Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout06/26/2000 Council MinutesCOUNCIL MINUTES JUNE 26, 2000 CITY OF LINO LAKES MINUTES DATE : June 26, 2000 TIME STARTED : 6:45 P.M. TIME ENDED : 9:40 P.M. MEMBERS PRESENT : Carlson, Dahl, O'Donnell, Reinert, and Mayor Bergeson MEMBERS ABSENT : None Staff members present: City Administrator, Linda Waite Smith; Administration Director, Dan Tesch (part); City Attorney, Bill Hawkins; City Engineer, John Powell; Community Development Director, Brian Wessel; City Planner, Jeff Smyser; Public Services Director, Rick DeGardner; and CMC City Clerk, Ry-Chel Gaustad SETTING THE AGENDA Item Aii, May 22, 2000, Special Council Meeting Minutes, was m Item Aiii, May 22, 2000, Council Meeting Minutes, was mo Item Ai, June 7, 2000, Council Work Session Mee ' 'n as moved to Item 7C. The agenda was approved as amended. CONSENT AGENDA Council Member O'Donnel Carlson seconded the ITEM prove the Consent Agenda, as amended. Council Member otion carried unanimously. DISBURSEMENTS: June 26, 2000 (Check No. 59130 —59282 $138,266.91) Manual Disbursements Centennial Fire District OPEN MIKE • No one was present for open mike. ACTION Approved Approved Approved COUNCIL MINUTES JUNE 26, 2000 ADMINISTRATION DEPARTMENT REPORT, DAN TESCH Consider Contracting Services with Marilyn Anderson (3/5 Vote Required), Linda Waite Smith - Staff advised that before Marilyn Anderson retired at the end of 1999, the City discussed contracting with her to provide assistance to the new City Clerk for two (2) specific projects. In 2000, Ms. Anderson would assist with the presidential election process. In 2001, she would assist with the redistricting process. An agreement was reached with Ms. Anderson and formalized by the City's employment attorney. Both Ms. Anderson and the City Administrator have reviewed the agreement and find it acceptable. Ms. Anderson would be paid $5,000 in each of the two (2) years she provides assistance to the City Clerk. While this was not included in the 2000 operating budget, the Finance Director has indicated that 2000 revenues are running slightly ahead of projections and should be sufficient to cover the 2000 portion of the contract. The 2001 amount will be included in the 2001 -operating budget. Council Member Carlson moved to approve the contract between Lino Lakes to provide assistance to the City Clerk in 2000 and Dahl seconded the motion. Motion carried unanimously. Conditional Job Offer to Mike Monson (3/5 Vo October 1999, Mike Monson was hired as a part - department's CSO program, the departme become a full-time police officer. Mi College where he is currently in On May 27, 2000, the dep this time, staff is requ based on successful co medical and psychologi rson and the City of ted. Council Member an Tesch — Staff advised in unity Service Officer. As part of the ge students who are attending school to s t s criteria. Mr. Monson is attending Century ement program. xp "'- nced the untimely death of police officer Steve Bikkie. At e City Council approve a conditional job offer to Mr. Monson law enforcement skills course, post licensure, background check, The anticipated start date for this request is October 23, 2000. Council Member O'Donnell moved to approve staff recommendation to hire current CSO Mike Monson for police officer position, contingent on successful completion of law enforcement skills course, post licensure, background check, medical and psychological exam. Council Member Reinert seconded the motion. Motion carried unanimously. Consider Adoption of Resolution Supporting Building Quality Communities Program, Linda Waite Smith — Staff advised in the past few years, members of the League of Minnesota Cities have become concerned about negative perceptions of city government. Believing that cities are the means to "community", and major contributors to the quality of life in Minnesota, the LMC Board of Directors worked with a public relations firm to obtain candid feedback from citizens to determine what quality of life means to them and how city government contributes to that quality of life. From their findings, the LMC developed a program called Building Quality Communities. The program's mission is to enhance the perception of Minnesota City governments and city officials, to 2 COUNCIL MINUTES JUNE 26, 2000 • reinvigorate and increase citizen involvement in city government and to reinstall a sense of pride in public service. Presentations about the program were made at the LMC annual conference in June, 2000. The first step in joining the program is to adopt Resolution No. 00 — 71, affirming the City's participation. Council Member Reinert inquired about any type of obligation if the City's does move to approve its participation. Staff advised there is no obligation. The program will give the City resources to work with. The City may withdraw from the program at any time. Council Member Dahl moved to adopt Resolution No. 00 — 71, as presented. Council Member Reinert seconded the motion. Motion carried unanimously. Resolution No. 00 — 71 can be found in the City Clerk's office. PUBLIC SAFETY DEPARTMENT REPORT, DAVE PECCHIA There was no Public Safety Department report. PUBLIC SERVICES DEPARTMENT REPORT, RICK There was no Public Services Department report. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEP PORT, BRIAN WESSEL PUBLIC HEARING, Resolutio Additions (3/5 Vote Require the public hearing for the p Street Improvement p 2000, in order to provi necessary notices have A opt Assessment Roll, Twilight Acres 1st and 2nd - Staff advised on May 8, 2000, the City Council set ments for the Twilight Acres lst and 2nd Addition Utility and t f • <,t ne 12, 2000. The hearing was opened and continued to June 26, the property owners in accordance with State statutes. The ailed to property owners indicating the amount of the assessment and the date of the hearing. ey have also received a copy of the entire assessment roll for their subdivision. Staff referred to summaries of the project costs and assessments, as well as the actual assessment rolls. The proposed assessments are based on the project costs. The City Attorney has indicated appraisals for the properties to be assessed could not be prepared in time for the meeting. The actual assessment amount, which can be assessed to each property, cannot exceed the benefit to the property as defined by State statute. After the assessment hearing is held, and the proposed assessment is adopted, the property owners have 30 days to appeal the assessment amounts. Only after the appeal period expires, and the City is able to determine the funding to be derived from assessments, will the City be able to consider award of the contract. Staff advised residents confer with an attorney regarding the appeal process. Staff also noted that the resident at 789 Vicky Lane, sent an appeal during the City Charter appeal period and was removed COUNCIL MINUTES JUNE 26, 2000 from the project. Stubs will be added at that property and costs will come out of the amount being assessed. Staff entered into the record two -(2) letters that have been received from residents. The first letter is from Mr. Pete Schroeder, 7981 Nancy Drive. Mr. Schroeder's letter indicated his objection to the assessments. Staff read the letter in its entirety. The second letter was received from Mr. Raymond Johnson at 7977 Nancy Drive. The letter expressed his concerns regarding the project. Staff addressed the concerns raised in the letter. Copies of the letters can be found in the City Clerk's office. Council Member Carlson clarified the amount of reduction in the project if bituminous is used instead of concrete for curb and gutter. She referred to the letter from Mr. Johnson and asked if the blacktop that is currently at the end of Vicky Lane will be replaced. Staff advised the bituminous was restored as part of another project. d to a map indicating where the curb will begin and end. Council Member Carlson advised one property owner has pe the map. She stated the cost is now spread over the re happen when that property owner does want to ho Staff advised the property owner would p will be comparable or may be slightly lit., Council Member Carlson clar' 1 icated that property on owners. She asked what will • es if a future hook up is desired. The cost ID nal assessments would not go back to the property owners if that resident hoo ture. The City Administrato long the bituminous curb would last. She also asked who pays for it if it has to be replace Staff advised concrete curb and gutter lasts much longer. Concrete will last about 10-15 years. Repair of bituminous comes out of the Public Service budget. Council Member Reinert inquired about the criteria for opting out of the project. Staff advised the criteria is per the City Charter. There is a 60 -day waiting period after the hearing held last Fall. Residents would submit a letter to the City. If most residents want the project to be ended, the Council has to determine if the project should proceed based on financial information. Council Member O'Donnell stated that if the appraisals are done and show the increase of value to the property only $10,000, assessments can only be in that amount. Staff advised that is correct. The City will then have to determine if there are enough assessment funds to pay for the project. 