Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout4A - Minutes from 06 23 14 Regular Meeting ti 4646 Dakota Street SE Prior Lake.MN 55372 REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES NNESOoo• June 23, 2014 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 Rosow, City Engineer/ Inspections Director Poppler, Public Works/Natural Resources Director Gehler, Finance Director Erickson, Community and Economic Development Director Rogness, and Police Chief O'Rourke. 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 governmental topics rather than private or political agendas. Topics may be addressed at the public forum that are on the agenda. However,topics that are the subject of a public hearing are best addressed at the public hearing,not at public forum. Therefore, topics may not be addressed at public forum if:(i)the topic has been the subject of a public hearing before the City Council or any City Advisory Committee and the Council has not taken action on the topic;or(ii)if the topic is the subject of a scheduled or continued public hearing or public information hearing on the current agenda or at a future meeting before the City Council or any City Advisory Committee. During public forum, a member of the public may request that the City Council consider removing an item from the Consent Agenda following the procedure set forth in Section 401.5. 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: Christian Lockberg (17556 Vergus Avenue, Spring Lake): Thanked the government officials who acted to implement the No Wake restrictions for Spring Lake. Requested that the entities work together to implement a more permanent No Wake ordinance. It seems every year the same type of circumstances are present. Also commented that the port-a-potty at the Spring Lake access is flooded and he has been unable to get response from the company. APPROVAL OF AGENDA MOTION BY MCGUIRE, SECOND BY HEDBERG TO APPROVE THE AGENDA AS PROPOSED. Boyles: Requested that 51 be removed from the agenda at the request of the petitioner since there are details still pending. Keeney: Suggested that a discussion be added to 9B that included flooding issues in general. Hedberg: Asked that 9B be moved immediately after the consent agenda. MOTION BY HEDBERG, SECOND BY KEENEY, TO AMEND THE ORIGINAL MOTION TO EXCLUDE 51 AND MOVE 9B TO FOLLOW THE CONSENT AGENDA. VOTE Hedberg Keeney McGuire Morton Soukup Aye Nay ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ Abstain ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ Absent ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ The motion carried. 1 MOTION BY MCGUIRE, SECOND BY HEDBERG TO APPROVE THE AGENDA AS AMENDED. VOTE Hedberg Keeney McGuire Morton Soukup Aye Nay ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ Abstain ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ Absent ❑ ❑ 0 0 ❑ The motion carried. APPROVAL OF MEETING MINUTES MOTION BY MCGUIRE , SECOND BY MORTON TO APPROVE THE MINUTES OF THE JUNE 9, 2014 CITY COUNCIL MEETING. VOTE Hedberg Keeney McGuire Morton Soukup Aye ® ® ® ® ❑ Nay 0 ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ Abstain 0 0 ❑ ❑ ►� Absent ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ 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 May 2014 Treasurer's 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 14-097 Declaring the City's Intent to Participate in the State of Minnesota's Standard Measures Program and Adopting the Ten Performance Benchmarks. H. Consider Approval of Resolution 14-096 Approving an Amendment to Chapter 3, Land Use Element, of the Prior Lake 2030 Comprehensive Plan Related to the Metropolitan Urban Service Area (MUSA) and the Orderly Annexation Area (OAA). --• - A:: - - - - ' - - -• A :: - - •• 1.1- A --- - ' - - - ' -- •-• Contract. J. Consider Approval of Resolution 14-098 Accepting Bids and Authorizing the Mayor and City Manager to Execute the City's Standardized Construction Contract for the 2014 Street Overlay Project#14-500 and Concrete Repairs. Items Removed: None. MOTION BY HEDBERG , SECOND BY SOUKUP TO APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA AS PROPOSED ABSENT ITEM 51 (WHICH WAS REMOVED AS PART OF THE AGENDA APPROVAL).. VOTE Hedberg Keeney McGuire Morton Soukup Aye =' IZ Nay 0 ❑ 0 ❑ ❑ Abstain ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 Absent ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ The motion carried. 