Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout08.16.99 Council Minutes COUNCIL MINUTES REGULAR August 16,1999 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, Soderberg, Verch Strachan City Administrator Erar, City Attorney Jamnik, City Management Team 4. APPROVE A GENDA MOTION by Soderberg, second by Cordes to approve the Agenda. APIF, MOTION CARRIED. 5. ANNOUNCEMENTS a) Employee Service Recognition - Administration Department Karen Finstuen, Administrative Services Manager, was rec:1gnized for 30 years of service. b) County Commissioner Harris - County Update County Commissioner Joe Harris recognized the City for 10 years with the Recycling Program. 6. CITIZEN COMMENTS a) Citizen Complaint - East Farmington Truck Traffic and Related Activities At the August 2, 1999 Council Meeting, Mr. and Mrs. Overfield expressed their concerns and frustrations with a variety of issues associated with the generation of dirt and dust being emitted from truck traffic using the 12th Street access road onto the East Fannington 6th Addition site. Staff has responded to the residents. Mr. Dick Graelish, 1020 3rd Street, brought to Council's attention sidewalk cracks and deterioration between 3rd and Hickory. 7. CONSENT AGENDA MOTION by Cordes, second. by Verch to approve the Consent Agenda as follows: a) Approved Council Minutes (8/2/99) (Regular) b) Authorized Change Order - Fire Station Modification c) Received information on School and Conference - Police Department d) Authorized Change Order - Pond Maintenance Dakota County Estates e) Adopted RESOLUTION R75-99 - 1999 Sea1coat Project Hearing Date Council Minutes (Regular) August 16, 1999 Page 2 f) Adopted RESOLUTION R76-99 - Accepting Parks and Recreation Donation g) Received information on Capital Outlay - Fire Department h) Received information on Capital Outlay - Police Department i) Approved 3.2 On-Sale Beer License - B&B Pizza j) Approved bills APIF, MOTION CARRIED. 8. PUBLIC HEARINGS a) Easement Vacation - Industrial Park Phase II The City Council initiated at the July 19, 1999 Council meeting the vacation of utility easements along the north lot line of the lot owned by Performance Industrial Coatings and the south lot line of the lot which they are currently purchasing from the HRA. This vacation is being requested to facilitate the expansion of PIC's existing building to the north. Mr. Marv Wier, 808 3rd Street, asked where the expansion is in relation to the extended 208th Street. Staff replied the proposed expansion is south of 208th Street. MOTION by Soderberg, second by Verch to close the Public Hearing. APIF, MOTION CARRIED. MOTION by Cordes, second by Soderberg to adopt RESOLUTION R77-99 vacating the la-foot utility easement in Farmington Industrial Park 1 st and 2nd Additions for Performance Industrial Coatings. APIF, MOTION CARRIED. b) Consider Wine License Request - B&B Pizza B&B Pizza, 216 Elm Street has submitted a first time application for an On-Sale Wine license. A 3.2 On-Sale Beer License for B&B Pizza has also been approved. The restriction for serving wine and beer is 18 years of age. Ms. Betty Goldberg, co-owner of B&B Pizza, assured Council no one under 18 would be serving wine or beer. MOTION by Cordes, second by Verch to close the Public Hearing. APIF, MOTION CARRIED. MOTION by Cordes, second by Verch to approve an On-Sale Wine License for B&B Pizza. APIF, MOTION CARRIED. c) Easement Vacation - East Farmington 6th Addition The Developer seeks to vacate an existing drainage and utility easement within the East Farmington 6th Addition on Lots 3, 4 and 5 in Block 5 and designate a new easement on Lots 2 and 3 in Block 5. The area is located at the northwest intersection of Locust Street and 12th Street. The intent of this easement was to encompass a storm water pipe adjacent to Lots 3, 4 and 5. However, the design has changed and the storm water pipe has been relocated between Lots 2 and 3, therefore requiring a drainage and utility easement between Lots 2 and 3 in Block 5. Council Minutes (Regular) August 16, 1999 Page 3 MOTION by Soderberg, second by Cordes to close the Public Hearing. APIF, MOTION CARRIED. MOTION by Soderberg, second by Cordes to adopt RESOLUTION R78-99 to vacate an existing drainage and utility easement within the East Farmington 6th Addition on Lots 3, 4 and 5 in Block 5 and designate a new easement in the East Farmington 6th Addition on Lots 2 and 3 in Block 5. APIF, MOTION CARRIED. 9. AWARD OF CONTRACT 10. PETITIONS, REQUESTS AND COMMUNICATIONS a) Adopt Resolution - Farmington Townhomes Preliminary and Final Plat/PUD Sherman Associates proposes a 16-unit rental townhome development on 1.6 acres ofland east of Trunk Highway 3 zoned R-2 PUD within the East Farmington PUD development. The Planning Commission reviewed the proposed project at their July 13, 1999 meeting and continued the public hearing to the August 10, 1999 meeting after a number of residents from the East Farmington PUD raised concerns regarding landscaping/screening and traffic. Staff suggested minor changes to the original site plan in order to reduce the number of driveway accesses proposed for the project. This is reflected in the final revision of the site plan titled Revision #4. The Planning Commission stated