Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout10.18.04 Council Minutes COUNCIL MINUTES REGULAR October 18, 2004 1. CALL TO ORDER The meeting was called to order by Mayor Ristow at 7:00 p.m. 2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Mayor Ristow led the audience and Council in the Pledge of Allegiance. 3. ROLL CALL Members Present: Members Absent: Also Present: Audience: Ristow, Cordes, Fitch, Fogarty Soderberg Joel Jamnik, City Attorney; David Urbia, City Administrator; Robin Roland, Finance Director; Kevin Carroll, Community Development Director; Lee Mann, Director of Public Works/City Engineer; Lisa Shadick, Administrative Services Director; Brenda Wendlandt, Human Resources Director; Ken Kuchera, Fire Chief; Cynthia Muller, Executive Assistant David Pritzlaff, Michael & Laura Pierce, David McKnight, Mike Zitek, John Anderson, Cathy Saari, Marion Graf, Randy Pedersen, Kim Leroux, Joanne Payne, Gene Pedersen, Stan Knutsen, Steve Wilson, Bill Sievers, Bob Weigert 4. APPROVE AGENDA Councilmember Fitch pulled the 10/8/04 Special Minutes to abstain. City Administrator Urbia added a supplemental item 109) Vermillion River Crossing Preliminary Plat Update. MOTION by Fogarty, second by Fitch to approve the Agenda. APIF, MOTION CARRIED. s. ANNOUNCEMENTS a) 2003 Life Safety Achievement Award City Administrator Urbia presented the 2003 Life Safety Achievement Award to Fire Chief Kuchera. Councilmember Cordes noted there have been 567 days without a structural fire in Farmington. 6. CITIZEN COMMENTS Ms. Joanne Payne, 20192 Akin Road, asked Council to reconsider the appointment that could possibly arise after the election for a third Council seat. She feels the seat should go to the third highest vote getter. She realized a new Council could change this, however she would like Council to reconsider the policy on filling a vacant Council seat. Mr. Michael Pierce, 5137 203rd Street W, recently moved into a new home and requested Council to vacate the wetland buffer behind their home. The plat shows a drainage and Council Minutes (Regular) October 18, 2004 Page 2 utility easement. Their lot backs up to a nature preserve. The covenants for that area do not speak to the wetland buffer. The City would like him to reseed the area with natural grasses up to the wetland buffer. He understood the developer is responsible for getting the information to the builder and the builder should pass it on to the homeowner. He noted the 3rd and 5th additions have the same setback and there are no signs in the 3rd addition. When he received a permit for a deckt there was nothing saying they were approaching the easement. Staff will research the issue. 7. CONSENT AGENDA MOTION by Fogarty, second by Cordes to approve the Consent Agenda as follows: a) Approved Council Minutes (10/4/04 Regular) (10/5/04 Special) b) Approved Temporary On-Sale Liquor License - Administration c) Adopted RESOLUTION R82-04 Gambling Event Permit - Administration d) Adopted RESOLUTION R83-04 Gambling Event Permit - Administration e) Set November 3,2004 Special Meeting - Election Results - Administration f) Received Information Capital Outlay - Parks g) Approved Appointment Recommendation Liquor Operations - Human Resources h) Approved Appointment Recommendation Finance - Human Resources i) Approved Appointment Recommendation Parks and Recreation - Human Resources j) Approved Maintenance Facility Fueling Station - Engineering Councilmember Fogarty asked ifthe City was partly to blame for the settling. City Engineer Mann replied there is an issue where the compaction was not done completely as well as when the area was redesigned to put the fueling island there, the designers were not aware that was used as a borrow area. A compromise was reached. k) Received Information September 2004 Financial Report - Finance I) Received Information Quarterly Building Report - Community Development m) Approved Change Order - Southeast Trunk Utility Pond Project - Engineering n) Received Information Capital Outlay - Fire Department 0) Received Information Change Order Tanker Truck - Fire Department p) Approved Bills APIF, MOTION CARRIED. a) MOTION by Cordes, second by Fogarty to approve Council Minutes (10/8/04 Special). Voting for: Ristow, Cordes, Fogarty. Abstain: Fitch. MOTION CARRIED. 8. PUBLIC HEARINGS a) Adopt Resolution - Main Street Project Assessment Hearing - Engineering The Main Street reconstruction project is almost complete. Phase 1 consisted of the area north of the railroad tracks and phase 2 was the area south of the railroad tracks. The assessment policy indicates that reconstructed streets and lateral utilities are assessed to benefiting properties at a rate of 35% and the City funds the remaining 65%. The appraisal indicated the maximum benefit received by the properties would be $6,000 per residential equivalent unit. Staffhas received four letters from property owners objecting to the assessment from Mr. Merle H. Council Minutes (Regular) October 18,2004 Page 3 McClintock, Ms. Margaret Weir, 406 Main Street, Walter and Kimberly