HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda & Minutes
City Council Work Session - Various Update Items (5:30pm)
FORUM: 7:00 P.M. - 7:30 P.M.
(Dave Berens - Annexation of 40 Acres in Credit River)
REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING AGENDA
1 CALL TO ORDER and PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: ......................... 7:30 p.m.
2 APPROVAL OF AGENDA:
3 CONSIDER APPROVAL OF OCTOBER 15, 2001 MEETING MINUTES:
4 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.
\l\'" ~ B) Consider Approval of a Resolution Approving the Common Interest Community (CIC)
· Plat No. 107 (Deerfield Condominium), Second Supplemental CIC Plat, Third
~ Supplemental CIC Plat and Fourth Supplemental CIC Plat.
~ J\c ---. C) Consider Approval of a Resolution Approving Special Assessment Deferral for the
2001 Street Improvement Project.
5 ITEMS REMOVED FROM CONSENT AGENDA:
6 ",~ PRESENTATIONS:
'~ Proclamation for Youth Appreciation Week (Mayor Mader)
~ Allina Ambulance System Response Time Report (Nan Clements & Mark Dascalos)
'Prior Lake Chloride Sampling Program (Lani Leichty)
7 ~~BLlC HEARINGS:
~ Consider Approval of a Resolution Denying the Vacation of a Portion of the Drainage
and Utility Easement Located on the North Side of Lot 4, Block 1, Eastwood Second
Addition.
8 OLD BUSINESS:
A) Consider Approval of a Resolution Amending the Wild Oaks Conditional Use Permit to
Allow Porches and Decks on Townhouse Units.
B) Consider Approval of a Cooperative Agreement with MnDOT for Intersection
Improvements for Commerce/Boudin and CSAH 23/Five Hawks.
C) Consider Approval of a Resolution Approving an Amendment to the Creekside Estates
Planned Unit Development to Revise the Approved Interior Floor Plans for the 54-Unit
Building.
162UV Eagle Creek Ave. S.E., Prior Lake, Minnesota 55372-1714 / Ph. (952) 447-4230 / Fax (952) 447-4245
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER
- -- -,-r ''''!'",
9 NEW BUSINESS:
A) Consider Approval of an Ordinance Amending Section 1102.1100 of the City Code by
Repealing Section 1102.1100 and Adopting a New Section 1102.1100 Relating to the
Downtown Business District.
B) Consider Approval of an Ordinance Amending the Zoning Ordinance to Limit the Hours
of Operation for Car Washes.
C) Consider Approval of Report Regarding Advisability of Developing a FIG Well in
Brooksville Hills.
D) Consider Approval of a Resolution Authorizing the Joint Purchase of an Infrared
Heater in 2003 through a Cooperative Agreement with Savage, Shakopee and
Burnsville.
E) Consider Approval of a Resolution Approving Change Orders to Contracts for the
Construction of the Thomas Ryan Memorial Park Concession/Restroom Building.
10 OTHER BUSINESS/COUNCILMEMBER REPORTS.
110501
REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES
October 15, 2001
CALL TO ORDER AND PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: Present were Mayor Mader, Councilmembers Petersen, Gundlach,
Ericson and Zieska, City Attorney Pace, Finance Director Teschner, Public Works Director Osmundson, City Engineer
McDermott, Planning Director Rye, Planning Coordinator Kansier and Recording Secretary Meyer.
APPROVAL OF AGENDA:
Mader: Requested adding a presentation by Sg1. Rob Boe regarding emergency management operations.
MOTION BY GUNDLACH, SECOND BY ERICSON TO APPROVE THE AGENDA AS AMENDED.
VOTE: Ayes by Mader, Gundlach, Petersen, Ericson and Zieska, the motion carried.
APPROVAL OF MEETING MINUTES OF OCTOBER 1, 2001.
MOTION BY ZIESKA, SECOND BY PETERSEN TO APPROVE THE OCTOBER 1, 2001 MEETING MINUTES AS
SUBMITTED.
VOTE: Ayes by Mader, Gundlach, Petersen, Ericson and Zieska, the motion carried.
CONSENT AGENDA:
(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 Monthly Report.
(E) Consider Approval of Fire Call Report.
(F) Consider Approval of 2001 Third Quarter Investment Report.
(G) Consider Approval of 2001 Third Quarter Budget Report.
