Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda & Minutes .. \ J EDA MEETING 5:30 - 7:00 p.m. 7:00 PM FORUM REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING AGENDA Date:. March 16, 1998 1. CALL TO ORDER................................................................................ 7:30 p.m. 2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: 3. APPROVAL OF AGENDA: 4. CONSIDER APPROVAL OF PREVIOUS MEETING MINUTES: A. March 2, 1998 5. 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 re considered under one motion, second and a roll call vote. Any item removed from the "Consent Agenda" shall be placed on the City Co~ncil Agenda as a separate category A. Consider Approval ofInvoices to be Paid. B. Consider Approval of Treasurer' s Report. C. Consider Approval of Animal Control Report for February. D. Consider Approval of Building Permit Report for February. E. Consider Approval of Resolution 98-XX Authorizing the Purchase of One 72" Rotary Mower. F. Consider Approval of Resolution 98-XX Authorizing the Preparation of Specifications, Advertisement and Solicitation of Bids for A) One Utility Maintenance Vehicle with Herbicide Sprayer and Ballfield Drag and B) One Utility Maintenance Vehicle with Athletic Field Line Striper. G. Consider Approval of Resolution 98-XX Authorizing the City to Apply for a Department of Natural Resources Natural and Scenic Area Grant. H. Consider Approval of Resolution 98-XX Requesting that Scott County Have a Traffic and Engineering Study Conducted on CSAH 12 (170th Street) from TH 13 to the City's Westerly Border. I. Consider Approval of Preliminary 1997 4th Quarter Budget Report. J. Consider Approval of Change Order No.1 to the Contract for Construction of Pike Lake Trail to Eliminate a Retaining Wall. K. Consider Approval of Purchase of Resolution 98-XX Approving the Chevrolet Suburban to Replace Existing City Vehic1e. L. Consider Approval of Fire Call Report for February, 1998. 16~~~gle Creek Ave. S.E., Prior Lake, Minnesota 55372-1714 / Ph. (612) 447-4230 / Fax (612) 447-4245 AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER 6. ITEMS REMOVED FROM CONSENT AGE~DA: 7. PRESENTATIONS: 8. PUBLIC HEARINGS: 9. OLD BUSINESS: A. Consider Approval of Resolution 98-XX Relating to the Timothy/Commerce/CSAH 42 Intersection Configuration. B. Consider Approval of Ordinance 98-XX Approving a Zone Change from the A-I (Agricultural) District and the C-l (Conservation) District to the R-2 (Urban Residential) District, Resolution 98-XX Approving the Conditional Use Permit for 121 Townhouse Units and Resolution 98-XX Approving the Preliminary Plat for "Glynwater". C. Consider Approval of Report on Resolution 98-XX Authorizing Cablecasting of Advisory Committee Meetings. 10. NEW BUSINESS: A. Consider Approval of Ordinance 98-XX Amending Section 9-4-15 of the Prior Lake City Code relating to Water Restriction. B. Consider Approval of Appointments to City Councilmembers to Serve as Liaisons to Boards and Commissions. C. Consider Approval of Resolutions 98-XX Approving the Cooperative Agreeme~t with Scott County for Cost Sharing of Aerial Photography and Stereodigitizing. 11. OTHER BUSINESS/COUNCILMEMBER REPORTS: 12. ADJOURNMENT: 13. EXECUTIVE SESSION: To Discuss Pending Litigation Concerning Challenge by Keep Spring Association to Incorporation, Annexation (Deerfield and South Shore Drive) and Orderly Annexation Agreement. 31698.DOC w~ ~NE:;9 City Council Work Session - 5:30 - 7:30 p.m. REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING AGENDA Date: March 2, 1998 1. CALL TO ORDER: Mayor Mader called the meeting to order at 7:40 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, Parks and Recreation Director Hokeness, City Engineer Ilkka, Fire ChiefChromy, Recording Secretary Oden. 2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: Mayor Mader led the Pledge of Allegiance and welcomed everyone to the meeting. 3. CONSIDER APPROVAL OF PREVIOUS MEETING MINUTES: A. February 17, 1998 MOTION BY KEDROWSKI SECOND BY PETERSEN TO APPROVE THE MINUTES OF THE FEBRUARY 17, 1998 REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING. Upon a vote, ayes by Mader, Kedrowski, Petersen, Schenck and Wuellner, the motion carried. B. February 20, 1998 MOTION BY KEDROWSKI SECOND BY PETERSEN TO APPROVE THE MINUTES OF THE FEBRUARY 20, 1998 SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING. Upon a vote, ayes by Kedrowski, Petersen, and Wuellner, abstentions Mader and Schenck, the motion carried. 4. CONSENT AGENDA: Those items on the Council Agenda which are considered routine and non-controversial are included as part of the Consent Agenda. Unless the Mayor, a Councilmember, or member of the public specifically requests that an item on the Consent Agenda be removed and considered separately. Items on the Consent Agenda are considered under one motion, second and a roll call vote. Any item removed from the "Consent Agenda" shall be placed on the City Council Agenda as a separate category. A. Consider Approval of Invoices to be Paid. B. Consider Approval of Disposal of Used Fire Equipment. C. Consider Approval of St. Michael's Church: 1. Temporary 3.2 Non-Intoxicating Malt Liquor License 2. Waiver of Outdoor Concert Permit Fees and Clean-Up Depositfor Aprilfest 162~gle Creek Ave. S.E., Prior Lake, Minnesota 55372-1714 / Ph. (612) 447-4230 / Fax (612) 447-4215 AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER D. Consider Approval of Resolution 98-26 Approving Amended Joint and Cooperative Agreement for Suburban Transit Authority (STA) and Approving City Council Appointment to the STA. E. Consider Approval of Recommending Dissolution of the Credit River Water Management Organization. F. Consider Approval of Resolution 98-27 Approving Plans and Specifications for the Reconstruction of Wellhouse 3 and Authorizing Advertisement for Bids. G. Consider Approval of Resolution 98-28 Approving Disposal of City-Owned Property Lot 2, Block 3, Brooksville Center 1st Addition and Directing Staff to Obtain a Survey, Appraisal, and Subdivide the Property to Proceed with Public Sale. · Mayor Mader asked that item 4F be removed from the Consent Agenda so staff could comment on the proposal. MOTION BY KEDROWSKI SECOND BY SCHENCK TO APPROVE CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS A, B, C, D, E, AND G. Upon a vote, ayes by Mader, Kedrowski, Petersen, Schenck, and Wuellner, the motion carried. 