HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda & Minutes
EDA Workshop - 5:00 - 7:00 p.m.
FORUM: 7:00 P.M. - 7:30 P.M.
REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING AGENDA
Date: May 1, 2000
1 CALL TO ORDER and PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE:.......................... 7:30 p.m.
2 APPROVAL OF AGENDA:
3 CONSIDER APPROVAL OF APRIL 17, 2000 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.
B) Consider Approval of 1999 Code Enforcement Report.
C) Consider Approval of 1999 Variance Report.
5 ITEMS REMOVED FROM CONSENT AGENDA:
5 PRESENTATIONS:
A) Proclamation by Mayor Mader Declaring May 4 , 2000 as National Day 0 f Prayer i n
Prior Lake.
B) Status Report on U.S. Post Office Facility Project - Tom Aggen
C) Status Report on Downtown Redevelopment Plan - Mark Koegler
7 PUBLIC HEARINGS:
A) Public Hearing to Conduct Board of Review.
B) Informational Hearing to Consider Approval of Resolution DO-XX Approving 2001-2005
Capital Improvement Program.
8 OLD BUSINESS:
A) Consider Approval of Initiation of an Amendment to the Zoning 0 rdinance Allowing
Garages and Accessory Buildings in Front Yards.
B) Consider Approval of Resolution DO-XX Approving Plans and Specifications and
Authorizing Advertisement for Bids for Street Reconstruction for 2000 Improvement
Projects (City Projects #12-00 and #13-00).
9 NEW BUSINESS:
A) Consider Approval of Ordinance DO-XX Approving a 50-Day Extension of the
Moratorium on Antenna Towers.
B) Consider Approval of Report on Potential Revisions to Outdoor Sales Ordinance
Regarding Downtown Area.
C) Consider Approval of Report Regarding Natural Gas Franchising.
D) Consider Approval of Report Regulating "Jake Braking".
E) Consider Approval of Resolution DO-XX Authorizing Execution of a Three-Year Labor
Agreement Between the City of Prior Lake and LELS Representing Police Officers and
Detectives.
050100
T
10 OTHER BUSINESS/COUNCILMEMBER REPORTS:
11 ADJOURNMENT
050100
T-~~ .
yet
REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES
April 17, 2000
CALL TO ORDER AND PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: Mayor Mader called the meeting to order.
Present were Mayor Mader, Councilmembers Gundlach, Petersen, Schenck and Ericson, City
Manager Boyles, City Attorney Pace, Finance Director Teschner, Planning Director Rye, City Engineer
Osmundson, Park & Recreation Director Hokeness, Park Maintenance Supervisor Friedges, Public
Works Supervisor Hartman, Assistant City Manager Walsh, and Recording Secretary Meyer.
APPROVAL OF AGENDA:
MOTION BY SCHENCK, SECOND BY PETERSEN TO APPROVE THE AGENDA.
VOTE: Ayes by Mader, Gundlach, Petersen, Schenck and Ericson, the motion carried.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES FROM APRIL 3. 2000 REGULAR MEETING.
MADER: Advised that on the last page it should be noted that Council member Schenck left the meeting
ill and was unable to participate in the Executive Session.
MOTION BY PETERSEN, SECOND BY GUNDLACH TO APPROVE APRIL 3, 2000 REGULAR
MEETING MINUTES AS AMENDED. .
VOTE: Ayes by Mader, Gundlach, Petersen, Schenck and Ericson, the motion carried.
CONSENT A"fiENDA:
(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 Monthly and Quarterly Fire Call Reports.
(F) Consider Appro'Val of Recycling .Grant Agreement with Scott County & Schedule 2000 City
Clean-Up Day (Resolution 00-24).
(G) Consider Approval of 2000 1st Quarter Investment Report.
(H) Consider Approval of 2000 1st Quarter Budget Report.
(I) Consider Approval of Resolution 00-25 Denying the Vacation of the Right-of-Way for
Kneafsey's Street adjacent to Lots 5 and 6, Kneafsey's Cove, and Resolution 00-26 Approving
the Vacation of the DecJicated Waterfront Adjacent to Lots 4 Through 15, Kneafsey's Cove.
(J) Consider Approval of a Temporary 3.2 Non-Intoxicating Malt Liquor License for Prior Lake Jays
/ Mudcats Baseball Season.
(K) Consider Approval of City Council Bylaws.
(L) Consider Approval of Resolution 00-27 Approving the Southwest / West Central Joint Powers
Agreement fro Group Employee Benefits and Other Financial and Risk Management Services.
