Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout02.20.02 Work Session Minutes Joint CounciVPlanning Commission Workshop Recreational Vehicles Minutes February 20, 2002 1. Call to Order The meeting was called to order at 5:00 p.m. Council Members Present: Ristow, Cordes, Soderberg, Strachan Planning Commission Members Present: Rotty, Heman, Larson, Johnson Also Present: Ed Shukle, Kevin Carroll, Karen Finstuen, Lee Smick, Mike Schultz Audience: Michelle Leonard, Tricia Buckman, Tammy McCabe 2. Approve Agenda MOTION by Cordes, second by Soderberg to approve the agenda. APIF, MOTION CARRIED. 3. Introductory Comments Police Chief Siebenaler, who was not in attendance because he was out of town, provided information that only a handful of complaints about parking of recreational vehicles had been received, most of which were illegally parked in the street. There have been no criminal prosecutions that he was aware of. 4. Overview of Current City Code Provisions and Possible Modifications Lee Smick briefed the Council and the Planning Commission on the existing ordinance regarding parking on City Streets. The type of recreational vehicles discussed, include recreational camping vehicles, boats, snowmobiles, trail bikes and other all terrain vehicles. Any vehicles parked on lots must be parked on a concrete surface or bituminous material. Parking on crushed rock, grass, or dirt is not allowed. The ordinance is enforced on a complaint basis. The zoning ordinance adopted 2/19/02 does not allow vehicles to be parked in the 5 foot utility or drainage easement located along lot lines. Pictures of several violations that existed within the City were reviewed during the workshop. Covenants would typically control some issues, however the developer of one development did not file the covenants. Staff was directed to prepare a proposed code amendment to allow a parking area with bituminous, concrete or decorative rock surface. Without altering drainage or changing grade, bituminous and concrete will be allowed up to 5 feet from the property line. Landscape rock may be placed up to the property line. Class 5 rock or gravel is not acceptable, it must be decorative landscape rock with landscape fabric underneath. The Community Service Officer and Planning will work together on enforcement which will continue to be on a complaint basis only. The code amendment will be presented to both the Planning Commission and City Council for their approval 5. Adjourn The City Council recessed at 6:41 p.m. The Planning Commission adjourned at 6:41 p.m. Respectfully~mitted, . )ja.Uf---J 1~--.-J Karen Finstuen Administrative Services Manager City Council Workshop Traffic Calming Methods City Hall Facilities Planning Sanitary Sewer - Vermillion Grove Trail Grant Minutes February 20, 2002 Members Present: Also Present: Ristow, Soderberg, Strachan Shelly Johnson, Ed Shukle, Kevin Carroll, Lee Mann, Karen Finstuen 1. Call to Order The City Council reconvened at 7:16 p.m. 2. Discussion: Speed Humps / Other Methods Information on past research regarding speed bumps and speed humps was presented. Other cities such as Bumsville and Plymouth were researched. According to Shelly Johnson, Bonestroo Traffic Engineer, speed humps should be 100 - 150 feet away from traffic control devices. Speed bumps are very dangerous. Speed humps should not be on a collector or higher street and there needs to be more than one hump to be effective. Speed humps can be useful in slowing traffic, however traffic tends to slow down when it becomes busier. Speed trailers can be used to help lower speeds. Speed humps will control speed only on the section where they exist. Mr. Johnson recommended the following be considered: 1. You must justify there is a problem. 2. Speed display devices are most effective 3. Costs for installing speed humps can be prohibitive and usually they are removed within a year. 4. If speed humps are installed on one street, many others may be requested. 5. After speed surveys on Embers, it was discovered that 85% of the vehicles were traveling 31 mph or lower. 