HomeMy WebLinkAbout031703 Regular16200 Eagle Creek Avenue S.E.
Prior Lake, MN 55372-1714
REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES
March 17, 2003
CALL TO ORDER AND PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE:
Present were Mayor Haugen, Councilmembers Blomberg, Petersen and LeMair, City Manager Boyles, City Attorney Pace,
Public Works Director Osmundson, Community Development Director Rye, City Engineer McDermott, Planning Coordinator
Kansier, Assistant City Manager Walsh, Recreation Supervisor Esser and Administrative Assistant Meyer. Councilmember
Zieska was absent.
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. Items to be considered as part of the
Council's regular agenda may not be addressed at the Public Forum. Topics of discussion are also restricted to
City governmental topics rather than private or political agendas. The City Council will not take formal action on
issues presented during the Public Forum.
No persons were present to address the Council at the public forum.
APPROVAL OF AGENDA:
MOTION BY PETERSEN, SECOND BY BLOMBERG, TO APPROVE THE AGENDA AS SUBMITTED.
VOTE: Ayes by Haugen, Blomberg, Petersen and LeUair, the motion carried.
APPROVAL OF MARCH 3, 2003 REGULAR MEETING MINUTES
MOTION BY LEMAIR, SECOND BY PETERSEN, TO APROVE THE MARCH 3, 2003 REGULAR MEETING MINUTES AS
SUBMITTED.
VOTE: Ayes by Haugen, Blomberg, Petersen and LeMair, 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 4th Quarter Budget Report.
(F) Consider Approval of Resolution 03-33 Approving a Joint Powers Agreement with the State of Minnesota Department
of Public Safety and the Prior Lake Police Department.
(G) Consider Approval of Resolution 03-34 Approving the Common Interest Community Number 1097 (Meadowview
Townhomes) Original Declaration and First through Twelfth Supplemental CIC Plats.
(H) Consider Approval of Resolution 03-35 Approving the Final Plat and Development Contract for Deerfield 11th Addition.
(I) Consider Approval of a Resolution 03-36 Amending Resolution 03-11 Authorizing Expenditure from the 2003
Contingency Account for Repair of the Aerial Ladder Truck.
(J) Consider Approval of a Resolution Requesting a Variance from Municipal State Aid Standards for the TH13 Frontage
Road Connecting Commerce Avenue to Boudins Street.
Bo¥1es: Reviewed the Consent Agenda items.
Haugen: Requested removal of Item (J).
www.cityofpriorlake.com
Phone 952.447.4230 / Fax952.447.4245
City Council Meeting Minutes
March 17, 2003
MOTION BY PETERSEN, SECOND BY BLOMBERG, TO APPROVE CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS (A) - (I) AS
SUBMITTED.
VOTE: Ayes by Haugen, Blomber§, Petersen, and LeMair, the motion carried.
ITEMS REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA:
Consider Approval of a Resolution Requesting a Variance from Muncipal State Aid Standards for the TH13
Frontage Road Connecting Commerce Avenue to Boudins Street.
Osmundson: Reviewed the agenda item in connection with the staff report.
Hau,qen: Asked if deviating from the State Aid Standards significantly saves taxpayer dollars.
Osmundson: Explained that by tightening the corners, less land is required for right-of-way, which is particularly important
given the topography in the area. The staff estimates the savings at $1.1 million. Any time the cost for land acquisition can
be minimized, the cost of the project is less.
Petersen: Commented that the proposal makes sense.
Blomber.q: Agreed and supported the motion.
MOTION BY PETERSEN, SECOND BY LEMAIR, TO APPROVE RESOLUTION 03-37 REQUESTING A VARIANCE FROM
MUNICIPAL STATE AID STANDARDS FOR THE TH13 FRONTAGE ROAD CONNECTING COMMERCE AVENUE TO
BOUDINS STREET.
VOTE: Ayes by Haugen, Blomberg, Petersen and LeMair, the motion carried.
PUBLIC HEARINGS:
Public Hearing to Discuss Future Operation of the Dance Program.