5. ITEMS REMOVED FROM CONSENT AGENDA: (4F) Consider Approval of Resolution 98-27 Approving Plans and Specifications for the Reconstruction of Wellhouse 3 and Authorizing Advertisement for Bids. . City Engineer Ilkka said reconstruction of Wellhouse #3 and #6 have all been in the Capital Improvement Program for the past couple of years. Approval was provided for reconstruction of Wellhouse #3 and replacement of the Supervisor Control And Data Acquisition system (SCADA) prior to construction of well #6 which is being delayed by a DNR regulatory process. At the October 6, 1997 City Council meeting, Council approved going forward with reconstruction of the Wellhouse, upgrading the SCADA system, and preparing plans and specifications. This authorization is for advertisement for bids for reconstruction of only Wellhouse 3, which would house wells number 3,4 and the future #6. . Mayor Mader asked if the City advertises for bids for the Wellhouse and it turns out that number six can't be built, will that mean the Wellhouse has been built to a capacity that is more than what we need? . City Engineer Ilkka said piping for the system will have been provided, but there won't be excess capacity in the building. . Mayor Mader asked about the piping system in the Wellhouse. . City Engineer Ilkka deferred to Tom Roushar of Bonnestroo and Associates, consultant on the project. 3298.DOC 2 . Mr. Roushar said the Wellhouse 3 replacement project will involve demolition and replacement. It houses well 3 and provides chemical feed for well 4 which is 500 feet to the east. Another element of the project is construction of a water main back into the Cardinal Ridge subdivision to strengthen the water system. The City paid a portion of the cost of a portable standby generator that sits by the Wilds booster station. They will put in a generator receptacle and transfer switch so a well can be run on the standby generator should there be a power outage. A Wellhouse contains the pump room, the well, piping equipment, and a chemical feed room. MOTION BY MADER SECOND BY SCHENCK TO ADOPT RESOLUTION 98-27 APPROVING PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS FOR THE RECONSTRUCTION OF WELLHOUSE 3 AND AUTHORIZING ADVERTISEMENT FOR BIDS. Upon a vote, ayes by Mader, Kedrowski, Petersen, Schenck and Wuellner, the motion carried. 6. PRESENTATIONS: A. Barb Marschall, Scott County Commissioner, Presentation of County Opinion on Traffic Signal on Timothy/CSAH 42. . Ms. Marschall said her purpose in presenting was to provide the Council reaction to some points from the County. The Scott County Board wanted the Prior Lake City Council to know the Board's position on possible impacts of the Prior Lake City Council resolution on the County Road 42, Timothy, and Rutgers intersections. The resolution states it is the desire of the Council to leave Timothy/CSAH 42 as is, but subject to continuing discussions with the County. The County wants Savage and Prior Lake to come to an agreement. The developer has requested that the County Board take action next week. When the County reviews the proposal, the issues they will consider in the access and intersection discussion include: safety, traffic patterns, impact on the City, cost, business impact, orderly growth and existing County policy. The County will look at more than the local issues. The Council decision on Timothy/Rutgers, including not having a desire to pay for any of the improvements raises questions. The first issue, leaving Timothy as-is, brings up safety issues arising from unrestricted movement using intersection A. The second issue is the long term implication of the decision. Intersections on TH13 and CSAH 42 share mutual boundaries with Savage. This decision will impact relations with the City of Savage. The Scott County Board has requested that County staff research the dispute resolution process if the cities and the County do not come to an agreement. MnDOT may have a role in that, but they would like to keep it local and avoid involving MnDOT. The Prior Lake City Council is interested in protecting local business. Businesses along Commerce are destination businesses versus convenience. Intersection A will protect access. The only thing happening in Intersection C is the fact that outbound traffic would be restricted from turning west on to CSAH 42 from Timothy. The tax impact ofthe proposed development in Prior Lake on an average $120,000 home would result in an $85 tax reduction. She said intersections A and C both work short term. Intersection A has an estimated life span of 2-3 years. Intersection C has a estimated life span of 3-10 years or longer. The ultimate objective is closing off the Timothy median completely on CSAH 42. The developer has said if a left-in from 42 is not allowed, the development will not proceed. 3298.DOC 3 · Mayor Mader said he interpreted her comments to mean that Scott County wanted Prior Lake to look at the issue again. · Commissioner Marschall said that was the bottom line. The best solution would be one all parties could agree on, and Scott County would prefer not to make the sole decision, although it could. · Mayor Mader said the resolution approved was a compromise for the City Council. He said they reached a resolution that everyone on the Council could live with. · Councilmember Schenck said he thought he heard something new that the developer needs a left cross immediately at Timothy as a temporary solution until a signal is installed. . Commissioner Marschall said that is correct. · Councilmember Schenck asked if it was short term? · Commissioner Marschall said it is agreed that the median will be closed eventually. The intersection could last up to 10 years. The concept in front of Target and Burnsville Center where left hand turns are allowed has not been a problem and could work here. The short distance between TH 13 and the left hand turn could possibly cause stacking problems and could create congestion and possible accidents. The developer would like the left hand turn from east bound CSAH 42 into the development. They would also use the Rutgers lighted intersection as an access and those would be the two entrances. If and when the median is closed, access would be gone except for the traffic on the north side of CSAH 42 where those traveling west would still have the entrance and exit at Timothy. · Councilmember Schenck asked why isn't the signal light itself adequate? · Commissioner Marschall said they prefer both to allow the traffic patterns to develop. Those traveling east on CSAH 42 passing the light at Rutgers thinking there is an entrance to Rainbow past that, would have nowhere to go except to U-turn or go past. That would cause them to lose customers. · Councilmember Petersen asked about the possibility of a left both ways at Harbor without the islands. · Brad Larson, County Engineer said at Harbor there is only a left turn in from west bound traffic to go south into Harbor Place. Access across to the golf course is an exit only. There is no left turn lane to go east bound to north bound at that location. · Councilmember Petersen