Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout061598 RegularREGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES Date: June 15,1998 CALL TO ORDER: Mayor Mader called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m. Present were: Mayor Mader, Councilmembers Kedrowski, Petersen, Schenck, and Wuellner, City Manager Boyles, City Attorney Pace, Assistant City Manager Woodson, Planning Director Rye, Planning Coordinator Kansier, Planner Tovar, City Engineer Ilkka, Assistant City Engineer McDermott, Public Works Supervisor Hartman, Parks and Recreation Director Hokeness, Parks Maintenance Supervisor Friedges. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: Mayor Mader led the Pledge of Allegiance and welcomed everyone to the meeting. 3. APPROVAL OF AGENDA: Mayor Mader said 7A needs to be deleted and item 9B should read "Consider Approval of Request" instead of"Consider Approval of Request to Reconsider". CONSIDER APPROVAL OF PREVIOUS MEETING MINUTES: A. June 1, 1998 Mayor Mader noted on page 4 in the paragraph under B said "individual notification was not required for preliminary plat and CLIP". That is incorrect. That is a requirement and should be reflected in the minutes. On page 6 the changes made to the resolution are not in the minutes. On page 8 he clarified that it was staff's position, not his, regarding Valley Paving. City Attorney Pace said the following should be inserted on page 4, second paragraph under B, "it would be the city's position that it would not be a fatal flaw." The next sentence, "individual notice was not correct since the procedure complied with state statute was our basis," should read "state statute is identical for CLIP and zoning change; it would be the City's position that it is not a fatal flaw that the number of individual notices sent were not correct since the procedure complied with state statute." MOTION BY KEDROWSKI SECOND BY SCHENCK TO APPROVE THE JUNE 1 CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES AS AMENDED. Upon a vote, ayes by Mader, Kedrowski, Petersen, Schenck, and Wuellner, the motion carried. 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 16~l~r~oogle Creek Ave. S.E., Prior Lake, Minnesota 55372-1714 / Ph. (612) 447-4230 / Fax (612) 447-42~5 AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER o roll call vote. Any item removed from the "Consent Agenda" shall be placed on the City Council Agenda as a separate category B. C. D. E. F. Go Ho Consider Approval of Invoices to be Paid. Consider Approval of May Building Permit Report. Consider Approval of Animal Warden Monthly Report for May. Consider Approval of Treasurer's Report for May. Consider Approval of Fire Call Report for May Consider Approval of Resolution 98-72 Approving Plans and Specifications and Authorizing Advertisement for Bids for a Replacement Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition System for the City's Water Distribution System. Consider Approval of Resolution 98-73 Authorizing the Award of Bid for the Construction of Road, Trail, and Parking Lot Improvements Identified in the 1998 Parks Capital Improvement Program. Consider Approval of Resolution 98-74 Authorizing the Purchase of Two (2) One Ton Four Wheel Drive Pickup Trucks with Plows Through the State of Minnesota Cooperative Purchasing Agreement. Consider Approval of 1998 - 1999 Liquor License Renewals. Consider Approval of Resolution 98-75 Approving the Final Plat and Development Contract for Knob Hill 3rd Addition and Resolution 98-76 Approving the Staging Plan for the Knob Hill Development. Consider Approval of Refuse Hauler Permit Renewals for Buckingham Disposal, Dick's Sanitation, Knutson Services, New Earth Services, Prior Lake Sanitation, Quality Waste Control, Shakopee Services, and Waste Management. MOTION BY KEDROWSKI SECOND BY PETERSEN TO APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS A-K. Upon a vote, ayes by Mader, Kedrowski, Petersen, Schenck, and Wuellner, the motion carded. ITEMS REMOVED FROM CONSENT AGENDA: A. None PRESENTATIONS: A. Ceremonial Presentation of Keys for Representatives of the City of New Market. 1970 and 1975 Fire Pumpers to This item was deferred. Receive Donation from Prior Lake Volunteer Firefighter Relief Association of 193 7 Antique Fire Truck (Prior Lake's First Fire Vehicle) Public Works Supervisor/Fire Department Captain Hartman gave a brief history of the fire track, which was Prior Lake's first motorized pumper ever purchased. It was donated to a museum in Minneapolis, then purchased and restored by Apple Valley. On behalf of Prior Lake Fire Chief Dave Chromy and the Prior Lake Volunteer Firefighter Relief Association, this vehicle is now being donated to the City of Prior Lake. 61598.DOC 2 The keys to the vehicle were presented to the Mayor. The Mayor acknowledged the donation and thanked the Fire Department for all of their work. PUBLIC HEARINGS: A. There were no public hearings. OLD BUSINESS: A. Consider Approval of Resolution 98-77 Upholding a Decision of the Planning Commission Denying a 22.54 Foot Variance to Permit a 62.46 Foot Setback from the Centerline of a County Road (Franklin Trail) Instead of the Required 85 Foot Setback and a 1.2 Percent Variance Request to Permit Lot Coverage of 21.2 Percent Rather than the Maximum Allowed of 20 