Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda & Minutes ;jo~ PR~ E-.. ~ U ~ I'rJ ~ 4646 Dakota Street S.E. Prior Lake, MN 55372-1714 REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING AGENDA May 19, 2008 6 p.m. City Hall 2009-2013 Capital Improvement Program 4:30 p.m. This meeting is open to the public. 1. CALL TO ORDER and PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE 2. PUBLIC FORUM: The Public Forum is intended to afford the public an opportunity to address concerns to the City Council. The Public Forum will be no longer than 30 minutes in length and each presenter will have no more than ten (10) minutes to speak. Topics of discussion are restricted to City governmental topics rather than private or political agendas. Topics may be addressed at the Public Forum that are on the agenda except those topics that are part of a public hearing or public information hearing. The City Council will not take formal action on Public Forum presentations. 3. APPROVAL OF AGENDA 4. CONSIDER APPROVAL OF MAY 5,2008 MEETING MINUTES 5. CONSENT AGENDA: Those items on the Council Agenda which are considered routine and non- controversial are included as part of the Consent Agenda. Unless the Mayor, a Councilmember, or member of the public specifically requests that an item on the Consent Agenda be removed and considered separately, Items on the Consent Agenda are considered under one motion, second and a roll call vote. Any item removed from the Consent Agenda shall be placed on the City Council Agenda as a separate category. A. Consider Approval of Invoices to be Paid. B. Consider Approval of Treasurer's Report. C. Consider Approval of Building Permit Report. D. Consider Approval of Animal Warden Report. E. Consider Approval of Fire Call Report. F. Consider Approval of a Resolution Approving a Proposal for an Enhanced Nature Area and Trail on City Property Adjacent to St. Michael's. G. Consider Approval of a Body Art License For Derek Winski. H. Consider Approval of a Resolution Authorizing New Purchase Options for Cable Television Production Equipment. I. Consider Approval of a Resolution Amending Ordinance Section 704, City Waterworks System. www.cityofpriorlake.com Phone 952.447.9800 / Fax 952.447.4245 J. Consider Approval of a Resolution Authorizing Execution of a Development Contract with CJF Holdings, LLC. K. Consider Approval of a Resolution Approving an Encroachment Agreement for Landscaping Located on a Public Easement Within the Wensmann 2nd Addition Plat. L. Consider Approval of a Policy Regarding Canoe Rental at Watzl's Beach. 6. ITEMS REMOVED FROM CONSENT AGENDA 7. PRESENTATIONS A. Recreation Activities - Angie Barstad and Debbie Carlberg B. Proclamation Declaring May 18 - 24 Public Works Week. C. Jeffers Pond Nature Trail. 8. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. No public hearing is scheduled. 9. OLD BUSINESS A. Consider Approval of Reports from the Scott county Assessor's Office Regarding Appeals to the Board of Appeals and Equalization. B. Consider Approval of 2007 Annual Financial Report and Management Letter. C. Consider Approval of a Resolution Accepting Bids and Awarding the City's Standardized Construction Contract for the Installation of a Security Fence for the Public Works Maintenance Facility. 10. NEW BUSINESS A. Consider Approval of Resolution Authorizing Telephone System Installation for Fire Station NO.2. 11. OTHER BUSINESS/COUNCILMEMBER REPORTS A. Community Events B. Executive Session to Discuss Pending Litigation 12. ADJOURNMENT City Council Meeting Minutes May 5, 2008 DRAFT REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES CALL TO ORDER Present were Mayor Haugen, Councilors Erickson, Hedberg, LeMair and Millar, City Manager Boyles, City Attorney Pace, Building and Transportation Services Director Kansier, Community Development and Natu- ral Resources Director Walthers-Moore, Assistant City Manager Meyer, Communications Coordinator Pe- terson and Administrative Assistant Green. PUBLIC FORUM The Public Forum is intended to afford the public an opportunity to address concerns to the City Council. It is no longer than 30 minutes in length and each speaker will have a maximum of ten minutes; less if there are more than three speakers. Topics of discussion are restricted to City government topics rather than private or political agendas. Topics on the agenda may be addressed except those topics that are part of a public hearing or public information hearing. The City Council will not take formal action on Public Forum presentations. City Manager Boyles explained the concept of the public forum. Comments: Doug Carnival of National Solid Waste Management Association, 800 Nicollet Mall, Mpls, MN, stated that solid waste haulers Waste Management and Allied are members of the Association. They compete, but agree that they prefer an open, competitive system and prefer to build their business one household at time. Stated that this is a complex issue that citizens are passionate about. Believes that some simple assumptions need to be questioned such as fewer trucks resulting in less wear and tear on the roads. The Association prefers to handle the issue in a way that preserves competition. Suggested that before the City begins a process to consider organized collection, it should visit with haulers in the community. Haugen: Replied that this will be discussed later in the meeting. Victoria Ranva, 2041140th Street NW, commented on the CR 21 extension and tree preservation. Stated that CR 21 will go through a remnant