Lang, III 6th Street, and Mr. Colin Garvey who owns several properties in the project area. One was for a deferment. One property owner asked for clarification regarding a deferred assessment. If there is a senior deferral and Council agrees to it, the assessment is deferred for a period of two years and then it has to be renewed after that. The person requesting senior deferral must present financial evidence that the assessment would present financial hardship. Interest accrues on the deferred assessment at a rate of 5%. MOTION by Fitch, second by Cordes to close the public hearing. APIF, MOTION CARRIED. Staffwill bring the deferral requests back to Council for approval. MOTION by Fogarty, second by Cordes to adopt RESOLUTION R84-04 adopting the assessment roll for the Main Street Area Reconstruction Project. APIF, MOTION CARRIED. b) Adopt Resolution - Spruce Street Extension Project - Engineering The proposed project consists of extending Spruce Street from Denmark Avenue west into the Spruce Street Commercial area. The bridge over the Vermillion River is a necessary and key component of the project. The project would end at the Town Square in the Knutson property. The roadway alignment has been incorporated in the preliminary plat design. The cost of the project is $3,046,000. The City has received a grant in the amount of $955,000. The remainder of the cost, $2,091,000, would be assessed to the benefiting properties. The cost of this portion of Spruce Street should not be allocated beyond the Knutson property. The portion beyond the Knutson property would be paid for by those properties as they develop. Properties south of the river would participate in the cost ofthe east-west roadway on the south side of the river. Mr. Gene Pedersen, Knutson Development, asked if the town square is included in the assessment amount. City Engineer Mann replied the town square costs are not included in the roadway costs. It includes the southerly portion that goes by the town square, but the town square itself is not included. Staff would like to take bids no later than March. Plans and specs will have to come to Council in January or February. MOTION by Cordes, second by Fitch to close the public hearing. APIF, MOTION CARRIED. MOTION by Fitch, second by Fogarty adopting RESOLUTION R8S-04 ordering the Spruce Street Extension Project and authorizing the preparation of plans and specifications. APIF, MOTION CARRIED. 9. AWARD OF CONTRACT 10. PETITIONS, REQUESTS AND COMMUNICATIONS g) Vermillion River Crossing Preliminary Plat Update - Administration (This item was moved forward to accommodate the audience). Mr. Randy Pedersen, Pedersen Ventures, requested the preliminary plat for the Knutson development be placed on the agenda for approval. The Planning Council Minutes (Regular) October 18, 2004 Page 4 Commission recommended the preliminary plat be forwarded to Council with certain conditions. Those conditions are being worked on and staff felt the plat was not ready for a recommendation. However, staff did provide an update. Community Development Director Carroll stated Pedersen Ventures filed a preliminary plat on August 27, 2004. Typically staff requires five weeks to review plats. It was agreed to reduce that time, and scheduled a special Planning Commission meeting for September 28, 2004. There was a public hearing held, and the Planning Commission recommended the plat receive a favorable recommendation, but that it not be forwarded to Council until a number of issues were resolved. Two issues were very technical and minor, but both would have involved physical changes to the plat. The third dealt with environmental concerns from the agencies. The DNR and Soil and Water Conservation District requested the City not approve the plat until their issues are resolved. Staff attended a meeting with several environmental agencies and discussed a number of environmental issues and made some progress. A follow-up meeting was also held where it was decided the developer's engineer would do some work on the plat to incorporate some of the agreements reached at the last meeting. The engineer indicated he would need a week to do that. He would then submit the revised plat and some related calculations to the agencies. The agencies would need a week to review the information and they would relay comments to the City. Their comments would be reviewed by staff. Staff did not feel there would be enough time for the agencies to do their work and to revise the plat in time for the November I meeting. It was more likely it would be ready for the November 15,2004 Council meeting. City Engineer Mann stated the main issue is the temperature of the trout stream. The PCA rules state there can be no temperature increase to the trout stream. Since the initial meeting discussions have concentrated on the temperature issue, how to treat the water, how to keep the water from getting to the river, and how to keep the water from heating up before getting to the river. The developer's engineer felt there were a couple things he could do to address