Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutDRAFT 05 28 13 City Council Minutes O � PRIp� � � v � 4646 Dakota Street SE Prior Lake, MN 55372 ` �INNES�� P REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES May 28, 2013 CALL TO ORDER The meeting was called to order at 7:00 p.m. Present were Mayor Hedberg, Councilors Keen- ey, McGuire, Morton and Soukup, City Manager Boyles, City Attorney Rosow, City Engineer / Inspections Director Poppler, Public Works / Natural Resources Director Gehler, Water Re- sources Engineer Young, Economic and Development Director Rogness, Planner Matzke, Fire Chief Hartman, Assistant City Manager Kansier, Assistant City Manager Meyer and Administra- tive 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 gov- ernmental topics rather than private or political agendas. Topics may be addressed at the Pub- lic Forum 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 Boyles: Requested that item 10A, Consider Approval of the 2012 Annual Financial Report and Management Letter, be removed from the agenda and rescheduled to the June 10, 2013 meet- ing. Noted that the Council received the audit document at tonight's work session and the doc- ument will be available on the City's Website for people to view and analyze. MOTION BY KEENEY, SECOND BY MCGUIRE TO APPROVE THE AGENDA AS MODIFIED. VOTE: Ayes by Hedberg, Keeney, McGuire, Morton and Soukup. The motion carried. APPROVAL OF MEETING MINUTES MOTION BY MORTON, SECOND BY MCGUIRE TO APPROVE THE MINUTES OF THE MAY 7 AND MAY 20, 2013 CITY COUNCIL MEETING AS THE LOCAL BOARD OF APPEAL AND EQUALIZATION. VOTE: Ayes by Hedberg, Keeney, McGuire and Morton. Soukup abstained due to her absence at the meeting. The motion carried. MOTION BY KEENEY, SECOND BY MORTON TO APPROVE THE MINUTES OF THE MAY 13, 2013 CITY COUNCIL MEETING. VOTE: Ayes by Hedberg, Keeney, McGuire, Morton and Soukup. The motion carried. Phone 952.447.9800 / F� 952.447.4245 / www.cityofpriorlake.com CONSENT AGENDA City Manager Boyles reviewed the items on the consent agenda. A. Consider Approval of Claims Listing B. Consider Approval of Treasurers Report C. Consider Approval of Building Permit Summary Report D. Consider Approval of Animal Control Services Report E. Consider Approval of Fire Department Report F. Consider Approval of Police Department Report G. Consider Approval of Resolution 13-060 Authorizing 2013 Insurance Policy Renewals H. Consider Approval of Resolution 13-061 Authorizing the Mayor and City Manager to En- ter into a Grant Agreement with the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency for Receipt of a $5,000 Local Government Air Pollution Emissions Reduction Grant I. Consider Approval of Resolution 13-062 Approving the Wetland Replacement Plan for the Markley Lake Woods Development (City Project #2013-103) J. Consider Approval of Resolution 13-063 Approving the Transfer of City-Designated Re- gional Transit Capital (RTC) Funds to Scott County for Improvements to Southbridge Crossing Transit Station and Marschall Road Transit Station K. Consider Approval of Resolution 13-064 Guaranteeing Operating Funds for Buses Pur- chased as Part of a Congestion Mitigation Air Quality (CMAQ) Grant Morton: Requested that items 5G, Consider Approval of Resolution 13-060 Authorizing 2013 Insurance Policy Renewals; 5J, Consider Approval of Resolution 13-063 Approving the Trans- fer of City-Designated Regional Transit Capital (RTC) Funds to Scott County for Improvements to Southbridge Crossing Transit Station and Marschall Road Transit Station; and 5K, Consider Approval of Resolution 13-064 Guaranteeing Operating Funds for Buses Purchased as Part of a Congestion Mitigation Air Quality (CMAQ) Grant, be removed from the Consent Agenda for discussion. Hedberg: Requested that item 5C, Consider Approval of Building Permit Summary Report, be removed from the Consent Agenda for discussion. MOTION BY MCGUIRE, SECOND BY KEENEY TO APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA AS MODIFIED. VOTE: Ayes by Hedberg, Keeney, McGuire, Morton and Soukup. The motion carried. 5C, Consider Approval of Building Permit Summary Report Hedberg: Requested the status of building permits to date. Poppler: Replied that as of last week, 68 building permits have been issued for townhouse and single family construction and an additional 21 permits are in process. Hedberg: Commented that the City budgeted 150 permits for the year. Poppler: Believes it may reach 180 permits at the current pace. MOTION BY HEDBERG, SECOND BY MORTON TO APPROVE THE BUILDING PERMIT SUMMARY REPORT. VOTE: Ayes by Hedberg, Keeney, McGuire, Morton and Soukup. The motion carried. 