of sugar maple forest up to Pike Lake. Read from City ordinance that trees may be removed if in an easement without being replaced and believes that none of the trees will be replaced in that area. Stated that 1200 trees have been surveyed, 600 of them are in Prior Lake and none of them would have to be replaced and that this is squandering an existing resource to save a wetland re- source. Noted that the ordinance no longer lists elms as a significant tree, but believes elms in this project area should be mitigated for as well since they appear to be healthy. Asked that the ordinance be re- viewed. MOTION BY MILLAR, SECONDED BY HEDBERG TO DIRECT STAFF TO RESEARCH THIS PARTICU- LAR ITEM AND BRING INFORMATION ABOUT IT TO THE COUNCIL WITHIN THE NEXT 30 DAYS. VOTE: Ayes by Haugen, Erickson, Hedberg, LeMair and Millar. The motion carried. www.cityofpriorlake.com Phone 952.447.9800 / Fax 952.447.4245 City Council Meeting Minutes May 5, 2008 DRAFT APPROVAL OF AGENDA City Manager Boyles suggested that the presentations scheduled for this meeting be removed from the agenda in consideration of the people who are present for the public hearing. MOTION BY LEMAIR, SECONDED BY ERICKSON, TO APPROVE THE AGENDA AS MODIFIED. VOTE: Ayes by Haugen, Erickson, Hedberg, LeMair and Millar. The motion carried. APPROVAL OF MEETING MINUTES MOTION BY MILLAR, SECONDED BY ERICKSON, TO APPROVE THE APRIL 21, 2008, MEETING MIN- UTES AS PRESENTED. VOTE: Ayes by Haugen, Erickson, Hedberg, LeMair and Millar. The motion carried. MOTION BY HEDBERG, SECONDED BY MILLAR, TO APPROVE THE APRIL 28, 2008, MEETING MIN- UTES AS PRESENTED. VOTE: Ayes by Haugen, Erickson, Hedberg, LeMair and Millar. The motion carried. CONSENT AGENDA City Manager Boyles reviewed the items on the consent agenda. A. Consider Approval of Invoices to be Paid. B. Consider Approval of City of Prior Lake Purchase Policy Revisions. C. Consider Approval of Resolution 08.068 Authorizing the Mayor and City Manager to Enter Into an Agreement with Scott County for the Operation of the Local Laker Link Summer Circulator Service. MOTION BY LEMAIR, SECONDED BY HEDBERG, TO APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA AS PRE- SENTED. VOTE: Ayes by Haugen, Erickson, Hedberg, LeMair and Millar. The motion carried. PRESENTATION All items identified in the agenda were removed for this meeting. PUBLIC HEARING Public Hearing to Conduct Board of Appeal and Equalization. City Manager Boyles reviewed the process that would be followed. Bob Schmidt, Michael Thompson and Cynthia Dressen were present from the Scott County Assessor's Office. Schmidt reviewed the time- line of the assessment process stating that the process is set by State Statute, and reminded everyone that this valuation impacts taxes paid in 2009. Explained sales ratios and gave the average percentage of change to the estimated market value by property type. Comments: LeMair: Asked if properties were under taxed if they are below the 90% sales ratio. Thompson: Replied that it would be undervaluing which affects taxes. If the ratio is below 90%, the State could apply across-the-board increases which does not address the quality of the assessment and even increases those properties that are valued accurately. Erickson: Commented that the appraisal isn't important, but rather how a property relates to others in the community and that if everyone's appraisal increases or decreases at the same rate, taxes wouldn't change at all since the ratio of what an individual owes would remain the same. 2 City Council Meeting Minutes May 5, 2008 DRAFT Thompson: Agreed and stated that statistics show that uniformity is important. Erickson: Stated that if a neighbor's property is undervalued, it means you pay more of the entire pool. Thompson: Noted that anyone can call or write to the County Assessor's office if they believe there is an inaccuracy in assessments. Millar: Asked how market value is calculated for non-buildable property, on the lake for example. Thompson: Replied that it is done on an individual basis depending upon what utility the lot has such as providing lake access or the ability to have docks. The Assessor's office usually contacts the City to learn what options there are for using the land even if it cannot have a structure built on it. Millar: Asked if the value would also be based on the size of the lot. Thompson: Affirmed. Hedberg: Asked if lakeshore is currently valued at approximately 86% and lake access lots at 84%. Thompson: Confirmed the statistics. Hedberg: Asked what kind of circumstances would result in that big of a systematic undervaluation. Thompson: Replied that the way the assessors are valuing the properties has improved and they are working on a five-year cycle to access and value properties. Assessments can be more accurate when that kind of review is done. This was the year to do lakeshore properties. Hedberg: Noted that the value of lakeshore property has increased dramatically over the past ten years and it is difficult to keep up with, but it is important to have the proper valuation so everyone pays a fair share based on the value of their properties. MOTION BY ERICKSON, SECONDED BY HEDBERG TO OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING. VOTE: Ayes by Haugen, Erickson, Hedberg, LeMair and Millar. The motion carried and the public hearing was opened at 6:40 p.m. Comments: Haugen: Stated that some residents have provided a written notice of appeal and do not have to speak to Council to preserve their rights of appeal. Jeff White, PID 