Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutDraft 05 13 13 City Council Minutes O � PRIp� � � v � 4646 Dakota Street SE Prior Lake, MN 55372 ' �INNES�� P REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES May 13, 2013 CALL TO ORDER The meeting was called to order at 7:00 p.m. Present were Mayor Hedberg, Councilors Keeney, McGuire, Morton and Soukup, City Manager Boyles, City Attorney Schwarzhoff, City Engineer / Inspections Director Poppler, Public Works / Natural Resources Director Gehler, Planner Matzke, Assistant City Manager Kansier, Assistant City Manager Meyer and Administrative Assistant Green. 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 and each presenter will have no more than ten (10) minutes to speak. Topics of discussion are restricted to City govern- mental topics rather than private or political agendas. Topics may be addressed at the Public Fo- rum that are on the agenda except those topics that have been or are the subject of a scheduled public hearing or public information hearing before the City Council, the Economic Development Authority (EDA), Planning Commission, or any other City Advisory Committee. The City Council may discuss but will not take formal action on Public Forum presentations. Matters that are the subject of pending litigation are not appropriate for the Forum. Comments: No person stepped forward to speak. APPROVAL OF AGENDA MOTION BY KEENEY, SECOND BY MCGUIRE TO APPROVE THE AGENDA AS PRESENTED. VOTE: Ayes by Hedberg, Keeney, McGuire, Morton and Soukup. The motion carried. APPROVAL OF MEETING MINUTES MOTION BY MCGUIRE, SECOND BY KEENEY TO APPROVE THE MINUTES OF THE APRIL 22, 2013 CITY COUNCIL MEETING. VOTE: Ayes by Hedberg, Keeney, McGuire, Morton and Soukup. The motion carried. CONSENT AGENDA City Manager Boyles reviewed the items on the consent agenda. A. Consider Approval of Claims Listing B. Consider Approval of Resolution 13-055 Approving Final Plat and Development Agree- ment for Maple Glen 5th Addition C. Consider Approval of 1S Qtr 2013 Investments D. Consider Approval of 1 S Qtr 2013 Financial Reports E. Consider Approval of Resolution 13-056 Approving an Extension of an On-Sale Liquor License for Teresa's Mexican Restaurant F. Consider Approval of Resolution 13-057 Approving an Extension of an On-Sale Liquor License for The Pointe G. Consider Approval of a Massage Therapy License for Paula Pentico H. Consider Approval of a Massage Therapy License for Erin Crabtree Phone 952.447.9800 / Fax 952.447.4245/ www.cityofpriorlake.com Morton: Requested that item 5B, Consider Approval of Resolution 13-055 Approving Final Plat and Development Agreement for Maple Glen 5th Addition, and item 5D, Consider Approval of 1 St Qtr 2013 Financial Reports, be removed from the Consent Agenda for discussion. MOTION BY KEENEY, SECOND BY SOUKUP TO APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA AS MODIFIED. VOTE: Ayes by Hedberg, Keeney, McGuire, Morton and Soukup. The motion carried. MOTION BY SOUKUP, SECOND BY MCGUIRE TO APPROVE RESOLUTION 13-055 APPROV- ING FINAL PLAT AND DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT FOR MAPLE GLEN 5TH ADDITION. Morton: Commented on references in the agreement to monies to be paid before the final signa- ture and asked when that will be paid. Matzke: Replied that when the final plat has received approval, the developer brings the Mylar plats for signature by the City Manager and Mayor prior to recording the plat. The City collects the development fees before the signatures occur. Morton: Asked about the monies going to Spring Lake Township in conjunction with no assess- ments of future road maintenance. Schwarzhoff: Replied that the money is for improvement of the road to a paved road and any other assessments are payable. Keeney: Asked if this agreement has met the criteria for the institution that backs the letter of credit. Matzke: Affirmed that a certain minimum rating is required and that requirement has been met. VOTE: Ayes by Hedberg, Keeney, McGuire, Morton and Soukup. The motion carried. MOTION BY MCGUIRE, SECOND BY SOUKUP TO APPROVE 1 ST QTR 2013 FINANCIAL RE- PORTS. Morton: Clarified that the "amendment" column is representative of the annual budget and "actual" is showing year-to-date. Erickson: Affirmed and stated it reflects the first quarter. Added that budget activity does not oc- cur at a rate of 1/12 per month for the year, but may vary from month to month. VOTE: Ayes by Hedberg, Keeney, McGuire, Morton and Soukup. The motion carried. PRESENTATIONS Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) Soflware Consultant Presentation (BerryDunn) Finance Director Erickson introduced consultants Chad Snow and