Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout09.15.03 Council Minutes COUNCIL MINUTES REGULAR September 15, 2003 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: Ristow, Cordes, Fitch, Fogarty, Soderberg None Andrea Poehler, City Attorney; Dan Siebenaler, Interim City AdministratorlPolice Chief; Robin Roland, Finance Director; Kevin Carroll, Community Development Director; Randy Distad, Parks and Recreation Director; Lee Mann, Director of Public Works/City Engineer; Lisa Shadick, Administrative Services Director; Jim Atkinson, Assistant City Planner; Cynthia Muller, Executive Assistant Barb Thompson, Sherri Buss, John Bergman, Steve Frandrup, David Birken, Steve Juetten Audience: 4. APPROVE AGENDA Councilmember Cordes pulled item 7a) Council Minutes (9/2/03 Regular) to abstain. MOTION by Soderberg, second by Fogarty to approve the Agenda. APIF, MOTION CARRIED. s. ANNOUNCEMENTS 6. CITIZEN COMMENTS Ms. Barb Thompson, Executive Director of the Farmington Chamber of Commerce, invited the Mayor and Council to participate in breakfast meetings called "Breakfast with the Counci1." It will be an informative morning gathering for Chamber members and Farmington residents. The format will begin with a moderator giving background on a topic selected by the Chamber Board of Directors then opening the floor for comments, questions and concerns. The series will be held once a month on Thursday mornings at the Eagle's Club. The first one is scheduled for Thursday, October 23, 7:30 a.m. It was suggested Council rotate two members at a time. Council Minutes (Regular) September 15,2003 Page 2 7. CONSENT AGENDA MOTION by Fogarty, second by Soderberg approving item 7a) Council Minutes (9/2/03 Regular). Voting for: Ristow, Fitch, Fogarty, Soderberg. Abstain: Cordes. MOTION CARRIED. MOTION by Soderberg, second by Pitch to approve the Consent Agenda as follows: a) Approved Council Minutes (9/3/03 Special) b) Received Information Capital Outlay - Parks and Recreation c) Received Information Capital Outlay - Parks and Recreation d) Received Information Capital Outlay - Parks and Recreation e) Approved Appointment Executive Search Firm - Administration f) Approved Appointment Recommendation - Public Works - Administration g) Set October 6, 2003 Public Hearing Designating Heritage Landmarks - Administration h) Acknowledged City Participation in County Auction - Administration i) Approved Bills APIF, MOTION CARRIED. 8. PUBLIC HEARINGS a) Adopt Resolution - 2003 Seal Coat Project Assessment Hearing - Engineering The 2003 Seal Coat project has been completed. The total project cost is $75,319.69. The proposed assessment amount is $56.13 per buildable lot. The city's portion of the project cost is $37,884.34 and will be funded through the Road and Bridge fund. Residents have 30 days to pay before it is certified to the County. Mr. David Birken, 18336 Elm Tree Circle, stated he lives in a cul-de-sac and felt the project does not work very well in cul-de-sacs. Tar is dumped with loose rock thrown on it. The cars spin around and kick it up. He has tar all over his car mats, he has tar in the house, the kids can no longer play in the cul-de-sac because when they fall, they get cut by the sharp rocks sticking up. He also does not understand how the city can just go ahead and repave the street and send him the bill. Why have a school levy? Why not just send him the bill for that? Why doesn't he just leave his checkbook with the city. He stated he is confused. He lost his job in March and is fighting to keep his house. The city decided to pave the street and while it was fine in everyone else's opinion, he gets a bill. He stated he did not receive any advance notice. City Engineer Mann stated all the affected properties were notified in the Spring when the project was ordered. Before the project was ordered there was a public hearing, so that process has been followed per State Statute 429. The seal coat project is done to seal up the street to keep the street from deteriorating and needing greater improvements in the future. Ultimately it is a cost savings to the city and residents to keep the street from deteriorating faster. The Council's policy on assessing seal coats is splitting the cost 50/50. In the cul-de-sac, staff does recognize there is an issue with cars turning. That is why they use a granite Council Minutes (Regular) September 15,2003 Page 3 crushed aggregate that while it does not eliminate some of the tracking and spinning problems, it does much better than the pea rock used on straight roads. Mayor Ristow stated this project has been ongoing for nine years. It is a policy that Council has set. There are many tax -exempt properties that would not get charged, so Council felt everyone should pay equally. That is the reason for the policy. Every year the project is rotated to different areas. Ifthere is a hardship, Mr. Birken could contact the Finance Director. Finance Director Roland stated the statutory policy is that this assessment would not be large enough to qualify for a hardship deferral. It has to be in excess of $200 or $300 dollars. If it goes on the taxes the interest is 6% and it is a one-year assessment. Mr. Birken stated everyone pays taxes and this is something that is scheduled. Why isn't this included in the property taxes? Why