Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout05.04.92 Council Minutes -s r'fJ.'~ lV'l.i MINUTES COUNCIL MEETING REGULAR MAY 4, 1992 1. Mayor Kuchera called the meeting to order at 7:00 P.M. Members Present: Kuchera, Mayer, Orr, Rotty, Galler. Members Absent: None. Also Present: Administrator Thompson, Attorney Harmeyer. 2. MOTION by Galler, second by Orr to approve the agenda with the following changes: a. Add discussion of an amendment of the Silver Springs developers agreement. b. Move 13a up on the agenda. APIF, MOTION CARRIED. 3. MOTION by Rotty, second by Orr to approve the minutes of the April 20, 1992 meeting with the clarification that the engineering staff could suspend operations of the compost site without Council action in Paragraph 17. APIF, MOTION CARRIED. 4. Mary Montagne of the Dakota County Alliance for prevention gave a presentation on the program and requested the Council appoint a person to serve as a representative on the Board. Ms. Montagne also stated the Alliance would assist cities on a local level. S. Representative Bill Macklin and Senator Pat Pariseau were present to discuss the 1992 Legislative Session and other issues concerning the City. 6. Mayor Kuchera opened a public hearing to consider a grading permit at 19331 Euclid Path atU7:15 P.M.. The hearing was continued until later in the meeting. 7. Representative Macklin and Senator Pariseau discussed the following issues: a. Sales tax extended to cities. b. Possible future LGA cuts. c. Presidential Primary - reimbursement of costs by State. d. Health Right. e. Water testing fees. f. MUSA Boundary legislation. g. Sales tax exemption. 8. Mayor Kuchera opened a public hearing at 7:30 P.M. to consider the preliminary plat of Dakota County Estates 7th Addition. The hearing was continued until later in the meeting. 9. Discussion with the legislators continued. A lengthy discussion continued regarding trust funds and mistrust. 10. Mayor Kuchera opened a public hearing at 7:45 P.M. to consider Project 92-7 - 4th Street Improvements. The hearing was continued until later in the meeting. 11. Discussion followed with the State representatives. The following items were discussed: a. State mandates. b. Emissions testing. c. Tax casino gambling. "1J .$.... Council Minutes - 5/4/92 - Page 2 12. Emily Rahn noted concerns she had regarding the traffic problems associated with the Streets of Reality. 13. Mayor Kuchera reopened a public hearing to consider the grading permit for 19331 Euclid Path. City Engineer Kaldunski reviewed the request to construct a wildlife pond in the backyard of Doug Johnson. Mr. Kaldunski noted the area was not impacted by the Wetlands Act and that the area appeared to be rather small for the proposal. Mr. Kaldunski stated that the City had not heard from the Army Corps of Engineers and that a decision should be tabled until the City received comments. Doug Johnson asked if the 10' buffer would apply if he jointly constructed the pond with his neighbor. The following questions and comments were heard: Cm. Ratty: Doug Johnson: Cm. Ratty: Doug Johnson: Mayor Kuchera: Doug Johnson: Att. Harmeyer: Cm. Mayer: Eng. Kaldunski: Att. Harmeyer: Cm. Galler: Eng. Kaldunski: Cm. Orr: Doug Johnson: Eng. Kaldunski: Cm. Orr: Are you going to use an artificial source of water to maintain the level? I'm not sure. What about the 50' buffer per DNR recommendation? There's not enough room. Are you going to fence the pond? It is not required by insurance. Hopefully I will not need one. I am still getting more information. There could be a liability. It's presently a storm water pond with an easement. Yes. All work is within the easement. It increases our liability. I would request indemnification and additional insurance for the City. What's the difference between this proposal and Dakota County Estates pond? Nothing. You want us to wait until you get more information? Yes. If it's expanded, we have to readvertise and invite additional comments. We should decide our intention before asking Mr. Johnson to go through additional work. MOTION by Orr, second by Galler to continue the hearing until May 18, 1992 at 8:00 P.M.. APIF, MOTION CARRIED. 