Percent for Eagle Creek Villas, Inc. City Manager Boyles introduced the item and reviewed the agenda report. A letter from the petitioner's attorney was received by the City at 3:30 p.m. today, June 15th. The City Attorney has not had the opportunity to research the case law cited in the letter. Councilmember Schenck said with the issue of the setback, there would not be an issue if Franklin Trail were currently a City street. Planner Tovar said that is correct. There would be a lot coverage issue. But for setback, if Franklin Trail were a City street, the required setback would be 25 feet. Councilmember Schenck asked about the distance between townhomes. Planner Tovar said 15.24 feet off the original proposal. They have pushed the buildings together to be 10 feet apart and pushed it further to the east. The modified request is that the setback be 72 feet. Councilmember Wuellner asked how could the lot coverage issue be considered a hardship? Planner Tovar said Mr. Huemoeller could answer that. The staff and Planning Commission review hardship criteria with respect to the property and reasonable use rather than financial considerations. Bryce Huemoeller, Attorney for Eagle Creek Villas LLC, asked that a copy of his letter be made part of the record. He said city staff reported the variance was denied because the developer can use the land without a variance by building seven units instead of eight. He said staff is wrong with its concept of reasonable use. Staff has identified hardship to mean there is no alternate use of the property. He cited several cases from his letter regarding variance appeals and said a government has the power to grant a variance despite the possibility of alternate use. He said the petitioner was asking the Council to consider the fact that literal enforcement of this ordinance would result in undue hardship. Councilmember Schenck verified that the setbacks are met with the exception of the townhomes in the southwest quadrant and that seven units is a possibility without variances. 61598.DOC 3 Councilmember Schenck asked if phase 2 was offset forward would it encroach on the setback on 44 and bring the southwest phase 2 townhomes within setbacks? Planner Tovar said the current setback of proposed building number 2 is 89.37 feet from the center line. So it could be moved forward but it would not totally eliminate the need for a variance request. No matter where the buildings are the lot coverage is still an issue unless the four units are made smaller. Councilmember Schenck said in the lot coverage issue what impact would the elimination of the eighth townhome have? · Planner Tovar said there would be no variance necessary with seven units. Councilmember Wuellner asked what is the hardship if building seven units is a viable option? Mr. Huemoeller said eight is a reasonable use. Seven is a reasonable use under the current ordinance according to staff. To keep the units at the $99,000 price there has to be eight units. If eight is a reasonable use and it is precluded by the ordinance, these cases and the state law would say that they are entitled to the variance. Councilmember Wuellner said any of these cases could be used to defend any variance. Just because a use is reasonable does not mean a property owner is entitled to it. He asked why the rush if the developer knows that Franklin Trail will become a City Street and then there will not be a need for the variance? Mr. Huemoeller said when trying to keep costs at a certain level the developer needed to be efficient and maximize use of people and equipment. Being able to build through and finish is essential. Councilmember Wuellner asked why was the development started before Franklin Trail became a City street? · Mr. Huemoeller said the developer felt he should be allowed a variance. Councilmember Petersen asked when the street gets turned over to the City from the County will it increase the area of the developable lot? Mr. Huemoeller said there would still be a 40 foot easement, and there would not be a recalculation of lot coverage ratio. So even though a turnover would solve the setback variance it would not solve the lot coverage unless the City would vacate a portion of it. Councilmember Kedrowski asked City Engineer Ilkka about whether there was a policy on road easement with tumbacks, if such a large easement would be maintained. City Engineer Ilkka said there is not a policy because the issue has never been addressed. The existing right of way and easement would be maintained. 