04 28 14 City Council Meeting Minutes 2 NEW BUSINESS (ADVANCED WITHIN THE AGENDA) 9B. Consider Approval of a Resolution Authorizing Emergency No Wake Restrictions for Spring Lake. Gehler: Discussed record rainfall the previous week and that the lake had now reached 905.73, the highest since 1983. Seven areas of standing water on public roads exist, including Watersedge, Glendale, Rutgers, Breezy Point cul-de-sac, Shady Beach cul-de-sac, County Road 21, Cove Avenue, and culverts in the outlet channel by Spring Lake. City staff has been working to protect infrastructure, trying to help property owners when possible. Thanked Prior Lake Aggregate who has donated nearly 800 tons of sand with City staff delivering sand. Staff is working extra hours to deliver sand, talk to residents, and monitor infrastructure. The outlet channel from Spring Lake to Prior Lake is flowing faster than water can exit Prior Lake. Further discussed the County's implementation of No Wake for Spring Lake with repeal being at 910.95 for three consecutive days, or a maximum of 30 days. Morton: Asked what happens to sand when the water recedes. Gehler: There will be a number of issues to address when the water recedes. Staff is working on plans to deliver to homeowners a number of processes that will provide direction. Keeney: Asked how existing services to homes impacted is being managed. Gehler: Discussed that staff is working to coordinate garbage removal, mail and other services with vendors, as well as access. Boyles: Advised that the County Board has the authority to implement No Wake on Spring Lake. Also believes the Council is supportive of implementing a more permanent solution for Spring Lake. Further advised that the outlet channel areas are also running and dangerous, so residents need to monitor these areas for kids (particularly within Pike Lake Park) so that safety is maintained. Theisen: Also noted that there are significant safety issues on flooded streets as well and children should not be playing in the area. O'Rourke: Repeated that kids should not be playing near rushing or swollen bodies of water. Further, the Police cannot be everywhere, and it needs vigilance by parents. Also advised that road closed barricades are in place for a reason, and to please observe them or tickets will be issued. Also advised that some no parking restrictions will need to be put in place in order to assure that emergency vehicles can get through. Hedberg: Advised that he believed 180cfs adds 3 inches of water to Prior Lake, and 60cfs is about 1 inch removal. Asked if there is an estimate when the outflow will decrease to below 60cfs, Gehler: Noted that no timeframe can be predicted, but there is a lot of water in the upper Watershed. Suggested that the water level will continue to rise and we will be addressing this issue for weeks. 04 28 14 City Council Meeting Minutes 3 MOTION BY HEDBERG, SECOND BY KEENEY TO DIRECT STAFF TO WORK WITH THE COUNTY, WATERSHED, AND TOWNSHIP TO ESTABLISH A PERMANENT NO WAKE ORDINANCE FOR SPRING LAKE. VOTE Hedberg Keeney McGuire Morton Soukup Aye Nay ❑ ❑ 0 0 0 Abstain 0 0 0 0 0 Absent ❑ 0 0 0 ❑ The motion carried. Hedberg: Commented that the rainfall this year is nearly 20% higher than the second highest period in the last 180 years. Keeney: Asked if there are other emergency measures the Council should be directing. MOTION BY KEENEY, SECOND BY SOUKUP TO DIRECT STAFF TO EVALUATE EMERGENCY ACTION OPTIONS AND ASSOCIATED COSTS. VOTE Hedberg Keeney McGuire Morton Soukup Aye o ® ® ® o Nay 0 0 0 0 0 Abstain 0 ❑ 0 0 0 Absent ❑ 0 0 0 0 The motion carried. PRESENTATIONS: NONE PUBLIC HEARINGS: 7A. Public Hearing to Consider Vacation of a Portion of a Drainage and Utility Easement Located on Lot 11, Block 2, Sand Pointe 2nd Addition (5953 Cedarwood Street NE). Matzke: Reviewed the agenda item in connection with the staff report, advising that it is the staff opinion that the City no longer needs the northern 15 feet of the drainage and utility easement, maintaining a 10 foot easement. Further advised that by vacating, the property owner will be able to construct a storage shed. MOTION BY MCGUIRE , SECOND BY MORTON TO OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING. VOTE Hedberg Keeney McGuire Morton Soukup Aye Nay 0 0 0 0 0 Abstain ❑ 0 0 0 0 Absent ❑ 0 0 0 0 The motion carried. No person were present to address the Council. Keeney: Asked if the area is currently under water. Matzke: No. 04 28 14 City Council Meeting Minutes 4 MOTION BY MORTON , SECOND BY SOUKUP TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING, AND APPROVING RESOLUTION 14-099 VACATING A PORTION OF A DRAINAGE AND UTILITY EASEMENT LOCATED ON LOT 11, BLOCK 2, SAND POINTE 2ND ADDITION. . VOTE Hedberg Keeney McGuire Morton Soukup Aye ® ►_� ® ® -� Nay ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ Abstain ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ Absent ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ The motion carried. 