot functioning, notably parking, it is suggested that contained single family homes be situated in a manner in which attached garages are setback as far as possible. Such a configuration will visually open the neighborhood, lessen the impact of minimal front yard setbacks, and provide adequate off-street parking space. Exhibit "G" provides an indication of the building design which is being suggested. Streets. As shown on the preliminary plat, the subdivision is to be accessed via a single cul-de-sac from Barthel Drive (Lansing Circle). The proposed street configuration is considered positive in that it reinforces an inward neighborhood focus and subsequently minimizes the negative impacts (i.e., noise, views, pedestrian safety) produced by stop -and -go semi -truck trailer traffic. It should be noted that, due to the narrowness of the site, the subdivision illustrates a 40 foot wide right-of-way upon its entrance road. While the 40 foot width does not conform to typical 60 foot R.O.W. widths as required by Ordinance, our office views the width is generally acceptable provided its contained street is of a width which may sufficiently accommodate vehicular maneuvering. According to the submitted street grade details, a 37 foot wide street is to be constructed within the 40 foot R.O.W. The acceptability of the street width should be subject to comment by the City Engineer. It should also be noted a 60 foot cul-de-sac radius has been provided within the plat, thus ensuring appropriate maneuvering space for emergency vehicles. Grading and Drainage. The applicant has submitted a preliminary grading and drainage plan. According to the plan, a significant amount of earthwork is to occur to the west of Lots 2, 3, and 4. To guard against any adverse impacts upon adjacent westerly properties, the grading plan should be modified to identify specific measures of erosion control. The plan will also be subject to further review and comment by the City Engineer. Utilities. A preliminary water and sanitary sewer plan has been submitted and will be subject to the review and comment of the City'Engineer. 5 Landscaping. With the subject property lying adjacent to an industrial park, it is imperative that design related measures are taken to lessen potential negative impacts. As a means of screening generally undesirable views of the industrial park and the adjacent high volume roadway (Barthel Drive), as well as buffering associated noise, it is recommended that both berming and coniferous tree plantings be placed along the subdivision's eastern border within the Barthel Drive right-of-way. By placing screening materials upon the Barthel Drive Boulevard, adjacent lots are allowed to fully utilize their already shallow rear yards. As a condition of subdivision approval, however, adjacent property owners will be required to maintain all proposed landscaping. Parks. The subject subdivision does not include any park land dedication. According to Section A-600.15 of the City Subdivision Ordinance, a cash contribution may be provided in lieu of land dedication. Per the Ordinance, a cash contribution of $170.00 per dwelling unit shall be required. Utilizing this formula, a total cash contribution of $1,530.00 would be required of the subject plat. This issue shall be subject to further review by the