HomeMy WebLinkAbout03.06.89 Council Minutes
MINUTES
COUNCIL MEETING
REGULAR
MARCH 6, 1989
1. Mayor Kuchera called the meeting to order at 7:00 P.M.
Members Present: Kuchera, Mayer, McKnight, Galler.
Members Absent: Sprute.
Also Present: Administrator Thompson, Attorney Grannis.
2. MOTION by McKnight, second by Galler to approve the agenda with the
following changes:
a. Remove item 6B - Diseased Elm Removal - 320 Maple Street.
APIF, MOTION CARRIED.
3. MOTION by Galler, second by Mayer to approve the minutes of the February 21,
1989 regular meeting. APIF, MOTION CARRIED.
4. Dick Gerten addressed the Council during citizens comments, stating that
he attended the Town Meeting on February 28, 1989 and was upset regarding
the statements he had heard and read in the paper that the majority of the
people at the meeting were opposed to the compost facility. Mr. Gerten stated
that most of the people around him were there to hear the presentation and
gather information and had not formed an opinion. Mr. Gerten also commended
staff on the excellent presentation.
5. MOTION by Mayer, second by Galler to set a public hearing for March 20,
1989 at 7:15 P.M. to consider the preliminary plat of Country Hills Addition.
APIF, MOTION CARRIED.
6. MOTION by Kuchera, second by McKnight to set a public hearing for April 3,
1989 at 7:30 P.M. to consider the vacation of the utility/drainage easement
in Lots 11 and 12, Block 1, Fair Hills 4th Addition. APIF, MOTION CARRIED.
7. MOTION by McKnight, second by Mayer proclaiming the week of April 9 - 15,
1989 as Volunteer Recognition Week. APIF, MOTION CARRIED.
8. MOTION by Galler, second by Kuchera proclaiming March as Youth Art Month.
APIF io MOTION CARRIED.
9. Mayor Kuchera opened a public hearing at 7:15 P.M. to consider amending
Titles 10-1-14 and 10-3-2 (J) of the Zoning Ordinance relating to resource
recovery. Administrator Thompson explained that the ordinance would be required
if the City wished to consider building and operating a resource recovery
facility in Farmington. Mr. Thompson added that, while most discussion had
centered around the City's resource recovery facility proposed to be located
next to the County Highway Shop, the ordinance would affect all industrial
property and any resource recovery facility, either publicly or privately owned.
The following testimony was heard:
Adm. Thompson:
If a private company wished to build a recycling plant,
could the ordinance be amended?
Yes, but again, I would like to caution that the Council
should not consider amending the ordinance with only one
Mayor Kuchera:
project in mind.
Council Minutes - 3/6/89
Pat Akin: I don't believe the Planning Commission and Council have
separated the two issues. You just can't focus on a City
owned composting plant, but must look beyond it. You have to make certain
proper controls are in place. A private company could just as well operate
under the proposed ordinance. I would like to make sure the Council is aware
of all the issues. What is the definition and where are the 1-1 zones?
(Administrator Thompson read the definition and described the 1-1 areas.)
- Pat, Akin:
Adm. Thompson:
Pat Akin:
em. Mayer:
Pat Akin:
em. Mayer:
Pat Akin:
em. Galler:
of the attention.
Pat Akin:
Adm. Thompson:
Andy Simon:
Adm. Thompson:
Are there any lot size requirements?
The same as for all 1-1 uses.
You could be spot zoning.
If we were focusing on one location, that would be spot
zoning.
As a private citizen, could I apply for a resource recovery
facility in the 1-1 zone adjacent to Marigold?
Yes. But it would require a conditional use permit. Any
potential problems would be addressed.
I just want to be certain everything is considered.
We would like to focus on the ordinance alone, but the
proposed City Resource Recovery Facility has taken a lot
Has a final determination been made on the City plant?
No.
Would incineration be allowed under the definition?
If power was produced, probably. But it must be understood
that the County could locate its facility with or without
the ordinance because its authority in this area supersedes City Zoning laws.
The proposed definition could be changed however to eliminate incineration.
Mayor Kuchera:
Adm. Thompson:
When did the Planning Commission consider the ordinance?
On January 24, 1989.
Andy Simon: The proposed location for the plant is bad. It is near
schools and residential areas. There is a chance of smell.
The City would be encouraging businesses like Koch refinery to locate in the City.
