Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes - 1997/02/10Page 1 1 ,_ ' ~ ~ 1 ~~ , • February 10, 1997 ~ I " '% ~, Mounds View City Council r- '~~ t ~ ~ ' PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW RAMSEY COUNTY, MINNESOTA • Regular Meeting February 10, 1997 Mounds View City Hall 2401 Hwy. 10, Mounds View, MN 55112 ********************************************************************************** CALL TO ORDER The Mounds View City Council was called to order by Mayor McCarty at 7:00 p.m. on February 10, 1997. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE MEMBERS PRESENT: Mayor McCarty, Council members Trude, Quick, Koopmeiners and Stigney ALSO PRESENT: Chuck Whiting, Clerk Administrator Pam Sheldon, Community Development Director Jim Ericson, Planning Associate Michael Ulrich, Director of Public Works Jennifer Bergman, Housing Inspector Bob Long, City Attorney ADDTITONS TO THE AGENDA: There were no additions to the Agenda. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: January 27,1997 -City Council Meeting: MOTION/SECOND: Koopmeiners/Stigney to approve the Minutes of the City Council Meeting on January 27, 1997, as presented. VOTE: 5 ayes 0 nays Motion Carried ACCEPTANCE OF ADVISORY COMMLSSION MINUTES: Page 2 • February 10, 1997 Mounds View City Council Planning Commission Minutes -November 20.1996. December 4.1996 and December 18.1996: MOTION/SECOND: Quick/Koopmeiners to accept the Planning Commission Minutes for meetings held on November 20,1996, December 4, 1996 and December 18, 1996. VOTE: 5 ayes 0 nays Motion Carried SPEC);AL ORDER OF BUSIlYESS: There was no Special Order of Business. CONSENT AGENDA: Mr. Whiting read the Consent Agenda as follows: A. Set a Public Hearing for 7:20 p.m., Monday, February 24,1997 to Consider Ordinance No. 594, An Ordinance amending Chapter 606, 607, and 1005 of the Mounds view Municipal Code related to the requirement to mow tall grasses and creating an exemption for wetland and native vegetation. B. Set a Public Hearing for 7:25 p.m., Monday, February 24, 1997 to Consider Ordinance No. 595, An Ordinance adding day care centers and group nurseries as a conditional use in the B-1, B-2, B-3 and I-1 zoning . districts. C. Consideration of Resolution No. 5085, approving a joint powers agreement with the Ramsey County GIS Users Group. D. Adopt Resolution No. 5086, Approving Just and Correct Claims Against City Funds. E. Adopt Resolution No. 5084, Approving the 1997 Labor Agreement Contract with Public Works and Parks Maintenance Bargaining Unit. F. Approval of Award of Bid for Well Head Maintenance. G. Approval for Hiring of Mechanic Position - Mr. Whiting asked that this item be removed from the Consent Agenda for further discussion. H. Resolution N0.5087, Approving Retainer for Legal Fees. I. Appointment of Planning Commission Chairperson. J. LICENSES FOR APPROVAL: HVAC -Expires June 30.1997 Gemmill Heating and A/C Inc. -New SIGNS Elements, Inc. -New Page 3 February 10, 1997 i Mounds View City Council Council member Stigney asked that Item C be removed for further discussion. Council member Trude asked that Item F be removed for discussion. MOTION/SECOND: Quick/Trude to approve the Consent Agenda without Items C, F and G. VOTE: 5 ayes 0 nays Motion Carried Discussion on Consent Agenda Items: Mr. Stigney asked how much staff time would be involved and how much work wouid be entailed at this time. Ms. Sheldon explained that a proposal has been developed with the other 3 5 W corridor cities to do a limited number of layers (the comprehensive plan desigQation, the zoning categories, land use) and she is hopeful that those layers could be added this year. As far as additional layers, she felt the city would want to put together an overall game plan. MOTION/SECOND: Stigney/Trude to approve Item C) Consideration of Resolution No. 5085, Approving a Joint Powers Agreement with the Ramsey County GIS Users Group. VOTE: 5 ayes 0 nays Motion Carried • Council member Trude had several questions about Item F on the Consent Agenda (Approval of Award of Bid for Well Head Maintenance). She noted a typographical error in the Staff Recommendation portion of the memo (Should Be $19,627.00). She also noted that there were no requests to amend the budget to allow for the additional costs and wondered if this item could be tabled until the next Council meeting. She stated she would prefer that an item such as this be approved in resolution form. Mr. Ulrich explained that he had some concerns delaying the approval of the bid award as a 10-day Notice to Proceed must be given as well. Mr. Kesel explained that the