The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About1993 [11] Nov 18 {Book 04} 'L . t-lrerlghter H e'L; r ell 11,:11 \ L H ~co~J\ I L 101\ I _L_ Loll UU}I. . 3. Approve Agenda 4. Approve Minutes - November 4. 5. Bills Payable 6 . Treasurer I s Report 7 . Mayor Reports 8. Counc i 1 Reports . 9. Clerk/Administrator Reports a) Apartment Heating b) Delinquent Bills c) street Lighting Proposal d) Towing of Cars d) other Matters of Concern 10. Chief of Police Reports 11. Director of Public Works Reports 12. Building Official Reports 13. Wage Negotiation Interim Report 14. OLD BUSINESS: ~ a) Ordinance Amendment - Org. and Procedures of Council b) Plumbing/Heating Inspector Position c) Street Numbering Proposal ,~ d) Water Tower Illumination Proposal e) Sign Report from Maintenance Department f) Hookup Fees - DBL Labs & Linnemann Inn g) Job Descriptions h) Realignment of County Road 133 i ) Amend. to Ord. 89 Bicycles, Ro 11 er Blades, skateboards j) Fence Construction Complaint . k) ROW Property Acquisition Request - Schneiders 1 ) Sign Obstruction 3rd Ave and Ash Street m) Linnemann Inn n) JR Mobile Parking 0) Policy Book p) Vending Machines 15. 7:45 P.M. Delinquent utility Bill Hearing 16. 8:00 p.m. OPEN TO THE PUBLIC 17. Recess 18. 8:30 p.m. ADA Study Report - Brad Fornbrook, SEH 19. 9:00 p.m. Dale Haug . 20. 9: 15 p.m. Noise Complaint Appeal - Gary Terwey 21 . 9:30 p.m. Fire Relief Association - Ken Twit 22. 9:45 p.m. City Attorney Reports a) Fence Complaint b) Noise Violations Procedures c) Hookup Ordinance Amendment d) Organization and Procedures of City Council 23. Adjourn . . I t . Stearns Electric Association Headquarters Brandl omc:e 900 East Kraft Drive· Melrose. MN 56352-0040 7341 Old Hwy. 52 · St. Cloud. MN 56303 Phone: (612)256-4241 . Fax: (612)256-3618 Phone: (612)259-6601 · Fax: (612)259-7099 . ~~--"~r:Ætª%~~~5E-i::>-.·-"C City of St. Joseph November 21 1993 Attn: Rachel Stapleton P.O. Box 668 St. Joseph, MN. 56374 Dear Ms. Stapleton: We have reviewed your request for street lighting along 9lst Ave. 1 Minnesota Street East, and at the intersection of 90th Ave. and Lynx Road. Currently 91st Ave. does have existing lighting along a portion of the route you proposed. This lighting consists of only 4 - 175 watt mercury vapor security lights over a distance of approximately one third of a mile. These lights are mounted on our existing distribution pole line which is approximately 24' west of the edge of pavement. As a result a minimal amount of lighting is reaching the roadway. . To . improve this situation, we suggest that new 150 watt high pressure sodium vapor cobrahead luminaires be installed on 8' to 10' mast arms mounted on each existing pole along the entire route. Cobrahead luminaires are specifically designed for roadway lighting purposes. They are the industry wide standard, and are superior to security lights for this application. We feel that this will " greatly improve the illumination of the roadway along 91st Ave. Minnesota Street East presents a different scenario. Currently NSP has a transmission line along the north side of the route. These poles are not accessible to attach street lights to. We are faced with installing new poles along this route. Three options exist to light the roadway. Option 1 includes installing 35' wood poles with a 150 watt high pressure sodium security light. A preferred second option for this situation includes installing the same 35' wood poles and using the aforementioned 150 watt high pressure sodium vapor cobrahead luminaire on 8' arms. These poles could be fed either with overhead wire or fed by underground wire if aesthetics is of concern. The third option is to install a 35' colored fiberglass pole with the same cobrahead lumina ire as above. These poles are direct buried type poles, (no concrete base) and are fed with underground conductor. Aesthetically these poles and lights will be the most pleasant 1 but are also the most costly. . The proper way to light this roadway is for a staggered pattern on both the north and south side of the road. I currently have not checked to see if there is proper clearance under the NSP line to install poles on both sides of the road. -. . I . . If this is not possible then our next best option is of course to install on the south side ?nly. The intersection of 90th St. and Lynx Road can be lit most easily on the Northeast corner. There is an existing padmounted transformer on that can be used as the power source. Again any of the lighting option can be used. Our suggestion is to utilize a cobrahead luminaire on either a wood or fiberglass pole. We also would like to bring to your attention that Stearns is now offering the above mentioned fiberglass poles and cobrahead luminaires for residential applications. These are currently being used by both Stearns and NSP for lighting projects for the City of St. Cloud. If you would consider converting any existing wood poles/security light combinations, such as in Pond View Ridge, we would be happy to work with you on this also. Aesthetics seem to play a greater role in today's street lighting projects and we are pleased to be able to offer this option. Enclosed is a cost sheet reflecting our costs to provide you with the type of street lighting you desire. The monthly rate for a 150 watt HPS is currently being developed. I hopefully can have this information to you within a week. . If I can be of any further assistance at this time, please contact me. I would be more than happy to meet with you on site to discuss the options further. , str:rø~ r( Paul Orndorff Operations Engineer Enc. . . . < , . . STEARNS COOPERATIVE ELECTRIC ASSOCIATION STREET LIGHT PRICES ITEM DESCRIPTION COST LUMINAIRE Security Light (Complete) 58.73 Cobrahead (Complete) 100 watt High Pressure Sodium 119.55 150 watt High Pressure Sodium 151.12 250 watt High Pressure Sodium 162.24 POLES . 3.0 ' Wood Pole 105.00 35' Wood Pole 155.00 30' Fiberglass Pole ( colored) wi 4' mast arm 359.00 35' Fiberglass Pole ( colored) 452.63 I MAST ARMS 8' Mast Arm for Wood Pole Steel 61.23 Aluminum 71.00 8' Mast Arm for Fiberglass Pole Aluminum 94.79 Aluminum painted to match pole 111.83 INSTALLATION PRICES . Set pole (ea. ) 95.00 Plowing wire (ft. ) .45 10-2 UF Conductor (ft. ) .24 ; . ( , F~i 11-05-93 St. Joseph Police De~a~tment Time: 8:55 am C~ime Summa~y Repo~ . - UOC Page: 1 Monthly Repo~t Fo~ Octobe~ 1993 SBN . All . P~int ALl U 0 C codes P~int ALL ISNs PTint ALL LGN Codes U 0 C Total U 0 C LiteTal TTanslation ------ ----- _______________________________w_______________ 9014 -7 SPEEDING · · · ~I 9018 · · · 1 WRONG WAY 9030 · · · ß STOP SIGN ,. 9068 . 1 SEAT BELTS AND CHILD REST RANTS · · , 9079 · · · 1 EXPIRED REGISTRATION 9200 · · · 1 NO INSURANCE ;' 9212 ~ DISPLAY WRONG REGISTRATION · · · L 9221 · · · 2 FALSE INFORMATION TO A POLICE OFFICER 9222 · ~ ILLEGAL USE OF DRIVERS LICENSE · · ~ 9224 · · · 4 REVOKED, CANCELLED OR SUSPENDED D.L. 9250 · · · 4 NOISE ORDINANCE 9251 · · · 3 DOG ORDINANCE ~ 9271 · · · 14 UNDER 21 IN A BAR ~ 9286 . · · 1 UNREASONABLE ACCELERATION OR BRAKING , F'ri 11-05-93 St. Joseph Police Department Time: 8:55 am Crime Summary Report - UOC Paqe~ /:) (- Monthly Report For October 1993 SßN : f::¡ 11 Print ALL U 0 C codes p.(' i n-l: fCjLI_ ISHs Print ALL LGN Codes U 0 C T () '1; a 1 U 0 C Lit e .(' é\ I Translation ._.....~.._- ----- -. -... - - - - -- - - - - - - - - -- --...... - -- - - - - - -.. ~ -.... - _. ~ - -- -- -. -~. -.. -- - - ~- ---- '3i.~'Jß · · · 1 :'UBI._ I C urn t~f::¡T I m~ '3:3 lE2 · · · ,.:\ FOUi'iD ¡:¡t, I 'f=1L S ':3313 · · · ') F OUt'1D PI~ () P I~~I~: TY /- '::Ii:¡ <~ 0 · · · ':i PROPERTY DAMAGE MOTOR VEHICLE ACCIDENT , '34~:'Ø · · · 1 HI'r AND RUH PROPER'ry DAMAGE ACCIDENT 9600 · · · 1 m..I... OTHEF~ F I F:ES .