those issues. If they could be shown on the plat, the Soil and Water Conservation District and the PCA would be satisfied. Councilmember Pitch stated his understanding after the Planning Commission meeting was that the PCA has the final authority to issue the permit. He asked if the DNR would accept whatever the PCA dictates. City Engineer Mann replied all of the agencies have been involved. Based on the new rules in August, this is the first development of this kind next to a trout stream that the agencies have dealt with. illtimately, the PCA is the bottom line agency to grant approval regarding the trout stream and the quality of the water. The DNR does have jurisdiction over the fisheries of the trout stream and the flood plain. The Soil and Water Conservation District gets involved with the wetlands and the trout stream. The developer will have to get an NPDES Phase II construction permit. There is no requirement to have this approved or any review before any City approves a Council Minutes (Regular) October 18, 2004 Page 5 preliminary or final plat. Staff could get through the whole process and then the developer would talk to the PCA and they would have the ability to change everything. Staffhas tried to be proactive and get the agencies involved from the beginning so when the construction permit comes through, there will not be any issues. Councilmember Fitch thought if the agencies all got together they would be able to work things out. No one knows what is and is not going to work. Technically, the City is the responsible governmental unit. If the PCA gives the permit are they responsible if this does not work. He understood the Planning Commission's reservations, but asked if this could be done simultaneously at the next meeting with Council approving the plat on the same conditions as the final PCA permit. City Engineer Mann replied they would have to look at the temperature issues and once the developer's engineer gives an update as to what he can achieve, staff can try to do the analysis. Councilmember Fitch understood the developer's concerns as they also have potential customers to satisfy. He wanted to make sure the City does not continually inhibit the process itself and at least get a preliminary plat approved with certain conditions. He thought it would be on the agenda tonight. City Engineer Mann stated at the initial meeting with the agencies, they spent a lot of time talking about a lot of different issues. There is evidence this is the first time for the agencies to look at something like this. Based on the second meeting, the agencies have an idea as to what will satisfy them. Staff's position is once we are comfortable we have something that will not put the City at risk as far as approving a plan, staff will bring it forward. Councilmember Cordes asked if the agencies are giving staff concrete resolutions to help the developer. City Engineer Mann replied at the last meeting there were good concrete ideas as to what they would like to see. The thing that is difficult is that until something is really built, it is hard to gauge if there will be a temperature impact. There was acknowledgement on the agencies part that this is a commercial development and they are not trying to look at things that will completely blow the costs out of the water. The issues mentioned did not seem to be out of line. Community Development Director Carroll stated the Soil and Water Conservation District stated there is $40,000 - $50,000 available from the Met Council they would be willing to devote to this project to help offset some of the costs the developer might have to make changes. Councilmember Cordes asked when Council can expect to see a preliminary plat. City Engineer Mann replied Council should see it no later than November 15,2004. It is difficult to guarantee seeing the plat on November 1, 2004. Mayor Ristow asked if the bridge and the roadway would be a factor. City Engineer Mann replied the bridge and the road are a separate project. The PCA is not going to look at the road project any differently than the development project. The storm water quality issues and temperature issues will be dealt with in conjunction with the ponding done for the Vermillion Crossing project. The DNR would be involved anytime you cross a river. Staffhas met with them regarding Council Minutes (Regular) October 18, 2004 Page 6 their concerns. The SWCD will weigh in on the wetland issues. The two projects should not affect each other. Mr. Gene Pedersen stated they have been going on for two years and has listened to the same story and about the drawings. He requested Council either decide tonight to approve the plat subject to the conditions, or forget it. He has spent too much money and they have no guarantees. Every time they come in, it is something different. To postpone this and go along with staffwill do this and that, it is another story. He cannot hold his clients anymore. He feels Council is hurting Farmington by postponing it. Some of his clients are asking for another site. He stated Council and