14. Mayor Kuchera opened a public hearing to consider the proposed preliminary plat for Dakota County Estates 7th Addition. Administrator Thompson reviewed the plat noting it substantially complied with the PUD. The following comments were heard: Cm. Orr: Adm. Thompson: Cm. Ratty: Leslie MCMurtrey: Is this the last phase? No. There are possibly 2 more. We are not requiring temporary cul-de-sacs. The developer should fill up the existing lots first because of weeds. Council Minutes - 5/4/92 - Page 3 195 Debbie Benedict: Mayor Kuchera: Cheryl Retterath: Eng. Kaldunski: Cheryl Retterath: Eng. Kaldunski: Debbie Benedict: We only have approximately 17 lots left. I think what Leslie is trying to say is to keep the weeds down. Are you going to connect with the storm sewer? The 7th Addition will drain to the south. There will be some grading. What is the timing? The project should start this Summer and be completed this Fall. We would like to pursue 429 financing. MOTION by Orr, second by Galler to close the hearing. APIF, MOTION CARRIED. 15. It was the consensus of the Council that staff prepare a resolution approving the Dakota County Estates 7th preliminary plat and developers agreement for consideration at the next meeting. 16. Mayor Kuchera opened a public hearing to consider Project 92-7 - 4th Street Improvements. Engineer Kaldunski reviewed the feasibility report noting: a. storm sewer improvements, b. 38' street - widened to the east to center, c. new sidewalk on east and replacement on west. The following comments were heard: Gareth Goetsch: Eng. Kaldunski: Gareth Goetsch: Eng. Kaldunski: Gareth Goetsch: Eng. Kaldunski: Neil Perkins: Adm. Thompson: Darrel Franke: Eng. Kaldunski: Darrel Franke: Cm. Orr: Eng. Kaldunski: Neil Perkins: Darlene Brummond: Gareth Goetsch: ~ng.Kaldunski: Bob Michaels: Will the alleys be improved? It is listed. It is up to the Council. I don't want it. Why did you list it? We list all possible improvements. It is up to the Council. Can the alley be vacated? Yes. I don't want the alley at Hickory and 5th. I am getting hit hard. There seems to be limited value for 2 lots. I concur. There appears to be limited value. Unimproved road. We are paying for it on a per unit basis. It is spread on a per unit basis. I don't want sidewalk. Neither does Nicolai. If 5th and Hickory were eliminated, would the underground improve- ments be installed. Sewer and water. I already have service. I would recommend it be divided into two projects and let each stand on its own merit. I would recommend sidewalks on the elementary side be kept and try to slow traffic down. No one will use Hickory and 5th. How far back would sidewalk RO? ri4.J '?ol~c..1/ l~ \' ~~ ~r"C)p.t.vi-)' r'lI\c.-. r ~ not sure) I would bave to measure How do you determine cost per lot? itJ( ~ 1'\ ~ ~I~ld.. t Council Minutes - 5/4/92 - Page 4 Eng. Kaldunski: Bob Michaels: Adm. Thompson: house is torn down. Gareth Goetsch: Adm. Thompson: Cm. Ratty: Eng. Kaldunski: Cm. Ratty: Mark Sol: Eng. Kaldunski: Adm. Thompson: Mark Sol: Eng. Kaldunski: Darrel Franke: Gareth Goetsch: Adm. Thompson: Roger Cook: Adm. Thompson: Cm. Galler: Mayor Kuchera: The feasibility divided by the number of lots. Why on a per unit basis? The Council feels it is the most fair way. There are lots that are shown as 2 buildable lots that probably are not unless the How do I get vacation started? By petition. Improvements? The same as 4th Street. Who pays for school water? Is this the maximum amount? Yes. No. It can't be guaranteed, but it would be highly unlikely. How long will I be without access? 