The technology is presently risky, with very few plants in operation. Our
own consultant designed Filmore, which had an overrun of $200,000. Can we
afford such an overrun? I am not aware of any plant operating in the black.
The plant could cost up to $2,000,000. Can we afford that? The sludge we are
adding is considered a Type 2 waste which is toxic. Will the compost be con-
sidered hazardous waste? Why doesn't the City consider placing it at the
County incinerator site? The consultant talks about filters to control odors
and at the same time says the composting process doesn't produce odors.
Bill Carey:
10-20 years ahead
date.
Ruth Simon:
Adm. Thompson:
This is a new technology. The County is doing something
about it, so why is the City considering it? We may be
of ourselves. We can always get into composting at a later
Are we encouraging the incinerator by passing this ordinance?
I don't believe so.
Council Minutes - 3/6/89
Pat Akin: I serve on the County Solid Waste Board and Farmington
would be excluded based on siting criteria. It is my
understanding that most of the solid waste statutes address County activities.
Ginny Black (KPCA): As far as the MPCA is concerned, we don't treat cities
or counties differently when reviewing applications.
Can we get a guarantee that the County will let us keep
our own solid waste for at least 20 years?
I am not sure.
Andy Simon:
Adm. Thompson:
Andy Simon:
Ginny Black:
Mayor Kuchera:
em. Galler:
waste operation.
Pat Akin:
Could the Met Council take over?
I doubt if the Met Councilor MWCC would want to take
over your facility.
They took over our wastewater treatment.
Chairman Steve O'Keefe of the Met Council and MWCC staff have
indicated they have no interest in taking over the solid
We've got to make changes in the way we deal with solid waste.
Adm. Thompson: I would like to note that this is a rapidly developing industry
and I don't think the City should turn its back on it.
Chaska just granted a permit for a 300 ton/day privately owned composting plant
in its industrial park.
em~ Galler: Also there is a 600 ton/day waste processing facility in
Eden Prairie's industrial park operated by Reuter, Inc..
Owen Pool: Don't the larger plants process garbage cheaper than small
plants?
Robert Williamson: The larger plants are generally more sophisticated and
more capital intensive. The plant incorporates designs which
are not necessary in small plants. Some systems do not presuppose upfront
recycling which the Farmington design incorporates.
em. Mayer: Most of the discussion has centered on the City's composting
and recycling plant. We have two separate issues here and
the one at hand is the zoning amendment. There appears to be no concern
regarding the City recycling, yet that factor is an integral part of the
amendment. Under our current zoning ordinance, I do not feel we are prepared
to store and process the recyclables. Maybe the definition is too broad, but
that issue should be addressed before we begin with recycling. If we need to
narrow the scope, then that's what we should do.
Adm. Thompson:
Owen Pool:
Bill Carey:
Pat Akin:
I concur, but I would recommend that the ordinance address
publicly owned recycling or place strong controls on private.
The City should turn the entire system, including collections
over to private.
I agree.
It appears the City is committed to collection by the
purchase of the new equipment.
Council Minutes - 3/6/89
Jim Emond:
Pat Akin:
Lakeville is also initiating recycling. Right now I pay
$42.00 per quarter for collection.
What does the Council intend to do tonight?
Mayor Kuchera: I think the Council should make a decision tonight. I
have a lot of respect for the Planning Commission expertise
in zoning matters and I have to go along with their recommendation. We
look to the Planning Commission to guide us.
em. Mayer: Pat Akin has already noted that we are committed to
collection/recycling. We don't need to make a decision
on the composting plant tonight, but I feel it is wrong to try and kill
the project through the zoning process. Let the compost plant stand on its
own merits. That's what the feasibility/design process and conditional use
process are for. I'm confident we can take care of recycling, but we should
address it in the ordinance.
em. McKnight:
Can we recycle under the present ordinance?
Adm. Thompson: While recycling isn't specifically addressed in the Zoning
Ordinance, Attorney Grannis has indicated storage would
be allowed under the Solid Waste ordinance. I feel the matter should be
specifically addressed by the Council.
Att. Grannis:
could also make
Ordinance.
Andy Simon:
The Council can pass the ordinance as presented, or amend
it, but it must relate to the 1-1 District. The Council
a determination on the applicability of the Solid Waste
It sounds like the Council is trying to confuse the issue.