Bo¥1es: Reviewed the agenda item in connection with the staff report.
Esser: Thanked the participants of the dance program. In response to earlier questions by the Council, explained that the
large increase in expenditures was due to a comparison of the budgeted amount to the actual amount. The real increase
from actual costs in 1999 to those in 2000 was approximately $100,000 which can be attributed to the cost of more students
who require additional teachers, and an expansion of the competition programs offered. Further noted that the program
probably has lost money because the City has added staff and maintained tuition costs. Added that 69% of students
participating in the program are residents. Non-residents do pay a $5 increase over the registration fee if they are outside
City limits and therefore do not pay City property taxes. Also discussed additional programming that could be offered if the
Dance program is privatized, as well as several ways that the dance studio space could be used including tumbling
programs, tot programming, martial arts, teen programming, aerobics, yoga, and senior programming. Discussed re-
allocation of staff time to programming and facilities management.
LeMair: Asked how our dance tuition costs compare to private programs.
Esser: Explained that the current tuition is currently slightly below the market, and the costume costs and recitals ticket
prices are significantly below private costs.
2
City Council Meeting Minutes
March 17, 2003
Mayor Haugen declared the Public Hearing open.
Mike Feriancek (Chairman, Parks Advisory Commission): Highlighted the issues discussed by the Parks Advisory
Committee including City's and State's financial position, the number of students anticipated in the future, the impact of
losing students and instructors, staff support with expansion and/or privatization, and revenue opportunities. The PAC
recommended an RFP process for privatizing the program, but retaining a portion of the studio space for other
programming if possible, and deferral of the hiring of a Recreation Coordinator.
Scott Siniem (15372 Wakoola Circle, Savage): Thanked the City for its initial forethought in establishing the dance
program. Supported the privatization of the program given the current circumstances.
Paul Viereck: Discussed his family's participation in the dance program. Believed the current facilities are too small for the
growing program, the program takes up too much staff time, that privatizing the program opens up participation for more
students, and that further partnerships and relationships will be developed. Supported privatization of the program. Believed
this is a win-win situation for all.
Carol Graham: Believed the program has outgrown its space and privatizing the program will allow the students to get the
most for their money. Stated that if the City can't provide 100% dedication to the program, it is time to move forward.
Supported privatizing the program.
Jeff Musolf: Discussed the participation of his family in the dance program. Believed the program cannot continue to
address the community's needs without privatization.
Tiffany Boozier (dance instructor): Believed that there is a strong bond between this community and its program.
Compared the higher caliber of the City program and facilities to other community programs. Believed privatizing the
program would allow students to be placed more effectively, and classes customized. Believed this program already
operates at a higher caliber than many private programs. Believed that the transition could be very smooth. Supported
privatization.
Kevin Si.qurdson: Shared his views as a resident, parent and student. Complimented the City that it is highly encouraging
that the City can begin a program, and then develop it to a point that it can become a private business. Supported the
comments already made. Supported privatization.
Kris Plissken: (Dance Committee): Believed privatizing the studio is important to address the community's needs.
Concerned about the escalating costs, but fully supported Dawn and privatization.
Jeff Grubb: Commented on his participation in the dance program. Thanked the Council for considering these issues and
asking for public input. Supported privatization of the program.
MOTION BY PETERSEN, SECOND BY BLOMBERG TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.
VOTE: Ayes by Haugen, Blomberg, Petersen and LeMair, the motion carried.
LeMair: Commented that he was surprised not to hear comments from the flip side of the coin. Believed that from a fiscal
standpoint and the opportunity for growth, privatization is important. Believed that the City's efforts should be directed to
those programs that cannot be provided privately. Would like to see the City provide some fee assistance in order to
provide for the concerns of those who have previously needed assistance.
Petersen: Agreed that some fee assistance should be provided, but that maybe it should be done privately. Supported
privatization.
City Council Meeting Minutes
March 17, 2003
Blomber.q: Thanked each of the residents who participated in the public hearing process, as well as the dance program.