(M) Consider Approval of Lease Agreement between the City of Prior Lake and Dwane and Merlin
Arndt for the Rental of a Municipal Parking Lot.
16200 Eagle Creek Ave. S.E., Prior Lake, Minnesota 55372-1714 / Ph. (612) 447-4230 / Fax (612) 447-4245
AN EQU,I"L OPPORTL~ITY Ef\1PLOYER
T
City Council Meeting Minutes
DRAFT
April 17, 2000
ERICSON: Requested that Item (K) (Consider Approval of City Council Bylaws) be removed.
MOTION BY ERICSON, SECOND BY GUNDLACH TO APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS
(A) THROUGH (J) AND ITEMS (L) AND (M) AS SUBMITTED.
VOTE: Ayes by Mader, Gundlach, Petersen, Schenck and Ericson, the motion carried.
ITEMS REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA:
Consider Approval of City Council Bylaws
ERICSON: Briefly discussed whether the bylaws needed to address the term for the official bank, as well
as the revised censure provision.
The Council reached a consensus that the censure language was appropriate and allowed for both
commendation or reprimand, and that the appointment of the official bank was not restricted to an
annual term.
MOTION BY GUNDLACH, SECOND BY ERICSON TO APPROVE THE CITY COUNCIL BYLAWS AS.
SUBMITTED.
VOTE: Ayes by Mader, Gundlach, Petersen, Schenck and Ericson, the motion carried.
PRESENTATIONS:
Legislative Update - Representative Mark Buesgens
BUESGENS: Discussed the transit issue before the legislature and his support of mass transit within the
metro area. However, advised that his position is as a strong opponent for the current mass transit plan
particularly as it affects his district and outstate Minnesota. Believes the proposed transit plan is merely
an economic development tool and is very much fiscally irresponsible. Frustrated with the lack of vision
the bill has for developing suburbs, particularly in Scott County.
SCHENCK: Noted that it is clear that Scott County is not being served by mass transportation. Asked
where Scott County citizens should be directing their concerns for transit issues and light rail.
~
~
BUESGENS: Answered that there are a number of alternatives including keeping the pressure on at the
state level through correspondence and your elected officials.
MADER: Briefly described the City's few benefits in relation to its fiscal responsibility for participating in
the r.1iRR88il!1 \.'.II!~ Transit AuLl,vl ;V",xingjl)strict, and asked if the City can be removed from that
district and whether its relationship with the Metropolitan Council will be in jeopardy.
BUESGENS: Noted that there js legislative precedent for withdrawing from the MVT A taxing district.
Believes legislation will be considered in the next legislative session and so this is the best opportunity
for the City to explore and develop its direction. The issue of the City's relationship with the
Metropolitan Council is very much a judgment call for the Council to determine, but there is a concern
that the relationship that has evolved over time between local units of government, who have a duty to
there constituents, will conflict with the Metropolitan Council who has assumed some level of regulatory
authority even though the individual members do not stand for election nor do they have to respond to
2
City Council Meeting Minutes
DRAFT
April 17, 2000
constituents. Hoped that the Metropolitan Council would respect the autonomy of local government and
not be out to punish.
PUBLIC HEARINGS: NONE.
OLD BUSINESS
Consider Approval of Resolution 00-28 Appointing the Official City Bank.
BOYLES: Briefly reviewed the history of the agenda item and noted a percentage number for Prior Lake
State Bank that was reported in error, and advised that the number does not affect the calculations.
MOTION BY SCHENCK, SECOND BY TO APPROVE RESOLUTION DO-XX APPOINTING
PRIOR LAKE STATE BANK AS THE CITY'S OFFICIAL BANK FOR A TERM OF THREE YEARS.
THE MOTION FAILED DUE TO THE LACK OF A SECOND.
MADER: Discussed the interest earned and fees paid for the general fund account in 1999 and how,
those interest fees and expenses relate to the present proposal from Prior Lake State Bank. Noted that
the difference is approximately $22,000. Asked if the initial letter from Marquette Bank proposed a
significantly higher interest rate.
TESCHNER: Clarified that initially the proposal from Prior Lake State Bank was to remain unchanged
from what the City had experienced in the past. Following, a letter from Marquette Bank was received
requesting to be considered for appointment as the City's official bank. It was at that point the staff
recommended that the appointment be opened up to solicitation. The letter received from Marquette
was not a specifiC proposal, but rather a generic comparison of what could be available.
