HomeMy WebLinkAbout04.17.06 Council Minutes
COUNCIL MINUTES
PRE-MEETING
April 17 , 2006
1. CALL TO ORDER
The meeting was called to order by Mayor Soderberg at 6:30 p.m.
Members Present:
Members Absent:
Also Present:
Soderberg, Fogarty, McKnight, Pritzlaff, Wilson
None
Joel Jamnik, City Attorney; Robin Roland, Acting City
Administrator/Finance Director; Kevin Carroll, Community
Development Director; Dan Siebenaler, Police Chief; Randy
Distad, Parks and Recreation Director; Lee Mann, Director of
Public Works/City Engineer; Lisa Shadick, Administrative
Services Director; Brenda Wendlandt, Human Resources Director;
Cynthia Muller, Executive Assistant
2. APPROVE AGENDA
MOTION by Fogarty, second by Wilson to approve the Agenda. APIF, MOTION
CARRIED.
3. CITIZEN COMMENTS
4. COUNCIL REVIEW OF AGENDA
Councilmember McKnight noted he would not be available on May 3 for the Council
Workshop. The workshop was rescheduled to May 2, 2006 at 5 :00 p.m.
Councilmember Wilson asked about the Wetland Alteration Permits for Riverbend. City
Engineer Mann stated there are several wetlands in the Riverbend project. A couple will
be impacted with the construction. They are lower quality wetlands and there will be
mitigation for the wetlands. The application allows for the impact. There are also
conditions attached as far as monitoring the mitigation.
5. STAFF COMMENTS
Police Chief Siebenaler informed Council alcohol compliance checks were conducted last
week. 19 licensed vendors were tested, 16 passed and 3 failed. Those three will be
penalized as first-time offenders. They were BP, Kwik Trip south, and Super America.
Council Minutes (Pre-Meeting)
April 17,2006
Page 2
Acting City Administrator Roland stated Councilmember Wilson had requested an update
as to how staffwas approaching the 2008 Comprehensive Plan update. Community
Development Director Carroll stated the Met Council is requiring all cities in the metro
area to have their comp plans updated by September 2008. This will include the land use
and planning components as well as system plans, transportation plans, etc. Staff has
discussed the process with Bonestroo. Discussions have focused on what will be done
and in what order. Currently staff is working on the system plan updates for the
southeast region, and the concept plan for the Economic Development Plan includes a
geographic component for industrial and commercial purposes which could be used in the
comp plan update. He provided Council with a memo informing them ofthe timetable.
Administrative Services Director Shadick informed Council that information on the
website regarding the 157th Street Park and Ride has been updated and it will be in the
next newsletter.
6. ADJOURN
MOTION by Fogarty, second by McKnight to adjourn at 6:39 p.m. APIF, MOTION
CARRIED.
Respectfully submitted,
// .~?' ~ v-v7~
Grrv~-k..4::'c- " . ,
c/7
Cynthia Muller
Executive Assistant
COUNCIL MINUTES
REGULAR
April!7, 2006
1. CALL TO ORDER
The meeting was called to order by Mayor Soderberg at 7:00 p.m.
2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Mayor Soderberg led the audience and Council in the Pledge of Allegiance.
3.
ROLL CALL
Members Present:
Members Absent:
Also Present:
Audience:
Soderberg, Fogarty, McKnight, Pritzlaff, Wilson
None
Joel Jamnik, City Attorney; Robin Roland, Acting City
Administrator/Finance Director; Kevin Carroll, Community
Development Director; Dan Siebenaler, Police Chief; Randy
Distad, Parks and Recreation Director; Lee Mann, Director of
Public Works/City Engineer; Lisa Shadick, Administrative
Services Director; Brenda Wendlandt, Human Resources Director;
Tim Pietsch, Fire Chief; Lee Smick, City Planner; Cynthia Muller,
Executive Assistant
Dawn Johnson, Tim Pietsch, Randy Oswald, Robin Hanson,
Caitlin, Drogemuller, Lauren Wustenberg, Katherine Norton,
Nancy Norton, Frank Norton, Marion Swanson, Michael Norton,
Chris Ockwig, Marcy Churchna, Giovanni Caponi, Kellie Bailey,
Randy Chuchna, Tom Grindorff, Trevor Ausen, Dan Ausen, David
Addelman, Lee Moe, Colin Moe, Bryce Olson, Troy Corrigan,
Todd Kindseth
4. APPROVE AGENDA
Acting City Administrator Roland added 5 g) Introduce Assistant Fire Chiefs.
MOTION by McKnight, second by Wilson to approve the Agenda. APIF, MOTION
CARRIED.