budget amendment and transfers would be done via resolution. MOTIONlSECOND; Trude/Koopmeiners to approve staffs recommendation to award the bid, amending the amount to $19,627. VOTE: 5 ayes 0 nays Motion Carned Mr. Whiting noted that Item G of the Consent Agenda was for the approval of hiring a mechanic. Staff was informed today that the Number 1 candidate will not be accepting the position. The Number 2 candidate has not been contacted, but staff would like authorization to offer the position to him, contingent upon him meeting the city's testing requirements. Mr. Ulrich noted that Candidate #2 does not have a DOT Truck Inspection Certificate (something not required but rather desired), but it can be obtained by attending aone-day seminar. MOTION/SECOND: Trude/Quick to approve the hiring of Candidate #2, contingent upon them successfully • completing a physical, alcohol and drug testing and background reference check. Page 4 February 10, 1997 • Mounds View City Council A discussion followed. Mayor McCarty noted that this motion will limit staff to the second candidate only. Council member Trude asked that her motion be amended to approve the hiring of the best candidate available from the pool of candidates contingent upon them meeting background and testing requirements. Council member Quick was in approval of the amendment. Council member Stigney asked if this position will follow the same guideline as in the past -with anticipated salary increases at three months, six months, one year and then a Cost of Living adjustment. He noted he is uncomfortable with this policy. Mayor McCarty noted that a Personnel Policy meeting has akeady been set to discuss this issue. Mr. Ulrich noted that it will follow the existing hiring guidelines. VOTE: 5 ayes 0 nays Motion Carried There were no requests or comments from the floor. • COUNCIL BU5IlVE55: A. Statue Report on Pedestrian Bridge over Highway 10. Ms. Pam Sheldon, Director of Community Development gave a brief overview of the Pedestrian Bridge project. She explained that in 1994, the City applied to the federal government to obtain funds for a pedestrian bridge at the Long Lake Road and Highway 10 intersection. That grant request was for $600,000, of which $480,000 would be federal money and $120,000 would be a local match. The grant was awarded to the City. To cover the match, $190,000 of local funds were set aside. The sources of these funds were Franchise Fees, Special Project Funds, General Fund, Street Light Fund, and Activity Fund. Since the grant was awarded, approximately $85,000 in additional items have been identified. She noted the possible funding sources for the additional items. Ms. Sheldon noted that at the last Council work session, a status report was presented and at that time, the Council directed staff to put it on the Council agenda for further discussion. Ms. Sheldon noted that most of the funding for this project are from Federal tax dollars. This money is available to many communities and if it had not been awarded to Mounds View, it would still have gone to another local community for this type of project. She noted that in order for the City to keep the grant, the bridge needs to be built this summer (by October 1, 1997), so there is a need to come to a quick resolution on this matter. Mayor McCarty stated he has had difficulty with this project from the very beginning. He stated he anticipated that there would be a public hearing and public involvement process prior to the approval of this project. One of his concerns is the source of funding on the local share. Council member Trude explained that there were Public Hearings and public meetings. There was public input from Spring to Fall and people were involved even prior to the approval of the grant. Page 5 • February 10, 1997 Mounds View City Council David Jahnke, 8428 Eastwood Road, asked if the Federal government would be matching funds for the additional expenses which have been identified after the grant was approved. Furthermore, did the stafffail, when projecting the costs, to get accurate figures? Mayor McCarty explained that the federal goven~uc-ent matched on the bridge construction ($471,910) and the local match was $117,977. In addition, there is a bridge design and inspection cost, there are contingency costs that the city must pay for in addition to the grant agreement. Ms. Sheldon explained that most of the additional costs are due to the change in the design of the ramp which was done after the grant request was submitted and a citizen committee met with a consultant and staff and recommended that the ramp be changed