asked whether taking the center island out would create a dangerous situation in creating a left out? 3298.DOC 4 "" ~ . County Engineer Larson said at that intersection, traffic would not be able to do a left out. The concern would be a motorist wanting to go left out or west looking back toward TH13 and at the same time having to deal with traffic coming from the west. That is too much. . Mayor Mader said the Commissioner has requested that the Council take another look at the issue. He suggested a subcommittee to deal with the issue. . Councilmember Schenck said there would not be enough time. The Scott County Board meets March 10. . Mayor Mader said they cannot react to the decision instantly, and would not formalize it immediately. . Commissioner Marschall said if the Council was willing to talk about it, that would send a positive message to the County. If there was a clear indication that the Council was not willing to compromise, that would give the County clear direction on what it needed to do. MOTION BY MADER SECOND BY KEDROWSKI TO RECONSIDER THE RESOLUTION VIA SUBCOMMITTEE AND RETURN WITH A RECOMMENDATION: Upon a vote, ayes by Mader, Kedrowski, Petersen, and Wuellner, nay Schenck, the motion carried. . Mayor Mader asked Councilmember Schenck if he would be interested in sitting on the subcommittee. . Councilmember Schenck said yes. . Mayor Mader suggested that himself and Councilmember Schenck serve on the subcommittee. The Council concurred 7. PUBLIC HEARINGS: A. There were no public hearings. 8. OLD BUSINESS: A. Consider Approval of Resolution 98-29 Approving the Preliminary Plans as Recommended by the Building Committee for the Library / Resource Center Including 1. Location, 2. Dance Studio, 3. Coffee Shop, and 4. Authorizing the Building Committee to Proceed with the Project. MOTION BY SCHENCK SECOND BY WUELLNER TO APPROVE RESOLUTION 98- 29 APPROVING THE PRELIMINARY PLANS AS RECOMMENDED BY THE BUILDING COMMITTEE FOR THE LIBRARY/ RESOURCE CENTER INCLUDING 1. LOCATION 2. DANCE STUDIO, 3. COFFEE SHOP AND 4. AUTHORIZING THE BUILDING COMMITTEE TO PROCEED WITH THE PROJECT. 3298.DOC 5 · Councilmember Kedrowski asked for staffs analysis with regard to leasing versus owning a dance studio. · City Manager Boyles said there was a note from Finance Director Teschner he is distributing explaining the two options. The question was whether it was appropriate for the City to lease the dance studio or if it would be more economically beneficial to own its own. Councilmember Kedrowski: On the dance studio, right now, for the record, we generate how much additional revenue above and beyond the cost with the program right now? City Manager Boyles: Right now the program is generating $10,000 per year but that is inclusive of the $25,000 annual lease payment. Councilmember Kedrowski: The $10,000 is above the $25,000? City Manager Boyles: That's correct. Councilmember Kedrowski: So, what you're saying is that if we go with this option, there will be approximately $35,000 of additional revenue. . City Manager Boyles: Assuming all things remain equal. Councilmember Kedrowski: When we talked about putting this money back into a special fund, is that something the Council would do or is it part of the budgeting process? City Manager Boyles: It would be part of the budgeting process. Parks and Recreation Director Hokeness: At the Parks Advisory Committee and Council workshop, the Parks Advisory Committee one time had talked about incorporating an "enterprise fund" so that would be a means for money to be put into an account for making improvements over the years and it would be a viable way to have money for long range maintenance or repairs, for such things as the roof, carpeting, etc., so they don't have to come back to the taxpayer and ask for help. We will come back to the City Council at a later date and talk to Ralph a little bit more about the "enterprise fund". Councilmember Kedrowski: While you're up there Paul, maybe you can comment. The coffee shop has generated some discussion in the past here. The intent from the staffs perspective here is to take this coffee shop concept and open it up for request for proposals? Parks and Recreation Director Hokeness: Yes, sir. Councilmember Kedrowski: So the intent would be that there are more than one companies with an interest in seeing that happen? Parks and Recreation Director Hokeness: That would be correct. Three have already approached us about operating the coffee shop. 3298.DOC 6 3298.DOC Councilmember Kedrowski: What kinds of numbers are being given? Are they in other libraries? Parks and Recreation Director Hokeness: Right now the Edina Library coffee shop is run from their Friends of the Library so the money they are generating is being put back into books and materials and programs and such. The Roseville Library space is being leased by Dunn Brothers and they are leasing their space for $40,000 a year. Councilmember Kedrowski: There also has been some discussion in regard to the possibility of building the library in a different spot in the City, the L-shaped piece of property behind the Conoco station, am I correct in that? Parks and Recreation Director Hokeness: That's correct. Councilmember Kedrowski: The layout of the property does not seem conducive to the library design that we have now. The staff write-up addresses this concern, and outlines that fact that we might have to acquire several other pieces of property. Am I correct in that assumption? Parks and Recreation Director Hokeness: That's correct. Councilmember Kedrowski: So what are we looking at, two or three additional pieces of property? Parks and Recreation Director Hokeness: (Shows diagram). This is the property that's in question. Looking at the plat map, one-dimensional here, this is the property that is currently owned by Lawrence Schwiech. It has been referred to as the Bob Mertens property, but it's Lawrence Schwiech who owns this property. If you look at this, the lots that are here, the one large section of the lot and one actually goes down the hill and into the wetland. You can't see that this is actually the pond here. So we looked at this and granted, if you take all ofthis property, and as a whole it comes out to 57,600 feet. When we first started looking at this property which was brought up at the January 5 meeting of the downtown steering committee, so it was the 28th of January that I wrote the memo. So, we did spend some time talking about it and we did research this to find ownership. What we did is went out and looked at each property and the flat areas in the property to establish 27,000 square feet. Now granted if you look at this upper property here... Mayor Mader: I would like a clarification. The staff report I saw earlier said the