7B. Public Hearing to Consider Approval of a Resolution Ordering the Improvements and Preparation of Plans and Specifications for the Rolling Oaks Circle Improvement Project(City Project#14-013). Hedberg: Advised that a number of requests had been made to continue the public hearing based upon new information related to the neighboring property development. The Council asked City Manager Boyles to outline the options for the Council to consider. Boyles:Advised that the options include: (1) remove the agenda item; (2) continue the public hearing to a future date if you found a rationale that is appropriate; (3) approve the resolution as recommended to order the project and allow the staff to prepare plans and specifications which would be the next step in the process; (4) conduct the public hearing this evening and take no action, or direct additional information be provided; and (5) order preparation of the plans and specifications for the project and defer action on ordering the project until after the public hearing. McGuire: Asked the costs for developing the plans and specifications. Boyles:Advised that$30k for the City staff to complete the project, and approximately$50k if we held off until fall and had to have a consultant prepare the specifications. Keeney: Concerned that we expend staff time and money on developing plans for a project that may not happen, or develop plans that will need to be reconsidered and refreshed at a point in the future. Not in support of proceeding with plans and specifications. Hedberg: Offered that if the project is likely to proceed in the foreseeable future, that we complete the plans and specifications so as not to further delay the process, and we also get the benefit of additional information on the construction costs. Believed the property owners want the project to move forward. Suggested ordering the plans and specs and deferring the public hearing for 3 or 4 months. Soukup: Asked if the plans and specifications will help us to further refine the numbers. Poppler:Advised that the feasibility study provides estimates, plans and specifications will allow us to further refine the numbers, but ultimately developing plans/specs allows us to go get construction bids which would give us the best numbers. Soukup: Asked how long it would take staff to complete plans and specifications, and if information would be available to residents. 04 28 14 City Council Meeting Minutes 5 Poppler: Several months to complete the plans and specifications and another neighborhood meeting would be held with property owners regarding the design. Property owners could be updated on a regular basis either as part of the neighborhood meetings or by email. Morton: Asked what level of detail and incremental value we are getting between the feasibility stage and the plans and specifications. Poppler: Explained that the feasibility study uses general quantities. The design phase looks at the soil borings and roadway elevations in greater detail. How much soil you are bringing in and out is one of the biggest drivers of cost. This final design allows us to no longer use estimates for those numbers. Once that work is completed, we are able to go get actual bids which will give us the cost implications. McGuire:Asked if the project doesn't happen for 2 or 3 years, is there a lot of additional work to do to use the plans. Poppler: Explained that if there was staff turnover and a new engineer had to certify the project, some additional work could be incurred but there would be a plan to base the engineer's design upon. McGuire: Suggested that the public hearing be continued for several months while the design work is completed so that there are more concrete numbers. Keeney: Commented that when the Council last acted and development wasn't imminent, the project was delayed. Concerned that we can't predict the timing of development. There are other priorities to be spending time and energy on. Does not wish to move forward until a development application is in place. Hedberg: Explained that he believes there is a difference between its action a year ago and the concept plan proposed now, which is a plan the City wants to see happen. We are really only waiting for the property owners to finalize. Believes there is a better than 50/50 chance development will occur. Poppler: Advised that the City also applied for a grant and in order to pursue that, it takes some time and the design plans are a component of being eligible to move that grant forward. Hedberg: Explained that if this alternative is pursued, it does not order the project. That step could only occur after the public hearing and would require a 4/5th vote of the Council. Schwartzcoff(City Attorney): Advised that if the Council delays the hearing, you need to pick a date and time certain. Otherwise, you will have to re-notice. MOTION BY MCGUIRE , SECOND BY SOUKUP TO CONTINUE THE PUBLIC HEARING TO SEPTEMBER 22, 2014 AND AUTHORIZING THE PREPARATION OF PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS. Morton: Believes it is appropriate to continue the public hearing, but has concern about spending another $30,000 when development is not imminent. Suggested just continuing the hearing. Keeney: Believes that the City Council would hear a lot of comment tonight in opposition to the project if the public hearing was conducted. If we are ordering the plans and specifications, it indicates that there is a good faith intent to proceed. For that reason, he will be opposing the motion. 