61598.DOC 4 Councilmember Kedrowski asked Planner Tovar whether setbacks to County roads were determined by City. · Planner Tovar said yes. Councilmember Kedrowski said if there were a comer lot on two city streets would it be two front yard setbacks or one. Planner Tovar said the current ordinance states that comer lots maintain two front yards on the sides facing the street. Then there is no rear yard. The interior yards are considered side yards. Councilmember Kedrowski said the City was looking for an equitable arrangement with the County for tumbacks. What is the projection for this to happen? City Manager Boyles said he spoke with Dave Unmacht, Scott County Administrator regarding County Road tumbacks. Maintenance of the roadway is an important issue for taxpayers. That is something that needs to be talked about before the roadways are turned back. Councilmember Kedrowski agreed the roads should not be turned back until maintenance was discussed. He said it was clear that Franklin Trail did not meet the criteria for a county road. It would be a minor collector forever. The Eagle Creek issue should be looked at from a perspective that this is a City street. Mayor Mader said both an earlier letter and the letter received this evening speculation on whether the streets would be turned back to the City. He asked Mr. Huemoeller if he felt the Council should act on speculation? In addition Mr. Huemoeller claimed that criteria which staff has used in the past is all faulty. Does this mean staff should throw away years of past practice and begin with new criteria? Mr. Huemoeller said yes based upon the cases he cited. The language says it is the intention to give governments flexibility to avoid hardship. Mayor Mader said he would interpret that to mean flexibility, not that variances should be automatically granted. City Attorney Pace said she disagreed with Mr. Huemoeller's representation that Council must grant the variances. It should be based on Council interpretation of facts. The statute does not say that the property owner must be allowed any reasonable use of the property. Council does have the right to determine whether or not the criteria is met in order to support a variance. Reasonable use exists under the terms of the ordinance since the property owner may build seven units. Councilmember Schenck asked how essential was it to sell the units at $99,000? There is a reasonable use with seven units. 61598.DOC 5 Mr. Huemoeller said as it is currently laid out, it creates equality, which is easier for the association to administer, and it is better and more marketable with eight units instead of seven units. Councilmember Wuellner said he would not support turning over a decision of the Planning Commission in this instance because the ability to hold up the zoning ordinance could be undermined if this argument was accepted. Councilmember Schenck said he agreed with Councilmember Kedrowski that Franklin Trail is as much a City street as any other except for its deplorable condition. Tumback is inevitable, but it should be under the City's terms. There are other options here for the developer and they will come up with a viable alternative. MOTION BY SCHENCK SECOND BY WUELLNER TO APPROVE RESOLUTION 98- XX UPHOLDING A DECISION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION DENYING A 22.54 FOOT VARIANCE TO PERMIT A 62.46 FOOT SETBACK FROM THE CENTERLINE OF A COUNTY ROAD INSTEAD OF THE REQUIRED 85 FOOT SETBACK AND A 1.2 PERCENT VARIANCE REQUEST TO PERMIT LOT COVERAGE OF 21.2 PERCENT RATHER THAN THE MAXIMUM ALLOWED OF 20 PERCENT FOR EAGLE CREEK VILLAS, INC. Upon a vote, ayes by Mader, Schenck, and Wuellner, nays by Kedrowski and Petersen, the motion carried. Bo Consider Approval of Request of Extension of Adelmann Street, Storm Sewer, Water and Sanitary Sewer by DeerfieM Development, Inc. City Manager Boyles introduced the item and reviewed the agenda report. The request was for the City to extend Adelmann Street in the amount of approximately $72,000, which would include the extension of storm sewer, sanitary sewer and water. The options are to deny the request, participate on a cost share at $38,000, or assume the entire cost of approximately $72,000. Mr. Huemoeller said it is Deerfield's position that according to the Comprehensive Plan and Subdivision Ordinance, developers are required to extend sewer and water to the property line. Some of it is oversizing which the City has to pay anyway. Any other developer would have had to mn the lines to the Deerfield property line. Mayor Mader asked if the property line was the same for Deerfield and the business park. City Engineer Ilkka said there are two parcels in the 260 acre Deerfield. Part is residential and part business park. Therefore there is more than one property line for Deerfield. Mayor Mader asked whether Deerfield and Mesenbrink are one in the same? Mr. Huemoeller said they were not the same. 61598.DOC 6 Councilmember Kedrowski said he will support the second option, which is splitting the cost with the developer. He said the City Council chose intentionally not to extend the road to the property boundaries. Any other developer would have had to extend the road to the property line. This is an attempt to meet the developer half way. It is pro-development and good long term development for the community. Councilmember Schenck said he would support Councilmember Kedrowski on the cost- sharing proposal. If Fish Point is left as the sole access for the development, they will find a great need for a second access in the future. If the industrial complex were done by a private developer, it would have required sewer and water. Councilmember Wuellner asked if the City bore the cost of oversizing. City Engineer Ilkka said yes. Councilmember Wuellner asked whether Deerfield would be interested in a cost sharing proposal? Mr. Huemoeller said he did not know for certain, but assumed they would be. Councilmember Wuellner said he would support that if any other developer would have been required to extend sewer and water. Mayor Mader