250260010, stated this is a vacant property across street from his home. He disputes both the 2008 and 2009 valuations. Stated the lot was surveyed in 1920s and is 55' wide by 88' deep. Believes a house could probably not be built within code on this lot and it has only been used as lake access. Stated that the lot is encumbered on all four sides by City, DNR or State codes and would never sell for the $304,000 valuation with the encumbrances. Suggested it could be taken off the roster as a buildable lot. Thompson: Replied that he went through the lot of record with White and suggested that White could put some kind of legal document together in reference to the title to prohibit it from being built on and then it would be valued lower. As it is, such lots have been built on with today's ordinances. Haugen: Suggested White work with City planners and the County and noted that the direction he chooses to go will dictate where the County will go with it. Thompson: Stated there is a list of property owners who have submitted a written appeal. Noted that the assessor of commercial properties could not attend this meeting. Pace: Commented that State Statute provides for individuals to appear before the board of equalization with an appeal and a basis for it and questioned whether it is enough to just add one's name to a list to say their valuation is not correct. Thompson: Replied that he had believed a letter stating wanting to appeal is adequate. Pace: Believes that a list of names does not perfect an appeal and to not indicate why they believe their valuation is not correct may be circumventing the process. Merely phoning the Assessor's office to add their name to a list of people who want to appeal their valuation is not a basis to support an objection. 3 City Council Meeting Minutes May 5, 2008 DRAFT Schmidt: Commented that the Assessor's Office has always allowed people to call or send a written re- quest that they be entered into the record that they are appealing valuation or classification and that the State Department of Revenues does allow letters to be entered into the record. Stated that the practice of the Scott County Assessor's Office has been to allow persons to have their name entered into the appeal. Pace: Stated she is not addressing those property owners who have written to the Assessor stating they believe their valuation is incorrect and they would like it reviewed, but rather the practice of people calling and asking to add their name to a list of people to be on the record so they can proceed to the next step in the appeal process. Suggested the Council could agree to the same standard this year and next year be explicit about what property owners have to do to perfect their appeal. Erickson: Commented that the Council may have to use the County's standard this year with a plan to establish better communications for next year. LeMair: Concurred. Hedberg: Stated that if there is a practice that people have come to expect, it is late to change it for this valuation period. Millar: Agreed that if people were told by the assessors that this is the appropriate practice, it would be unfair to prevent them from making an appeal. Haugen: Concurred and asked if there are letters from the people on the list. Thompson: Believes there are letters or emails from each of the people and reiterated that he was under the impression that a written appeal submitted to the assessor's office would be legal. Stated that he does not know if the office received letters from the commercial properties who want to appeal. Haugen: Stated that the Scott County Assessor is the City's agent for this process and the process can be reviewed for next year. Thompson: Identified the following commercial properties as requesting an appeal of their valuation: PID 250010210 & 250010211, Rock Creek Plaza, LLC PID 250010260, S&M Development, LLC PID 259020220, Premier Equity Investments, Inc. PID 254140010, Bluff Heights apartments PID 251940060, River Bluffs of Prior Lake PID 259360040, Gary Revak PID 250010320, JCT I Limited Partnership Tom Merchant, PID 250460160,16705 Bay Ave SW, stated he has a non-homesteaded lot, considered an outlot, that he has owned since 1985. States that it is non-buildable, more or less swamp and when the water is high can access the lake by canoe. Stated the valuation from 2004-2006 was $5,000; in 2007 valuation was $50,000. Wonders if it is a typographical error. Thinks it needs a review. Thompson: Stated he has not yet had contact with Mr. Merchant and requested that he make an ap- pointment to see the property. Wes Mader, PID 251950011,3470 Sycamore Trail, is appealing appraisal on adjacent property stating it is small, that nothing can be built on it, nor can it be used for access to the lake because it has no access to the road. Since the 2007 appraisal, the valuation was increased four-fold. Provided a written appeal and stated that the market value should be what someone is willing to pay for it. Thompson: Replied that he has spoken with Mader and that the process used to value property was as if the two adjacent properties were one parcel number. Valued the same as a single property with that amount of square footage and usability. Mader: Reiterated that the property is being valued the same as if it was buildable lakeshore lot and it is not. Highly improbable that it could be sold for what it is appraised at. Robert Peterson, PID 250470100, 14956 Pixie Point Circle SE, stated he built the house in 1944 and the footprint has not changed since that