is this something special? All the streets will need to be resurfaced. He does not feel they were singled out. He is put out as to why all of a sudden he got a bill. As to the prior mailings, Mr. Birken stated he did not receive them. The bill was the first he was notified. In fact, when they were ready to begin work, there were still cars parked on the street because no one knew what was going on. There were signs posted no watering Monday-Friday 7 a.m. -7 p.m. Mayor Ristow stated ifit is not paid in 30 days, it will go onto the property taxes. Councilmember Soderberg clarified Mr. Birken's comments saying what Mr. Birken is asking is why don't we just pay this out of the property tax levy. There are a number of tax-exempt properties that would not contribute to the seal coating. In an effort to make it fair for the property tax payers and those that are exempt the cost is assessed. It brings the cost down for the taxpayers. Mr. Birken stated he has been here for three years and his neighbors told him last time the sealcoating did not last five years. Mr. Birken felt it should be done differently. He understood the tax-exempt reason. Staffwill check on the cul-de-sac. MOTION by Soderberg, second by Cordes to close the public hearing. APIF, MOTION CARRIED. MOTION by Fogarty, second by Fitch adopting RESOLUTION R6S-03 adopting the assessment roll for the 2003 Seal Coat project. APIF, MOTION CARRIED. b) Adopt Resolution _19Sth Street West Extension Project Assessment Hearing - Engineering The project consisted of street and utility improvements as well as trail improvements along 195th Street west of Pilot Knob Road. The total project cost is $1,015,840. Dakota County's share is $558,711.16, the city's share is $2,516.73,ISD 192 is $200,188.61. There are two properties on the south side of 195th that are assessed. The assessment for the property to the north, $247,433.89 Council Minutes (Regular) September 15, 2003 Page 4 is in ag preserve and is therefore deferred. The property to the south was assessed $6,988.09. MOTION by Soderberg, second by Cordes to close the public hearing. APIF, MOTION CARRIED. MOTION by Fogarty, second by Cordes adopting RESOLUTION R66-03 adopting the assessment roll for the 195th Street West Improvement project. APIF, MOTION CARRIED. c) Adopt Resolution - 209th Street Street and Utility Improvements Assessment Hearing - Engineering The project provides municipal street, water main and storm sewer for 209th Street West between Chippendale Avenue and Cantata Avenue West. The total project cost was $280,000. The project costs will be financed through assessments to the residents along the south side of 209th Street and the Tamarack Ridge Development on the north side of 209th Street. The city has the funds to carry any deferred assessment amounts to the properties on the south side of 209th Street until such time those costs are actually assessed. The amount to be assessed to the resident along the south side of209th Street for street and storm sewer improvements is $7,088.76. The amount to be assessed for the water main improvements is $1,959.11. The deferred assessments are in the amount of $78,441.43. A request for senior deferral was received from 3400 209th Street W. This defers the assessment until the property is sold. Interest is not charge for senior deferrals. MOTION by Cordes, second by Fogarty to close the public hearing. APIF, MOTION CARRIED. MOTION by Cordes, second by Fogarty adopting RESOLUTION R67-03 adopting the assessment roll for the 209th Street - Street and Utility Improvement project and approving the senior deferral for 3400 209th Street. W. APIF, MOTION CARRIED. 9. AWARD OF CONTRACT 10. PETITIONS, REQUESTS AND COMMUNICATIONS a) Discuss Pre-Council Meeting Work Sessions -Administration Council discussed whether they would like to engage in pre-Council Meeting Workshops. They would be public meetings and published in the paper. Items to be discussed include ground rules, what Council would like discussed, rules of presentation and conduct. Councilmember Fogarty talked with other cities and sat in on Apple Valley's pre- workshop. Both Eagan and Apple Valley have different approaches. Eagan started theirs at a time when they had a divided Council and a lot of lengthy citizen comments that were bogging down the meeting. A lot were personal Council Minutes (Regular) September 15,2003 Page 5 attacks and showboating for the cameras. They opened the pre- Workshops to citizen comments and found a lot of people would come there that did not want to be on camera. They also moved the citizen comments on the agenda to just before Roundtable. Apple Valley holds their meetings once a month and are used to update Council on certain issues. Members of the Council spoke very easily to each other because it is off camera and opens up conversations. Councilmember Fogarty would like to see a melding of the two. She would like to give citizens another arena to approach Council other than the telephone or TV. It could eliminate some of the workshops. Apple Valley's meetings start at 8:00 p.m. so they hold their pre-Workshops at 6:30 p.m. Councilmember Cordes also checked with cities and found some are very positive but some are also currently in litigation where they are being challenged by citizens for making decisions