5. ANNOUNCEMENTS
a) Association ofMN Counties Community Service Award Recognition for
Dakota Dreamcatcher's 4H Club - Parks and Recreation
Ms. Caitlin Drogemuller, Dreamcatcher's 4H Club President, thanked Council for
acknowledging their work on the chair project and the AMC Award they
received. They thanked people who helped them with this project. This is the
second year in a row they have won this award.
b) Introduce New Employee - Police Department
Council Minutes (Regular)
April 17, 2006
Page 2
Officer Tom Strese was introduced as a new Police Officer.
c) Swearing-In Police Officer - Administration
Acting City Administrator Roland administered the Oath of Office to Officer Tom
Strese.
d) Citizen's Police Academy - Sgt. Brian Lindquist
Sgt. Brian Lindquist presented a new program by the Police Department. This is
a training course for any interested residents on what the Police Department does
on a daily basis. The program will cover constitutional law, what the patrol does,
investigations, how to make traffic stops, and dispatch. This will be a hands-on
training.
e) Proclaim Earth Day - Parks and Recreation
MOTION by Fogarty, second by McKnight to proclaim April 22, 2006 as Earth
Day. APIF, MOTION CARRIED.
1) Proclaim Arbor Day - Parks and Recreation
Mayor Soderberg proclaimed April 28, 2006 as Arbor Day.
g) Introduce Assistant Chiefs - Fire Department
Fire Chief Pietsch introduced Assistant Chief Troy Corrigan who has 17 years
with the department, Todd Kindseth has 16 years with the department, and Terry
Traen, who was unable to attend the meeting, has 24 years with the department.
6. CITIZEN COMMENTS
7. CONSENT AGENDA
MOTION by McKnight, second by Wilson to approve the Consent Agenda as follows:
a) Approved Council Minutes (4/3/06 Regular) (4/5106 Special)
b) Received Information School and Conference - Police Department
c) Received Information School and Conference - Police Department
d) Received Information School and Conference - Police Department
e) Authorized Disposal of City Property - Bikes - Police Department
f) Adopted RESOLUTION R42-06 Approving Comprehensive Plan Amendment
Concerning Existing and Proposed Parks, Trails and Open Space Plan Map -
Parks and Recreation
g) Adopted RESOLUTION R43-06 Accepting Donation Earth/Arbor Day - Parks
and Recreation
h) Received Information Purchase of Organ - Rambling River Center - Parks and
Recreation
i) Approved Of-Sale Beer License and Tobacco License Transfer - Administration
j) Adopted RESOLUTION R44-06 Supporting Change in Eminent Domain
Legislation Regarding Heritage Landmark Designations - Administration
k) Set May 2, 2006, 5 :00 p.m. for City Hall Planning Workshop - Administration
Council Minutes (Regular)
April 17, 2006
Page 3
I) Received Information School and Conference - Administration
m) Received Information March 2006 Financial Report - Finance
n) Received Information School and Conference - Human Resources
0) Approved Memorandum of Understanding - Human Resources
p) Approved Appointment Recommendation Community Development - Human
Resources
q) Approved Easement Acquisition - Spruce Street Extension Project - Engineering
r) Approved Wetland Alteration Permits - Riverbend Phase II, Spruce Street
Extension Project - Community Development/Engineering
s) Received Information First Quarter Building Permit Report - Community
Development
t) Approved Bills
APIF, MOTION CARRIED.
8. PUBLIC HEARINGS
9. AWARD OF CONTRACT
10. PETITIONS, REQUESTS AND COMMUNICATIONS
a) Approve Joint Powers Agreement with Dakota County Regarding Hiring
Consultant to Review Recycling Contract - Parks and Recreation
The Joint Powers Agreement is between the City and the county to work with a
consultant to review the City's current recycling contract to determine if there are
areas it could be enhanced. If the agreement is approved, staff would bring a
Request for Proposals to the next Council meeting. The anticipated consultant
project costs would be $30,000. The county would reimburse the City in an
amount not to exceed $15,000. The City's portion would be funded through the
Solid Waste budget.
Councilmember Fogarty felt the cost was high. Staff explained this is an estimate
and if it goes above $30,000 the City would not do the project. The current
recycling contract expires at the end ofthe year. Staff wanted to determine if
there are additional things that can be done with recycling to generate more
revenue. The City ofRoseville used the same procedure and identified revenue
sharing for recycling. They are realizing $8,000/month from their revenue
sharing and recycling. Councilmember McKnight asked if the county was doing
this with other cities. Staff explained they have offered this to other communities,
but Farmington is the first one to take them up on the offer. Councilmember
McKnight asked ifthis money was in the budget. Staff replied the Solid Waste
budget is an enterprise budget, and the budget can absorb the $15,000. Finance
Director Roland explained it would be included in professional services.
Councilmember Pritzlaff asked if there was a way to know what we would get out
of the contract before we spend $30,000. Staff explained that is why they want to
hire a consultant, to have a professional tell us what should be in the contract. It
Council Minutes (Regular)
April 17, 2006
Page 4
depends on the amount of recycling materials that is gathered each month, and the
price of aluminum, glass, plastic, etc. The recycling industry is moving toward
co-mingling everything into one container. Currently residents are sorting their
recycling. Councilmember Pritzlaff was wondering if staff reviewed other cities
contracts, if we could determine what Farmington would get out of it before
hiring a consultant. The only contract staff has seen is Roseville's and they have
the revenue sharing for recycling in their contract, but staff did not know what the
percentage is. Mayor Soderberg assumed a consultant would give staff ideas of
ways to enhance the revenue we are receiving through revenue sharing such as the
cardboard recycling. Staff felt if the contract is up this year it would be a good
time to have a professional review the contract in case there are things in the
recycling industry that staff is missing. Councilmember Wilson suggested in the
RFP they could request information as to what they would recommend that would
provide a savings to the City. This could be obtained at no cost. Parks and
Recreation Director Distad stated they will send out an RFP from the various
haulers for the recycling contract. We need to identify in the RFP what staff is
looking for the haulers to identify.
