Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout08.02.04 Council Minutes COUNCIL MINUTES REGULAR August 2, 2004 I. 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 None Joel Jamnik, City Attorney; Dan Siebenaler, Acting City Administrator/Police Chief; Kevin Carroll, Community Development Director; 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 David McKnight, Michelle Wood, Mark Zitzmann, John Frank, Steve Corraro, Cheryl Retterath, Kate Peterson, Lowell Peterson, Tim Weyandt, Pam Melby, Kelly Alexander, Douglas Bonar, Randy Oswald, Julie Bittner, Dawn Mason, Todd and Julie Endersbe, Paula Higgins, Jeff Ibinger, Paul and Jolene Bendix, Brad Meeks, Scott Hinrichsen, Dan Hesse, Terry Donnelly, Paul Hardt, Brenda Solis, Wes Agnew, Renee Meyers, Paul and Jodi Sand, Kim Fortney, David Cronk, Mike Dow 4. APPROVE AGENDA Councilmember Soderberg pulled item 7L) Adopt Ordinance - Amending Section 10-5-7 ofthe Zoning Code Related to Rear Yard Setbacks in the R-2 (Medium Density Residential) Zoning District for discussion. Councilmember Cordes pulled item 7a) Council Minutes (7/26/04 Special) to abstain. MOTION by Soderberg, second by Cordes to approve the Agenda. APIF, MOTION CARRIED. 5. ANNOUNCEMENTS 6. CITIZEN COMMENTS Mr. Gene Pederson, representing the Knutsen project in the Spruce Street area, stated he is deeply concerned about the project and he is not pointing any fingers. He just wanted to get to the bottom. Three months ago they submitted a plan for the Spruce Street area. Now they are at a standstill because of having to move the east-west road further north due to the wetlands. Between his engineer and the City's engineer they are not getting anything done. They came in for a grading permit and they have the northern portion all Council Minutes (Regular) August 2, 2004 Page 2 set to move ahead and ready to build and they have a negotiation for a big box store. If the street is moved north, they will have to change the size of the big box store. They wanted to physically start the buildings and submit the whole plan for approval. No matter whose engineer is causing this, he is paying for it dearly. Each meeting with an engineer costs him $2,000. Ifthe project does not start this fall, it will cost him $100,000. He would like to get everyone together and submit the plan the way it is. They cannot submit it because it is incomplete until this issue is settled. He asked Council to direct staff to work with them, let them submit the whole package, and get it approved so they can start this fall. They are ready to go and they are losing people because of the delay. He would like the road left where it is and try to mitigate the wetlands. He asked for a push to get this submitted. He did not want to tell the engineer to do final drawings, because every time they do there is a change. He asked what they can do to expedite this. They are at such an impasse that either the project goes or he has to walk. He assumed from the last meeting that the City wants this, but it is not getting done. Mayor Ristow asked ifthe preliminary plat has gone to the Planning Commission. Mr. Pederson relied they cannot because it is not complete because of the road. Community Development Director Carroll stated they submitted a preliminary plat application on July 6, 2004. Mr. Pederson asked why is there a hold on the southern portion. Staff replied City Planner Smick sent his development team a letter on July 13,2004 that identified the items that were missing from the plat application. Mr. Pederson replied he does not know what the story is, but something does not add up. He wanted to get to the bottom ofthis. His engineer told him that every time he has come in for the last 3 months there is always a change. It is no use doing any more drawings. In the meantime, the project is in jeopardy of being dropped. Mayor Ristow asked ifit was an engineering problem. Community Development Director Carroll replied it is primarily an engineering issue related to the alignment of Spruce Street. Mr. Pederson asked why is the whole project being held up for Spruce Street. Councilmember Soderberg replied we are dealing with a trout stream and a wetland. It has special considerations. Mr. Pederson asked why has it taken 6 months to hold up the project. City Engineer Mann stated they would put together a time line as to when things were submitted and addressed. The issue with Spruce Street does have to do with wetlands. The original concept plan shows an alignment for Spruce Street. Since that was created Council authorized staff to put together a feasibility report on the Spruce Street extension. A draft is complete and ready to bring to Council the first meeting in September. There is an issue with the wetlands. Engineering has identified the alignment on the concept plan has to