Understood that the public comments are saying that from a fiscal perspective and a timing perspective, privatization seems
appropriate. Agreed with Councilmember LeUair's suggestion to provide some type of fee assistance. Is excited by the
additional programs that the City could offer. Supported privatization.
Haugen: Thanked everyone who participated. Believe timing is important and that the City government has been
responsive to many of the concerns. Believed this decision is about impacts on people, and that the program needs to
remain in the Prior Lake Library. He would only support privatization if lease of the studio space was included in the RFP.
Disagreed with providing fee assistance to a private program, but that a fee assistance resource should be provided by the
private party.
MOTION BY PETERSEN, SECOND BY BLOMBERG TO DIRECT STAFF TO PREPARE A REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL
FOR PRIVATIZING THE DANCE PROGRAM.
Haugen: Asked if the item would come back to the Council.
Boyles: Advised that staff would prepare the Request for Proposals as soon as possible and the item would come back to
the Council for approval. The target would be the first or second meeting in April.
VOTE: Ayes by Haugen, Blomberg, Petersen, and LeMair, the motion carried.
PRESENTATIONS
Safe & Sober Award Presentation to Prior Lake Police Department
O'Rourke: Reviewed the item in connection with the staff report.
Susie Palmer (Office of Traffic Safety): Discussed the importance of the Safe & Sober program, and Prior Lake's efforts.
Bob O'Brien: Discussed the statistics related to seat belt use and serious injuries or fatalities.
Boyles: Asked if the numbers have any correlation with the introduction of air bags.
Palmer: Commented that airbags alone are evaluated to safe a life 1 out of 10 times. Seat belts alone are about 50%
effective. Air bags are a supplementary restraint system, and increase the probability to about 55%.
Petersen: Given the expense of the air bag, a 5% increase doesn't seem like a very good correlation.
O'Brien: Commented that even though 5% is a Iow number, it equates to a large number of people impacted.
Hau.qen: Asked how Prior Lake compares state-wide and nation-wide.
Palmer: Explained that at 80% seat belt usage, Minnesota has the highest rate of seat belt use in the nation of those who
have a secondary seat belt law.
O'Rourke: Added that Prior Lake has an approximately 76% rate of seat belt use, and that it is likely that the figure will not
increase until not wearing a seat belt is a primary law.
City Council Meeting Minutes
March 17, 2003
Hau,qen: Also noted that the Safe & Sober program is administrated in cooperation with the City of Savage which is another
example of our partnering efforts that ultimately benefit the taxpayer.
OLD BUSINESS:
Consider Approval of a Resolution Authorizing Negotiated Sale of $~1,975,000 General Obligation Improvement
Bonds of 2003.
Mattson: Reviewed the agenda in connection with the staff report.
Hau,qen: Asked if the bonds are sold in anticipation of the approval of the 2003 Improvement project, what happens if the
project does not move forward.
Mattson: Explained that the options would be to set the money aside for improvement projects over the next three years. If
the money is not spent, it is put into the bond fund and can only be used to service the bonds.
LeMair: Asked if the money can be used to pay off other bonds.
Mattson: No. The risk is investing the money at a lower rate than the investment coupon on the bond. The money cannot
be used to make money.
Petersen: Believed the competitiveness of the project may offset any increase in the cost of bituminous.
Haugen: Asked if the amount of this sale is similar to other bond sales.
Mattson: Advised that this is a bit higher than normal, but the interest rate is to our advantage at this point.
MOTION BY PETERSEN, SECOND BY LEMAIR, TO APPROVE RESOLUTION 03-38 AUTHORIZING THE NEGOTIATED
SALE OF $1,975,000 GENERAL OBLIGATION IMPROVEMENT BONDS OF 2003.
VOTE: Ayes by Haugen, Blomberg, Petersen and LeMair, the motion carried.
Consider Approval of Report Regarding the Position of the Planning Commission and Lake Advisory Committee
Regarding the 75 Foot Setback from the Ordinary High Water Level
Bo¥1es: Reviewed the agenda item in connection with the staff report.