time. Reviewed sales from 2006 and 2007 on Prior Lake and gave 4 City Council Meeting Minutes May 5, 2008 DRAFT comparisons of different homes showing footprint, lakeshore lengths and square footage. Lakeshores dif- fer remarkably and those considered premium are the ones that are selling and forcing the valuation of the others. Believes he is overvalued on the house and the lot. Thompson: Responded that he would want to research the comparables before making comment. Noted that previously Peterson declined an inspection of the home and an appraisal, and offered to meet with Pe- terson to go through the house. Peterson: Responded that there seems to be a fundamental flaw with the valuation and will pursue it. David Salonen, PID 251410060,16553 Northwood Road NW, stated he does not believe he could sell his house for the valuation amount. Increased $180,000 in one year. 2007 valuation was $437,000 and this year it is $614,000. Contacted the Assessor's Office to correct the matter and was told that it is lakeshore. Believes that lakeshore has gone down in value and many lakeshore properties are listed at $500,000 that are comparable to his. An appraisal done this year by American Family Mortgage valued his property at $546,000 and the bank will only loan money based on that value. Stated he faxed a copy of the appraisal to the Assessor's Office and they did not believe the com parables were correct and did not agree with ap- praisal. Stated his property is 50 feet of lakeshore with an older style cabin. Believes the American Family valuation was accurate and is asking to have valuation set at $546,000, which is still a 20% increase. Thompson: Offered to set up another inspection and will provide a copy of both inspections to the Board. Brian Burkart, PID 250410050, 4059 Grainwood Trail NE, asked Thompson about valuing a vacant piece of land that had lake access. Thompson: Replied that the size of the lot is taken into consideration, but that is not the only basis. Burkart: Assumes that most contractors use a dollar value per square foot when valuing a piece of prop- erty. Thompson: Responded that is a factor but that valuation varies depending on style. Burkart: Stated that when he contacted the assessor and asked how the process worked he was informed that he could come up with own comparables. He provided three properties which support a mid-$400,OOO valuation. Stated that the assessor suggested he come to the hearing to appeal and request an inspection. Dave Rozak, PID 253270390, 4334 Priorwood Street SE, complimented the Assessor Office staff for help- fulness and professionalism. Stated he lives in a town home at Eagle Creek on a street referred to as a speedway because of amount and speed of traffic on Priorwood Street. Stated that a number of the resi- dents there do note think the increase is timely or appropriate. Believes the traffic is cause for lesser valua- tion. Stated there has not been an assessor in the Eagle Creek Villa Association to his knowledge and be- lieves it would be good to get someone in there this year. Believes that if selling, he would not be able to sell it for the estimated value. Thompson: Replied that Cynthia has been working with Mr. Rozak, and that he has been to the house recently. Will submit report to the board about valuation on his property and will be happy to make interior inspections in the neighborhood. Janet Franta and Floyd Nagler, PID 251720830, Spruce Trail, 251720830, purchased the earth-covered house in 2005. Stated major repairs were needed due to water and mold that were undisclosed by the seller, and if they choose to sell in the future they will have to disclose the damage that had been done which would create a bad "track record" for the house making it difficult to sell. Asked to have the valuation reduced to $175,000 due to repairs needed in the house. Noted that it is difficult to find comparables for the house and the best comparable would be a house that is built on a cement pad. Thompson: Replied that there were improvements made to the property in the last year that would make it so that damage due to water intrusion would no longer occur. State law does not allow reductions for damaged by mold. Assessor has to take out of consideration any value that would be reduced due to mold. Has to look at what the house would sell for if that didn't exist and cannot make reductions for this condi- tion. If it is corrected, the homeowner can apply for a reduction for one year from the State of Minnesota for 5 City Council Meeting Minutes May 5, 2008 DRAFT the mold damage. Would be happy to review the value as if the mold damage did not exist if Board so directs. Nagler: Agrees the mold is not an issue right now but the issue is the bad track record. The home used to be an earth home which had some value to it, but it now is a concrete home with a bad track record. Based on value of the square footage of the house on a cement slab, the valuation should be around $175,000. Does not believe the resale value is $250,000. Thompson: Stated he would be happy to review the valuation as though no mold conditions existed. Jeff Wiltz, PID 250730070, 5952 Hidden Oaks, stated he came to the Board in 2006, a minor adjustment was made at that time and then last year the valuation was raised again. County has com parables that he submitted showing homes in the neighborhood at approximately $300,000. Stated his property went up last year and one neighbor's valuation decreased 10%, one neighbor's decreased $20,000, and another neighbor's