¡ ')602 · · · 1 MUTIPLE DWELLING FIRE 9605 ") VEH I CLE F I F:E · · · C'_ '3"7 Ji} .~) I~-ALI._ · · · I.. ':)7JB · · · 1 ALL OTHEr-< MEDIC¡:¡LS 'Jß00 1:"- ALL MISCELLANEOUS PUBLIC · · · ,J 9£>02 · · · 18 MOTOF<IST ¡:¡E,~nSH) - 'Jß134 · · · -4 PU.HLIC ASSISTS - 9ßØ6 · · · -4 HOUSE l.oJ(.¡TCH :t:".,:" . -~,-- , . , - F'f'i 11-05-93 St. Joseph Police Depa~tment Time: 8:55 am C~ime Summary Report - UOC Page: 3 Monthly Repo~t For October 1993 SBN . All . Print ALL U 0 C codes P'f'i nt ALL I SNs Print ALL LGN Codes U 0 C Total U 0 C Lite'ral T'rans 1 at i on -.-.--- ----- ----------------~---_._------------------------- ':3809 . · · 3 SUSPICIOUS VEHICLE ':HH0 . · · 3 REMOVE UNWANTED PERSON '3812 · · · 4 CHECK THE AI~EA I' 981 ~~ . ¡:;. RECWEST OFFICER · · ~J ..-... ':3 8 1 5 · · · 1 TI~AFF I C HAZARD - 9r:;}03 · · · 3 FUI"¡Efi:AL ESCORT " t~- 9904 · · · ,-, DELIVER AGENDAS/MINUTES/OTHER PACKETS 9907 . · · i STFŒET SIGN DOWN ':)':309 · · · 1 GUN PERMIT ISSUED 991 c~ · · n 1 TFi:At'¡~)PORT t'IALE 9913 · · · 1f:., ASSIST OTHER AGENCY 9'::J1.t.¡ · · · 2 ATTEMPT TO LOCATE ........ ':3 ';:; 1 7 it (:¡LA¡:;:i'1 · · · --- 9921 · · · 1 DISPOSAL OF ANIMAL _:) - - F'r-i 11--05-93 St. Joseph Police Department Time: 8:55 am Crime Summary Report - uoe Paqe: 4 Monthly Report For October 1'393 SBt~ : All I='ri nt ALL U 0 e codes ¡:. Of' i n t I-::¡ LI_ I ~3¡-I!:; Print ALL LGN Codes U 0 C Tot;,:'\l U 0 C Lite°f'iill T Of' an!; 1 ~" t ion _...._-~ ----- ------------------------------------.-------.---- ':3':32i.~ · · · 1 FIN (3E I~ P I~: I 1-1 TIN (3 '-;) ':1 i.~ 3 i:. EXTRA PATROL NEEDED · · n Co' ':3'3;~ 'f ':j ALU::l3r:¡r I Ctr~ OF 1'1 I SCmmUCT · · · c_ J- ';)1:)26 n · · 4 'j 11 HANG-UPS OR UNFOUNDED OR OPEN LINES ...... 'j'3Ei · · · c: FIGI'j'f - r;:J'330 · · · 3 t~EIGHÐ()F< DISPUTE I '3'J33 · · · 2 DRIVING COMPLAINT 9'3;;55 · · · 1 PUBLIC SERVICE TALKS '3'33)' u · · 1 DEL I \'!¡~:I~ l::ì'1ER(31::NCY /1'1ES~3r:¡GI::: S ')'33£\ · · · 3 NATUR¡:::¡L on::; LEAK r::¡ 2 3-<'+ i.~ · · · 1 AS~3~~ULT B':¡ ?,f,L¡ · · · 1 BURGLAf('( fŒUITED ...... Ji~50Ø · · · 1 GROSS D. vJ. I. --- J2t'i01 · · · 1 GROSt; D. U. 1. . . F-ri 11-05-93 St. Joseph Police Depa~tment Time: 8:55 am C~ime Summa~y Repo~t - UOC Page: c:- ,J Monthly Repo~t Fo~ Octobe~ 1993 SBN : All P~int ALL U 0 C codes p.(' i nt f=1LL I ßNs PTint ALL LGN Codes U 0 C Total U 0 C L i te'('a 1 T'(,2\ ns 1 at i on ----- ----- ___________________________._"_______M__...._._____~_ J2701 · · · 1 AGGRAVATED D.U.I. J3500 . · · 1 D.vJ.I. J3501 · · · 3 D. U. L -- f1LCOHOL /- /<1-'+102 . 1 LIQUCm - SELLING · · , ." 1'1410'<+ . · · 39 UNDER AGE POSSESION/CONSUMPTION N2031 · · · 1 DISTURBING PEACE I PRIVACY .j i N3070 . · · 1 DISTURBING PEACE I PRIVACY 03690 . · · 1 OBSCENITY P3110 . · · 1 DAMAGE TO PROPERTY P3119 · · · 1 DAMAGE TO PROPERTY P313':3 · · · 1 DAMAGE TO PROPERTY P3310 . · · 1 TRESPÇ¡S~) .- P3320 · · · 1 HŒßPASS ....... P36f29 . · · 1 PROPERTY DAMAGE / TRESPASS . F'ri 11-05-93 St. Joseph Police De P¿¡ 'rtment Time: 8: 55 arn C'r i me Summa-ry I=<e pO'rt - UOC Page: 6 Monthly Report For Octobe-r 1993 SBN : All P'ri nt (41..L U 0 Ceo cI e s> p'r i nt AI_L ISN$ P'ri nt ALL LGH Codes lJ 0 C Total lJ () C Lit e'r a I T'r ct n s I ~'\ t ion -.....--- ----- _________________.__._________________w___u_________ 1:;:2113 · · · 1 :::OBBEI~:Y T7ft2':) · · · 1 THEFT I;J35-'t'0 · · · 1 WEAPONS/FIREWORKS ,. X2200 · · · 2 G11,IE F AUÆ t~AI'IE TO f:'()LICE OFF I CEf< I ¥,..ìf:.,* AGEt-ICY GRAND TOTAL: 280 , - ........ - F1'i 11-05-93 st. Joseph Police Depa~tment Time: 8:58 am C~ime Summa~y Repo~t - uoe Page: 1 Monthly Repo~t Fo~ Octo beT 1993 SBN . All . PTint ALL U 0 C codes P,' i nt ALL ISNs PTint ALL LGN Codes U 0 e Tot:al U 0 C Litel'a1 T'r a n s 1 at ion ----- ----- ---~-----------------------------_._----------- '3014 · · · 37 SPEEDHIG 9018 . · · 1 WFWt'¡G wr.¡'( 9030 · · · ß STOP SIGN /- 9068 . · · 1 SEAT BELTS AND CHILD REST RANTS - ,'/- 907'3 · · · 1 EXPIRED REGISTRATION ~ 9200 . · · 1 NO INSURANCE .1 i 9212 ';) DISPLAY WRONG REGISTRATION · · · £. 9221 · · · 2 FALSE INFORMATION TO A POLICE OFFICER '3222 · · · 2 ILLEGAL USE OF DRIVERS LICENSE '322-4 · · · L¡ REVOKED,CANCELLED OR SUSpENDED D.L. 9250 . · · 4 NOISE ORDINANCE 9251 · · · 3 DOG Dfm I NANCE - 9271 14 UNDER 21 HI A Bi~R · · · ........ 9286 . · · 1 UNREASONABLE ACCELERATION OR BRAKING - Fri 11-05-93 St. Joseph Police Department Time: 8:58 am Crime Summary Report - UOC Page: 2 Monthly Report For October 1993 SB~~ ~ All Print ALL U 0 C codes Pï'int ~)LL I S N ~; Print ALL LGN Codes U () C TQt~Ü U 0 C L i te'('a 1 T 'r a 1F;; 1 ~'\ t i Q n ~-..-_--- ---~- - - - - -. - - - - - -- - - - -- -- --.- - - -- -- - - -- -- - - -.- - - - --- - - -- - - -.. --- '3;'~'3ß · · · 1 PUBLIC UF\INATIlJl-..J '331E · · n ¿ F (I W,J) m~ I MAL S '3313 · · · '3 F OUtJD I:'I~~OPI:::I:;;TY ,- I] A "1 ø · · · 9 PROPERTY DAMAGE MOTOR VEHICLE ACCIDENT - '04~':!('J · · · 1 HIT AND RUN PROPER'ry DAMAGE ACCIDENT ~ '3b0Ø · · · 1 ALL OTHER FIF:ES í ') (7,. (oJ ¡_~ · · · 1 MU'fIPLE DWELLING FIRE 9605 · · · c! VEHICLE FIFŒ ')/3A ~J FALI._ · · · L_ Ij ï' 38 · · · 1 ALL OTHER MEDICALS 9ßØØ 1::- ALL MISCELLANEOUS PUBLIC · · · ,J 98Øé~ · · n Hs MOTor:: I ST ASf¡ I STS - ':3ßØ4 · · · 4 PUB L ! CAS:3 I :.; T S -- 9806 · · · 4 HOUSE ~Jr:}TCH , ~ ...... F~i 11-05-93 St. Joseph Police Depa~tment Time: 8:58 am Crime Summary Report - UOC Page: 3 Monthly Repo~t For Octobe~ 1993 SBN . All . P~int ALL U 0 C codes Print ALL ISNs Print ALL LGN Codes U 0 C Total U 0 C Literal Translation ----- ----- ------------------------------------.-....--------- 9809 . · · 3 SUSPICIOUS VEHICLE 9810 . · · 3 REMOVE UNWANTED PERSON 9812 · · · 4 CHECK THE AREA J. 9813 r REQUEST OFFICER · · · ~ I .-f 9815 · · · 1 TRAFFIC HAZARD 9903 · · · 3 FUNERAL ESCORT Ii 9904 · · · 5 DELIVER AGENDAS/MINUTES/OTHER PACKETS 9907 · · · 1 STREET SIGN DOWN 9909 · · · 1 GUN PERMIT ISSUED 9912 · · · 1 TRANSPORT MALE 9913 . · · lb ASSIST OTHER AGENCY 9914 . · · 2 ATTEMPT TO LOCATE , 9917 · · · 4 ALARM 9921 · · · 1 DISPOSAL OF ANIMAL ...-.. - F'r i 11-05-93 St. Joseph Police Department Time: 8:58 ë\m Crime Summary Report - UOC Page: 4 Monthly Report For October 1993 SBN : All Print ALL U 0 C codes P'r i n tAL L I;3Ns Print ALL LGN Codes U 0 C Tot<."Il U () C Lite'ral T 'r a n s 1 at: ion ----- ~-_-..- ------------------------------.-----------------.-- ,:)'32í.~ · · · 1 FIN G E I~ P R I NT I N G 99í.?J · · · 6 EXTRA PATROL NEEDED ':71 '3 ~~.t, · · · 2 ALLEGATION OF MISCONDUCT /. 9':J2f. · · · L¡ 911 HANG-UPS OR UNFOUNDED OR OPEN LINES I ')'J¡:,?,} .:~ FIGHT · · · c. '39JØ · · · J NEIGHBOR DISPUTE , ')933 ':~ DRIVING COMPLAINT · · · c. 'j'j35 · · · 1 PUBLIC SERVICE TALKS 'J')]} · · · 1 :OELI\ÆI~ E-=!1EI~GENCY /'1ESS¡:-¡OES 99~W · · · 3 t-IATUF<AL GAr; LEAI< A2J4;~ · · · 1 I'C'¡SSAUL T £11.764 · · · 1 BUr-;:GLARY FŒUHED J250\.3 · · · 1 G I~: () S S D. W. I . , J2501 · · · 1 GFWSS D.U.I. . - F"t'i 11-05-93 St. Joseph Police Depa~tment Time: 8:58 am C~ime Summa~y Repo~t - UOC Page: 5 Monthly Repo~t Fo~ Octobe~ 1993 SBN : All P~int ALL U 0 C codes P"r i nt ALL ISNs P~int ALL LGN Codes U 0 C Total U 0 C L i te'ra 1 T'ran~:;l at i on -......---- ----- ----------------------------------------------- J2701 · · · 1 AGGRAVATED D.U.I. J3500 . · · 1 D. W. L J3501 · · · ;3 D. U. I. - ALCOHOL /- M4102 . · · 1 LIOLJOF: - SELLING .- . ~, i'14104 · · · 39 UNDER AGE POSSESION/CONSUMPTION ~ N2031 · · · 1 DISTURBING PEACE I PRIVACY ,i N3070 . · · 1 DISTURBING PEACE I PRIVACY 03&90 . · · 1 OBSCENITY P3110 . · · 1 DAMAGE TO PROPERTY P3119 · · · 1 DAMAGE TO PROPERTY P313':1 . · · 1 DAMAGE TO PROPERTY P3310 . · · 1 TRESPASS .