6. Unmarked squads of an unlikely color with radar equipment are a very good alternative. Safe and sober grant money may be used for a display sign and unmarked squads. Tubed equipment is the most accurate. The cost of one temporary speed hump is approximately $1,000 and a permanent speed hump is nearly $10,000. One speed hump should not be installed, two are needed to be effective. Staff suggested when a neighborhood perceives a problem with speed, there could be an educational effort along with unmarked enforcement. A handheld radar gun is another effective way to identify speeders. Farmington City Hall Facilities Planning Short Term/Long Term This portion of the workshop began at 7:55 p:m. Present: Ristow, Soderberg, Strachan Also Present: Carroll, Finstuen, Mann, Roland, Shukle, Wendlandt City Administrator Shukle gave an overview of the current facilities. Immediate needs - six months to one year Short-term needs - one to five years Long-term needs - five years and beyond Multi-functional building Location Monies required for immediate, short-term and long-term needs Public sentiment towards existing City Hall facility Retain existing location for City Hall Determine size of facility to meet long-term needs Building must be "community friendly" - functional for staff/less institutionalized Possible auxiliary uses of City Hall (meeting spaces for community organizations) City Hall must have visibility (focal point) within community and be easily accessible Scope of City Hall - what should be incorporated into the facility from minor to major items Following are options to be considered: Do nothing to the existing City Hall facility Develop a plan to remodel the police department to accommodate offices and/or storage Develop a plan to enlarge the city council chambers Develop a plan combining the remodeling of the police department and the enlargement of the city council chambers Conduct a feasibility study on the immediate, short and long term needs of the City Hall facility Council thoughts and concerns were as follows: . The financial situation determines when this should be done, there is concern about debt. . Councilmember Soderberg stated Council has decided the downtown is the commercial area and the City Hall should be in that commercial district . If we stay the way we are, what will happen in 5 years . A task force should be established and Council should set the parameters. . A feasibility study could cost in the area of $3000 - $5000. . If we stay in the current location, more land would have to be purchased or the building could be enlarged by adding stories and a parking ramp. . It may be wiser to go out to bare land in the rural areas and have space for parking. . The new police facility is adequate to serve a population of27,000. The Central Maintenance Facility will be full in much less time. . It is not fiscally responsible to have the money saved before constructing a building, tax payers residing in the city at the time the building is being used should pay. . If a feasibility study is done, are we committed to the downtown? . A feasibility study can show that it is possible to keep it here, and what it will cost. . The task force should be comprised of approximately 12 members plus staff (in an advisory only capacity) and consist of residents, a council member, boards and commission members. . The task force could determine if City Hall should stay in it's present location. . We need to determine the best amount of space for the best amount of time for the best amount of money. . The commercial district is defined as the downtown area and the Spruce Street corridor. . Members stated they are not opposed to the present location. Staff spoke with the architect for the Central Maintenance Facility and they would be willing to give some upfront assistance for a minimal fee and serve in an advisory capacity to the task force. It was agreed a task force should be created and then prepare a feasibility study. The task force could be a continuation of the public facilities task force. Staff should talk to the architect for approximate costs and bring the information back to a Council meeting. Sanitary Sewer - Residents adjacent to Vermillion Grove Council discussed the sanitary sewer installation for four residents adjacent to Vermillion Grove on Akin Road that will run along the rear of resident's lot line. Staff recommended the sewer should run in a straight line to the east of the property line. The residents previously wanted to save the trees which would suggest it should be east of the property line. If placed on the property line, two large trees will be removed along with another stand of trees to the north of the two large oaks. It was Council consensus that it is the property owner's decision where the line be placed and if they do not want the trees, they go down. The developer will not be required to add more trees to his plat to mitigate this decision. Trail Grant - Gaps in existing trail system The DNR has a local trail connection grant program that the City may be eligible for. Engineering will provide areas where residential development has created gaps in the City's trail system. It was consensus of the Council to submit an application for the cost of trails connecting to the City's Public Park system. Motion by Strachan, second by Soderberg to adjourn at 9:30 p.m. Respectfully submitted, .:) J1a~~~~ Karen Finstuen Administrative Services Manager