from a long, switch back design to a spiral design. Mayor McCarty explained that the city has experienced a 25% cost estimate overrun thus far. Under the city charter and special assessment projects, if there is a 10% cost ovemm, the project is not done. A representative of the Ramsey County Library Board stated she is in favor of the Pedestrian Bridge. They feel it is an intelligent approach to getting people across the road to where public access ought to be allowed. The Ramsey County Library Board recommended to the Ramsey County Board of Commissioners that they approve a conveyance of a requested wallcway and bridge easement to the City of Mounds View. They are dismayed to see that the project is being reconsidered at this time. Bruce Brasaemle, 5127 Long Lake Road, stated his concerns center around safety. He is a bicycle rider and he often sees teens riding across the intersection, going against the red light. The bridge will give them an opportunity to not have to wait for the light. If the city does not go ahead and there is a fatality, what has been gained? He believes the Council does have the opportunity to reconsider where the matching funds come from. However, he feels the council should move forward and not interfere with the construction of the bridge in order to do that. Julie Olson, 2663 Lake Court Circle, wondered what things the grant funds could be used for other than the construction of a pedestrian bridge, and did the council ever review the other options? Ms. Sheldon noted that the Transportation Act which was passed in 1991 created different pools of funding. Some went for streets and highways, some for trailways. Mounds View's grant application was submitted under the ?railway section as it will provide a connection to other parts of the community. Ms. ?rude explained that if the funds are not used by Mounds View, the funds will go into another trailway project fund to be awarded to another community. Ms. Olson stated she feels there has not been enough input or direction to the full body of Mounds View in order to have an opinion on the project. She took this opportunity to present a list of names of residents who are definitely opposed to the project to council and staff and stated she would be getting additional names and telephone numbers from those unable to attend the public meetings. She wondered why the city is not sticking to the charter with regard to cost overruns. Russell Nordstrom, 2536 W. County Road H2, feels the bridge is just another example of government telling parents that it isn't necessary to teach kids common sense. He feels there are plenty of stop lights. There will • be no laws forcing kids to use the bridge. He feels Mounds View Square is going to benefit the most from the project, not the city. He is not in favor of the project. Page 6 • February 10, 1997 Mounds View City Council Vivian Henningfield, 2559 Mound View Drive, stated she has difficulty crossing Highway 10 and often ends up crossing on a red light in order to get across the intersection. Something needs to be done. Mayor McCarty stated he feels the timing of the lights needs to be looked at again. Another resident commented, however, that the lights are tied in with others on Highway 10 and therefore it is difficult to have the timing adjusted. Dean (inaudible), 5415 Erickson Road, stated everything was covered in previous Council meetings. People had opportunities to listen, voice their opinions, etc. He feels the issue of safety alone should justify the project costs. He thinks of the children's safety, and is willing to pay higher taxes to protect them. Tom Ernstor, 2504 County Road H2, asked if anyone has looked at the traffic as it could end up in three years with the 610 cut off. As he understands, traffic on highway 10 will cut down somewhat. Mayor McCarty stated the city does not have a professional opinion on this and it will likely require an independent traffic study. Council member Quick stated information was provided some time ago and it is projected that 610 will lower the traffic on Highway 10, but almost immediately increase again in the way of local traffic. Carol Golden, 2749 Lake Court Drive, stated she was at a mceting last year on this issue and never heard . anything other than the safety issue of children before and after school. She feels the bridge will only add to the number of distractions to drivers on Highway 10 and she wonders how many people it will really benefit. Mayor McCarty stated he does not believe a demographic study attached to the bridge. Jim Schmidt, 5446 Erickson Road, stated he is in favor of the