move to the north in order to avoid the wetland. The Spruce Street alignment as currently proposed in the feasibility report does cut through a lot of wetlands, but to the east before the gas easement it comes out of the wetlands. Staff has been informed in talking with the agencies that to go back into the wetland after coming out of it will not be acceptable. We have to avoid the wetland that is at the south end ofthe north-south road. That is what the Spruce Street alignment is based on. It is designed to be as close to the wetland as possible without getting into it. Council Minutes (Regular) August 2, 2004 Page 3 Mayor Ristow asked if this has been discussed with Knutsen's engineer. City Engineer Mann replied this has been given to their engineer and staff is waiting for their engineer to submit a new plan that shows the town square moved to the north along with the Spruce Street alignment and a reworking of the concept plan. Staff has not received anything back yet and staff is also looking at it for any ideas. If the developer chose to change the way he submits his preliminary plat in such a way as to do the north half rather than the entire area at once, that could be addressed over time. City Engineer Mann agreed the best thing to do was to get everyone together and figure out the best way to move forward. Mr. Pederson stated if it is moved north they lose half of the big box which kills the big box because there is no cross street in front and they have to cut down almost 30% of the size of the building which is too small for what they want. They would have to redo the whole plat if the big box stays or forget about it. It is a national company. Councilmember Fogarty stated we are not choosing the connection, we are being told where we need to put the connection according to where the wetlands are. There are not a lot of options. Mr. Pederson stated this was known 6 months ago. They have done the drawings and are ready to submit them. The City now says it is not complete. He can appreciate there is a problem. In the meantime they have a street going across and one party saying they want to keep the street and the other group is saying move it up. Mr. Pederson suggested taking the town square out. The City wanted the town square, not the Knutsen's. They designed it the way the City wanted it and now it cannot be done. It has to be moved north so the whole thing has to be redrawn. The feasibility report will be brought to Council in September and it takes 60 days to get the plat approved. That brings us to November. By spring they could lose 30% of the people they have all set to go with letters of intent because they cannot get the project done. Because ofthe Spruce Street problem, we are holding up the whole project and a lot of businesses that want to come in. There has to be a solution if everyone were to get together. Mr. Pederson recommended Council direct staff to get it done. Mayor Ristow asked ifpart of the project could be submitted to get it started and work out the rest. Mr. Pederson stated that kills the big box. Councilmember Soderberg stated it might require some reconfiguration, but if we have agencies telling us we cannot go into a wetland, there is not a lot we can do about it. Mr. Pederson stated when they first started it was a case you could mitigate or replace what you are taking. Now we cannot do that. What is the true story? Mr. Pederson stated in the meantime he is paying for it. He is trying to get a project done and cannot get it approved. Everytime we have a meeting with the engineer it costs him $2,000. He would like to get everyone together. He did not feel the answer was phasing the project. He has been working on the big box for a year and has them ready to go. Acting City Administrator Siebenaler stated staff can set up a meeting with Mr. Pederson and interested parties, but the bottom line remains. The road alignment is what it is and where it is and cannot be shifted. If Mr. Pederson expects the outcome of the meeting to change the road alignment, that cannot happen. It is not allowed by the agencies. This is a challenging piece of property, we knew that going in. It is not simply a wetland, but it Council Minutes (Regular) August 2, 2004 Page 4 is a trout stream. It is the first test case for all of the agencies involving a trout stream in the metro area and they are going to be watching it carefully. When they say no, it means no. Staff can meet with Mr. Pederson and his team and put some ideas together on how to move the project forward, but there will be some reconfiguration necessary from the original concept plan that was submitted. It cannot appear that way in the final product. Mr. Pederson asked why doesn't the City give a little on putting in the street. He does not disagree, but staff is saying just move