staff will have to start showing some indication that they want this project. He felt staff is not doing that. He asked to let the development team help solve the problems. He wanted the preliminary plat approved and work as a team instead of fighting back and forth. Their engineer does not know what to do anymore. Right now, they do not have the incentive to spend anymore money. There has been cooperation on both sides, but Council is only asking for griefto put it off. He does not think staffhas been completely cooperative in working with them. He would like their development team, Council and staff, work together as a team to solve issues with the agencies. City Administrator Urbia stated there are no documents in front of Council to approve. They are not ready. It is out of staff's hands and up to the agencies. Staff wants to get this approved and feels there has been a team effort. The Met Council grant money is good news. The agencies are adding another requirement as far as the temperature, but they are also willing to put money into it through the grant. Council just approved doing plans and specifications for the road and bridge extension. Mr. Pedersen stated we have been at this same spot for a long time and it is one more deal. He wanted everyone on the team and put the agencies on the spot to approve this. The agencies are not going to hurry. City Administrator Urbia stated staffhas 60 days to review the preliminary plat and the agencies are under the same timeline. There is no one that can make the PCA move faster. Staffhas worked hard to get an answer from the agencies. Mayor Ristow asked if the plat can be approved contingent on the PCA approval. City Attorney J amnik stated that approval is running on the same timeline. Councilmember Cordes believed they have approved preliminary plats before with contingencies. City Attorney Jamnik stated there are too many uncertainties for staff to make a recommendation for approval. In the past Council has scrutinized those conditions to see which ones they are comfortable with. Because this is an environmentally sensitive area the storm water pond design is an essential element. Because of those situations, staff is not comfortable coming to Council for a conditional approval. Council would be delegating a central feature of the project to the engineering department. Council would see it on the final plat, but it might be substantially different than the preliminary plat. Past practice has been to keep the changes as small as possible between final plat and the preliminary plat. Councilmember Fitch stated we gave the Planning Commission the option of approving it with conditions, but Council is the final Council Minutes (Regular) October 18, 2004 Page 7 authority. City Attorney Jamnik stated it could be processed November 1, but you would be doing it on the faith that engineering would get the approvals necessary so there are no additional City costs between preliminary and final plat. Councilmember Fitch asked if there are substantial changes on the preliminary plat, does it have to go back to the Planning Commission. City Attorney Jamnik stated that is one of the issues, if the conditional approval is substantially different, we have sent it back. There might not be anything significant at this point, but we do not know for sure. Mayor Ristow stated Mr. Pedersen has said if this does not move tonight, he is done. The land sits, the Spruce Street corridor is done, the project is over. He asked if Farmington wants this development or not. Staffhas to follow protocol and there are other agencies involved, but he also understood Mr. Pedersen's frustration. Councilmember Cordes stated she can understand their frustration, but hoped they would respect her position. She cannot in good conscience approve a preliminary plat when she has no information in front of her and that she has not been able to review. She asked if the Knutson's and staff could work hard in the next two weeks and asked if they can have two more weeks to get this done. Mr. Pedersen said no, they asked to have the plat brought to the meeting tonight. They have been told this so much and received a different answer each time. They have the opinion someone is trying to stop this project. They could be wrong, but there have been too many individual things that have happened. He thinks there is someone on staffwho is trying to stop the project. They do not have the faith they should have. There are many on staff that have worked very hard. He understands Council does not have a plat tonight, and that is one of the problems, why isn't it here. He stated staffhas everything they need to make the changes. Councilmember Fitch stated legally we cannot do anything with the plat tonight. City Administrator Urbia stated he received a call Thursday, and that is too late. City Attorney Jamnik stated under the by-laws you cannot add an action item tonight except by unanimous consent. The standard protocol is for Council to direct staff to place it on the next agenda for either a Special or Regular