at the pre-Workshops. There is also the issue of violation of open meeting laws where after workshops have ended, Councilmembers go outside for a breath of air and are asked if they are discussing the same issues. Her other concern is the Council Meetings start at 7:00 p.m. At certain times ofthe year she works later and it would be impossible for her to come earlier. Councilmember Fogarty agreed the timing could be difficult for some people. Councilmember Fitch stated he is fine with whatever Council decides. Councilmember Soderberg stated initially he was not in favor of the idea and felt like Council could do whatever is needed during Roundtable. After hearing these comments, he would be willing to explore it. It would give the citizens another opportunity to address Council as a body in a more relaxed atmosphere. Mayor Ristow asked ifthe discussion would include items on the agenda. Councilmember Fogarty stated sometimes it was very simple requests and sometimes items on the agenda, where citizens do not want to comment on camera. Councilmember Soderberg recalled there was a comment from citizens comments where a citizen asked how else can residents address Council without coming to the meetings. This would give them another forum. There could be some give and take rather than a written response. Questions could be answered right away, more of a conversation. Mayor Ristow asked if the agenda would have to be set to comply with the open meeting law. Attorney Poehler replied an agenda would be set, but it could be left open for citizen comments. Councilmember Soderberg stated there would not be an decisions, just a conversation. Councilmember Fogarty stated the set items would be more of an update on items from staff. Mayor Ristow stated for the next couple months Council will be tied up with the City Administrator hiring process. Council agreed to table the item to the December 1 Council agenda. Mayor Ristow stated the regular Workshops are Council Minutes (Regular) September 15, 2003 Page 6 noticed and he did not want to start an issue where Council is trying to do something off camera. Councilmember Fogarty felt it would really help communication. Mayor Ristow stated he has not had any problems. Residents call ifthey have a problem. Councilmember Fitch felt it would be good to wait until a City Administrator has been selected. That should be accomplished by December and let him be a part of it. MOTION by Soderberg, second by Fogarty to table the item to the December 1 Council agenda. APIF, MOTION CARRIED. b) Approve Joint Powers Agreement for Dakota County Domestic Preparedness Committee - Police Department The Agreement is similar to those in place for the MAAG team and the Mutual Aid Agreement. It is a direct result of the 9/11 tragedy. It showed the vulnerability of communities to answering major disasters. Our Police and Fire Departments are very capable of handling most ofthe issues that arise, however, there are very few public safety organizations that are able to respond immediately to a large scale disaster. This Agreement is designed as a rapid response rescue organization. The Fire Department has already been participating in the formation of the group and some are already trained. This is a great example of cooperative agreements between a large number of cities. There would not be an initial cost in the formation of the group, it would be funded by a grant. However, the city must recognize that grants do not last forever and future subsidies may be required. There may be expenses for materials and equipment in the future. There is a withdrawal clause in the agreement. Councilmember Soderberg asked how this would differ from a mutual aid agreement. Staff replied it is the same thing. The ability of this group is in specialized rescue operations where members are trained as a group. The group would be made up of individual members from the different departments. Each individual member would have their basic equipment. Some would be materials that are already on hand. While on scene the members are under the direction and supervision of the team leader. They remain the employee of the city. MOTION by Fogarty, second by Soderberg to approve the proposed Joint Powers Agreement for Dakota County Domestic Preparedness. APIF, MOTION CARRIED. c) Consider Noise Ordinance - Police Department There is an ongoing issue of engine noise. Previous discussions have centered on a specific manufacturer of an engine braking system. Recent threatened court action by that manufacturer has prevented the use of any trade names in either ordinances or signage. Staffhas conducted research and in the 13 county metro area, MnDOT requires Council enact an ordinance and pass a resolution stating that two Minnesota Statutes regarding mufflers and noise would be enforced and staff would be able to demonstrate consistent enforcement ofthose ordinances. Council Minutes (Regular) September 15, 2003 Page 7 Staff would be required to demonstrate the violations are taking place by the use of a decibel meter. A noise level that is unacceptable is at 85 decibels or greater. This is the same as a push lawn mower. The manufacturer states it is not the brakes that cause the noise, but it is a poorly maintained muffler system. That is why the state requires