Seth Hedstrom from Ber- ryDunn. Snow spoke of the BerryDunn company and introduced the team working on our project. Hedstrom spoke of the project approach and timeline, and recapped the City's goals and objec- tives. Hedberg: Commented on today's kick-off meeting for the new financial system planning and re- marks he made to the group that the current system cannot provide the reporting that is desired Keeney: Commented that purchasing an accounting system includes consideration of many op- tions and much customization. The software will touch most of the operations that the City per- forms. Asked if the essence of the system is the same for many cities in Minnesota. Snow: Replied that cities start with a similar set of baseline requirements. Not everyone has the same other systems to interface with, business processes or local procedures that we have in place. We must consider where the City wants to go regarding work flow, which will drive require- ments and dictate the way vendors respond to the proposal. DRAFT 05 13 13 City Council Meeting Minutes 2 Keeney: Commented that some processes are in place due to the limitations of the existing sys- tem and it is hard to imagine how something will work until it is tried. Cautioned against being too extreme with design and to keep in mind the things that are working. Would like to make the soft- ware fit how we are doing business now. Morton: Asked how often progress reports will be brought to the Council. Erickson: Replied that staff will have weekly contact with BerryDunn. Asked the Council if they have preferences about frequency of reporting. Morton: Suggested that reporting be done via the Weeklv Update. McGuire: Suggested a monthly report and agreed it could be done in the Weekly Update. Hedberg: Stated that an Enterprise Resource Planning program can cover a wide range of sys- tem needs, but we are focusing on core financial systems. Any expansion will be carefully looked at and any expansion should fill a compelling need. Commented that we are a medium-sized sub- urban city and wishes BerryDunn to bring their expertise to bear on processes of what is best prac- tice for a city like ours rather than an open slate of possibilities. Snow: Responded that two series of on-site meetings are planned to do fact finding on current processes and associated challenges, and to validate and develop requirements to be included in the RFP which will cover how we want to do things in the future. Erickson: Reviewed the timeline for completing the process culminating in bringing a proposed contract to Council in September. That will be followed by conversion of existing data, setting up the new program, training, etc. from September to July 2014 at which time the program would be fully implemented. Any future modules would be evaluated on their own merits based on identified needs. PUBLIC HEARINGS Assessment Hearing for the Welcome Industrial Improvement Project and Consideration of a Resolution Adopting an Assessment Roll for the Project Public Works / Natural Resources Director Gehler reviewed the wellhead protection and Mar- kley Lake flood protection and stormwater management priorities for this project. Stated that bids have been received at $1,983,000 for both the base bid and alternative #1. Spoke of the assess- ment policy and that it allows 100% of the project to be assessed. Stated that representative ap- praisals have been completed. Some parcel areas were adjusted to allow for undevelopable land. Provided project timeline with an anticipated start date in June. Keeney: Asked if assessment notices were based on the estimated cost or the bid received. Gehler: Replied that they were based upon special benefit received by each property and noted that assessments will vary depending on whether alternative #1 is chosen. MOTION BY SOUKUP, SECOND BY KEENEY TO OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING. VOTE: Ayes by Hedberg, Keeney, McGuire, Morton and Soukup. The motion carried and the pub- lic hearing opened at 7:40 p.m. Comments: No person from the audience stepped forward to speak. Boyles: Stated that written appeals were received from Philip Krass regarding PID 259010280, 6000 Credit River Road SE and Archie Pavek for his property located at 16801 Industrial Circle. McGuire: Commented that the Pavek appeal states that he uses Industrial Blvd to access his property, but he would consider a split of the assessment on Welcome Avenue as part of his prop- erty would benefit. Gehler: His perception was that we used his entire parcel to calculate the assessment vs. just the vacant half which is what was actually used in the assessment calculation. DRAFT 05 13 13 City Council