Meeting. If the developer's engineer has the information back, and staff has had time to review it, Council could act on it at the next meeting. If not, Council would be in a position to say they are not comfortable with the information and table it. Mr. Bob Weigert, Paramount Engineering, stated the preliminary plat had a couple minor technical issues to be resolved. The issue with the temperature was brought forward at the Planning Commission meeting to delay action on the preliminary plat until that issue is resolved to the satisfaction of a number of agencies. The ponding issue is something staffhas decided they want to resolve before bringing the preliminary plat. Normally, the NPDES II permit is applied for prior to commencing grading operations. For some reason the agencies have gotten involved early with the thought it might have a significant impact on the layout of the plat. He thought the last meeting was good. The design with regard Council Minutes (Regular) October 18, 2004 Page 8 to the lot and street layout, will probably not change significantly to satisfy the issues with the agencies. They are trying to get something from the PCA in writing that the direction they are taking will satisfy them to issue a permit. To get to that stage requires quite a bit of work. The question before the Council is, is the change to the ponding and infiltration so significant that Council cannot consider the review and approval of the preliminary plat prior to the resolution of those things. Mr. Weigert feels they can get there without significant changes to the preliminary plat layout. City Engineer Mann agreed that based on the meetings with the agencies there are no major changes to the plat layout. If what is shown will meet what the agencies are asking for, the plat can be brought forward. Mayor Ristow asked if the Knutson's are acceptable, would staff agree this can be brought to Council for November 1. City Engineer Mann stated he can guarantee Council they can bring the plat to Council November 1. The part that needs to be worked out between the developer's engineer, staff, and the agencies is, are we far along enough that we can comfortably recommend sending it on. There is potential for that to occur on November I. Community Development Director Carroll stated it is not a lot different than what was done with the Planning Commission. There was not enough information for staff to recommend approval, but they agreed to bring it to the Planning Commission. If Mr. Pedersen is looking for guarantees, and Council tells staff they want it on the November 1 agenda, staff can guarantee it will be on there. What staff cannot guarantee is whether the developer's engineer will be able to get the changes done in time to get them to the agencies, and to receive the agencies' comments in time. If that is not of great concern, staff will put it on the agenda and Council can make their decision then. Councilmember Cordes stated if it was far enough along to present it to the Planning Commission and they are usually the first body that recommends to the Council, why hasn't it come to Council. Staff replied the Planning Commission does not make the final decision. They are an advisory body. The Planning Commission has said do not bring things to us until most ofthe issues are resolved. In this case, because of staff's interest in moving this forward, they agreed to putting it on the Planning Commission agenda, even though under normal circumstances they would not. Staff is trying to respond to the direction from the Planning Commission. They did not want this to go to Council until these issues are resolved, but Council can override them. Mayor Ristow understood from Mr. Weigert that there are just a few ponding issues that are staff's concern. City Engineer Mann replied the main issue is the ponding and that any changes will not significantly change the layout. It is possible there will not be major changes. Mayor Ristow asked if City Engineer Mann agreed Mr. Weigert has to have it worked out with the agencies, or it can be a contingency. City Engineer Mann replied it is possible that by November 1, Mr. Weigert will look at what the ramifications to the design are, and touch base with the agencies. There is not a huge change between the concept plan and the preliminary plat. Community Development Director Carroll stated the Planning Commission does not get too concerned about ponding issues. They look at the lot lines. Because ofthe timing, it was discussed at the meeting Council Minutes (Regular) October 18, 2004 Page 9 last Wednesday, for Mr. Weigert to use the remainder oflast week and all of this week to make changes to the plat. That would allow the week of October 25 for the agencies to review it, which is 5 business days and much less than they like to have. It would then go to staff for review for a week and put together the packet for the meeting on November 15. If you want to short circuit that, what Council may get is an indication that staff and the agencies have received a revised plat, but comments