cities to enforce muffler laws as well as the noise ordinance itself. The police department has not received any complaints regarding engine braking systems. There is no existing noise ordinance in Dakota County that would meet this requirement. According to the Dakota County Highway Department, they do not have any of these signs anywhere in Dakota County and according to Dakota County Court Administration they have no record of fines or penalties imposed for this type of ordinance. Staff would like direction from Council as to whether they should continue in the preparation of an ordinance or obtain further information. The city would have the authority to enforce along state highways, however, state cooperation would be required in the posting of the SIgn. The meter is a portable device that measures the noise. In order to enforce the ordinance, the police officer would have to be at the location of the offense at the time of offense with the meter turned on. The chances of that happening are very slim, so it would require a determined effort to be monitoring a specific spot at a particular time. The greatest cost would be designating personnel to monitor noise at designated spots. Demonstrating consistency of enforcement would have to be done similar to other saturation points. Officers would have to be dedicated at a variety oftimes throughout the year and show the information to MnDOT periodically. The offense would be a misdemeanor. Councilmember Soderberg stated the cost of equipment, signage, and the decibel meter would be minimal. The cost of another officer or taking the resources we have now seems like the costs far outweigh any benefit by having the ordinance in place. The closest city that has signs in place is Jordan. Mayor Ristow requested staff check into how they enforce the ordinance. Councilmember Fitch recalled in the past Bloomington had noise ordinance signs. Some of the pickup trucks with loud mufflers as well as radio systems would be out of compliance. Staff stated those are the reasons the second state statute regarding vehicle noise is included in the ordinance. Staffwill check further into the two ordinances and report to Council. d) Adopt Resolution - Meadow Creek 3rd Addition Development Contract- Engineering The final plat was approved by the Planning Commission on June 10, 2003 and by the Council on June 16, 2003. The conditions of approval are: - The developer enter into this Agreement. - The developer provide the necessary security in accordance with the terms of the Agreement. - The developer record the plat with the County Recorder within 6 months after Council approval of the final plat. Council Minutes (Regular) September 15,2003 Page 8 As far as the hours listed on the contract, the contract covers the developer and the builders are covered under the city's general disturbance of the peace ordinance. MOTION by Fitch, second by Cordes adopting RESOLUTION R68-03 approving the execution of the Meadow Creek Third Addition Development Contract and authorize its signing contingent upon the above conditions and final approval by the Engineering Division. APIF, MOTION CARRIED. e) Adopt Resolution - Bristol Square 4th Addition Development Contract- Engineering The final plat was approved by the Planning Commission on January 14,2003 and by the Council on January 21,2003. Conditions of approval are: - The developer enter into this Agreement. - The developer provide the necessary security in accordance with the terms of this Agreement. - The developer record the plat with the County Recorder within 6 months after Council approval of the final plat. MOTION by Fogarty, second by Soderberg adopting RESOLUTION R69-03 approving the execution of the Bristol Square Fourth Addition Development Contract and authorize its signing contingent upon the above conditions and final approval by the Engineering Division. APIF, MOTION CARRIED. t) Adopt Ordinance - Zoning Code Text Amendments for Spruce Street Master Plan Area - Community Development Staff is proposing several text amendments as follows: - Amend the Spruce Street Commercial District regarding permitted and conditional uses - Create a Business/Commercial Flex Zoning District - Create a Mixed-Use Zoning District The Spruce Street Commercial District was reviewed by the Planning Commission. Originally the district had a very small number of permitted and conditional uses. After seeing the proposal for the Knutsen property at the corner ofHwy 50 and Denmark, staff agreed to revise the district provisions. Permitted uses to be added include indoor commercial recreation, commercial services, clinics, personal and professional services, personal health and beauty. Conditional uses to be added include outdoor commercial recreation, major auto repair (if confined to the interior of the building), minor auto repair, mixed-use buildings (mixture of retail and residential in the same building, with retail being on one floor and residential above), and public buildings. The Planning Commission identified two uses as needing more research. One is major auto repair. After reviewing other portions of the code, there are other parts that would regulate major auto repair. Design standards would require screening for certain types of activity. There is also a portion of the code that