MADER: Commented that the three proposals offer both tangible comparisons, as well as subjective
comparisons based upon, for example, the number of wire transfers, stop check payments, etc. so it
would be difficult to make a direct comparison.
TESCHNER: Advised that a direct comparison can be made because the official solicitation of services
provided a volume in terms of how many accounts payable check, how many payroll checks, how
many deposits, how many wires, etc. so each bank could work from the same daily transactions to
come up with the fees that will be charged.
MADER: Added that if the charges are different, then the assumption itself finally determines what we
are assuming in terms of a cost saving.
TESCHNER: Explained that he does know the number of transactions are valid based on a historical
basis. In terms of the automatic payroll deposits, staff knows exactly how many individuals are
currently signed up and can use that volume. It's the same with accounts payable checks. I used all
that information in the bank solicitation so they would each use the same volume and when they
generated their fees, we would have a basis for comparison in terms of true cost.
MADER: Summarized that in reviewing the spreadsheets in terms of interest rate, the number of checks
processed and the number of deposits made, it appears that the Marquette Bank is preferable. There
is also some inconsistency in comparing between, for example, the costs of wire transfer fees in the
3
T
City Council Meeting Minutes
DRAFT
April 17, 2000
two reports being different, while the final total remains the same. The point being it becomes nebulous
as to how to come to a firm number.
TESCHNER: Advised that each of the numbers can be explained. The difference is that when Marquette
prepared the spreadsheet, they used a different number because I advised them that most of the wire
transfers would be domestic, rather than national, so they were able to reduce the fee. The final
number of $457 was based on the $10 per wire charge throughout. The fees are based on the
spreadsheet not the solicitation form. Initially, I had the same problem with the numbers and the
volume, which is why I then asked each of the banks for a supportive spreadsheet based on the
service fees applied, so I could come to a bottom line cost for both service fees and interest earnings.
The agenda report, in terms of final cost to the City is 100% based on the spreadsheets.
MADER: Summarized that if the City looked at interest rate alone, Marquette Bank is best. Prior Lake
State Bank is best on the costs of processing checks and deposits. The difference is the incidental
charges and is then more favorable to Prior Lake State Bank.
ERICSON: Asked for a clarification on the investment wire charges and how the comparison relates
between Prior Lake State Bank and Marquette Bank. Commented that the difference between the.
Marquette and Prior Lake State Bank proposals seems to be primarily that charge. Also asked in terms
of the interest the City would be getting, if it was still true that the longer the term, the higher the rate.
TESCHNER: Explained that because Marquette Bank does charge an investment transaction fee and
Prior Lake State Bank proposed to waive the fee, together with the waiver of the safety deposit fee, is
the difference between the proposals. Also explained that the shorter term of commercial paper has
almost doubled the number of investment transactions, so the fee becomes important. Until interest
rates stabilize, the short term rates will be to the City's advantage. Further explained that it used to be
true that the longer the term, the higher the rate. Now, there is an inverted yield curve happening, The
Prior Lake State Bank is based on 3D-day, while Marquette is based on 90-day.
GUNDLACH: Asked how it was that the proposals between the two banks came in so close on a
competition bid.
TESCHNER: Explained that this was a request for proposals and not a competitive bid, which is different
than sealed bids or quotes. Further advised that the General Fund checking account is at Prior Lake
State Bank, while the EDA checking account is at Marquette Bank. Both banks presently are giving
1.2% and .70% respectively, which are their standard corporate rates. There are three factors in
considering public funds - safety, liquidity, and yield.
GUNDLACH: Asked if it is safe to assume that Prior Lake State Bank came up with their proposal
because they knew of the proposal from Marquette Bank.
TESCHNER: Both US Bank and Prior Lake State Bank knew of each proposal because they were
interested in terms of how they competed with each other. US Bank was faxed the spreadsheets of the
others after the RFP proposals were received.
MOTION BY SCHENCK, SECOND BY ERICSON TO APPROVE RESOLUTION DO-XX APPOINTING
PRIOR LAKE STATE BANK AS THE CITY'S OFFICIAL BANK
4
City Council Meeting Minutes
DRAFT
April 17, 2000
MADER: Did not support the motion given that the interest rate is most favorable on the Marquette Bank
proposal, and it seems to be a matter of interpretation and is difficult to track the miscellaneous factors.
Believes that Marquette Bank deserves the opportunity to be the official bank given that they initiated
the action through a competitive environment, and if asked they would probably be willing to waived
some of the wire transfer and/or miscellaneous fees.