Francis Blaha: What you are looking for is a temporary solution. Why
not determine that the City garage can be used to store
recyclables? Why not set aside the composting part of the ordinance if or
when the Council decides to build a plant? Restrict composting at this time
and address recycling.
em. McKnight:
Pat Akin:
The City Engineer doesn't seem to be too concerned about
the storage of recyclables. Why not just clarify that issue?
You are going to have to give a site to store the materials.
Robert Williamson: The County recycling facilities will be open by late
April, so you are only looking at allowing it on a temporary
basis.
Dick Gerten:
em. Mayer:
Pat Akin:
basis?
Churches and Boy Scouts have been storing newspaper for
years.
Not on this scale.
Are they any emergency provisions in the statutes which
would authorize the City to allow recycling on an interim
Att. Grannis: The Council can adopt an ordinance allowing recycling in
an 1-1 District tonight. While I believe the present
Solid Waste Ordinance would allow the storage of recyclables, it is a "grey"
area and should be clarified by the Council.
Council Minutes - 3/6/89
Andy Simon:
Adm. Thompson:
I believe you have a mess here and don't know how to solve it.
I don't see a problem with the way the City is proceeding.
The Council can determine the matter through an interpretation
of the Solid Waste Ordinance. We are only considering storing, not processing,
the materials on a temporary basis.
Francis Blaha:
Why don't you just define the three recyclable materials
and say they can store it at the City garage for a six
month period?
Owen Pool:
Why don't you just get out of the business?
Adm. Thompson: It's not that simple. Even if we turn it over to a private
hauler, we are still held accountable for enforcing the
recycling/yard waste issues. If we run our own system we have the ultimate
control. Also, the City of Hopkins got out of the business and 5 years later
they were back in it because of complaints.
MOTION by Kuchera, second by Galler to close the public hearing. APIF, MOTION
CARRIED .
10. MOTION by Galler to table the matter until the full Council is present.
MOTION DIED FOR LACK OF A SECOND.
11. MOTION by McKnight, second by Kuchera to deny the Zoning Amendment.
Voting for: McKnight, Kuchera. Against: Galler, Mayer. Motion failed.
12. Attorney Grannis stated that the Council could offer a motion to adopt
the ordinance, but based on the previous vote, it does not appear such a motion
would pass.
13. MOTION by Kuchera, second by McKnight to allow the temporary storage of
recyclable materials at the City garage on a temporary basis as per the provision
of Title 7-1-5. Voting for: McKnight, Kuchera, Mayer. Against: Galler.
Motion failed.
14. Councilmember Galler clarified his vote stating the time period should
have been defined. Councilmember Galler also noted that this was just a
temporary fix with no clear direction as to which way the City should proceed.
Councilmember Mayer stated that is appears that the unanimous support of the
City owned collection system was losing support and felt the Council should
explore looking at all the alternatives, including private collection. MOTION
by Mayer, second by Galler to\direct staff to explore the possibility of going
with a private hauler. APIF, MOTION CARRIED.
15. MOTION by Galler, second by Mayer to adopt RESOLUTION NO. R15-89 adding
a $15 per fire report fee to RESOLUTION NO. R4-89. APIF, MOTION CARRIED.
16. The Council next considered an amendment to the Zoning Ordinance changing
a portion of the N~ of the S~ of Section 32, Township 114, Range 19 as described
in the Public Hearing Notice from R-3 to B-1. Administrator Thompson reviewed
the Planning Commission's report which recommended approving the change. Art
Leibfried, who requested the change, stated that it was his intent to construct
and operate a car wash, which would require a conditional use. Administrator
Thompson stated that while a car wash was proposed, if the zoning amendment
was approved, the property could be used for any use listed under B-1. Mayor
Kuchera asked if the City sewer could handle the flow. Administrator Thompson
stated that Superintendent of General Services Kaldunski had indicated that it
probably could, but couldn't give a definite answer until he had all the
information. Mayor Kuchera asked how much the sewage flow would be. Mr. Leibfried
Council Minutes - 3/6/89
stated that the proposed system would recycle most of the water so it wouldn't
be that great. Administrator Thompson stated that the City had experienced
problems with lift stations which served the Henderson Addition, and that
the proposed car wash could have an impact on the lift station, but that
would be addressed during the conditional use permit process. Joy Eldred
stated that the car wash would impact the lift station. Councilmember Mayer
stated that he welcomed the commercial development, but was concerned about
the mixture of uses on the TH 3 corridor. Councilmember Mayer stated that
the Planning Commission should develop a plan for the ultimate use of the
corridor so development is not "piecemealed". Councilmember Galler noted
that the City Planner's main concern was the overall plan for the transition
of the area. Mr. Leibfried stated that he had invited all of the neighbors
to his office to discuss any concerns. Mr. Leibfried noted that the major
concerns were related to the sewer, but added that under present zoning, he
could apply for a permit for an apartment building which could produce a
greater sewer flow. Councilmember Mayer noted that the original rezone for
the convenience store was criticized as spot zoning, but did not feel this
was spot zoning because it was adding on to an existing commercial zone.