increased due to remodeling. Stated the assessor is welcome to come for an inspection. Thompson: Responded that he will set up an appointment. Dan O'Keefe, 3281 Balsam Street, regarding Lot 20, Green Heights, adjacent to Captain Jacks. Stated the valuation is set at $325,000. He disagrees with that valuation and would like to set appointment for inspec- tion. Greg McClenahan, PID 254140010, 16638 Franklin Trail, wants to appeal the valuation of Bluff Heights Apartments stating there is a proposed 57% increase for this year. Stated the valuation should be based upon actual rents that can be charged and explained his analysis for reaching valuation he believes is ac- curate. Haugen: Suggested McClenahan meet with the assessors. Schmidt: Replied that the person who assesses commercial property is not available at this hearing to discuss how he analyzes the properties but will submit a report to the City to give his analysis. Haugen: Suggested McClenahan submit his comparisons to The Assessor's Office so that can be in- cluded. Jim McMahon, 17178 Adelman Street SE, Wreck A Mended Auto Body, did not provide property 10. Opened business a few years ago, now valuation has gone up 24.5%. Would like an explanation of why there is a sudden increase in property value and tax increase. Schmidt: Responded that the commercial property assessor will contact McMahon. Nancy Loesch, PID 250320100,4131 Grainwood Circle NE, stated she is representing her mother for this appeal and is concerned about the property valuation stating it was valued at $439,000 in 2007, $406,700 in 2008 and $467,700 in 2009. Cannot understand the variations. Stated it is an original summer cabin that was closed up to live in year around which hasn't changed hands in over 20 years so has not gone through a true market test. Believes there may be assumptions that modifications have been made to the home. Would like to have someone come to the house and look at it. Thompson: Will set up an appointment. Duane Hoffman, 17182 Adelmann Street SE, stated this is a commercial property he purchased in De- cember. Stated he paid less than what previous owners bought it for, but the property is valued at 24% more, which is approximately a $107,000 increase in one year. Haugen: Asked when the property was purchased. Hoffman: Replied it was purchased December 2008 for $625,000 and the market value is $550,000. Schmidt: Responded that the property is valued at less than the purchase price and the ratio looks like it is near 90%. Stated that the fact that it went up 24% is not relevant. Noted that all commercial properties were reviewed this year and there were many increases. Sounds like value was not overstated based on what it was purchased for. Hoffman: Responded that the company was forced to find a place to be and this is all that was available at the time. Knows that he paid less than the original owner and previously was taxed at a valuation of 6 City Council Meeting Minutes May 5, 2008 DRAFT $440,000. Stated he was under impression that commercial values were being kept low to be able to "stomach" the tax. Schmidt: Replied that the assessors don't artificially keep a value low to keep the taxes low, but rather appraise at market value. Appears that these properties were undervalued. Some owners bought for over $600,000 and the appraisal was at the $400,000 range. Currently this property is appraised at $550,000. Asked Hoffman if he believes the $550,000 valuation is overstated. Hoffman: Considering the rents that can be charged, he does not believe it would be $550,000 in value. Schmidt: Responded that he will have the commercial assessor contact Hoffman to determine if he needs to conduct an inspection. Earl Drangstveit, PID 251000030,3443 Twin Island Circle, suggested that the water/sewer, public road services, and public safety benefits of police, fire and ambulance that people receive with payment of taxes are not available to him at his property. Commented on a circumstance where he provided transportation for building inspectors to come to his property when a remodeling project was underway. Also noted that the school district is not be able to provide transportation for children to schools. Asked if these things are considered in the estimated market value. Stated that since 2001 taxes have tripled and services received have not improved at all. Would like the property to be considered on individual basis. Haugen: Asked if the assessors factor in that this is a seasonal property. Thompson: Replied that they factor in anything they can extract from the market that would affect property value. This is island property and all similar properties experience the same issues. Sales on islands would be considered for com parables along with market trends to try to judge where the values are. Went to the island as part of inspection, but was only able to enter one house as only one resident was there. LeMair: Asked if it is a public road. Drangsveit: Replied that it is not maintained by the City. Stated that it is not owned by him or his neighbors although they maintain it. Noted that there are back lots that do not border the water and those residents pull up to the road and walk to their cabin. LeRoy Arnoldi: Stated that he is an agent for Village Commercial Building, LLC, 4719 Park Avenue SE, PID 254560010. Commended the assessment staff on the presentation and making citizens feel comfort- able. Stated he is here to follow the appeal process and asked to have his client's valuation lowered. Schmidt: Commented that