TESCHNER: Clarified that that even if the wire fee were factored out, the Marquette Bank rate is higher.
GUNDLACH: Agreed with the Mayor's assessment, and noted that if Marquette Sank hadn't initiated its
request, the City would be back at the Prior Lake State Bank rate of last year. Believes that some of
the fees had been negotiated with Prior Lake State Bank.
TESCHNER: Advised that all three institutions have been involved in City banking. There was never any
official proposal at the beginning of the year. Prior Lake State Sank had the general checking,
Marquette Bank the EDA checking, and investments were done through US Bank.
ERICSON: Asked for clarification as to what terms were discussed with each bank when the proposals
were reviewed.
TESCHNER: Explained that he had discussed the interest rates and volumes with Marquette, Prior Lake
State and US Bank. US Bank then asked to see how their final proposal compared to the others, and
were then faxed the spreadsheets. The original rates were explained to each because they were too
low. Each bank came back after that. The fee charges were never discussed with the exception of US
Bank on the safety deposit box because theirs was Downtown.
ERICSON: Based upon that clarification, withdrew his second, because he misunderstood the process.
Believes it is quite convenient that Prior Lake State Bank has come in ahead, and wanted to promote a
competitive environment.
TESCHNER: Explained that Marquette Bank had less room to negotiate service fees. The best way they
could compete was the interest rate, which were negotiated through the whole process. None of the
banks changed their initial proposals for fees with the exception of the domestic wire transfer fees,
because those fees are inherent in their banking structures.
Because the second was withdrawn, the motion on the floor failed
due to lack of a second.
MOTION BY GUNDLACH, SECOND BY PETERSEN TO APPROVE RESOLUTION 00-28
APPOINTING MARQUETTE BANK AS THE CITY'S OFFICIAL BANK FOR A THREE YEAR PERIOD
ENDING DECEMBER 31,2003.
VOTE: Ayes by Mader, Gundlach, Petersen and Ericson, Nay by Schenck, the motion carried.
Consider Approval of Report Regarding Park and Library Referendum Finances and
Improvement Projects.
BOYLES: Discussed the status of the Park and Library Referendum projects, including (1) additional
funds needed, (2) what funding is available, and (3) remaining obligations for completing the
5
T
City Council Meeting Minutes
DRAFT
April 17, 2000
Referendum projects. Also discussed the variables, the options available and the staff
recommendation.
ERICSON: Asked what the $450,000 estimate for completing Busse park is for.
HOKENESS: Explained that the money would be. used for construction of the restroom/concession
building, field lights and playground equipment.
BOYLES: Clarified that the recommendation is to complete the restroom/concession building, and not
the lights and playground equipment at this time.
MADER: Asked if the $1.88 million for Busse Park includes irrigation.
HOKENESS: Advised that the irrigation is included in the current contract, and that the cost for lights
would be $115,000 per field and the play equipment was approximately $30,000.
PETERSEN: Asked if there was an agreement with the neighbors that lights would not be included right
away. Suggested completing the restroom facility only at this time.
HOKENESS: Confirmed that the neighbors have been advised that field lights may not be needed for a
youth athletic complex.
GUNDLACH: Asked how the City makes interest money on obligation bonds that we are paying interest
on.
'A
TESCHNER: Explained that when the City sells the bonds, the City gets proceeds which are required by
statute to go into a construction fund, and the interest earnings on those construction dollars are
typically utilized for all construction activities, rather than bond redemption. The sole source fOr paying
oft the principal and interest on the bonds comes from the tax levy approved by the Council in
December each year. No interest income is transferred to the debt account. It has to stay in the capital
project fund. I/(). 'z...3 ~ ~ P;"'~ Or ~
MADER: Commented t the initial price tag was $7.8 million dolla..( and the final cost at this point is
approximately million dollars, or a 55% overrun on 'R~ferendum projects. The staff's
recommendation to buy property and not pursue completing the project would mean the City would
have spent the $7.8 million dollars from the bond, plus an additional $1.053 million in estimated interest
earned, $219,000 from other funds, $50,000 in grant money from the state, and would still need $1.7
million more. Does not support buying additional property. Discussed the increases in the Park and
Recreation budget and the additional financial impact for other projects needed by the City, including
the ring road and the redevelopment of Priordale Mall. Does not support going ahead with any
additional park land acquisitions at this time, and believes that priority should be given to the things the
City needs rather than want it wants.