Revision #4 reduces the safety issues due to the reduction in driveways from eight to five and allows for consistency with the East Farmington PUD design by providing a central green space similar to the single-family blocks to the north and east. Revision #4 also provides greater stacking distances from the driveways to the stop signs along Larch Street and the Trunk Highway 3 Frontage Road. Councilmember Soderberg stated a concern regarding the number of driveways on 9th Street. He notiCed some of the driveways have been combined to have one driveway to the street, and asked why this was not done with all the driveways. Mr. George Sherman, Sherman Associates, replied the site logistics allowed them to pull the building in without the two buildings encroaching on the setback. Everything has been shifted to the right. If the building in question is brought up the same distance, the required setback is not there. The Mayor asked if parking would be allowed on Larch Street. Staff replied the Police Department and Engineering will have to review that issue. Mr. Kevin Hand, 509 lOth Street, stated E. Farmington homeowners presented Mr. Sherman with their guidelines last week. He was wondering if the same guidelines would be adopted by the townhomes. Mr. Sherman stated many of the guidelines were reasonable, but some did not apply. However, he did not see any problem with adopting these guidelines, in fact some of the townhome's guidelines would be stricter. Council Minutes (Regular) August 16, 1999 Page 4 Ms. Karen Nichols, 604 Fairview Circle, co-owner of713 9th Street, stated Mr. Sherman had made good amendments to the parking problem. However, she still does not see the benefit to the project. She wants to keep the small town atmosphere and low crime. Current homes in Minneapolis are not kept up to standards and she does not see how the lenders will make sure they are maintained. She would like the City to take another look at the project. The Mayor replied the number of townhomes has been reduced from 20 to 16. The only reason for denial would be if they did not meet the City codes and ordinances. Ms. Corrine Horseman, 713 9th Street, stated when the plans from 1992 and 1994 were made, there were no homes in the area. The Mayor replied the townhomes could have been built before the homes. Mr. Paul McHenry, 708 9th Street, questioned how the 24 foot variance will fit between the buildings, and could the building be slid back to eliminate a driveway on Larch. Mr. Sherman replied the buildings are offset so they do not run into each other. The 24-foot variance aligns if the buildings are offset. Mr. McHenry stated parking is also a concern. There are 8 houses entering on Larch Street. He would like to see no parking on Larch Street to eliminate the possibility of blind spots. Councilmember Cordes asked how many driveways access Spruce Street. There are eight entrances on Spruce Street and four on Larch Street. The Mayor replied on Larch Street there is a commercial business, and more traffic. Mr. Darin Olson, 709 9th Street, is concerned with the traffic on Larch Street. He would like one entrance on the frontage road with fencing or trees around the townhouse development. Ms. Corrine Horseman, 713 9th Street, stated she is a loan officer and has talked with two appraisers regarding what would happen to the value of her home if a multi-use is mixed with a single-family. She was told it would decrease the value of the homes $10,000-$15,000 if a multi-use was next to a single-family development. Councilmember Soderberg replied the multi-use was approved as part of the original PUD. Ms. Karen Nichols, co-owner of713 9th Street, had questions regarding the project being approved seven years ago. The Mayor replied the developer elected to build the houses before the townhomes. Ms. Nichols asked if Cities do not have legal recourse on things that were not anticipated seven years ago. City Attorney Jamnik replied it is not so much the approval in 1992, but that it is still consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. Staff stated this has been before the Development Committee on several occasions. This type of housing provides a buffer for single family housing to the Council Minutes (Regular) August 16, 1999 Page 5 east and is very consistent and less dense from the original PUD. The quality of the properties being constructed are 3-bedroom units. These will be working class families who do not have an income level that will allow them to buy. This does not mean they are anything less or more than anyone else in the community. This type of housing is in need in many communities. Council has been very careful relative to insuring the development will be maintained. Mr. Paul McHenry, 708 9th Street, stated he wished he would have known about this project before he bought his home. Mr. Rod Hardy stated each builder was required to place this plan in their model homes. Mr. McHenry also stated these are 3-bedroom units in which City Code states there can be four non-related adults living together and an unlimited number of related adults living in a unit. If there are that many adults with vehicles, the parking and traffic is a great concern. Councilmember Cordl:?s asked Mr. Sherman