the whole thing. Mr. Pederson would like to redraw the southern portion and leave the big box. It is nice to have the town square, but maybe it has to be eliminated. They will put the road where it has to be, but the city wants to move the whole thing up which kills the big box and the street across from it. Mr. Pederson was saying staff should give a little and they will give a little, but he has not seen any give. They will put the road where it should go, but then maybe the design wanted by the City cannot be there. Maybe the City has to give a little on that. Council stated that is the town square and is envisioned to be a park. Mr. Pederson stated it is killing the big box by doing it that way. Mr. Pederson felt that needed to be redone some other way so they do not lose the big box. Community Development Director Carroll stated they have indicated to Mr. Pederson's engineers that staff is willing to work with them to try to devise a revision that works for everyone. He suggested to Mr. Pederson that another meeting with staff might be helpful. Staff has talked to Mr. Pederson's engineers last week about this specific issue. The engineer stated he had been talking about a variety of options for dealing with this. He had talked with the Knutsen's and New Century. If they want to have another meeting to bring Mr. Pederson up to speed with his engineers, staff would be happy to do that. They have indicated to staff that if staff had ideas of their own they would be receptive to that. Staffhas been working on that since the middle of last week and would be prepared to meet with them anytime. Councilmember Fitch stated he can understand Mr. Pederson's frustration, we have been at this a long time. He thought everyone was on the same page when the grading permit was approved. He did not realize there were still issues. Mr. Pederson stated if you have to move the road you move the road, but staff wants to push it all north which cuts down the big box and the road in front of it. He stated they can have a meeting, but every time they do they walk out thinking they have a solution and then a week later they are back in the same spot. He was not blaming anyone individual. He did not want to tell the engineer to draw the final plans and then have it changed. He thought they had it done three months ago. Mr. Pederson stated someone is not giving. Let's get it going so we can submit it. If we have the meeting, can we get the job done. Councilmember Fitch asked Mr. Pederson ifhis engineer has contacted him regarding the letter from City Planner Smick. Mr. Pederson replied he spoke to his engineer an hour ago, he did not get the same story he got from Community Development Director Carroll. He is not saying who is wrong. His engineer said he is done drawing. He was supposed to have gotten the information from staff a week ago and he did not get it. He did not know who to believe. Councilmember Fitch asked if Council could get an e-mail copy of the letter. Community Development Director Carroll had a copy with him to give to Mr. Pederson. Council Minutes (Regular) August 2, 2004 Page 5 Mayor Ristow suggested Mr. Pederson come with his engineer and meet with staff. Mr. Pederson stated he will meet with the engineers, but don't charge him $2,000 until something is settled. Mr. Pederson stated he has been gone, he came back, thought they would be ready to start grading, and found out there was another problem. Councilmember Fogarty asked staff if it is possible to keep the town square and the big box and make the road work. Community Development Director Carroll replied it is apparent that some modification needs to be made. That may involve relocating some of the buildings in the southern portion of the plan, or it may involve reducing the size of one of the rectangles on the concept plan. He felt it can be achieved. The real issue is whether it is reasonable to expect that a concept plan that was originally prepared months before the Spruce Street alignment was identified as a problem, whether a concept plan based on some erroneous information about where the road should go, now has to be approved simply because it has been discussed for six months. Staff is prepared to work with them. The Spruce Street alignment was mostly an engineering issue. They had extensive contact with the DNR and there were a couple options identified. Staff and the DNR finally agreed on one. Staff is trying to be sensitive to what they are concerned about. Frankly, the DNR was not too happy about the road going through the wetlands at all. Staff felt it was fortunate they could be persuaded that the circumstances warranted going through the wetlands further to the east to get the road to the development. Staff could process the concept plan, have it reviewed by the DNR' and have them show up at