Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutInformal minutes of 6/13Informal Council Discussion June 13, 1988 Informal Council Discussion: June 13, 1988 at 7:35 p.m. in the Council Chambers in the Civic Center. Mayor John McDonald presiding. Council Present: Strait, Horowitz, Larson, Ambrisco, Dickson, Courtney, McDonald. Staff Present: Atkins, Helling, Timmins, Karr, Smith, Schmeiser. Tape Recording: Reel 88-35, Side 1, 1—End, Side 2, 1 -End, Reel 88-36, Side 1, 1-69. Consent Calendar Additions: Reel 88-35, Side 1 City Council agreed to add to the consent calendar a motion approving Class B liquor license for MS Restaurant Corporation, Denny's Restaurant. Planning & Zoning Matters: b. Settin a ublit hearin for June 28 1988 on an ordinance to vacate portions of Cap to an Boom ngton streets. Schmeiser stated this vacation is part of a joint University -City project to construct a parking ramp, water storage facility and chiller plant. Schmeiser stated additional information will be presented to Council prior to the public hearing. In response to Dickson, Atkins said the chiller plant will be located west of the University chemistry building and behind the City's water plant. Timmins said the chiller plant will be located where the arboretum is currently located, McDonald DDroposed dtrocting tits City Manager to initiate a study to address the issues relating to expanding the CB -10 ions. Horowiti asked if the study would be dons within the context of the Comprohon- siva plan Update. Atkins slid "t a 1tudy would be done separately end independently of Of coaprahansive p1<an update, Schmalur stated the :turfy will bs part 9r, tint E,ayr#hci"wivo plan prottss> Hteowltt Salo the major traffic routes and trainsit routes would be Involved, Larson asked how long the otahy wov I d take and what ii the octuWty of the Northwestern loll building, aktkins said the study would take at least six month► to taxplete, xchmeistr said there is suffitienl parking fol t%# upivcrsity saw, but zhs additional 18,490 eSusre fact would rasaln vatant It the proposed ordinance was not adopted. Corson raised concerns about the Ia irness of the rocaawwndlllen to the other prapiPly &mita If; tf4a area, 3chaxeluc explalnsd the cripintt staff potitinr, tae t< ri4 0 regvirrmcnts for rffi=t em! ua•a in lha CA,: a gnw; and: ar a reaullof diarua� �{oria wiwi�n itiff ina lid `+rte?i:: cawriitt.ii &f thi fhpt`a; 'vt Cnmimrta, it was telt Ilw "lindawws to place the tilling at 0,400 &+4a:# fi:i v� the ;rairc: St s lr was the hvs t nalutlen_ PEBarrald 7 / j, said the compromise addresses the immediate problem regarding the use of the Northwestern Bell building and the study would address long- range problems for the area. Ambrisco volunteered to serve as City Council representative on the committee to study the issue of whether or not the City should expand the central business district. C. Ordinance to amend the high-rise dwelling, grade, and story defini- tions in the Zoning Ordinance. (first consideration) d. s, I Schmeiser noted there is a request to waive first consideration. Strait asked why staff is requesting the expedited action. Schmeiser explained staff has a request for expedited action from the developer who wishes to have the ordinance approved before July 1. Strait asked if staff usually requests the expedited action on behalf of the developer. Schmeiser stated it is not unusual for staff to request the expedited action on behalf of the developer. Schmeiser said staff can obtain a letter from the developer requesting the expedited action by tomorrow's formal meeting. Larson asked Schmeiser to summarize the expected impact and motivation for changing the ordinance. Schmeiser explained when the revision was adopted in 1985, high-rise development was halted and high-rise development is encouraged in the downtown/University campus area. Schmeiser said in the goals and policies of the Comprehensive Pian, certain areas are proposed for high-rise development. Larson requested background information regarding why the City staff feels high-rise development should be in the downtown area. Horowitz noted that high-rise development in the downtown area may impact on the transit system. McDonald explained the previous decision to encourage high-rise development in the downtown area was made because of concerns that existing neighborhoods were being destroyed. Horowitz said the theory of havingp people downtown