Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout03.24.05 Work Session Minutes COUNCIL WORKSHOP MINUTES MARCH 24, 2005 1. CALL TO ORDER Mayor Soderberg called the meeting to order at 5:32 p.m. 2. APPROVE AGENDA MOTION by McKnight, second by Pritzlaffto approve the agenda. APIF, MOTION CARRIED. 3. TRANSIT ISSUE Apple Valley has proposed parking permits to park at the transit station in Apple Valley. The transit taxing district has not changed for 32 years. If Farmington were to join the taxing district it would cost the City $202,000 without a lot of service. If Farmington were to join it could be structured as follows: 1. Farmington could join, but there would be nothing applied towards providing service to Farmington for a long time. 2. Another would be to do something voluntarily or negotiate with the Met Council and MVT A and try to get some sort of service. Legislation has been introduced for voluntary expansion ofthe taxing district. This bill would expand the taxing district voluntarily by an agreement between the Met Council and the City. The agreement must describe the type and level of service. The agreement would allow the City to join the taxing district over an 8 year period, allow for an agreement for the Met Council to levy within the City, the levy could vary throughout the City, the levy could be used for operations or to pay principal and interest on transit bonds. The legislation would go into effect with taxes payable in 2006. There were 143 license plates identified from Farmington in the park and ride lots. In the meantime, Council and staff are working on a way to allow Farmington residents to continue to use the park and ride lots. There is a timetable for developing a plan. The 143 license plates were throughout the south metro. There is not enough parking at the Apple Valley transit station. Notices were sent by Apple Valley that towing would begin for cars parked in the Carmike Theater parking lot. Also, Watson's will no longer allow parking in their lot. Apple Valley did allow some on-street parking. City Administrator Urbia suggested an option would be a shuttle from Farmington to Apple Valley. The permit issue will be brought to the EDA board meeting on April 1 O. There would be a 30-60 day period after that before enforcing permits. Councilmember Wilson asked if there was a definitive response as to how long Farmington residents will be allowed to park there. Councilmember Fogarty replied no, but she feels this will happen. Apple Valley does not want to have to issue permits, but they are running out of options. The Apple Valley residents pay for the park and ride lot. Representative Garofalo is a co-sponsor on the bill to allow more cities to join the transit taxing district. If you are not currently a member, there is no incentive to get involved in the process. This bill will provide a tool for local government to address the issue. He Council Workshop Minutes March 24, 2005 Page 2 thanked Council and staff for getting involved right away. There is a three-prong approach. 1. Need to expand the capacity at the existing facility. The house bonding bill contains $10 million for the Cedar Avenue bus way. The majority will go for Eagan. Next year money could be submitted for phase 2 which would include a bridge for the Apple Valley facility. 2. Get the park and ride lot at 160th Street up and going. 3. The permit issue. As a resident of Farmington he has a problem with this, but he also does not like the idea oflocal communities gating off their park and ride lots. The transit taxing district does not pay for the operating funds to run the bus service. Everyone in the state pays for it. Two-thirds comes from motor vehicle sales tax and one-third from the general fund. For people to say we are not paying for the service, is not true. If Apple Valley insists on moving forward with the permitting proposal, residents can expect some sort of legislation from the capitol to stop them from doing that. Councilmember Fogarty noted the park and ride lot is owned and serviced by Apple Valley. Residents noted the lot at Palomino Drive is full. MVTA gives the impression people can park in other lots and it is not possible. Residents heard 50% ofthe cars at the park and ride were from Farmington and Lakeville. Once a bridge deck is built in Apple Valley, it will fill up. Councilmember Wilson felt the media is not giving an accurate picture. Representative Garofalo felt there are some long-term things that can be addressed. He hoped a short-term agreement could be reached with Watson's to use their lot. Mayor Soderberg stated at the meeting last Friday, MVT A is interested in looking at a temporary park and ride. The City has to engage the Met Council to see what kind of structure the City can have as far as coming into the taxing district. It was suggested Farmington contract with the MVT A to bring a bus down here, but that would involve the Council taxing the residents to cover the cost. Residents had suggestions for vacant parking at the old Hertz lot at County Road 42 and Galaxie, and where the Dollar Tree store was proposed. Councilmember Pritzlaff