said the City extended the road, sewer and water to the property line. The place in which it put roads is consistent with the comprehensive plan and map. He said when developers buy land they do it at their own risk. The developer petitioned for annexation and was granted. They knew where the street, sewer and water were when they purchased the property. He said the request is outrageous. Asking taxpayers to make the development more profitable is offensive. Councilmember Kedrowski said in reference to the road issue, he is on the Orderly Annexation Board. The development petition was presented to that board. The option was to mn the street through the unimproved back lot. Running commercial vehicles through a residential area is not responsible planning. The City must recognize that with the industrial park. Mayor Mader said no one suggested Adelmann should not be extended. The City should not be held accountable for extending it. Councilmember Kedrowski said the road should have been extended to the City limits. MOTION BY SCHENCK SECOND BY KEDROWSKI TO APPROVE ON A COST SHARING BASIS THAT THE CITY WILL PAY 50% OF THE ACTUAL CONSTRUCTION OF INFRASTRUCTURE EXTENSION AT A COST NOT TO EXCEED $38,036. 61598.DOC 7 · Councilmember Petersen said he would support it. Councilmember Schenck asked is it addressing future needs by going with only one access? City Engineer Ilkka said the extension from Adelmann will be sufficient to serve the industrial park and additional connections. The only issue is the Met Council lift station. That will be addressed in the next five years. Councilmember Schenck asked whether it was wiser to do the entire project right now? City Engineer Ilkka said there is capacity as far as the pipes. He said he did not know the improvements that were required to the lift station. Councilmember Schenck asked if the impact was the same to the lift station on Adelmann? City Engineer Ilkka said yes. Mayor Mader said he would not support it. He said he can't believe the viability of the project rests on whether taxpayers contribute money for the developer. The developer acquired property, had it annexed, and proceeded. He was not hearing' the reason the developer was doing it was the development won't happen otherwise. Mayor Mader called the question. Upon a vote, ayes by Kedrowski, Petersen, Schenck, and Wuellner, nay Mader, the motion carded.. C. Consider Approval of Ordinance 98-11 Pertaining to Certificate of Survey Requirements for Building Permits. MOTION BY KEDROWSKI SECOND BY PETERSEN TO APPROVE ORDINANCE 98- 11 PERTAINING TO CERTIFICATE OF SURVEY REQUIREMENTS FOR BUILDING PERMITS FOR DECKS. Mayor Mader said in item E, "Planning Director and Building Official" should be changed to the "City Manager". Under Item 2, structure setbacks, some people have difficulty because they do not have a survey. He was concerned that forcing them to locate pins would require a survey. He suggested deleting the first sentence. The general ordinance will still require a survey in that case. The City is only waiving the survey requirement when City staff has determined that there is no encroachment. On item 3 regarding inaccuracy on the site, if the owner has a sketch, there is still a problem if the sketch is wrong. At end of the sentence, add "or infringes on". The hold harmless needs to be revised to address some additional issues. Councilmember Kedrowski said verifying the pins on property cannot be done without a survey. 61598.DOC 8 Planning Coordinator Kansier said it depends on the age of the lot. There will be some indication of lot boundaries on the site. Property owners usually have an idea of where the property lines are. Councilmember Kedrowski asked about utility easements and setbacks. City Attorney Pace said there was a clause for indemnification. With respect to the property line, when it would apply and under what circumstances, the representation of boundaries would trigger the provision. Second, section 2, made by the petitioner states "if the risk of violating ordinances is minimal." It should read based upon representations. Councilmember Kedrowski indicated that he felt the Building Official and Planning Director should remain. Mayor Mader said the City Manager should waive it because the survey requirement is a fundamental requirement of the ordinance and it should only be waived when there is no risk. Therefore another set of eyes is a good idea Councilmember Wuellner asked do they want to specifically state a $50 fee in the ordinance or refer to the City fee structure? Mayor Mader said the fee should be set tonight by separate resolution. Councilmember Wuellner agreed with Councilmember Kedrowski that the determination should be the responsibility of the Planning Director and Building Official. Councilmember Schenck concurred. He said he liked the changes to items #3 and 4. When it says site plan it must identify the existence of structures and lot lines. He said perhaps there should be more wording on the indemnification. City Attorney Pace said the property owner must sign an indemnification prepared by the City. Councilmember Schenck asked what would be the process for a neighboring property owner? City Attorney Pace said hiring an attorney. She read "the requirements for a certificate of survey for a deck may be waived provided the property owner has made reasonable representation of the location of the boundary lines." Planning Coordinator Kansier said the purpose is to make sure there is some. MOTION BY KEDROWSKI SECOND BY SCHENCK TO DEFER THE ITEM UNTIL AFTER NEW BUSINESS. 