(H) Consider Approval of Temporary Liquor License for Prior Lake Rotary Club.
Zieska: Requested removing Item A (Invoices to be Paid)
MOTION BY GUNDLACH, SECOND BY PETERSEN TO APPROVE CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS (B) - (H).
Bovles: Reviewed the remaining consent agenda items.
VOTE: Ayes by Mader, Gundlach, Petersen, Ericson and Zieska, the motion carried.
ITEMS REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA:
Invoices to be Paid
Zieska: Discussed an insurance contribution made by the City and residents to the Firemen's pension fund and what an
asset it is in recruiting and retaining quality firefighters. Thanked the residents of the community.
MOTION BY ZIESKA, SECOND BY GUNDLACH TO APPROVE INVOICES TO BE PAID.
VOTE: Ayes by Mader, Gundlach, Petersen, Ericson and Zieska, the motion carried.
16200 Eagle Creek Ave. S.E., Prior Lake, Minnesota 55372-1714 / Ph. (952) 447-4230 / Fax (952) 447-4245
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER
I, r 1
City Council Meeting Minutes
DRAFT
October 15, 2001
PRESENTATIONS:
[ADDED] Emergency Management Operations Report
SQt. Rob Boe (Emergency Management Director): Discussed the City's emergency management plans and cooperation
with county, state and federal authorities, as well as Mystic Lake Casino and at a staff level, in light of the September 11,
2001 attacks in New York, Washington D.C. and Pennsylvania.
Ericson: Noted that the City Council had met with Sgt. Boe and been briefed on the emergency management operations
prior to the meeting.
Mader: Advised that he is aware that the City staff and Police Department are remaining vigilant, and encouraged residents
to continue to do the same.
PUBLIC HEARINGS:
Consider Approval of Resolution Adopting 2001 Special Assessment Roll for 2001 Public Improvement Project
Bovles: Discussed the effort and project to date. Advise the Council of its options and discussed the assessment appeal
process. Further advised that the Finance Director and City Engineer have worked very hard to address all of the concerns
of the residents in the project area.
Teschner: Discussed the process of applying the assessment policy uniformly across the project, and in conjunction with
the special benefit received. Further discussed front footage assessment vs. unit assessment, the size of the lots in the
Frogtown area, and the public information process to date. Also discussed the terms of the project assessment including
assessment term, rates, classification, interest rate and method of payment.
McDermott: Advised that approximately half of the project is paved to date, and that the concrete work and sidewalks are
substantially done. Once the remaining bituminous is complete, driveway improvements and restoration will follow. The
intent is to have the entire project completed this year.
Zieska: Asked staff to clarify the calculation of the 40% assessable costs.
Teschner: Explained that the City has tried to reduce the assessable costs by having the City assume as many of the costs
as possible, including such things as main replacements in the street. and sidewalks. The City attempted to reduce as
much of the costs of the project as possible because of the difficulty of the project and the expense of the improvements.
Mader: Noted that the total project cost was $1.762 million and that $1.254 million was not being assessed.
Gundlach: Asked the Finance Director to discuss the calculation of the interest rate and benefit provided in relation to value
of the homestead. Also asked about the appeal process.
Teschner: Explained the bonding process and the attempt to bond later in the construction process in order to eliminate a
large portion of the capitalized interest. Discussed special benefit and the City's intent to assure that the benefit provided is
greater than the cost of the improvement. Further noted that in addition to providing a written letter of appeal at tonight's
meeting, the next step is that property owners must file with the District Court.
2
City Council Meeting Minutes
DRAFT
October 15, 2001
Mayor Mader declared the public hearing open and noted that
assessment appeals have been received by property owners
Loftus, Armstrong, Borchardt, Leidner and Brown.
Troy Maas (4955 Dakota St. S.E.): Discussed his flagged lot property and requested that additional consideration be made
due to the fact that his front footage on a dead-end road was approximately 30 feet, even though his lot width is
approximately 144 feet. Also asked when a decision would be made.
Mader: Advised that a decision could be made tonight, but that a decision was necessary before the end of October. Noted
that the meeting would be open to the public, but no further public input would be taken unless the public hearing remained
opened tonight.
Vic Oerescavich (16240 St. Paul St.): Presented a letter of appeal of the assessment to the Council. Further discussed the
definition of front footage in particular with respect to corner lots.