3 to 4 weeks. I'm in favor of sewer. How are assessments paid? They are assessed over a 10 year period of equal payments. They can be prepaid within 30 days of adoption. (On behalf of Auges.) I have a problem with 2 units. It is not a buildable lot. I agree. We will look at it. We make adjustments. Owners wanted larger lots for more privacy. Adm. Thompson: Storm sewer is needed only to serve 5th and Hickory. Hopefully, storm sewer will be installed along Ash Street which would serve 5th and Hickory much more cheaply. Cm. Ratty: I like the sidewalk on the east. I would like staff to look at eliminating 5th and Hickory, to vacate the alley in Block 3 of Greenway Addition and to look at single lots for Perkins, Clayton, Sol, Durbin, Auge, and May. Jim Purdy: Cm. Orr: Bonnie Purdy: Bill Klotz: left. Cm. Orr: Gareth Goetsch: We do not want sidewalk. There does not have to be sidewalk on both sides. There is sidewalk on the west side of 4th Street. It should either be eliminated or extended. Ash Street will have sidewalk. Could it just stay on the east side? I would like to have sidewalk scratched on the east since you are taking 7 feet from that side. We won't have any front yard There will probably be sidewalk on one side. How far back will sidewalk be from the curb? (The Council directed the Engineer to stake for the sidewalk so the Council and property owners can review it.) Council Minutes - 5/4/92 - Page 5 IB7 Jim Purdy: Eng. Kaldunski: When will it be staked? (A lengthy discussion followed regarding sidewalks.) Tomorrow. Linda Perkins: Darlene Brummond: Cm. Orr: Matt May: Cm. Ratty: Leslie McMurtrey: Eng. Kaldunski: Jim Purdy: Bill Klotz: Eng. Kaldunski: Darlene Brummond: Cm. Orr: Jim Purdy: Herman Hagen: Bob Michaels: Richard Johnson: Adm. Thompson: Why do you want sidewalks. Kids have to be bussed anyway. When will we know when the project is ordered? By the next meeting probably. Why not eliminate the whole sidewalk on 4th Street? Good point. It is a possibility. Why don't you put sidewalks in new developments? We are doing it now on certain streets. I would propose not putting in sidewalks now, but look at it on an overall basis. Water main was just installed 18 years ago. I don't think it should be replaced. It is in good shape. There are very few galvanized pipes. I would be adamantly opposed to the elimination of sidewalks. Are you opposed because of landscaping? Yes. It would be hard to go around. Sidewalk is spotty all around town. Get an overall plan. We have a sidewalk. I would hate to lose it. You should look how things are assessed. Consider a per foot basis. I am for sidewalks. Does the assessment policy vary from region to region? (19Sth Street Project) Staff will come to the next meeting. MOTION by Orr, second by Rotty to continue the hearing until May 18, 1992 at 8:30 P.M. APIF, MOTION CARRIED. 17. The Council next considered a request by Leslie McMurtrey to install a stop sign at the intersection of 182nd Street and 183rd Street, specifically at 183rd Street and Embers. MOTION by Orr, second by Kuchera to install 4 stop signs at 183rd and Embers. APIF, MOTION CARRIED. 18. The Council next considered a liquor store report and proposal by the developer of the Farmington City Center to relocate the liquor store. Liquor Store Manager Paul Asher outlined various options listed in his report dated April 29, 1992. Councilmember Orr stated the recommendation of looking at obtaining the lot north of the liquor store was sound policy. Councilmember Rotty asked if he felt the store's profit would increase 15% by taking the lot. Mr. Asher stated increased exposure should increase sales by 15%. Administrator Thompson wasn't looking to lock into an option but felt the City had to get off dead center. George Daniels, representing Elm Park Developers presented a proposal to relocate the liquor store .into Farmington City Center. Mr. Daniels was asking for the Council to decide if the City was going to expand at its present location or relocate to the City Center. A lengthy discussion followed regarding the pros and cons of the proposals. Councilmembers Mayer and Rotty expressed concern regarding pulling another business ,,", ~..+ . CounCl.l Minutes - 5/4/92 - Page 6 out of the downtown. enough profit at the the consensus of the Manager's April 29th Councilmember Orr stated he could not see the store generating new location to compel him to be in favor of moving. It was Council that staff continue with Option 3a of the Liquor Store report. 