suggested Farmington ask Carmike ifthe City can have an area for Farmington residents, or in the summer, if people could park at North Trail and run a shuttle service to Apple Valley. Councilmember Fogarty noted the short-term solution cannot be months, it has to be years. In the summer Carmike will not allow parking. The new park and ride at 160th Street is proposed to open in November 2005. Councilmember Fogarty noted ifthe cities do not join voluntarily, the legislation will change the regions. Mayor Soderberg stated we are in the best position now to make arrangements. Right now, if the City joins a taxing district, none of what we pay will go for service. That is part ofthe reason for the legislation. Councilmember Fogarty asked how time consuming and expensive would it be to check the license plates ourselves in the park and ride and in the accessory lots. Residents in the audience volunteered to do this. Residents offered to ask other riders where they are from. Mayor Soderberg felt we still need to develop and distribute a survey. Even ifthe residents hand it to Farmington riders. It could also be placed on the website. Another resident suggested making up cards with the City's website and telling people to complete the survey. Councilmember Fogarty suggested asking residents if they would want a park and ride in Farmington and where the best location would be. One resident felt it was not really important to have a Council Workshop Minutes March 24, 2005 Page 3 park and ride in Farmington, they just need more room for parking in Apple Valley. Some felt the new park and ride at 160th Street would be sufficient. Councilmember McKnight is willing to work to resolve this issue, but it depends on Apple Valley. Mayor Soderberg was encouraged by the contact with Apple Valley and felt staff should begin working on developing a survey. Residents have indicated they will help distribute the survey. Councilmember Fogarty encouraged residents to provide suggestions for the survey. It is the City's responsibility to figure out how to pay for it. The survey should cover short and long-term goals. There is a meeting at the Apple Valley Transit Station on April 25, 2005 from 4:30 - 6:30 p.m. They want to know what kind of routes to plan, such as an express from Apple Valley to Minneapolis. Council asked to be reminded of this meeting. Community Development Director Carroll stated most ofthe discussion has to focus on short and mid-term issues. Planning has given some thought as to where park and ride lots should be located. They have identified two sites. Planning felt the best location for these lots is in commercial areas. One location is the Spruce Street commercial area south ofHwy 50 at the intersection ofHwy 50 and Pilot Knob Road. The other location is the Seed-Genstar property west ofHwy 3. At that point 195th Street would go through to Hwy 3. He asked if residents living north and west would drive south to reach a park and ride lot. Residents indicated they would if it was close enough. Residents asked if Farmington would consider a joint solution with Lakeville. City Administrator Urbia stated that is an option the Council and MVT A discussed. Residents also suggested a park and ride at Hwy 50 and Cedar Avenue. Councilmember McKnight felt this decision cannot affect just Farmington. It has to be a regional solution. Councilmember Fogarty noted Lakeville is putting together a survey and they are waiting for the results before they discuss the issue. Residents felt both locations are good. If the park and ride is in a commercial area they will utilize it and do shopping around the park and ride. Council will support the resolution for transit legislation at the next Council meeting. Apple Valley will have an implementation plan ready by April 10, 2005. That does not mean they will implement the parking permits at that time. That is the date of the next EDA meeting. It depends on what the residents of Apple Valley are telling the City. Residents noted if Farmington residents do not park at the transit lot, the lot would be half full. 4. SCHOOL SITE UPDATE There was a meeting March 18, 2005 with Dakota County, school representatives and staff. The issue of improvements on Flagstaff Avenue and required utility and road construction were discussed. The 20gth Street alignment is proposed to go through the middle of the site. There was some discussion on this alignment and the school district is taking this alignment into consideration. The school avoided the issue regarding paving Flagstaff to the border, however Council and staff would recommend this. Councilmember Wilson noted at the joint meeting there was a lot of enthusiasm for the Community Center and the possibility of it being adjacent to a high school facility and the City contributing to infrastructure costs. He felt the school district realized the gravity of the infrastructure costs and the development associated with that. Staffhas been meeting with the school for over a year. They have encouraged them to understand the gravity ofthe infrastructure issue. Councilmember Pritzlaffhad concerns with the Council Workshop