property area from edge to edge of the property was 27,000 square feet. Parks and Recreation Director Hokeness: That's my mistake. I was thinking edge to edge of buildable property. I was thinking edge to edge, not boundary to boundary, so I went out and walked the site and scaled off the flattest, most open area that I could, and I came up with 26,800. You could have put in a little bit more property, add another maybe 20,000 square feet, down by the pond. As you can see, in order to put in parking lots, the driveway, dance studio, it's really a tough site to build on. 7 3298.DOC Barry Petit: The property significantly drops off. There is a fill issue, which hasn't been verified, but there is that possibility. The land makes it difficult to configure. It begins to substantially move that building out of that downtown core. I think that would have a real critical impact on the development of downtown. If you want to sum it up, you've got unknown site conditions, configuration of a lot that is very restrictive, and the neighbors, and you probably don't have enough property. You'd have to go acquire even more than what is here. Councilmember Kedrowski: I guess I would just like to close with a few comments. Overall, I would support the resolution tonight as presented for several reasons. One, as I look at the dance program, and the park and recreation program it is a partnership between the City and the community. Prior Lake has taken a very aggressive approach with park and recreation programs, and most of our park and recreation programs are totally cost recovered. Which means it doesn't cost the taxpayer anything. We demonstrate an economic advantage with the dance studio and community resource center. The cost recovered for the community is much greater. Hopefully we are using our dollars in the best interest of taxpayers here. It's just like anything we do in terms of park and recreation. We could make our parks--we could charge people to use them, but there is some public benefit to be served here. I think tonight we should take this stand in terms of our relationship and what we offer the community. And I think we've always been a conservative community in the fact that we do make these programs cost-recoverable. I think that the ideas for the coffee shop and the dance studio, with those funds that are available and that they will be generating, they can be used to make this project more self sufficient in terms of having funds available to help in cost recovery of items, including the enterprise funds. That shows good stewardship for taxpayer dollars. I think building the library on city-owned land, and we don't have land acquisition cost, and we know what we're dealing with in land, reflects well. I think the community supports the idea of redevelopment of downtown, and the library as the centerpiece. I think we are taking a strong position on what is going to happen downtown Prior Lake, and the direction we want to go. And I've been in Council now for not quite six years and the Planning Commission for another six years. And all that time, there have been several proposals to redevelop downtown, and nothing happened. I think that this is the first step for Prior Lake with where we want to go with this community. And I think we have to make a statement. Thank you. Councilmember Petersen: Well, I came in here tonight pretty much against this dance studio and I thought it would be best in the old library. But looking at the numbers, with $2 million in the library and $295,000 in the dance studio, that changed my mind a little bit. And then talking to some of the dance instructors, and finding out what private industry has got today, and the number of kids involved, and the number of years they have been involved, and then I looked at some of the other programs that we've got, the hockey ice- skating rink was a real success... So looking at those factors, at least the dance studio didn't get caught in El nino. So, looking at this, I would have to go with this conclusion, that this is an all right program. Councilmember Wuellner: First of all, as far as the site is concerned, I am very much in favor of the site as it's been proposed in the resolution. I said it before in the workshop. I think this is an excellent way for us to create an impetus to the downtown. It is excellent representation of the City's investment in downtown. I like the whole idea of the cityplex, 8 3298.DOC and even the future evolution of that with there being other nearby facilities and parking. I really feel that this building and all that it encompasses is the crown jewel for this community and could well be and should be the beating heart of Prior Lake. And I really feel strongly about that and I am very excited about this project. Economically it really makes sense. We already own the land. Granted, there may be an opportunity cost to using that land. However, I think the commercial value of the land that we're proposing is suspect because of the limited access it would have off of County Road 21. And still it enables us with the ability to spin-off the existing library building or site at the cost of building it. The existence of a coffee shop, I am very in favor of provided that we can enter into a contractual agreement with a private enterprise and not be in the business of competing against our local businesses. The Dance studio again I'm going to refer to as a multipurpose room, that is how I envision that, and that is an additional quality of life that we can accomplish with the building of this facility, and it is a badly needed entity in this community. I have been a part of a couple of different groups in Prior Lake, and we've never had a good place to meet and it was a downer to go to the meeting just because of where we had to have it. And being able to have access to a facility like this I think would really raise the interest of a lot of community groups because you've got such a good place to have it. It could be an enjoyable experience actually going to a meeting instead of reiteration of Robert's Rules of Order, which nobody likes anyway. Coffee shop, dance studio, multipurpose room, I'm committed to that. I think that's all I really had to say, other than that I fully support the resolution and I'm real excited to see this thing come off the ground. Councilmember Schenck: The previous Councilmembers summed up everything quite well, but it goes a little bit further than that, and it goes into the history that Mary gave us earlier tonight in our workshop. I was part of the Council in 1994 that voted against the regional library system. And sometimes on the Council when you make those votes, you go home and you lose sleep over it. I lost sleep for a long time. I didn't want to