HomeMy WebLinkAbout01-31-96 CCMLAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIUPLANNING COMMISSION WORKSHOP
WEDNESDAY, JANUARY 31, 1996
Mayor John called the workshop to order at 7:00 p.m. in the council chambers. PRESENT:
CITY COUNCIL:Hunt, Conlin, John, Johnston, DeLapp, PLANNING COMMISSION:Berg
(departed 9:35 p.m.), Helwig, Colombo, Carlson, Monette, CITY STAFF: Administrator Kueffner,
Planner Terwedo, Public Works Supv. Olinger, FIRE DEPT:Malmquist.
I.AGENDA
ADD: #3. Discussion on Composting
M/S/P Johnston/Hunt - to approve the January 31, 1996 agenda as amended. (Motion passed 5-
0).
2. MINUTES: January23, 1996
M/S/P Conlin/Hunt -to approve the January 23, 1996 workshop minutes as presented. (Motion
passed 5-0).
3. Discussion on Composting
Since the information the City received on composting was misrepresented, Council member
Conlin asked that the City Council direct the Solid Waste Advisory Committee discuss the future
of the City's compost program. Councilman Hunt suggested the committee also look at a City -
run compost facility versus a private composting business. Administrator Kueffner has invited Sig
Scheurle of the Office of Environmental Assistance to attend the Solid Waste Advisory
Committee meeting on February 5, 1996,
M/S/P Conlin/Hunt - to direct the Solid Waste Advisory Committee to review the City's
composting program as a service the City provides. (Motion passed 5-0).
4. Public Works Site Selection (Continued)
Mayor John read out loud a letter from Judy Blackford. Mayor John explained the Council had
received a letter from Judy Blackford at their January 23rd workshop, but because of the late
hour it was not read out loud.
Joe Baumann, 9383 Jane Circle N., had talked to the Minnesota Lung Assoc. about the hazards
of a compost site. The Council asked if this could be clarified - what type of composting (was it
just yard waste) were they talking about, was this his (rep. from MN Lung Assoc.) opinion or the
Association's opinion.
In regard to the site along Ideal and Hwy 5 owned by 3M suggested by Commissioner McLeod,
Councilman Hunt contacted 3M and they were not interested in selling. One of the criteria for
selecting a site was the ability to have a willing seller.
H = High M = Medium L = Low
SITE #1 - BERSCHEN'S PROPERTY
Road configuration is awkward
Neighbors object
Close visibility of operations
Runoff maybe worse
(cannot make runoff more than existing)
Prime Ag land
Lacks natural vegetation (screening)
"Negative impact on neighborhood
Has to be rezoned
May be in shoreland district
"close proximity to homes - more homes
SITE #2 - RICHERT PROPERTY
Site access difficult (slopes)
Potential neighborhood concern
Extensive site preparation
10 acre site not fully usable
Within Well advisory area
May need to remove old oak growth
Additional land may need condemnation
4 buildings on -site to be removed
Site configuration awkward (more difficult)
SITE #4 - BROCKMAN PROPERTY
Interference school bus vs. equipment
Exit quickly onto State Hwy
Loss of commercial tax base
Adverse "image"
Unknown seller
Value is high ($ /acres)
Not central to majority maintenance activity
Probability
M
H
M
M
H
H
H
Probability
H
H
H
H
H
H
H
H
Probability
H
H
H
H
H
H
H
Seriousness PxS
M
H
M Site Design
M
Seriousness PxS
M ---
H
M ---
L tank & booster
H
H avoid if possible
L
M ---
Seriousness PxS
H
H
L?
? Design
M
The Friedrich site (Site #3) and Manning Avenue site (Site #5) were not considered because of
the low scoring of criteria established to evaluate the sites at the January 23,1996 meeting.
Councilman Hunt indicated he would make a motion at the February 6th council meeting to direct
the Planning Commission to remove off the table the public hearing on the rezoning of the
Berschen property and ask the Planning Commission to make a recommendation to the council
on a site selected for the public works facility.
5. OTHER
Council member Johnston has talked to an individual who requested comparative study for the
maintenance dept. as the City did for the fire dept.
M/S/P Hunt/Conlin -to adjourn the workshop at 10:00 p.m. (Motion passed 5-0).
MINUTES APPROVED:January 31, 1996
LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIUPLANNING COMMISSION WORKSHOP
JANUARY 23, 1996
Mayor John opened up the workshop at 7:00 p.m. in the council chambers. PRESENT: CITY
COUNCIL: Hunt, Conlin, John, Johnston, DeLapp, STAFF:City Planner Terwedo, Administrator
Kueffner, Public Works Supvr. Olinger. PLANNING COMM ISSION:McLeod, Colombo,
Armstrong, Helwig, Carlson (Departed 10:30), Monette (Arrived 9:30, Departed 10:30). FIRE
DEPARTMENT: Malmquist
1. AGENDA
M/S/P Hunt/Johnston - to approve the January 23, 1996 Workshop agenda as presented.
(Motion passed 5-0).
2. Definition of Objectives and Site Selection for Maintenance Garage:
City Council, Planning Commission, Public Works Supvr., Fire Chief, Staff
The purpose of the workshop was to select a site for the relocated maintenance facility through a
decision analysis process. Maps of each option were reviewed and aerials were provided on
sites 1-3. A list of requirements were developed and rated: (W) want, (R) must as follows:
W
1.
Adequate screening from surroundings
W
2.
Flat, not much slope
M
3.
