HomeMy WebLinkAbout9F - PD City Hall Site
MEETING DATE:
AGENDA #:
PREPARED BY:
AGENDA ITEM:
DISCUSSION:
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
May 19, 2003
9F
Frank Boyles, City Manager
CONSIDER APPROVAL OF A RESOLUTION CONFIRMING CITY COUNCIL
ACTION TO SELECT THE LAKEFRONT PARK SITE FOR THE POLICE
STATION I CITY HALL I COMMUNITY CENTER AND DIRECTING THE
ARCHITECT TO UNDERTAKE ADDITIONAL SITE ANALYSIS TO REFINE THE
PROJECT COST PROJECTIONS.
History: On February 18, 2003, the City Council discussed the site selection
criteria and alternate sites to house the proposed Police Station I City Hall I
Community Center. The Council reduced the sites for further consideration and
prioritized the site selection criteria. The Council's final action was to appoint
Mayor Haugen and Council member LeMair as a subcommittee to supply a report
on the proposed site.
On April 21, 2003, the subcommittee submitted a report to the City Council
recommending the Lakefront Park site. The Council concurred with the
subcommittee's recommendations, but wanted to provide the public with an
opportunity to comment. Therefore, a motion was unanimously adopted
confirming that the City Council would receive input regarding the proposed site
for the next 30 days and that a final decision would be scheduled for the May 19, .
2003 meeting (see attached minutes).
Current Circumstances: Police Chief Bill O'Rourke has been gathering feedback.
We have received a total of three comments. In one case, an e-mail indicates that
"the Lakefront Park option is a good option': The person goes on to point out that
traffic issues need to be addressed so the intersection of Main I TH13 I
Ridgemont can accommodate the added traffic. As the City Council is aware, this
intersection is to be improved in conjunction with or as soon as possible after the
Police Station! City Hall! Community Center is completed.
Two persons phoned in comments. One expressed concern that the Police
Station! City Hall! Community Center should not be installed at the Lakefront site
because then other things will be installed there as well. The other caller had not
read the newspaper articles but called to oppose the Lakefront site because she
had been told to do so.
Conclusion: The thirty day comment period has not revealed strong feelings about
this site.
16200 Eagle Creek Ave. S.E., Prior Lake, Minnesota 55372-1714 / Ph. (952) 447-4230 / Fax (952) 447-4245
1:\COUNCIL\AGNRPTS\2003\CITY HALL SITEiIli>O$UAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER
ISSUES:
The proposed 2004-2008 Capital Improvement Program proposes that the Police
Station / City Hall/ Community Center project be undertaken in 2005. Since the
Council has not approved the Capital Improvement Program, the date could be
revised. Moreover, even after the CIP is adopted, the Council has the flexibility of
determining the most appropriate construction date. The Council has already
reaffirmed its commitment to the lifetime estate for Meda Kop which will be a key
factor in scheduling this project.
The Capital Improvement Program estimates this project at $13 million and
assumes bonding of no more than $10 million. In order that better construction
cost estimates can be made, the staff should be directed to:
1. Conduct a preliminary site analysis and model to assure that the building
can be completed on that site and obtain a better estimate of associated
costs. This information will further help to refine the Capital Improvement
Program.
2. Report upon alternate uses of the existing City Hall site.
This information would be shared with the Council and may be the basis for
further adjusting the timing of the project.
ALTERNATIVES: (1) Motion and Second confirming selection of the Lakefront site for eventual
construction of the Police Station / City Hall/Community Center.
(2) Motion and Second directing staff to proceed to complete a site analysis,
model and report regarding alternate uses of the existing City Hall / Annex
site.
(3) Take no action.
RECOMMENDED
MOTION: Alternatives (1) and (2).
1:\COUNCIL\AGNRPTS\2003\CITY HALL SITE. DOC
City Council Meeting Minutes
February 18, 2003
VOTE: Ayes by Haugen, Blomberg, Petersen, Zieska and LeMair, the motion carried.
Hauaen: Added that there is discussion currently taking place to redevelop the Priordale Mall area, and that that would
certainly emphasize the value of the Ring Road project to the area and the surrounding land.
PRESENTATIONS NONE.