run into Mary in a dark alley. When my kids needed to go to the library, I waited in the parking lot. And now to see this before this Council, right now, it's the greatest. It's absolutely the greatest. The one thing that was left out of the discussion is that this entire project, from the concept to the referendum to the site plan is all citizen involved. It was a citizens' committee that did this. And part of being on a Council is accepting citizen input, whether you agree with it or not. This was done with class. The committee that put this together has class. And they produced a good project for us. Not only was the committee involved with this from the beginning, the citizens committee, it was produced by the citizens, and that gives credence to the project. It's a good project, I'm anxious. Why aren't you moving dirt yet, Paul? Mayor Mader: I'm afraid I'm going to sound like the lone ranger tonight because I think it's very clear how the Council is going to act on the resolution. I've had some difficulty supporting the resolution for a number of reasons and I will comment on those. It would be a lot easier for me to just go a long with it. And I'm afraid I'd have a little bit of a conscience struggle if I did. So, I have some problems with some of the data. It is troublesome to me that it's been over a year since the referendum was passed and tonight was the first night we've sat down and talked about it. And even at the work session, I had a list of questions which I had given to staff this morning, and we didn't have time to get through those, and that's what disturbs me. There are a number of things in there that I know are estimates. I have concern as to whether they are realistic estimates or whether they are for example, to help move this along. 9 . Besides the coffee shop, which I remember is 15 by 15 or 12 by 12 feet, looking at a 12 by 12 coffee shop, we are talking about $40,000 a year to lease that space. And I find myself wondering how many cups of coffee does one have to run through there to justify the end. And I have no idea, we were talking about the Roseville Library, how its size compares and that sort of thing. This information doesn't mean anything to me. But I certainly haven't seen any data that says here's some assumptions and here's some analysis that says that the coffee shop will pay for itself. It's just a blank statement and percent, and I'm sorry but I can't do business that way. I looked at the floor plan and it appears to me that the dance studio portion and the meeting room portion and the coffee shop portion roughly looks like it's about thirty percent of the floor space. Yet, we're saying that the library part is going to be $2 million and the other stuff a quarter of a million. It sounds to me like we have two absolutely different figures that we apply to those two spaces, and I was wondering about whether that kind of information is valid because they all have to have floor, they all have to have ceiling, walls, windows, plumbing, heating, bathroom fixtures, etc. And I have some concerns about that. . We started with a program that indicated that it would be about a $2.5 million project. And if my understanding is correct, I believe the committee communicated to our citizens that we were going to build a library for them, and that the dance studio-resource center, whatever we wish to call it, was going to be the refurbished old library. And suddenly for the same price we can build a new building that is bigger and better and more wonderful, at the same numbers. I'm concerned from my standpoint, if I were sitting on a board of a corporation, I would not use this kind of data to make a decision to invest $2.5 or $3 million for a company. It's clear that we are talking about a project that probably has a price tag of somewhere around $2.7 to $2.8 million if you take into account the value of the land. The land clearly has a market value and if we use it becomes a cost in the project. I have some concerns about that. . Since we promised our citizens initially that we were going to build them a library building and refurbish another building, I would have liked to see an analysis that says that would have cost x amount of dollars, but by doing it this way, we're adding x amount. But to have it be the same number no matter what we do, I don't view that as good analytical data. I have concerns with what is going to happen with the old library building. Right now, it sounds like what we're saying is we've decided it has no value other than land and I assume that means demolition costs (end oftape)..the one right now is going to have access roads to the library through there and its seems to me like we have created a very small parcel of land that I think loses its marketability. In other words, someone can't come along now and buy a piece of land from us which includes the old library site and something else because they want to put a business there. By doing what we're doing, we're-I think resigning ourselves to the fact that that corner is only going to be useable by someone that has a very small shop in mind or whatever it may be. And it bothers me that we just dismissed that piece of property offhand. . As far as the alternate site, as I indicated earlier, I was concerned that it seemed to me that it was dismissed very suddenly, and with data that seems to be, to indicate the site wasn't accessible. The size of the site was certainly not represented fairly, I don't think, in the data I 3298.DOC 10 ----- .....-q . . . 3298.DOC saw, I hear that there may be fill problems there, I understand that. But I've also had a citizen tell me wait until you start digging on the site you're proposing. It used to be an old grain elevator or something and there are railroad tracks under there. How do we know that site doesn't have some problems? And I'm assuming we haven't evaluated that. But we're taking the other site and saying it's not accessible because we know there's fill there. But please understand, I'm not proposing the other site. I'm merely saying that I'd like us to consider the options and the alternatives before we set in place what we are all going to live with forever. In terms of the size of the other site, one of the questions I would have is if the site is a little restrictive because of wetlands or whatever, would that site have been big enough ifit had been a library only rather than a library / dance studio? Lastly, I have a question of where we stand with our present situation with the architect. I read in the paper that the architect has already incurred $60,000 in costs. We don't have a contract with that architect yet. Is that information correct or is that incorrect? And it leads to questions such as if the project were reduced