Petersen: Commented that given the recommendations, he supported leaving the regulation as is.
Blomber.q: Supported the existing 75 foot setback.
LeMair: Appreciated the review and comment of the Planning Commission and Lake Advisory Committee. Commented that
even though the LAC members had each requested a variance at some point, no one supported a lesser setback, and the
rationale seemed to be primarily aesthetics. Supported retaining the 75 foot setback.
NO FORMAL ACTION WAS REQUIRED.
NEW BUSINESS
Consider Approval of a Resolution Approving a Concept Plan for Jeffers Pond.
5
City Council Meeting Minutes
March 17, 2003
Kansier: Reviewed the agenda item in connection with the staff report. Posed several questions, including but not limited to
issues relating to using private park for public use, use of the 12+ acres if a school site is not purchased, benefit to City of
PUD.
LeMair: Mostly concerned with the same questions asked by staff. Concerned with having a private park versus a public
park.
Gary Tuschie (architect): Discussed the progress of the project to date.
Lee Kopee (engineer): Reviewed the concept plan, and the effort to make the 2020 Vision a reality through the donation of
land for use as a fire station, improving water quality, providing portion of regional trail, including neighborhood parks and a
nature center, and providing property for a school site and transit station. Further reviewed the access points to the
development, and the design criteria. Believed the preliminary plat and preliminary PUD plans will be submitted next week.
Paul Ober.q (attomey and executor for Bob Jeffers Estate): Discussed the estate and the vision of Bob Jeffers in connection
with the development. Advised that the Jeffers Foundation has been created to administer any land proceeds for charitable
purposes of the estate. Noted that the concept is that Jeffers Pond be maintained as a nature park. Further advised that if
the land is maintained but the development is required to pay the fee in lieu, there is no money left to complete and operate
the park or build the trail system. Believed the most important public purpose of the park and the project is the trail system.
Noted that when the school site is developed, there will be recreational land available in connection with that site. Further
noted that an interpretive center to be constructed. Believed the estate has done more than its obligation to meet the
wishes of the 2020 Vision. Advised that early one he committed the land for a fire station regardless of whether the land
was to be used jointly for any other purpose. This left the nature center to be placed on the south side of the creek to be
credited as part of the park contribution. If the City is then able to use the property as nature center or recreational field, that
is agreeable to the estate. Further discussed his idea that the area surrounding the pond would be park and that park area
would be dedicated to the City as park contribution. After reviewing the potential uses for the nature park area, his
preference would be that the land be held by the Jeffers Foundation with restrictive covenants that would dedicate to public
use as a nature park in perpetuity and not counted as part of the park dedication. If the City is prepared to improve and
operate the area as a nature park, it could be leased to the City for $1 per year. The same offer could be extended to Scott
County or Three Rivers Park District. With regard to the questions raised in the staff report, indicated that the park would
not be private due to the restrictive covenant in perpetuity for public nature park; did not believe there would be any costs
for operation and maintenance of the park area initially, but that ideally wood chip trails and plantings would be added; the
responsibility for building the transit center would be Peter Andrea Company with public funding; building the nature center
would not fall to the estate; if the school site was not purchased by the District, Wensmann homes would reallocate the
units and use it for residential de~/elopment. It seems that by moving the Fire Station adjacent to the school site, there is
adequate land to address the school's needs. Discussed the location of the proposed park land on the north side of the
development. The trails system is proposed to be built by the developer using the cash portion of the park contribution.
Believed this was his best proposal at this point.
LeMair: Asked if the proposal was that the park be leased from the Jeffers Foundation.
Ober.q: No. As the process started, the proposal was that the nature center area be dedicated as park. However, that is not
acceptable because the Jeffers Foundation would lose all control over the area. That bore the idea of leasing the property
under restrictive covenants.
LeMair: Asked why maintaining control was important.
Oberg: Believe that was the only way to assure that the nature center remain over time, and wouldn't be developed into ball
fields or otherwise developed for recreational purposes.