needs to be balanced against the theory that psople wlil take the bus if they live on a major artery. Schmeiser said Council received a memorandum several weeks ago explaining the history and reasoning behind the proposed amendment. No Countil coataant. Schmeiser said this item outs in rasolution form the rsasona for donisl cf the prollarlrary plat that was considered and dar:!nd by Council two Meees ago ll jn6i stilia 6Zr tpandLnCi ilii Fr.W vid Tr.ilm ir; irtArrzy representing Jim Glasfew flying Council and the Planninf ane i«ininf fewmistlon Fwto 4 4w to rnnI�ldor the Idyllwild Snhdlvlelhni I+iaeenw iec s.linq that a tirr be deferred to allow the preliminary subdivision plat to be redone and it is staff's recommendation to Council that the action that was taken at Council's last meeting on the Idyllwild preliminary plat be reconsidered so that both preliminary and final plat can go back to the Planning and Zoning Commission for consideration. Timmins stated that Mr. Glasgow wants to take preliminary and final plat back to the Planning and Zoning Commission and to present the preliminary and final plat to Council prior to August 10. Timmins said the revised plats have already been presented to the City's Planning Department. Schmeiser said the final plat is before the Planning and Zoning Commission. Strait asked if Glasgow has proposed to dismiss his lawsuit filed against the City. Timmins said no. Timmins explained the matter is essen- tially moot given the objections to the preliminary plat raised by Council and given the objections raised in the lawsuit to the denial. Timmins said the June 13, 1988, correspondence received from Glasgow's attorney make the lawsuit, under its present terms, moot. Strait said the lawsuit should be dropped before the Council gives favorable consideration on the revised plat. Timmins explained that Glasgow could not prevail on the lawsuit given the new set of circumstances, Glasgow could airend the lawsuit if there were a new set of circumstances, and the City could not ask him to dismiss his lawsuit. McDonald asked Timmins how Council should proceed. Timmins said the resolution on the agenda is meaningless because Glasgow is revising the plat to eliminate the objections that were identified. Timmins recommended that Council bring the denial back by a motion to reconsider and send the plat to the Planning and Zoning Commission for further consideration. Timmins said this recommendation is consistent with what the City has allowed other developers to do. Larson stated that Glasgow might agree that the facts and circum- stances have changed enough so his original course of action would no longer prevail but that he may think he has other reasons, such as delayed damages or procedural changes he wants made, to not dismiss the lawsuit. Larson asked if Glasgow's now plat proposes more units. Schmeiser said it is the same plat with the elimination of the lots along Taft Speedway. Schmaiser said that Glasgow has submitted a revised plat. Larson asked about the "new platting_ alternatives" mentioned in Atty. Houghton's June 13 letter received by Council. Atkins said the platting alternatives involvo a new plat, Timmins said that GIs* ow will present a revised plat, deleting the nine lots that were in violation. Schmeiser sold that a revised plat has been submitted and is before the Planning and Zoning Commission. Larson raised concerns that a new plat with additional units could be submitted. Strsit suggested that Council coneider Glasgow's reouest after the lawsuit has been dropped. Horowill noted that Houghton's June 13 letter Is not clear. Horowitz asked that the process be started over again, a new plat be submitted and a new subdivision number be riven Timmins said he e.euMe4 tel+sl Glaegaw was referring to the rty.aeA pias when he referred to the 'alternative olattino proc duri,a.