City Park Board. CONCLUSION Because the proposed single family use does not reflect proposed land use as cited within the City's Comprehensive Plan, our office feels that a decision of appropriate use is a policy matter to be determined by City Officials. If the City finds single family development to be an acceptable use upon the subject site, our office would recommend approval of the requested rezoning from R-8, Mixed Housing District to PUD, Planned Unit Development as well as the submitted preliminary plat. These approvals, however, shall be contingent upon the fulfillment of those conditions listed within the Executive Summary of this report. cc: Thore Meyer Bob Rohlin Barthel Construction Company 0 %3M '3Ar nu P 3'N 3 3N AV TN UW �H m� M� N 4 sg= C 0 O EXHIBIT A - SITE LOCATION | No 31 | | | \ SUBJECT SITE EXHIBIT B - DETAILED SITE LOCATION �-A a- V:� \ Albertvll• l,duatrtat D•v. Co. V• / ! • 91 �'��10 alyd Avn C'+� Brooklyn enve Park. M 3Saa3 �� 7 0 0 ,; (♦ Alt \ `♦\: J !\t•s Bso' • J,lsa`c�,ellJ'e `J\�f \�e`'•e � / ��, � / � ''b°� Smneth S. [ Laurel S. Nl.•• \ •••ttt/// \ , ' \ \ ' ° S I1, ao Usal l• clrc 3• / +� / I�lul ti. p. \ /) \ �" A lber tvll b. M 55301 t \ /\ ••[1 fit. .<---'\13 %/♦\ / / Yr 7 \— he tr IS55 313 /Ae 1• Jody L, r•b.r' •IJlel ^fe \ hJ.�O•JI,\ ♦ I `• \ \ \ \ \ ]lean L•S•I clrc 1. ewJ c * o \,y� 576a..1 l.Id �'° . \ • \ • \f P A lb.r tvl ll• M Sol fk°l..^ 4, 9s � � \ \ f Cq) a.Y3d I ssJowl°^! f 4\\ \ \\ \• ^l'(� \'Q\ \\�y ,.�� / \\i \ 1^Q�!I� ,'^ .t'- Slii iil \i• II C� Q%uo'h\��•� / 31 I I J 1 11J1'�11[�,111 Aleert nr tnd I _,11 1 I \ \ ., !L� I \ 9uo esrd )-,R - 3 J ff AV "�� \ \ \oY� Brooklyn P•rk. cl,voaM.G\ �4 .\D•1• w. Pannllq [ w•ney �• 1 �` \ \ -11e09 A1b.rtvl lla, M 53 SO1 1 _ \ E \ I ` Htcn.el J. [ J.yc• C. 51oe1. ual. Ls.u• etrele \ \ \\ \ \ `Alb•rtvul., M Ss3o1 a 4 11 \\\ — \ \ \ \ \6 hIF. I Jo `t I 5 e \ ` \ A y 9..1 I .'fitGt• \ yam+ j-. 1 � EJ..�w•� I 1 \ \ Hlehaal R. [ Patrtrla J. Varontka• \ ��r I T I Alb— Larebe•HN S5301 / q\�l Jw•' I Aleartel ll•. �Je i2ca'r lJ \\ � R-3 with E. [ J•nm L. A•t dark• i 11630 L•ree.. C1ro la / Alb—tvGlle. - 5510, \ [mn•th C. [ N. JOan Xa<ker ue3e L.r•baa c,-1. PLAT DATA Albartvtll•. M 55301 TOTAL AREA - 13 1.478 S.F. 3.0 183 Acres o x5 so ,00 Iso _ Steat• 22.405 S.F. 0.51 Acres GRAPHIC SCALE IN FEET Lots • 109.074 S.F. 2.50 Acres May 16.1990 EXHIBIT C - PRELIMINARY PLAT. 5 �• / �6�• ~� /• 9l I. l• I,Wu. Cr1.1 D.V. Co. I e3rd Avenue R / •�� \ Brooklyn Perk, I.I 55145 a \VV \ 1 \ r5 \ •.,y /'��:.i. it ��- / !� II rV o,i �,,C a• p�\ {�/�; u / nh \ 1 P posed concrete / ro gutter / C 17s nn<th S. L L•urel e. Nl•.. -+/ �Q�• �• �\ C ir.o L.s.11. clrol. �+� / 1911 /' 4✓/O — \ . `� lb•rtvll l., ,n 55301 _ e+ \-J,J�w s Non.rd D. L Jentc• to �� n \ /OJ \ E Bu[[•lo, I•', 51313 lleoe L.5.14. clrc 1. °•..z Alb•rtvtila HII 301 I tL`!°ll °+• • -'� '" ` n I'1 I \ „ ,a'•'~ s Albertvlle Indust. ` \ 1\I \ 9110 .3rd A-- e 0 I erookly.. v.rk, Hn M - 5 \ D \ \ \ a. G ap 0.1. N. rmnlrq L R.nw Lod• •I1L09 L.Sel l• cir. , I i l I •�1 ��e.5 Alb•rtvlll.. Ie1 55301 1 uew Let• Clrete u \\�\ \ l Aib.rcyul-. Nn 55301 x2.8 1 P .tit Gt 1 [Ja,.e..c `\ \ \\ 91Z\ Y l I \ 1 Pilr—L R. L r.trtet- J. llel0 L.r.b•.