Teschner: Clarified that the assessment policy sets the short side on a corner lot as the assessment footage and noted that
from a benefit standard the lot cannot be doubly assessed.
Zieska: Noted that in some cases corner lots can be affected by two projects which is also not fair.
Mader: Noted that the Council is obligated to be as consistent as possible with City policy, state statute, and to most
economically construct the improvements and equitably distribute costs.
Oerescavich: Further discussed the City's past practice to use a unit method of assessment, and believes that this project
should also be assessed on the unit basis.
Carl DinQman (16260 St. Paul Ave.): Presented the Council with an assessment appeal letter. Further discussed his
flagged lot and the front footage of approximately 33 feet. Believes his lot is unique, and that the assessment is excessive.
Would like to see a more reasonable assessment somewhere among the average lot size in the area of 86 feet.
Zieska: Clarified that front footage in respect to the assessment policy is average lot width rather than footage abutting the
street.
Gerald Haferman: (Three Oak Street properties): Presented the Council with a letter of appeal. Discussed the fact of
assessing Oak Street at 100% first-time assessment when there was significantly less work to improve the roadway.
Preferred a unit assessment rather than front footage.
Matt Spencer (16220 St. Paul Ave.): Asked why a decision needed to be made by the end of the month. Further suggested
that the project be finished before the costs are charged because otherwise hard feelings are created.
Teschner: Explained that the City needs to start to recover its costs on the bonds, and that there is a statutory certification
date of November 30th and that a 30-day window needs to be provided to residents who would like to payoff their
assessments prior to certification.
Zieska: Asked the ramifications of not meeting the statutory deadline.
3
City Council Meeting Minutes
DRAFT
October 15, 2001
Teschner: Explained that if the City waited until the project was completed and missed the statutory deadline, the residents
would have to incur the additional year of interest costs. The City's practice has been to assess the project costs as late as
possible to save residents as much interest cost as possible.
Mader: Discussed the project schedule and the need to start the project after school was out. Believed the staff worked
very hard to communicate with the residents in the area and has operated in good faith. This particular project has been
quite challenging.
Petersen: Commented that although the people present were opposed to their assessment, there were many more
properties in the project area. Noted that he had received a letter from Mark Ericksen who was in favor of the project and
his assessment.
MOTION BY PETERSEN, SECOND. BY ERICSON TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.
VOTE: Ayes by Mader, Gundlach, Petersen, Ericson and Zieska, the motion carried.
The Council took a brief recess.
Mader: Explained the options available to the Council at this time.
MOTION BY MADER, SECOND BY PETERSEN TO REFER THE ITEM BACK TO THE STAFF AND THE ASSESSMENT
SUBCOMMITTEE IN LIGHT OF THE INFORMATION RECEIVED AT THE PUBLIC HEARING.
Zieska: Advised that the subcommittee has met three times, and believed that all of the assessments were acceptable with
the exception of the flagged lots. Proposed that the dead-end flagged lots be assessed at the average lot size for the
project of 92 feet and that the assessment roll be adopted with that amendment.
Ericson: Agreed with Councilmember Zieska, and that with the exception of the flagged lot, the other assessments appear
equitable.
Gundlach: Also agreed with the proposed amendment. Asked how the costs would be recovered if the front footage were
reduced for the flagged lots.
Teschner: Advised that the lower amount would not have to be re-certified and the preliminary levy has already been
determined. The few dollars of the proposed amendment would not break the debt service fund.
Mader: Concerned that there are properties where the special benefit and increased value may be close, and therefore
warrants another look. Also concerned with amending specific lots with respect to past practice in applying the assessment
policy.
Gundlach: Asked what the subcommittee objective would be as it reconsidered the assessment roll.
Mader: Suggested that the subcommittee would review the application of the assessment policy in light of the comments
received during the public hearing process, and also regarding the more unique lots to make sure the assessments are
sustainable. Noted another commercial property that has no access to the street. Uncomfortable that the assessment roll is
where it should be. Believes one more review with staff is warranted.
Ericson: Advised that the one resident who discussed a $50,000 assessment actually has three lots involved in the
assessment on a street that was a first-time improvement.
4
City Council Meeting Minutes
DRAFT
October 15, 2001
Zieska: Comfortable with the assessment process to date and believes all the concerns have been adequately addressed.
Ericson: Stated that those individuals with concerns seem to be the properties with flagged lots, and that there are few
other objections.