The request died for lack of a motion.
b) Consider Olson, Garvey, King and Mock Annexation Petitions - Community
Development
Bryce and Carol Olson own 160 acres in Castle Rock Township which is the golf
course property east ofhwy 3 and south ofhwy 50. The proposal was to divide
the property into three parcels, each of which was less than 60 acres. Ifparcels
are less than 60 acres they can be annexed by ordinance and can be done by the
City unilaterally whether or not the township opposes the annexation which was
the rationale to dividing the property into parcels of this size to give the Council
the opportunity to annex them by ordinance if the Council chooses to do so. Mr.
Colin Garvey has indicated he has a contractual right to acquire the property from
the Olson's.
Councilmember McKnight noted the City has been working with Castle Rock
Township on this issue for a year. He recommended Council give them a little
more time. They are very close to bringing a draft joint resolution to the Council
and the Town Board for discussion. He asked Council to wait until the May 15,
2006 Council meeting. Council agreed to give the time needed to work out a
resolution. MOTION by McKnight, second Fogarty to refer the matter to the
Farmington/Castle Rock Planning Group with a request it come back to the May
15,2006 Council meeting. APIF, MOTION CARRIED.
Terry and Linda Mock own 2.5 acres in Castle Rock Township north of 225th
Street. It is surrounded on two sides by the Executive Estates development. They
have expressed an interest in subdividing their property into two developable lots.
Staffhas indicated to the owners that they are working on an orderly annexation
agreement that would enable them to annex the property without any opposition
Council Minutes (Regular)
April 17,2006
Page 5
by the township. The general boundaries ofthe annexation area discussed with
the township encompass the Mock property. As the petition was dated last year,
staffwas uncertain if this has come before the Town Board. Council preferred it
be brought to the Town Board first and bring it back to the May 15, 2006 Council
Meeting.
The property owned by David and Gina King is in Empire Township. The
property is located on the north side of CR66. The property owner has a failing
septic system and would like to annex their property to hook up to City utilities.
The Sauber property annexation was recently approved and will have City
services, which make it economic to provide services to the King property. The
Town Board understood the owner's desire to obtain City services and did not
oppose the annexation. Staffneeds to make sure the King's are aware of the costs
in making the connection and needs more information on the timing of utilities on
the Sauber property. Staffhas requested the City Attorney to prepare ajoint
resolution and will bring this back to Council when the utility connections are
determined. The property is 1.94 acres.
c) Adopt Resolution - Swanson Acres Preliminary Plat - Community
Development
Double E Development is proposing 7 lots on 3.25 acres on the west side of Akin
Road and north of Middle Creek Estates. This will be a cul-de-sac. A storm
water pond will be located next to Akin Road. There is an existing home, which
will be demolished and it is a very wooded area. The Middle Creek Historic
Cemetery is located just to the south. There is a 48 ft. fall from the top of the hill
to the bottom, which is an 11.8% slope. The developer will need to utilize every
portion of the property to get the 7 lots in. The area is zoned R-1 and has a
10,000 sq. ft. lot minimum size. As the property is less than five acres, the
developer will need to submit cash in lieu for park dedication. No trails will be
required. They are providing boulevard trees and evergreen trees around the
pond. Staff is suggesting deciduous trees around the pond to move equipment
easily around the pond area. Retaining walls are proposed on the south and west
sides of the property. The walls will be made of boulders and will step down.
The wall will need to be structurally engineered. The Middle Creek Historic
Cemetery is located next to the southwest comer and is a heritage landmark. The
Heritage Preservation Commission had four requirements:
1. Mr. Robert Vogel needs to be notified when the developer begins grading
near the cemetery. He will monitor the grading on site to ensure that the
cemetery is protected and if any burial sites are discovered, that grading is
stopped immediately.
2. Ifwork is not being done near the cemetery, the area should be fenced in
order to protect the cemetery from any construction work.
3. A 4-ft. tall, black, vinyl chain link fence is installed on the Swansonxproperty adjacent to the cemetery's property line. The developer will be
installing this fence all along the south and west property lines.
Council Minutes (Regular)
April 17, 2006
Page 6
4. A 10ft. buffer setback will be required between the cemetery property line
and the retaining wall and no work will be allowed within the buffer.
Contingencies include:
1. The satisfaction of any engineering requirements.
2. The satisfaction of the Planning Division concerning the tree variety
surrounding the pond.