a meeting objecting to it. That would delay the project even more. Staff is trying to reasonably anticipate what the agencies are going to say and help the Knutsens structure a preliminary plat that will not generate opposition, but be supported by the DNR. Staff's goal is to get this done as soon as possible. That is why staffhas been meeting regularly with the Knutsen's engineer, they have had ongoing contacts, there was a meeting on June 23, Randy Pederson was here, one or both of the Knutsens were here, their engineer, and the City's engineer. This problem was specifically identified and discussed and also the alignments. It was agreed some modifications would need to be made. It was brought to the Planning Commission on July 13 for review of the concept plan. The memo to the Planning Commission specifically identified this as a problem that would need to be addressed. The Knutsens development team knew about that, and their engineer indicated he was working on that the middle of last week. Council saw this on the agenda 10 days ago and there was no indication this was a big concern. Everyone was happy the grading permit was approved, and understood some changes would have to be made in the south. If the Knutsens want to come in with a grading plan for the northern part in order to get grading started, they can do that, Council has approved it. If they want to wait until all the issues are resolved before starting grading, that is fine too. Staffwill work with them. Mayor Ristow understood the Knutsens point if they do all the grading and they cannot do anything else, they have wasted a lot of time and money grading if they cannot get the rest of it approved. Community Development Director Carroll stated from what they have indicated, they have people ready to occupy buildings in the northern half of the development. If they do the grading up there and get the roads in for some distance, Council Minutes (Regular) August 2, 2004 Page 6 make the pad sites available there is more time then to address the other issues. If they would rather wait until all the issues are addressed before any grading starts, that is fine too. Mr. Pederson stated the silver tongue is beautiful and he has listened to it for two years and it all sounds good, but for three months we have been at the same spot we are tonight. We walked out of a meeting and thought we had it all straightened out and we aren't any further. He stated we can have the meeting and try, but that is not the answer he came to get. He would like a decision made now. Councilmember Fogarty asked what decision he would like Council to make. The Council is unanimous; they want this project to go through. We cannot change the rules. Mr. Pederson replied he is not asking Council to change the rules. He has not heard one remark tonight, except that they move the park up and cut down the size of the buildings after they have spent three months. Why couldn't they have been told this three months ago before they did all the drawings. They are no farther now, than they were three months ago. It is the same every time they come in it is something else. They will lose 30% of the big box, which kills the box. They want the size that was put in. This would create another problem on parking, and another problem with parking on streets and it creates another one on wetlands and it just keeps compounding. It is to the point that maybe the job cannot get done in Farmington because the wetlands are more important. He has not heard anyone say they are willing to redraw it. He heard someone very sarcastically say they have all these in front why don't you go ahead and build it. Mr. Pederson did not see him picking up his checkbook. It is getting to the point where they are not getting anywhere. He agreed to having a meeting, but did not hold out much hope. Mayor Ristow asked Mr. Pederson ifhe was aware of this when he applied for the grading permit. Mr. Pederson replied it came up but they did not know where it would go. Staff wanted to keep the town square which kills the size of the big box. Mr. Pederson was negotiating with the big box people and asked ifthey would take a smaller building and they said no. He felt the Spruce Street deal was creating more problems for the City and for them and it was killing their project. As far as Mr. Pederson was concerned, they did not need Spruce Street. They could do the project without it. He asked what guarantee there was that there would be a town square. They cannot afford to gamble to do the grading and not have the southern portion settled. Councilmember Fitch asked for an agreement to set a meeting with staff. Councilmembers would be glad to sit in on the meeting. We do have to bring a resolution to this. Both sides might have to compromise on what we are doing. Staff will arrange