Mader: Noted that there have been numerous inquiries and nine letters have been received tonight objecting to the
assessments.
Petersen: Commented that there do appear to be concerns with several of the lots.
Ericson: Stated that it appears that there may be concerns from the Council associated with the lots receiving 100%
assessment.
Mader: Believes that the discussion tonight with respect to corner lots, flagged lots, those lots receiving 100% assessment,
and the letters of appeal received at the meeting, deserve further review before the policy arbitrarily changed either formally
or by precedent.
Ericson: Noted that the flagged lots have been at issue since the beginning of this process, and are not necessary being
just changed at the end.
Mader: Discussed the property of Calvin and Marilee Brown and advised that the question becomes whether there is
tangible benefit to that property when there is no access provided.
Zieska: Commented that the argument is difficult because then any property owner who has access via an easement over
private property shouldn't have to pay for the road in front of their house.
McDermott: Advised that the lot in question is currently vacant and a curb cut was not included, but that the property does
have front footage to Oak Street. With development, an access could be provided along Oak Street.
VOTE ON MOTION TO DEFER: Ayes by Mader and Petersen, Nays by Gundlach, Ericson and Zieska, the motion failed.
MOTION BY ZIESKA, SECOND BY ERICSON TO APPROVE RESOLUTION 01.115 ADOPTING THE ASSESSMENT
ROLL FOR THE PROJECT WITH THE AMENDMENT THAT THE TWO FLAGGED LOTS ON THE DEAD-END STREET
BE ASSESSED AT THE AVERAGE LOT SIZE OF THE PROJECT AREA WHICH IS 92 FRONT FEET.
Gundlach: Asked if the 100% assessments should be reviewed.
Zieska: Believes there is an appeal process in place for those persons who may still object to their assessments.
Ericson: Noted that he would have no objection to reviewing the properties with 100% assessments, but that the
assessments appear fair and equitable, and that considerable amount of analysis has been completed. Advised that there
are special circumstances for amending the assessments for the flagged lots due to their unique situation of being located
on a dead-end and suggested that the assessment policy be reviewed to address this type of circumstance.
VOTE: Ayes by Gundlach, Ericson, and Zieska, Naye by Mader and Petersen, the motion carried.
Mader: Further noted that an application for deferment has been received.
5
'!" f
City Council Meeting Minutes
DRAFT
October 15, 2001
MOTION BY ERICSON, SECOND BY ZIESKA, TO ADOPT THE DEFERRED ASSESSMENT APPLICATION OF LUCY
ARMSTRONG.
Teschner: Advised that he had met with the applicant and explained the deferred assessment process.
Mader: Noted that the applicant had also appealed the assessment.
VOTE: Ayes by Mader, Gundlach, Petersen, Ericson and Zieska, the motion carried.
OLD BUSINESS:
Consider Approval of a Resolution Accepting Quotes and Awarding the Contract for Cates Street Channel
Improvement (City Project 01-15)
Mader: Noted that the project was originally estimated at $60,000 and that the City staff has, through negotiation and
discussion with the landowners, been able to make the routing of the channel more aesthetically effective as well as reduce
costs.
MOTION BY MADER, SECOND BY ERICSON TO APPROVE RESOLUTION 01-116 ACCEPTING QUOTES AND
AWARDING CONTRACT FOR CATES STREET CHANNEL IMPROVEMENT.
VOTE: Ayes by Mader, Gundlach, Petersen, Ericson and Zieska, the motion carried.
NEW BUSINESS:
Consider Approval of a Resolution Approving a Preliminary Plat to be Known as McCormick Acres.
Kansier: Discussed the preliminary plat issues in connection with the staff report.
Mader: Asked for clarification as to how many homes could be built in addtion to the two existing single-family homes.
Kansier: Two.
MOTION BY ERICSON, SECOND BY PETERSEN TO ADOPT RESOLUTION 01-117 APPROVING A PRELIMINARY
PLAT TO BE KNOWN AS MCCORMICK ACRES.
Zieska: Asked if the remaining lots meet the minimum lot area.
Kansier: Confirmed.
VOTE: Ayes by Mader, Gundlach, Petersen, Ericson and Zieska, the motion carried.
6
City Council Meeting Minutes
DRAFT
October 15, 2001
Consider Approval of a Resolution Endorsing Scott County Plan to Sell Conduit Bonds to Finance the St. Michael's
Catholic School Improvement Project.