04 28 14 City Council Meeting Minutes 6 Soukup: Commented that she is agreeing to order the plans and specifications to get more information. She has not made a decision to order the project. Keeney: Asked about the grant process. Poppler: Explained that the backlash for not doing a project after receiving the grant is that there could be eligibility issues down the line on future projects. VOTE Hedberg Keeney McGuire Morton Soukup Aye ® ❑ ® ❑ Nay ❑ ® ❑ ® ❑ Abstain ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ Absent ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ The motion carried. McGuire:Asked if a re-notification of the public hearing will occur. Poppler: Confirmed even though it is not required. The Council took a recess at 8:13pm, and reconvened at 8:18pm. OLD BUSINESS 8A. Consider Approval of an Ordinance Amending Subsections 1101.1000 (Land Use Descriptions), and 1104.307 (Additional Special Provisions, Shoreland Regulations)of the City Code Related to Marinas and Controlled Access Lots. Rogness: Reviewed the agenda item in connection with the staff report, noting that the Council had reviewed this item at a previous meeting. The additional changes include re-defining the definition of"mooring'; adding a requirement for recreational marinas requiring that they have portable toilets or public restrooms; removal of the non-conforming clause since it is already covered under state statute. One further amendment is removal of the permitting process every 3 years for controlled access lots. Marinas are still regulated by conditional use permit. Schwartzkoff: Advised that two actions are required: (1) adoption of the ordinance, and (2) authorizing summary publication. MOTION BY KEENEY, SECOND BY MCGUIRE APPROVING ORDINANCE 114-12 AMENDING SUBSECTIONS 1101.100, 1104.307, 1102.503, AND 1102.1103 OF THE PRIOR LAKE CITY CODE WHICH, AMONG OTHER THINGS, CONTAINS PENALTY PROVISIONS. Morton: Asked if the DNR has to re-approve the ordinance amendments since they first commented in May. Rogness:Advised that the changes were not substantive enough to trigger an additional comment period, but that if the Council approves the ordinance, staff will submit a summary of the changes to the DNR for final approval. 04 28 14 City Council Meeting Minutes 7 Soukup: Asked if a discussion occurred about watercraft safety and education requirements as part of boat rental and marinas. Rogness: The task force focused on the land use aspect, but the Council could direct the staff to take up this issue as phase two for the task force. McGuire: Noted that a recreational marina is defined as 7 or more restricted watercraft. Asked what is required of a person who purchases a vacant lake lot for lake access. Rogness: Noted that the ordinance follows the DNR in this respect and mooring facilities are 7 or more watercraft. Less than that indicates operation like a typical single family residence. If a single family homes has 8 watercraft, it doesn't mean you are mooring facility, it means you are out of compliance with a City policy. The same is true if you are renting slips. Boyles: Believed that if the watercraft are not owned by the property owner, it is considered a commercial operation. It would not be a simple thing to prove or enforce. Schwartzkoff: Advised that the task force spent a lot of time discussing regulation of homes with six or fewer watercraft and rental watercraft. It is such a huge issue and the task force determined it would be nearly impossible to enforce. The Council could consider it in terms of the bigger issue of short-term rentals. It is not currently illegal. Keeney: Asked if there is any permitting requirement for any type of marinas or controlled access lots. Rogness: Explained that currently all the commercial marinas have DNR permits as they exist today. Marinas also have conditional use permits from the City. Controlled access lots also have DNR permits and the City uses those to establish what they are allowed to have. The City will use this information as a basis for enforcement, but we won't be establishing a new permitting process that establishes a new basis. Keeney: Asked the process for enforcement. Schwarzkoff: Advised that the DNR will no longer issue permits, so going forward controlled access lots will not be permitted. Enforcement would be by standard zoning enforcement. Controlled access lots can continue non-conforming, but will otherwise have to comply with the other provisions of the zoning code. Marinas are enforced by City conditional use permits. Conditional use permits are permanent unless something changes or a violation of the conditions occurs. Hedberg: Clarified that controlled access lots are not required to have toilet facilities, but recreational marinas are required. VOTE Hedberg Keeney McGuire Morton Soukup Aye Nay 0 0 0 0 0 Abstain ❑ ❑ 0 0 0 Absent ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 The motion carried. 