5G, Consider Approval of Resolution 13-060 Authorizing 2013 Insurance Policy Renewals MOTION BY MORTON, SECOND BY SOUKUP TO APPROVE RESOLUTION 13-060 AU- THORIZING 2013 INSURANCE POLICY RENEWALS. DRAFT 05 28 13 City Council Meeting Minutes 2 Morton: Noted that the current policy is fee-based rather than commission-based. Asked what the commission rate was in the past. Erickson: Replied that commission was 7% of the premium for $15,500. The fee for 2013 is $9, 000. Morton: The insurance agent provides services for workers compensation insurance which has not been the case in prior years. Erickson: The insurance agent has not been in workers compensation insurance renewals in previous years, but they have provided feedback on how we are coding for the 2013 renewal which has been helpful. Keeney: Noted that pricing and rates will shift premium cost toward member cities that have police departments. Erickson: Stated that representatives from Northern Capital Insurance Company were present to provide feedback on that question. Invited representatives Ron Youngdahl and Carl Bennet- sen to the podium. Keeney: Asked about the costs related to insurance for police officers for cities that contract out for police services. Bennetsen: Replied the annual cost is about $2,000 per officer annually. For cities that are credit certified the cost drops down to around $1,300 annually. More claims are resulting from police situations. Many are of questionable liability; but the cost of defending claims is driving up the cost of the LMCIT insurance trust. So premiums are being applied to the cause of the most losses. Keeney: Asked about cost for land use based claims. Youngdahl: Replied that land use has traditionally been the strongest area of claims; but now police are generating the most claims so the cost is being reallocated. VOTE: Ayes by Hedberg, Keeney, McGuire, Morton and Soukup. The motion carried. 5J, Consider Approval of Resolution 13-063 Approving the Transfer of City-Designated Regional Transit Capital (RTC) Funds to Scott County for Improvements to Southbridge Crossing Transit Station and Marschall Road Transit Station MOTION BY MORTON, SECOND BY SOUKUP TO APPROVE RESOLUTION 13-063 AP- PROVING THE TRANSFER OF CITY-DESIGNATED REGIONAL TRANSIT CAPITAL (RTC) FUNDS TO SCOTT COUNTY FOR IMPROVEMENTS TO SOUTHBRIDGE CROSSING TRANSIT STATION AND MARSCHALL ROAD TRANSIT STATION. Morton: Asked whether the City has oversight over any expenditures. Kansier: Replied that the County is managing the project. Oversight occurs at bi-monthly transit meetings. Staff has input on the processes of bidding and design. The City receives in- voices from County for our share. This action will assist with administration of the project. VOTE: Ayes by Hedberg, Keeney, McGuire, Morton and Soukup. The motion carried. 5K, Consider Approval of Resolution 13-064 Guaranteeing Operating Funds for Buses Purchased as Part of a Congestion Mitigation Air Quality (CMAQ) Grant Morton: Suggested this item be discussed due to the amount of funds involved. Hedberg: Asked Kansier to present the staff report. Kansier: Reviewed the original grant application for CMAQ funds. Stated that new transporta- tion laws have been passed which dictate that future CMAQ dollars can only be used for capital. Questions have been posed about whether already approved operation grant dollars will be DRAFT 05 28 13 City Council Meeting Minutes 3 honored, but no answer has been received. Stated that if grant monies cannot be used for op- erations, the City needs to determine if it will guarantee operating funds by June 7 in order to comply with the deadline of Metropolitan Council submission of grant paperwork. If the CMAQ grant for purchasing buses is declined, it is likely that existing buses will be reassigned. Staff recommends committing because we have heard they will honor operating dollars. Money the transit fund intended for growing the service, and the addition of RTC bonds used toward transit station improvements, will free up funds allocated to that. We have included safeguards that the City reserves the right to refuse the grant if conditions of Shakopee agreeing to its share and CMAQ funds being used for these purpose are not met. Morton: Clarified that if the grant is not approved the City does not expect a degradation in rid- ership numbers, but rather a shift of which station the buses will use. Kansier: Believes ridership would stay flat and not grow. Currently the buses are full, but can- not be turned around any faster to allow additional routes during peak