4 • • COUNCIL MINUTES JUNE 26, 2000 Mayor Bergeson opened the public hearing at 7:28 p.m. Mayor Bergeson clarified that everyone present had received information about the public hearing. He advised residents from the 1st Addition will be from heard first. Mr. Keith Peterson, 761 Vicky Lane, came forward and stated that the City Engineer, at a meeting last fall, told residents their property would be appraised. He stated he is in the process of selling his home so his property has been appraised. He noted that the benefit to the property is a lot less than the proposed assessment. He asked why the City did not have the appraisals done prior to this meeting. Mayor Bergeson asked if Mr. Peterson is willing to share the amount of benefit to the property. Mr. Peterson indicated he would not like to share the amount indicated by the appraiser. Staff advised the assessments are based on project costs, not appraisal ted the City Attorney has not yet obtained the appraisals. The City Attorney advised that timing was a problem relatin boom, appraisals could not be obtained in time to comp public hearing prior to the appraisals in order to o Mr. Peterson stated he received his apprai ._,�_°> eeks. als. Due to the housing s year. The City held the Mr. Dean Kaufman, 732 Vicky Lac m ar and asked where the City comes in if the vacant lot is sold in regard to assess Staff advised the vac. op is a piece of right-of-way for the concept of extending a roadway. The City can vacate th t ermines there is no use for it. Mr. Lyle Bye, 775 Vick . s e, came forward and stated there is no excuse for the City not obtaining appraisals for the affected properties. He stated the project does not include storm sewer. He advised his garage floods every time there is a heavy rain. Staff explained the process used to determine if storm sewer is included in a project. He stated the road elevations and existing pond are such that the storm sewer cannot be designed to meet City standards. Mr. Mike Adamczak, 757 Vicky Lane, came forward and asked if there is any federal funding to help with the project costs. Staff advised they are unaware of any current grant programs that pay the residents assessments. The City did investigate a Rice Creek Watershed District grant but does not qualify because the water quality will not be improved. COUNCIL MINUTES JUNE 26, 2000 Mr. Doug Sontag, 767 Vicky Lane, came forward and asked how far the well must be from the new sewer. Staff advised the distance must be 50' to a public sewer. A variance can be requested if the well does not meet the setback before construction takes place. The City does not pay to have wells capped if a resident does not hook up. Ms. Cindy Bruneberg, 7941 Nancy Drive, came forward and submitted a letter of objection to the project. A copy of the letter can be found in the City Clerk's office. Mr. Richard O'Kelly, 7951 Nancy Drive, came forward and asked what happens if one property owner objects but the rest are in favor of the project. He asked if the project cost would then be higher to each property owner in favor of the project. Staff advised the City could not go back and raise the assessment f City will have to determine if the project is financially feasible that can be collected. Mr. O'Kelly inquired about the criteria needed to a project. Staff advised that once the appeal process been adopted. The ount of assessment f would develop a recommendation to Council. There is no set formula to dproject will continue. Mr. O'Kelly asked if he has d w` the assessments if he is opposed to the project. Staff advised if the Ci oc with one property owner against the project, the City could still assess that property o t property owner can appeal the assessment. It is likely that the City would levy the assessor a assessment may be reduced if it is appealed. The next step in the process is the appeal pro ss. The City would then get appraisals. The fee for appraisals is a part of the project cost. Mr. Ed Frost, 733 Vicky Lane, asked about the location of the property line. Staff advised the City's right-of-way is about 30' feet from the center of Vicky Lane. Mr. Frost asked if the Bisel Amendment covers street and gutter. Staff advised the Bisel Amendment applies to hook up to City sewer and water. Mr. Frost asked that if there had been 5-6 property owners on Vicky Lane objecting the project through the appeal process, would the project still be divided among those that are in favor of the project? 6 • COUNCIL MINUTES JUNE 26, 2000 Staff advised the project would be divided among those who are in favor if the City decides to proceed. Mr. Frost asked if it would be cheaper for the property owner at 789 Vicky to hook up at a later date. Staff advised it is possible the assessment will be cheaper. The assessment will be based on standard rates for a future connection. It is also possible the assessment could be higher. The City would not use a deferred assessment. Ms. Brunberg asked if property owners will be "double dipped" if she opts out of the project. Staff advised that when the property owner at 789 Vicky opted out, the City was in the feasibility study portion of the project. If property owners opt out now, the City can levy the assessment. Ms. Brunberg asked when property owners could opt out without a penalt told by the City Council they could opt out at any time without a pen will be a levy on the assessment. She stated many residents let the neighbors an opportunity to obtain City utilities. She noted sh the Bisel Amendment. She clarified the appeal process with The City Attorney recommended residents consu0 l Ms. Brunberg asked if she is too late to ge She stated residents