Meeting Minutes 3 Hedberg: Clarified that the assessment was based on an assumption of how he might divide the property. Keeney: Referred to the property depiction on the map and clarified that the west side of Pavek's property already has water and sewer. Gehler: Stated that his assessment will only be for road, stormwater sewer and capacity in the pond as the water and sewer is already installed. Boyles: Stated that staff's recommendation is that this matter be referred to the Special Assess- ment Committee to continue the public hearing; and in order to do so the meeting must be sched- uled for a date certain and announced at this meeting. Keeney: Commented that the objections on the mini-storage property appear to be that the prop- erty has not received a special benefit. Stated his understanding of the process is that the as- sessment roll is approved based on the project moving forward and that benefit will be received when the project is completed. Asked if assessments are levied upon the completion of the pro- ject. Gehler: Replied that when the assessment is adopted, the process must begin moving forward. Interest begins accruing when it is adopted. Keeney: Asked if staff believes there will be objection that they are not receiving benefit even after the project is complete. Gehler: Yes. Schwarzhoff: Commented that three factors to prove for an assessment are that there must be special benefit, the assessment is uniform and a written notice of appeal must be filed at a public meeting. These letters are to inform the Council that they will appeal. Keeney: Stated that we would have to find basis at this meeting that they will receive benefits. Schwarzhoff: Correct. Adopting the assessment would state that we believe the property will re- ceive benefit to at least that value. Keeney: Asked if staff would be returning to Council with specifics about what the benefits are af- ter continuance of the public hearing and Special Assessment Committee consideration of this is- sue. Schwarzhoff: Replied that appraisals are confidential until further into the process, but the Coun- cil should be able to feel there is enough benefit to adopt the assessment. If not, more information should be requested from staff. Keeney: Stated he has been working on this project for two years and wants to have the infor- mation on the record because we believe this is the right thing for this neighborhood. Hedberg: Asked if the Special Assessment Committee would need to evaluate whether the Coun- cil should hear additional public comment. Gehler: Replied that Statute 429 allows for continuation to receive both public comment and staff comment. Hedberg: Asked when the Council will decide on the scope of the project. We have a bid; but al- so have an alternate for extending the road on the north side of the project and a wider roadway to consider. Gehler: Awarding the contract and adopting the assessment will be brought to the May 28 meet- ing. The amount of the assessment adoption will be dependent upon whether or not the Council chooses to adopt alternate #1. RECESS Mayor Hedberg called a recess to determine a date for the committee to meet. RECONVENE Mayor Hedberg reconvened the meeting at 7:58 p.m. DRAFT 05 13 13 City Council Meeting Minutes 4 MOTION BY MORTON, SECOND BY MCGUIRE TO CONTINUE THE HEARING TO A MEETING OF THE SPECIAL ASSESSMENT COMMITTEE TO BE HELD WEDNESDAY, MAY 22, 2013 AT 4:30 P.M. IN THE PARKVIEW COMMUNITY ROOM. VOTE: Ayes by Hedberg, Keeney, McGuire, Morton and Soukup. The motion carried. Public Hearing to Consider the Vacation of a Portion of Candy Cove Trail Right of Way Ad- jacent to 5322 Candy Cove Trail SE Planner Matzke stated the vacation is being requested because there is no longer a public need for the use of the property. Described the area proposed for vacation. The Planning Commission reviewed the request and recommends approval of the request. Staff concurs the request could be approved as it complies with conformance to the Comprehensive Plan and the right of way does not serve a public need. MOTION BY SOUKUP, SECOND BY MCGUIRE TO OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING. VOTE: Ayes by Hedberg, Keeney, McGuire, Morton and Soukup. The motion carried and the pub- lic hearing opened at 8:06 p.m. Comments: William Peterson, 3601 Minnesota Drive in Edina, stated he is representing the interests of Rich- ard and Norene Lewin. Stated the staff report laid out the considerations well and he is willing to respond to any questions the Council may have. Keeney: Asked the purpose of the vacation request and whether the property owners have some use for the property for which the vacation is needed. Peterson: Replied that the right-of-way line is within three feet of the garage and more space is needed there. Noted there are different surveys that do not match up and the owners want to have the property properly registered. MOTION BY MORTON, SECOND BY MCGUIRE TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. VOTE: Ayes by Hedberg, Keeney, McGuire, Morton and Soukup. The motion carried and the pub- lic hearing closed at 8:10 p.m. Keeney: Stated it appears there are structures that were built not in accordance with normal set- backs and asked if variances are recorded with this property and whether they will be adjusted. Matzke: Replied the property has a current non-conforming status. The existing garage and home were built many years ago. If the garage were expanded, a variance might be needed. Any fur- ther right-of-way vacation would encroach upon utilities or other public need. Keeney: Asked if there is a setback distance on the main structure and if this vacation would allow them to expand the home. Matzke: Any addition would be measured at a 25-foot setback, and if it came closer they would need to seek a variance. MOTION BY MCGUIRE, SECOND BY MORTON TO APPROVE RESOLUTION 13-058 PROVID- ING FOR THE VACATION OF A PORTION OF THE CANDY COVE TRAIL RIGHT OF WAY. At 5322 Candy Cove Trail. VOTE: Ayes by Hedberg, Keeney, McGuire, Morton and Soukup. The motion carried. OLD BUSINESS Consider Approval of a Resolution Amending the Professional Services Contract with Bol- ton and Menk for the South Downtown Study City Engineer / Inspections Director Poppler reviewed the history of the study of south down- town and decisions made to this point. Discussion has been held with MnDOT and property own- ers regarding signaling on Hwy 13, Franklin Trail, and Duluth. Bolton and Menk provided a quote DRAFT 05 13 13 City Council Meeting Minutes 5 of $50,810 to consider access management along Hwy 13, traffic study of Hwy 13 / Duluth inter- section, traffic study of Hwy 13 / Franklin Trail intersection and an update of the downtown south study. MOTION BY MORTON, SECOND BY SOUKUP TO APPROVE A RESOLUTION AMENDING THE PROFESSIONAL SERVICES CONTRACT WITH BOLTON AND MENK FOR SOUTH DOWN- TOWN TRAFFIC STUDY. Hedberg: Stated he supports the proposed work to learn what information is needed to support a light at Hwy 13/Franklin, whether MnDOT would support a light at that intersection and whether that would lead to an amendment to our comprehensive plan; if there is likelihood that timely de- velopment will occur; and, if there is a finance plan that would ensure the tax levy would not be im- pacted and that development could and would pay for the improvement. Keeney: Concurs with the need to know about a finance plan. Noted that the Hwy 13 / CR 21 in- tersection improvement is moving up in the Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) and the baseline plan improvements for Pleasant and Main are scheduled, but improvements for the Hwy 13 / Franklin intersection are not in the CIP because it is not the plan for the City to fund it. Believes there should be significant development participation to build that. Believes that the Hwy 13 / Franklin intersection improvement would benefit properties south and east and Franklin Trail is somewhat dangerous so there would be a safety benefit in improving the intersection. Supports having a stop light at that location. Expressed concern about having a road come through the downtown resi- dential area on the north end of the Digger's area. Opposes a rapid process of acquiring residen- tial properties believing the City should not be acquiring homes to develop that parcel. One of the things to be answered is how the developer plans to acquire the properties. A concept of residen- tial development was discussed for some of the area and he would want to hear of developer in- terest in making that happen as having a walkable downtown means it is important to have people living with walking distance of downtown. Commented that a problem with this process is that each step taken moves us forward and investing more money in studies and plans makes it harder not to do it. Will withhold support of this study until some of these problems are solved. Not op- posed to development at Hwy 13 / Franklin, but the question of the cost to residential downtown has not been answered. Soukup: Appreciates that we are looking at a broader section of downtown and how to develop it. Concurs with comments about funding. Bolton and Menk have looked at this and propose different options in the past. This is a new proposition for what we could do here and it comes from a de- veloper. Concerned about the vision and how this is going. From