time. Morton: Asked the anticipated ridership increase if considering three buses v. two buses v. no additional buses. Kansier: Replied they expect to add 200 riders per day with three buses and 100 riders with two buses. Morton: Stated she struggles with the amount of increase. The transit fund has decreased. Understands that reserves were put in place to grow the ridership, but the funds are expected to be depleted by 2017. Kansier: Replied that if the service plan is fully implemented, it will deplete reserves and this would not necessarily accelerate that. Legislature has lifted the decrease in legislative dollars and we will see an increase in MVST dollars over the next two years. Noted that ridership was growing during the years we lost MVST dollars and some of that loss was made up with fare increases. Keeney: Asked if this is only way we can purchase the buses. Kansier: Replied that buses are purchased by the Metropolitan Council and this is the only way we would get new buses. Keeney: Asked if we will score higher in the Metropolitan Council processes as reserves lower. Kansier: Replied they would like to see us spend down the reserves more quickly than we are. Keeney: Asked about the City's liability v. idling buses. Kansier: Replied we will look at reducing services if necessary and will operate based on trans- it dollars. We do not plan to use tax levy to support the transit services. The Transit Review Board is exploring membership in other transportation entities. Keeney: Asked if it is possible to make the commitment to the extent we are funded by grants. Hedberg: Asked if it violates the CMAQ grant if we terminate service due to depleted reserves and no operating funds. Kansier: Replied there are $1.5 Million in reserve funds and that will not be depleted for 4-5 years which is still within the parameters of the grant. They ask a three year commitment and we can give them that without going into general funds. Hedberg: Commented that when the Marschall Road station was being developed, it was con- templated what it would do to ridership possibilities in Prior Lake. It was viewed as unlikely that many Prior Lake residents would go to the Marschall Road station. Believes a resulting impact could be that we will transfer buses from Eagle Creek to Marschall Road and reduce services to Prior Lake residents. Kansier: Agreed it is likely that buses would move from Eagle Creek to Marschall Road. De- pending on the type of service offered from Marschall Road, that location could be more appeal- ing. DRAFT 05 28 13 City Council Meeting Minutes 4 MOTION BY MCGUIRE, SECOND BY KEENEY TO APPROVE RESOLUTION 13-064 GUAR- ANTEEING OPERATING FUNDS FOR BUSES PURCHASED AS PART OF A CONGESTION MITIGATION AIR QUALITY (CMAQ) GRANT. VOTE: Ayes by Hedberg, Keeney, McGuire and Soukup. Nay by Morton. The motion carried. PRESENTATIONS No presentation was scheduled. PUBLIC HEARINGS Consider an Appeal of the Planning Commission's Decision to Approve Variances from the Minimum Lakeshore Structure Setback, Minimum Front Yard, Minimum Sum of Sideyard Setback, Minimum Building Separation, Maximum Impervious Surfaces and Minimum Lot Area for a Property in the R-1 Zoning District at 14354 Watersedge Trail Planner Matzke described the location of the property. Reviewed the six variances the appli- cant is requesting. Described the proposed house. Flood plain ordinances apply regarding ele- vation. Reviewed the variance requests approved by the Planning Commission. Lot drainage was reviewed. Provided information about neighboring properties regarding lot sizes, setbacks, impervious surFaces, etc. Reviewed criteria for approving or denying variance requests. Staff recommends approval of the variances as requested as it meets merits of comprehensive plan variances. Keeney: Asked if this property would drain towards the lake and the street. Poppler: Replied that drainage will go both ways and that elevation could be raised to have all drainage to the street. Stated that it is preferable to go to the street to keep pollutants out of the lake. Keeney: Asked if there is a ponding system in this neighborhood. Poppler: Replied that the area was reconstructed in 2011 and there is some ponding. MOTION BY MORTON, SECOND BY SOUKUP TO OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING VOTE: Ayes by Hedberg, Keeney, McGuire, Morton and Soukup. The motion carried and the hearing opened at 8:01 p.m. Comments: Bob Miller, 14359 Watersedge Trail, stated he lives across the street from the site and filed this appeal for himself and the neighbors. Stated he is not opposed to a home