have not been received. The agencies may show up in person to provide comments. Mr. Bill Sievers, general contractor, stated at the last few meetings, the only thing discussed is drainage and the sensitivity to the Vermillion River. No one has talked about the numerous times they have revised drawings to meet staff requirements for the buildings themselves and the development. He asked if the City wanted this development or not. It sounds like the issues can be worked out without major changes. No one talks about whether they want this development. The Vermillion River is 700 ft. away. He does not see how it can change temperature. He asked if the City wants this development. He has been at all of the meetings and they have changed it and changed it. Mayor Ristow stated the Council has put in a tremendous effort and if they did not care, the development would not be as far as it is. Mr. Sievers did not understand why it cannot be approved tonight with the contingency of getting approval from the agencies. Mayor Ristow stated Council does not have the plat to approve. Councilmember Fogarty stated Council has worked hard from the beginning, it was left out of the moratorium, staff and the developer worked hard on the concept plan, the developer has provided a preliminary plat, staff usually takes 5 weeks to review it, they expedited that, they called a Special Planning Commission meeting to help get the preliminary plat approved, and the Council has approved grading without the preliminary plat. Council wants this project, but they cannot blindly pass a preliminary plat right now. It is unfair to say it is done, when Council cannot do this. Council and staffhave worked very hard to make this project happen. Mr. Pedersen stated he agrees with Councilmember Fogarty and the Mayor 100% that the Council has worked every way they can to help this. They would not be where they are today, if the Council had not taken it upon themselves to push this. Councilmember Fogarty stated staff asked for the special Planning Commission meeting. Mr. Pedersen stated he is trying to tell Council they have also done a lot of work to help. He stated whether Council knows it or not, they helped a great deal to get the grant for the bridge. They moved the road. Council has done a lot and some of the staff has done a lot, but there has been someone fighting this from the beginning. It is time the public realizes someone has a personal vendetta against them. City Engineer Mann and City Planner Smick have done a tremendous job working on this. He asked how much they expect. The Knutson's are common, sincere people trying to put a project together. He realized it cannot be approved tonight. He agreed to give the Council until November I, 2004. Council Minutes (Regular) October 18, 2004 Page 10 Council directed staff to bring the preliminary plat to the November 1,2004 Council Meeting. a) Customer Service Response Report - Administration For the second quarter of 2004, the surveys showed 91 % for prompt response, 84% were personally satisfied, and 100% said employees were courteous and helpful. b) Approve Metro Watershed Partners Funding - Engineering The Metro Watershed Partners are a group that puts together educational materials to help people living in watersheds understand the ramifications of their actions. The educational items help the City to meet the best management practices that are required in the stormwater pollution prevention plan. The Metro Watershed Partners asked the City if they would be willing to participate in the amount of $1500 to help them continue to put together these educational items. The funds would come out ofthe storm water utility fund. MOTION by Fogarty, second by Cordes to approve the expenditure of $1 ,500 to support the Metro Watershed Partners. APIF, MOTION CARRIED. c) Adopt Resolution - TH3 Functional Classification - Engineering The Met Council is in the process of putting together their 2030 Transportation Policy Plan. The main issue is the status ofTH3. Currently it is classified as a minor arterial and has the status of preservation which means there will be very little funding put towards TH3. Staff presented a resolution asking the Met Council to consider putting the status of principal arterial on TH3. Without this status there is very little opportunity for funding. In other areas of the metro communities have come together to try to address funding issues for roadways. If Council is interested, staffwill do this. The status is preservation until 2025. The plan shows Farmington is in the area for transit expansion. If this occurs, the City will be taxed to be in this area. Staff asked for comments from Council as to whether they wanted to be included in this area. Another issue is the City endorsing the Cedar corridor transit project. This is a recommendation from the Traffic Engineer. The City would like to include in the letter to the Met Council that the City is interested in this. Councilmember Cordes asked about the City putting in a park and ride. City Engineer Mann explained this