61598.DOC 9 Upon a vote, ayes by Mader, Kedrowski, Petersen, Schenck, and Wuellner, the motion carried. Do Consider Approval of Ordinance 98-12 Approving an Amendment to the Zoning Ordinance Relating to the Engineering Certification Requirements for Building Permit Applications on Properties Determined to Have a Bluff. MOTION BY KEDROWSKI SECOND BY SCHENCK TO APPROVE ORDINANCE 98- 12 APPROVING AN AMENDMENT TO THE ZONING ORDINANCE RELATING TO THE ENGINEERING CERTIFICATION REQUIREMENTS FOR BUILDING PERMIT APPLICATIONS ON PROPERTIES DETERMINED TO HAVE A BLUFF. Planning Director Rye said the changes reflect the comments from the engineering community. Mayor Mader asked whether the Planning Commission and engineers agreed with the recommendation. Planning Coordinator Kansier said the work done on an engineering certification complies with the recommendations from the engineers. Upon a vote, ayes by Mader, Kedrowski, Petersen, Schenck, and Wuellner, the motion carded. E. Consider Approval of Report Regarding Construction Management. This item was moved to after new business. Consider Approval of Resolution 98-78 Approving Inflow/Infiltration Control Program Loan Agreement Between Metropolitan Council and the City of Prior Lake and Authorizing Howard R. Green Company to Implement the Program. City Manager Boyles introduced the item. The program as proposed was for 1950 residential inspections. Plymouth, Savage and Farmington had savings in 1997 of $753,200. They hope to reduce the escalation of clear water into the sanitary sewer system. The resolution approves the loan agreement. MOTION BY KEDROWSKI SECOND BY PETERSEN TO APPROVE RESOLUTION 98-78 APPROVING INFLOW/INFILTRATION CONTROL PROGRAM LOAN AGREEMENT BETWEEN METROPOLITAN COUNCIL AND THE CITY OF PR/OR LAKE AND AUTHORIZING HOWARD R. GREEN COMPANY TO IMPLEMENT THE PROGRAM. Mayor Mader said based on the presumption of the number of sump pumps and interconnectedness would it be appropriate to include a questionnaire with the water and 10 sewer billing to indicate whether they have a sump pump? Secondly, the cost for clear water treatment was $80-90,000 year. How much clear water is coming out of sump pumps? Councilmember Wuellner said during wet years there is unusually large sewer treatment amounts, and lake level to determine where the water is coming from. City Engineer Ilkka said there were not specific correlation studies showing high water and high sewage flow. Mayor Mader said the two years when the lake level was high, the water level was close to the storm sewer level. Councilmember Wuellner said perhaps instead of inspecting, the money could provide an incentive to bring systems up to code. City Manager Boyles said 50% of the investment is covered by the Met Council. Craig Ebeling of Howard R. Green addressed the Council. The easily found causes of infiltration/inflow have been found and eliminated already. The Met Council premise for the loan program is that a significant part are problems coming from private property. The City staff has proposed that a select subset of the City be tested, those with the highest probability of a problem. Mayor Mader said he was concerned that the number of homes with a sump pump was much higher than 7%. Councilmember Schenck asked about the financial impact of disconnecting a sump pump from the sanitary sewer system. Mr. Ebeling said it could be done by $40-$50 worth of material, and potentially up to $150. A licensed plumber would cost more. Inspectors will give them information on how the problems can be remedied. Councilmember Schenck asked if a sump pump is designed to remove water from basement, what happens to that water. Mr. Ebeling said ideally it would be routed outside the home and into the storm water system. Many times it can be a direct connection to the storm sewer. The intent was to discharge away from home. Councilmember Schenck said if they find they are not going to come up with anticipated savings, what happens? Mr. Ebeling said clear water comes from many sources. If they found 2% from sump pumps, he would be surprised. There will be weekly reports to the Public Works Director on how the project is progressing. · Councilmember Schenck said he stated he would prefer not go with $80,000. Mr. Ebeling, said staff is not willing to recommend the entire City and that is why this first phase was recommended. The Council could discontinue next year. Councilmember Schenck asked whether there is a possibility of getting other fimding for manhole sealing would this have an effect on the grant application?. City Engineer Ilkka said t he application period is over. Councilmember Wuellner said he won't support it because he feels assumptions were made. He said they could spend less money and accomplish the same goal. Upon a vote, ayes by Mader, Kedrowski, Petersen, and Schenck, nay Wuellner, the motion carried. Go 9C) Consider Approval of Ordinance 98-11 Pertaining to Certificate of Survey Requirements for Building Permits. Planning Coordinator Kansier read the