~
ERICSON: Concurs with the Mayor's assessment. Concerned about the costs and suggested
completing the projects started.
BOYLES: Noted that a specific dollar amount was not set aside for the restroom/concession facility, but
the staff was directed to pursue the costs for completing the building.
6
City Council Meeting Minutes
DRAFT
April 17, 2000
SCHENCK: Asked if the remaining Referendum funds can then be directed to other projects.
PACE: Advised that Referendum funds can be redirected as long as the projects are park related.
GUNDLACH: Noted his concurrence with the opinions expressed by Mayor Mader and Councilmember
Ericson. Also concerned with the escalating Parks budget necessary for caring for additional parks.
BOYLES: Clarified that the Council consensus is to direct staff to come back with a final proposal for
the restroom/concession facility and playground equipment.
Consider Approval of Resolution 00-29 Authorizing the Preparation of Plans and Specifications
for Trails and Playground Equipment as Identified in the 1999 and 2000 Capital Improvement
Program.
BOYLES: Reviewed the agenda item in connection with the staff report.
MOTION BY PETERSEN, SECOND BY ERICSON TO APPROVE RESOLUTION 00-29
AUTHORIZING THE PREPARATION OF PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS FOR TRAILS AND
PLAYGROUND EQUIPMENT AS IDENTIFIED IN THE 1999 AND 2000 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT
PROGRAM.
MADER: Asked if the Resolution binds the City to funding the projects from the park capital fund, rather
than the Referendum funds.
BOYLES: Confirmed that based upon the remaining Referendum balances, the funding could also come
from the Referendum funds.
VOTE: Ayes by Mader, Gundlach, Petersen, Schenck, and Ericson, the motion carried.
Consider Approval of Resolution 00-30 Authorizing Expenditures for Miscellaneous Park
Capital improvement Projects and Park Capital Equipment as Identified in the 1999 and 2000
Capital Improvement Program.
BOYLES: Discussed the expenditures and improvements planned, and the request of staff. Clarified that
a funding source is not identified and may come from the park capital fund, or the Referendum money.
MADER: Suggested that staff make the decision as to whether funding comes from the Capital Park
Fund, or the Referendum Fund.
MOTION BY MADER, SECOND BY PETERSEN TO APPROVE RESOLUTION 00-30 AUTHORIZING
EXPENDITURE FOR MISCELLANEOUS PARK CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS AND PARK
CAPITAL EQUIPMENT AS IDENTIFIED IN THE 1999 AND 2000 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT
PROGRAM NOT TO EXCEED $75,000.
VOTE: Ayes by Mader, Gundlach, Petersen, Schenck, and Ericson, the motion carried.
7
,.
~
~
~
~
j
1
~
"1
~
>
~
!
v
.,.
s
\-\
City Council Meeting Minutes
DRAFT
April 17, 2000
NEW BUSINESS:
Consider Approval of Resolution 00-31 Approving the Preliminary Plat for Carlson's First
Addition.
.
BOYLES: Briefly reviewed the agenda item in connection with the staff report.
MOTION BY PETERSEN, SECOND BY GUNDLACH TO APPROVE RESOLUTION 00-31
APPROVING THE PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR CARLSON'S FIRST ADDITION.
VOTE: Ayes by Mader, Gundlach, Petersen, Schenck and Ericson, the motion carried.
Consider Approval of Resolution DO-XX Approving the Conditional Use Permit for a Multi-Family
Dwelling for Affordable Housing Solutions, Inc. on Property Located in the Southeast
Intersection of Tower Street and Toronto Avenue.
BOYLES: Provided a brief review of the proposed project and the conditions currently proposed for the
conditional use permit.
TOVAR: Summarized the project and the Planning Commission review process, including the tree
replacement requirements, increased screening and buffering, need for no parking signage, peak
traffic, existing runoff and proposed ponding, future connection to storm sewer with the development of
the ring road. Also noted that a petition was received from 75 persons objecting to the development,
and that there are several options the Council could consider for additional conditions.
MADER: Asked of the timeline for action.
TOVAR: Noted that the applicant has waived the 120-day deadline.
ERICSON: Asked if the property was previously zoned R-3, and what the density was prior to the R-4
zoning.
TOVAR: Explained that the 1975 zoning ordinance designated the property R-3 and that no R-4
designation existed at that time. The new zoning ordinance added the R-4 designation.
BYf: The maximum density for an R-3 designation under the old ordinance was 14 units per acre up to
18.8 units per acre under a PUD.