- P3320 1 TI:;:ESPASB · · · -- P3E..29 . · · 1 PROPERTY DAMAGE / TRESPASS . ...... Fri 11-05-93 St. Joseph Police Department Time: 8:58 am Crime SummaTY Report - UOC Page: b Monthly RepoTt For October 1993 SBN : All PTint ALL U 0 C codes PTint ALL ISNs Print ALL LGN Codes U 0 C Total U 0 C LiteTal TTanslation ------ -.---- ____________________._____M_____.__________.._______.__ R2113 · · · 1 ROBBERY T7029 · · · 1 THEFT W3549 · · · 1 WEAPONS/FIREWORKS /- X2200 · · · 2 GIVE FALSE NAME TO POLICE OFFICER ~ ....- *** AGENCY GRAND TOTAL: 280 í ~ ..... <, ~ I 11-05-93 St. Joseph Police Depa~tment Time: 8:59 am Citation Locat10n Summa~y - Com Code/UOC Page: 1 Monthly Repo~t fo~ Octobe~ 1993 Com Code . All . P~int ALL U 0 C codes Including Juv. Wate~/Traffic Records Com Code U 0 C Total U 0 C Lite~al T~anslation ---- ------ ------ -----------~----------------------------------- 21 PARKING 9014 36 SPEEDHIG 9018 1 WRONG WAY 9030 8 STOP SIGN 9Ø79 1 EXPIRED REGISTRATION 92ØØ 1 NO INSUI:;;j~NCE /_ 92:1.2 1 DISPLAY WRONG REGISTRATION I ' ':3221 2 FALSE INFORMATION TO A POLICE OFFICER 9222 2 ILLEGAL USE OF DRIVERS LICENSE 9224 4 REVOKED, CANCELLED OR SUSPENDED D.L. i 9271 1 ¡~ UNDER 21 IN (.¡ B¡::}R i 9 i.~ 8 E, 1 UNREASONABLE ACCELERATION OR BRAKING 9298 1 PUBLIC URINATION Ji.~500 1 GROSS D. W. r. J2501 1 GFWSS D. U. I. Ji.~701 :I. AGGRAVATED D.U.I. J3500 1 D. W. I. J3501 3 D. U. I. - ALCOHOL ~1·t102 1 LIQUOR - SELLING 1'14104 38 UNDER AGE POSSESION/CONSUMPTION I N3070 1 DISTURBING PEACE / PRIVACY P3E..2'j 1 PROPERTY DAMAGE / TRESPASS U3028 1 WORTHLESS CHECKS . F'f'i 11-05-93 St. J 05(;' ph Police De p¿u'trnent Time: 8 : 5', I Cit~'\tion Location Summ~'\-r'j - Com Code/UI)C P..-=..ge Monthly Fü" pOï't fOï' Octo be'f' 1993 Com Code : All P'r i n t ALL U 0 C codes Including JUY. W ~'\ t (.? -r / T 'f' a f fie Reco'rd 5 Com Code U 0 C Tot¿\l U 0 C Lit e'r a 1 T-rëlnsJ."ltion ---- _ _ _ _ MOo .........--- .......- M_ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ ~ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ __ __ ...continued W35A9 1 WEAPONS/FIREWORKS X2200 2 G I\,) E r--nLSE l'-IAI1E TD POLICE OFF' I CER To-l:;al 145 Citation: 1 '"Jr:' I¡)~'\-rni ng: 0 P;'{R:X I NG- 21 . . . . L-~ * .'¡(. * * * 'If: -)(. * * .)f: * .)f: 'If * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * .)1: .)1: * ~..). GRAND TOTAL 145 Citation: l'"Jc W ¿I ï' n i n ~I : ø PARKING . . . . L- ..J 21 J. I í I , .. . W DONOHUE RAJKOWSKI L T D. Attorneys at Law Reply to: st. Cloud November 5, 1993 ST. CLOUD 11 Seventh Avenue North P. O. Box 1433 Ms. Rachel Stapleton St. Cloud, MN 56302-1433 st. Joseph City Clerk 612-251-1055 City Hall P.O. Box 668 800-445'9617 st. Joseph, MN 56374 FAX 612'251-5896 RE: Amendment to Ordinance No. 31 MINNEAPOLIS Rental House Noise Ordinance 2904 Plaza VII Rieke Pence Issue 45 South Seventh Street Pepsi Machine Keg Ordinance Minneapolis, MN 55402-1620 Our Pile No. 15,692 612-339·9206 800'445-9617 Dear Rachel: ,. . FAX 612-339-4775 Enclosed herewith, please find the following: FRANK J. RA/KOWSKI 1- An Amendment to Ordinance 31 dealing with house GORDON H. HANSMEIER numbers. FREDERICK L. GRUNKE THOMAS G. JOVANOVICH 2. A revised Ordinance 89 omitting the reference to JOHN H. SCHERER "scooters". ~AULA. RAIKOWSKI KEVIN F. GRAY with regard to the other matters discussed in your letter of October 26, 1993, by separate letter, I am addressing some of the questions with regard to the WILLIAM J. CASHMAN Limitation of Council Ordinance. Please let me know DAVID T. SHAY if the Council wants me to attend the meeting in the CAROL A. STARK middle of November to discuss this issue, or if they RICHARD w. SOBALVARRO want any additional information prior to that time. MICHAEL C. RA/KOWSKI with regard to the rental housinq noise violation, I A. CHAD McKENNEY previously sent you a proposed letter to Mr. Terwey. MOLLY J. WINGATE Let me know if anything more needs to be done with regard to that matter. It is my feeling that a MICHAEL H. DONOHUE suspension of the license will not result in the loss OF' COUNSEL of the grandfather status of the five person definition of family. A revocation of a rental JAMES H. KELLY, M.D., F.A.C.P. license would result in the loss of the grandfather MEDICAL CONSULTANT status. .DON H. HANSMEIER IS ADMmED TO PRACTICE IN NORTH DAKOTA AND WISCONSIN. I have reviewed the documentation which you provided PAUL A. RAIKOWSKI IN WISCONSIN, CAROL A. STARK IN ILU.~OIS AND MISSOURI with regard to Ross Rieke fence construction. In AND WILLIAM J. CASHMAN L'l SOUtH DAKOTA. accordance with Mr. Euteneuer report it appears as . . .. Ms. Rachel Stapleton November 5, 1993 Page -2- though the materials are not prohibited by the Ordinance. The Ordinance does require the material to be stained or painted upon completion of the fence. The report also indicates that Mr. Rieke is using treated lumber. This, in conjunction with the fact that the fence is painted, adequately meets the definition of low maintenance in accordance with section 56.2. It is my understanding that Mr. Euteneuer has inspected the site and is satisfied that the fence will be constructed at least two feet from the property line. I will defer to Mr Euteneuer's judgment as to whether or not this is in fact the case. A question was also raised as to whether or not the "finished" side faces the adjacent property. The intent of this provision of the Ordinance is to provide the adjacent landowner with the benefit of the better appearing side of the fence. Depending on the design and construction of the fence, it mayor may not be dictated by the location of the posts. Normally, this Ordinance would require posts being set on the inside of the fence (on the owner's side of the fence). In this regard, I would again defer . to the judgment of the building inspector, based upon his view of the fence design. Finally, the Ordinance requires non-toxic building materials. From the information I have, I am unaware of any claim that the fence is going to be constructed of toxic materials. Absence of evidence and confirmation of a valid concern in this regard, I i would not recommend that the City require the suspension of construction at any testing of materials. The expense does not warrant testing absent strong evidence of toxicity. On the other hand, if the material is such that there is legitimate question as to whether or not the materials may release toxins into the soil, or be highly toxic to people or animals coming in contact with the fence, then construction should be suspended and testing performed. Again, I would defer to Ron Euteneuer's judgment. It is my understanding that a permit has been issued for the construction. As long as the construction complies with the fence ordinance, the construction may continue. The City Council cannot or should they go beyond the requirements of the Ordinance. On the other hand, compliance with the Ordinance should be required. It is my understanding that a question was also raised with regard to the installation of a Pepsi machine in city Hall to be . owned and operated by a City employee. It is my understanding that this machine is primarily for the use of other City employees. V . , .. Ms. Rachel Stapleton November 5, 1993 Page -3- Whether or not this constitutes a conflict of interest or should be prohibited depends upon the circumstances. I believe that the City should guard against situations where employees conduct separate businesses on City property during City time. This appears to be the case here. On the other hand, where the city makes a decision to bring in a service, such as a vending machine, I don't believe that an employee should necessarily be