a safety perspective, Franklin could be improved. Questions whether we are doing this for the greater good of the community or for the greater good of development. Does not see that it would benefit the community at large. Considering the church/school and the properties that would need to be demolished to push roads through, as well as action needed from other entities such as MnDOT. Stated she does not want to move hastily when there are so many things unresolved. Morton: Stated that last year Bolton and Menk provided us with study that looked at an entire concept and gave us several options. Agreed that signals at Franklin would enhance safety, but questioned the value of additional study and what it would bring to the discussion. Hedberg: Queried the scope and cost of studies conducted to date. Poppler: Replied that $41,000 was expended on last year's study. This study addresses access management and it differs from the previous study by looking at all of the access points on Hwy 13. Reiterated the points of study proposed. Morton: Asked if it would make sense to see the outcome of the study being done around the CR 21 / CR 42 area and whether the outcomes of that study might impact this area. Perhaps it would change how Hwy 13 is viewed. Poppler: Replied that the land use study on CR 42 could change some of the land use there, but it is not anticipated to relate to or impact this area. DRAFT 05 13 13 City Council Meeting Minutes 6 Morton: Questioned whether it might change how traffic comes into the City from that part of town. Poppler: Believes that without this traffic study we cannot get more assurances for MnDOT; and without more information they cannot go any further than they have in their decision-making about Hwy 13 / Franklin. McGuire: Believes from a safety standpoint, we need to do something with the Franklin intersec- tion. Stated that we have been speaking of economic development for 35 years and we need to look at what we can make happen. Having something like a Walgreens would be a nice benefit to the people living here. If we need this last piece of information to pursue the necessary intersec- tion improvement and continue with economic development, we should do it. Keeney: Stated there were four elements proposed for this study. Believes it is unlikely we will do anything at the Duluth intersection. Concept #6 impacts Duluth less and takes advantage of the intersection at Franklin. Believes the fourth task of updating the downtown study does not provide a lot of value. Stated the most valuable part is the reporting that lets MnDOT makes a decision on the stop light for Hwy 13 / Franklin. Expressed interest in the idea of short-term development phasing and whether we could meet that with development of the Digger's property and lights at Franklin. Stated he would support a scaled-back study that serves the Digger's/Franklin area with the presumption of a connection to downtown or a phased connection to downtown. That would need to be part of a comprehensive road plan. Stated we have not heard from a developer if they are willing to make the new roadway happen. Asked if we know traffic numbers at the Duluth in- tersection. Poppler: 4,400. Keeney: Added that CR 21 is 10,000 or 12,000 cars per day so it sounds as though we would be close to meeting their numbers. Soukup: Asked what steps must be followed for us to propose a project to MnDOT and determine whether a signal is warranted. Poppler: MnDOT attends the technical meetings and open houses. They are part of the study that gives us information about intersections. Input is taken from the public. A recommendation is developed which comes to the Council for a decision as the policy maker. Then it goes back to MnDOT for approval and funding is solicited for the improvements. Soukup: Clarified that it would be MnDOT and the City using what is learned in the study and without the study, MnDOT would not be on board. Poppler: Correct. Soukup: Commented she would like to see the speed from Duluth to CR 21 reduced. Asked how it would be for cars accessing Hwy 13 from Pleasant. Poppler: Replied that is what the study looks at. MnDOT indicated Franklin might be a more ap- propriate place for a signal and in that discussion we brought up Pleasant. Soukup: Stated that if a study is what is needed to get MnDOT to look at a light on Franklin, it should include suggestions for alternatives that use existing infrastructure. McGuire: Suggested that the budget for this study be reduced to concentrate on Franklin Trail. Suggested the area from Franklin to CR 21 could be three separate projects: Arcadia to Colorado to Pleasant as one phase; Pleasant through the wetlands