To be appox. 10 acres
M
4.
To have room for future expansion
W
5.
Centrally located to maintenance needs
W
6.
Located on City street (not State hwy)
W
7.
Site to hold all functions --vehicle storage, external storage
W
8.
Located remote from homes (500 yds to separation)
W
9.
Design complimentary to residential/commercial areas
W
10.
Does not create additional safety hazards
m
11.
On ground suitable for services and footings
W
12.
Least costly land
W
13.
Easily accessible
W
14.
Suitable for long term fire needs
W
15.
Does not devalue surroundings
W
16.
Affordable
W
17.
Meets needs of clean-up day
W
18.
Least impact on surrounding residential
W
19.
Space for support of Parks Dept.
W
20.
Feeder roads with adequate load capacity
By paper ballot, these 20 requirements were evaluated as to importance. The top 10
requirements would be used as criteria for site evaluation. Each of the five sites were evaluated
against this criteria as follows:
LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIUPLANNING COMMISSION WORKSHOP 1-23-96
SITE #1 BERSCHENS PROPERTY (Julep and 45th Street)
Criteria
Wt.
Sc
TOTAL
1.
Site holds all functions
10
10
100
2.
Centrally located to mtnce needs
9
10
90
3.
No additional hazards
8
8
64
4.
Location on City street
7
10
70
5.
Feeder roads w/adequate load capacity
6
10
60
6.
Least impact on surrounding resid area
5
4
20
7.
500 yd separation from homes
0
0
0
8.
Easily accessible
3
8
24
9.
Flat, not much slope
2
10
20
10.
Design compatible to site
1
10
10
458
SITE #2 RICHERT PROPERTY (Jamaca Avenue N.)
Criteria
Wt.
Sc
TOTAL
1.
Site holds all functions
10
7.4
74
2.
Centrally located to mtnce needs
9
9
81
3.
No additional hazards
8
9
72
4.
Location on City street
7
10
70
5.
Feeder roads w/adequate load capacity
6
10
60
6.
Least impact on surrounding resid. area
5
5.4
27
7.
500 yd separation from homes
0
0
0
8.
Easily accessible
3
9
27
9.
Flat, not much slope
2
3.1
6
10.
Design compatible to site
1
10
10
427
SITE #3 FRIEDRICH PROPERTY (Stillwater Lane N.
by Sunfish
Park)
Criteria
Wt.
Sc
TOTAL
1.
Site holds all functions
10
9.1
90
2.
Centrally located to mtnce needs
9
8
72
3.
No additional hazards
8
3
24
4.
Location on City street
7
9
63
5.
Feeder roads w/adequate load capacity
6
2
12
6.
Least impact on surrounding resid. area
5
9
45
7.
500 yd separation from homes
0
0
0
8.
Easily accessible
3
5
15
9.
Flat, not much slope
2
5
10
10.
Design compatible to site
1
10
10
341
SITE #4 BROOKMAN PROPERTY (39th Street and County Road 17)
Criteria
Wt.
Sc
TOTAL
1.
Site holds all functions
10
10
100
2.
Centrally located to mtnce needs
9
5
45
3.
No additional hazards
8
8
64
4.
Location on City street
6
6
36
5.
Feeder roads w/adequate load capacity
7
10
70
6.
Least impact on surrounding resid. areas
5
10
50
7.
500 yd separation from homes
0
0
0
8.
Easily accessible
3
10
30
9.
Flat, not much slope
2
10
20
10.
Design compatible to site
1
10
10
LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIUPLANNING COMMISSION WORKSHOP 1-23-96 3
SITE #5 SCREATON PROPERTY (30th Street and County Road 15)
Criteria
Wt.
Sc
TOTAL
1.
Site holds all functions
10
10
100
2.
Centrally located to mtnce needs
9
2
18
3.
No additional hazards
8
6
48
4.
Location on City street
7
10
70
5.
Feeder roads w/adequate load capacity
6
8
48
6.
Least impact on surrounding resid. area
5
8
45
7.
500 yd separation from homes
0
0
0
8.
Easily accessible
3
8
24
9.
Flat, not much slope
2
10
20
10.
Design compatible to site
1
10
10
425
378
Planning Commission member Jim McLeod suggested reviewing another site owned by 3M along
Ideal Avenue and Hwy 5.
The Council received comments and rankings from Planning Commission member, Jeff Berg,
and a letter from Judy Blackford, 9765 45th St., on the location of the new public works facility.
The council decided since the hour was late they would proceed with the decision analysis and
look at the negatives of each site at another workshop.
M/S/P Hunt/Conlin - to postpone consideration of maintenance site selection until Wednesday,
January 31,1996, 7 p.m. (Motion passed 5-0).
3. Annexation Issue
Council member Rita Conlin explained she had talked to Amy Sherman, Oakdale -Lake Elmo
Review, who is writing an article for The Review regarding annexation legislation. Sherman had
talked to Peg Larsen, state legislator, who stated it seems unlikely that an annexation bill will be
considered this legislative session. At a council meeting in 1995, the Council requested
Representative Larsen and Senator Laidig to author an annexation bill.
M/S/P Conlin/John - to Invite Representative Larsen and Senator Laidig to attend the February 6,
1996 council meeting . (Motion passed 5-0).
M/S/P Hunt/DeLapp - to adjourn the workshop at 11:00 p.m. (Motion passed 5-0).
------------------
Respectfully submitted by Sharon Lumby, Deputy City Clerk