were staff is saying there ed only to give their 6 that she fell under ss. ey regarding the appeal process. Staff advised property owners cou to oject. The City does not want to proceed with a project that neighbors are ag ' t fin cially feasible for many of the homes to add City utilities. The City Attorney adv i e is whether or not residents want City sewer and water at the proposed cost. Mayor Bergeson advised the project was initiated by the neighborhood. The City responded to that request. If the majority of residents are opposed, the project won't proceed. He suggested staff conduct an informal survey of residents to see where they are at this point in the project. The City Attorney advised the Council has the right to continue the public hearing in order to obtain more information from residents. Council Member Carlson stated the City dropped the ball by not obtaining the appraisals. She noted the project was initiated by the neighborhood. She suggested taking a representative property from each subdivision for an appraisal. She stated the public hearing should be continued until next month so residents have more information. Mayor Bergeson stated he believes it is appropriate to continue the public hearing until the next Council meeting. Appraisals should be discussed at the next Council work session. COUNCIL MINUTES JUNE 26, 2000 Staff advised they proceeded with the public hearing due to the scheduling of the project. Mr. Peterson came forward and stated his appraiser indicated his property would increase in value in the amount of $5,000. The City Attorney stated residents seem to have doubts regarding the project due to the proposed assessments. He stated the issue is if residents are willing to pay that amount for utilities. The City needs to consider if appraisals should be obtained if residents are opposed to the project. Council Member Reinert stated that he understands the project is desired if the cost of assessments are the same as the increased value to the property. Mr. Dennis Gamboni, 762 Vicky Lane, asked when the project has to be done if it is not done now. Staff advised the City is in the project process now. The fact that there is development around the properties is not a factor. The City does not have a plan to provide uti r'� e to every resident. Mr. Bye came forward and clarified that the City can not asses increased. He expressed frustration regarding the City's opp his septic system has failed and can't be fixed. He state alue of the property is ning appraisals. He stated about how to proceed. Mayor Bergeson advised that assuming the C a =»rove z he assessment roll, the appraisals have to be done in 30 days. The City Attorney advised the app have to be done in 30 days. noted there is a provision i improvements out of hal a to be completed within 30 days. The appeals e apeal process if an appeal is made or not made. He er that prohibits the City can not pay for public Mr. Paul Stenger, 751 Lane, came forward and clarified that the assessment cost does not include hook up and oth costs. He noted that the appraisal will not include those costs. Staff advised the hook up charge is approximately $1,650 plus the cost of a plumber. The well may need to be capped if it is not being used. The well does not have to be removed. He reviewed the timing of the project noting that the assessment roll can be adopted in July, 2000. The project can then proceed this year weather permitting. He stated he will speak to the contractor regarding pricing and scheduling of the project. Mr. Richard Urbis, 7949 Nancy Drive, came forward and asked what will happen ten years from now if the road must be replaced. He asked if residents would be forced to put in City sewer and water and if the City would pay for part of those costs. Mayor Bergeson stated the City can not pay for roads. The cost would be assessed to property owners. The City prefers to install sewer and water when reconstructing roads. 8 COUNCIL MINUTES JUNE 26, 2000 Staff advised an exception would be if the project is part of a project that is on a ballot voted on by the entire City. It is unlikely that a street would be put in without sewer and water. Mr. Richard O'Kelly stated he is in favor of continuing the public hearing. He advised he would like the City to send a letter to each resident regarding their position on proceeding. Mr. Garman Torp, 793 Vicky Lane, came forward and asked if the Bisel Amendment gives you special hook up provisions, such as no water with sewer. Mayor Bergeson advised the Bisel Amendment does not provide special revisions regarding hook up. Staff advised the current code states that if a resident hooks up to sewer or water, they have seven (7) years to fully hook up. Ms. Lynn Schmidt, 7916 Nancy Drive, came forward and stated two (2) pro erty owners have failing septic systems. She asked if those residents can hook up to 79th Street Mayor Bergeson those residents should contact the City Engin Staff advised that situation has occurred before. Each s Mr. Gary Sarppo, 718 Vicky Lane, came forward proceed if residents are opposed to it. He Mayor Bergeson stated the City d the project does not proceed. 