ERICSON: Discussed his concern for traffic issues, specifically the access to the property rather than
the volume. Also asked how elevations are calculated and for clarification as to the bonus provided for
underground parking with respect to setback. Also asked if the parking was adequate, and if the
ponding will be directed to the parking lot. Believes that the proposed runoff plan is not adequate, and
without adequately taking car.e of the surface water issues, there is additional water hazard for the
area. Suggested that some sort of tie in with the development of the ring road, or the Post Office site
be a condition of development of the property. Further believes that development of this property will
have an adverse impact to the residential property to the south unless all of these items are addressed.
Believes the full replacement of trees removed is necessary.
TOVAR: Clarified that under the current zoning ordinance, access for an R-4 designation is required to
e from a collector or arterial, or shall be otherwise directed to not create a significant impact on local
8
City Council Meeting Minutes
DRAFT
April 17, 2000
residential streets. Toronto is a two-lane urban street designed to carry a maximum of 8000-9000 cars
per day. Further explained that the height of a building is measured from a mean curve level along the
front lot line or from the finished grade level to the mean distance of the highest gable on a pitched or
hip roof. Advised that with respect to setbacks in order to not penalize the developer for installing
underground parking, nine feet is taken off of the height of the building and then the setback is
calculated as half the height of the building. Confirmed that the developer has proposed ponding in the
parking lot. Clarified that the developer will be replacing all of the trees required by the policy, though
they will be along the 170th Street rather than between the road and the building.
ERICSON: Noted that page 27, item W of the Comprehensive Plan specifically states that development
shall be constructed in a manner sensitive to the impact of the natural features and environmental
constraints including but not limited to surface water. Also discussed the number of police calls to the
area in 1999, and the public safety impact if the additional area is developed in the proposed manner.
Further advised that the literature with respect to apartments included in the packet is prepared by the
National Apartment Association and is not objective.
MADER: Also had concerns with the access to the property and management of traffic in the area and
pedestrian safety to the school bus stop, as well as the surface water issues associated with that.
intersection.
SCHENCK: Asked how close the property is to hooking into the storm sewer system, and if it is the
City's obligation to improve that intersection.
OSMUNDSON: Advised that the property is about 500-600 feet to the west from the storm sewer system,
and that intersection improvements are anticipated with the ring road project and/or the development of
the postal site.
SCHENCK: Asked if once the City resolves its obligation for the intersection improvements with respect
to drainage, should there be a CUP requirement that the property be connected to the storm sewer
system.
TOVAR: Noted that the developer has proposed to extend a pipe to the right-of-way.
SCHENCK: Asked for clarification of the correlation between the post office ponding and this proposed
project.
OSMUNDSON: Advised that in developing the post office site, it has been proposed that a nerp basin
improvement be added adjacent to this site which would take the drainage from the intersection to the
pond and eventually to the wetland in the middle of the post office site and then back across Tower to
the wetland on the south side. A nerp basin would improve water quality and slow the water down. With
the intersection improvements, the City would install storm sewer pipe to catch the water and bring it
underground into the pond.
TOVAR: Advised that the developer at this point has not be privy to these discussions, and is not aware
of the alternative the Council may wish to impose.
BOYLES: Asked if there was any further discussion of a sidewalk on Tower Street due to the fact that
the school does not send busses to the top of the hill.
9
T
City Council Meeting Minutes
DRAFT
April 17, 2000
TOVAR: There has been no discussion at the Planning Commission or DRC level, but could certainly be
considered.
MADER: Noted that it would be difficult to identify specific additions to the resolution at this time, and
suggested directing staff to address the concerns raised by the Council, including the sidewalk issue,
directing surface water under the road, and accesses to the property for management of traffic flow,
and bring back a revised resolution. Also realized 'that the City will have some responsibility for
resolving the problem, and will take some cooperation from the developer. At this point, the Council is
looking for the alternatives for fixing the intersection.
GUNDLACH: Added that if the ponding at the post office site it not possible, one way or another there.
needs to be some storm water management.
ERICSON: Asked Andy Whiting to confirm that he did not know Mr. Whiting prior to the project, that he
did not sign any petition with respect to the project, that he did not publicly state at any time whether he
would or would not support the development.
ANDY WHITING (17057 Toronto Ave): Confirmed Councilmember Ericson's statements and also stated,
he is also concerned that the steep retaining wall proposed for the east side of the property will be a
safety hazard for children in the area.