on the property. Expressed concerns about the impervious surface being excessive; sidelot variances make the proposed home too large for the property; not sure that having staff offer guidelines is appropri- ate process; swales seem to be inadequate to handle stormwater; runoff may be pollutant for the lake; hand drawn documents not drawn to scale are inadequate for drainage planning; and that this may set a precedent for other substandard lots to ask for similar variances. Linda Burnam, 14360 Watersedge Trail, submitted pictures. Concurred with Miller comments. Expressed concerns that the revised house plans only reduced footage by two square feet; ele- vation of the retaining walls appears to be only one foot but will actually be much higher; wants drain tile to be installed on both sides of the retaining wall; damage to the trees will occur when constructing the retaining wall and queried how much time would be allow to be compensated for that loss; differed with the amount of impervious surface shown for neighboring properties; whether variances would be available for future improvements of neighboring properties; whether DNR approval required and has been received; comments from Commissioner Phelan are not reflected in the Planning Commission minutes. DRAFT 05 28 13 City Council Meeting Minutes 5 Jason Miskowic, 15867 Kendale Drive, Lakeville, stated he and wife, Amanda, are the appli- cants. Related their decision to build and own a home in Prior Lake. Want to be part of the community. Asked the Council to uphold the ruling of the Planning Commission. Joe Eidem, 14360 Watersedge Trail, believes the retaining wall will be 4-5 feet tall and only five feet away from the neighboring home. Concerned about drainage running from the wall. Requested gutters on home to direct runoff from roof. Concerned about sideyard setbacks in respect to access to the lake side for maintenance as well as emergencies. Todd Iverson, 14329 Rutgers Street, stated he had interest in building on this lot in 2008 and received no guidance about any possibility of variances. MOTION BY SOUKUP, SECOND BY MCGUIRE TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. VOTE: Ayes by Hedberg, Keeney, McGuire, Morton and Soukup. The motion carried and the hearing closed at 8:28pm. MOTION BY KEENEY, SECOND BY MCGUIRE TO AFFIRM THE PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION EXCEPT FOR THE APPEAL WITH THE EXCEPTION OF THE 39.8% IMPERVIOUS SURFACE VARIANCE. Keeney: Commented that the 30% impervious surface limit is intended to protect the water quality in the lake and, historically, the City has taken a strong stance on that part of zoning or- dinance. Would like to see a mitigating plan to do something with stormwater other than have it drain into the lake or the street untreated. Stated he does not want to stop project. Considering the amount of funds spent on water quality, wants to work on the amount of impervious surface. Hedberg: Asked staff to respond to questions that were raised at the public hearing. Poppler: Stated the retaining wall height is noted on the original survey and the highest point is 3.2 feet tall and varies lower than that as the one moves north and south along the lot line. Stated that the identified tree is not likely to survive construction. Roof and yard drainage is viewed as clean water runoff; driveway runoff is viewed as a pollutant source. A gutter system is a good idea so runoff can be directed appropriately. Generally retaining walls are constructed with drain tile. Hedberg: Queried the likelihood of the gutters being effective in a heavy rain event. Poppler: Depicted how the lot drains and stated that gutters could be located to be sufficient to handle the drainage. Stated that if water went over the wall, it would go along the wall on both sides. Hedberg: Questioned Iverson's experience in wanting to build on the lot in 2008. Matzke: Stated that Iverson had email correspondence about building, but specific records of the correspondence are not available. General inquiries about lots receive zoning information about lot areas, setbacks, etc. and an invitation to contact staff for further information. Hedberg: Asked if follow-up conversations then cover the possibility of variances or other de- tails. Matzke: Possibly. Greater detail is gained in follow-up visits about lot sizes, width of property, surveys, etc. Hedberg: Mr. Miller referred to hardship. Asked Rosow to address how rules under state law changed regarding variances. Rosow: Standards have changed since 2008. In 2008 the statute that allowed granting of var- iances where