19. The Council next considered the feasibility report for 2nd Street Parking (Project 89-18). City Engineer Kaldunski reviewed the project noting the projected costs were $74,764.00. A lengthy discussion followed regarding the project, including costs, assessments and rentals. It was the consensus that the Council should assess the costs in the 4 block downtown area and Feely's and to probably assess a greater portion than outlined in the Finance Director's memo. MOTION by Orr, second by Galler to adopt RESOLUTION NO. R57-92 accepting the feasibility report for Project 89-18 and setting a public hearing for June 1, 1992 at 8:00 P.M. to consider the project. APIF, MOTION CARRIED. 20. The Council next considered a requirement for mandatory garbage as outlined in the Administrator's memo dated April 29, 1992. The Administrator noted the Council had the option of billing everyone or requiring an affidavit stating how their garbage is being disposed of. MOTION by Orr, second by Mayer to direct staff to prepare an ordinance billing every house for garbage service. VOTING FOR: Orr, Kuchera, Ratty, Mayer. VOTING AGAINST: Galler. MOTION CARRIED. 21. The Council next considered the feasibility report for Project 92-3 (Hill Dee, Hillview Drainage). MOTION by Galler, second by Orr to adopt RESOLUTION NO. R58-92 accepting the feasibility report for Project 92-3 and setting a hearing for May 18, 1992 at 7:15 P.M.. APIF, MOTION CARRIED. 22. The Council next considered an amendment to the parking ordinance as recommended in the Police Chief's memo dated April 16, 1992. Chief Siebenaler indicated the recommendation not only precluded semis from parking overnight, but also R.V.s, any trailers, boats, business vehicles larger than a pickup. Chief Siebenaler also recommended that the Police Department be allowed to issue permits for temporary overnight parking. The Council directed staff to redraft the ordinance to include temporary permits. 23. MOTION by Galler, second by Orr to approve the Consent Agenda as follows: a. Amend Fire Marshal job description and budget adjustment. b. Approve interim wage adjustment for the Assistant City Engineer - $1.00/hour. c. Adopt RESOLUTION NO. R59-92 relating to IRS Reimbursement Bond regulations. d. Approve an agreement relating to the Lampert sanitary sewer variance. e. Approve Engineering Intern position. f. Adopt ORDINANCE NO. 092-268 appointing the EDC as the CATV. g. Approve 1992 Budget Transfers. h. Approve Change Order #5 - Project 91-10 - Middle School. i. Approve payment of the bills as submitted. APIF, MOTION CARRIED. 24. Administrator Thompson presented a request by the Silver Springs developer to allow the person taking the building permit to deposit $1,000 surety for trees and boulevard sodding. MOTION by Orr, second by Galler to approve the proposed amendment as presented in the Attorney's May 4, 1992 memo. APIF, MOTION CARRIED. 25. The following items were discussed during roundtable: a. Meeting with Planning Commission on May 12, 1992 - Proposed topics: Low/High Density; Garage; Growth Issues Report; Goals and Objectives Report. Council Minutes - 5/4/92 - Page 7 f Dn.' ..oL~--yn b. Meeting with HRA on Exchange Bank Building - May 19, 1992. c. Social Hours with Boards and Commissions. d. Reisinger storage on CSAH 31 - extension for two weeks and nothing added, especially fill. e. Parks and Recreation Director to notify area residents of status of parks. f. Update on trail acquisition. g. Candidates for Dakota Alliance for Prevention. h. Update on Akin Park 2nd Addition and Nelsen Hills Farm. i. Brief discussion on the Blaha and Ristow garages. j. Development boards. k. Talking sessions. l. Budget meetings - inform the public. m. Gambling trips. 26. MOTION by Orr, second by Mayer to adjourn at 12:30 P.M. APIF, MOTION CARRIED. Respectfully submitted, ~ Larry Thompson City Administrator Approved LT/mh 51?> CU C1~Jz,Q '* -:tt l~