prohibited from offering that service. I think it is important for the Council to first decide to allow a pop machine and then secondly to authorize the employee to locate the machine on the property. I believe that it is important to make sure the operation of the pop machine is specifically permitted by the Council. I also believe that it is important that the employee does not service the machine while on City time. It is also important that employees under his supervision do not feel obligated to purchase from his machine as opposed to others. /, . In summary, I would recommend that the Council closely scrutinize practices of this type, but not necessarily prohibit them. Where an employee provides the best cost efficient delivery of a service to the city and its employees, then it makes sense to authorize the employee to act. But when the service or products provided occurs on city property, it must be specifically . authorized by the City. It is also important to verify that the practice does not in any way disrupt the employees usual and , customary duties. Finally, I am in the process of contacting the City of st. Cloud and asking them for a copy of their Keq Ordinance. I will review it and provide my comments. Very truly yours, DONOHUE RAJKOWSKI LTD. By John H. Scherer JHS/baz N:\city\stjoe\y . W . , . .. - . AMENDMENT TO ORDINANCE 89 The City Council for the city of st. Joseph hereby ordains: That Ordinance 89 of the st. Joseph Code of Ordinances - 1992 Edition, is hereby rescinded and the following Ordinance 89 enacted in its place: ORDINANCE 89: BICYCLES, ROLLER SKATES AND SKATEBOARDS. section 89.1: DEFINITIONS. For purposes of this Ordinance, the following terms shall be defined in this manner: Subd. 1: "Bicycle" is as defined in Minn. Stat. § 169:.01, Subd. 5l. . Subd. 2 : "Roller skates" are defined as a boot or shoe having wheels attached which enable the wearer to propel him or herself with a skating motion. This definition shall specifically include, but is not limited to, in-line roller skates. Subd. 3 : "Skateboard" is defined as a rider propelled ifootboard mounted over small wheels upon which a rider may sit or stand. Subd. 4 : The "Restricted Area" shall include the following streets and the sidewalks adjacent thereto: a. College Avenue between Birch Street and the alley immediately south of Minnesota Street. b. Minnesota Street between Second Avenue West and First street East. c. First and Second Avenues NW lying south of Ash street. d. Ash Street between College Avenue and Second Avenue NW. .-. 89.2: PROHIBITED ACTIVITIES: No person shall engage in the following activities within the Restricted Area: - . . ~ - " . Subd. 1. Ride a bicycle on a sidewalk, except when crossing the sidewalk at a right angle for purposes of entering or exiting a driveway or alley. Subd. 2. Travel on roller skates in or on any street, except for the purpose of crossing a street, at which time the crossing shall be made at a right angle to the street at an intersection or designated crosswalk in accordance with the laws governing a pedestrian. Subd. . 3. No person shall ride a skateboard on any street or sidewalk. 89.3. PENALTIES: Subd.. 1. Any person who violates this Ordinance shall be guilty of a. petty misdemeanor, except as provided in Subd. 2. Subè.. 2. Any person violating this Ordinance.where such violation resulted in injury to any person or property, or where the violation created the imminent danger of injury to any person shall be guilty of a misdemeanor. ,. This; Ordinance was passed by the City Council for the City of st. Joseph this _ day of , 1993. . Mayor I Clerk/Administrator N:\ci~y\s~joe\a£lOO493.222 - - ,,, ' . ç;¡ ¿\ y¡ VJ JY11 May 3, 1993 . r ifW1mI5S¡cr1- . . Lance spoke on ~is behalf. He stated that he currently has Mr. a single garage and a lean-to on his property. In an effort to clean up his property and provide security for his possessions', he would like to build a two stall garage and tear down the existing b~ildings~ Because the lot Is long and narrow, Mr. Lance is requesting a two foot variance on the side yard setback. By allowing the two foot variance, Mr. Lance will be able to construct a larger concrete pad. The concrete pad will provide adequate space for turning around. After reviewing the plans, the Commission determined that Mr. Lance owns enough property to support the two stall garage. Sniezek made a motion to recommend Council . ......L.._ +ur" f()oi: variance as requested, based on the fol 1 ) St..1oseph Code oj Mr. Lance owns a Gt(Psp:;nc!enc¿ ;e being located in the f1 ~operty houses a single gar age ; In granting the (-f'Jafc1r'; 1 ~he.- to demolish the existing bui provide safety and security to 2)" 5t. Joseph Code 0 L, n fI V?1 al1 rt &1 P1. . The proposed var .ate supply of li gh t and air t< 1i n ish or impa ir established pro! Id ing area. Based upon these findings, the Planning CommissIon recommends that tjle request for a two ( 2) foot variance on the sideyard setback in a R- 1 zone be approved. Approval shall be on the following conditions: 1 ) None. The motion was seconded by Nierengarten. Ayes: Klein, Kalinowski, Sniezek, Brixius, Schneider, Hiemenz, Nierengarten. Nayes: None. Motion Carried 7:0:0 '., Mark Lamber't·- PURD Application: Mr. Lambert appeared before the Planning Còmmission to ~ake application for a PURD development. St. Joseph Cod~ of,Ordinanc~ No. 52.18 subd subd 4(c) states that Multi Fami I y Dwelling units shall be required to utilize the PURD procedural process excluding the PURD requirement for acreage. Mr. Lambert stated that he would like to construct a 15 unit apartment complex. The ,- Planning Commission accepted his PURD application and scheduled the hearing for June 7 , 1993. ,- Steve Dehler ~ Building Permit: Steve Dehler appeared before the Commission to request authorization to apply for a building permit to Page 2 , May 3, 1993 remodel Linnemann I Store. Mr. Dehler and his partner, Brad Lindgren, . s have secured contract with St. John r Prep School to provide living a s quarters for female students attending the Prep School. The Store will be converted into a lodging house, with 18 people living in the lower level and 12. s tuden ts Li v ing in the upper level. The plans include 2 students per bedroom, a cormnon living room and a cormnon kitchen. Corrnnissioner Kalinowski questioned whether Mr. Dehler has adequate parking and if he rents his parking lot to the American Legion. Mr. Dehler stated that he currently has a non-exclusive agreement with the Legion and IS compensated for that agreement. However, parking space is not guaranteed. After discussion, the Planning Corrnnission determined that 20 parking spaces would b_e required for the volume of renters. The Corrunission discussed at length whether or not Mr. Dehler had to pave and strip his parking lot. Mr. Dehler stated that due to the costs involved in paving the lot, he currently has no plans to do so. Commissioner Brixius felt that ;1' is important that the parking spaces J. . be marked. I f the Legion has an event, and the renters come home, what will assure them a parking space? Mr. Dehler stated that if i t becomes a problem, he wi 11 cease the agreement with the Legion. The Commission g eneI' a 11')1 agreed that unless parking spaces are marked and designated people other than residents wi 11 continue to park in his lot. . The Commission agreed to seek legal opinion regarding the designation of parking spaces and the possibility of making the building permi t conditional upon the paving of the parking lot. Nierengarten made a motion authorizing Mr. Dehler to make application f <;fr a building permi t . Application IS contingent upon the recommendation of the City Attorney, John Scherer, with regard to the designation of parking. The motion was seconded by Sniezek. Ayes: Klein, Kalinowski, 5niezek, Brixius, Schneider, Hiemenz, Nierengarten. Nayes: None. Motion Carried 7:0:0 Minutes: Kalinowski made a motion to approve the minutes of the March 1 , March 16 and April 5. 