in scope, would the cost projection be proportionally reduced. If scope or location of project changes, in other words if we decide on a smaller scope of project, or if we change the location, are we going to be subject to change related fees? And I don't know the answer to that. I know that we are receiving invoices from an architect who is not yet under contract. It is a legitimate reason to raise 'a question of where we're going. When I see invoices for surveying of the final site which the Council hasn't yet accepted or approved. It sounds to me like the train is going down the tracks at high speed and I would much prefer that we could have had some meaningful dialogue on this rather than getting to the point where it's cast in concrete. Those are the kinds of things that I am concerned about, to state my pOSItIon, and incidentally, I would like to request that in the minutes that my comments be verbatim so that there is no misunderstanding or misquoting of what my position is. I am absolutely in support of a library project. But, I think it's fair to say that based on the referendum, the Council has basically a fiduciary responsibility to build a new library. We have the right but not an obligation to expand the new building beyond the library configuration. I cannot believe that going from a library only to a library and a dance studio costs the same. There's got to be some differences. And I'm amazed that they cost the same. I'm not persuaded that the dance studio and coffee shop will generate a profit for the City. I have seen the data we just received about lease versus ownership. I looked at the previous data that talked about the profits we generate. But in a business, if you buy donuts for 20 cents and sell them for 30 cents, I guess you can say you made a 10 cent profit if you don't consider the staff time or overhead or insurance or utility costs or that type of thing. I saw in one of the documents an indication that we could do it cheaper and better than private industry. I certainly haven't seen evidence that government bodies can do things cheaper and better than private industry. And I think a real world sort of analysis of the cost would not lead to the conclusion that we are going to generate profit for the City. I think what it will do is lead to the fact that we are going to have some costs going on indefinitely. There are costs for every square foot of new building. There are initial construction costs, there are interest costs that continue for the term of the bond, I don't recall either twenty or thirty year bond. So we have interest costs that go on for twenty years. We have ongoing costs that continue forever, such as utilities, maintenance, insurance, etc. and future budgets 11 will automatically be burdened with these costs. And we are moving in this direction on blind faith I think. I don't support building any more buildings than we need. You don't have to look very far to find half utilized buildings and I don't want to build any more than we need. I've heard comments that we need more meeting space. This City has probably quadrupled its available meeting space just the last couple of years. This facility that we are sitting in, not just this room, but other conference rooms have just been built in the last couple of years. We have a large maintenance building which has many meeting rooms in it of various sizes. On Monday nights when we all have our meetings on the same nights, it gets crowded, but I'm not sure it's crowded on Tuesday, Wednesday, Thursday, Friday. . My personal attitude and I suppose it is part of a conservative type philosophy is that government should supply or provide services that citizens themselves or the private industry can't. And I look at library, roads, athletic fields, fall into that category because citizens can't practically provide that on their own. However, I don't think the dance studio falls into that category. The private sector can provide for that service and it does very successfully in some of our surrounding communities. I don't think we should be spending taxpayer dollars on new facilities that will discourage anybody from coming and wanting to operate a dance studio here. A dance studio, if it was operated here by private enterprise, would create tax revenue. We will create no tax revenue when we do that ourselves. . The committee and staff were charged with the responsibility to use their judgment and experience to formulate a recommendation. I sincerely believe and I mean this very sincerely, that they have done that with diligence. That doesn't mean that it is necessarily the right recommendation. As a Councilmember, I was reluctant to use my judgment and my experience to cast a single vote. And a single vote on behalf of all of the residents in the City, not a vote on behalf of just those that would agree with the presentation. I have had a tremendous amount of citizen feedback this week. And I have to say that based on that feedback, there is no question in my mind that the vast majority of citizens in Prior Lake do not support the idea of us spending tax dollars to build new facilities with a dance studio. That might be subjective, but I would have to say that's based on at least several dozen phone calls. Many of them precipitated by the article that was in the newspaper about seven or eight or nine days ago. Based upon these factors I can't support the resolution as it stands. My preference would be to take another look at it. For the Council to arrive here tonight, review some quick facts and go out and say yes, that's the right thing to do, I frankly can't do that. So I cannot support it. Weare not opening it up to the public tonight, unless we get to the point where for some reason that was appropriate. Is there any other discussion by Councilmembers? Councilmember Wuellner: I did have one thing. I have had several phone calls myself, too, Mr. Mayor, at least a dozen this past weekend, and they included the opposite of what you are hearing. So maybe people pick their target according to who they want to vent frustrations to. I heard nothing but support for the facility as it is represented by the resolution. Mayor Mader: We should not lose sight of the fact that with the referendum, I believe that we had 13% of our registered voters voting. And of those, the vote was almost split. I think there were about sixty to seventy votes difference between those that supported it and those 3298.DOC 12 that did not. It is clear that the referendum passed and that's the basis on which we need to act. However, I certainly would not conclude from that that there is support for everything that we are talking about tonight. The referendum that passed addressed clearly the library, but did not address