6
City Council Meeting Minutes
March 17, 2003
LeMair: Advised that the area could be conveyed for the use as nature preserve in perpetuity, or under a contract. Unclear
of the benefit of the City providing on-going maintenance to a private park. Asked what happens if the Jeffers Foundation
decides not to lease the property at some point.
Ober,q: Believed that if the land is part of park contribution, the estate loses control without some type of conservation
easement. Intended to satisfy the park contribution without including that land. Advised that leasing the property to the City
for $1 was a matter of contract. As long as the City would operate and maintain the property as nature park, it would be
used for the benefit of the public.
Pace: Commented that to make the distinction again, every developer has a park dedication requirement'that must be met
under the City ordinances. If the estate dedicated the nature area to the City for park purposes, he would lose control over
it. To the extent that the estates objective is to assure that the parcel continue to be used for nature preserve in perpetuity,
the Jeffers estate would not need to retain control or lease it to the City. It would just have a restrictive covenant on the
deed with the City that it could not be used for any other purpose. The question becomes whether the park is active or
passive, and to what extent the City is interested in improving, operating, and maintaining it.
Ober.q: The point is that if the City fails to step up to the plate and maintain a nature preserve, and Three Rivers fails to do
it, he would like to maintain the control to do so. Hopes that he does not have that obligation in perpetuity because there
are other things Bob Jeffers wanted the money used for. He believes he can accomplish his objectives and the City's
objectives by not putting the land into the park contribution. The money used to build the trail portion would be used as park
dedication fee for the non-land requirement.
Pace: Clarified that the park dedication can be taken in land and/or cash or both. That is a decision the Council determines.
Oberg: Agreed with the City Attorney. Commented that he is looking for a way to accomplish the nature trail. If the estate
completes the trail system, it should be credited against the park dedication. If there is a better solution, he is open to it. The
current proposal is targeted at 75% land, 25% cash without the nature area, which he believes satisfies the park dedication.
Petersen: Asked about construction of trail system.
Ober.q: Advised there are two parts to the trail system - the regional trail system and the internal park trail system. The
regional trail portion, if open year-round, would need to be constructed of bituminous. The internal trail could be pea rock or
wood chips. The idea is for the land to remain a preserve. The idea is to surround the water with 60 feet of trail and
vegetative setback which would assure that nothing is done to further disrupt that land by adjoining property owners.
Pace: Clarified that it would be installed onto that part of the park land that is not part of the park dedication requirement.
Petersen: Commented that he has enjoyed walking the area. Asked about construction of the waterfall.
Ober.q: Advised that there would be several waterfalls and he has an informal agreement with the Watershed District to
cooperate in the cost of the project.
Pace: Advised that part of the purpose of a concept plan is to get Council reaction to the proposals. Clarified that the City
Council typically decides for itself where the location of the park land would be and how much if any would be met with cash
and how those funds might be used. Further noted that any thoughts by the Council are for discussion only and should not
be relied upon to satisfy the preliminary plat or PUD requirements.
City Council Meeting Minutes
March 17, 2003
Ober.q: Commented that he is prepared to move forward with this proposal, but is open to suggestions on the part of the
City. Looking for a practical solution that will satisfy the Jeffers estate and improve the City.
Petersen: Agreed with the concept of maintaining the nature area as a preserve. Believed it is a matter of how we get from
here to there, and satisfy the requirements and costs.
Blomberfl: Believed the vision for the project is valuable. Asked who would build the nature center, and how the fire station
land would be donated. Asked for clarification as to why it wouldn't work to dedicate the nature preserve for park dedication
with some sort of covenant as to the parameters of its management.
Ober.q: Advised he would donate the land for the nature center as part of the park dedication. The development would be
up to the City at its cost and its determination of use. Believed that when the school is built, it will include ball fields.
Hopefully, the land dedicated can be used for the nature center. He will not donate the land for the Fire Station without
somehow an equal credit for park dedication. Also noted that dedication of the nature area will far exceed the park
dedication requirement and he does not want to lose control over the management of the park. If there is a better way to do
it for the benefit of the City and the estate, he is open to it.