3. The satisfaction of the HPC requirements.
4. A demolition permit will need to be applied for by the developer to
demolish the existing home on the property.
Councilmember Wilson asked who would pay for Mr. Vogel to monitor the
grading. Staff noted it is part of his retainer. Councilmember Wilson asked if any
neighbors had any concern with the construction. Staff replied neighbors to the
north, west and south attended the Planning Commission meeting and they were
concerned that the site be surveyed correctly and that it be staked every 75 ft.
This has been done. Councilmember Pritzlaff noted the development is within a
half mile of the Middle Creek park and Pine Knoll park. He asked how people
will get to the parks. Parks and Recreation Director Distad replied that does
present an issue as there are no sidewalks or trails leading anywhere from this
property. People will have to drive to the park or walk along Akin Road to Eaves
Way. Councilmember Pritzlaff added or cross Akin Road and get on the bike
trail. He had a problem with that. Akin Road is a downhill grade there and felt it
presented a safety problem. He felt this is one of the worst areas for people to get
out of when school begins and gets out. Staff noted the traffic engineer has
approved the plan. Councilmember Pritzlaff noted there is a sidewalk on 203rd
Street leading to the park and asked if there could be a bike path from this
property to 203rd Street. Staff replied the issue is whether there is enough bench
area to put in a flat trail. However, Councilmember Pritzlaff did not want to
encroach onto other properties to put in a trail. He noted with the hill on Akin
Road would there be a school bus stop sign. Staff noted buses stop on Akin Road
and staffwill contact the school district.
MOTION by McKnight, second by Fogarty to adopt RESOLUTION R45-06
approving the Swanson Acres Preliminary Plat with contingencies. Voting for:
Soderberg, Fogarty, McKnight. Voting against: Pritzlaff, Wilson. MOTION
CARRIED. Councilmember Wilson noted this is a nice development, but
Council has spent a lot of effort trying to connect trails. He asked staff discuss
with the developers that some type of trail or sidewalk be installed.
d) Adopt Resolution and Ordinance - Comprehensive Plan Amendment from
Non-Designated to Commercial and Rezoning from A-I to B-1 Bauer
Property - Community Development
This property is located south ofhwy 50 and on the east side of Canton Court.
The property was approved for annexation and MUSA on June 20,2005.
Council Minutes (Regular)
Aprill7, 2006
Page 7
Currently the property is zoned A-I and the comp plan is non-designated. Staffis
proposing to amend the comp plan from non-designated to commercial and
rezone the property from A-I to B-3 heavy business. MOTION by Wilson,
second by McKnight to adopt RESOLUTION R46-06 approving the Comp Plan
amendment. APIF, MOTION CARRIED. MOTION by Fogarty, second by
Wilson to adopt ORDINANCE 006-554 rezoning the property located at 22068
Canton Court from A-I to B-3. MOTION CARRIED.
e) Consider Request for Text Amendment in the IP Zone - Fitness Club-
Community Development
Mr. Larry and Michael Conroy, of Lifetime Fitness have requested a text
amendment to the code to allow a fitness/exercise club in the industrial park.
Currently this type of use is not allowed in the IP zone. They are interested in the
Vinge Tile building. This was discussed with the HRA and the Planning
Commission in May 2005 and they felt an exercise facility was not the best use of
industrial property and should not be allowed in the IP zone. They came to the
Planning Commission again on April 11, 2006 and the Commission again denied
the request.
Councilmember Wilson asked if staff has given any recommendations for other
areas where their business could be located. Community Development Director
Carroll stated staff has suggested the Tamarack Retail Center and Vermillion
River Crossing. Other sites have also been available in the downtown area.
Councilmember Fogarty felt it is not an appropriate use for the industrial park
especially when it is open 24 hours. MOTION by Wilson, second by Pritzlaffto
deny the request. APIF, MOTION CARRIED.
11. UNFINISHED BUSINESS
a) Consider Recommendation Regarding Community Center Referendum-
Parks and Recreation
Parks and Recreation Director Distad gave background information on studying
the need for a Community Center. The Park and Rec Commission recommended
the Council approve a referendum for a Community Center be placed on the
ballot for the November 2006 election.
Councilmember Pritzlaff asked Finance Director Roland to explain the financing.
Finance Director Roland explained the debt limit is like a credit card. Currently
the debt limit is based on the market value of all properties in the City. It is 2% of
that total value. In 2005 the market value was $1,291,198,400. 2% of this is
$25,823,000. Of that the City has spent taxpayer levy debt amounting to $7.2
million. Currently the debt margin is over $18 million. 2006 reflects an increase
of $2.5 million for the Fire Station. The debt limit goes up as the market value
goes up. 2007 reflects $9.2 million of increase for the City Hall project at $8.6
million plus $600,000 for the First Street garage. The increase in 2008 is for the
expansion of the Central Maintenance Facility identified in the CIP. With the
addition of City Hall in 2007 the available debt margin is $13.6 million. It
Council Minutes (Regular)
April 17, 2006
Page 8
increases in 2008 to $16.1 million. The Community Center debt is $16.2 million.