amendments to the ordinance: Chapter 4 of the Prior Lake City Code is hereby amended to add Section 4-1-7 (E) as follows: · The City may waive the survey requirements for decks set forth above when, in the judgment of the Planning Director and Building Official, the property owner provides reasonably reliable evidence of what the property owner believes are the property boundaries and meets the conditions and requirements below: The deck must be drawn on a site plan to scale. The site plan must identify dimensions of both existing and new structures, and the distance from any lot lines. The property owner must sign an agreement, prepared by the City, holding the City harmless from any damages incurred if the deck is placed inaccurately on the site, or of it infringes on any setback requirements or easements. The property owner shall pay a fee for the staff review according to the adopted fee schedule. MOTION BY KEDROWSKI SECOND BY SCHENCK TO APPROVE ORDINANCE 98- 11 PERTAINING TO CERTIFICATE OF SURVEY REQUIREMENTS FOR DECK BUILDING PERMITS AS AMENDED. Upon a vote, ayes by Mader, Kedrowski, Petersen, Schenck, and Wuellner, the motion carried. 9E) Consider Approval of Report Regarding Construction Management City Manager Boyles introduced the item. Staff recommendation is to solicit proposals for construction management firms. Councilmember Kedrowski asked about the liability cost of administering contracts. City Attorney Pace said it depends whether the City requires all subcontractors to use the City form. The AIA document requires extensive information. If there is a dispute it would be considerable time. ,~98.mc 12 City Manager Boyles said once the contracts are prepared the construction manager administers them. City Attorney Pace said there is not additional exposure, however there are that many more contracts. The City of Prior Lake is a party to the contracts. With a General Contractor, the City is a party to the contract with the general contractor only. City Manager Boyles said if the estimated $80,000 savings were accurate it represented a compelling dollar amount of savings. He said he has not been through the construction manager process. Councilmember Kedrowski said the construction management proposal is much cheaper. Mr. Bossardt, Principal of Bossardt, Inc., a Construction Manager Firm, said there were some cost advantages of using subcontractors instead of a general contractor. Councilmember Kedrowski asked what liability does Bossardt assume for the subcontractors? Mr. Bossardt said the contractors are fully bonded. Draft contracts would be subject to City Attorney review. Liability is covered by the contracts. The specifications are extremely detailed. There will be someone on site 40-50 hours per week. City Attorney Pace said what liability does Bossardt accept? Mr. Bossardt said the cities use the AIA contract. Liabilities are listed on 12 pages of information and a very lengthy list of duties and responsibilities. The AIA document is written in favor of the architect or construction manager Architect Barry Petit of Meyer, Scherer and Rockcastle, said he is an agent of the City. There is not substantial variation to the architect's contract. If there is a reduction in architectural fees it implies effort is reduced. The only way to do that is to reduce the architect's work on the project. Councilmember Petersen asked Mr. Bossardt whether there was a guarantee of 10-15% savings. Mr. Bossardt said it changes because of market percent. It is 8-10% plus 5-6% value engineering difference. It is impossible to determine an accurate calculation. It is best when the construction manager works as a resource with the architect and design engineer. Councilmember Wuellner asked Mr. Bossardt to define value engineering. Mr. Bossardt said it is not cheapening the building. He said they work as a resource for the architect and engineer. During the pre-construction phase, the architect lists its needs. There are detailed cost estimates during the construction phase. 61598.DOC 13 Councilmember Wuellner said so it is not using cheaper materials. Mr. Bossardt said materials may be different, but not cheaper. Councilmember Wuellner said he thought value engineering is cutting comers. Mr. Bossardt said he works with the architect as a team. Mr. Petit said the fundamental difference is the architect has already guaranteed a price for the building, the construction manager has not. Councilmember Wuellner said the specifications do invite value engineering. It could already be present without a construction manager. Councilmember Schenck said in general, when a city opens a bidding process for Construction Management is the estimated cost provided by the City or does the construction manager say it should cost SX and the percentage fee is X%? Mr. Bossardt said the City comes to us with a budget. The architect and construction manager design the building. The RFP is sent to one or more Construction Management firms. It includes the scope of services; all Construction Managers deliver the same professional service. It is the compensation that each needs to have to perform. Councilmember Schenck asked about dealing on a percentage basis. Mr. Bossardt said it was widely used. It is being used because it is good practice. Just as they picked an architectural firm, they should pick a construction manager on the same basis. Councilmember Schenck asked about conflicts between construction manager and subcontractors. Mr. Bossardt said there are conflicts between Construction Managers and subcontractors every day. Mayor Mader said the State of Minnesota exempted materials purchased for libraries and construction from paying sales taxes Mr. Bossardt said that was easier to accomplish through a construction manager than through a general contractor. Mayor Mader said he was concemed about quality for the dollar. He said they need a business manager on the project. 