is part of the Cedar corridor transit project. This would provide residents an opportunity to park at the park and ride and be able to get to the transit corridor. Councilmember Cordes stated if the City were to commit to being included in the transit area, it should be discussed further as it is another tax. Councilmember Fogarty would like to see the transit go from Cedar, across CR50, and north on Pilot Knob to include more communities. City Engineer Mann stated this would fall more into the category of being in the transit area, rather than just having a park and ride. MOTION by Fitch, second by Fogarty adopting RESOLUTION R86-04 requesting that the Met Council change the functional classification ofTH3 from minor arterial to principal arterial. APIF, MOTION CARRIED. MOTION by Fogarty, second Council Minutes (Regular) October 18,2004 Page 11 by Cordes to approve the draft letter to the Met Council. APIF, MOTION CARRIED. d) Approve Joint Annexation Resolution - Giles Development - Community Development There is a property currently located in Empire Township, just south of the future 19Sth Street alignment. It is adjacent to property formerly owned by Bernard Murphy. Mr. Murphy has petitioned for the annexation of his property. He agreed to wait for annexation until the property was granted MUSA. Empire Township has agreed to not oppose the annexation and agreed to execute ajoint resolution. Community Development Director Carroll thanked the people who served on the EFP AC committee. Councilmember Fogarty thanked Community Development Director Carroll for his work on the committee and stated this is an example of what can happen when communities work together. MOTION by Fogarty, second by Cordes adopting RESOLUTION R87-04 approving the annexation of approximately 93 acres currently owned by Bernard Murphy Farms Limited Partnership and Giles Properties, Inc. APIF, MOTION CARRIED. e) Adopt Ordinance - Logo Signs - Community Development The Farmington Lions Club has indicated an interest in placing logo signs in the right-of-way next to a number of City entrance monuments. There are two specific changes to the sign ordinance. One is the definition of a logo sign and the other change specifies the circumstances under which logo signs could be permitted within the right-of-way. One condition is the sign be co-located with the City's entrance signs not exceeding 24 inches in height or width or 24 inches in diameter. The sign has to be sponsored and maintained by an organization's local chapter with an office located within the City. A responsible person of the organization has to be designated for maintenance issues. The organization has to provide written proof that it has obtained any permits or approvals that are required by any other governmental entities for the placement of signs within their rights-of-way. Signs would not be able to be attached to the concrete entrance signs. Staff would like the organizations to work with them to explore the possibility of getting some sort of structure built near the entrance monuments to place signs on for a number of organizations. There may be the possibility of cost sharing between the organizations. Staff recommended 24 inches in size, as that is what the State requires. Any organization could have a sign attached to the green entrance signs. The Lions Club has already purchased a sign that is 30 inches in diameter. Council should determine if they want to keep the size at 24 inches or go up to 30 inches. The Lions Club ordered the sign some time ago on their own initiative. They have explored the possibility of placing the signs on private property. The County would not object to having free standing signs next to the entrance monuments as long as it is in the landscaped area on the far side of the monument. If signs are placed in the middle of the green entrance sign, the state would require raising the entire sign and would charge a fee. Council Minutes (Regular). October 18,2004 Page 12 Councilmember Cordes noted the City Attorney indicated in a letter that the Council can place a limit on the number of signs allowed. She asked how you define a service organization. City Attorney Jamnik stated that is his primary concern with the ordinance and the proposal. You can allow some, but by allowing some, means you allow all. If an organization can persuade a court they meet the same requirements as the other service organizations approved, the City would have to allow them. Staff believes that risk is outweighed by the benefit to the community by acknowledging the valid service organizations. Once the ordinance is adopted it would have to be administered in an even handed fashion. Mayor Ristow stated if the City goes with putting the signs on the green entrance sign, it would have to be approved by the State. Councilmember Cordes did not have a problem with the signs, she did not want the clutter. If Council does nothing, the Lions Club can petition to put them on the State's signs at two entrances. The ordinance states the signs should be co-located with the