a letter was received from Vaughn Lemke to be entered into the record. Other property owners who contacted the Assessor's Office or entered an appeal at this hearing were: Janine Haas, PID 254300190 Mary Smith, PID 251400030 Bob Tansey, PID 251410320 Parker Chandler, PID 250720110 Mike & Char Jasan, PID 250710050 Debbie McGahey, PID 2500010260 Jim Speiker, PID 2500010260 Elizabeth Coddington, PID 251060100 Dimitri Ginzberg, 253820250 Lisa Franz, PID 250360360 Monte Giles, PID 251780010 Mike Leech, PID 253610040 Debbie McGahey, PID 250490050 Ken Drum, PID 253420220 Janece Quade, PID 254040230 Lee Woodruff, PID 253880020 7 City Council Meeting Minutes May 5, 2008 DRAFT David Yajko, PID 252290080 Jim Zimmer, PID 252970080 Chris Hesh, PID 252290090 MOTION BY HEDBERG, SECONDED BY MILLAR TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. VOTE: Ayes by Haugen, Erickson, Hedberg, LeMair and Millar. The motion carried and the public hearing was closed at 8:35 p.m. Comments: LeMair: Thanked those appealing their valuation for coming to the hearing and expressed appreciation for the way they conducted themselves. Believes it will be interesting to see how market values change in the future with foreclosures and other market conditions. Erickson: Agreed that the professionalism that people brought to the meeting is commendable as well as that of the Assessor's Office. Millar: Appreciated the civil manner of conduct of the participants and complimented the assessors for their work noting the improvement over previous years. Hedberg: Noted that market values have increased quite a bit in the last ten years; particularly lake values and commercial values. The assessors are clearing up some mistakes or oversights with previous as- sessments and bringing properties up to market conditions. Seems many of the questions came from mar- ket dynamics and past assessment. Haugen: Noted that County Chief Financial Officer Howard Ellsworth was in attendance. Directed Asses- sor's Office to move forward with inspections and reviews of properties appealed and bring responses back to the May 19, 2008, City Council meeting. RECESS Mayor Haugen called a recess at 8:40 p.m. RECONVENE The meeting was reconvened at 8:45 p.m. PRESENTATION Excellence in Masonry Design and Construction Award Mike Cox of Wold Architects presented the Excellence in Masonry Design and Construction Award from the Minnesota Masonry Institute. Stated that the award recognizes buildings built with masonry in a way that is sympathetic to their environment and with craftsman-like materials. Masonry is durable, energy effi- cient and this design fits into the downtown area. Stated this is an admirable award and he is pleased that the facility was recognized for its decisions made to build with masonry. OLD BUSINESS Consider Approval of Change Order #7 for the Prior Lake Police Station and City Hall Project. City Manager Boyles explained the final change order for the police station and city hall construction pro- ject. Stated that change orders have amounted to 2% of the total project, and the project was completed below contract by $73,000. Bill Wolters, Owners Representative, was present to answer questions. Comments: Hedberg: Asked if the $73,000 is available for transfer to other projects. Boyles: Replied that there are some restrictions but there is flexibility that the Council will have. 8 City Council Meeting Minutes May 5, 2008 DRAFT LeMair: Recalled that some overages were transferred into that fund. Boyles: Replied he will provide a more specific answer after research. Hedberg: Complimented Wolters on a job well done. Will support the change order. Millar: Concurred stating that Wolters definitely looked out for the City's interest. Erickson: Concurred stating that, based on observations of buildings in neighboring communities, full value was received for the cost. LeMair: Noted he was part of the original selection process and is pleased that Wolters did everything as well as he said that he could bringing the project under budget with few change orders and the expenses saved paid for having an owner's representative. Haugen: Stated he also served on the committee that interviewed and chose Wolters and Wold Architect. Tremendous value was created over the past three years that will pay dividends for coming generations. MOTION BY LEMAIR, SECONDED BY HEDBERG TO APPROVE RESOLUTION 08-069 APPROVING CHANGE ORDER #7 FOR THE POLICE STATION / CITY HALL CONSTRUCTION PROJECT. VOTE: Ayes by Haugen, Erickson, Hedberg, LeMair and Millar. The motion carried. Wolters: Appreciated compliments and noted that this was a team effort and a great job in design, quality and cost. Consider Approval of a Report on Process for Securing Vacant Buildings. City Attorney Pace advised the Council that it has the authority to order vacant and abandoned buildings that meet criteria to be boarded by the owner. If the owner fails to respond to the order, the City may have the building boarded and assess the cost against the property. Explained that there is a separate process to follow for emergency situations that require immediate boarding, which would require adoption of an or- dinance as set out in State Statute. Recommends adopting amendment to the ordinance to provide for the abatement of public nuisances which unreasonably endangers the safety of the public. Comments: Millar: Asked if the City has a right to secure a building if an owner fails to secure it upon City request. Pace: Affirmed. Stated that an owner would have six days to secure