as another phase; and the Franklin inter- section as a third phase. All three areas connect together nicely, but may not necessarily depend on each other. Hedberg: Believes it worthwhile to consider scaling back on the scope on the study to items #1 and #3. Designing the intersection at Hwy 13 and Duluth may not have to be part of this task. Up- dating the downtown study would be of modest value as the conclusions of that study stand. Commented that plans for developing this community have called for downtown to be a hub of the community and that is part of the mission statement of the City. It is important to have a supporting roadway that connects the downtown to Gateway and Southlake Village. There are residential possibilities on the wetland property and that property owner is interested in seeing the property developed. Stated the City needs to have the right pieces and policies in place before anyone is going to consider developing it. In regards to financing alternatives, the taxes that can be generat- DRAFT 05 13 13 City Council Meeting Minutes 7 ed will be considered and a TIF district could generate the funds to pay for the infrastructure. This study will help determine if a light is supported. Does not see the three areas as disconnected pro- jects. Believes warrants for a Hwy 13 / Franklin intersection light would not be reached unless a roadway to downtown is opened. Believes this could all be put in place in the next couple of years. Supports narrowing the study down to what is essential for our decision which is the access man- agement plan and the traffic study at Hwy 13 / Franklin. Poppler: Believes some components of task #4 which included public input would be appropriate. Part of the cost is for option 6B and 6C and believes that should be incorporated. Keeney: Responded to funding comments stating that if TIF is used, it should be carefully meas- ured so the City comes out ahead. The jobs should be there along with leveraging other develop- ment. A trade-off would be a detriment to the residential section of down town and the Council has to make that decision as a policy. Hedberg. Concurred. Boyles: Clarified that some elements of the proposed study are not believed to be currently rele- vant to this discussion. Expressed concern that existing businesses at Hwy 13 / Duluth may have concern about the impact to their intersection. Would feel comfortable to have the data to respond to that. Asked if there is some specific thing to remove from the study; or is there a maximum dol- lar amount the Council wishes to expend. McGuire: Stated staff should bring something back to Council to say what could be cut to come back with the needed answers; or whether all aspects need to be completed. Keeney: The Hwy 13 / Duluth intersection is less controversial and, therefore, could be removed from this study. There is already a County project to replace that light and it is known that the road alignment is not optimum. Believes we are considering making the best of that situation. Sug- gested not mixing that in with this study and simplifying this task. Some aspects of task #4 could be foregone, but the public input and cost estimates will probably be needed. Primarily tasks #1 and #3 should be included. THE MOTION AND SECOND WERE WITHDRAWN. MOTION BY MCGUIRE, SECOND BY SOUKUP TO HAVE STAFF REVIEW THE FOUR TASKS, SEE WHERE REDUCTIONS COULD BE MADE, SEPARATE HWY 13 / DULUTH FROM THIS STUDY AND BRING SOME OPTIONS FOR THE COUNCIL TO CONSIDER AT MAY 28, 2013 MEETING. VOTE: Ayes by Hedberg, Keeney, McGuire, Morton and Soukup. The motion carried. NEW BUSINESS Consider Approval of a Resolution Accepting Donations and Grants to the City During the First Quarter of 2013 Finance Director Erickson reviewed the donations and grants for the first quarter of 2013. MOTION BY MORTON, SECOND BY SOUKUP TO APPROVE RESOLUTION 13-059 ACCEPT- ING DONATIONS AND GRANTS TO THE CITY DURING THE 1 ST QUARTER OF 2013. Keeney: Asked where the Bowflex home gym will be stationed. Erickson: Fire Station No. 1. Hedberg: Thanked the people who made the contributions. VOTE: Ayes by Hedberg, Keeney, McGuire, Morton and Soukup. The motion carried. Consider Approval of a Report and Provide Direction on the Conversion of Trail Point Court from a Private Street to a Public Street DRAFT 05 13 13 City Council Meeting Minutes g City Engineer / Inspections Director Poppler described the Jeffers Pond PUD and identified the area requesting the conversion. Reviewed the criteria for converting to a public street. Noted that an additional ten feet on each side of Trail Point Court would be required to be turned over with the street to accommodate snow storage. A one-time