OLD BUSINESS:
Consider Approval of a Report Regarding the Proposed City Hall/Police Station / Community Center with respect
to the following: (1) Criteria for Site Selection; (2) Refinement of Sites for Further Consideration; (3) Establishment
of City Council Subcommittee.
Bovles: Reviewed the agenda in connection with the staff report.
LeMalr: Believed it is important that the site location is tied to the redevelopment effort of the Downtown area.
Zieska: Believed that availability and the size of the lot is of equal importance so that there is room for the facility to grow as
the community grows.
Petersen: Also believed that it was important for the facilities to stay in the Downtown area, where there is good access to
CSAH 21 and TH13.
Blombera: Believed it important to remember that we have been given a road map by the community, in which it states that
the facility should be a gateway to Downtown and Lakefront park amenities. Also believed the site should make sense
logistically from an access and size perspective, and that land not be taken that removes viable commercial property from
the community tax rolls.
Hauaen: Noted that this process is one of evaluation and that there is no exact timeline as to when a facility will be built, or
what it will look like. It is important to plan for our future, and the current facilities prohibit the full use of our staff capabilities
and limit the services that could otherwise be provided. Positives in moving quickly include the current cost of money. The
process at this point is similar to when an individual would buy a home. Some money is being set aside, infonnation is
being gathered, but we just haven't decided yet. Reviewed each of the proposed criteria and asked Councilmembers to
comment.
LeMalr: Believed it important that the project be tied to Downtown redevelopment.
Zleska: Concurred. Suggested that the gateway criteria could be encompassed in the criteria that states consistency with
the 2020 Vision.
Petersen: Believed it critical to keep the City Hall and Police facilities in the Downtown area where access to CSAH 21 and
TH13 is best.
Blombera: Believed if the item was critical to the long-range planning committee, it is reason enough for her support.
MOTION BY ZIESKA, SECOND BY BLOMBERG SUPPORTING THAT CRITERIA #1/S THAT THE SITE BE A GATEWAY
TO DOWNTOWN AND CONSISTENT WITH THE 2020 VISION.
VOTE: Ayes by Haugen, ,Blomberg, Petersen, Zieska and LeMair, the motion carried.
9
City Council Meeting Minutes
February 18, 2003
MOTION BY LEMAIR, SECOND BY BLOMBERG SUPPORTING THAT CRITERIA #2 IS THAT THE SITE BE NOT LESS
THAN 5.5 ACRES.
VOTE: Ayes by Haugen, Blomberg, Petersen, Zieska and LeMair, the motion carried.
MOTION BY LEMAIR, SECOND BY PETERSEN SUPPORTING THAT CRITERIA #3 IS THAT THE ZONING BE
COMPATIBLE WITH THE USE OR ABLE TO CHANGE.
VOTE: Ayes by Haugen, Blomberg, Petersen, Zieska and LeMair, the motion carried.
MOTION BY PETERSEN, SECOND BY LEMAIR SUPPORTING THAT CRITERIA #4 IS THAT THE PROXIMITY TO
MAJOR THOROUGHFARES AND ACCESS IS REQUIRED.
VOTE: Ayes by Haugen, Blomberg, Petersen, Zieska and LeMair, the motion carried.
Zieska: Believed the remainder of the proposed criteria are part of the process and need not be included.
All Councilmembers concurred.
LeMalr: Commented that availability and cost may be two separate issues, but are undoubtedly included in the process. Did
not believe availability was necessarily critical because a timeline had not yet been identified. The cost of the site and
estimated construction factors could eliminate some properties.
Zleska: Agreed.
Petersen: Commented that he is often questioned why the City is planning a new facility given the current economic and
political climate. Believed a plan is very important to guide our future action. Would like to see the timeline remain open until
such time that the impacts of the State budget deficit upon Prior Lake are more fully identified.
MOTION BY LEMAIR, SECOND BY BLOMBERG SUPPORTING THAT CRITERIA #5 THAT THE AVAILABILITY AND
COST OF THE SITE MUST BE CONSIDERED.
VOTE: Ayes by Haugen, Blomberg, Petersen, Zieska and LeMair, the motion carried.
Hauaen: Discussed sites eliminated in a work session that were not included in the initial analysis, including a parcel at
CSAH 42 & County Road 18, the Shepherd of the Lake Church which was part of an idea for a community center facility
only, and a site by Pond's Edge which is the new Post Office site. Suggested adding the 5 acre parcel along CSAH 21
between Duluth Avenue and West Avenue to the list of sites to be considered.
