Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout4C - Elimination Of Fees MEETING DATE: AGENDA #: PREPARED BY: AGENDA ITEM: DISCUSSION: ISSUES: CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT April 3, 2000 ~ ~~nk Boyles, City Manag~ CONSIDER APPROVAL OF ELIMINATION OF FEES. History: On July 6, 1998, the City Council established by motion a fee as a means to control access and pay the. City for opening and shutting the gate at Shady Beach Lane lake access. This agenda item proposes discontinuation of this fee. Current Circumstances: On July 6, 1998, the City Council established the Shady Beach Access permit fee of $15.00 for residents and $20.00 for non- residents. Last season, 32 permits were issued. The year before approximately 50 permits were purchased. Conclusion: The City Council should consider whether the access permit is effective. The access permit is not accomplishing its objective (Le. to reimburse the City for the costs of opening and closing the gates). The Council has discussed the possibility of keeping the gates but removing the locks and therefore the necessity for collecting the permit fee may be moot. I believe that discontinuation of this fee will eliminate an administrative process which is not accomplishing its objective, while concurrently sending a positive message to the Sportman's Club which may facilitate a more amicable relationship. ALTERNATIVES: (1) Motion and second as part of the Consent Agenda to discontinue the Shady Beach Access permit fee for residents and non-residents. (2) Defer action pending receipt of additional information. RECOMMENDED MOTION: Alternative (1). Motion and second as part of the Consent Agenda to discontinue the Shady Beach Access permit fee for residents and non-residents. 16200 Eagle Creek Ave. S.E., Prior Lake, Minnesota 55372-1714 / Ph. (612) 447-4230 / Fax (612) 447-4245 1:\COUNCIL\AGNRPTS\2000\0403_5C.DOC AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER - '- /' /// Upon a vote, ayes by Made edrowski, Petersen, enck, and Wuellnevthe motion carriY MOTION BY OWSKI SECOND SCHENCK TO . ~VE ORDINANCE 98-13 MODIFYING EXTENDING . ROPOSED MORAT~~OR 180 DAYS. / //. te, ayes by Mader, K7dfu'wski, Petersen, S;J;1efi~, and Wuellner, tgein~tion carried. / __~___....-,".-.,.-G---._~- . "~--"'~'.''''''-7''-'''''.-'----~''-''''''"-~'--~'''--''-~ C. Consider Approvtli ~f Report on Shady B;~ch Access. // . Boyles introduced the item. Staff believes these are good recommendations and after some study has made some amendments as follows: * Access open 6:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. daily year around *Access controlled with a manual gate December IS-February 28 by closing gate between approximately 10:00 p.m. and 6:00 a.m. *Gates open March I-December 14. * All access users have visible permit, maximum of 500 permits, $15 each. *New sign at access. Questions from Councilmembers: Wuellner: Reason for access opening times? Boyles: Winter ice fishing hours are most disruptive. Wuellner: Did the Task Force agreed to that change? Woodson: They received a copy of that report. Bill O'Rourke, Chief of Police, who is on that Task Force, thought the committee would be amenable. Mader: Was Schenck implying No Parking on those other streets or saying No Parking With Trailers? Schenck: One side No Parking altogether, one side No Parking With Trailers. Mader: Wouldn't it be realistic to assume that the access being open shouldn't attract vehicles without trailers? Boyles: The City Engineer indicates that on both sides of the street near the access there is No Parking Anytime. Woodson: This report only addresses the location near the access. It does not address the side streets. Boyles: Staff is looking at other locations within 2500 feet of accesses to determine whether the No Parking or No Parking With Trailers signs were installed. Kedrowski: The recommendation came down from December 15 to February 28. Yet in some years people can be driving on the lake earlier than December 15th or actually later than February 28th. Where is this date coming from? Boyles: February 28th is the date which the fish houses must be off the ice. Tom Kearney, Lake Advisory Committee Chair: These times were given to the Task Force by the two gentlemen who live in the neighborhood. Kedrowski: Wouldn't it be prudent for a petition to be circulated through the area regarding No Parking? Boyles: In the past we have relied primarily upon petitions to establish No Parking areas 76REVK2.DOC 5 . Mader: Are permits issued for the operator or vehicle? Boyles: It was intended to be in the name of the person. Petersen: Can a club come in and buy 300 of these or does the individual have to come in? Mader: It has to be in the name of the individual, so they are going to have to come in. Comments from Councilmembers: Mader: · Sportsmen's Club indicated that if the City Council were to adopt, in general , the recommendations of the Task Force, they would be comfortable with that. · The 2,500 feet only applies to trailers and not just parking in general. It makes sense to see the