In 2005 and 2006 there was an increase in the tax levy from $5.8 million to $6.6
million. Of that, we have to take off the amount owed for debt service payments.
In 2006 that amounts to $1.195 million that will go from the tax proceeds to
payment for debt and this includes the existing debt on the Police Station and the
Central Maintenance Facility. In 2007 that increases to $1.8 million which
includes the debt for the Fire Station. There are also two projects for which the
City was going to pay a portion. These projects are Main Street and Ash Street.
The first payment for debt for the City Hall project would be in 2008 which is
what takes this to $2.5 million. Currently Council has a policy that no more than
25% of the annual levy should be identified with debt service. For 2006 we are at
21 %. In 2007 given all the items the City has to levy for, and assuming only a
10% increase to the total levy 25% of the levy would be for debt. In 2008 the
debt jumps to 31 %, which is above the Council's maximum. Council agreed for a
particular period oftime they could endure a larger percentage of debt service. If
we were to add the $1.2 million for the first year of the levy for a new Community
Center to the 2008 number, the debt levy would be 46% ofthe total levy dollars.
If the amount of the levy were to increase more than 10% the percentage of debt
would be reduced.
A Community Center referendum would result in a market based levy. It would
be a percentage on the market value of each home in Farmington. This is
different than a tax capacity levy because a tax capacity levy spreads the burden
of the taxes more equitably between households and businesses. A market based
referendum levy primarily affects residences. It does not affect businesses to the
same impact. On a $300,000 market value home, an average cost would be $196
per year on the property taxes for a $16.2 million facility. This can go up to $238
a year.
Councilmember Pritzlaff asked what happens ifthe Community Center does not
support itself financially. Finance Director Roland stated a facility like this
normally does not make money for the first couple years. The City would have to
identify how much the Council would be willing to take on for additional
operation costs. Any additional money would come from the operating budget.
Councilmember Fogarty stated the survey indicated that if a Community Center
opened with an aquatics feature the community would not be opposed to closing
the outdoor pool and the Rambling River Center would be moved into the
Community Center. The amount the City subsidizes for those two facilities
would be put to a Community Center and the City would break even. These two
facilities are subsidized for $207,000. Councilmember Fogarty stated this was a
community initiative brought to the Council. Nine years ago this was brought to
Council and the residents were not given the opportunity to vote on it. She asked
Council to allow the voters the opportunity to vote on it. She was not asking them
to privately or publicly support the Community Center.
Council Minutes (Regular)
April I?, 2006
Page 9
Councilmember McKnight thanked everyone for the work done on this proj ect.
He looked at the finances of the project and it gets broader than the Community
Center. There have been a couple years of budgets in the red which we are
working to correct. Looking at the fund balance we have a target of35%-40% of
annual expenditures as the fund balance level. At the end of last year we were at
24%, well below the target. He looked at the likelihood ofthe operational deficit
of the facility. There are Community Centers in this county that cannot support
themselves. The debt level would be well over Council policy of25% if we
construct a new City Hall and a Community Center. He views the City Hall as a
priority when it comes to City building projects. Council is educated by staff on
the budget issues. Council was elected by the people to make those decisions. He
did not feel we could afford a Community Center. He felt Council needs to make
that decision and would not support putting it to the voters.
Mayor Soderberg stated he had confidence in the voters to make the right
decision. He recognized the City cannot afford this. He agreed to put it to the
voters, but not recommend it to the voters. This would be the same as maxing out
a credit card and that is bad policy. He had enough confidence in the voters to
make the right decision if they are educated.
MOTION by Fogarty, second by Soderberg to approve the referendum.
Councilmember Wilson agreed there was a high level of interest from the
residents. The possible return on investment could be 85% - 90%. This is a
project he would be one of the first ones to use. However, having a 46% debt
margin is unsettling to him. He noted we have fitness centers in the community.
He was concerned with government going into competition with a private entity.
Councilmember Pritzlaff stated Council is elected to make these decisions. He
did not feel the City could afford this. He looks at it from two aspects, whether
the City can afford it and the taxpayer standpoint. If it was approved by 51 %, it
could mean 49% cannot afford it.
Voting for: Soderberg, Fogarty. Voting against: McKnight, Pritzlaff, Wilson.
MOTION FAILED.
b) Tree Preservation Ordinance - Community Development
This was brought to the Planning Commission on March 14, 2006 and the
Commission felt it was too late to preserve any remaining tree stands. They felt
property owners should be allowed property rights and staff should continue to
rely on the developer to protect trees. Staff asked for direction regarding the tree
preservation ordinance. There are trees that will remain in wetlands and steep
slopes, but there are not a lot of tree stands left. Staff asked for direction on the
following:
Council Minutes (Regular)
April 17, 2006
Page 10
1. Should staff write a more rigorous ordinance that requires the developer to
retain as many trees as possible?
2. Should staff continue to utilize the current ordinance, but include
something that requires the developer to show staff the locations where
they are proposing to remove trees, have the developers show this on a
map, and have the developer come before the Planning Commission to
explain why they are moving the trees?