strict compliance would cause a hardship could be considered. That statute pegged all variances to meeting the undue hardship standard, which meant the property could not be put to reasonable use if used under the conditions allowed by zoning code. That was changed two years to change undue hardship to practical difficulties. Explained the impact of the change. Stated that staff would be unable to identify that variances would be required until an application is submitted. DRAFT 05 28 13 City Council Meeting Minutes 6 Hedberg: Asked about the comment made that sidelot variances result in a building that is too large for the lot and concerns about precedent setting that could cause problems in the future. Matzke: Replied that variances are granted uniquely in each situation. Noted that lot sizes and building styles vary greatly in the City. Stated that newly platted lots have a five-foot setback on each side and this matches that standard. Hedberg: Asked about the concern expressed about a hand-drawn drainage display. Poppler: Replied that the City has the survey, and the hand-drawn display was in response to a Planning Commission query about how drainage would work on that property. The graphic was prepared to illustrate that in a general sense. Hedberg: Asked about the reduction in square footage. Matzke: Replied that the reduction was two feet by 24 feet which reduced the setback in the depicted area eliminating two feet from the variance request. The revision was responsive to the request to move runoff from the roof to land inside the retaining wall rather than on the re- taining wall. Hedberg: Asked if there is any requirement for tree replacement for any that are taken or dam- aged. Matzke: Replied that the applicant can remove 35% of the total diameter of trees without re- placement. The tree replacement ordinance requires two front yard trees and replacement in excess of 35% of loss. Hedberg: Questioned particular trees and what provisions exist if those trees are damaged. Matzke: Replied that a tree escrow is established in the amount of $100 per inch of tree re- placement that would guarantee tree replacement. When working with the tree on neighboring property, applicants are advised to work around the trees to save them. Grading is reviewed to assure that it will not impact the trees; but if damage occurs, it becomes a civil issue. Keeney: Commented that this plan does not appear to save the tree straddling the property line. Asked if that is worked out in the final grading plan. Clarified that the City does not guar- antee that a grading plan will save a neighbors tree. Matzke: Replied that staff advises based on the kind of tree and the circumstances. Keeney: Clarified that it is not a City tree and is not being considered as part of the plan in to- night's action. Hedberg: Asked for staff comment about concerns of setting precedent. Rosow: Precedent is often cited as a concern by Council as it wants to be consistent in appli- cation of rulings. Noted that it is difficult for a property owner to sustain a challenge to a denial of variance based on another property being granted a similar variance. Variances are lot de- pendent and factors taken together make it difficult to prove that applicants are being treated differently. Hedberg: Queried about maintenance and emergency access to the lakeside of lots with nar- row setbacks. Matzke: Replied that in an emergency, the City utilizes boom trucks and boat access. In re- gards to maintenance, he has observed that some properties landscape in a fashion to reduce need for equipment or bring in equipment and materials by boat from the lake side. Hedberg: Asked if the property requires DNR approval and whether it was received. Matzke: Replied that the City refers to the DNR for comment. Unless the DNR requires a sep- arate permit for shoreline alterations, approval is not required. Their comments in this case cite impervious surface and setback from the lake. This house is closer to the street than it is to the lake and the DNR liked that. The DNR noted that it is a small lot and did not oppose the sideyard setbacks. Hedberg: Stated that typically drain tile would be installed with a retaining wall and asked whether that can be made a requirement. Poppler: Replied that the Council can require the drain tile and the gutters. DRAFT 05 28 13 City Council Meeting Minutes 7 Rosow: Affirmed that statutes allow the Planning Commission or the City Council to impose conditions in granting the variance and conditions must relate to the impact created by the vari- ance. Morton: Asked if the motion should