the building with the dance studio. Again, we will not take comments from the public. I picked up today from City Hall copies of the presentations that were made and I'll read from those. Here is the presentation that was on cable TV. It says, "What is included in the referendum? Improvements to Lakefront Park according to the master plan, construction of the new library and remodeling the old library, and then developing the community parks and other things. To me, that is very specific and very clear. That was what was in the presentation." · Mayor Mader called the question. Upon a vote, ayes by Kedrowski, Petersen, Schenck, and Wuellner, nay Mader the motion carried. B. Consider Approval of Resolution 98-30 Approving Final Plat and Developers Contract for Red Oaks Second Addition. MOTION BY KEDROWSKI SECOND BY SCHENCK TO APPROVE RESOLUTION 98- 30 APPROVING THE FINAL PLAT AND DEVELOPERS CONTRACT. · City Manager Boyles asked if that included a waiver of the $530 application fee. · Councilmember Schenck said that was not a waiver it was a reimbursement. Upon a vote, ayes by Mader, Kedrowski, Petersen, Schenck, and Wuellner, the motion carried. C. Consider Approval of Ordinance 98-02 Extending the Duration of the Moratorium on Downtown Development. MOTION BY KEDROWSKI SECOND BY SCHENCK TO APPROVE ORDINANCE 98- 02 EXTENDING DURATION OF THE MORATORIUM ON DOWNTOWN DEVELOPMENT. . Councilmember Schenck said if the conclusions from the downtown development committee come back before hand can it be rescinded? . City Manager Boyles said the way the ordinance reads in section three, it "shall remain in effect until the new zoning ordinance is adopted or until this is amended whichever is sooner." . Councilmember Kedrowski asked how does this affect the construction of the library with a moratorium downtown? 3298 DOC 13 . City Manager Boyles said it does not affect it. Construction is not expected to start until the end of the moratorium. Building permits can still be processed. Mayor Mader called the question. Upon a vote, ayes by Mader, Kedrowski, Petersen, Schenck, and Wuellner, the motion carried. D. Consider Approval of Resolution 98-32 Approving Final Plat and Developers Contract for Pheasant Meadows Second Addition. MOTION BY KEDROWSKI SECOND BY WUELLNER TO APPROVE RESOLUTION 98-32 APPROVING THE FINAL PLAT AND DEVELOPERS CONTRACT FOR PHEASANT MEADOWS SECOND ADDITION. Upon a vote, ayes by Mader, Kedrowski, Petersen, Schenck, and Wuellner, the motion carried. E. Consider Approval of Follow Up Actions from February 13 and 14 Workshop: 1) City Council Bylaw Revisions . City Manager Boyles introduced the item. There are two follow-up items. The Bylaws reflect the revisions that the Council reviewed paragraph by paragraph at the workshop. MOTION BY KEDROWSKI SECOND BY PETERSEN TO ADOPT THE CITY COUNCIL BYLAWS. . Councilmember Kedrowski said additional time or hours should be considered for the work session. There is a two hour block of time once per month, it should not be limited. He said the Council needs to consider a second night and additional time. . Councilmember Petersen said if it will take more time it will take more. . Councilmember Wuellner said more would be OK. He said they may not need to have one, but they can set aside the time in case there is an issue. . Councilmember Kedrowski said he wanted to make it clear that he was available for these work sessions. . Councilmember Schenck said he agreed there should be more time spent, but could change it to read "but not limited to". . Mayor Mader said work sessions are appropriate but he would be reluctant to schedule too many. He said he found it difficult to accept that the Council needed two work sessions. He mentioned running out of time in the work session because some yes/no questions got ten minute answers and he did not get his questions answered. He said they also need to be 3298.DOC 14 effective with how they use time. He said he was not opposed to having work sessions when it was appropriate, let the City Manager schedule them as he sees fit. · Councilmember Kedrowski said that is what he is proposing. He said he did not want it to be limiting. · Councilmember Wuellner said he would have been willing to talk about the library issue at the works session and put off the other items. · Councilmember Kedrowski said he would defer this to City Manager Boyles. He said he wanted the work sessions. · City Manager Boyles said you could strike prior to the first meeting and just say the City Manager may schedule work sessions. · Councilmember Kedrowski said under section 10, page 14 item b number 2 he thought Councilmembers were being assigned to a specific committee as a liaison. He questioned whether they should limit the association to one year. He said he would like to accept two amendments, to rewrite section 2 (D) as proposed by staff and section 10 number (2) to delete the word mayor. The proposal was considered a friendly amendment to the main motion by the maker and seconder. Upon a vote, ayes by Mader, Kedrowski, Petersen, Schenck, and Wuellner, the motion carried. 2) Strategic Plan · City Manager Boyles said the vision was revised at the workshop. The Council did not have time to go through the Tactical Action Plans at the workshop. · Councilmember Kedrowski it would be prudent to go through it in a work session so that the entire Council can agree on it. · Mayor Mader asked ifhe was suggesting to defer it to a workshop? MOTION BY KEDROWSKI SECOND BY SCHENCK TO TABLE THE STRATEGIC PLAN TO A TIME CERTAIN, WITHIN 60 DAYS, TO A WORK SESSION. Upon a vote, ayes by Mader, Kedrowski, Petersen, Wuellner, and Schenck, the motion carried. 3) Purchasing Policy . City Manager Boyles introduced the item. He outlined the existing guidelines, and the sample contracts. 3298.DOC 15 . Mayor Mader suggested deferring this also because Council needs to have a clearer understanding. MOTION BY MADER SECOND BY PETERSEN TO TABLE TO A TIME CERTAIN WITHIN 60 DAYS TO A WORK. SESSION. . Mayor Mader said it was appropriate to take another look at this because of the new Councilmembers; and the City has had some snafus in relation to how purchases are made. Upon a vote, ayes by Mader, Kedrowski, Petersen, Schenck, and Wuellner, the motion carried. 