City's entrance signs. Councilmember Fitch wanted to see how it would look aesthetically before it is approved. The State will not commit to a proposal for a free standing structure in their right-of-way unless they see what is proposed. Councilmember Fogarty felt the organizations could come up with some type of free standing structure on their own rather than staff designing a structure. She would also like to see a computer-generated drawing as to how it would look. City Administrator Urbia will talk to the organizations about this discussion and determine how the organizations want to proceed. MOTION by Fogarty, second by Cordes to table this item until the next meeting. APIF, MOTION CARRIED. t) 2005 CIP Authority to Proceed with Preliminary Planning - Administration City Administrator Urbia identified the projects for 2005 and the status. He noted the Council approved the plans and specifications for the Spruce Street project. He knows everyone on staff has recommended the Council should proceed with the plans and specifications. That shows everyone is on board with the project. Council direction was pending on the Fire Station, Prairie Creek drainage way dredging, and sewer meter replacement. The Prairie Creek dredging is funded by the storm water funded and is done by City staff. Staff asked for Council to approve this. There are three sewer meters that need to be replaced. They need to be brought up to date to receive accurate readings. One meter was installed with the Main Street project. This would come out of the sanitary sewer fund. For the Fire Station, the architectural fees for Wold would be 70% of the basic services of $85,000 equaling $59,500. This would cover the design of the facility and ready for the City Council with a decision to bid the project. The costs would come out ofthe municipal building fund. Another 5% would be for bid services and the remaining amount would be for the actual construction, administration, inspection, etc. The second location is located on the campus at 195th Street and Pilot Knob Road, across from the Maintenance Facility. In the future, with the build out ofthe City and the MUSA granted, a third station would be necessary. A station should cover a 1.5 mile radius. The proposed location for a third station Council Minutes (Regular) October 18, 2004 Page 13 is at the future 195th Street connection with TH3. Staff asked for direction so bidding could be done in the spring. Councilmember Fitch noted new trucks have been ordered and a place is needed to store them. He felt the City could afford the Fire Station. Mayor Ristow asked if these were the actual costs. Finance Director Roland replied these costs are estimated. If there were 100% City funding of the Spruce Street, Ash Street and Fire Station projects, the Fire Station would be a 20- year bond. Councilmember Fogarty agreed that public safety is a number one priority. MOTION by Fitch, second by Fogarty to approve proceeding with the necessary planning and design of the three remaining projects. APIF, MOTION CARRIED. 11. UNFINISHED BUSINESS 12. NEW BUSINESS 13. COUNCIL ROUNDTABLE Councilmember Fogarty: There will be a discussion on the Thoroughfare Plan for the area east of Akin Road and south of 195th on October 20, 2004. There are six weeks until the truth-in-taxation hearing. A budget meeting was held last week. No one on the Council takes $1.2 million lightly. She encouraged residents to call Councilor staff if they have any questions about the budget. City Administrator Urbia: Coffee with the Council will be October 21,2004, 7:30 a.m. at the Eagles Club. Mayor Ristow and Councilmember Fogarty will attend. The topic will be the Spruce Street bridge, and the trout stream. He received a note from the Farmington Area Historical Society that they will have their fall presentation at the Library on October 27,2004 at 7:00 p.m. Community Development Director Carroll: He received an e-mail from Councilmember Soderberg that he wanted read. He apologized for not being able to attend the meeting and wanted to give an update from the HRA meeting. Vinge Tile and Stone has begun construction in the industrial park, Controlled Air has essentially finished a new building as an expansion. They have created a building large enough to serve their immediate needs as well as a couple smaller spaces they have available for lease to serve as incubator space for small businesses. There is a link on the website that says available commercial properties. The Thoroughfare Meeting on October 20, 2004 will be followed by the MUSA Review Committee meeting. Council Minutes (Regular) October 18, 2004 Page 14 The first meeting with Farmington and Castle Rock representatives was held October 8, 2004. It was an initial meeting and was productive. City Engineer Mann: There is a verbal agreement with Castle Rock Bank. Staff will bring the documentation to a future meeting. 14. ADJOURN MOTION by Cordes, second by Fogarty to adjourn at 9:58 p.m. APIF, MOTION CARRIED. Respectfully submitted, ~~ ~~a~ Cynthia Muller Executive Assistant