MOTION BY MADER, SECOND BY SCHENCK TO DEFER THIS ITEM TO ALLOW STAFF TO
FURTHER CONSIDER THE DIRECTION PROVIDED BY COUNCIL.
VOTE: Ayes by Mader, Gundlach, Petersen and Schenck, Nay by Ericson, the motion carried.
The Council took a brief recess.
Consider Approval of Initiation of the Vacation of Right-of-Way at Timothy / Commerce Avenue
Intersection.
BOYLES: Briefly reviewed the history of the vacation request and the issues for the Council to consider,
including title issues, sewer and water easements for City sewer and water, impacts of potential
development.
PETERSEN: Asked if the area has curb and gutter, and what the intended use for the area would be.
MADER: Noted that it is not appropriate at this time to take public comment prior to the public hearing.
Noted that the choices for the Council are to determine if the road has any public interest or if it should
initiate a vacation process. Believed that it would be difficult to determine that no public interest existed
or may exist in the future.
ERICSON: Noted that the previous Council determined that to close the right-of-way was reasonable,
and believed that it would be appropriate to initiate the process. In the larger scope of extending that
roadway, 87 feet is a very small portion for the City to re-acquire if a future development is proposed.
MADER: Noted his history with the Timothy Avenue neighborhood, and did not recall any implication
that the City was going to vacate that property. Also noted that acquiring private property in a
10
City Council Meeting Minutes
DRAFT
April 17, 2000
condemnation action is not friendly way to do business and can be very expensive. Agreed that the
City should maintain the property if it retains ownership.
MOTION BY ERICSON, SECOND BY GUNDLACH TO APPROVE RESOLUTION DO-XX TO CALL A
PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER VACATION OF THE RIGHT-OF-WAY BETWEEN NATALIE
AVENUE AND COMMERCE AVENUE INTERSECTION.
GUNDLACH: Has some concern that the neighborhood is under the impression that the area was to be
vacated, and to resolved the issue, suggested going on with the public hearing process.
SCHENCK: Agreed with the Mayor and noted that the Council's decision to close the roadway was
unanimous. Noted that the City has done everything the property owners have asked to manage traffic
through the neighborhood. Agreed that the City should retain and maintain the property.
VOTE: Ayes by Gundlach and Ericson, Nay by Mader, Petersen and Schenck, the motion failed.
MOTION BY ERICSON, SECOND BY MADER DIRECTING STAFF TO CONSIDER ADDITIONAL
ALTERNATIVES FOR THE MAINTENANCE AND RE-DESIGN OF THE PORTION OF ROADWAY TO
LOOK MORE APPEALING FOR THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
VOTE: Ayes by Mader, Gundlach, Petersen, Schenck and Ericson, the motion carried.
Consider Approval of Resolution 00-32 Authorizing Purchase of One (1) 22-foot (10,000 GVW)
Trailer.
BOYLES: Explained how the next two agenda items came to the Council for consideration. Briefly
explained the use of the vehicles and the quotes received including trade-in if any, and the rationale for
purchasing the equipment.
MOTION BY PETERSEN, SECOND BY GUNDLACH TO APPROVE RESOLUTION 00-32
AUTHORIZING PURCHASE OF ONE (1) 22-FOOT (10,000 GVW) TRAILER.
MADER: Asked if the reference to structural integrity implies that it will no longer carry the weight.
FRIEDGES: Advised that the trailer is homemade and does not comply with strap down regulations.
VOTE: Ayes by Mader, Gundlach, Petersen, Schenck and Ericson, the motion carried.
Consider Approval of Resolution 00-33 Authorizing Purchase of One (1) Turf Seeder.
BOYLES: Briefly reviewed the current condition of the equipment, the staff's rationale for recommending
its replacement. and the quotes received.
MOTION BY GUNDLACH, SECOND BY PETERSEN TO APPROVE RESOLUTION 00-33
AUTHORIZING PURCHASE OF ONE (1) TURF SEEDER.
VOTE: Ayes by Mader, Gundlach, Petersen, Schenck and Ericson, the motion carried.
11
T
City Council Meeting Minutes
DRAFT
April 17, 2000
Consider Approval of Resolution 00-34 Authorizing the Purchase of Two (2) Five-Ton Single-
Axle Cab and Chassis for Public Works Maintenance Through the State Cooperative Purchasing
Program.