Minutes March 24, 2005 Page 4 ramifications with the road and infrastructure and when do we say we will not approve this. City Administrator Urbia stated we have to get down to our core values and where we will not compromise. Staff noted, if Council says no, they will be the bad guys and you will be the focus of an intense scrutiny and frustration. The $6.5 million would cover running water from CR 50 to 195th Street and connect to the trunk water main. This would be to run sewer only to the school site. This would also cover paving Flagstaff from 195th Street to CR 50. Councilmember McKnight asked if staff has a list of issues. He would like to see what staff sees as issues, estimated costs, school issues, and the process the school has to go through with the City to get this to completion. If some of the numbers don't match up, then we need to decide what can be done. Councilmember Fogarty asked if Council agrees on what they want from this site. She wants 20Sth Street built to Lakeville or at least accounted for, Farmington will provide the services, and she will not back down from Flagstaffbeing paved to the border. Councilmember Wilson wants the best site and the major components of the comprehensive plan not altered. We are not going to be forced to develop outside oftms parameter. Councilmember Pritzlaff agreed with Councilmembers Wilson and McKnight. He was still concerned with whether it will come out of ag preserve. Staff stated on March 17 the EQB ruled in favor of taking it out of ag preserve. As they did not have nine people there, then by default they did not order a public hearing. They do not have the legal right to halt the condemnation proceeding. Once that is completed, it is out of ag preserve. Councilmember Pritzlaff agreed with the others on 20Sth Street, paving Flagstaffto the border, and the school should pick up any costs not covered by the City, and that no other development will occur in the area. Councilmember McKnight would be willing to negotiate on paving Flagstaff to the border. He would agree to phase it in over a number of years. Mayor Soderberg was concerned with high school students using Flagstaff and not having it entirely paved. He wanted Flagstaff paved to the border, the school knew about the infrastructure prior to the referendum. Staff estimated it would cost $3 million to pave Flagstaff from 195th Street to the border. This does not include infrastructure. The infrastructure estimate the school received was for their site only. If Flagstaff will be constructed from CR 50 to 195th Street we need to extend sewer throu~ the entirety of that piece. Staff did not account for sewer from the school site to 195t Street. Mayor Soderberg noted Lakeville has approached him regarding over-sizing the sewer pipe to serve the interceptor. Staff stated you need to consider what the trunk funds can handle. We need to consider the service to the site versus making sure there are stub outs along the way. Even if development is 20 years away, the sewer pipe has to go in now. There may not be enough money in the trunk funds to cover those costs. Regarding the list of numbers, Councilmember Pritzlaffwould like to know how much would be the responsibility of the school. Staff felt the school understands what costs they are responsible for. Councilmember McKnight wants this list to be more than just costs, he wants to know everything that has to be done. Community Development Director Carroll noted if Council stands in the way of the high school going on that site without another solution, they will see Council and staff as being obstructionists. He asked to what extent the Council wants to authorize staffto explore other alternatives. The school has never asked Staff their opinions of the sites or asked for site recommendations. There is a small group of residents that will be suggesting other sites. Staffhas felt they should not be looking for other sites. The Council Workshop Minutes March 24, 2005 Page 5 school has selected a site and we should either accept it or reject it. The suggestion that a possible location be on the Seed-Genstar site did not come from staff. The developer wants to meet with staffto discuss 195th Street. Much of their planning depends on extending 195th Street and what it will cost. They may ask for a feasibility study on 195th Street. They are concerned with the cost of the roadway. The school is prepared to spend $6.9 million at a minimum for Flagstaff and some infrastructure. We have a developer on the east side with a large development we want and need and we need a road built there. IfSeed-Genstar is willing to sell a portion of their site for a school, they have the opportunity to have someone else pay for a portion of 195th Street. The County pays for 55% ifit is within the City. If the road is within the township they would pay 100% and they are reluctant to do that. Staff discussed this with the developer and asked if they would accelerate their annexation plans, so if the Council requests a feasibility report, it would be for a road within the City. The developer agreed it needed to be done soon. Ifthe cost is $5 