bridge. He attended many of the meetings last year on the issue. He feels the pedestrian bridge would directly benefit himself and many other children in his area. His children are involved in little league baseball as well as basketball in the Winter and they are constantly needing to cross Highway 10. He would like to be able to allow his children someday to go to practice or to the library without having to be supervised. Under no circumstance would he allow them to cross Highway 10 as it steads now. He feels it is difficult for him and others in his area to access that part of the city and it would provide a great link and connect the community. He wondered if the traffic signal costs would be covered by the State. Mayor McCarty stated this is a local project and therefore the state would not cover the cost. A brief discussion followed in regard to other funding options. Pam Starr, 7778 Woodlawn Drive, stated the local funds that would need to be spent are well worth a child's safety. She thinks many residents who have children would be overjoyed to have the pedestrian bridge and believes many of those who attend the meetings to voice objection are those who do not have children and who would likely not use the bridge. She feels many parents would gladly pay a little more in taxes to support the bridge. She feels if the city does not proceed they will just be wasting a valuable resource and if the city wants to look for alternative financing, they should do so but they should not holdup the construction of the bridge. • Ann Weber, 2512 County Road H2, asked if sidewalks will be necessary in the future along Highway 10 to funnel people to the bridge, and if so, who will pay for that? She doesn't feel it is realistic that people will Page 7 February 10, 1997 • Mounds View City Council cross at one point on Highway 10, unless sidewalks are provided. Furthermore, if safety is such an issue, why haven't more sidewalks been added. Dave Mehick, (inaudible-Spring Lake Park Road), noted the city has expended $55,000 on the project which cannot be recouped. He wondered if the city has thought about the liability of not proceeding with the project after spending this amount, should there be a severe injury or fatality crossing Highway 10. Jerry Linke, 2319 Knoll Road, stated in response to the comment on lack of input, there was a Trailways Committee that met and Focus 2000 talked about the separation between the North and the South areas of the community. The bridge would help to identify Mounds View. Information was provided to residents as to what they could expect as far as tax increases if the project were funded that way. Additionally, the $190,000 local cost was discussed at numerous meetings. Mr. Linke noted a Public Hearing was held before the actual grant process. In response to the benefits to Mounds View Square versus the benefits to the city, he feels if the city can keep one business due to better access, it is also a benefit to the city. Tamara McBride, stated she is a student at Edgewood Middle School and she is also concerned about safety. Often she is assigned report projects which require her to go to the Ramsey County Library. It is difficult to get transportation there and often the kids end up putting themselves at risk by having to cross Highway 10. She is in support of the bridge. Marshall Johnston, 5701 Bunker Hill Drive, asked if the council had considered using MSA funding to finance part of the project. He noted that another financing option to consider is an interest-free advancement. Jerry Linke stated MSA funding was discussed early on, but at that time the city was told they could not use it for this purpose. There were no fiuther public comments and Mayor McCarty stated there are several issues he would like the staffto examine before a final decision is made on this project. He proceeded to address these concerns. MOTION/SECOND: Trude/Quick that the Council continue to allow the pedestrian bridge to move forward. Council member Trade stated she has had several telephone calls from residents who were very alarmed that since the new council members took office the council has suddenly been backtracking and looking at every issue that was voted on in the past two to three years. She is very concerned about that precedent occurring on any project and feels it give the city a bad reputation in the metropolitan community. She is concerned about the city's reputation when they go out to apply for other grants. She thinks irreparable harm will be done to the community if the city turns its back on a grant that it went out and sought based on