contribution toward annual maintenance of the roadway should be considered. Reviewed conditions of the roadway and recommendations for corrections. Identified that this street is part of a Planned Unit Development (PUD) and it should be considered whether the benefits of a PUD to the City remain if the street is converted to a public street. MOTION BY MORTON, SECOND BY SOUKUP TO APPROVE THE REPORT AND DIRECT STAFF TO PREPARE A LETTER TO THE PETITIONER SETTING FORTH THE CONDITIONS FOR CONVERSION OF THE STREET FROM PRIVATE TO PUBLIC. Soukup: Ascertained that some roads in the development are already public and the City plows are already in the neighborhood. Commented that a number of the lots are not developed yet. Poppler: Responded that there are eight existing homes and some under construction. Soukup: Asked if there are homes developed on the lots where the City would need ten additional feet of easement. Poppler: Replied that many of those lots have homes on them. Matzke: Commented that the setbacks in the area are consistent with single family homes. If ad- ditional easement is created for the roadway, the setbacks would be adjusted for any future homes that will be built. Keeney: Asked if there would be any consideration given to not having the City take the boulevard island with Outlot B and the additional ten feet of easement. Poppler: Replied the island is currently in Outlot B. Keeney: Commented that there are concerns with the current condition of the road and asked if the property owners would have to rebuild it if tests show the roadway is not acceptable. Poppler: Replied there would be much work to some of the recommendations for correction and staff is seeking direction on whether the petitioner should be asked to make those corrections. Keeney: Believes they should be held to the standards for City roads and petitioners should have to decide if they want to meet those standards. If the conditions are met, it is not a problem. Hedberg: Stated the City has maintenance programs to ensure there is less runoff into storm sewers and private streets don't receive that service so there is water quality improvement by con- verting private streets to public. Stated that private streets are not being maintained and property owners will have significant costs for maintenance. Supports providing the petitioners with condi- tions that have to be met for the City to accept the street. Morton: Queried whether they have to complete the repairs before the City would take the street. Poppler: Replied that staff is looking for direction from Council on that. Keeney: Expressed concern about the original construction of the private streets and whether they were not built to the appropriate standard at the start. Suggested changing the City policy to discourage private streets in the future. VOTE: Ayes by Hedberg, Keeney, McGuire, Morton and Soukup. The motion carried. MOTION BY KEENEY, SECOND BY MCGUIRE TO DIRECT STAFF TO PROPOSE CHANGES IN CITY CODE FOR THE DEVELOPMENT PROCESS THAT WOULD SET MORE STRINGENT STANDARDS FOR NEW PRIVATE STREETS, OR REMOVE THE PROVISIONS FOR PRIVATE STREETS, OR MAKE PRIVATE STREETS A SPECIAL CASE RATHER THAN A MATTER OF COURSE. VOTE: Ayes by Hedberg, Keeney, McGuire, Morton and Soukup. The motion carried. ORAFT 05 13 13 City Council Meeting Minutes 9 Consider Approval of an Ordinance Repealing City Code 404 (Minnesota Electrical Act) City Engineer / Inspections Director Poppler stated the City adopted City Code 404, Electrical Inspections, after the State closed operations in July 2011 due to budget cuts. Prior to that, the State performed electrical inspections. Currently, the City is using the State inspector, but going through a City permitting process. The current workload is making the electrical inspections pro- cess burdensome and contractors are indicating they would prefer electrical inspections be sched- uled directly with the State as in the past. MOTION BY MCGUIRE, SECOND BY SOUKUP TO APPROVE ORDINANCE 113-07 REPEAL- ING CITY CODE SECTION 404 MINNESOTA ELECTRIAL ACT IN ITS ENTIRETY. Morton: Asked if the City receives any monies for the State's administration. Poppler: Replied that the City would be completely out of it and everything would be taken care of by the State. VOTE: Ayes by Hedberg, Keeney, McGuire, Morton and Soukup. The motion carried. OTHER BUSINESS No other business was brought forward. ADJOURNMENT With no further business brought before the Council, a motion to adjourn was made by Soukup and seconded by Keeney. The motion carried and the meeting adjourned at 9:52 p.m. Frank Boyles, City Manager Charlotte Green, Administrative Assistant DRAFT 05 13 13 City Council Meeting Minutes 10