would Council Minutes (Regular) September 15,2003 Page 9 regulate noise and air pollution. Staff feels major auto repair would be appropriate given the other code provisions that currently exist. The second was housing and whether multi-family housing should be included in the Spruce Street district. After review, stand alone residential uses should not be permitted given the commercial nature ofthe area. Staff would allow in the mixed-buildings some residential if it were combined with some retail. The other two proposed zoning districts are new. The Business/Commercial Flex District was an area identified in the Spruce Street Master Plan located in the northwest corner of the study area. This will provide for larger office complexes as well as smaller retail operations. The Mixed-Use District was also identified in the Master Plan. This would allow smaller retail buildings similar to the existing downtown with residential above. There is a maximum lot width to regulate the size of buildings. Councilmember Fitch stated this gives a lot of flexibility in the corridor area and it was very well thought out. Councilmember Soderberg asked about the Mixed-Use District, and if mixed-use buildings are conditional. Staff replied they are. Under permitted uses are offices and restaurants and staff reviewed whether to allow a stand alone retail building or whether only mixed-use buildings should be allowed. This may be revisited in the future. If mixed-use buildings were allowed as permitted, that would be encouraging them, which is what staff wants to do. Councilmember Soderberg stated we have a designated district for mixed-use and it would seem logical to have it as a permitted use. The definition of a mixed-use is office/retail on the first floor and residential above. He suggested inserting the word "may" would give the flexibility to have a stand alone building. Community Development Director Carroll stated staff discussed the possibility of requiring all the buildings in the mixed-use district to be mixed-use. In the interest of greater flexibility staff decided not to mandate that. Right now, mixed-use buildings are allowed, but not required. Going to a smaller lot size would give more of a downtown feel. Ifwe end up with no buildings having residential above, the goal is not accomplished of having a mixed-use district. Staff decided to wait and see what happens and re- assess that if needed. Councilmember Soderberg stated the flexibility is still there if it is under a permitted use. It saves one level of review. The developer does not have to go through the conditional use process in order to get a mixed-use building. Community Development Director Carroll replied when something is shifted from the permitted to conditional category it is because there are special circumstances that warrant.a higher level of scrutiny. With regard to having retail below and residential above sometimes there may be special issues with regard to Council Minutes (Regular) September 15, 2003 Page 10 access to stairways, parking, etc. If shifted to the permitted category staff can still interact with the builder informally. Councilmember Fogarty asked about the major auto repair and that inoperable vehicles are not specifically listed. She wanted to know if that is enforceable. Interim City Administrator Siebenaler replied the ordinance on junk vehicles does cover inoperable vehicles. He cautioned that the places that are in the business of repair are exempted from the junk vehicle ordinance. So this ordinance does not cover junk vehicles at these businesses. As it is listed as a conditional use, you can make it a condition ofthe business itselfto provide the storage or screening of vehicles. Councilmember Fitch asked regarding the mixed-use, if it is made a permitted uset it would not stop the city from enforcing certain architectural standards? Staff replied no, any design or architectural standards adopted would apply equally to permitted and conditional. Secondt if it is called a mixed-use buildingt it should include office/retail and the apartments. If you say "may" it would no longer be a mixed use building. Staff replied in the development community, mixed-use refers to not a mix of commercial uses, but a mix of residential and commercial. Councilmember Soderberg understood staff wanted the flexibility to allow an all commercial building in that district. Staff replied it would be allowed without the suggested change. Should mixed-use be office/retail with housing above, or can mixed-use also be two levels of retail or commercial? It would be cleaner to not have the suggested change and move it to permitted use. Mayor Ristow was concerned by having residential abovet there could be noise complaints. Staff stated ifuses tend to be disruptive, they are conditional uses, so staff could regulate them through the conditional use permit. Councilmember Fitch stated, but we are considering moving it to permitted use and not conditional use. Councilmember Soderberg stated we are talking about in the mixed-use district. Auto repair would be in the commercial district which has a mixed-use as a condition in that district. Councilmember Fitch stated under the conditional use they would have the option of limiting hours of operation if you have residential above. If