's at possibility. ated individually. that he assumes the project will not in bad shape and has many potholes. o '= s. The road will not be reconstructed however, if The Public Services for ised he will speak to the Public Works Department regarding the potholes. Council Member O'Don 11 moved to continue PUBLIC HEARING, Resolution No. 00 — 64, Adopt Assessment Roll, Twilight Acres 1st and 2m1 Addition, to the July 10, 2000, Council meeting. Council Member Reinert seconded the motion. Council Member Carlson amended the motion to include that the City obtain two (2) representative appraisals. Council Members agreed to the amendment. Mayor Bergeson amended the motion to include that staff will poll the affected property owners regarding the project proceeding. • Council Members agreed to the amendment. Mayor Bergeson requested that property owners be prompt with their response of the survey. Council Member Dahl suggested the possibility of a special meeting if residents want to move forward to enable the same price and schedule. 9 COUNCIL MINUTES JUNE 26, 2000 Staff advised they will contact the contractor regarding their flexibility. Council Member O'Donnell asked if staff is comfortable with obtaining only two (2) appraisals. The City Attorney stated the issue is time. He stated he does not believe that anyone will be able to provide a detailed appraisal within two (2) weeks. Council Member Reinert stated the property value with and without utilities is the biggest missing piece to the project. The appraisals are necessary. The City should take more time if necessary to make sure the process is done correctly. The City Attorney advised he does not want everyone to come to the next meeting with the expectation that two (2) appraisals have been done. He recommended the public hearing be continued to the July 24, 2000, Council meeting. Council Member Reinert suggested three (3) appraisals be done. Mayor Bergeson stated the Council can continue the public he Council meeting. �.in July 10, 2000, Council Member Reinert amended the motion to iia h City Attorney will determine how many appraisals are appropriate. Council Memb agre to the amendment. Motion carried unanimously. Mayor Bergeson called for ass Mayor Bergeson reco 8: eeting at 8:45 p.m. Consider Gary Uhd ' o ` " ubdivision at 265 Apollo Drive (3/5 Vote Required), Jeff Smyser — Staff advised this applic o on involves a request from Gary Uhde to create an eight (8) acre parcel in the Apollo Business Center for future development. A development proposal has been received and scheduled for a public hearing before the Planning and Zoning Board at their July 12, 2000, meeting. Mr. Uhde and the new owner, Marmon Keystone, would like to close on this sale prior to the Council's review of the site plan and have scheduled the closing for June 30, 2000. The property is Zoned Light Industrial and meets all zoning district requirements for width, depth and lot area. A shared driveway will be required on the east side of the site and the applicant will be dedicating a partial roadway on the west side that is intended to provide a second assess to this 8 acre parcel. This proposed roadway is also intended to provide access to the balance of the northern portion of the business center, which is approximately 14.8 acres in size. The two -(2) accesses provided are within the confines of the joint powers agreement with Anoka County. Although roadways are typically dedicated as part of a plat, staff believes this is an acceptable arrangement subject to City review and approval. 10 COUNCIL MINUTES JUNE 26, 2000 The City Engineer has reviewed this proposed subdivision and finds the access roadway to be acceptable in regard to width and location. Final plans for construction of the roadway, storm sewer improvements, and site grading are subject to review and approval of the City Engineer and will be considered with site development. Staff noted the Planning and Zoning Board recommended approval of the minor subdivision at their June 14, 2000, meeting. Staff recommended approval of the minor subdivision based on conditions. Council Member Carlson expressed concern regarding the assurances of no road issues when the large parcel develops. She noted the City has already vacated the dirt road. Staff advised Apollo Court will provide access to the site. Any development that occurs on that property will have to go through the entire City process. Any road issues can be addressed at that time. The City Engineer advised Apollo Court will be dedicated tot it h elopment of that parcel occurs. Council Member Reinert moved to approve minor sed on the following conditions: 1. Drainage and utility easem according to City Ordinance and subject to the review and appr ngineer. 2. An access agre be a ovided for the easterly driveway. 