Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPC Meeting Minutes 04-12-10Planning Commission Meeting Minutes April 12, 2010 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES MONDAY, APRIL 12, 2010 Call to Order: Chairman Ringstad called the April 12, 2010, Planning Commission meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. Those present were Commissioners Perez, Billington, Howley and Ringstad, Community Development and Natural Resources Director Danette Parr, Assistant City Engineer Larry Poppler and Development Services Assistant Joe Sortland. Commissioner Fleming was absent. 2. Approval of Minutes: The Minutes from the February 22, 2010, Planning Commission meeting were approved as presented. 5. New Business: A. 2011 - 2015 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM ANNUAL REVIEW Community Development and Natural Resources Director Parr presented the draft of the 2011 - 2015Capital Improvement Program (CIP) to the Planning Commission. The Planning Commission was asked to review the CIP to ensure consistency between the proposed CIP and the City of Prior Lake's 2030 Comprehensive Plan. The budget for the projects within the five year CIP totals approximately 25.4 million dollars and includes street improvements, transportation improvements, park improvements, well #10, water meter replacement and various utility improvements. Parr stated that she had been contacted earlier by Commissioner Fleming, who supported the CIP without any changes. Ringstad stated that they would combine Commissioner questions and comments while discussing the proposed CIP. Commissioner Comments and Questions: Howley asked, in reference to CIP 24, why three buses were being purchased atone time, rather than one bus every year Poppler answered that the bus purchases are in conjunction with a grant, which may have an influence on the bus purchases. Howley commented that in regards to CIP 20, which relates to the pressure reducing valves, that during his review of the Comprehensive Plan he did not see that reducing pressure or fixing small leaks due to high pressure should be corrected with a capital improvement project. Howley stated the Comprehensive Plan wouldn't support spending $80,000 on such tasks, though Howley stated it still may be a necessary project. Howley asked if CIP 10 encompasses neighborhood parks or all parks within the city. Parr answered that the park improvements will not be limited to new parks. L:\10 FILES\10 PLANNING COMMISSION\10 MINU1'ES\MN041210.doc Planning Commission Meeting Minutes April 12, 2010 DRAFT Howley commented that most parks have been updated in the past ten to fifteen years, and the amount listed seems like a lot of money for parks that were updated or built in the past ten years. He stated that the figures are likely appropriate, but the Comprehensive Plan wouldn't support those high dollar amounts. Howley asked if the tree planting plan is for replacing trees that have died or to plant new trees. He commented that tree planting is listed under the Capital Park Fund. Howley asked if it is a Capital Improvement Project because the City is planting new trees or is it for replacing trees that have died on City property. Poppler explained that in anticipation for the Emerald Ash Borer they intend to replace trees that have died. Howley acknowledged the Emerald Ash Borer should be taken into forethought, and stated that if it was used to implement an aggressive tree planting schedule, that the Comprehensive Plan does not mention such improvements. Howley stated that the Comprehensive Plan encourages preservation of natural resources but does not mention adding new natural resources. Howley stated that the CIP plan should be approved as submitted. Billington found the CIP appropriate and approves the CIP as presented. Perez asked about CIP 12, the meter replacement program, wondering if the City loses money due to water meters not functioning correctly. Poppler answered that meters not reading properly could cause the City to lose money, as homes may be using more water than the meters record. Perez asked if it would be possible to acquire the money owed by homeowners due to faulty meter readings. Poppler answered that the City would not have proof that homeowners owed money as a result of faulty meters. Perez asked if other cities use the water meters proposed in CIP 12. Poppler answered that some cities still use door to door readings. Perez thinks that the CIP is well thought out and supports the CIP as presented. Ringstad asked about CIP 20, the pressure reducing valves, if the City would recoup its costs for the project. Poppler answered that the homeowners would save money as a result of not using as much water, but the City would not gain its money back as a result of the pressure reducing valves. Ringstad stated that the CIP looks well thought out. He pointed out City Council liaison Rick Keeney was in the audience and asked him to provide comments or questions on the CIP. Keeney asked the Planning Commission to recommend to the City Council the scheduling of street improvements, in order of priority. L:\10 FILES\10 PLANNING COMMISSION\10 MINU1'ES\MN041210.doc 2 Planning Commission Meeting Minutes April 12, 2010 DRAFT Ringstad said that Planning Commission could not compare the street improvements tonight and would direct the question to the Engineering Department. Keeney asked the Planning Commission to prioritize the intersection improvements, where they stand when compared to the Comprehensive Plan, to improve traffic flow, safety and growth. Howley stated that all the street improvement plans presented in the CIP are short term plans, and the order of priority shouldn't be answered as a body. Howley stated it would not be possible to provide a prioritization recommendation without having done research. Ringstad agreed with Howley. Perez stated that he believed CR-21 and Arcadia should be addressed first, and asked when the CR- 21 extension will be completed. Poppler answered that they anticipate the CR-21 extension to be completed around the fall of 2011 or spring of 2012. Billington agreed with Howley in regards to prioritizing street improvements. A MOTION WAS MADE BY HOWLEY AND SECONDED BY BILLINGTON TO APPROVE THE 2011 -2015 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM ANNUAL REVIEW VOTE: Ayes by Perez, Billington, Howley and Ringstad. The motion carried. 6. Announcements and Correspondence: A. DISCUSS FUTURE WORK PLAN FOR SIGN CODE UPDATE Parr stated that the revisions to the sign code would be addressed at a later date and would involve a public hearing, reaching out to the business community, and would also include a workshop. Billington asked if electric signs would be considered. Parr stated that it would addressed, but has not been brought up as a major issue by business owners. Billington stated that he has found the electric signs to be a distraction. Parr answered that the City ordinance will require updates to address issues related to electronic signs. 7. Adjournment: The meeting adjourned at 6:24 p.m. L:\10 FILES\10 PLANNING COMMISSION\10 MINU1'ES\MN041210.doc