1993 as presented. The motion was seconded by Brixius. Ayes: K l·e in, Kalinowski, Sniezek, Brixius, Schneider, Hiemenz, Nierengarten. Nayes: . None. Motion Carried 7:0:0 Comprehensive Plan Update: A special meeting has been established with the City Councìl on May 13, 1993. Since not all the Planning Commissioners can be present, the following are alternative dates: May 21 , May 22, May 23. New Business . Hearin!; Request: The Sisters of the Order of 5t. Benedict have requested the City to consider allowing a special use permit to a 11 ow Page 3 . . . . . - EXCERPT OF THE MAY 6, 1993 COUNCIL MEETING HIEMENZ: The Planning Commission would 1 i ke 1 ) Transportation Roadway map adopted to designate the area for roadways, particularly on the east end. 2) They would like a memorandum of understanding with the Township the they would review with the City any activity in that area. 3) The Planning Commission tabled the Stellmach request for special use permit for a cold storage facility, to be a two phase project. They also considered Nélson Lance's request for a variance on placement of a garage. Mark Lambert appeared at the Planning Commission meeting to begin the PURO process for a 15 unit apartment complex. steve Dehler requested approval for a building permit in the Business zone. The Planning Commission approved the plans, which included 20 parking spaces, with the stipulation that they would require the parking area blacktopped and parking places marked, if our ordinance will allow this requirement. . i . ß ---~ --- ~. " . . , . W I . I DONOHUE RAJKOWSKI L T D. Attorneys at Law Reply to: St. Cloud I ST. CLOUD i I U Seventh Avenue North I I P.O. Box 1433 ¡ May 5, 1993 St. Goud, MN 56302-1433 612-251>1055 800-445'%17 FAX 612'251-5896 Ms. Rachel Stapleton MINNEAPOLIS St. Joseph City Clerk Administrator 2904 Plaza vn City Hall P.O. Box 668 45 South Seventh Street St. Joseph, MN 56374 Minneapolis, MN 55402-1620 612'339'9206 RE: Boarding House 800'445-9617 Our File No. 15,692 ,. FAX 612'339'4775 Dear Rachel: . FRANK J. RATKOWSKI I have prepared this letter to respond to a question GORDON H. HANSMEIER raised with respect to the lodging house being FREDERICK L. GRUNKE developed by Steve Dehler and Brad Lindgren. THOMAS G. JOVANOVICH JOHN H. SCHERER It is my understanding that the matter has been before i'AULA. RAjKOWSKI the Planning Commission and the Planning Commission has i determined that the proposed lodging house is a KEVIN F. GRAY permitted use in a general business district. Therefore, I will not address that question. WILLIAM J. CASHMAN DAVID T. SHAY The Planning Commission did have a question as to what CAROL A, STARK should or should not be required 3.S far as off street RICHARD w. SOBALVARRO parking. It is my understanding that a parking lot is MICHAEL C. RATKOWSKI adjacent to the structure which will provide enough A. CHAD McKENNEY parking spaces. The specific question has to do with the requirement of paving and striping of the parking MOLLY J. WINGATE lot. MICHAEL H. DONOHUE In this regard, I would refer you to Section 52.13 OF COU~Et. Subd. 5 of the Code of Ordinances found at page 98. This sets forth the requirements for a parking lot in lAMES H. KELLY, M,D., F.A,C.P. the district where off street parking is required. The MEDICAL CONSULTANT area where the lodge will be situated falls within such GORDON H. HANSMEJER IS ADMITTED TO PRACTICE a district. 1,.'" NORTH DAKOTA AND WlSCO~SIN. ~ PAUL A. RAIKOWSK! L'I WISCONSL'I, OL A. STARK IN Ilti."óOIS AND MISSOURI ND WILUAM J. CASHMAN IN SOUTH DAKOTA. I - :~~~~-':-Í~C ~t .-~. -.--.--.- '.- ..-- . - , . MS_ Rachel Stapleton . May- 5, 1993 ~ Page -2- . , ~ -~- -_. - ~, ~Th~ordiDance requires the Planning Commission to approve the -- -~ - - ,- parkin~lot before construction is started~ The parking lot must have auseable dust proof surface which may consist of concrete, black top or properly treated crushed rock. If the proposed parking-lot will have any of the three permitted surfaces, the Planning Commission should approve the plan. The Planning Commission may not require concrete or tar if the property owner proposes to use treated crushed rock. There is no requirement that there be any striping of the lot. This may not be required by the Planning Commission. Essentially, the Planning Commission should determine that the requirements of Subd. 5 are met. It is not up to the Planning Commission to place any more restrictive or burdensome requirements on the lot. Let me know if you have any questions. Very truly yours, DONOHUE RAJKOWSKI LTD. /' /' . JHS/jck . L:\gen\15692\afU50593 .011 Ii C6'\~ ~0 a~~ ·M~ 'P~JO~. . W . . , . .e 3. Motor fuel station car wash. Zero (0) in addition to that required for the station. Subd. 5: Parking Lot Standards. In all districts where off-street pårking lots are permitted or required such off-street parking lots shall be constructed and maintained subject to the following regulations: a) Adequate ingress and egress shall be provided. b) Such parking lots shall be maintained in a useable dustproof condition, such as concrete, blacktop or properly treated crushed rock, or some other permanently surfaced area and shall be kept graded and drained to dispose of surface water. c) Whenever such parking lot boundary adjoins property zoned for residential use, a setback of fifteen (15) feet from said lot line shall be required, and maintained. d) .Necessary curbs or other protections against damages to adjoining properties, streets and sidewalks shall be provided and maintained. e) Plans for the construction of any such parking lot must be approved by the Planning Commission before construction is started. No such land shall be used ,. for parking until approved by the Planning Commission. . Subd. 6: Reauired Loading Berths. In connection with any structure which is to be erected or substantially altered and which requires the receipt or distribution of materials or merchandise by trucks or similar vehicles, with a gross floor area of five thousand (5,000) square feet or more, there shall be off-street loading provided on the basis of the following: Gross Floor Area Minimum required i square feet loading berths 5,000 to 16,000 1 16,000 to 40,000 2 40,000 to 70,000 3 70,000 to 100,000 4 each additional 40,000 1 additional Subd. 7: Sign Regulation. All signs hereafter erected or maintained, except official, public, traffic and street signs shall conform to the provisions of this subdivision and any other ordinance or regulation of the City. Subd. 8: General Provisions. The following regulations shall apply to all signs hereafter permitted in all districts: a) Signs shall not be permitted within the public right-of-way or easements, except as erected by an official unit of government or public utilities for the direction of - traffic or necessary public information. - 98 Ldfev , . :¡; if 6 {'(ì .:J()h rì ~fyrty' . . Ms. Judy Weyrens æ f5'"/C¡ 3 August 5, 1993 Page -2- Ordinance 52.20, Subd. 2 provides the following permitted uses: "Hotels, motels, taverns, private clubs, and lodges." I would be of the opinion that the term "lodges" in this context refers to fraternal organizations such as the Moose Lodge or Elks. I do not believe that it refers to a "lodging house". Subd. 3 of the same Ordinance does allow multiple family dwellings