HomeMy WebLinkAbout1999-09-17 CA Ltr Re Neighborhood Complaint LAW OFFICES OF t
Eckberg, Lammers, Briggs, Wolff & Vierling, P.L.L.P.cc�
1835 Northwestern Avenue 44
yr
R Lammers Stillwater, Minnesota 55082 ik ' 1.y J. E i i
James L . e c erg
Robert G. Briggs* (651) 439-2878 OF Counsel
Mark J. Vierling* FAX (651) 439-2923 Paul A. Wolff
GregorytG. Gaiter* (1944-1996)
Thomas J. Weidner* Direct Dial No. : (651) 351-2118 *Qualified Neutral Arbitrator& Mediator
Susan D. Olson• *Qualified Neutral Arbitrator
David K. Snyder September 17, 1999 *Certified Real Estate Specialist
*Qualified Neutral Mediator
Dictated but not read
Mr. Joe Anderlik Ms . Kris Danielson
Bonestroo, Rosene, Anderlik Community Development Director
& Associates City of Oak Park Heights
2335 West Highway 36 14168 - 57th Street North
St . Paul, MN 55113 P.O. Box 2007
Oak Park Heights, MN 55028
Mr. Scott Richards Mr. James Butler
Northwest Associated Building Official
Consultants, Inc. City of Oak Park Heights
5775 Wayzata Blvd. , Suite 555 14168 - 57th Street North
St . Louis Park, MN 55416 P.O. Box 2007
Oak Park Heights, MN 55082
Mr. Jay Johnson
Director of Public Works
City of Oak Park Heights
14168 - 57th Street North
P.O. Box 2007
Oak Park Heights, Minnesota 55082
Re : Valley View I - Neighborhood Complaint
Correspondence of September 14 , 1999
Ladies and Gentlemen:
Enclosed herewith you will find a copy of the September
14 , 1999 complaint letter that was provided to City Council by the
property owners at the September 14 meeting.
This matter was, on motion of Councilman Swenson,
referred to our offices for investigation report back to the
Council . On consultation with the City Administrator, we have been
advised that we are at liberty to contact the various in-house and
September 17, 1999
Page 2
other professional staff to secure services in this area but that
any time that you spend with regard to these particular issues
should be separately billed to the City so that the items can be
clearly identified to the City Council and they can be aware as to
what this particular issue has expensed them in terms of in-house
supervision, etc .
In reviewing the complaint from the neighborhood, a copy
of which is attached, we are requesting information from your
offices as follows:
With regard to the individual areas of complaint, please
note as follows :
1 . Lack of Parking for Visitors . The reference is made
by the neighborhood to a planning report that accompanied the
development agreement with regard to the additional parking for
single unit cars . I would ask the City Planner to review his
records in this matter as I presume that the commentary within the
Planner' s report as noted to be on August 4, 1994 is quite
different than that which was probably finalized at the time of the
development agreement on November 14 , 1994 . If there is an
appreciable difference between the preliminary report of the
Planner and the final on this aspect, I would ask that the Planner
identify same in correspondence back to this office .
2 . Retaining Wall . The City directed the developer to
construct a new retaining wall between the church and the
development . I would ask the Building Inspector, Mr. Butler, to
pull whatever documents he has with regard to the retaining wall
correspondence and/or permits as were issued and forward them to
our office .
3 . Soil on Streets . I will handle this matter through
our office directly.
4 . Curb Southeast Corner of Building D. I would ask
the Building Inspector to pull whatever record he has with regard
to the reference to his office and the commentary that was made so
I can determine at what point in time a curb was damaged. If it
was, as I suspect, a curb that was damaged after the City accepted
this project, I would assume that that is the sole responsibility
of the affected properties and/or the successor to the developer.
September 17, 1999
Page 3
I would ask, however, that the Engineer review his records in this
matter and advise me as to when the project was certified as
complete or substantially complete to the City so that the
developer' s obligations under the development agreement would have
ceased.
5 . Street Lighting. I would ask that the Building
Inspector review his records in conjunction with the Development
Director of the City to determine that the current placement of
lighting throughout the area either is or is not in conformance
with the existing city lighting plan.
6 . Pond Dredging. I will handle this matter through
our offices .
7 . Drainage Issues . I would ask the Engineer again to
review his records to determine whether or not he has a final and
approved drainage plan for this development and, if so, provide a
copy to me, making sure that we have an indication on there as to
the date of the plan and when its approval was issued from the
engineering office with regard to the plan.