3. Use the current ordinance and continue the current practice of trying to get
developers to save as many trees as possible.
Councilmember Fogarty would like to see more bite in the current ordinance.
Councilmember McKnight preferred to use the current ordinance unless staff can
show an ordinance for protecting trees and the issue ofland owner rights.
Councilmember Wilson stated as opposed to a developer coming to staff, he
suggested taking it directly to the Planning Commission and show them what is
brush and figure out a way to work with an area and give them some credit.
Councilmember Fogarty stated rather than having restrictions, maybe we should
offer incentives such as parkland dedication trade for keeping existing tree stands
and putting soft paths through the trees. Give the developer an incentive to do it
rather than forcing them to do it. Councilmember Wilson noted a resident had
mentioned doing custom grading to preserve trees. City Planner Smick stated at
the concept stage they could put more bite into having the developer show what is
brush and what are trees. Councilmember Pritzlaff favored having more teeth in
the ordinance. He agreed with giving them an incentive, or if they have to
remove trees, require more than just boulevard trees be put in. Mayor Soderberg
noted all of these could be done within the scope ofthe current ordinance. He
stated trees are a renewable resource and there are property rights involved. Ifthe
government is going to get involved in preserving trees, that can be done in parks
or require tree stands as park dedication.
Community Development Director Carroll clarified the Council does not want to
change the code, but there would not be any objection to making a greater effort
in making sure the code is complied with. Currently staff does not say to a
developer that they have a duty to establish that it is not feasible to leave those
trees. Staff can be more aggressive. Mayor Soderberg replied if the ordinance as
it is written now prescribes a duty for the developer, then follow the ordinance. If
it does not, then it does not. Councilmember Wilson felt the majority of Council
would be interested in having a little more rigor to the policy. Mayor Soderberg
replied they can do that operationally without changing the ordinance.
Community Development Director Carroll stated staff would request something
specific in writing that addresses this duty. They may have to identify how many
trees will be removed. Councilmember Pritzlaff agreed with being more rigorous
with the policy, but Council mentioned they would like to see an incentive. If
they remove trees and are asked to add more than boulevard trees, does that go
beyond the policy. Councilmember Fogarty felt that gets away from the incentive
and gets into the ordinance.
Council Minutes (Regular)
April 1 7, 2006
Page 11
12. NEW BUSINESS
13. COUNCIL ROUNDTABLE
a) Response to Development Questions - Community Development
At the April 3, 2006 Council meeting, Councilmember Pritzlaff asked about the
policy regarding the issuance of building permits in new developments.
Councilmember Pritzlaff reviewed some discussions on the Parkview Ponds
development agreement where Council stated they could construct model homes
while the project was starting. He asked if there was a standard development
agreement in place and if in a situation where the City deviates from the standard
language, can it be highlighted in the development agreement for any future
agreements. City Engineer Mann replied there is a standard contract. In most
developments there are additions and changes to the language depending on the
circumstances of each development. Parkview Ponds and Executive Estates had
special situations that had to be addressed. Staff could look at ways to separate
this out and make it clearer. Councilmember Pritzlaff acknowledged the model
homes were approved, but he asked why it was put on the agenda to be approved
that way, if that is not normally what is done. Staff replied every developer has a
special circumstance or request. Staff reviews the request and determines whether
it is reasonable and what things can be put into the development contract to make
them acceptable to the City. The extra paragraph included in Parkview Ponds and
the conditions and stipulations made staff confident that it could work and it did.
Councilmember Wilson noted with the Hometown Development one permit has
been issued on an existing lot that had a previous home on it adjacent to 209th
Street where sewer and water services existed. Nothing he read in the
development agreement told him they approved to put up a house before rough
grading of streets. City Engineer Mann explained there was a house there
previously and it is connected to 209th Street. Ifthe house had not been tom
down, there would have been an existing house next to the streets being built. In
this case, it seemed reasonable to allow the house to be built since the fire
protection was there, the street was there, and the services were in. Staff felt that
house met the criteria set forth in the development agreement.
Councilmember Pritzlaff asked why some kind of adjustment was not made to
Executive Estates. City Engineer Mann replied staffhas been talking with Mr.
Garvey and looking at making adjustments. The stipulation in the Executive
Estates agreement said no building permits could be issued until 22Sth Street was
completed. In late 2005, early 2006, when staffhad discussions with Castle Rock
Township on how 225th Street would be constructed, those discussions took
longer than anticipated and therefore staff was discussing with the developer
about how he could provide a secondary access in order to allow for permits to be
issued before 225th Street was constructed. The main issue of concern was that
once 225th Street was being constructed, if there were a lot of homes in Executive
Estates that there would be no real access outside the plat other than to go through
Council Minutes (Regular)
April 17, 2006
Page 12
the construction area of225th Street which at times could be completely blocked.