be amended to add conditions. Rosow: Stated there is a resolution that has been prepared that contains findings and para- graph 3B could be removed from that resolution. Or, the Council could ask staff to prepare re- vised findings and bring them back to the next meeting. Keeney: Stated he is open to conditions that would mitigate the effect of the impervious sur- face. We have discussed gutters and drain tile in the retaining wall. Hedberg: Suggested that staff could be directed to work with the applicant to determine the best management practices that would mitigate the impact of the greater impervious surfaces. Rosow: Asked if there is time to continue to the next meeting as that would place less burden on the applicant. Applicants Miskowic conferred with their counsel. Matzke: Stated that the 120 day timeline would allow for continuation to the June 10, 2013 City Council meeting. KEENEY AND MCGUIRE WITHDREW THE MOTION AND SECOND. MOTION BY KEENEY, SECOND BY MCGUIRE TO CONTINUE TO THE JUNE 10, 2013 CITY COUNCIL MEETING TO ALLOW STAFF TO CONSIDER MITIGATION TO IMPERVIOUS SURFACE WITH THE APPLICANT. Matzke: Clarified that the public hearing has been closed. Hedberg: Affirmed. VOTE: Ayes by Hedberg, Keeney, McGuire, Morton and Soukup. The motion carried. OLD BUSINESS Consider Approval of Resolutions Receiving Bids and Awarding a Construction Contract for City Project 12-012, Welcome Industrial Park Improvements and Adopting the As- sessment Roll for the Project Public Works / Natural Resources Director Gehler stated that seven bids were received for the project. Reviewed the bids received and identified that the low bid was Chard Tile and Ex- cavating. Special Assessment Committee meeting was held. Prior to the meeting two objec- tions were received, but no further objections were raised at the meeting. Business owner Le- Mair spoke in support of the project. The Committee recommended the base bid and alternative 1 as well as the assessment roll. Construction is anticipated to begin mid-June. McGuire: Staff report summarized the Committee's recommendation. Morton: Stated the Committee agreed that widening the road and doing the extension is a wise decision and assessments are based upon that decision. MOTION BY MORTON, SECOND BY MCGUIRE TO APPROVE RESOLUTION 13-066 ADOPTING THE ASSESSMENT ROLL FOR THE WELCOME INDUSTRIAL PARK IM- PROVEMENTS, PROJECT 12-012. Gehler: Recommended that the construction contract resolution be adopted first. MORTON AND MCGUIRE WITHDREW THE MOTION. DRAFT 05 28 13 City Council Meeting Minutes $ MOTION BY MORTON, SECOND BY MCGUIRE TO APPROVE RESOLUTION 13-065 AC- CEPTING BIDS AND AWARDING THE CITY'S STANDARDIZED CONSTRUCTION CON- TRACT FOR THE WELCOME INDUSTRIAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT, PROJECT 12-012. VOTE: Ayes by Hedberg, Keeney, McGuire, Morton and Soukup. The motion carried. MOTION BY MCGUIRE, SECOND BY MORTON TO APPROVE RESOLUTION 13-066 ADOPTING THE ASSESSMENT ROLL FOR THE WELCOME INDUSTRIAL PARK IM- PROVEMENTS, PROJECT 12-012. Rosow: Wants the record to reflect that the minutes of the meeting were presented to the Council and the findings are that the assessments are reasonable and are part of the record. Keeney: Noted that the minutes are marked draft and asked if they must be formally approved. Rosow: Stated that the fact that the minutes were prepared and presented is sufficient. VOTE: Ayes by Hedberg, Keeney, McGuire, Morton and Soukup. The motion carried. Consider Approval of Two Resolutions Pertaining to the Ridgemont / Main Avenue / Trunk Highway 13 Improvement Project (City Project #13-001): 1. Approving Plans and Specifications, Ordering the Project and Authorizing the Ad- vertisement for Bids 2. Accepting Quotes and Approving a Contract for an Entry Monument Sign and Fi- ber Connections City Engineer / Inspections Director Poppler reviewed the design for the Ridgemont / Main / TH 13 project as well as the project schedule and cost estimate. Stated that approval is sought to bury power underground, pre-order signal pole hardware and the downtown entry monument sign. Depicted location of the proposed downtown entry monument sign. WSB representative Don Sterna was present. MOTION BY SOUKUP, SECOND BY MCGUIRE TO APPROVE RESOLUTION 13-067 AP- PROVING THE PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS, ORDERING THE IMPROVEMENTS, AND AUTHORIZING THE ADVERTISEMENT FOR BIDS FOR THE RIDGEMONT / MAIN / TH 13 IMPROVEMENT PROJECT, PROJECT 13-001. Soukup: Queried how many poles are required for the stoplight on TH 13 / CR 44. Poppler: Replied that four poles are required and