Bovles: Reviewed the item in connection with the staff report, noting that the action does not bind the City to any financial
obligation.
MOTION BY ZIESKA, SECOND BY GUNDLACH TO ADOPT RESOLUTION 01.118 ENDORSING SCOTT COUNTY PLAN
TO SELL CONDUIT BONDS TO FINANCE THE ST. MICHAEL'S CATHOLIC SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT.
VOTE: Ayes by Mader, Gundlach, Petersen, Ericson and Zieska, the motion carried.
Consider Approval of a Resolution Approving in Concept the Use of Tax Increment Financing to Fund A Senior
Housing Project.
Bovles: Briefly explained the nature of the request for tax increment financing in connection with the construction of the 54-
unit building as part of the Creekside Plaza project. Noted that the request is for approval in concept for the project and
does not obligate the Council at this time.
Pace: Suggested that since the Council is proposing to act only in concept, amending the resolution to not move forward
with the notification process or scheduling the public hearing at this time.
Bovles: Explained that the intent is to be able to move forward with the public hearing process at such time as the staff is
able to fully analyze the specifics of the request.
Pace: Suggested moving the condition to the end of the findings within the resolution.
Bovles: Agreed that that would be acceptable.
Mader: Asked the applicant how it would be that the project could start this fall when the Council is only considering the
application in concept at this time.
Harold Jesh (representing Eagle Creek DevelopmenO: Advised that the developer would like the option to assume the
responsibility and proceed with installing the footings for the building. It is the intentof the developer to submit any and all
documents to obtain a building permit and at least install the footings this fall. Then, once footings are installed, construction
can commence once the TIF application has been fully considered.
Bovles: Advised that if the Council agrees in concept with the TIF proposal, the staff intended to meet with the consultant in
the following week to begin to analyze the project and its TIF application. Further advised that the applicant had requested
that the application be fast-tracked with respect to the School District and County 3D-day notification. Noted that his initial
reaction was to not accommodate that request respecting the desires of the School District and County to have the time
necessary to familiarize themselves with the request. Noted that it is probably not likely that the project would be started
until spring.
Mader: Advised that the concern would be that the City does not have enough time to thoroughly review the application in
its entirety, nor does the City wish to have footings in place in a project with the prospect that the construction stops if the
TIF application is not approved. Suggested adding a condition to the resolution that "in the event the Developer chooses to
proceed with any aspect of construction prior to potential approval of a TIF plan, that the Developer would be proceeding at
its sole financial risk."
7
r 1
City Council Meeting Minutes
DRAFT
October 15, 2001
Bovles: Expressed concern that initiating construction before TIF approval could disqualify the project from assistance.
MOTION BY ERICSON, SECOND BY ZIESKA TO ADOPT RESOLUTION 01.119 AS AMENDED APPROVING IN
CONCEPT THE USE OF TAX INCREMENT FINANCING TO FUND A SENIOR HOUSING PROJECT.
Jesh: Clarified that the next steps in the process is to meet with staff and the Ehlers group, and review the project for its
feasibility and bring it back to the Council to set the public hearing,
Bovles: Confirmed.
Jesh: Explained the timing and the Council's consideration of waiver of the public hearing notice period if the site is
blanketed in order for the project can proceed expeditiously.
Mader: Believed that the discussion would be left to a recommendation by staff.
Jesh: Asked for a timeline to consider the application if the necessary paperwork was completed within the next two weeks.
Bovles: Did not believe staff could answer the question of a timeline, because the consultant has not had an opportunity to
evaluate what additional information is needed.
Gundlach: Supported the project and the concept plan, and noted the newspaper had inaccurately reported the progress of
the project. Further discussed the actions taken by the Council in order to assist this project.
Ericson: Reiterated that the Council has been very supportive of the project and that any problems with the progress of the
project have been from the developer's standpoint.
VOTE: Ayes by Mader, Gundlach, Petersen, Ericson and Zieska, the motion carried.
Mader: Commented that he also has some sensitivity to the inaccuracies reported in the newspaper with respect to the
Council's action or inaction on senior housing projects and advised that there have been four different projects approved by
this Council on some level.
Consider Approval of Zoning Ordinance Amendment to Require Rain Sensors on Irrigation Systems.