3. Park D .;; ': ati all be required subject to the Park Dedication ordinance. Council Member Dahl +ni d the motion. Motion carried unanimously. Consider Gary Uhde/Minor Subdivision at 295 Apollo Drive (3/5 Vote Required), Jeff Smyser — Staff advised this application involves a request for a minor subdivision in the Apollo Business Park that would create a four (4) acre parcel (Parcel D) just west of the proposed H & L Mesabi site. A public hearing is scheduled for the July, 2000, Planning and Zoning Board meeting to consider the site plan and some exterior storage on the site. For Council information, the applicant is anticipating a closing on the property prior to the development review, thus the minor subdivision request. The property in question is Zoned LI, Light Industrial and indicated as commercial on the City's Land Use Map. The proposed lot will meet all requirements of the ordinance pertaining to lot width, depth and area. Access to the site will be via a shared driveway with the parcel to the west. The City Engineer has reviewed the request and indicated no objection. The access locations are consistent with the City's Joint Powers Agreement with Anoka County. Drainage and utility 11 COUNCIL MINUTES JUNE 26, 2000 easements will be provided per City Code and access subject to the existing Joint Powers agreement with Anoka County. Staff recommended approval of the minor subdivision based on conditions. Staff noted the Planning and Zoning Board recommended approval of this minor subdivision at their June 14, 2000, meeting. Council Member Dahl moved to approve minor subdivision based on the following conditions: 1. Drainage and utility easements are provided subject to the approval of the City Engineer. 2. A shared driveway agreement shall be provided subject to the approval of the City Engineer. 3. Park Dedication shall be required based on the Park Dedication Ordinance. Council Member O'Donnell seconded the motion. Motion carried un Consider Dairy Queen Site Plan and Conditional Use Pe Staff advised the application includes a site plan and conditi 21st Avenue at Northern Lights Blvd. The site is zoned dive -through facility require a conditional use pe This site is part of a preliminary plat that was approved. It is best to clean up condition of approval for the D . . also discusses platting issues. The applicant for the requirements. Howev did not bring this proje uired), Jeff Smyser — for a new Dairy Queen on ssiness. Restaurants with a the City in December, 1997. No final plat requiring that a final plat be approved as a hi end, the report addresses the site plan, CUP, and project is not the landowner who is responsible for the platting sues must be resolved before additional development occurs. Staff City Council immediately after the hearing at the Planing and Zoning Board meeting. Staff w. ` hoping the plat issues could be resolved sooner so that several conditions of approval could be eliminated. However, in order to comply with the deadline law, the City must act on the applications by July 11, 2000. The review is based on the following plan submittals: Title Sheet 3/13/00 (Archnet) Dimensional Site Plan and Proposed Utilities 3/13/00 (Stevens Eng.) Grading, Drainage, and Erosion Control Plan 3/13/00 (Stevens Eng.) Site Plan 3/13/00 (Archnet) Exterior Elevations 4/4/00 (Archnet) Landscape Plan 4/4/00 (Archnet) 12 COUNCIL MINUTES JUNE 26, 2000 • Staff presented the analysis of the building, lighting, signage, landscaping, and plat issues in detail. Staff recommended approval of the site plan and conditional use permit based on conditions. • Staff noted the Planning and Zoning Board recommended approval of the applications at their April 12, 2000, meeting. Staff also noted a meeting was held last week with the landowner to discuss the outstanding issues. Council Member Carlson stated the City does have until July 11, 2000, to act on this item. She stated there are significant concerns relating to this issue. She suggested the Council continue this item with the intent that progress is made. Staff advised the Council can continue to the next Council meeting. Staff noted they do not anticipate that any changes will be made in the next two weeks relating to the outstanding issues. The City Engineer referred to a memo written regarding credit for oversizi g of utilities. He explained the process regarding this issue. Council Member Carlson read the memo from the City Engine d concern regarding this issue costing taxpayers money in the future. The City Engineer advised he did research regardi _. re t is not common to give a credit for over sizing. He noted the credit comes from the, Area Unit funds. Council Member Carlson asked if the enefits the property owner to the south. The City Engineer advised the propert t• so th does not benefit and will be served by a separate lateral connection. Council Member Carl -L ask i+ hich property is being referred to in the memo. The City Engineer advised the property o f Main Street will benefit from the additional depth. Council