it. Stated that the City needs an or- dinance in place in order to act quickly in the case of an emergency. Millar: Stated he would want it to be an emergency situation before the City went in. Hedberg: Clarified whether a non-emergency situation does not need an ordinance as it is already cov- ered under State Statute, but there is a process required of notifying and giving the owner a chance to remedy. Pace: Affirmed. Hedberg: Believes the City should take great care, but there may be circumstances where an emergency would occur and ordinance should be drafted to cover that. LeMair: Believes there are circumstances in which homes have been abandoned and need to be secured. Will support. Erickson: Asked what the definition is of a vacant property stating there are different levels of vacancy such as homes for sale, or waiting between renters or away on vacation for several months. Pace: Replied that the Statute defines criteria that must exist before the Council can find a building vacant and abandoned. Erickson: Asked if a non-emergency situation would go before the Council. Pace: Affirmed. Erickson: Asks who determines whether action should be taken under an emergency situation. 9 City Council Meeting Minutes May 5, 2008 DRAFT Pace: Replied that the Statute and ordinance would define process and authority. Haugen: Supports moving forward with an ordinance and stated he would like to know what the State Statute intends when it refers to the terms vacant or unoccupied. MOTION BY HEDBERG, SECONDED BY MILLAR TO ACCEPT THE AGENDA REPORT AND DIRECT STAFF TO PREPARE AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CITY CODE SECTION 605 TO EXPRESSLY PRO- VIDE FOR SECURING VACANT AND UNOCCUPIED BUILDINGS THAT PRESENT A HAZARD BE- CAUSE THEY ARE NOT SECURED, ADDRESSING BOTH EMERGENCY AND NON-EMERGENCY CIRCUMSTANCES. VOTE: Ayes by Haugen, Erickson, Hedberg, LeMair and Millar. The motion carried. Consider Approval of a Report Regarding A Plan and Process for Considering Modifications to the City's Noise Ordinance. City Manager Boyles presented a proposed process and timeline for amending the City's noise ordinance including a survey of neighboring community ordinances, conducting a survey to learn the kinds of noise the City would want to enact ordinance about, compilation of a report relaying the findings of the survey and possibly bring an ordinance amendment. Asked the Council for feedback about its primary area of concern whether residential, construction, traffic, etc., and the geographic areas to be included in the survey. Erickson: Believes the City needs to change its noise ordinance and recalled a resident addressing the Council about vehicle noise. Stated he cannot identify how to measure the noise, but ordinance does need changing. LeMair: Stated this is a complicated issue which can affect different businesses in different ways. Need to look at cities that have ordinance that is working. Hedberg: Commented that this topic presented as a construction activities complaint. Standards may apply differently for private entertainment activities than for business activities. Believes the metropolitan communities should be surveyed, not just developing communities as the noise issues go beyond construc- tion. Expressed concern about the level of noise, but cannot answer whether it should be decibels or "throttle." Prohibiting construction activities wouldn't do as the ordinance would have to get at noise that isn't just equipment activities. Agreed the ordinance needs changing as the City's standards allow activities much later into the evening than is appropriate for residential neighborhoods. Millar: Noted that construction noise is repetitive for a number of days. Social functions may be one-time affairs and often have to apply for a permit. Believes the ordinance cannot be based on a decibel level as some noises are more pleasing to the ear and can operate at a higher level. An ordinance would have to be reasonable and consistent. Haugen: Agreed that staff should check with other communities to see if there are commonalities. MOTION BY LEMAIR, SECONDED BY MILLAR TO DO RESEARCH WITH A NUMBER OF COMMUNI- TIES AND BRING RECOMMENDATIONS FOR REVISED NOISE ORDINANCE. VOTE: Ayes by Haugen, Erickson, Hedberg, LeMair and Millar. The motion carried. Consider Approval of a Report Outlining a Process for Considering a Change in the Refuse Collec- tion System. Building and Transportation Services Director Kansier explained the process to follow if the City chooses to implement a organized collection system defined as a specific hauler or group of haulers au- thorized to collect solid waste in a specific area. Indicated that process would take 180 days to follow State Statute. Noted that establishing a particular day for pick up in a given area would not require that the proc- 10 City Council Meeting Minutes May 5, 2008 DRAFT ess be followed. Has been contacted by representatives of solid waste haulers who have asked to meet with the City to develop a plan that would meet the needs of the City and the haulers. Comments: LeMair: Stated this discussion started with the best of intentions with the City wanting to reduce wear and tear on the streets, reduce noise, reduce pollution, and gain better aesthetics. Hoped to make a better community. Stated that feedback he received makes it obvious that a large majority of residents do not want government to become involved in private business. Expressed interest in dividing the community into geographical areas to limit days for pick