regarding the application process renters go through which would address or eliminate some of the concerns. Mr. Sherman replied they are required to do extensive income c~lecks and criminal background checks. He also stated they are required to rent to families or two related adults. They cannot have multiple related adults. It cannot be unrelated adults raising children. These are requirements of their lease and each family has to be re-qualified each year. The units are inspected by Sherman Associates and the lenders twice a year. Marilyn Weinhold, Chamber of Commerce, stated the homeowners concerns are understandable, but there is a need for rental housing in Farmington. There are a lot of good rental families and asked the homeowners to keep an open mind. Many renters are new to the community and are not able to buy right away. She complimented the City on moving forward on this need in the City. Councilmember Soderberg felt this is a nice transition between single family homes and would be more appealing than a multi-story rental unit. Granted they are rental units, but there is a procedure in place to ensure there will be quality renters. By eliminating some of the driveways they have indicated they are willing to make it safe. Councilmember Cordes asked if restrictions can be put in the Development Contract as far as upkeep. City Attorney Jamnik replied restrictive covenants are usually not in a Development Contract, but a reference is made to restrictive covenants. The covenants are enforced by the townhome association. Mayor Ristow stated he is still concerned about the traffic on Larch Street and hoped the traffic engineer would look at the issue thoroughly. The other issue is the setback. The houses are usually lined up evenly. Staff replied the buildings were originally in line. One of the compromises to achieve the driveway combinations and to get the turnarounds in front was to set the building back Council Minutes (Regular) August 16, 1999 Page 6 further. The Mayor also wanted a contingency added to the resolution to receive approval from the Fire Department and Solid Waste. MOTION by Soderberg, second by Cordes to adopt RESOLUTION R79-99 approving the Farmington Townhomes 1 st Addition Preliminary and Final PlatlFinal pun Revision #4 contingent on requirements. APIF, MOTION CARRIED. b) Communications - Farmington Area Senior Center Advisory Committee The City received communications from the Senior Center Advisory Committee requesting that the City's Fee Schedule be revised in 2000 relative to membership rates and facility rental fees for non-resident users. The rationale for separate rates for residents and non-residents is based on the fact that Senior Center facility operations, as with the Pool, are funded almost entirely through the City tax levy and special agency grants. The City receives no financial support from outlying service areas to fund basic operating costs such as capital improvements, staff salaries, equipment costs, etc. There is no difference between an individual living in a township or in another city as in both cases, neither cor-tributes financial support through property tax levies to this facility. The membership rates do not figure prominently into the cost of running the center. It is specifically to know whether a member is active or not in terms of receiving the newsletter. The Senior Center Advisory Commission should explain why non-residents should enjoy the same benefits as residents at the same rate. Councilmember Cordes asked as far as Pool rates, what constitutes a resident and non-resident? Staff replied City boundaries. Councilmember Cordes stated there are many cities that charge resident and non-resident rates. Farmington is not unique. Marilyn Weinhold, member of the Senior Center Advisory Committee, stated as a board member, they have also discussed the same issues. The reason the issue was addressed, is there are a number of seniors who were very active in the senior center, and raised money to buy the building. A lot of the people feel like they belong to the City. They do not have a problem paying the extra fee, they are hurt by the us and them feeling it gives that they are not part of the City. There are many members who attend regularly and do not live in the City, but feel very much a part of what happens at the Center. The members do realize the expenses are paid by the tax payers. Councilmember Cordes stated it would be great to charge everyone the same, but fees need to be consistent across the board. Council reached a consensus to leave the fee structure as is. c) Arcon Development Request - Initiate City Condemnation Action The City has received a letter from Larry Frank of Arcon Development requesting the City to initiate condemnation of the necessary utility easement in order for Council Minutes (Regular) August 16, 1999 Page 7 Arcon to access the trunk sanitary sewer located on the Progress Land Company property to the north. 