° .ihmeisar said that that ie not ntetf'a underetand I nq and that Glasgow is looking at an entirely different proposal. Sihm?icer acid Ltnff has boon inforn"id that ;l*su w 13 looking at an ontiroiy Asiiereniproposal, y f � f. In response to Strait, Timmins said that it can be suggested to Glasgow that Council would feel more confident about their intentions if the lawsuit were dropped but the City could not insist the lawsuit be dropped as a condition. McDonald said the Planning and Zoning Commission is concerned about procedures because they have a final plat without a preliminary plat. Ambrisco referred to Asst. City Atty. Boyle's June 13 memo regarding Idyllwild Subdivision. Council agreed with Boyle's recommendation to take action on a motion to reconsider and refer it back to Planning and Zoning Commission. (See continued item e.) No Council comment. Continued Item e. Larson asked McDonald to explain the action Council will take at Tuesday's formal Council meeting. McDonald said Council will make a motion to reconsider the preliminary plat and to refer the preliminary plat back to the Planning and Zoning Commission. McDonald said the Planning and Zoning Commission intends to consider the final plat at their meeting on Thursday night. Schmeiser said that Atty. Houghton's letter waived the 45- and 60 - day limitation periods which gives the Planning and Zoning Commission additional flexibility. Atkins said that the potential exists for Glasgow to come back with an entirely new plat. Larson noted that Council will not act at Tuesday's formal Council meeting except to send the plat back to the Planning and Zoning Commission. McDonald said that it is unlikely the Planning and Zoning Commission will act on the plats Thursday night. in response to Strait, McDonald noted that any member initially voting no could make a motion to reconsider. Since all seven Councilmembers voted no, any member can make that motion. 21 Schmeiser stated that there are still deficiencies with this plan so It is retonotmded that fnuntti dafar consideration at Tuesday's formal maating provided the developer gives a waiver to the 60 -day limitation period. The applicant will either correct the deflciencios or provide the walvar. Nee Item g. i - k. Schmeiser stated that this plat, except for a couple of very minor deficiencies, was ready for Council consideration. Schmeiser noted that the applicant was present to answer Council questions. Horowitz asked if there was going to be anything located where the Mobil station was. Schmeiser stated that there is nothing shown on the plan. Horowitz asked if in the future, 5-10 years, something wants to be put there, if there is enough parking space. Schmeiser stated that they would have to comply with the ordinance. He added that they currently have excess parking spaces. Horowitz asked whether Traffic Engineering has looked at the routes from the back where there will be parking. Schmeiser said that the driveway around the building is 40) feet wide which the City considers more than adequate for traffic flow. Horowitz noted the traffic island in front of Walgreen's is heavily populated by senior citizens and the access road goes around behind the Sycamore Mall. The Council viewed a map of the site. Bill Tucker, manager of Sycamore Mall, said the parking should remain the same after remodeling. Horowitz asked that the traffic patterns be monitored. Schmeiser stated that there are minor revisions needed in the legal papers. A waiver of the 60 -day limitation period has been provided until June 15. Schmeiser will advise Council about the status at Tuesday night's formal Council meeting. Schmeiser Said a letter of authorltation has not been received because it lacks one aI nature but CM applicant's attorney hes assured the loiter wil be +vallsble by luesday's formal Countil meeting. is reaponsi te, COUFtniy, :[hmc!arr r-We!nr@ that this its*! it, r••9!' for consideration and there are Iwo pari"eys for the tt0h%44r "*&. tide I,abinm and one ia� a ..slghhnrhagd Der4; All weft, rensidered for dedir•tian to ther,14 it nc cost provides the City would accept the storw"ttor ealaallne tualns in a state considared n. M. 11mowable." Schmeiser questioned when the parkways should be accepted and in what condition the City should accept them. Schmeiser said Atty. Sanderson's letter clarifies that it has always been the intent to offer parkways to the City on the condition the parkways would be approved so as to be mowable. In response to Courtney, Schmeiser said the Parks and Recreation Commission knows the City would have to mow the retention basins forever upon acceptance of them. Timmins said it is curious the City does not utilize the same mechanisms as Rochester Place, where the City would impose requirements by a home owners' association and covenant. In response to Larson, Schmeiser said this was a compromise to accept the stormwater detention basins for parkland use. Larson asked if the City plans to not accept the land until the development is 