Staff has been discussing the secondary access with the developer. Recently the
developer came up with a plan for that access and staff did allow one building
permit to be issued for a model home. The developer agreed to particular
stipulations as far as that permit was concerned and getting the access road built
before any more permits would be issued. Councilmember Pritzlaff noted he
received an e-mail that at one point staffwas requiring that trails and sidewalks in
front of the houses had to be completed. City Engineer Mann agreed. That is
standard because when trails or sidewalks have gone in after the fact, there has
been opposition to them or there have been issues with driveways being put in
prior to the trails and sidewalks that have created grade problems. Some
driveways have had to be tom out in order to get the trail or sidewalk to work.
City Attorney Jamnik stated having the trails and sidewalks installed first was a
Council directive.
Councilmember Fogarty: Pond clean-up day is May 6, 2006. She thanked Robin
Roland for serving as Acting City Administrator. She has worked hard these months and
it was appreciated.
After the last Council meeting Councilmember Pritzlaff made some comments at Council
Roundtable and she received some e-mails regarding it. She realized there is still some
really bad information in the community and wanted to correct that information. People
were angry that no one on this Council interrupted Councilmember Pritzlaffwith his
comments because some people thought they were inappropriate. She has her own
opinions about what is said at Council Roundtable and what is appropriate and what is
not. She will not sensor any other Councilmember as she would not want them to sensor
her. Whether she agrees with what they are saying or how they are saying it, this is the
Council's opportunity to speak the things that are on their mind.
Some ofthe e-mails crossed over into other subjects and that is where the bad
information comes out. One accused someone from this Council of asking for the audit
on the Superintendent's contract and that the City probably had lots of hidden things in
our contract for the City Administrator. She wanted to clarify that she does not know
who made the request but suspects they were done simultaneously. Not only was the
Superintendent's contract reviewed, so was Peter Herlofsky's. Council received a
summary of that. The newspaper will write what they will write. They thought there was
a story in one spot and not in another. In one ofthe e-mail's she was told to just drop the
lawsuit against the school district and give them their site. It is frustrating that there is a
perception in the public that there is something this Council can do about the lawsuit.
The City is defending itself in the lawsuit. Anyone at this table would love to see the
lawsuit dropped, but we cannot drop the lawsuit. We did not bring the lawsuit. Weare
defending the lawsuit. If someone would like the lawsuit dropped, they need to talk to
their school board members. She agreed it should be dropped, but she cannot do it. The
e-mail said "you never gave the district a chance to ever get the Christensen site. You
sank it from day one." Councilmember Fogarty stated there is some information that is
not public information. The district was given an option where they could have had the
Council Minutes (Regular)
April 17, 2006
Page 13
Christensen site. When this site was denied on August 19,2005 there were two weeks
the school district could have talked to the City and asked to work this out. They had
discussed a Memorandum of Understanding, there was a rough draft, but they could not
agree on terms. This document sat there for two weeks. The Thursday before that
Tuesday Council meeting she had a board member call her and they talked to see if there
was something they could work out. They thought they had come to an understanding
that we could all live with. She asked the City Attorney to take the draft Memorandum of
Understanding, incorporate the ideas she and the board member had come up with, to see
ifit could be worked out because it could be reconsidered on September 6,2005. This is
the only time it could be reconsidered. This was sent to the school district on Friday.
The following Tuesday afternoon, she received a call from that board member saying the
Superintendent and the attorney are not comfortable with the language and they are not
happy with the agreement. Councilmember Fogarty believed they came up with
something that was workable, the school could have the Christensen site, it protected the
City financially, it secured safe roads, it gave us the infrastructure guarantees the City
needed for the future, everyone wins. At 6:30 p.m. that night, she was not at the Pre-
Council meeting, she was on the phone with Superintendent Brad Meeks who was telling
her he would not accept the Memorandum of Understanding and wanted her to pull the
item and continue the saga. Councilmember Fogarty refused to do it. To say the school
never had the opportunity to get the Christensen site is unfair and untrue. They did have
the opportunity. They chose to say no on September 6, 2005.
Councilmember McKnight: He thanked Acting City Administrator Roland for all her
work. It is not an easy job, but thanked her for all the work she had done in both
positions. With Mr. Herlofsky starting in two weeks, Council needs to set some goals for
him so a work session soon after he starts would be a good idea.
Councilmember Wilson: He noted Acting City Administrator Roland at times has
been very stressed out with the audit and everything going on. He said she has done a
superb job handling both roles and did not know how she had the patience to do it.
He will not be able to be the captain for the dodge ball team this year.
He met with a couple local realtors, Mike Hinzerling and Cheryl Retterath, and discussed
what is going on in the Farmington market. As he and his wife were driving around
looking at new developments, they became very alarmed at the number of for sale signs
in Farmington. He learned through the realtors there is nothing unique about what is
going on in Farmington. He appreciated the good information they provided. They are a
wealth of good information and provide some good insight in terms of decisions the
Council makes.
Councilmember Pritzlaff: He also thanked Acting City Administrator Roland for
doing both duties. He admitted recently there have been a few issues that he has not been
happy with, but those are things that as a Councilmember he needs to take care of. It
would not have mattered who was in that position, he would have brought these items to
the Administrator. He thanked her for doing the job she has done.