Member Carlso :a tated the cost needs to be agreed to. She stated there are many outstanding issues relating to this item. She stated that approval will give up the City's right not to act on this property. She stated it would be better for the Council to deny. It is up to the property owner to resolve the outstanding issues. The Community Development Director advised the applicant needs evidence of support from the City relating to this project. The conditions of approval are straightforward. He noted the applicant is on a time schedule. Mr. Archie Lessard, applicant, came forward and stated he is on a time constraint by the Dairy Queen. He needs to have the facility open by October 1, 2000. He stated that he hopes the City will not use his permit as leverage against Mr. Rehbein. He stated he would like to get approval so he can put pressure on the Dairy Queen. He noted he has spent a lot of money on this project. 13 COUNCIL MINUTES JUNE 26, 2000 Staff advised Mr. Lessard is in a situation he can't get out of. Staff is requesting approval so Mr. Lessard can get everything in place for when the final plat is completed. Staff noted they do not feel denial will protect the City's interest. Council Member Carlson advised she will withdraw her suggestion to continue. She stated that her concern is that the Council be informed on this issue on a regular basis. She noted she would like to discuss trunk credits at a Council work session. She asked for information regarding cost related to the project, details of other project, costs to taxpayers, and how to limit the credits to projects without setting a precedent. The City Engineer advised an overview will address the entire trunk assessment. He advised he will discuss and clarify the credits at a Council work session. Mayor Bergeson suggested staff give an overview of the assessment policy in general. Council Member O'Donnell moved to approve the site plan and conditional use permit based on the staff report and the following conditions: 1. The final plat must obtain approval from the City befog Dairy Queen. The conditions of approval for the pre plat approval. t is issued for the ust be met before final 2. Building material shall be as shown on re ed a rior elevations received April 4, 2000, showing EIFS as the primary mate ? h .�� orrugated metal. The fence around the cooler and the trash enclosure cedar wood, not corrugated metal. These materials shall be reflectet submittals. 3. A lighting plan for n site must be submitted and must meet City lighting requirements ding permit is issued. Lighting information shall include a photometric p1. . 1 figures of any lot and exterior building fixtures. Lighting shall be directed downw an • not up into the night sky. 4. Approval of the site plan and conditional use permit is not an implied approval of signage. All signs require a sign permit and must comply with the sign ordinance. 5. Proper building permits must be obtained prior to any construction and 1% of the construction costs must be put in escrow to insure completion of all site improvements. Prior to issuance of building permits, building plans must be reviewed by the City CSO for compliance with CPTED recommendations. 6. All permits required by the Rice Creek Watershed District shall be obtained prior to additional grading on the Dairy Queen site. In addition, failure to comply with Watershed District permit requirements will delay final plat approval by the City. 14 COUNCIL MINUTES JUNE 26, 2000 7. Final utility, grading, and drainage plans must obtain approval from the City Engineer and Rice Creek Watershed District. 8. The City Engineer's concerns, included in his memo of April 6, 2000, must be addressed to his satisfaction. 9. A landscaping plan must meet with the approval of the City Environmental Specialist. 10. Park dedication shall be paid per City policy. Council Member Reinert seconded the motion. Motion carried unanimously. FIRST READING, Ordinance No. 10 — 00, PCS Tower Moratorium (4/5 Vote Required), Jeff Smyser - Staff advised on May 22, 2000, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 00 — 67, directing staff to initiate the process for adopting a moratorium on new towers for personal wireless services, such as wireless telephone services. The resolution also set a public hearin: at the June 14, 2000, Planning and Zoning Board meeting. A moratorium on new tower apwill be treated as an amendment to the zoning ordinance, which requires a 4/5 vote. O 0 — 00 established the moratorium. MN Statue 462.355 Subd. 4 authorizes a municipality the purpose of protecting a planning process when location study. This study will inventory existing where new facilities likely will be needed locations and minimize the number o The intent is to include tower one (1), consistency with th compatibility with pr standards are adequate m ordinance (moratorium) for tudy. Staff has begun a towers in the area with the goal of determining taff can do this, staff will plan for those nin': in the