if there is adequate off-street parking, and if there is no conflict with adjacent activities pursuant to a special use permit. Arguably, a dwelling house, as a multiple family structure, may be considered permissible pursuant to a special use permit. Ordinance 52.4, Subd. 32 actually defines a lodging house and suggests that it is limited to an R-3 area. I believe that the permitted special uses under 52.20, Subd. 3, would be broad enough to allow a lodging house in the general business area if it is otherwise compatible and has adequate off-street parking. " . Therefore, I would suggest that the developer proceed with an application for a special use permit, but that the request be closely scrutinized in light of the other uses within the area; in particular the lack of residential use, the presence of the gas tanks, and any ingress or egress problems created by the Highway. I It is my understanding that some question may also arise because of the permitted development of the Linneman Inn. During our recent conversation, you informed me that at the time the development of the Linneman Inn was proposed, there was an application made for a special use permit with the payment of a fee, advertisement and hearing before the Planning Commission. At that hearing, the Planning Commission determined that the use was proper and acceptable; although it may not be clear as to whether or not that decision was made based upon a determination that the use was "permitted" or that the use qualified for a "special use permit". In any event, the Linneman store development was brought before the Planning Commission pursuant to a request for a special use permit, a hearing was held and the Planning Commission approved the use. Therefore, I see no contradiction in requiring the special permit procedure in this case as well. ~ - W ~. ... .... . , . .. . 7:&OT'SPLIT - DEHLER: Hazen made a motion to approve the .lot split as ',:ï:-eqtiested by'gteve~ehler,.,-and recommended by the Planning Commission. ---~he "property to be split is ~he Old Linnemann house, in the Business zone, which is Lot 7 and 8 of Block 9 of the Original Townsite of st. .Joseph. Discussion of the common entry area for this property and the -adjacent property. That issue will be addressed if the new owner would require changes. The legal descriptions of the new parcels are: TRACT "A" The North Half of Lot 7 of Block 9 of the Original Town of st. Joseph, stearns County, Minnesota, Less and Except the east 10.0 feet thereof. TRACT "B" The east 10.0 feet of Lot 7 and all of Lot 8 less and except the east 2.00 feet thereof, of Block 9 of the Original Town of st. Joseph, stearns County, Minnesota. TRACT "C" The South Half of Lot 7 of Block 9 of the Original Town of st. Joseph, stearns County, Minnesota. Less and except the east 10.0 feet thereof. The motion was seconded by Rieke. Ayes :' Sadlo, Rieke, Loso, Hazen. . Nayes: None. Motion carried. Dehler abstained. ~ LfJ /79').. - {]~ ¡:!~ ~(J4 r;n 2~ /797- - - ~ , . r ~ steve Dehler .=. Lot Split: steve Dehler appeared before the Commission . requesting approval to split a portion of his property located on Minnesota street East. The property to be split is th~ old Linnemann ,~house._ The reason for the split is due to the recent sale of the -:~property _ ~Since the property is located in the General Business Zone, :)Mr_ Dehler does not nee.d to conform to a minimum lot size. Kalinowski made a motion to recommend Council approval of the lot split as requested by steve Dehler. The legal descriptions are as follows: Tract A: The North half of Lot 7 of Block 9 of the Original Town of st. Joseph, stearns County, Minnesota, Less and except the east 10.0 feet thereof. Tract B: The East 10.0 feet of Lot 7 and all of Lot 8 less and except the east 2.00 feet thereof, of Block 9 of the Original Town of st. Joseph, stearns County, Minnesota. Tract C: The South Half of Lot 7 of Block 9 of the Original Town of st. Joseph, stearns County, Minnesota. Less and except the East 10.0 feet thereof. The motion was seconded by Reber. Ayes,:. Klein, Hiemenz: Kalinowski, Sniezek, Nierengarten, Reber, Schneider. Nayes: None. Motion Carried 7:0:0 . -::r ~ \ J I C¡9-z- - Pz ( . i - - !-. .... _ ~ 1! (/ .~ .. ROSS AND MARY RIEKE . POST OFFICE BOX 700 41 FIFTH AVENUE NORTHWEST SAINT JOSEPH, MINNESOTA 56374 .(612) 363"8545 November 12, 1993 Rachel Stapleton City of St~ Joseph Post Office Box 668 21 FLrst A~enÙeNorthwést St. Joseph,MN 56374-0668 Dear Rachel: I received the carbon copy of your letter to Ron Euteneuer dated November 8, 1993. Thank you for sending it to me. As I read it, it began to upset me and I need to respond, once again, A.S.A.P. I am very concerned about the following paragraph: nPlease review these materials and reinspect the fence as indicated ,iïn the November 4 minutes. This matter will be addressed at the . NOvemb. er 18. Council meet. ing. As we have discussed, you will be 'attending t:J:.~s meet~~ !c;r a monthly report to the Council." It seems that you're ·i.mplying that Mr. Euteneuer should reinspect the fence and be ready to respond by the Council meeting of November 18th. On that basis, I have the following two comments: 1. The day after the Council meeting of October 14th, you called and then FAXed me a copy of the Evens' complaint, dated October 14th. , I immediately responded with my letter of October 15th, which requested two procedures. You've indicated to me that you received that letter on the morning of October 18th, yet late on the day of the 18th, the Building Inspector and Bob Loso knocked at the door, unannounced, and said to my wife, while daycare parents were . standing right there, "We're here to follow-upon compla:irít;s about your fence, let Ross k...10t'.t' we':ce oüt back. If ThEm, walked right back. It is my position the City blatantly ignored my request for certain procedures. However, I did not make a big issue of it at that time. I cordially dealt with their questions and based on Ron Euteneuer's October 21st memo to the city, I was found to be in compliance, with the exception of it being his feeling that the city could "require the owner to show proof...", (I made it very clear that I disagreed). Now it appears you're requesting the Building Inspector to come onto the property before November 18th. Yet my recent letter of November 5th, again, clearly requests certain procedures, procedures Mr. Euteneuer can not possibly confo;-rn_ to if he tries to reinspect by November 18th. Is the city going to ignore me again? I don't believe I'm being .~._~~~~a_s~,X:~.le, ~spc~cia_lly since the requests are based on counsel. - - - c: -" . T _' ....-;~.-- ~..........--...-- ,~ -.. .... --- ~ - : -:. - --. -.~. ~ - .. -.. - - - ',. t ;¡":-'~,..-'.".-.....- - ..:;~ _ _ . _ r ~---~~~,-'-'- . i~;~~j~;-J~~- ~ .~1 , City of St. Joseph -- - _. November 12, 1993 - - .-- .. " .. Two.~. .'" _'Cc{:'-':":~': What do you want the=¡f~tspector-to rein~~i~~~~J~t~'~~~~ -- ' - based on the minutes of November_, 4th,the._ only ..,issuefor,i1:b,e_:_ -j,:,:~~:'c~:~::C?;f<'=~ Building Inspector is to check the fence height., However,a's thee - - - .--,'- ~ ~y- minutes reflect and as I've clearly stated, the fence is not complete. I finished the construction of it on November 7th and I've cleaned up for the winter. In the spring I' 11 do the finish work, including the landscaping, and if the fence height is an: issue at that time, we can deal with it then. In the meantime, I certainly won·t deny that the highest point of the fence is currently 7·3".... is that a problem? To make my position clear, based on the ~utes of November 4th, there is no reasonable need for the Build' g Inspector to be on the property. .