�t 5530, / 01r I I 1`1 Alb.rtvt il•. PJe' •(Q.ec'+ lJ / R•tt L. L J—Y L. Aald•rk• \ r. _ I/ I1e30 Ler.b•. cl-1. /^ r Alb •re.111., lel SS301 \ Kenneth C. L N. Je.n Nseker ll.i. L.r.b.e Clrel. PLAT DATA Aibertvui•. NN 55301 0 is so 100 ISO LEGEND TOTAL AREA- 13 1.4 78 S.F. 3.0183 Acres GRAPHIC SCALE IN FEET May 16. 1990 970.2 Proposed ground elevation at house Stott- 22,405 S.F. 0.51 Acres —e► Direction or Drainage Lots - 109,074 S.F. 2.50 Acres EXHIBIT D - GRADING & DRAINAGE PLAN. 1 �1060S \ st° 1 ML� ^`\ Aloertrl le Industrial Dar. Co. ��• / t �� �' \ 9110 e]r ood Avenue N Orklyn Park. M1 S5445 'fie• Pd` * � y G •'I^1L 1 _L 40 v V. e•tiot�'+ ' r / a b \•( r � �- e�• roposed 8' X 8' Redueer D. •• �'�•` \ �, b1 *�'` t Existing 8' Water • 4 sue'+ �.e•r \ eo°FI�sF�� 9 � \ nn., \ - \� �E, / ' ��e•^r • tiv �. `� �*�o"t� / ZA /• /\\ '\`\ — h S. i I",. L•3•i le Cirele L•rel a. Hte•e / �r / I91lul NA /% \ Alh.rtrlil.. Na SS301 1 NorarA D. i Jenlc. When �� \ r• \ L � - euar.lo. .e. SS31] i A— K. i Jody L. I.Der , •Ittef? ac4 \ . 01 O.UI)\ ;� I \\ ` \ \ Ps lleoa u3.11e Clrele en ay O Nn \Ad w \Y]1 Atbererllle )ol % °yet wit ate `9G � \ y �+•" J•^ o s s tar ewsr \ \ - % 4.0 j /.. » •. s ..rt. I A , a)i I I 1 6 O r _ bete K. v"nntnG i Raney Lod" •ltao9 L"s.11e ct r. 1 {' 11 1 I //�..� ¢ \ :vysN,v Albar[r11 L, M 55301 \ \ \\1 1 H1ch.el J. i Joyce C. stock hts 11 \` au, 11 Clrele a I \\ \�\\ \\\ ;� - \ \ \ 6 \ \ \` '•1 Alhertv1110. M+ ss101 4 \ YYYNNP \\\ \ \ .Ij hl%• I ' ''l< ` I CJa.+lam I \ \\ 60— �_ od ttl l A. Patr5tSc10l•1 J. Venfk•e arabO.CIrcIQ Albercrl / \ ►ti q PJa •(EBe'r Lu / Keith C. i J—rrl L. Aalderke r • It 11820 ura0es Cl role r Albertville. HR SSlol \ Kenneth C. i M. Jan ua°ker lisle L.r.Bee Circle PLAT DATA Albertville. NI SS301 TOTAL AREA- 131,478 S.F. 3.0183 Acres Stoat- 22,405 S.F. 0.51 Acres 0 25 so too Ito GRAPHIC SCALE IN FEET Lots - 109.074 S.F. 2.50 Acres May 16. 1990 EXHIBIT E - WATER & SANITARY SEWER PLAN. EXHIBIT F - STREET GR EXHIBIT G Barthel Parks Edge Subdivision EXAMPLE: GARAGE DESIGN Lots 7&9 Street SUGGESTED PER SUBMISSION Lot 8 Street Street RECOMMENDED DESIGN Street SUGGESTED PER SUBMISSION ! RECOMMENDED DESIGN CITY OF ALBERTVILLE P. O. BOX 131 ALBERTVILLE, MINNESOTA 55301 PHONE: (612) 497-3384 May 23, 1990 To: City Council Albertville, Minnesota From: Maureen Andrews, City Administrator Re: Information Needed for December 31, 1989 Audit Our auditors, Gruys, Johnson and Associates, Ltd., are auditing our financial statements as of December 31, 1989. In connection with the audit, the provisions of the Legal Compliance Audit Guide promulgated by the Legal Compliance Task Force pursuant to Minnesota Statutes Sec. 6.65 require that our auditors test for the City's compliance with certain laws and regulations. One of the categories of compliance to be tested is conflicts of interest. Minnesota statutes forbid any public officer authorized to take part in the making of a sale, lease or contract, to voluntarily have a personal financial interest in the transaction or personally benefit financially from it. The statutes specifically forbid city council members from having any interest in any contract made by their respective governing bodies. In order for our auditors to test compliance by City of Albertville, Albertville, Minnesota with the laws and regulations relating to conflicts of interest we ask that you provide them with the information requested on the attached form. After completing the form, please sign, date and return the form to the City Administrator. This information will be used only to test compliance with the conflicts of interest laws and regulations. Thank you for your cooperation in this matter. Make our Citv........ Your Citv We invite Home, /ndustrv, Business CITY OF ALBERTVILLE Albertville, Minnesota City Council Information for December 31, 1989 Audit Council Member's Name Employer (if self-employed list occupation or name of business) Title/Position of Responsibility. Spouse's Name Employer (if self-employed list occupation or name of business) Title/Position of Responsibility List all transactions and/or contracts with the corresponding dollar amounts during the year ending December 31, 1989 between City of Albertville and (1) you, (2) your spouse, (3) your or your spouse's employer or own business, if self-employed, (4) any business in which you or your spouse had an interest or investment. Signature Date_ FN A C Northwest Associated Consultants, Inc. U R B A N PLANNING • DESIGN • MARKET RESEARCH 30 May 1990 Ms. Maureen Andrews City Administrative Offices Box 131 Albertville, MN 55301 RE: Albertville - Zoning Ordinances - Adult Entertainment FILE NO: 163.05 Dear Maureen: As you have possibly heard through the Metro news media, the City of Ramsey has recently experienced the unanticipated opening of an adult bookstore within a neighborhood retail area. Being treated as an automatically allowable retail use, this adult facility was unrestricted to locate within 100 feet of a day care operation, 300 feet of a church, and 400 feet of a single family residential neighborhood. Not surprisingly, this situation has created controversy in the City and some concern as to why such activities have gone unregulated. Certainly to be recognized are the constitutionally protected free speech rights of adult entertainment. Simultaneously, the right to regulate the secondary effects of adult facilities has been determined acceptable. Separation of adult facilities by distance from one another as well as from uses possibly negatively affected can be legitimately accomplished through zoning. To be effective, however, this must occur prior to the location of adult facilities as contrasted to the Ramsey case where the business located, and now the City is looking to act. As a result, little can be done about the existing new operation in Ramsey. 4601 Excelsior Blvd. • Suite 410 - Minneapolis, MN 55416.(612) 925-9420 • Fax 925-2721 Ms. Maureen Andrews 30 May 1990 Page Two As one of our client communities, our office is fully aware of Albertville's current zoning regulations and generally, the City Code. To the best of our knowledge, these regulations are presently lacking in possible protection which could be enacted to address adult facilities. We alert you to this situation as we believe consideration should be given to possibly pursuing some type of protective regulations. As illustrated by the current Ramsey case, preventative action is much preferable and less costly than an after the fact, reactive approach. Our office's current association with the City of Ramsey, providing assistance on regulations to govern adult entertainment facilities, has provided substantial background on this subject. While each community must specifically and individually