Bill Carey stated that nothing should be rezoned until the sewer problem is
taken care of. Administrator Thompson stated that potential sewer problems
would be addressed by the City Engineer during the permit process. Council-
member Mayer noted that Mr. Leibfried may not get the necessary permits to hook
into the sewer system. Mayor Kuchera suggested that the matter be postponed
until the Engineer was present. Jim Emond, representing Mr. Leibfried, stated
that the sewer was an engineering issue, not a land use issue, and could see
no reason to postpone. MOTION by McKnight, second by Mayer to rezone the
aforementioned parcel from R-3 to B-1. Voting for: Mayer, McKnight, Galler.
Against: Kuchera. Motion failed. (4 votes are necessary to approve zoning
amendments)
17. Administrator Thompson informed the Council that it appeared staff had
settled the dispute relating to the Fire Hall repairs.
18. Administrator Thompson presented an overview of an MPCA Loan Program
as outlined in his March 2, 1989 memo. Mary MacEnany stated that she
appreciated the City looking into the program, but was offended by the
Administrator's implications that all Henderson residents were dewatering
their basements into the sewer system. Administrator Thompson stated that
the memo neither stated nor implied that they did. MOTION by Mayer, second
by Kuchera endorsing the program and directing staff to send a letter requesting
to be placed on the MPCA needs list for the loan program. APIF, MOTION CARRIED.
19. LaDonna Riste requested that the City support Mt. Dew Days through in-kind
and/or cash donation. Attorney Grannis stated that the statutes were grey
relating to such donations, but it could be interpreted as advertising for the
City. Finance Director Henneke stated that the donation would require a
budget adjustment. MOTION by Galler, second by McKnight to provide in-kind
services of the Police, swimming pool and arena, provided the Parks and
Recreation Director concurs, and to donate $500. APIF, MOTION CARRIED.
20. MOTION by Galler, second by Kuchera to adopt RESOLUTION NO. R16-89
ordering a feasibility report for the extension of sanitary sewer to the
proposed TH 50 industrial park. APIF, MOTION CARRIED.
Council Minutes - 3/6/89
21. MOTION by Mayer, second by McKnight to adopt RESOLUTION NO. R17-89
endorsing the CEAM position on the distribution of MVET funds. APIF,
MOTION CARRIED.
22. The Council next considered parking on Elm Street in the vicinity of
Hardees and Tom Thumb. A lengthy discussion followed regarding the location
of signs and including 5th Street. MOTION by Galler, second by McKnight
to place No Parking signs as proposed in the March 2, 1989 memo from the
General Services Superintendent and to place 4 No Truck Parking signs on
5th Street between Elm and the alley just south of Elm Street. APIF, MOTION
CARRIED .
23. It was the consensus of the Council to set a special meeting for
March 15, 1989 at 7:00 P.M. to discuss the City's compensation plan.
24. MOTION by Mayer, second by McKnight to approve the consent agenda as
follows:
a. Approve School and Conference Request - Liquor - Minnesota Liquor
Store Association.
b. Approve School and Conference Request - Building Inspector.
c. Approve School and Conference Request - Police - Spring Institute
for Chiefs.
d. Approve bills as submitted.
25. The following items were discussed during roundtable:
a. Administrator Thompson stated that a tour of Hopkins' automated
garbage collection would leave City Hall on March 10, 1989 at
8:00 A.M.
b. Mayor Kuchera stated that the Parks and Recreation salaries must
be addressed because it was unfair that they were making so much
less than Maintenance Workers.
26. MOTION by Mayer, second by Galler to adjourn at 11:15 P.M. APIF, MOTION
CARRIED.
Respectfully submitted,
/~ Y-lz"
LaKy' Thom son
City Administrator
Approved
3-~{) ~ ~q