OSMUNDSON: Advised the Council of the City's current fleet, together with the number of plow routes,
and how the vehicles are used. The two 1988 vehicles are the vehicles scheduled for replacement in
1999 and 2000, remaining is a similar 1984 truck currently assigned to the parks maintenance
department. Also noted that the current vehicles need extensive repairs as noted in the staff report.
Reviewed the City's purchasing criteria and the cost benefit analysis for replacing the trucks through
the State Cooperative Purchasing Plan. Advised that if only dump trucks were needed, the City could
lease them. It is not the same in this case because having snow plow equipment is the concern. Noted
how carefully the staff considers the replacement of its equipment.
MOTION BY PETERSEN, SECOND BY SCHENCK TO APPROVE RESOLUTION 00-34
AUTHORIZING THE PURCHASE OF TWO (2) FIVE-TON SINGLE-AXLE CAB AND CHASSIS FOR
PUBLIC WORKS MAINTENANCE THROUGH THE STATE COOPERATIVE PURCHASING
PROGRAM.
GUNDLACH: Asked if the vehicles have summer time uses and if the parks department and public works
department can both utilize the equipment.
OSMUNDSON: Advised that the trucks are also used to haul soils during watermain breaks, as well as
hauling bituminous material, gravel, and materials from spring street sweeping. All of the equipment is
shared between the parks and public works maintenance departments when appropriate.
ERICSON: Asked about the equipment packages to be added.
OSMUNDSON: Staff will be coming back to the Council to equip the trucks with snow plow equipment,
including the box, hydraulics, plow and wings. The approximate cost for the equipment for one fully
equipped truck is approximately $95,000.
BOYLES: Clarified that staff has found in the past that adding wings to the truck reduces the number of
passes needed to be made when plowing, and thus minimizes the number of routes.
MADER: Noted his appreciation of the staff's consideration for moving things back in the equipment
replacement matrix. Asked about the mileage on the vehicles and if there are ways to address the fact
that the engines are outlasting the equipment on the vehicles. Also suggested staff also look at other
ways to utilize and extend the life of the equipment, as well as operator costs factors.
OSMUNDSON: Advised that the 1984 vehicle has about 58,000 miles, while the 1988 has about 72,000
miles. Also noted that the new equipment should last longer now that a mechanic is on staff.
BOYLES: Noted that the staff has hoped to address some of the issues with respect to extending the life
of equipment by improving our maintenance programs. In the past, much of the equipment sat outside
and was not washed as frequently.
VOTE: Ayes by Mader, Gundlach, Petersen, Schenck and Ericson, the motion carried.
12
City Council Meeting Minutes
DRAFT
April 17, 2000
OTHER BUSINESS I COUNCILMEMBER REPORTS:
GUNDLACH: Asked for clarification of an April 12th memo Don Rye addressed to the City Manager,
which was in turn forwarded to Council members for comment.
RYE: Advised that his perception was that there are some issues revolving around low-to-medium and
high-density residential density within the Comprehensive Plan, and that there was also some concern
from the Council with where the Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Ordinance stood today. The memo
was intended to advise the Council on how those issues could be addressed, and Councilmembers
could be more informed early on in the process. One of those suggestions would be to distribute to
Councilmembers applications materials when they are received. Another option is that Council could
take over the responsibilities of the Planning Commission, or the Council could only take on
responsibility of presiding over the public hearing. Another option would be to send Council members
could be sent draft staff reports at the time they go to the Planning Commission. The second issue
would be to revisit the level of comfort the Council has with the Comprehensive Plan through a series
of workshops. The Council could also impose a full or partial moratorium on low-to-medium and/or high
density residential development.
GUNDLACH: One of his concerns was that the staff reports provide a greater flexibility of options, rather
than just a staff recommendation or to deny it.
RYE: In many cases, staff has tried to layout all of the options before the Council. Often times the staff
has a difficult time in anticipating what the hot button might be.
MADER: Asked staff to look at the Zoning Ordinance with respect to the density allowed in a PUD
versus the density allowed in an R-4 zoning area. The idea that a PUD allows a higher density does
not seem consistent with protecting the natural amenities to the property. Also discussed the NSP
franchise presentation and whether it is sensible and beneficial to the consumer. Suggested staff look
at the issue of benefit and come back with a recommendation on whether a public hearing should be
initiated.
TESCHNER: Briefly advised that three quotes were obtain for disposal of the obsolete computer
equipment. The interesting point is that at least half of the vendors advised that most computer is
obsolete after 18 months.
Frank Boyles, City Manager
A motion to adjourn was made and seconded. The meeting adjourned at 11' p.m.
Kell
13
T