04 28 14 City Council Meeting Minutes 8 MOTION BY MCGUIRE, SECOND BY SOUKUP APPROVING RESOLUTION 14-101 AUTHORIZING SUMMARY PUBLICATION OF ORDINANCE 114-12. VOTE Hedberg Keeney McGuire Morton Soukup Aye Nay ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ Abstain ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ Absent ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ The motion carried. MOTION BY SOUKUP, SECOND BY KEENEY DIRECTING STAFF TO UTILIZE THE MARINA TASK FORCE TO ADDRESS RENTAL WATERCRAFT SAFETY AND EDUCATION. VOTE Hedberg Keeney McGuire Morton Soukup Aye Nay ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ Abstain ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ Absent ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ The motion carried. NEW BUSINESS 9A. Consider Approval of a Resolution Authorizing the Negotiated Sale of$2,740,000 General Obligation Bonds of 2014. Erickson: Reviewed the agenda item in connection with the staff report, noting that the projects Crest Avenue/Carriage Hills, Maplewood, and the Highway 44 cooperative agreement with the County. Further advised that there is a refunding of a 2008B GO Bond that financed the Brooksville Hills project. Mattson: Advised that the plan is to negotiate the bond issue authorizing Northland to sell the bonds at a future date at a time that is most advantageous for the City. The process is identical to those processes used in the past to sell bonds, with one exception. Rather than using Moody's who has issued the City a Aa2 rating, we are proposing to use both Moody's and Standard & Poors. Abdul: Explained that a Standard & Poors rating application would be made where Standard & Poors provides a confidential rating on the City's existing outstanding bonds. Once you get the rating from S&P, the City has a decision to request a rating on the existing 2014 bond. You would know in advance if there was a higher rating from Standard & Poors. Morton: Asked the upfront cost for getting the confidential rating from Standard &Poors. Adbul: Explained that we will not know for certain until the request is made. Estimated $7,000-$10,000. If the City pursued a rating, the full amount would be a credit. Morton: Why would this be in the City's best interest. Adbul: If S&P comes back with a higher rating than Aa2 issued by Moody's the City would leverage a better interest rate on its 2014 bond issue. We believe that the Standard & Poors new methodology heavily weights financial management and that there is a good chance the City will be eligible for a higher rating. 04 28 14 City Council Meeting Minutes 9 Morton: Asked if there is a greater weight in the market given to a Moody's rating versus and Standard & Poors rating. Abdul: It depends on the investor. Morton: If the confidential rating would come back lower, would it have to be shared with the investor community. Adbul: No, it is confidential unless you allow it to be released, but you pay for it either way. Mattson: Explained that both Moody's and Standard &Poors have re-vamped their rating criteria and made that information available. Based upon our review of the criteria, we believe the City would rate higher with the S&P criteria. Northland implemented a similar process with Apple Valley several months ago. If the S&P comes in higher, then Moody's likely will take a second look at their rating. Keeney: Asked the cost for the indicator rating. Mattson: Believed that$25,000 between the two ratings will be sufficient. Keeney:Asked the benefit of this re-issue. Mattson: Approximately$13,000. Keeney: Asked the Northland fees. Mattson: Estimated discount factor of 1.35% is the Northland fee. Noted that in the resolution there are items to be filled in, including an interest rate, and re-financing of previous bond issue. Suggested 2.5% interest rate and a net savings of at least$15,000. Advised that upon adoption, Northland would be back to the Council in mid-August. MOTION BY MORTON, SECOND BY SOUKUP TO APPROVE AN AMENDMENT TO THE RESOLUTION TO INCLUDE CONDITIONS THAT THE INTEREST MUST BE LESS THAN 2.5%WITH A TOTAL NET SAVINGS OF AT LEAST$15,000. VOTE Hedberg Keeney McGuire Morton Soukup Aye Z Z Z Z Z Nay ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ Abstain ❑ D ❑ ❑ ❑ Absent ❑ D ❑ ❑ ❑ The motion carried. MOTION BY MORTON, SECOND BY SOUKUP TO APPROVE RESOLUTION 14-102 AUTHORIZING THE ISSUANCE OF GENERAL OBLIGATION BONDS, SERIES 2014A AS AMENDED. VOTE Hedberg Keeney McGuire Morton Soukup Aye Z Z Z Z Z Nay ❑ ❑ 0 0 ❑ Abstain ❑ 0 ❑ 0 ❑ Absent ❑ 0 0 0 0 The motion carried. 04 28 14 City Council Meeting Minutes 10 ITEMS REMOVED FROM CONSENT AGENDA: NONE. OTHER BUSINESS ADJOURNMENT With no further business brought before the Council, a motion to adjourn was made by MORTON and seconded by MCGUIRE. The motion carried and the meeting adjourned at 9:31pm. 9j4111' Frank a A -s, ity Manager 04 28 14 City Council Meeting Minutes 11