a meeting for this week. 7. CONSENT AGENDA MOTION by Fogarty, second by Soderberg to approve Council Minutes (7/26/04 Special). Voting for: Fitch, Fogarty, Soderberg. Abstain: Ristow, Cordes. MOTION CARRIED. I) Adopt Ordinance - Amending Section 10-5-7 of the Zoning Code Related to Rear Yard Setbacks in the R-2 (Medium Density Residential) Zoning District - Community Development Councilmember Soderberg pulled this item to ask why multi-family is not allowed in an R-2 zoning district. Community Development Director Carroll replied R-2 is Council Minutes (Regular) August 2, 2004 Page 7 single family homes and duplexes. Duplexes are not considered multi-family. R-3,4 and 5 are considered multi-family. Multi-family suggests you can have higher densities in an R-2 district than allowed. This was a typographical error when the zoning code was revised. MOTION by Soderberg, second by Fogarty adopting ORDINANCE 004-514 amending Section 10-5-7 to delete the rear yard setback for multi-family under the R-2 Zoning District. APIF, MOTION CARRIED. MOTION by Soderberg, second by Fitch to approve the Consent Agenda as follows: a) Approved Council Minutes (7/19/04 Regular) b) Received Information Park and Recreation Commission Minutes - Parks and Recreation c) Adopted RESOLUTION R58-04 Appointing Election Judges - Primary Election - Administration d) Approved Tobacco and Off-Sale Beer License Transfers - Administration e) Adopted RESOLUTION R59-04 East Farmington 9th Addition Development Contract - Engineering f) Approved Cataract Fire Relief Association 2005 Pension Request - Finance g) Received Information Capital Outlay - Parks h) Approved School and Conference - Parks and Recreation i) Approved Park Planning/Park Development Schedule - Parks and Recreation j) Adopted ORDINANCE 004-512 Amending Section 10-3-6(C) ofthe City Code Concerning Variances - Community Development k) Adopted ORDINANCE 004-513 Amending Section 10-2-1 and Section 10-5-14 Adding Mixed-Use Buildings as a Conditional Use in the B-2 Downtown Business Zoning District - Community Development m) Adopted ORDINANCE 004-515 Amending Section 10-5-12 of the Zoning Code Related to Rear Yard Setbacks in the R-D (Downtown Residential) Zoning District - Community Development n) Authorized Quick Take Action - Phase 2 Pond Project - Engineering 0) Authorized Grant Application - Police p) Approved Bills APIF, MOTION CARRIED. 8. PUBLIC HEARINGS 9. AWARD OF CONTRACT 10. PETITIONS, REQUESTS AND COMMUNICATIONS a) Consider Pursuing Agreement for Cardboard Recycling - Parks and Recreation Staff asked for direction to move forward with obtaining an agreement with Liberty Diversified Industries (LDI) a cardboard recycling company. Currently the City hauls cardboard to a recycling site in Inver Grove Heights. Based on LDI's proposal staff would have a cardboard compactor and a box on site at the Council Minutes (Regular) August 2, 2004 Page 8 Maintenance Facility for the City to use. The City would receive $25/ton for the cardboard. Right now, the City does not receive any money for the cardboard sent to the recycling site. This would also save staff drive time to the site estimated at 425 hours per year. It would also save wear and tear on the vehicles and fuel costs. The cardboard is picked up by LDI on site at the Maintenance Facility. Councilmember Fitch stated some ofthe moves the Solid Waste has done lately in rerouting their schedule for efficiency and now this make sense. Councilmember Soderberg agreed with taking an item that costs the City money and turning it into revenue. Councilmember Fogarty also agreed, and was very impressed with saving staff time. Staff stated they can now dump the cardboard bins more often. MOTION by Fitch, second by Cordes to direct staffto work with LDI in creating an agreement that will be returned to the City Council for consideration at a future meeting. APIF, MOTION CARRIED. II. UNFINISHED BUSINESS a) Community Center Feasibility Study - Parks and Recreation A proposal was submitted by Ballard King and Associates to do a feasibility study for a community center. Staffhad identified funding in the park improvement fund to pay for the study. One concern when the CIP was reviewed was whether there were enough funds in the park improvement fund to develop existing parks and pay for a feasibility study. Based on the park planning/park development schedule staff used the estimated numbers based on this schedule and estimated the revenues to come in. With MUSA that will be granted, those revenues will increase with land being developed. Other items identified for funding include park dedication special assessments. Right now there are special assessments on developments that have outstanding payments due for past park dedication requirements. Another funding source is the liquor store