Pace: Clarified that land dedicate~l under the park dedication ordinance can be used only for park purposes. Land donated
over and above the park dedication requirement can be used for any public use deemed appropriate by the Council.
Hau.qen: Shared several comments noting how exciting the project is and the vision for what this project can bring to the
community. However, is frustrated with the details and the number of points outstanding because nothing is getting
resolved. Reviewed the components to the project including the affordable housing development, the transit station, the
regional trail, the internal trail to be used in a natural setting, and the nature center to be used for park land dedication.
Noted that the natural area needs to be finalized because both the County and Three Rivers have already advised that they
will not maintain it. Disagreed with Mr. Oberg on the issue of the Fire Station because in previous discussions there was no
indication that the land for the fire station would be considered part of the park dedication, and would be donated
regardless. Asked with respect to the school property if some of the playfields could be used as park dedication and thereby
lessening the school distdct expense.
Deanovic: Advised that the donation of the fire station site was considered when it was connected with the nature center.
Oberg: Advised that the school district is controlled by the state as to the size of the site. The lesser acreage previously
discussed for the school site was partly bad land with respect to topography.
Hau.qen: Suggested that the staff and Mr. Oberg meet after the DRC and Planning Commission review the concept plan
and begin to resolve some of the issues one at a time.
Ober,q: Commented that the input received from the Planning staff and the Council to this point has been remarkable,
especially with respect to the re-classification of the lake and the re-zoning.
Deanovic: Added that he believed the big issue is to build the infrastructure, get the park dedication and reserve the nature
park are to be developed or not at a later date. Believed that they have tried very hard to come to the City with solutions and
the issue seems to be the nature park.
Pace: Asked the process for a phased planned unit development.
Kansier: Explained that the development can be phased, but the project needs to be laid out at preliminary plat.
City Council Meeting Minutes
March 17, 2003
Haugen: Summarized that the direction is that the parties continue to meet with the DRC to begin checking off the issues
that can be resolved.
NO ACTION TAKEN TO APPROVE CONCEPT PLAN.
The Council took a brief recess.
Consider Approval of a Resolution Denying an Amendment to the Comprehensive Plan for 4.25 Acres of the
Deerfield Area and Consider Approval of a Resolution Amending the Comprehensive Plan for Approximately 20
Acres of the Deerfield Industrial Area Located in Section 12, Township 114, Range 22 (Case File #03-11).
Kansier: Reviewed the agenda item in connection with the staff report.
Boyles: Asked what the acreage is for the remaining business park.
Kansier: Approximately 20 acres.
LeMair: Asked who will incur the cost for the extension of Adelman to CR87, and if all the area had previously been
considered. Also asked if all the areas have been included in the previous amendment requests.
Kansier: Advised that the issue has not yet been worked out with respect to the extension of the road. A number of years
ago the City Council had agreed to pay approximately half of the costs. The issue seems to be negotiable. With respect to
past requests, the easterly half of the property has remained commercial business / office park.
Hau.qen: Asked for examples of what types of business are permitted in the industrial district versus C-4 or C-5 districts.
Kansier: Explained that general business uses in the C-5 district, which is the designation for the current business park,
include uses such as office with warehousing or light manufacturing attached, limited, if any, outdoor storage is permitted,
retail is limited. Industrial uses allow more intense industrial uses with outdoor storage such as contractor yards, auto body
repair, heavy manufacturing, and so on. General business uses include a more retail or customer based use, such as malls
or commercial uses.
LeMair: Commented that the area in general overall appears to suit apartment housing. Searching for the rationale, other
than the fact that it was changed before, for not permitting this use.
Petersen: Supported the Planning Commission decision.
Blomber.q: Agreed with Councilmember LeMair that some segment of affordable housing seems appropriate if we expect
to have homes for the people who will work within the uses designated for the business park. Supported the change to R-4.
Haugen: Commented that the recent Scott County Housing Study indicated that Prior Lake now will have an abundance of
apartment housing given the recent addition of those types of units. Asked developer John Uessenbrink if the proposal is
for apartments or condominiums because there was some confusion since the Planning Commission.