90% sold. Schmeiser said the decision needs to be made by Council. Schmeiser said the applicant has preferred the City accept the language in the legal papers as presented, leaving it to the City's discretion to decide when to accept the land. Schmeiser said the applicant has agreed to keep mowing the land until such time the applicant wants to offer the parkways to the City and the City has the right to accept or not to accept the parkways. Larson said he does not feel the City is living up to the original intent of the agreement - the City told the applicant when you dedicate the parkland and you get the development done, the City will take it over and mow it. Council and staff discussed when the parkland should be accepted. Schmeiser suggested the subdivider attend Council's formal meeting to discuss the agreement. No Council comment. Ne Council comment. Coom(A ?imp A into: Reel 88-75, Side 2 (Agenda item No. 22) Courtney inquired about the bond loss. Atkins said that this is the first time the City has had a bond loss; Vltosh hes consulted Atty. Ken Harlot acid it was decided assufahta would oawd to be provided tp the Elly hefore a new bond would be issued. Ourtney stated he has received complaints regarding the messy alloy idcatad dowiltowi south of W10-0ten dtrest in the Plate arra, "ttlm euoGGct>d dtrartlej Sit 6i•,s clean-up prrtnn to rhrrY the @I ley and ideetify prabioms. tir.rowitt asked about thi ua d swr 10 4" of the 7a�ht Club par0119 Int located on first Avenue, i!101rk +paid he ssoowes the properiy mwor is pnailting It. Horowitz said when Idyllwild Subdivision was denied by Council, Council also denied recommendations by the Planning and Zoning Commission regarding amendments to the Subdivision Regulations to adopt or require subdividers to place in escrow an amount in cash for off-site improvements. Council agreed to Horowitz's request to direct staff to develop a framework where developers could pay their fair share for off-site improvements. Timmins noted that the Supreme Court has indicated there must be a clear nexus between the develop- ment and the impact it is creating and the exaction or fee the City wants them to pay. Strait stated Council received a letter regarding 420 Church Street. Timmins stated an ordinance is being prepared and relates to a nuisance regulation. 6. In response to Strait, McDonald stated discussion will be scheduled at an informal Council meeting to discuss environmental issues. Strait asked that Dr. Bovbjerg be considered as a member if an environmental committee is re-established. 7. Dickson asked for a status report on the old library. Atkins stated he had reviewed information six months to a year ago and will prepare an updated summary for Council. B. Ambrisco stated that local subcontractors have complained that the Paul H. Laurence Company is bid peddling. Ambrisco suggested that the City require general contractors to identify the subcontractors in the bidding process. Atkins noted he has been informed by trade unions that the Paul H. Laurence Company intends to sub -out 75% of the work. Atkins said that the contract requires the Laurence Company to do 60% of the work with their own forces and Stanley Consultants has been contacted regarding this issue. Timmins said the City has contracted with Stanley Consultants to manage the project and the City can direct them to look into both issues and maka a report back to the City. Appointments: Reel 88-35, Side 2 Design Review Committee - Clark Writs Riverfront Commission - Loren HorteG �Vynl;iL Time/Aggnds-Continued+ Reel 88-35, Side 2 0. (Agenda Item No. 5.g.(2)) Karr asked i/ Council would like to direct staff to look at tho outdoor eerviee area criteria as it relates to Season's Best and present alternatives to Council. Council directed etaff to explore oDtlons and propared informntion for Council. fxfctrilye_Sosllon: Reel RR -15, Side 1 Yt rieuor gjfcu+•wd privatviy w.u. i'r�,i"Vidual mi;riuv; iiiCch;duI1rg evaluations Considering the lateneaa of the boor. lho:rd by Ambriitoi Wond±9 by Slratc; to adjourn to executive aestion under section 21.6C to disruaa il.ratapy with Council on matters that are presently in litigation or where I W041110" is imminent. where ilk L disclosure would be likely to prejudice or disadvantage the position of the governmental body in that litigation. Affirmative roll call vote, 7/0, Mayor declared motion carried. Council adjourned to executive session at 9:15 p.m.