Council Minutes (Regular)
April 17, 2006
Page 14
Finance Director Roland: Thanked Council for the opportunity to serve over the last
7 -8 months. It has been great and she is looking forward to Mr. Herlofsky joining us on
May 1, 2006 and she will do everything in her power to see that he succeeds in
Farmington.
Police Chief Siebenaler: He reminded everyone this is Severe W eather Awareness
Week. This is the chance to practice what we will do in the event of a weather
emergency. On Thursday, at 1 :55 p.m. and at 6:45 p.m. they will be testing the outdoor
warning sirens. There are new sirens in place, so 95% of the population should be
covered by sirens. He stressed these are outdoor warning sirens. They are intended to
warn people ofthe onset of severe weather who are outdoors and away from other
sources of information. If people are in their homes, they should check the TV and the
radio. When people hear the siren, do not look out the door. These are not intended to
warn people in their well-insulated homes with the windows closed, the air conditioner
running, and perhaps the TV and stereo going. They are not intended to wake a person
from a sound sleep. They are outdoor warning sirens. The Dakota County Emergency
Management Director took it upon himself in cooperation with the Chiefs of Police to go
to the National Weather Service to answer some concerns. In the past Dakota County has
taken some heat from the local media about the number oftimes the sirens are activated.
In the past in Dakota County every time there has been severe weather they have sounded
all of the sirens in Dakota County even though the storm may have been 25 miles away.
Now Dakota County has been divided into four zones. It focuses attention on specific
areas ofthe County. If our sirens go off, it is because there is a storm very close by. The
map showing the zones will be placed on the website.
The Dakota County chapter of Mothers Against Drunk Drivers will be honoring three
Farmington Police Officers for their efforts in enforcing DWI. There will be a reception
on Sunday, April 23, 2006, at 2:00 p.m. at Lakeville North High school. Staffwill
forward written acknowledgement to the Council. They will be honoring Sgt. Brian
Lindquist, Officer Briana Dirks, and Officer Matt Hendrickson. Everyone is invited to
the ceremony. Sgt. Lindquist issued 26 DWI's over one year, both Officer Dirks and
Officer Hendrickson issued 24 DWI's each during that time period. Last year the City
issued 170 DWI's and these three officers account for not quite half ofthem.
After an absence of several years, the Law Enforcement Torch Run for Special Olympics
will be returning to Farmington. He met with the organizing committee and the Dakota
County leg ofthe run will begin at Farmington City Hall, June 21, 2006. Farmington will
be taking the leg between here and Rosemount. The entire Dakota County leg is 23 miles
and it will be turned over to St. Paul at the border of West St. Paul. You do not have to
be a police officer to participate. Anyone can run, bike, or roller blade. There is a $10
registration fee. Donations will also be accepted for the Special Olympics. Anyone who
wants to participate should contact Police Chief Siebenaler or register at the event.
Mayor Soderberg noted he will run in part of it. Any employee that runs a mile will
receive a Police Department challenge coin.
Council Minutes (Regular)
April 17, 2006
Page 15
Earlier Sgt. Brian Lindquist talked about the Citizen's Police Academy. This is an
external program. It is also important that we educate internally. Last fall he invited
Mayor Soderberg to participate in a shoot with the Police Department. This was a
competition where he had to run, carry a piece of police equipment, climb over a wall,
build a gun, and shoot. Outreach is important as an educational tool internally as well as
externally. The Council is familiar with how the budget process works. Staff meets as a
Management Team and they reach consensus on what will be presented to Council for
final approval. He relies on the Management Team to set his budget for him. It is
important they know what is going on as well. Based on his experience with the Mayor
he invited the Management Team to the firearms range this week. He thanked them for
coming out and participating and showing an interest. This May, June, and July when the
budget is decided, because they participated they will have a clearer understanding of
what the Police Department's training needs are, what the firearms needs are, and what
the officers have to go through everyday. What he did not anticipate is how appreciative
the officers were that they took the time to come out and learn what the officers are
doing. It is so important that we reach out to the community, but also internally. Ride-
alongs are another example of internal outreach. The more you all know about what we
do, the better off we are. Police Chief Siebenaler stated the more you know about my
business the better my budget ends up looking.
Mayor Soderberg: He appreciated the job Acting City Administrator Roland
has done. During the State of the City he described it as a magician spinning plates. Not
only has she kept the plates ofthe Finance Director spinning, but also the plates ofthe
City Administrator spinning. He noted she did a great job. Mr. Herlofsky will be here at
the next Council Meeting. The Mayor spoke with him briefly today and they have been
touching base at least once a week. Mr. Herlofsky has reaffirmed that he is excited to be
coming. Regarding the suggestion about having some goals, he is absolutely looking for
that and looking forward to it. He is looking forward to getting engaged in the processes
we have.
14. ADJOURN
MOTION by Fogarty, second by McKnight to adjourn at 9:44 p.m. APIF, MOTION
CARRIED.
Respectfully submitted,
~ rV?~
( .."
Cynthia Muller
Executive Assistant