61598.DOC 14 Councilmember Kedrowski asked what is the liability with the architect; would they need to renegotiate that contract? City Attorney Pace said it depends upon the interaction between the architect and construction manager and scope of work. Councilmember Kedrowski asked Parks and Recreation Director Hokeness about his position on the issue. Parks and Recreation Director Hokeness said if construction management can save us $85,000, then perhaps more quality could be put into the library. Mayor Mader asked if the City was planning on taking advantage of the sales tax break of exemption on library purchases. Councilmember Petersen said tax would be charged if it were through the general contractor. Councilmember Schenck asked where would the cost savings go? Mayor Mader said that is a decision the Council can make. City Attorney Pace said if money is saved, they do not have to build a bigger building. It should, however, stay in the referendum construction budget. MOTION BY MADER SECOND BY WUELLNER TO AUTHORIZE STAFF TO SOLICIT REQUESTS FOR PROPOSAL AND QUALIFICATIONS OF CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT FIRMS. Councilmember Kedrowski said he needs more information on the liability. Mr. Petit said he was concemed about the cost issue. He said he was not sure if it can be guaranteed that the process is not superior to the standard process. This is not a big building. It is puzzling that they would want construction management. If it comes to dollars, he said he does not think there is anything that will save money. If construction management saved 10-15% over the normal process, the normal process would not exist. Upon a vote, ayes by Mader, Petersen, and Wuellner, nays by Kedrowski and Schenck, the motion carried. A. Consider Approval of Revision to Section 6-7-1 of the Prior Lake Subdivision Ordinance Relating to Boulevard Trees. City Manager Boyles introduced the item. If the Wilds PUD were amended they could have trees in the boulevard. It would serve no one to change the ordinance. Councilmember Kedrowski asked about the cost to amend the PUD. 15 Planning Director Rye said $500. City Engineer Ilkka said there are other outstanding issues in the Wilds which could be resolved with a PUD amendment. Mayor Mader said the recommendation is to leave the ordinance as is, which requires no action. NEW BUSINESS: A. Consider Approval of Resolution 98-79 Awarding Bids for 1998 Improvement Projects and Authorizing Bolton and Menk, Inc. to Perform Construction Staking Services. MOTION BY KEDROWSKI SECOND BY PETERSEN TO APPROVE RESOLUTION 98-79 AWARDING BIDS FOR 1998 IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS AND AUTHORIZING BOLTON AND MENK, INC. TO PERFORM CONSTRUCTION STAKING SERVICES. Councilmember Schenck asked about price comparison and bidding. City Engineer Ilkka said it was for construction staking only. There is a cheaper hourly rate and the number of hours was better. Councilmember Schenck said alternative no. 1 was $40,000. Mayor Mader said the staff report says hourly rate, and not to exceed, which is it? City Engineer Ilkka said he cannot recommend taking advantage of their professional services for that amount. At some point in the project they will ask for more hours and if they don't get it they will walk away from the project. Mayor Mader said BRA had $31,500 at a cost not to exceed price. City Engineer Ilkka said it is a professional service and it is not a bid. Councilmember Kedrowski said City Engineer Ilkka believes the other bid is not realistic. The Bolton bid is more realistic. City Attomey Pace said as the contract is written, if they guessed wrong, they still have to perform the scope of services. City Engineer Ilkka said the problem is as a professional firm, they give an estimate of what they feel is the correct number of hours and price. Mayor Mader asked if BRA would do it for a real not to exceed price of $31,5007. City Engineer Ilkka said if they expend the hours and it is not done that is the problem. 