Messenbrink: Explained that apartments or condominiums are a same R-4 designation as far as the building. The
difference between apartments or condominiums is in design, and owner-occupancy of the building. Has no preference for
one or the other. The idea is that when the industrial park becomes successful, the housing unit will be needed.
City Council Meeting Minutes
March 17, 2003
Blomber.q: Commented that rental housing isn't doing so gmat at this point. Based upon your projections, can the R-4
designation be justified.
Messenbrink: Believed that rental housing is not doing well at this point because of Iow interest rotes. The idea is to sell a
complete plan, from Industrial to lower end housing. R-4 allows the developer to build a cheaper structure. The concept
itself hasn't changed from the beginning.
Kansier: Explained that the high-density residential designation paves the way for the zoning. The zoning allows a density
and types of units, including townhouses, multi-family buildings, and condominiums. Condominiums am not a use
recognized in the zoning ordinance since the difference is method of ownership. The City cannot regulate apartment vs.
condominium. The question is density and use.
Hau,qen: Concerned that the discussion turned to condominiums rather than apartments at the Planning Commission
because they am looked upon mom favorable. His pemeption is that the term was used to get something done. The
question is what is the best use for the property. Given the additional apartment units that have been added within the City,
did not believe additional housing units of this type were necessary. The Maxfield Study, as Councilmember Blomberg
alluded to, did not indicate a need for additional apartments. Suggested tabling the residential m-classification item for
additional information. Asked for the number of multi-family units approved in the past two years, mfemnce to the data from
the Maxfield Study with respect to rental housing, and clarification of whether the proposed units will be owner-occupied or
mntal.
Kansier: Advised that the 60-day timeline does not expire until June.
MOTION BY LEMAIR, SECOND BY PETERSEN, TO DEFER ACTION ON THE AGENDA ITEM UNTIL APRIL 7, 2003
PENDING ADDITIONAL INFORMATION BY STAFF.
VOTE: Ayes by Haugen, Blomberg, Petersen and LeMair, the motion carried.
LeMair: Supported the portion amending the Comp Plan designation for the industrial park in order to attract mom
business.
Petersen: Agreed.
Blomberg: Commented that she agreed with the placement of the industrial ama away from residential housing, and
supported the proposal.
MOTION BY PETERSEN, SECOND BY LEMAIR TO APPROVE RESOLUTION 03-39 AMENDING THE
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN FOR APPROXIMATELY 20 ACRES OF THE DEERFIELD INDUSTRIAL AREA LOCATED IN
SECTION 12, TOWNSHIP 114, RANGE 22 (Case File #03-11).
VOTE: Ayes by Haugen, Blomberg, Petersen and LeMair, the motion carried.
Consider Approval of an Ordinance Approving a Zone Change Request for the Property Located at 16450 Anna
Trail (formerly the CH Carpentar Lumber Site).
Kansier: Reviewed the agenda item in connection with the staff report.
LeMair: Believed the change would make the property mom attractive to prospective businesses. Asked if the change is
limiting in any manner.
10
City Council Meeting Minutes
March 17, 2003
Kansier: Explained that the action actually opens up the applicable uses.
MOTION BY PETERSEN, SECOND BY BLOMBERG, TO APPROVE ORDINANCE 03-04 APPROVING A ZONE CHANGE
REQUEST FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 16450 ANNA TRAIL.
VOTE: Ayes by Haugen, Blomberg, Petersen and LeMair, the motion carried.
Consider Approval of Joint Powers Agreement between Scott Joint Prosecution and the Scott County Attorney's
Office.
O'Rourke: Reviewed the agenda item in connection with the staff report.
Bo¥1es: Asked if the current joint powers for prosecution still exists. Clarified that the process for distributing the revenue
stream continues unabated. Basically, this action will enhance the efficiencies of two attorneys representing the same
constituents by having one or the other present in court.
O'Rourke: Confirmed.