Bovles: Discussed the item in connection with the staff report.
Mader: Asked what the approximately cost is for a rain s~nsor.
Rve: Did not believe rain sensors were prohibitively expensive.
Zieska: Asked if the ordinance would be retroactive to existing irrigation systems.
Kansier: Advised that the ordinance would apply to commercial and townhouse projects under new construction.
MOTION BY PETERSEN, SECOND BY GUNDLACH TO ADOPT ORDINANCE 01.12 REQUIRING RAIN SENSORS ON
IRRIGATION SYSTEMS.
VOTE: Ayes by Mader, Gundlach, Petersen, Ericson and Zieska, the motion carried.
8
City Council Meeting Minutes
DRAFT
October 15, 2001
Consider Approval of Report Authorizing Reimbursement to the Prior Lake - Savage School District for Public
Education and Government Access Channel Support.
. Bovles: Discussed the item in connection with the staff report.
Mader: Commented that the process appears consistent with past agreements.
MOTION BY GUNDLACH, SECOND BY ZIESKA TO ACCEPTING THE REPORT AND AUTHORIZE THE CITY MANAGER
TO REIMBURSE THE PRIOR LAKE-SAVAGE SCHOOL DISTRICT FOR PUBLIC EDUCATION AND GOVERNMENT
ACCESS CHANNEL SUPPORT.
Bovles: Noted that this is a great opportunity to note an opportunity the City has taken, through the initiation of the Mayor,
to be a good neighbor in assisting the School District
VOTE: Ayes by Mader, Gundlach, Petersen, Ericson and Zieska, the motion carried.
OTHER BUSINESS I COUNCILMEMBER REPORTS:
Ericson: Commented that he is disappointed in the misinformation that continues to appear in the editorial pages of the
Prior Lake American. Discussed that this City Council is the first Council to reduce the property tax bill, that the well
situation is a planning project that goes back much farther than this Council and that this Council has done all it has been
asked to do in constructing a new well and initiating the process for an additional well beyond that. Further discussed that
the progress this Council has taken toward financially conservative planning for the redevelopment the Downtown area (an
effort that has failed on numerous previous occasions), that the delays in senior housing projects have been due to
extenuating circumstances and not the actions of the Council, that the relationships between the staff and Council have
been cooperative and open, and that there are numerous ways that this Council is accessible to the public by telephone,
and open forums. Believes people should take the time to inform themselves before discussing items in the newspaper.
Publicly endorsed each of the current Council members and the Mayor for re-election.
Gundlach: Specifically listed the properties the Council has acquired to clean-up the City, as well as move forward with the
Downtown Redevelopment project. Also discussed the delays due the developer in connection with the Creekside Estates
development. Also advised that many of the accusations in the newspaper have been wholly inaccurate.
Zieska: Described a current experience he had with Mediacom with the installation of his cable modem, and regardless of
the technical difficulties, the customer service was lousy.
Ericson: Noted that he also had a cable modem installed and had no problem.
Mader: Commented that the new bus service routes will be implemented sooner rather than later, and asked Assistant City
Manager Walsh to comment.
Walsh: Advised that the MVT A is realigning their routes in November or December and has offered to implement the new
Prior Lake route in their schedule until such time as the City takes over the operation. Also noted that notification will go out
when the new routes start.
9
City Council Meeting Minutes
DRAFT
October 15, 2001
Mader: Also asked the staff to review and recommend a course of action with respect to the discussion regarding fence
restrictions for lake properties that was discussed at the public forum.
MOTION BY MADER, SECOND BY ERICSON TO DIRECT STAFF EXPLORE THE OPTIONS AVAILABLE TO FENCE
ISSUES AND VEHICLE STORAGE ISSUES PARTICULARLY WITH RESPECT TO HOW THOSE ITEMS AFFECT
PROPERTY OWNERS VIEWS OF THE LAKESHORE.
VOTE: Ayes by Mader, Gundlach, Petersen, Ericson and Zieska, the motion carried.
Bovles: Advised that Monday, October 22nd at 4pm is the groundbreaking for the new high school at the intersection of
150th and CSAH 27.
Zieska: Also advised that there are two vacancies on the Parks Advisory Committee, and to contact Susan Walsh at City
Hall for an application.
A motion to adjourn was ade and seconded. The meeting adjourned at 10:30pm.
Kelly Meyer, Recording Secretary
10