million and the school pays $2.5 million it would enable Seed- Genstar to move forward and give the City the east-west connection. Look at the comparison between the cost of 195th Street and Flagstaff Avenue. A good part of the high school site is ball fields. If there were a Community Center in the vicinity, why not take out some of the ball fields and require a smaller site. The developer might agree to this. Seed-Genstar is looking at paying 100% of the City's share ofthe road. Staff wondered if it was economically worthwhile for Seed-Genstar to have the high school site on their property rather than an elementary school. Community Development Director Carroll asked to what extent staff can talk with people about this. At some point Council will have to vote on whether to amend the Comp Plan to create this pocket of development that was not envisioned in the Comp Plan. If the school pays $7-10 million for a road and the budget gets tight, they will want to recover that money as soon as possible. If the City holds the line on development out there, and development is not occurring that the school district thinks will help them recover their costs, they will not be happy. There are a fair number of properties along Flagstaff that are not ag preserve. At some point someone will want to assess those properties now for their share of the road costs. Mayor Soderberg wanted to make it clear the City is not interested in developing out there. Staff noted the school time frame is very short. Any delay is intolerable to them. 195th Street east of Akin Road is a City road, not a County road. Unless 195th Street is completed in it's entirety to Hwy 3, it is very unlikely the County will participate. The County is already in the red for their CIP for the next five years. Finance Director Roland noted regarding 195th Street west of Pilot Knob to Flagstaff for Meadowview when the County could not pay, the City carried the County for 1.5 years. If this is designated MSA, those funds are available. Currently the account is $1.4 million. There are other options assuming that it goes all the way through. She cannot see Seed-Genstar wanting 195th to go part way. Community Development Director Carroll stated there are one or two other sites that present far less challenges. Mayor Soderberg asked how much time can be devoted to this. School has also accused staff of back-dooring. Should the ideas come from staff or from Council? Councilmember Wilson asked if Council gave direction, staff would investigate sites and report to Council and then meet with the school or meet with them, announce the intentions, and then follow through with discussions with landowners. Community Development Director Carroll felt the best way would be to operate under the direction of Council with clear parameters as to what he can and cannot do. If Council wants staff to investigate issues related only to Flagstaff, they will do that. If Council wants staff to look at other sites, staffwill do that because they believe there are better sites. Mayor Soderberg noted part ofthe school's tight schedule is self-imposed. It was indicated at the EQB meeting Council Workshop Minutes March 24, 2005 Page 6 that a year delay will not hurt. City Administrator Urbia suggested letting staff research the idea with Seed-Genstar and work on issues with Flagstaff and 20Sth Street. Finance Director Roland noted the City's CIP identifies two major projects this year without Flagstaffwhich are Ash Street and the Spruce Street extension. Councilmember Pritzlaffhas stated he would not support changing the 2020 Comp Plan. Since the referendum has passed, he asked if the land is already purchased and would that go against the theory of providing another site. Staffwas not sure. They thought the property would close in 2006. The Christensen's want to close in March or April 2005. The school district has been saying they need three sites and they currently have two. Staff recalled a provision in the purchase agreement whereby if the school decides not to build there, the Christensen's get the property back at the same price. Councilmember McKnight stated it has been discussed with the school whether to take it out of ag preserve. The voters said yes to the referendum. He did not want staff to spend time looking for other sites for the school. If Seed-Genstar or a resident suggests other sites, fine. Councilmember Fogarty stated if the school is saying the City should fix the problem it would be good to have an option. She feels the biggest issue will be completing Flagstaff to the border. She can see the school bringing a plat with Flagstaff paved to 195th Street and not to the border, and Council will not approve the plat. Then the Council will be blocking the school. Staff would like to have alternatives for the school, but to do that staff needs to be able to talk to people. Staff feels this would be helpful to the school, but is not sure the school would see it that way. Community Development Director Carroll asked if we have the capability of doing a feasibility report for Flagstaff and contemporaneously doing one for 195th Street. Assistant