Pace: Asked staff to follow up with the Scott County Attorney's office whether the parties should be contracting rather than
~ntering into a joint powers. If no other cities object, she will not oppose further.
Boyles: Also discussed that insurance coverage is provided through the League in this instance, where in most cases
indemnity does not extend to joint powers groups. In this case, the League has advised that coverage is extended.
Petersen: Asked if the other cities are typically in agreement.
O'Rourke: Commented that if any of the other cities elected not to participate, the Scott Joint Powers entity could still exists
as a separate entity. Noted that he had some concerns that the attorneys would direct their best energy to the high-profile
County cases, and that smaller cities would suffer. However, Pat Ciliberto is the person who actually formulated the Scott
Joint Powers Association and will continue to oversee that entity.
MOTION BY LEMAIR, SECOND BY BLOMBERG, TO APPROVE RESOLUTION 03-40 AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR AND
CITY MANAGER TO ENTER INTO A JOINT POWERS AGREEMENT AS A PARTY TO SCOTT JOINT PROSECUTION
WITH THE SCOTT COUNTY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE.
VOTE: Ayes by Haugen, Blomberg, Petersen and LeMair, the motion carried.
Consider Approval of a Resolution Authorizing the Purchase of One Crack Joint Sealing Unit and Pavement Crack
Router Equipment through the State Cooperative Purchasing Program.
Eldred: Reviewed the agenda item in connection with the staff report, noting that the equipment was proposed to be
purchased in cooperation with the Shakopee Mdewakanton Sioux Community.
Petersen: Asked if both the items were included in the equipment matdx, and so we are saving approximately $35,000.
Eldred: Confirmed and advised that the equipment is something that we will be able to coordinate to utilize cooperatively.
LeMair: Believed this was what the Council is looking for and is partnership at its best.
11
City Council Meeting Minutes
March 17, 2003
Hau.qen: Echoed Councilmember LeMair's comments and complimented the good management.
MOTION BY PETERSEN, SECOND BY LEMAIR, APPROVING RESOLUTION 03-41 AUTHORIZING THE PURCHASE OF
ONE CRACK JOINT SEALING UNIT AND PAVEMENT CRACK ROUTER EQUIPMENT THROUGH THE STATE
COOPERATIVE PURCHASING PROGRAM.
VOTE: Ayes by Haugen, Blomberg, Petersen and LeMair, the motion carried.
Consider Approval of a Resolution Authorizing the Purchase of One 9-Foot, 3.06 Cubic Yard Slide-In Sander
through the State Cooperative Purchasing Program.
Eldred: Reviewed the agenda item in connection with the staff report.
MOTION BY BLOMBERG, SECOND BY LEMAIR, TO APPROVE RESOLUTION 03-42 AUTHORIZING PURCHASE OF
ONE 9-FOOT, 3.06 CUBIC YARD SLIDE-IN SANDER THROUGH THE STATE COOPERATIVE PURCHASING
PROGRAM.
VOTE: Ayes by Haugen, Blomberg, Petersen and LeMair, the motion carried.
Consider Approval of a Resolution Approving Acquisition of Parcels 3 and 4 from Wells Fargo for the Ring Road
and Authorizing the Mayor and City Manager to Execute All Documents to Effectuate the Purchase.
Bo¥1es: Reviewed the agenda item in connection with the staff report.
MOTION BY PETERSEN, SECOND BY BLOMBERG, TO APPROVE RESOLUTION 03-43 AUTHORIZING ACQUISITION
OF PARCELS 3 AND 4 FROM WELLS FARGO FOR THE RING ROAD AND AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR AND CITY
MANAGER TO EXECUTE ALL DOCUMENT TO EFFECTATE THE PURCHASE.
VOTE: Ayes by Haugen, Blomberg, Petersen and LeMair, the motion carried.
OTHER BUSINESS
LeMair: Congratulated Leroy Schommer on his re-election to the Township Board.
A motion to adjourn was made and seconded. The meeting adjo~.~
Frank Boyles, C~ty Manager Kelly rv~le~er, r~ucording
Secretary
12