up and hearing whether that would work to become more effi- cient. Suggests meeting with the haulers to see how to make the system better. Erickson: Agreed staff should meet with haulers to come up with ideas as the City needs to hear the haul- ers thoughts and ideas. Concerned that if all haulers are in same area on the same day, it may cause con- gestion and safety problems. Stated that he would volunteer to help with discussions if it was determined that a Councilor should be involved with meetings. Need to listen to all sides to make decision. Millar: Concurred with LeMair remarks and stated that suppressing competition is neither a good idea nor what the community wants. Believes there should be freedom of choice and that people like their haulers. Does not know where the statistics came from that identified wear and tear on the road. Agreed it might increase congestion if all haulers are in an area on the same day. Agreed staff should meet with haulers to converse about what might work, but stated the City may not be ready for change. Hedberg: Stated he also received many comments from residents and noted that there are no proposals before the Council. The Council has learned what State law allows, agreed that the City should not be- come the refuse hauler, and is looking at the issue to learn alternatives and what process to follow. Be- lieves that any alternative should retain consumer choice. Stated he is also interested in reducing truck traffic in the City to achieve benefits of less fuel usage, less noise, greater safety and less wear and tear on streets. No statistics have been received on any of those benefits and Council should learn the facts about those benefits. Believes that if there is an opportunity to extend the life of streets, it is worth considering because of the amount of money spent on reconstructing streets. Stated that he wants to retain an open system, but does not know if limiting the number of haulers in any particular zone in the City is possible with either an open system or an organized system. Believes that if neither works, then the City should do nothing, and that consumer choice and reduced traffic are primary. Haugen: Stated that the 2030 vision addresses the natural environment protection, pollution, infrastructure and quality of life and this discussion came about when dealing with challenges of safety, fuel usage, envi- ronmental concerns, street and road impact, aesthetics and noise. The City has issues and needs to talk about them. Agreed that free enterprise and the freedom of choice are valued. No direction was ever given to establish the City as the hauler or having just one hauler. Suggested that staff work with the exist- ing haulers and the National Solid Waste Management Association to develop ideas where independents continue to prosper and the community deals with the aforementioned issues. Hedberg moved to direct staff to meet with currently licensed haulers in the City of Prior Lake to solicit in- put regarding the identified issues of: safety, fuel usage, environmental concerns, street and road impact, aesthetics and noise. LeMair: seconded the above motion. Haugen: requested an amendment to the motion to include any organization to which the haulers belong. Hedberg: Accepted the amendment. MOTION BY HEDBERG, SECONDED BY LEMAIR TO DIRECT STAFF TO MEET WITH CURRENTLY LICENSED HAULERS IN THE CITY OF PRIOR LAKE AND ORGANIZATIONS TO WHICH THEY BE- 11 City Council Meeting Minutes May 5, 2008 DRAFT LONG TO SOLICIT INPUT REGARDING THE IDENTIFIED ISSUES OF: SAFETY, FUEL USAGE, ENVI- RONMENT AL CONCERNS, STREET AND ROAD IMPACT, AESTHETICS AND NOISE. VOTE: Ayes by Haugen, Erickson, Hedberg, LeMair and Millar. The motion carried. NEW BUSINESS Consider Approval of a Resolution Accepting a Donation of Exercise Equipment and Declaring Ex- isting Exercise Equipment Excess to City Needs. City Manager Boyles described the donation from Lifetime Fitness to the fire stations and requested that the Council accept the donation and authorize disposal of old equipment. Suggested that the proposed resolution delete the reference to the estimated value of the exercise equipment. Comments: Hedberg: Thanked Lifetime Fitness for making these donations available to communities. Millar: Agreed it is a terrific program they have to help organizations. Erickson: Will support. LeMair: Will support. Haugen: Will support. MOTION BY LEMAIR, SECONDED BY ERICKSON TO APPROVE RESOLUTION 08-070 ACCEPTING THE DONATION OF EXERCISE EQUIPMENT FROM LIFETIME FITNESS AND DECLARING EXISTING EXERCISE EQUIPMENT SURPLUS AND AUTHORIZING ITS DISPOSAL AS MODIFIED TO DELETE ESTIMATED VALUE OF EQUIPMENT VOTE: Ayes by Haugen, Erickson, Hedberg, LeMair and Millar. The motion carried. OTHER Millar: Club Prior appears to be a success and gaining momentum. Grand opening event will be May 15 from 4 - 7 p.m. LeMair: Thanked those who came to the Senior Luncheon. Announced three triple crown winners in the wrestling program. Erickson: Reported on the lighting ceremony at Ryan Park last night. Thanked PLAY and SMSC for their donations. Congratulated and thanked all the mothers for the upcoming Mother's Day. Encouraged fishers to be safe on the upcoming fishing opening weekend. Haugen: Reported that Prior Lake Rotary Dare Day was successful with a great turnout. ADJOURNMENT A motion was made by LeMair and seconded by Hedberg to adjourn the meeting. With all in favor, the meeting was adjourned at 9:58 p.m. Frank Boyles, City Manager Charlotte Green, Administrative Assistant 12