Zieska: Suggested that a subcommittee be appointed and charged with the job of reviewing the sites against the criteria
identified.
Councilmembers concurred.
MOTION BY ZIESKA, SECOND BY PETERSEN TO APPOINT MAYOR HAUGEN AND COUNCILMEMBER LEMAIR TO
THE CITY HALL I POLICE STATION I COMMUNITY CENTER DEVELOPMENT PROJECT SUBCOMMITTEE.
VOTE: Ayes by Haugen, Blomberg, Petersen, Zieska and LeMair, the motion carried.
Consider Approval of a Resolution Author/zing Payment to Scott County for Construction of CSAH 42 and CSAH 83
Improvements, City Project 02-01.
10
1
City Council Meeting Minutes
February 18, 2003
McDermott: Reviewed the agenda item in connection with the staff report.
Zleska: Asked what happens to the $300,000 that was saved on this project.
McDermott: The money remains in the Construction Fund for future projects.
Bovles: Explained that money such as the Construction Fund are funded by development fees and must be used for
designated types of projects through which the funds were collected.
MOTION BY ZIESKA, SECOND BY LEMAIR, TO APPROVE RESOLUTION 03.24 AUTHORIZING PAYMENT TO SCOTT
COUNTY FOR CONSTRUCTION OF CSAH 42 AND CSAH 83 IMPROVEMENTS, CITY PROJECT 02-01.
VOTE: Ayes by Haugen, Blomberg, Petersen, Zieska and LeMair, the motion carried.
NEW BUSINESS
Consider Approval of Report Regarding 50 Foot Versus 75 Foot Setback Requirements from the Ordinary High
Water Marie (9047.
Rye: Reviewed the agenda item in connection with the staff report, discussing the history of the setback ordinance, the
rationale for the Planning Commission's recommendation that the 75 foot setback be reinstated which it was with the
adoption of the new zoning ordinance in May 1999, compliance with DNR and state rules, and consistency in application of
the ordinance. Concluded that there appear to be significant reasons to retain the 75 foot setback, although it is ultimately a
police decision for the Council.
b!M!!r: Asked if the City is required to abide by State standard for impervious surface and height, if we adopted the State
standard for a 50 foot setback. Also asked what setbacks are on other area lakes.
Rye: Clarified that if the idea is to be consistent as possible with the State standards, the Council may want to consider
impervious surface and height as well. Believed the setbacks are different from community to community because of the
structure of the lake and the level of development and land available.
Petersen: Believed changing the setback just exchanges one set of issues for another. Noted that the Planning
Commission strongly supports the 75 foot setback, because of lake creep, and the affects upon water quality.
Blombera: Did not see any compelling reason to change the existing 75 foot setback standard.
Rye: Commented that variances are typically only granted past the 75 feet if it means the lot is otherwise un buildable.
Zleska: Supports the Planning Commission recommendation.
Hauaen: Did not support an ordinance amendment at this time, but suggested staff take it to the Lake Advisory and
Planning Commission as a discussion item for an informal recommendation.
Zleska: Believed the issue is dead given the past viewpoints of the bodies.
LeMalr: Believed it important to gather all the information and have a full discussion.
Blombera: Commented that additional information never hurts, but she is not inclined to change the setback.
11
1
City Council Meeting Minutes
DRAFT
April 21, 2003
industrial area, all of which prohibit it from being added to surrounding commercial property. Believed that an R-4 high-
density development is the best use for the property.
PETERSEN: Agreed with Councilmember Zieska's point on viewing the bigger picture for the area.
BLOMBERG: Previously voted to amend the Comprehensive Plan for this area, and repeated that she believed market-rate
rental property is beneficial to the City as a whole. This area seems appropriate for that use.
LEMAIR: Added that providing this type of housing for employees of local employers can aid small business owners in
bringing business to Prior Lake. Supported the amendment.
HAUGEN: Agreed that looking at the property as it relates to other business development in the community as a whole,
makes a designation to R-4 high density residential development a better use for the property.