community input. She would ask that everyone give this matter sincere consideration. MOTION/SECOND: Koopmeiners/Stigney to postpone the council's decision on the pedestrian bridge until the February 24, 1997 City Council Meeting. VOTE: 4 ayes 1 nay (Trade) Motion Carried Mayor McCarty asked Attorney Long to check out Section 804, Subdivision 3 of the Charter, to see if the pedestrian bridge would be affected by this section of the Charter. • Page 8 February 10, 1997 • Mounds View City Council B. Final Reading and Adoption of Ordinance No. 588, An Ordinance Amending Chapter 1124 of the Mounds View Zoning Code Relating to the Location and Design of Wireless Communication Facilities within the City of Mounds View. Mr. Jim Ericson, Planning Associate, explained that the first reading of Ordinance No. 588 was held on January 27th, where some issues were brought up by industry representatives. The City Attorney researched the issues and he felt there was no need to change the ordinance as it was written. A copy of the ordinance was also sent to SEH and they felt the ordinance covered the essential topics and supported the requirement that the plans be prepared by a registered engineer. He did not feel any changes needed to be made. MOTION/SECOND: Quick/Koopmeiners to Adopt Ordinance No. 588, An Ordinance Amending Chapter 1124 of the Mounds View Zoning Code Relating to the Location and Design of Wireless Communication Facilities Within the City of Mounds View. William Werner, 2765 Sherwood Road asked if the ordinance excludes lattice towers. Ms. Sheldon explained that lattice towers would only be allowed per special city council approval. ROLL CALL VOTE: Mayor McCarty Council member Trude Council member Koopmeiners Council member Stigney Council member Quick yes yes yes yes yes Motion Carried C. Request for Council Workshop Regarding the Bel Rae for February 13,1997. Mr. Whiting stated he would like to schedule a workshop, per council's request, to go over the work that staff has been doing on trying to bring this project to a conclusion. He would like to schedule this meeting for Thursday, February 13, 1997 at 6:30 p.m., and have it open to the public and televised. MOTION/SECOND: McCarty/Stigney to schedule a Council Workshop Meeting for Thursday, February 13, 1997 at 6:30 p.m. to discuss the status of the Bel Rae project. VOTE: 5 ayes 0 nays Motion Carried D. Setting of Public Hearing for Tau Increment Financing District. Attorney Bob Long provided the Council with a list of requirements which must be met prior to the Public Hearing for Tax Increment Financing District. MOTION/SECOND: Quick/Tnide to Schedule a Public Hearing for a Tax Increment Financing District on March 24,1997 at 7:30 p.m. • VOTE: 5 ayes 0 nays Motion Carned Page 9 February 10, 1997 • Mounds View City Council E. Consideration of Resolution No. 5088, Authorizing the Filing of an Application Under the Minnesota Cities Participation Program to Fund a Loan Program for First Time Home Buyers with the Mortgage Including Rehabilitation Funds. Jennifer Bergman, Housing Inspector, explained that the funds received from this program will be used to fund mortgages for first time home buyers for families in the City of Mounds View. Over the past three years, the city has received approximately $500,000 for this program and has been able to provide mortgages for seven families. The grant application is due by February 18, 1997 and the city should be notified of funding by the end of March or beginning of April. MI3FA will deternvne the amount of funds available. MOTION/SECOND: Trude/Stigney to Approve Resolution No. 5088, Authorizing the Filing of an Application Under the Minnesota Cities Participation Program to Fund a Loan Program for First Time Home Buyers with the Mortgage Including Rehabilitation Funds. VOTE: 5 ayes 0 nays Motion Carried REPORTS• Report of Council members: Trade: No report. Koopmeiners: No report. Sti¢nev: Mr. Stigney stated he has received calls from residents who claim that there has been a lack of audio on some of the recent televised Council Meetings. uic No report. Report of Mayor McCarty: No report. Report of Ckrk Administrator: No report. Report of Staff: No report. Report of Attorney: No report. Mayor McCarty noted that the next Council Work Session will be held on March 3, 1997 at 6:00 p.m. The next Council Meeting is on February 24, 1997 at 7:00 p.m. MOTION/SECOND: Koopmeiners/Stigney to adjourn the meeting at 8:57 p.m. VOTE: 5 ayes 0 nays Motion Carried Respectfully submitted, • Tamara D. Saeflce Page 10 February 10, 1997 • Mounds View City Council Recording Secretary • •