depicted area of placement. Soukup: Asked if they will match those at the Arcadia intersection when activated. Poppler: Replied they will not have a rock base, but will be the same color and same style of light. Soukup: Asked if we can pre-order in bulk and store them for Arcadia. Poppler: Replied that the Arcadia signal has vertical components installed already. Sterna: Added that there would be no significant discount in volume and source of funding will come into play. Scott County will assist in funding at Arcadia when the time comes. Soukup: Asked when the Kop farm changes will be considered. Poppler: Identified the areas where structures are planned. Additional approvals will be sought , when that stage of planning is undertaken. Soukup: Asked about the plan for trees when removing roadway and expressed concern about the wind and noise in the park from TH 13. Poppler: Replied the large oaks will be saved and the hill buffers the park from some of the noise and wind. Some landscaping is proposed as well as stormwater features. Keeney: Clarified the scope of this resolution. DRAFT 05 28 13 City Council Meeting Minutes 9 Poppler: Replied that it includes the intersections, the trails, overhead power burial, signal and parking lot. Keeney: Expressed concern about tree removal and stormwater ponding. Poppler: Described the ponding and water flow. Sterna: Commented that the original funding source for the park was through the DNR and the land used for roadway must be mitigated. Looked at the least impactful drain system. Keeney: Suggested more tree replacement. Commented that this will be a great addition to the downtown entry. Asked about additional funding. Poppler: Replied that a cooperative agreement with MnDOT will provide additional funding of approximately half a million dollars. Hedberg: Echoed concern and suggestions about additional tree planting. Commented that it appears there will not be wetland along the old roadway south of the new intersection. Poppler: Depicted the area of infiltration cells where there will be no trees. Sterna: Commented that the landscaping plan was not presented at this meeting, but the theme will be to recreate the savanna on the hillside. Some screening will be placed along the ponding sites and up the hillside. Hedberg: Would support looking for ways to add foliage between Hwy 13 and Main. Keeney: Suggested a row of boulevard trees along the sidewalk. VOTE: Ayes by Hedberg, Keeney, McGuire, Morton and Soukup. The motion carried. MOTION BY SOUKUP, SECOND BY MCGUIRE TO APPROVE A RESOLUTION ACCEPTING BIDS AND AWARDING THE CITY'S STANDARDIZED CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT AND AUTHORIZE ACCESS COMMUNICATIONS TO PROVIDE FIBER CONNECTION FOR THE RIDGEMONT / MAIN / TH 13 DOWNTOWN ENTRY MONUMENT SIGN. Soukup: Questioned the visibility of the sign believing the elevation is lower at the proposed site. Poppler: Replied the site is closer to the roadway and will be graded equal to or higher than the sidewalk. Because of curvature of roadway, visibility will be good. Soukup: Believes we should have a monument, but the proposed site's visibility does not justi- fy the cost of the sign and suggested it be located differently on the NE side of the intersection. Keeney: Added that the visibility of sign from CR 44 is going to be while waiting at lights. Sterna: Responded they did not study sightline from CR 44 to the sign. Reason for pie-shape is to capture benefit of curvature of Hwy 13. There will be some view from CR 44 but the main emphasis was to capture visibility for people on Hwy 13. If the emphasis is to reach more peo- ple moving south, moving the sign to the north side of intersection would work. Noted that the digital display area is foot higher and foot longer than the Arcadia sign to enhance visibility with the increased speed of TH 13. Keeney: Suggested deferring the actual location for the time being and putting up the tempo- rary sign in each location to see which is preferred. Soukup: Commented that the shape of the sign is specifically proposed for the site and that may change based on the location. Asked if the shape impacts the cost. Sterna: Replied that approximately half of the cost of the sign is for the digital display. The concrete foundation is the next largest cost component. The pie-shape angle captures maxi- mum visibility. Keeney: Believes we would know better where we want it after the intersection is built. VOTE: Ayes by Hedberg and McGuire. Nays by Keeney, Morton and Soukup. The motion failed. DRAFT 05 28 13 City Council Meeting Minutes 10 Morton: Expressed concern about