larger land use planning of the City to ensure: provisions of the Comprehensive Plan; two (2), e land uses; and three (3), that official controls and performance Staff advised they are as g surrounding communities to join in the study. With their cooperation, staff hopes to minimize the number -of new towers in all the communities and still provide for full PCS service in compliance with federal law. Staff is also asking for the cooperation of the providers of wireless services, such as the firms that lease space on the City's water towers. Staff hopes the study will be beneficial to all involved, including the participating cities and the wireless service providers. The City Attorney has advised that once the City Council initiated the process by directing staff to prepare a moratorium ordinance, the City can forestall approvals of applications for new towers until the study is completed. 15 COUNCIL MINUTES JUNE 26, 2000 The following schedule outlines the anticipated timeline. The public hearing occurred at the June 14, 2000, Planning and Zoning Board meeting. The Planning and Zoning Board recommended approval of Ordinance No. 10 — 00 with a unanimous vote of the six- (6) members present. May 22, 2000 City Council meeting: initiate process for adopting 90 -day moratorium by directing staff to prepare ordinance and setting public hearing date June 14, 2000 June 26, 2000 July 10, 2000 July 17, 2000 August 16, 2000 November 14, 2000 Public hearing at Planning and Zoning Board meeting First reading of ordinance at City Council meeting Second reading of ordinance at City Council meeting Ordinance published in newspaper Ordinance effective (30 days after publication) 90 -day moratorium expires. Council Member Dahl moved to approve FIRST READING Council Member Carlson seconded the motion. Council Member Carlson voted yea. Council M voted yea. Council Member Reinert vote Motion carried unanimously. PUBLIC HEARING, FI Easement Vacation, settlement of this matt the two -(2) parties con 4 co. 10 — 00, as presented. • voted yea. Council Member O'Donnell • geson voted yea. G, Ordinance No. 99 —17, Oak Brook Peninsula 1— Staff advised no new information has been received regarding r of the affected property owners. It is staff's understanding that mediate. Staff advised this item should be continued to the July 24, 2000, City Council Meeting. Council Member Dahl moved to continue Public Hearing, First Reading, Ordinance No. 99 —17, Oak Brook Peninsula Easement Vacation, to the July 24, 2000, City Council meeting. Council Member Reinert seconded the motion. Motion carried unanimously. UNFINISHED BUSINESS Consideration of June 7, 2000, Council Work Session Minutes — Council Member Carlson expressed many concerns regarding the minutes. Council Member Carlson inquired whether or not the previous Council had seen a four -(4) lane highway plan for Highway 49. She corrected page 2 to read "amount to a multiplier of 1.5". She also expressed concern regarding the detail of public comment relating to the highway project. 16 COUNCIL MINUTES JUNE 26, 2000 411 Staff advised the minute taker was directed to summarize the public comment. TimeSaver is in the process of transcribing the tape verbatim. Council Member Dahl also expressed concern regarding the detail of public comment. It was the consensus of Council to pull the June 7, 2000, Council work session minutes until staff has updated them. Consideration of May 22, 2000, Council Meeting Minutes — Council Member Carlson corrected page 6, paragraph 7, to read "The average fee on the survey was over $4,500 three (3) years ago". Council Member O'Donnell moved to approve the May 22, 2000, Council meeting minutes, as amended. Council Member Dahl seconded the motion. Motion carried unanimously. Consideration of May 22, 2000, Special Council Meeting Minutes — Council Member O'Donnell moved to approve the May 22, 2000, Special Council meeting minute nted. Council Member Dahl seconded the motion. Motion carried unanimously, NEW BUSINESS - None COMMUNITY CALENDAR JUNE 26, 2000 T • City Council Meeting, Monday, June 2 City Council Comprehensive P1 a.m. Environmental Boar Y 10, 2000: sion, Wednesday, June 28, 2000, 7:00 a.m. — 8:30 Wednesday, June 28, 2000, 6:30 p.m. City Hall Closed, Ind deice Day, Tuesday, July 4, 2000 Council Work Session, Wednesday, July 5, 2000, 5:30 p.m. City Council Comp Plan Work Session, Saturday, July 8, 2000, 7:00 a.m. — 9:00 a.m. Joint Meeting with City of Hugo, Saturday, July 8, 2000, 9:00 a.m. — 11:00 a.m. City Council Meeting, Monday, July 10, 2000, 6:30 p.m. EDAC Meeting, Thursday, July 13, 2000, 7:00 a.m. COUNCIL MINUTES ADJOURN JUNE 26, 2000 There being no further business, Council Member Dahl moved to adjourn at 9:40 p.m. Council Member Carlson seconded the motion. Motion carried unanimously. These minutes were considered and approved at the regular Council Meeting, July 24, 2000. Ry -Cel Gaustad, CMC City Clerk Transcribed by: Kim Points TimeSaver Off Site Secretarial, Inc. 18 ngeso , Mayor