'Arcon Development has been in discussions with Progress Land Company for several months, but have not been able to reach an agreement. Arcon is now requesting that the City utilize its power of Eminent Domain to condemn the necessary easement. Arcon has indicated a willingness to cover all costs associated with obtaining the required easement including legal fees, appraisals, and the actual cost of the easement. Council granted the request from Arcon Development and the agreement and final resolution will be brought back to Council at the September 7, 1999 Council Meeting. d) Appointment to ISD 192 Growth Planning Task Force The Farmington School District is requesting a representative of the City Council to serve on their Growth Planning Task Force. The Task Force will provide short and long range recommendations to the School Board concerning strategies to accommodate projected growth in the District. Staff requested a member of the City Council be appointed to serve on the Task Force. Councilmember Verch agreed to be an alternate. (In a later conversation, Councilmember Strachan agreed to represent the Council on the Task Force). 11. UNFINISHED BUSINESS a) Henderson Storm Sewer Project - Feasibility Report Update The Henderson Area Storm Sewer Project was originally presented to Council in 1997 to discuss the feasibility of providing storm sewer ser/ice to the Henderson Area of Farmington between 7th and 10th Street, including the location of an existing low point located on Hickory Street midway between ih Street and Highway 3. The combination of storm sewer and drain tile in the Henderson Area will reduce overland flow and maintain the groundwater table at the same subsurface elevation of the storm sewer. In the original report, it was proposed that storm sewer be extended to the intersection of 7th and Hickory from the low point on Hickory Street just west of TH 3. This section of storm sewer has been eliminated from the scope of the project. In the future, this section of storm sewer can be installed when Hickory Street and/or 7th Street is reconstructed. The total estimated project cost for the Henderson Storm Sewer project is $404,000. The cost of the improvements proposed would be split between MnDOT, the benefiting City properties and the City. The estimated assessment amount for benefiting single family residential properties is approximately $1,520 per residential unit. The estimated assessment amount for commercial, multi-family and the MnDOT properties is approximately $5,620 per acre. MOTION by Cordes, second by Soderberg adopting RESOLUTION R80-99 accepting the Henderson Area Storm Sewer feasibility report and directing staff to schedule a neighborhood meeting. APIF, MOTION CARRIED. b) Set Public Hearing - CSAH 31 Project The City Council authorized the award of contracts by Dakota County for the improvement of CSAH 31 on March 16, 1998. The improvements for the CSAH 31 project are substantially complete and the project costs are being finalized by Council Minutes (Regular) August 16, 1999 Page 8 Dakota County. In order that the assessments can be certified to the 2000 taxes, the hearing needs to be held at the October 18, 1999 City Council meeting. Residents would have 30 days to pay the assessment without any interest or penalty. After that, assessments would be certified to the County and payable over a period of 15 years beginning with the 2000 taxes. MOTION by Soderberg, second by Cordes to adopt RESOLUTION R81-99 setting the CSAH 31 project assessment hearing for October 18, 1999, at the Farmington Senior High School at 7:00 p.m. APIF, MOTION CARRIED. c) Adopt Ordinance - Water Use Restrictions The ordinance outlines odd-even water use restrictions corresponding to property address, effective year round. The ordinance is limited in its restrictions to lawn and garden sprinkling or irrigation. Upon adoption of the ordinance, the water use restrictions become effective January 1,2000. Enforcement of the policy would be through penalties included as a surcharge on the water bill. MOTION by Cordes, action died for lack of a second. d) Authorize Submittal of Comments - Empire Township Comprehensive Plan (Supplemental) The City Council previously received a copy of the proposed Comprehensive Plan update for Empire Township. Mayor Ristow and Councilmember Strachan met with representatives of Empire Township on August 11, 1999 to discuss a range of concerns associated with continued township urbanization and population growth. There were five major issues that were discussed with Empire Township on August 11, 1999. Agreement Regarding Discontinuance of Previous Annexation Efforts - City representatives expressed concerns to Empire Township representatives that it had been the understanding of the City Council that Empire's growth rate would be limited to approximately five new households per year. In contrast to this previously held understanding, Township forecasts contained in the proposed Comprehensive Plan call for a growth of 50 households per year over the next 20 years. MUSA - Wastewater Flows to Empire Treatment Plant - The proposed level of residential development contained in the Comprehensive Plan update is approximately four times greater than what the Metropolitan Council's Projected Preferred Flows to the Empire Treatment Plant was previously based on. Sewer flows from Empire Township will put additional strain on capacity treatment conditions at the treatment facility, and further limit sewer flows being generated by the cities ofLakeville