moved to permitted uset you do not have that control. Staff stated if mixed buildings were moved to permittedt only the mixed use building would be permitted. The major auto repair would still be conditional even though the mixed-use building would be permitted. Councilmember Soderberg asked how parking is addressed in a mixed-use building. Community Development Director Carroll replied there would be street parking available, with the right design there would be off-street parking either permitted or required. To what extent should the city rely on developers to propose something that will be acceptable if it is not a conditional use? Ifit is a conditional use, you can require a certain number of parking spaces for every unit. Ifit is a permitted use, the city may not have that opportunity, so staff would have to encourage people to do that. Council Minutes (Regular) September 15,2003 Page 11 MOTION by Soderberg, second by Fogarty adopting ORDINANCE 003-498 approving the ordinance and amendments as requested. Councilmember Soderberg commented he did not make the amendment because he wants to make sure the parking issue is addressed for the residential uses. The mixed-use designation will not be moved to permitted uses. APIF, MOTION CARRIED. g) Adopt Resolution - Comprehensive Plan Amendments for Spruce Street Master Plan Area - Community Development The area is located south ofHwy 50 and west of Denmark Avenue. The proposal does not include the Knutsen property in the northeast corner, as the Comprehensive Plan for that area was amended earlier in the year. That area is still consistent with the Master Plan. The proposed designations are consistent with the land use plan provided in the Master Plan. The majority of the area north of the river would be designated business, a pocket of high density residential and medium density residential. South of the river is a larger area of high density residential on the western and eastern sides and medium density in the middle. MOTION by Soderberg, second by Fitch adopting RESOLUTION R7o-03 amending the Comprehensive Plan for the subject properties. APIF, MOTION CARRIED. h) Adopt Ordinance - Zoning Code Amendments for Spruce Street Master Plan Area - Community Development The zoning lines are identical to the above amendments to the Comprehensive Plan. The zoning is consistent with the Land Use Plan in the Master Plan. MOTION by Soderberg, second by Cordes adopting ORDINANCE 003-499 rezoning the subject properties in the Spruce Street Master Plan Area. APIF, MOTION CARRIED. i) Review Seed/Genstar AUAR - Community Development Council was requested to approve the report for the environmental review of the Seed/Genstar AUAR. The area contains approximately 1,000 acres and is currently outside of the city. There have been two major issues. One is storm water management. The whole area drains to North Creek, which is a tributary to the Vermillion River. The Vermillion River has been designated as a trout stream. In addition to the normal ponding requirements, the developer will need to develop 16 acres of infiltration areas that will allow water to soak into the ground rather than run into the creek. The second issue is traffic. At full development, it will generate 30,000 additional trips per day, many of which will be on Hwy 3. This exceeds the capacity ofHwy 3 as a two-lane road. Hwy 3 would need to become a 4-lane divided highway at some point. This is not on the schedule for MnDOT. The city will need to work with MnDOT on this issue. Council Minutes (Regular) September 15, 2003 Page 12 Once approved, the report will be sent to the agencies and then there will be a 30- day review period. The environmental review should be adopted by the end of the year. MOTION by Fogarty, second by Soderberg authorizing the distribution of the AUAR and authorizing the publication for the required notice in the Environmental Quality Board Monitor. APIF, MOTION CARRIED. j) Adopt Resolution - Meadow Creek 4th Addition Final Plat - Community Development This is located in the northern part of the city. Progress Land Company is proposing to plat 126 single-family lots. Since the Council approved the Preliminary Plat on July 21, 2003, three lots have been added. They were originally plated as a single outlot in the 3rd Addition due to the design of the waterway. The design of the ditch has now been clarified allowing the three lots to be platted. Building permits cannot be issued for lots along the waterway until construction of the waterway is complete. MOTION by Cordes, second by Fitch adopting RESOLUTION R71-03 approving and authorizing signing ofthe Meadow Creek 4th Addition Final Plat. APIF, MOTION CARRIED. k) Discussion of Possible Zoning Code Text Amendments Regarding the Keeping of Farm Animals Within the City - Community Development There is a resident that has a 0.8 acre parcel and they have acquired two pygmy goats. They are in violation of city code because the structure for the goats is less than 500 feet away from the nearest adjoining home. This was contested and the Planning Commission requested staff to look at the code regarding keeping of farm animals in the city. Farmington only has a distance requirement and not a lot size requirement for the keeping of farm animals in the city as some other cities