address this issue, there are most certainly common elements which are involved and guide such regulations. These factors minimize the work which is involved in establishing appropriate and sound protection. So as to protect the community from unanticipated, unwelcome situations, we would suggest that this matter be presented to the City Council for a determination as to whether appropriate regulations should be pursued. In this regard, we are available to provide further background or respond to questions. Very truly yours, NORTHWEST ASSOCIATED CONSULTANTS, INC. ....r.-..�-•--ar...�.,---;,s4:�..._" ..- -.. .-�..._....,�,-...., ..a.�-..i*:-. v�. �',x••�'*.-"_-=++-.a-firr;.; � tA*.""e'gfs'!�'g'tiF'�Grc-t,,;,2w,,z;r►:.raR-�s-�+.wc.o�-�.-.�.�.�-.-....�..-.T...---�.�-.-...-----.: Ur" *In axtl Page No. of Pages DJ'S HEATING AND AIR CONDITIONING, INC. 6060 LABEAUX AVENUE N.E. ALBERTVILLE, MN 55301 s ti r PHONE (61 2) 497-2661 PROPOSAL SUBMITTED TO: City of Aibertville PHONE 497-3384 DATE -'�-t�l' STREET JOB NAME CITY, STATE AND ZIP CODE A'-bertville, MN JOB LOCATION ARCHITECT DATE OF PLANS JOB PHONE We hereby submit specifications and estimates for: Fu-'nish & install one of the -following: A. Janitrv! CL30 2R Ton 8 SEE.t Air Condit-ionin;Y. 143,).Oki 3. Amana VRCF30 21 Ton 9 SEER Air Conditioner _;165C,0C C. Ames ARCF30 2; Tnn 10.5 SEER air Conciit4-oner $1�S0.0J * NNSP $100.00 Rebate* All above oor_ions include wiring and a fresh air intake. Deduct $175.00 if no wiring requi-red. Or FrOpOliP hereby to furnish material and labor — complete in accordance with the above specifications, for the sum of: dollars ($ ). Payment to be made as follows: All material is guaranteed to be as specified. All work to be completed in a workmanlike manner according to standard practices. Any alterations or deviations Authorized from the above specifications involving extra costs will be executed only upon written Signature orders, and will become an extra charge over and above the estimate. All agreements contingent upon strikes, accidents or delays beyond our control. Owner to carry fire, Note: This proposal may be wind damage and other necessary insurance. Our workers are fully covered by withdrawn by us if not accepted within '� days. Workman"s Compensation Insurance. Arreptanrr of f rnpnsal — The above prices, specifications and conditions are satisfactory and are hereby accepted. You are Signature authorized to do the work as specified. Payment will be made as outlined above. Date of Acceptance: Signature RUN: 22-MAY-90 INSTALLATION NAME -WIGHT CO. SHERIFF DEFT- PACE 1 CFS14 JIAIS: 21 t t t t PRIMARY ISH'S Owr NO ENFORS le HOW REMM CODES: ALL ACTIVITY CODES: ALL 041S FM 57RVT(. fir" _ _i t•ti rA 09172 VEHICLE IN DITCH 095M CONSERVhTIOM 09531 CHILD ABI.WJ ER= 09600 FIRE CALL 09651 LIQUOR VIOLATION 09M MEDICAL 09800 PUBLIC PEACE 09805 MOTORIST AID 09807 TRAFFIC/PAWING 09807 TRAFFIC/PARKING 09920 ALARM 09920 ALARM 09920 ALARM 09920 ALARM D 09921 SUSPICIO<JS PERSON 09945 MISCELLNEOUS XMIATION 0- ALBERTVILLE VILL 233 90006876 01 P 0905 04/25/90 CITY OF ALBEMILLE 0 Al RTVILLE VILL 280 90006013 01 P 1425 04/12/90 HApKDffALFR'S GRoC@zy 911-GW ALBS MILLS VILL 90005943 01 P 13V 0411IJ90 LANCE, DONNA 0 ALBERTVILLE VILL 233 90006043 01 P 0211 04/13/90 ANONYMOM 0� ALBEMILL.E VILL. -_ 289 90006407- 01 P 0804 