__4 Currently, I await your written follow-up to the Council action of November 4t a d my letter of ovember 5th. As always, "r do l.ook forward t know' g that: the Cit has put these concerns to rest.... . ~~ j - - . . , · W I DONOHUE RAJKOWSKI LTD. Attorneys at Law Reply to: St. Cloud I November 4, 1993 i ST. CLOUD i 11 Seventh Avenue North I Ms. Rachel Stapleton P.O. Box 1433 I St. Joseph City Clerk _ I City Hall St. Cloud, MN ~6302-1433 I P . 0 . Box 668 6120251'1055 St. Joseph, MN 56374 800'445·9617 I I FAX 6120251'5896 ! RE: Organization and Procedures of the City Council I Our File No. 15,692 MINNEAPOLIS I ! Dear Rachel: 2904 Plaza VII I ! 45 South Seventh Street ! I have your correspondence of October 28, 1993, and Minneapolis, MN 55402,1620 I the accompanying comments of Stephanie Hazen. I will 612'339'9206 I attempt to respond to her comments at this time. 800'445'9617 i Please let me know if the Council wants anything else FAX612'339'4;~5 i done on this issue before the November 18, 1993, I ' . I meetJ.ng. FR..4NK ¡. RA/KOWSKI ! S ' 2 3 f 0 d· 2 h . d· . ! ectJ.on 1. 0 r J.nance 1 as eXJ.ste J.n J.ts I GORDONH.HANSMEIER I current form for some time. When I revised this FREDERICKL.GRUNKE " Ordinance, I did not chan~e that provision. That is THOMASG.¡OVANOVICH D,Ç)t to say that the Councll may ;not want to look at ¡OHNH.SCHERER I the agenda procedure set forth in the Ordinance at ~AULA.RA/KOWSKI . this time to make sure it is workable and consistent ! with their wishes. KEVIN F. GRAY I Section 21.2, Subd. 1, sets forth a proposed list of WILLIAM¡.CASHMAN activities on which a Council person shall not engage lli~D~~AY unless he or she is authorized by the Council. F and CAROLA.STARK I G deal with communication with the independent RICHARDWSOBALVARRO I contracting professionals employed by the City as well , as the League of Minnesota Cities. There is no MICHAEL c. RA/KOWSKI I h ' b ,. , . . d· . d 1 C . I statutory pro J. J.tJ.on agaJ.nst any J.n J.VJ. ua ouncJ. A. CHAD McKENNEY i person contacting the City Attorney, City Engineer, MOLLY¡. WINGATE Accountant or the League of Municipalities. The reason I included these two paragraphs in the first MICHAELH, DONOHUE draft of the Ordinance was due to the fact that OF COUNSEL uncontrolled contract of this nature can lead to I problems. First of all, the City Engineer, City ¡AMESH.KELLy,M.D.,F.A.C.P. Attorney or Accountant does not know whether or not MEDICAL CONSULTANT I the Council person contacting them is acting under the r~""ONH.HA"SMEIERISADMITTEDTOPRACTlCE authority of the Council. The professional then IlNNORTH DAKOTA ANDWISCO>iSIN. becomes concerned as to whether or not they should act PAUL A. RAJKOWSKI IN WISCONSIN, t "LAROLA.STARKINILLlNOISANDMISSOURI at the dJ.rection of the individual and incur an A>iDWILLIAM.CAsHMANlNSOUTHDAKOTA. expense for the City. . . . . . November 4, 1993 Page -2- Ms. Rachel Stapleton It is also a concern that an individual may contact one of the City professionals, or the League of Minnesota Cities, with the question phrased in such a manner so as to solicit an opinion supporting the individual Council person's position. Later on, when the issue is presented with all of the facts laid out, the professional may find that his opinion would have been totally different than that expressed to an individual Council person, or the action recommended would differ. Therefore, I believe that there is benefit to placing some degree of control upon contact to the City Attorney, City Engineer, Accountant or the League of Minnesota Cities; But I can certainly see the other side of this issue, especially where the League of Minnesota Cities is concerned. Maybe some type of compromise can be reached to address both concerns, such as no direct communication regarding matters currently before or about to become before the City, unless authorized by the Mayor. Subd. 2a allows a Council person to take any action authorized by Minnesota statutes. I did not identify any particular statute simply because the law is constantly changing. The intent of . this provision is to simply make it clear that the Council members are allowed to t~ke any action which they are entitled to take by statute, especially if a statute authorizes a Council person or the Mayor to act alone. Different statutes may apply to different situations. Different statutes may be subject to amendment or recision. I would recommend that this language be left in in the present form simply to allow actions permitted by i statutes. The City Council members could later be provided with a list of statutes authorizing specific acts. Finally, Section 21.3, Subd. 3 allows the Mayor to deal directly with the professionals retained by the City. This certainly could be deleted in that Section. The reason I included it had to do primarily with the relationship with the Mayor and the City Engineer which may involve regular communication regarding current or proposed projects. Overall, in drafting this Ordinance, I was acting somewhat as an outsider. The Council members are certainly in as good a position or better, to determine what would be workable boundaries or guidelines to which they should adhere to foster an efficient and organized management structure. For that reason, any proposed changes based upon their experience certainly has validity. - When considering this issue, the Council should view themselves as a board of directors for a corporation. The primary duty is ----- to set policies and make the significant decisions of the City which have long term consequences. The Mayor assumes the role of T . . . . November 4, 1993 Page -3- Ms. Rachel Stapleton chairman of the board and serves as a point person for the organization. An effective board of directors removes themselves from day-to-day decision making, and relies upon qualified employees to carry out their policy on a day-to-day basis. The Council may want to keep these concepts in mind when considering the proposed Amendments to Ordinance 21. I also wish to note that I checked my files for the League of Cities materials about this subject. I can't locate anything. I'm not sure that I ever received anything, but I may have and it was simply misfiled. Anyway, would you be able to send another copy for my review and comment. Thank you. Very truly yours, DONOHUE RAJKOWSKI LTD. ,- H. Scherer . JHS/baz L:\gen\15692\af110493.011 i - "f '. . , . " . - -~ . AMENDMENT TO ORDINANCE 31 The city council for the City of st. Joseph hereby ordains: That Ordinance 31 of the st. Joseph Code of Ordinances is hereby amended in the following manner: 1. Section 31.3 of the st. Joseph Code of Ordinances is hereby rescinded and the following Section 31.3 enacted in its place: Section 31. 3 : NUMBERS. The City Council shall appoint an official of the City of st. Joseph to assign numbers to the properties within the City of st. Joseph, including properties joining the City of st. Joseph by annexation, in accordance with the plans set out in this Ordinance for naming streets as their numbering shall become necessary. The ,- City Clerk shall prepare and keep as part of . the permanent records of the City, a record of all numbered properties, and such records shall be open for inspection by the Public at all reasonable hours. Upon the assignment of a street number to a property, the City Clerk shall send notice to the property owner advising the property owner of the assigned I number and informing the property owner of the requirement of section 31.4 with regard to the posting of the street number. 