and Farmington. Implication of Increased Township Development on Municipal Services and Infrastructure - This growth will continue to place increased demand on municipal services from new township residents. In addition, the level of traffic generated by this additional development will place additional demands and Council Minutes (Regular) August 16, 1999 Page 9 strains on both the City and County's road systems. In particular the need for additional east-west transportation corridors in the City will be of critical importance. Township Development Standards and Infrastructure Compatibility - Empire Township had developed its own water and sewer utility systems including the recently completed water tower. Non-compatibility issues continue to be a focus with respect to interconnectivity. Empire's water system operates at a different pressure level than the City of Farmington's system and thus any future connection would reql.Jire installation of equipment to establish a new pressure zone for the abandonment of existing water service infrastructure. Urbanization of Empire Township - Future Township Objectives - Empire Township representatives place considerable emphasis on retaining Empire Township's identity. Discussion of this issue at the August 11, 1999 meeting led to the question of whether Empire was contemplating incorporating as a city. Empire representatives pointed out that as an "Urban Township" they have powers almost identical to those of a city. While it was not the stated intent of the Township to incorporate as a City, they did not rule out the possibility in the future. Both State Statute and previous positions of the Metropolitan Council have confirmed that cities are the most appropriate political jurisdiction for intensive residential, commercial or industrial development and that the Metropolitan Council has in the past indicated that creation of new cities is not consistent with Regional Policy. MOTION by Soderberg, second by Cordes authorizing staff comments be submitted to the Metropolitan Council regarding the Empire Township Comprehensive Plan. 'APIF, MOTION CARRIED. e) Adopt Resolution - Cable Communication Systems Joint Powers Agreement Efforts to support the televising of government programming in the City have been in process with the cities of Apple Valley and Rosemount. Objectives identified in this cooperative effort would include the design, acquisition and installation of appropriate audio/visual equipment in each jurisdiction's Council Chambers, would provide for the staffing, production and televising of Council and Planning Commission meetings, and would be responsible for jointly overseeing the administration and enforcement of the City's cable franchise ordinance and telecommunications system. The three cities have developed a joint powers agreement that would create a Cable and Telecommunications Advisory Commission to address issues associated with coriununity television operations. Each city would designate their City Administrator and designee to represent their jurisdiction in overseeing the operations of the three-city cable and telecommunications system. MOTION by Verch, second by Cordes adopting RESOLUTION R82-99 approving a Joint and Cooperative Agreement Council Minutes (Regular) August 16, 1999 Page 10 establishing a Commission to serve as a Cable and Telecommunications Advisory Body. APIF, MOTION CARRIED. 12. NEW BUSINESS 13. COUNCIL ROUNDTABLE a) King Property 300 1st Street - Update The City Council inquired as to the status of the demolition of the property which was damaged by fire over a year ago and has since been purchased by Dave King. The owner has obtained the necessary demolition permit and is scheduled to begin demolition on August 14. The entire demolition should be completed by the end of August. b) Railroad Mitigation Issues At the last meeting, the Mayor inquired if the gate arms could be extended. Staff has checked with the railroad and they indicated the arms could not be extended because of the possibility of trapping cars between the gates. As far as mitigation measures for train whistles, the railroad is looking at median barriers. The FRA will be publishing their mitigation measures by the end of the year. Putting stationary horns at the crossings was also discussed, however, the cars do not have a sense of direction as to where the train is coming from. Councilmemher Cordes: the end of the year. She and Mayor Ristow will resign from the HRA Board at City Administrator Erar: The Mayor has been contacted by Congressman Luther's office as to whether the City would be interested in purchasing the Nike missile base. There are several issues to be considered. Castle Rock Township has notified the City they will not sign the Joint Powers Agreement. Council can end negotiations, or schedule another meeting to discuss the language changes, or write a letter to Castle Rock asking for an explanation. Council agreed to a full board meeting on August 30, 1999. Community Development Director Olson: The re-scheduled HRA Board meeting will be August 23, 1999. 14. ADJOURN MOTION by Cordes, second by Soderberg to adjourn at 11:15 p.m. APIF, MOTION CARRIED. Respectfully submitted, ?~/r7~ Cynthia Muller Executive Assistant