transfers. Currently $40,000 per year is transferred from profits. Also included are park development fees. As more land is developed, park development fees will be required. In 2006 there will be more park development fees as the Seed-Genstar property will come in for development. The issue with park development is that it can be spread out over five years or the developer can pay it up front. This showed a lump sum of $880,000. The next item is cash in lieu from new development which has been spread out over five years. The last item is the vending contract. Currently the City receives $1,000 per year which goes into the park improvement fund. As far as expenses the City is not anticipating buying any land, but obtaining land through the park dedication process. Staff also identified supplies such as park containers, picnic tables, etc. Other services and charges such as grading work, etc. There will also be expenses for developing Master Plans for all parks. In 2005 and 2006 there will be a surplus in the park improvement fund. In 2007 there will be a deficit. In 2008 and 2009 there would be a surplus. Parks and Recreation Director Distad stated staff will not spend the money in a deficit mode. If the money is not available for park improvements, they will scale back the number of improvements or defer them to another year. Council Minutes (Regular) August 2, 2004 Page 9 Councilmember Fitch asked if estimated construction costs includes playground equipment and noted there are two bonded debt issuances for this which would be a referendum. He asked what the money would be paying for. Staff replied it would include outdoor athletic facilities at the Seed Genstar property and the redevelopment of Rambling River Park. These are estimated costs. It also includes the neighborhood parks on the park improvement schedule. Councilmember Fitch asked what would happen to the schedule if the referendum did not pass. Staff replied items such as the Seed-Genstar property would be pushed back. The City may only be able to develop a few ball fields or soccer fields to start. With the $880,000 identified in park development fees a lot of work can be done if it is paid in a lump sum. If it is spread out over five years it becomes more difficult. Councilmember Cordes noted the example from Forest Lake identified a couple items that mayor may not be included in the feasibility study. One area she was concerned with was an arena. A few years ago the City purchased land adjacent to the existing arena that if we were to build a second sheet it would be built on that site. She asked if an arena will be part ofthe feasibility study. She wanted to know what will be included in the study. The City has not identified what they want. Parks and Recreation Director Distad replied the process would be to assemble a task force that would be the advisory body for putting together the information for the feasibility study. Ballard King also surveys youth organizations as to what their needs are, what their projected numbers will be, whether their numbers will decline, and what their needs are for facilities. Councilmember Cordes stated to her a Community Center is a building and outdoor facilities are outdoor facilities. She asked ifthis will be a combination of both. Staff stated this would be courts for basketball, swimming needs whether a competitive pool or a leisure pool. The study will not look at outdoor facilities. They will look at a site to do both. This is an indoor facility. The study would look at things like an ice arena, gymnasium, leisure or competitive pool, climbing wall, racquetball courts, etc. The study would identify what the community perceives as needs and what makes the most sense based on this study and what we know we can generate in revenues, what makes the most sense to build at this time. Community Centers do not pay for themselves. In other cities community centers are covered through subsidies or transfers from other funds. When the study is brought back to Council, they will need to decide what they are comfortable with when it goes out for referendum and what they are comfortable with as far as a subsidized amount. Based on a $350,000 subsidy that amounted to $60/year increase in taxes on a $200,000 home. Councilmember Soderberg noted the feasibility study will identify a lot of things Council is wondering about. Council has identified an outdoor facility plan and doing a referendum around 2006. This is the next step in that process that was identified by the Park and Rec Commission. Mayor Ristow asked if the population is a factor. Staff replied it depends on the study and what the comfort Council Minutes (Regular) August 2, 2004 Page 10 level is for the Council. This would come out in the feasibility study process. Councilmember Cordes wanted to make it clear