9. NEW BUSINESS: A. Consider Approval of City Participation in the US Census Local Update of Census Addresses Program. MOTION BY KEDROWSKI SECOND BY SCHENCK TO APPROVE CITY PARTICIPATION IN THE US CENSUS LOCAL UPDATE OF CENSUS ADDRESSES PROGRAM. . Mayor Mader asked if the City knew how much it will cost. . Planning Director Rye said it is not a dollar amount. The City maintains address lists as current as possible. They send the City their current addresses, and City then compares it so it is as current as possible. Upon a vote, ayes by Mader, Kedrowski, Petersen, Schenck, and Wuellner, the motion carried. B. Consider Approval of Resolution 98-33 Approving Preliminary Plat for Woodridge Estates Fourth Addition. . City Manager Boyles said the plat was in conformance with city code. MOTION BY KEDROWSKI SECOND BY WUELLNER TO APPROVE THE PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR WOODRlDGE ESTATES FOURTH ADDITION SUBJECT TO THE CONDITIONS OUTLINED HEREIN. . Councilmember Kedrowski asked Planning Director Rye about outlot A, whether it was the intent for the developer to give the City outlot A. . Planning Director Rye said it is a pond, or a wetland. It remains to be resolved. There has not been firm direction from the developer. It will come back with the final plat. Upon a vote, ayes by Mader, Kedrowski, Petersen, Schenck, and Wuellner, the motion carried. 3298.DOC 16 C. Consider Approval of Resolution 98-34 Approving the Developers Agreement for Creekside Estates Storm Sewer (City Project #97-41). MOTION BY KEDROWSKI SECOND BY PETERSEN TO APPROVE RESOLUTION 98-34 APPROVING THE DEVELOPERS AGREEMENT FOR CREEKSIDE ESTATES STORM SEWER. · Mayor Mader said it appears the City is reimbursing the developer for building ponds. Why is the City picking up the cost ofNURP ponds imposed by federal legislation? · City Engineer Ilkka said it is currently part of the assessment policy. In this case, the pond will treat more than the developer's water. Upon a vote, ayes by Mader, Kedrowski, Petersen, Schenck and Wuellner, the motion carried. 10. OTHER BUSINESS · City Manager Boyles said in speaking with members of the Library/Resource Center Building Committee they would like a Council liaison. MOTION BY KEDROWSKI SECOND BY PETERSEN TO APPOINT COUNCILMEMBER WUELLNER TO THE BUILDING COMMITTEE AS LIAISON. Upon a vote, ayes by Mader, Kedrowski, Petersen, Schenck, and Wuellner, the motion carried. . City Manager Boyles read through the Weekly Update. One of the items was the Inflow / Infiltration loan program with Metropolitan Council Environmental Services (MCES). . Councilmember Schenck said the reason for bringing the manhole sealing in was to apply for and hopefully receive grant approval. . City Engineer Ilkka said MCES wanted to quantify the reduction in inflow. Manhole sealing is not easily measured. The payback doing manhole sealing at City cost will come and he would recommend doing it outside the loan program. . Councilmember Schenck said he would recognize the savings ifhe could get the grant. . Mayor Mader asked about quantifying the sump pump disconnection. . City Engineer Ilkka said the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) and the Met Council have done an estimate. Each manhole is constructed differently so each one has a different amount of inflow. . The Council concurred that manhole sealing could be omitted from the MCES Loan program request. 3298.DOC 17 . . City Manager Boyles said an earlier Council directive asked the staff to come up with a Lake regulation coordination plan in case action is needed for the future winter ice problems. Councilmember Kedrowski said there was a lot of coordination involved with the ice issues, and there should be a timeline for lake regulations in the future. . City Manager Boyles said he wanted to make sure the staff was interpreting the Council's direction correctly. . City Engineer Ilkka said 60 days was overly optimistic. . Councilmember Kedrowski said the Lake Advisory Committee could deal with it on a more comprehensive level. . The Council concurred with the staff interpretation of the direction as set forth in Lani Leichty's memo. . Mayor Mader said the sidewalks on Northwood Road were not being plowed. . Parks and Recreation Director Hokeness said most of the Northwood Road sidewalks were not going to be plowed this year, it is not our current maintenance policy. He said the City did plow some sections of it and may plow the whole thing next year. . Councilmember Kedrowski said it was very costly for the City to plow the sidewalks. There was quite a bit of staff time involved. . Mayor Mader said the sidewalks and lights have been a major investment for the City. . Councilmember Kedrowski said he was not opposed to it for next year. . City Manager Boyles said this is something that could be looked at annually where the trail and sidewalk policy is approved by the Council. . Mayor Mader said he had a list of follow-up items he was seeking staff to follow up on: Council took action to restrict parking along CSAH 21 by the bridge and that alternative parking would be explored. Where is the alternative parking? . Mayor Mader said the Council made a decision to close Shady Beach access at night and the staff was to investigate an alternate access. . The staff should take a look at the speed limits on CSAH 12 from the Triangle Car Wash down through the two lakes; it is 45 mph and then it drops down to 35 mph. . Councilmember Schenck said there should be a trail on that road. . Mayor Mader asked about the Burdick property issues. 3298.DOC . ,.{ 18 """ ~. J/A. · City Attorney Pace said the Planning Commission granted a variance on building setback and denied the variance on the trash enclosure. Burdick intends to appeal the decision on the trash enclosure. The five day appeal period was not met. · Councilmember Kedrowski said so the only outstanding issue is the trash enclosure. · Mayor Mader said the resolution included the berm. · City Attorney Pace said it was her opinion that there was a zoning violation. Now that a variance was approved, permits and a certificate of occupancy can be issued. · Planning Director Rye confirmed that the five day variance appeal time limit had expired. · Mayor Mader questioned playground equipment and accessibility. The new equipment will be delivered this coming summer. The suggestion was that it will not be Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) compatible. He said he talked to someone who works with accessibili ty. · Parks and Recreation Director Hokeness said the ADA was started in 1991. The manufacturers and buyers have no guidelines. Before he came to Prior Lake none of the playgrounds had accessible components. Now all the new playgrounds which have been installed are accessible. · Mayor Mader asked whether the equipment the City is buying will meet the anticipated new ADA requirements? · Parks and Recreation Director Hokeness said the smaller parks will. The Ponds and larger parks may have to be adapted at a later date. He does not anticipate retroactive application of any new standards. 11. ADJOURNMENT: MOTION BY SCHENCK SECOND BY WUELLNER TO ADJOURN THE MEETING. The meeting adjournl at 10:00 p.rn. ~1 -- !4~!Jiw Recording Secretary City 3298.DOC 19