do. Staff recommended to the Planning Commission a lot size requirement of a minimum of 1 acre. The Planning Commission recommended 1.5 acres. Going higher than that would reduce the number of parcels in residential communities that have the potential of having farm animals. The other issue is the spacing requirement. Staff suggested reducing the spacing requirement to 100 feet between any outdoor farm animal enclosure and any residential dwelling. Staff felt the long-term goal should be to eliminate these uses wherever possible. The minimum lot size requirement is being proposed after the residents acquired the goats. Therefore, they would be able to keep the goats, but cannot expand the number of animals or replace them. They are within the 100 ft spacing requirement, but would not meet the lot size requirement. In the future, any owners of farm animals would have to meet the spacing and lot size requirements. Attorney Poehler was not sure the goats are considered a lawful non-conforming use. If the change is made, they may not be grandfathered in as they do not meet the current ordinance. Once the ordinance is changed, even though they meet one criteria, they do not meet the other criteria. Council Minutes (Regular) September 15,2003 Page 13 Council recommended amending the ordinance to a minimum lot size of 2.5 acres and a minimum distance of 100 feet from the enclosure to the lot line rather than from adjacent homes. 11. UNFINISHED BUSINESS a) Appoint Council Liaison - Water System Vulnerability Assessment- Engineering The Water Board requested a Council liaison be appointed to the Water System Vulnerability Assessment project. MOTION by Soderberg, second by Cordes to appoint Councilmember Fogarty to the Water System Vulnerability Assessment project. Voting for: Ristow, Cordes, Fitch, Soderberg. Abstain: Fogarty. MOTION CARRIED. 12. NEW BUSINESS 13. COUNCIL ROUNDTABLE Councilmember Fogarty: Regarding the Chamber's Breakfast with Council she asked how Councilmembers should rotate. It was suggested two Councilmembers rotate each month. Staff suggested if a topic is of particular interest to a Councilmember, that Councilmember should attend, as long as there are only two Councilmembers there. The first meeting will be October 23. Councilmember Fitch asked Interim City Administrator Siebenaler to come up with a rotating schedule. Councilmember Soderberg: He attended the 21 st Anniversary of the Rambling River Center. It was a great program and he appreciated all the work people do there. There was a group of young ladies that volunteered to help which allowed more people to enjoy the program. Councilmember Fitch: He noticed on 190th Street, west of Euclid there is a lot of shrubbery planted and it is hanging over the sidewalk. Staffwill review the situation. Interim City Administrator Siebenaler: The topic has come up regarding the vacant lot at 3rd and Spruce Street. The HRA is holding the lot for final determination by the Council as to whether City Hall will go there. He suggested it would be beneficial to consider that property and discuss whether City Hall mayor may not be located there. If it will not be located there, it would free up the HRA to make other uses available for that property. Councilmember Soderberg stated Council had determined it would be discussed when the financial analysis was completed for the Spruce Street site and the current location. Staff stated the appraisal company will provide a quote and it should be received tomorrow. The work should be completed by early October. The report will be presented to Council the second meeting in October. Councilmember Fogarty mentioned the Task Force wanted to be included. Mayor Ristow replied no, they are done. It is up to Council. The Task Force made the recommendation and it is up to Council. Council needs to decide. We cannot hold that lot up any longer. We either have to let them know Council Minutes (Regular) September 15,2003 Page 14 if we are going to build or not. During the last meeting we had with the Task Force they made the recommendation and it is now up to Council to put the financial information together and go from there. Mayor Ristow stated he agreed with Interim City Administrator Siebenaler Council needs to make a decision. There are people that are willing to buy the property and move on. Councilmember Fitch stated it is fair to make a decision and get it over with. Councilmember Cordes stated Council is waiting for the financial analysis. Staff stated the information will be provided for the second meeting in October. Finance Director Roland: The Budget Workshop will be held on October 1, at 6:00 p.m. City Engineer Mann: He asked if Development Contracts could be placed on the Consent agenda when they are subsequent additions, and straightforward. New Development Contracts or if there is an issue would be brought to Council under Petitions, Requests and Communications. The entire Development Contract would still be provided. Council agreed. Mayor Ristow: Pollution Prevention Day was held for the 4th Grade students and it went well. He thanked Lena Larson and Kellee Omlid for arranging it. 14. ADJOURN MOTION by Cordes, second by Soderberg to adjourn at 9:36 p.m. APIF, MOTION CARRIED. Respectfully submitted, ~~L:~;h'7~~ v' Cynthia Muller Executive Assistant