8 . Garage Dimensions . Again, this references what
appears to be a preliminary planning report which I assume changed
by the time the final planning report and the development agreement
went forward. I would ask that the Planner review her records in
this regard.
9 . Trees on North Side of Building. I assume from the
reference in the letter that this is something new that was not
previously addressed and I will deal with it pursuant to the
Development Agreement .
10 . Drainage on North Side of Building. Again, I
believe that this matter will be resolved by the acceptance of a
final drainage plan by the Engineer' s office .
11 . Permanent Lot Markers . Since I expect that the
Director of Public Works has a locator that can determine whether
or not there are permanent markers in place even though they would
be underground, I ask that that office review the area to determine
whether or not there is a buried pin in the northwest corner that
can be located.
12 . Landscaping. I would ask the Planner provide me a
copy of the landscaping plan as was finally approved.
September 17, 1999
Page 4
13 . Sidewalks Along 58th Street . I will deal with this
as per the development agreement .
14 . Street Widths. I would ask the City Engineer to
review the plans for the development and determine what the
appropriate widths were as specified and then advise me as to
whether or not the streets as constructed are substantially
complete and in compliance with those requirements .
If you have any further questions in this matter, please
feel free contact me directly.
Yours very truly,
. r f t
Mark J. Vierling
MJV/sdb
Enclosure
cc : David Schaaf, Mayor
Thomas Melena, City Administrator
C PYI
Tuesday, September 14, 1999
After reviewing the development agreement, it has come to our attention that
there are a number of issues that need to be addressed. Some are issues
which we were aware of early, and some are new issues.
Compilation of Linda Carufel's list of 9/13/99 with additions by Donna Gray
discussed at the Board Mtg. 9/13/99.
Lack of parking for visitors r
The planning report indicated there should be additional parking for the c '; �i ,
single car units. Where is this parking? The development agreement stated
that there is to be no parking on the streets because of their narrow width.
Where are visitors suppose to park? Were all parking issues resolved and
signed off on by the city?
Retaining wall f.
Has the city okayed the retaining wall between the church and our D'5
development?
development? Have the documents been updated to reflect this change since 4�
it is different than what is on the initial drawing?
Soil on streets
The development agreement stated that the developer must have a plan to
deal with soil on the streets. We have had to deal with this issue on our own
and would like the city to enforce the agreement they have with the
developer. We have worked with Krongard and at this time the streets are
acceptable. In the future, we expect the developer to keep the streets clean
and the city to ensure that this is taking place.
Curb - SE corner of Bldg. D
The city inspector indicated some time ago that a curb needed to be repaired
and that the city would deal with Jack directly on this. When will this be
taking place?
Street lighting
In the planning report it was recommended that street lights be installed for
safety reasons even through dusk to dawn sensors have been installed. Has
the current street lighting been approved by the city?
Pond dredging
Who is responsible for dredging of the holding ponds? Is this city property
or does it belong to our association. The development agreement states that
the developer is responsible for "dredging of the holding ponds before
completion of the development." We expect the city to ensure that this is
completed when the last building is finished.
Drainage issues
We have been unable to obtain a copy of an approved drainage plan for our
development. What did the city approve? Is the current drainage acceptable
to the city and has this been recorded?
Garage dimensions
The planning report indicated that some of the garage dimensions on the
single car units did not meet the minimum requirements? Do the current
garage meet this requirement? Has the city approved the single car units as
they exist today? Is this recorded?
Trees on N side of new building
Concern for trees on the north side of the new building. Some of them are
right up to the building. How is this going to be addressed by Krongard?
Drainage on N side of new building
We anticipate the same drainage problem on the N side of the new building
as what existed on Building D that Krongard had to come back and correct.
How is this going to be addressed by Krongard?
Permanent lot markers
There is a permanent marker on the NW corner. There is none on the NE
corner. When will this issue be addressed?
Landscaping to N lot line.
Is Krongard required to landscape to the N lot line along the entire property?
He has said he will not do this for the property on the NW corner.
Sidewalks along 58th Street.
Who put this in, who maintains them for weed control, snow plowing and
repairs?
Street Widths
The main street running N & S is 21' wide - paved area only.
The street on the W side of Building D is 20' wide - paved area only.
The street on the E side of Building C (new building) is 20' wide - paved
area only.
The street running S of Buildings A& B is 20'3" wide - paved area only.
The street running N of Buildings A & B is 21' wide.
Valley View Condominiums North Association
Board of Directors