MOTION BY ZIESKA, SECOND BY LEMAIR, DIRECTING STAFF TO PREPARE A RESOLUTION AMENDING THE
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN FOR 4.25 ACRES OF THE DEERFIELD AREA TO R-4 HIGH-DENSITY RESIDENTIAL
DESIGNATION.
VOTE: Ayes by Haugen, Blomberg, Petersen, Zieska and LeMair, the motion carried.
Consider Approval of a Report from the City Council Subcommittee on Site Selection for the Police Station / City
Hall / Community Center.
BOYLES: Reviewed the agenda item in connection with the staff report, advising that the evaluation of the subcommittee
resulted in a recommendation that the Lakefront Park site be designated as the site for a new facility.
BLOMBERG: Supported the rationale for recommending the Lakefront Park site. Encourage that the Council solicit further
public comment before a site is choosen.
MOTION BY PETERSEN, SECOND BY ZIESKA, ACCEPTING THE REPORT OF THE SUBCOMMITTEE AS PROPOSED.
ZIESKA: Supported accepting the report and moving forward with the 3D-day public comment period, but would like the
Council to move forward with choosing a site so that other property owners in limbo can get some direction.
LEMAIR: Welcomed public comment, but did feel the Council could go on record in support of a particular site.
HAUGEN: Discussed the disadvantages to the four sites other than the Lakefront Park site, including the costs of the sites,
the removal of property from use as a viable commercial site, and the inability to tie Downtown to the lake which is a
direction from our 2020 Vision. Advised that no further progress would be made on a project until such time as the City
fulfills it's obligation to Meda Kop.
BLOMBERG: Clarified that once public comment has been submitted, the Council can further consider the item.
VOTE: Ayes by Haugen, Blomberg, Pefersen, Zieska, and LeMair, the motion carried.
PACE: Commented that if no formal process is being used for soliciting public comment, and that comments should be in
writing and directed to City Hall.
5
City Council Meeting Minutes
DRAFT
April 21, 2003
MOTION BY ZIESKA, SECOND BY BLOMBERG, DIRECTING THAT THE CITY WILL CONSIDER FORMALLY
SELECTING A SITE AT ITS MAY 2, 2003 MEETING AND UNTIL SUCH TIME WILL TAKE PUBLIC COMMENT.
VOTE: Ayes Haugen, Blomberg, Petersen, Zieska, and LeMair, the motion carried.
BOYLES: Clarified that the staff will not advertise for public comments, but will share any comments received with the
Council in its staff report for the 2nd meeting in May.
The Council took a brief recess.
NEW BUSINESS
Consider Approval of 2002 Financial Report and Management Letter
TESCHNER: Reviewed the agenda item in connection with the staff report.
STEVE McDoNALD (Abdo Abdo & Eick): Advised that the audit did not reveal any reportable conditions or instances of non-
compliance. Discussed the management letter included as part of the public record.
HAUGEN: Commented that the report and management letter are particularly favorable given the strict regulation by the
State Auditor's office.
MOTION BY ZIESKA, SECOND BY PETERSEN, TO APPROVE 2002 FINANCIAL REPORT AND MANAGEMENT
LETTER.
VOTE: Ayes by Haugen. Blomberg, Petersen, Zieska and LeMair, the motion carried.
Consider Approval of a Resolution Approving General Fund Transfer to the Capital Building Fund.
TESCHNER: Reviewed the agenda item in connection with the staff report.
ZIESKA: Pointed out that these are excess funds available from non-tax revenues, and an excellent use of funds.
MOTION BY PETERSEN, SECOND BY ZIESKA, APPROVING RESOLUTION 03.60 APPROVING GENERAL FUND
TRANSFER TO THE CAPITAL BUILDING FUND IN THE AMOUNT OF $1 MILLION.
HAUGEN: Commented that it is very important to save funds of this type to offset the tax impact upon our residents when the
process eventually moves forward. Hopefully interest rates will also stay down and make the project even more feasible.
VOTE: Ayes by Haugen, Blomberg, Petersen, Zeiska and LeMair, the motion carried.
Consider Approval of Resolutions (1) Approving the Re.Division of Prior Lake Precinct #5 and Designating Precinct
Polling Places; and (2) Authorizing ~he Purchase of a Precinct Counter and the Acquisition of 50 Voting Booths
from the Contingent Reserve Account.
TESCHNER: Reviewed the agenda item in connection with the staff report.
6