61598.DOC 16 · City Attorney Pace said no professional firm wants to face those kinds of complaints. Mayor Mader said the motion should be amended for the resolution to delete the authorization of Bolton and Menk and change to BRA in an amount not to exceed $31,500. Council concurred. Mayor Mader asked did BRA have not to exceed? City Engineer Ilkka said no. Councilmember Schenck said if it was put in the resolution not to exceed $31,500, they can. Upon a vote, ayes by Mader, Kedrowski, Petersen, Schenck, and Wuellner, the motion carded. B. Consider Approval of MVTA 1999 Tax Levy Request. MOTION BY WUELLNER SECOND BY MAI)ER TO DEFER THE MVTA 1999 TAX LEVY REQUEST TO THE METROPOLITAN COUNCIL. Mayor Mader said there was merit to having the Met Council levy the transit tax rather than by the City because otherwise it could be confusing on property tax statement. Councilmember Kedrowski said the issue is who controls the money. There is a shift from the City to the Met Council special tax district. Those dollars right now go from the County Treasurer's to the Met Council. The law is written so if the Met Council controls the funds, it has control over how dollars are spent. Then there is no guarantee that Prior Lake is getting its fair share. Prior Lake would have to petition the Met Council to get its own tax money back. Mayor Mader said the thing that is inexcusable is that state law requires a tax levy of $380,000 for mass transit and there are only 26 riders in Prior Lake. The fact that 10% of the total tax dollars is being used to subsidize transportation is discouraging. Councilmember Kedrowski said if the City gives the money to the Met Council the Met Council keeps the surplus. Assistant City Manager Woodson said Beverly Miller, Executive Director of the MVTA, is of the position that the entire amount should be levied by the City. Motion and second withdrawn. Councilmember Kedrowski said this is a state mandated tax. · Councilmember Wuellner said the average taxpayer does not know. 61598.DOC 17 o MOTION BY KEDROWSKI SECOND BY PETERSEN TO APPROVE OPTION #2, THE CITY TO LEVY THE MVTA TAX IN THE AMOUNT OF $379,950. Assistant City Manager Woodson said even though it is a separate levy, it will show up under the City tax portion of the tax statements. Upon a vote, ayes by Mader, Kedrowski, Petersen, Schenck, and Wuellner, the motion carded. (Continued) Consider Approval of Ordinance 98-11 Pertaining to Certificate of Survey Requirements for Building Permits. Staff confirmed that the fee would be $50. MOTION BY KEDROWSKI SECOND BY PETERSEN TO APPROVE A FEE FOR WAIVER OF BUILDING PERMIT REQUIREMENT FOR DECKS. Upon a vote, ayes by Mader, Kedrowski, Petersen, Schenck, and Wuellner, the motion carded. OTHER BUSINESS: Mayor Mader said the Update mentioned that Playground equipment for the Wilds could be reassigned to Oakland Beach Park where playground equipment was demolished in the storm with the understanding that 1999 CIP playground equipment will go to the Wilds. MOTION BY KEDROWSKI SECOND BY PETERSEN TO SWITCH THE PLAYGROUND EQUIPMENT TO OAKLAND BEACH PARK FROM THE WILDS AND FOR EQUIPMENT TO BE PUT IN THE WILDS IN 1999. Upon a vote, ayes by Mader, Kedrowski, Petersen, Schenck, and Wuellner, the motion carded. Councilmember Wuellner said there was a great number of City employees cleaning up after the storm. The City Council should do something to recognize them. City Manager Boyles said the Prior Lake American is reserving an upcoming issue for thank you notes, etc. MOTION BY MADER SECOND BY WUELLNER FOR STAFF TO PUT TOGETHER RECOGNITION RECOMMENDATIONS FOR CONTRIBUTORS TO THE STORM CLEAN UP EFFORT. Upon a vote, ayes by Mader, Kedrowski, Petersen, Schenck, and Wuellner, the motion carried. 61598.DOC 18 Councilmember Wuellner said in reference to the Regency Coffee issue; Prior Lake lost an operation and ten local jobs and should attempt to get the business back. City Manager Boyles said they would have the attomeys meet. Councilmember Wuellner asked is there some way to mediate the dispute? City Manager Boyles mentioned the southwest metro mediation group. It is the City's preference to have the two parties work issues out. Councilmember Schenck said the whole process bothered him. As soon as it reached the attorney level, he thought it would be inappropriate to interject. Mayor Mader said just as police officers enforce traffic ordinances, attorneys enforce our other ordinances. This situation goes back a year ago when complaints were received. There were written agreements about putting filtration in. He said he thought complaints came from other business people. Councilmember Wuellner said the situation was avoidable. MOTION BY WUELLNER SECOND BY PETERSEN FOR THE CITY MANAGER AND CITY ATTORNEY AND COUNCIL REPRESENTATIVE TO MEET WITH MR. PASCHKE AND TRY TO REACH A SOLUTION AND RELOCATE THE BUSINESS BACK INTO THE BUSINESS PARK. Upon a vote, ayes by Mader, Kedrowski, Petersen, Schenck, and Wuellner, the motion carded. Mayor Mader said the proposed ordinance for recreational vehicles should perhaps be amended so operation of ATVs is permitted. It appears the ordinance refers to operation on public property; does it mean streets? City Attorney Pace said she was receiving suggestions from various sources. There is a public hearing scheduled before the Planning Commission on June 22nd. A representative from the Police Department will be in attendance so that comments will be heard. Councilmember Wuellner said the ATV motocross was an issue. Councilmember Kedrowski said there should be a speed limit on ATVs. Councilmember Wuellner said it should address motocross in particular. ANNOUNCEMENTS/CORRESPONDENCE ADJOURNMENT MOTION BY KEDROWSKI SECOND BY MADER TO ADJOURN. 61598.DOC 19 Upon a vote, ayes by Mader, Kedrowski, Petersen, Schenck, and Wuellner, the motion carried. The meeting adjourned at 12:17 a.m. Tuesday, June 16th. City Manl~g.,or"'0 Recording Secretary 61598.DOC 20