04/19/90 BRAW, JOW 0 AL3UMILLE VILL 287 90006852 01 P 1955 04/24/90 CT! OF AL3MILLE 0 AL.BERTVILLE VILL 270 9000SW2 01 P 1734 04/10/90 OLSM, "IS 0 AL MMILL.E +TILL 269 90006972 01 P 1110 04/26/90 ALBERTVILLE CITY HALL 0 ALEUMILLE VILL 280 90007= 01 P 1200 04/30/90 WALD, KIM 0 ALBERTVILLE VILL Z70 900064-00 01 P 1334 04/15/90 JLE-FS, RICHARD 0 ALBERTVILLE VILL 289 90001410 01 R 0900 04/19/90 ST MICHAEL STATE SAW 0 ALBERTVILLE VILL 272 90006.949 01 P 2027 04/20/90 FAY, THIOMAS 0 ALBERTVILLE VILL Z76 90006636 01 P 04/21/90 JJUS, RICHARD Z = 0 AL3ERTVILLE VILL 266 90006684 01 P 1433 04/22/90 CAMPBELL, DM.ES CS ,H 0 ALMMILLE VILL 234 90005296 01 P 1712 04/01/90 MARTIJ+lSCN, F RUN: 22-0W-90 CFS14• aRIS: 21 PRIMARY ISN'S owr Na HOW RE.CEIVEII C TES: ALL ACTIVITY CMES:. ALL ACTIVITY CL7DE! DESCRIPTION 0994U MISCiLLANEOW IWORMATION INSTALLATION NAIL —WIGHT CO. SHERIFF DEPT- ENFORS CALLS FW SERVICE INCIDENT S~ BY ACTIVITY 04/01/90 TIRU 04/30/90 PRI INCIDENT SE2 HOW TIME DATE PSWU GRID LOCATION APT OFF APSER' NO. RECV RECV REPORTED BUSINESS NAME PAGE 2 0 ALBERTVILLE VILL 9000=2 01 P 1300 04/05/90 CITY OF ALBERTVILLE- 09950 0. ALBERTVILLE VILL 284 90OM727 01 P OM 04/08/90 SANDERSON, DEAN C CIVIL 09950 0 ALBERTVILLE VILL CIVIL ,ti%� =52 9— 11 ALBERTVILL VILL ASLT 5-INFLICTS 4 V T-Am A5352 911 ALBS MILLF VILL ASLT S-INFLICTS. ATTEMPTS i4?!F-MANaS-AJXT-ACII AM 911 AL.BERTVILLE VILL TERROR-THRT INFLT Eft-tW WEAP-UNC RE -AT J3500 CA&t ALBERTVILLE' VILL TRAF-4MID-M-DRIVE LkER INFLLENCE OF LIaJ R N3190 ALBERTVILLE VILL DISTURB PEACE-itS-4RRASSING COMN_NICATIOW N3190 �'!'�t'd 0 ALBERTVILLE VILL DISTURB PEACE�SS-HASASSING CD,MMUNICATIONS P3120 ZAv-0""I A;lw� 0 ALBERTVILLE VILL PROP DAMAGE-rx-PUBLIC-UNC INTENT JURIS 21 TOTALS - NLRtBER OF INCIDENTS. 26 2 - TRAFFIC TICKETS ISSUED. Q 265 90005948 01 P1458 04/11/90 OAKS, CINDY 280 90005384 01 P 1129 04/03/90 WOLD, KIMBE3LY MARIE 296 90005671 01 P 1740 04/07/90 HOUl, PATRICK ALLAN 288 90005387 01 P 1252 04/03/90 WOU, KIM MARIE 287 90006737 01 P 0103 04/23/90 WRIGIT COWN %iERIFF'S DEFT 90006231 01 P 1028 04/16/90 WALKER, SUSAN J 90006957 01 P 0820 04/26/90 HUING, KEVEi}f L 279 90006134 01 P 1114 04/14/90 CITY OF ALBEr"IT'JILLE RUN: 22-MAY-90 ADU01 JURIS: 21 PRIMARY ITS ONLY? NO NAPE TYPES: A T B ACTIVITY CRIES: ALL INCIDENT PER INC NAME ADULT NAME NUMBER SEB SE4 TYPE GRID ADDRESS INSTALLATION NAME -WIGHT CO. SHERIFF DEPT- **STAi E N F 0 R S ADULT SUMMARY BY INCIDENT - WITHIN 'DATE REPORTED' 04/01/90 THRU 04/30/90 M5384 1 1 A WOLD, KIMBERLY MARIE 911 11706 54TH ST 90005384 2 1 A SANIERSON, DEAN CHARLES 911 11706 54TH ST 90006737 1 1 A REINKING, LESLIE LYLE 25185 HASSON PKWY 90683303 1 1 T NEUTGENS, KEVIN JAPES TI-M 616 10TH AVE SE JURIS 21 TOTALS - NUMBER OF INCIDENTS: 4 PAGE 1 OFF DATE OF RACE DATE OF: DATE OF ACT SUPPLEMENT ARREST NO. BIRTH SEX REPOT DISPOS. CODE ID NUMBER DISPOSITION CITY STATE ARREST ACTIVITY DESCRIPTION 290 7/13/64 F W 4103/90 4/03/90 A5352 280 REL BAIL OR R ALIERTVILLE MN 4/03/90 ASLT 5-INFLICTS ATTEMPTS HRM-HAND-ADLT-AM 280 11/28/66 M W 4/03/90 4/03/90 A5352 280 REL BAIL OR R ALBERTVILLE MN 4/03/90 ASLT 5-INFLICTS ATTEMPTS HRM-HANDS-ADLT-AU 297 4/03/67 M W 4/23/90 4/23/90 J3500 23377 REL BAIL OR R ROGERS 4/23/90 TRAF-ACCID-MS-DRIVE UNDER INFLUENCE OF LIQUOR 287 3/30/68 M W 4/14/90 09021 23272 NO ENTRY MPLS UNREASONABLE ACCELERATION