there are construction costs to build the building which would be done by referendum and then there is additional cost which at the cost of the taxpayer not only do you pay what you pass on the referendum, but also pay operating costs. Staff added there are also fees charged to use the facility. All ofthis will be shown in the study. Councilmember Fitch asked about the $350,000 subsidy costing $60 on a $200,000 home. During the budget discussions it was stated that raising the levy $825,000 would be a $20 tax on that same level of home. Acting City Administrator Siebenaler replied a portion ofthat $850,000 is an increase in property valuation. $850,000 is a slight increase in the tax rate. That percentage increase in the tax rate represented the $20. Councilmember Fitch asked if $350,000 is added to that, why wouldn't that increase only that same percentage because we are only asking for that much more. Staff stated the $20 does not represent the whole ofthe $850,000. Mr. Steve Corraro, 18775 Essence Trail, stated school facilities account for 77% of the athletic facilities in the City. The community has worked very closely with the school district. The school board held a scheduling meeting with the Park and Rec Commission. Mr. Corraro is president of the basketball association. His frustration is the school has stepped up to the plate time and time again and asked what the City is doing. The community center feasibility study is another step in that process that the City needs to approve. He would like to see a partnership between the school and the City. He asked the Council to step up to the plate as the residents want the feasibility study. He wanted Council to listen to the taxpayers. Mayor Ristow stated there was a joint meeting today between the school board and the Council and they are committed to working as a team. MOTION by Fogarty, second by Soderberg to enter into an agreement with Ballard King and Associates for a feasibility study for a Community Center. Councilmember Cordes thanked Parks and Recreation Director Distad for providing Council with the information. She was opposed to doing the feasibility study as it is quite a bit of money, but if Park and Recreation Director Distad is comfortable with spending $32,000 knowing we may be short somewhere else when it comes to new playground equipment, etc. she will agree. Park and Recreation Director Distad stated if they are short they will be asking for partnerships to be developed. They have done that in the past. Councilmember Fitch stated Council asked for a 60 day delay to make a good financial decision for the City and staff brought a lot of information Council did not have before. Councilmember Soderberg stated the feasibility study will also identify partnerships in the City. He was excited about working with the school district. APIF, MOTION CARRIED. 12. NEW BUSINESS Council Minutes (Regular) August 2, 2004 Page 11 13. COUNCIL ROUNDTABLE Councilmember Fogarty: Dakota County is having a meeting August 24 to discuss a county-wide smoking ban. Almost all Councils in Dakota County in 2002 passed resolutions saying they would not pass smoking bans within their Cities and would defer to a statewide ban. She plans on attending this meeting and wanted to know where the rest of Council stands. She would still support the resolution. Council agreed to not support a citywide smoking ban and to leave it to the County. Council directed staffto prepare a new resolution supporting the previous resolution and bring it back to the August 16 Council Meeting. Councilmember Soderberg will also attend the County's meeting. Councilmember Soderberg: He received an invitation from Congressman Kline to attend a roundtable on August 9. He will be attending. He had a discussion last night with some residents regarding recreational issues. A lot of questions were geared to what the City is doing for outdoor facilities. He was not aware ofthe extensive frustration over the lack of facilities. Acting City Administrator Siebenaler: There are four applicants for a vacancy on the HRA. A date needed to be set to conduct interviews. The next HRA meeting is August 9 and the HRA would like to have the seat filled for that meeting if possible. He suggested a pre-meeting to the August 16 Council Meeting. Mayor Ristow suggested August 4. It was decided if all four applicants are not available on August 4, interviews would be held on August 16. City Attorney Jamnik suggested recessing this meeting until August 4, at 7:00 p.m. Staffwill contact the candidates. Mayor Ristow: August 10. He will be attending a breakfast at the Fairgrounds on 14. RECESS MOTION by Cordes, second by Soderberg to recess until Wednesday, August 4,2004 at 7:00 p.m. APIF, MOTION CARRIED. Respectfully submitted, ~~/~ ?-v7~~ Cynthia Muller Executive Assistant