same policy used here as at other accesses. · The third item in the recommendations is redundant and he would suggest that it be eliminated. · With 500 permits available, they should do it on a first come first serve basis. . Recommends the City use one permit fee at the present time. Wuellner: · Prime example of various interested parties coming up with a joint solution. Schenck: · Did not want to transfer the problem from Shady Beach Trail on to Bayview, Hidden View or Orchard or the other street. Specify 2,500 feet from the access point and apply it universally. · Take committee recommendations for parking along Shady Beach and make sure it is applied appropriately. . Signage is lacking on those access points as well as the enforcement. Kedrowski: · Would disagree with parking restrictions because it is impacting the neighbors and restricting their parking within their neighborhood. · A higher non-resident fee would be consistent with our current Parks and Recreation Policy; otherwise, supports the process as recommended by staff and would like to see this again in a year. Petersen : · Would recommend alternative number one, Approve the Shady Beach Access Task Force Recommendations as Amended by Staff. MOTION BY KEDROWSKI SECOND BY PETERSEN TO ADOPT THE STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS FOR THE SHADY BEACH ACCESS. · Kedrowski said he did reference the non resident fee and he wanted it added to the motion unless there is an objection. MOTION BY KEDROWSKI SECOND BY PETERSEN TO AMEND THE MOTION TO INCLUDE DIFFERENT FEES FOR RESIDENTS AND NON RESIDENTS FOR PERMITS FOR THE ACCESS. Comments from the.Public: Bruce Erickson 16313 Northwood Road, member of the Sportsmen's Club, concern is Sportsmen's Club has put in the effort to maintain the access, so the Sportsmen's Club membership card should 76REVK2.DOC 6 be sufficient to be a permit to use that access. The Club has been paying taxes on the property for a number of years. If they are paying taxes, why get taxed again to use their own access? Kedrowski said it was his understanding that through title work the City is the actual owner. Boyles said the parcel identified as the Sportsmen's Access property is not the Shady Beach Access. There has been legal research done that the easement isn't valid. If the Sportsmen's Club is paying taxes they need to have the County abate them. Upon a vote, ayes by Kedrowski, Petersen, Schenck, and Wuellner, nay by Mader, the motion carried. Mader said the motion at the present time is to accept the recommendations of the staff but deleting the third bullet in the recommendation because it is redundant, and the fourth bullet would require that the permits be issued each year on a first come first serve basis and number three that the non resident fee would be $20 ($5 more than resident fee )and number four that prior to implementation that the DNR and the Sheriffs department would be sent courtesy notification for their response. Upon a vote, ayes by Mader, Kedrowski, Petersen, Schenck, and Wuellner, the motion carried. '" consider~ppr lal of Resolution/98-84 Approving Unsafe Lake Conditions Public Notification R ocess. // ./ / MOTION B~KEDROWSKI S~eOND BY PETERSE~ TO APPROVE RESOLUTION 98-84 APPROVING THE UNSAFE LAKE CONDITIONS PUBLIC NOTIFICATION PROCESS. Boyles Z the purpose Lto review an organiz;d means of notifying various agencies and memi?e'rs of the genera~1(ublic under a couple of different circumstances. One had to do with the l~~ actually being cl6sed. The second W9uld be where the City of Prior Lake sees a set of "circumstances thatjtbelieves are inappro~ri~te to keep its accesses open. I Questions froni Councilmembers: / I Kedrows~How can the City make the determination of an unsafe lake, and how can the City regulate (udividual behavior on the lake? He asked Kearney to comment. - . / Tom Kearney, Chair of the Lake Advisory Committee: "Is there a Joint Powers Agreement with the / DNR that that access serves as the DNR's access when they close down the ramp? Boyles: Doesn't kno~ but he did know that during, this last season that gate was shut. Kearney: The City should check to make sure they have the jurisdiction to close that access. The DNR ~asical~y s;!es the lake is ne~er safe and they don't ever w~t to say an~hin~ more than that. He saId he dId n t know the legal Issues but as far as the governmg body whICh IS the DNR they will always stat that the lake is never safe. ' . / ' D. f ..' , j Boyles: un~' the new park ordinance, he has the authority to clo~e' certain parks. He does not know if they can . antify it~ but he could re}y on the judgment of the~6lice Chief and Fire Chief and their staffs to i e such action. ( / . Kedro!:.ki: Asked the City Attoqiy to comment on the iS~U:Of determination. ' Pace:' Would prefer not to give,a definitive answer untiHhe had more opportunity to look at it. By ha~g the access open, the 9tY is inferring that it is safe. They need to talk tdsome professionals about how they would makjthe measurements; there would be different parts of the lake that she is 76REVK2.DOC 7 -