Engineer Gross stated it would be contracted with Bonestroo. Finance Director Roland estimated it to cost $40,000 each. The funds would come from the road and bridge fund. Mayor Soderberg asked if doing Flagstaff on the school district's timeline is almost impossible. Assistant Engineer Gross replied it is impossible to estimate how long it will take without doing a feasibility report. He recommended ordering a feasibility report for Flagstaff as soon as possible. City Administrator Urbia stated they want a commitment in writing from the school first. A feasibility study would take 6 months not including an EA W or anything else that might arise. Councilmember Wilson agreed we need to be proactive. He felt we need to develop a checklist, set up a meeting, hand it to them and read it. He was more than comfortable for Community Development Director Carroll to have these discussions. Mayor Soderberg agreed that we need alternatives. Councilmember Wilson stated he knows how hard staff works. They have great ideas and there is no communication with the school. Councilmember Fogarty felt staff should pursue the options and let people know Council has directed staff to do this. At the next meeting, these issues should be brought up. Council should tell the board at the joint meeting about the things that matter and review the checklist. Councilmember McKnight does not want to see anything in the school's column as far as money. It should show the City's position, dollars and the required steps such as the comp plan amendment. Community Development Director Carroll stated the Planning staffwill not be starting the search for the school site all over again. As far as Seed Genstar, staff is working with them to determine if they want a feasibility report for the road. The school will need to know that if they want an elementary school at that site. Ifthis gives them information on the feasibility of putting a high school on the site, what is wrong with that? There are one or two other sites staff suggested and staff would like to find out why those sites were rejected. He will report the information back to City Administrator Urbia and Council Workshop Minutes March 24, 2005 Page 7 Council. Councilmember McKnight stated when the school board tells me where to put a fire station or police station, he will tell them we have professionals to deal with that and the Council makes that decision. He felt we are crossing a big line because there are City issues with the roads and sewers, but he doesn't like telling them how to do their job. Councilmember Fogarty was afraid the school's budget will be short and they will blame the City. It is not the City's job to reduce their costs. It is our job to make sure we have our staff making safe roads for the school buses and that the land use is appropriate. Finance Director Roland stated the school can reallocate the bond proceeds within the project. The bonds will go to pay for the project budget. Council reached a consensus for staff to proceed. Mayor Soderberg stated making the site work means presenting the checklist and informing the school they will need to request a feasibility study. Councilmember Wilson would like to receive it prior to or at the April 4 Council Meeting. Council would like it sent with the packet on March 31, 2005. 5. PROJECT UPDATES City Administrator Urbia handed out information on the Spruce Street feasibility report, an update on the Community Center, and information on the Clean Water Legacy Act. Regarding the Community Center there will be a joint meeting with the Park and Rec Commission and the Community Center Steering Committee on April 13. On May 2 the report and executive summary will be presented to Council. At the April 4 Council meeting, staffwill ask for approval to hire Hoisington Koegler to master plan four new parks. Councilmember McKnight noted there is a gap on the funding for the Spruce Street bridge and asked about the amount. Finance Director Roland stated there is a good deal of items built into the feasibility study and it is a conservative estimate. The difference between the actual cost and the estimate is approximately $200,000 - $300,000. The preliminary plat was approved in November 2004. Mayor Soderberg stated it was approved with the contingency they have all the issues worked out before bringing back the final plat. Staff noted they are making progress. The final plat could be ready before spring. Mayor Soderberg asked where they are on the issues with the agencies. Staff stated there was an issue with the high water level. Staff is working on negotiating the high water mark. This is needed to determine building elevations and pond elevations. Instead of piping everything underground, a lot of the parking lot drainage will go towards CR 50 and through a grass swale to the east and into the ponds instead of being piped. The developer has also agreed that for the portion of the development closer to the river, all of the runoff from the roofs is going into some underground piping and will infiltrate into the ground rather than going into the ponds. The road and bridge plans and specs