having signage at that intersection due to distracted driving issues. Hedberg: Responded that the motion has already been acted upon. Consider Approval of a Resolution Amending the Professional Services Contract with Bolton 8� Menk for the South Downtown Traffic Study City Engineer / Inspections Director Poppler reviewed the history of the studies undertaken for the downtown area. Provided scenarios of tasks that would need to be undertaken based upon whether or not a signal and full access could be placed at Hwy 13 / Franklin Trail. MOTION BY MORTON, SECOND BY SOUKUP TO APPROVE RESOLUTION 13-068 AMEND- ING THE PROFESSIONAL SERVICES CONTRACT WITH BOLTON AND MENK FOR SOUTH DOWNTOWN TRAFFIC STUDY. Keeney: Task #1 is key to the discussion and he supports moving forward with that. Not sure there will be much support from the community to change Duluth to 3 /4 access. Stated he is not interested in giving up full access at Duluth to get it at Franklin. Soukup: Asked which side of the Hwy 13 / Duluth intersection would be closed if it were not full access. Poppler: Replied there would not be access across and no left turns from Duluth to north or south. The access management plan would study the ramifications of that so the Council has the information to make a decision. Soukup: Stated she wants to hear what they come back with, but does not want anyone to think the Council is preconceiving these scenarios to play out. Study may come back with something completely different. Poppler: Stated this would study access points on TH 13 from CR 42 to CR 81. It is a blank slate in terms of an access management plan. Soukup: Stated the City will have to make sure there is buy-in from the State and the County on any plan. Poppler: Referred to the report's flow chart of activities proposed by Bolton & Menk and at what point information will be received from data and public meetings. McGuire: Supported proceeding with the study and expressed reluctance to reduce access at Duluth. Morton: Commented that the Council discussed that updating the downtown study (task #4) would not have any value and could be shelved. Poppler: Replied that portion of the study updates the cost estimates, provides public meetings and updates the study itself. No option has been recommended yet for the downtown area. If a task reveals that, for example, a full signal on Franklin Trail is appropriate, the study should be updated to identify the final decision and the costs for it. Morton: Asked if Council will have an update at the end of task #1 prior to moving on to the balance of the tasks. Poppler: Replied that the Council would have the information to make the decision and would make it before moving onto the other tasks. Morton: Clarified that the process could be stopped if it was not going down a path that was prudent. Poppler: Could give that direction at a council meeting. Hedberg: Pointed out that the last point on task #1 identifies there will be a Council meeting to approve further steps. MOTION BY HEDBERG, SECOND BY KEENEY TO AMEND THE MOTION TO AUTHORIZE ONLY TASK #1. DRAFT 05 28 13 City Council Meeting Minutes 11 VOTE: Ayes by Hedberg, Keeney, McGuire, Morton and Soukup. The motion carried. Morton: Asked if there would be a public hearing with task #4. Poppler: Replied there would be an open house to present the study and preliminary scenari- os. And another to present the preferred scenario. MOTION BY MORTON, SECOND BY SOUKUP TO APPROVE RESOLUTION 13-068 AMEND- ING THE PROFESSIONAL SERVICES CONTRACT WITH BOLTON AND MENK FOR SOUTH DOWNTOWN TRAFFIC STUDY AMENDED TO AUTHORIZE ONLY THE COMPLETION OF THE ACCESS MANAGEMENT PLAN ALONG TH 13 (TASK #1). VOTE: Ayes by Hedberg, Keeney, McGuire, Morton and Soukup. The motion carried. NEW BUSINESS No new business was discussed. OTHER BUSINESS Keeney: Related his experience when speaking at Memorial Day events as the Acting Mayor. People questioned the meaning of that role. Suggested changing the title to Deputy Mayor. Rosow: Replied that the role of Acting Mayor is to conduct meetings in the Mayor's absence. Suggested Keeney introduce himself as a City Councilmember and that his presence is be- cause the Mayor is out of town. Noted he could also introduce himself as the Deputy Mayor as it has no impact on his duties as the Acting Mayor. ADJOURNMENT With no further business brought before the Council, a motion to adjourn was made by Soukup and seconded by Morton. The motion carried and the meeting adjourned at 10:26 p.m. Frank Boyles, City Manager Charlotte Green, Administrative Assistant DRAFT 05 28 13 City Council Meeting Minutes 12