2. section 31 of the st. Joseph Code of Ordinances is hereby amended by the adoption of the following Section 31.4: 31.4: POSTING OF NUMBERS. Within 15 days of the assignment of a street number to a property upon which a building or structure is located, the owner of the property shall post the street number on the building or structure in accordance with the following provisions: a. The street number shall be posted on the side of the building or structure facing the street on - which the building or structure is located. - b. The number shall be of such size, material and color so that it can be read from the adjacent . . .. . . . public street or roadway by a person having corrected vision of 20/20. Any owner of property in violation of this Section shall be issued a written warning by the st. Joseph Police Department to bring their property in compliance. If the property owner does not bring the property in compliance within 15 days after the written warning, the property owner shall be guilty of a petty misdemeanor. This Ordinance was passed by the City Council for the city of st. Joseph this ____ day of , 1993. Mayor Clerk/Administrator N:\ci~y\s~joe\afl10493.251 J- . , - ~ 2 -~------~--_..-~--~------...-- ----~-._. ----~---_:--- . ------ ._~ .., t . . , .-- -~. . SAINT JOSEPH CHAMBER OF COMMERCE ··~~cBOX 696 -.- ----~_.~-.- - ..'._- - > , SAINT JOSEPH.. MINNESOTA 56374 NEXT MEETING: NOV. 16, 1993, noon, LA PLÃYETTE AGENDA L Welcome. vice president Hub Klein 2. Minutes of Oct. 19 meeting and Treasurer's Report, Sister Andre' 3. Old Business: Reports: ACity Beautification B. Welcome New Business C.Star City D. Santa Train E. Other New Business A Christmas Street Decorations ,- B. Christmas Street Lights " ,- Program: Tax Bill. 1993 and its Impact on Small Business: . Minutes: October 19 meeting--- - Stueve moved and A. Pfannenstein seconded acceptance of minutes. Passed Sorensen moved and Reinhart seconded acceptance of Treasurer's report Passed Brophy read a thank you to the Chamber for participation in Community Day City Beautification: 20 benches need assembling on Tues., Oct 27, 6:30 p.rn. in Stueve's Garage. i Hub Klein in charge. City Brochure: J. Weyrens is working on it with Mary. Women of Today will distribute. Santa Train: Resurrection Church wants more adults available to protect their bushes. It is recommended that THE NEWSLEADER really promote every person should bring one item for the foodshelf. Hub will go to Avon to solicit funds from businesses there since many families from Avon come to the part<.r- Sorensen moved and Reinhart seconded that Virginia. Al Pfannenstein and the St. Joe Meat Market be nominated for the National Small Business Award. Passed. Sorensen in charge. B.Krebsbach moved and Smith seconded that the Chamber give $50.00 to the City Halloween Party. Motion was amended to state that the purchases must be made in St Joseph. Passed Millstream Festival Rethink our participation in 1994. Prom will not be available; questions are being asked about Booth insurance. Program: State Representative Dehler discussed issues impacting Small Business as they come - up in Minnesota. He discussed: Charitable Gambling, Agriculture, Responsiblities of - innkeepers, Garbage and Trash. Milk Pricing bills, Ethenal. Guns in Schools, Gay Rights, Gender Balance, Government spending, Small farms, Worker's Compensation. Meeting adjourned at 1:50 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Sister AndreI Marthaler, OSB .~~.C( . 1-, ~ . - LETERS/MEMüS/ETC All Employees RE.: Compensat 01"~Y time paid out when balance is over 40 hours Dennis Stueve RE: use of City pa1"~k i ng lot for st o1"~age of c a 1"~ s Paul \'{o 11 man Rt::: Instructions on applying fo)'~ 1"~ental license Maintenance Dept RE: skating rink ~:J1"~epa1"~at ion nea1"~ hockey 1"~ink " . Police Dept RE: 1"~eport i ng of st1"~eet Ii ght s in need of 1"~epai 1"~ to City Offices Joe Bettendo1"~f: Req\.\est f01"~ 1"~eview of street numbe1"~i ng information Dick Stock RE: 'r~equest f01"~ solutions to stop sign blocked by i t)'~ee Dale Schne ide1"~ RE: purchase of property and payment of all expenses incurred B1"~ad Lindgren RE: notificatin of tenant s upon noise violation All t::mployees RE: use of purchase orders TO DO: Linnemann Inn RE: hook-up fees - -- ~ Mayor Donald "Bud" Reber Councilors Ken Hiemenz Ross Rieke 21 First A venue NW Bob Loso P.O. Box 668 Stephanie Hazen St. Joseph, Minnesota 56374 - (612) 363-7201 City Clerk/Adm FAX # 363·0342 CITY OF ST. JOSEPH Rachel Stapleton NOTES TO THE COUNCIL DATE: November 18, 1993 TO: Members of the Council FROM: Rachel Stapleton 9 a. Our renters are experiencing heating problems. There ~s only one thermostat for both apartments. One of them complains that it is too hot and the other one is too cold. The state Fire Marshall will include in his report of his inspection of the apartments that each one is to have a separate thermostat. I checked with Metro on the feasibility of separating the heating in the apartments. They said it is feasible and estimated about $160 for their costs, about $100 fq.r the electrician. This would save heating costs. Do you wish to have this done? . 9 b. I will have a report for you on the delinquent bills that have not been paid. (The public hearing at 7:45 p.m. was provided as a legal requirement. Currently no one has contacted us to plead their case at the hearing.) 9 c. Street lighting - stearns Electric information is i enclosed. They will prepare a plan for placement of lights on a map. Stearns Electric recommend the 150 watt sodium high pressure cobrahead. 9 d. Dennis stueve stated that he has no where else to park cars if he can not park them in the new parking lot. I have not discussed this matter with Brad Lindgren, because he was gone deer hunting. Last year we had a contract with Dennis stueve to tow cars. 14 a. John intends to handle this under his report. 14 g. What do you want done with the job descriptions. It appears that the job descriptions are those which were done up in 1991 but I could find no documentation of their approval. Also Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) requires that job descriptions use knowledge, skills and abilities rather than physical requirements. Our job descriptions should be updated to ADA requirements. Sherri Le at the League of - Minnesota Cities has done this for many Cities at a nominal charge. 14 i. Information in packet. 14 j. Information in packet. . . 14 k. We have requested from the utility companies if they have any utilities or plans for them in the ROW area that Schneiders are requesting at 2nd Ave. NW. Schneiders are considering accepting the costs of obtaining the property and the vacation of it. 14 l. Joyce Stock discussed with me the stop sign visibility problems on their cornet. Suggestions are to put a sign before it (in front of the tree) indicating stop Sign ahead, paint stop on street, install the stop sign on an arm which will extend out past the tree. They are unwilling to have the tree removed and or trimmed. 14 m. Information in packet. 14 n. Past minutes in packet. 14 o. Policy book will be catalogued as time permits. 14 p. Information from John in packet. 15. See 9b above. 19. Dale Haug wishes to speak to you about building inspection. 20. Gary Terwey will be here to appeal his case. 22 d. Information in packet. I' offer because We have not moved quickly on the CSB property . the consumated sale of it would have a property value effect on properties that would need to be obtained if the realignment of Co. Rd. 133 is approved in the near future. The value of property in the area, which will be set aside for roadways will probably be set at the same value as other property which is sold recently. i - -