are being reviewed by FEMA. Community Development Director Carroll stated there have been some internal changes to reduce the involvement of Gene and Randy Pedersen. Mr. Dick Allendorf is the Project Manager, Mr. Bob Pittner is the Corporation Manager, and PCL is the builder. Staff met with them on March 21,2005 where they supplied staffwith a spreadsheet giving a timeline through 2006. They are planning on coming in with a final plat on May 23,2005, which would be on the June 14,2005 Planning Commission agenda and if approved, will be brought to Council on June 20, 2005. They are hoping to open at least one business either late this fall or early winter. It is a nationally known restaurant chain. It would be located on the left hand corner as you turn off ofCR 50 on the north-south road. They could get a grading permit now. They would begin work on five or six additional lots in April or May and complete by the end Council Workshop Minutes March 24, 2005 Page 8 of 2006. They would include a bank, gas/convenience store, a hotel and a multi-tenant building. They are still keeping space for the big box store. Councilmember Pritzlaffhad asked who the City would have to promote economic development. Council was informed at the last meeting that Ms. Tina Schwanz has been appointed to the position of Economic Development Specialist. Staffhas been interviewing candidates for the Assistant City Planner position. Councilmember Pritlzaff asked about the prospect of touring some Community Centers to determine what would be included. He asked if Council, staff and the Steering Committee could take a bus tour. City Administrator Urbia stated first a feasibility study should be completed. If approved, then the recommendation steps would be followed including a tour. Councilmember Fogarty suggested next Council could provide a list of items they would like to see included in a community center as determined by the Steering Committee. The Steering Committee needs to know the Council likes the ideas, if a Community Center should be designed, and partnerships. Then the Council could take some tours. Councilmember Pritzlaff also requested information on any projects from the previous Council. For example, on the Ash Street project, he felt Council was not informed well enough in advance. He did not want another project to come up without having all the information. Mayor Soderberg stated there will be issues and projects come up that will require more research. Staff can provide that information. He requested Council be cognizant of staff and their time and rather than dropping in on them, call and ask when would be a good time to meet. Councilmember Pritzlaff also asked there be a section on the management report for the City Administrator. Councilmember McKnight liked the update from City Administrator Urbia and encouraged him to do it more. Councilmember Pritzlaff also requested that any meetings Councilmembers attend, that they share the information with other Councilmembers. Mayor Soderberg stated this could be done under Council Roundtable. Regarding the Ash Street project, Councilmember Wilson does not support doing any modifications to the project. The previous Council voted for the sidewalk. Councilmember Pritzlaff asked if staff had any options for the trees. Following are the options: 1. Not acquire the easement and trim the trees at the right-of-way line and install the sidewalk. There would be no cost. This would cause the trees to die as half the root system would be removed to install the sidewalk. 2. Acquire the easement by negotiation or condemnation and move the trees. The trees would have to be moved back further than the construction easement so they would not hang over the right-of-way. The property owner would have to give the City right of entry. The cost would be $150 - $200 per tree with an estimated survival rating of 95%- 98%. This would be the most successful. 3. Acquire the easement and cut the trees down and replant trees. The City can spade in 15 ft. trees, which would be equivalent in size. The cost would be $900 per tree and there are five trees. 4. The City can take the easement, cut down the trees and not replace them. 5. Plant smaller trees. Council Workshop Minutes March 24, 2005 Page 9 Council was unanimous that the sidewalk stay in the proj ect as designed. If the owner does not give right-of- entry and the trees have to be moved somewhere else, it was suggested to move them to a park. Mayor Soderberg asked about the McVicker lot. Staff is waiting to hear back from Dakota County to see what the state will allow the City to do. The County will allow the HRA to deed the property back to the County, and the County will send it back to the City and change the current restriction on the deed. Currently the deed reads the property has to be used for a sidewalk. The County will deed it back with the indication the property has to be used for redevelopment. Four Star is still interested in the property. 6. ADJOURN MOTION by Fogarty, second by McKnight to adjourn at 9: 12 p.m. APIF, MOTION CARRIED. Respectfully submitted, ~ h-7~~ Cynthia Muller Executive Assistant