Loading...
City Council Minutes 05-27-2003MINUTES REGULAR MEETING - MONTICELLO CITY COUNCIL May 27, 2003 - 7 p.m. Members Present: Roger Carlson, Glen Posusta, Robbie Smith, Brian Stumpf and Bruce Thielen. Members Absent: None 1. Call to Order and PledLFe of Allegiance. Mayor Thielen called the meeting to order at 7 p.m. and declared a quorum present. The Pledge of Allegiance was said. 2. Approve minutes of May 14, 2003 regular Council meeting. BRIAN STUMPF MOVED TO APPROVE THE MINUTES OF THE MAY 14, 2003 COUNCIL MEETING. GLEN POSUSTA SECONDED THE MOTION. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 3. Consideration of adding items to the agenda. Glen Posusta added tree planting to the agenda. Bruce Thielen added scheduling meeting/workshop dates for the following: 1) Personnel Committee and performance review of City Administrator; 2) Workshop meeting with Towne Centre developer; 3) Followup meeting with school district and other entities on collaborative efforts; 4) Meeting on goals and priorities of various commissions; and 5) Meeting with township regarding annexation concerns. Brian Stumpf asked how the performance review for the City Administrator would be conducted. Bruce Thielen indicated the full Council would conduct the performance review at a closed meeting unless the City Administrator indicated he did not want a closed meeting. 4. Citizen comments/petitions, requests and complaints. Mayor Thielen stated the purpose of the citizen comments portion of the meeting. Douglas Prahl from 212 Mississippi Drive came before the Council concerning the questionable activity in his neighborhood. He stated that he has discussed the activity with the Wright County Sheriff's Department and their records show that police calls to the area thus far in 2003 have already surpassed the number of calls made in 2002 in the same area. Mr. Prahl listed incidents of criminal activity that prompted residents in the area to conduct a neighborhood meeting. As a result of that meeting Mr. Prahl was recommending some courses of action for the Council to consider which include reduction in the speed limit on Mississippi Drive, installation of additional street lighting and adoption of ordinances relating to meth labs. At the present time the speed limit in this area is 30 mph. Because of the number of kids in the area, their use of the street as play area and steep incline C', Council Minutes - 5/27/03 of the driveways which make access to the roadway more difficult, he felt the speed limit should be reduced to 20 mph. Mississippi Drive is approximately four -tenths of a mile in length and within that distance there are 3 street lights. He did not feel this number was adequate. Roger Mack, Street Superintendent, stated that City policy was to place street lights 600-700 feet apart and to light the intersections. Mr. Prahl stated that the bend in the street made the existing lighting inadequate. The last suggestion presented by Mr. Prahl was that the Council consider adoption of an ordinance that would govern sale of materials used in meth labs and also cover responsibility for clean up of meth lab sites. He cited the ordinances that were adopted by the cities of Oakdale and Anoka as models that the City could review. Brian Stumpf noted concerns with the proposal to reduce the speed limit pointing out that reducing the speed limit doesn't necessarily eliminate the speeding problem. He added that it was an enforcement issue and efforts should be made to ensure that the speed limit is enforced. Brian Stumpf suggested that these concerns be referred to the Police Commission. The Police Commission can meet with the residents and then make a recommendation to the council. Glen Posusta questioned whether additional street lighting would do anything to deter criminal activity. Bruce Thielen stated that the cost of additional street lights would be minimal and he felt it would be well worth the cost. BRIAN STUMPF MOVED TO REFER THE ISSUES OF THE SPEED LIMIT, STREET LIGHTING AND POSSIBLE ORDINANCES TO THE POLICE COMMISSION FOR THEIR REVIEW AND STUDY AND THE POLICE COMMISSION WILL MAKE RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE CITY COUNCIL REGARDING THESE ISSUES. GLEN POSUSTA SECONDED THE MOTION. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. Roger Carlson stated that he had attended a meeting of the Wright County Drug Task Force and reported that the investigation into the meth lab is continuing. He added that the County Attorney is reluctant to pursue adoption of an ordinance relating to sale of meth lab materials because it comes down too hard on the people who sell material. Douglas Prahl invited the Council to a meeting that will be held on June 10, 2003 at 7 p.m. at the Community Center. Bruce Thielen pointed out that the Open Meeting Law would restrict the full council from attending unless there was posted notice. 5. Consent Agenda A. Consideration of granting approval for municipal liquor licenses. Recommendation: Approve renewal of wine/strong beer license for Crostini's Grille and 3/2 on -sale beer license for China Buffet and 3/2 off -sale beer license for Cruiser's Gas N Goods contingent upon submittal of appropriate insurance and payment of license fees. B. Consideration of approving the appointment of Ben Hitter for the vacancy on the Parks Commission. Recommendation: Appoint Ben Hitter to the Parks Commission to 2 Council Minutes - 5/27/03 complete the term of Earl Smith. C. Consideration of ratifying new hires. Recommendation: Ratify the hiring of the employees as identified. D. Consideration of adjusting sidewalk construction quantities and assessment procedures - Cedar Street Improvement Project No. 2002-06C. Recommendation: Approve deletion of sidewalk improvements from the project except for those properties currently being considered or already under construction at the intersection of Cedar Street and School Boulevard and to establish an assessment term of 15 years for the project. E. Consideration of approving Change Order No. 1 to Well #5, Project No. 2003-04C. Recommendation: Approve Change Order #1 adding $2,897.50 for a design change to the well screen making a revised contract amount of $51,512.50. F. Consideration of replacement of street name signs on Broadway. Recommendation: Select the 9" street name plats with white letters and border on a green background at a cost of $2,066.31 for materials with installation to be done by the Monticello Public Works Department. G. Consideration of approval of award of contract for library demolition. Recommendation: Move to award the contract for the demolition of the old Monticello Library building including Alternate A to Veit & Company, Inc. in the amount of $16,148.00. It was suggested that agenda item #7, the final plat and development agreement for Hillside Farm be added to the consent agenda. Bret Weiss stated that under the conditions for this item, condition B relating to acquisition of easements could be removed. ROBBIE SMITH MOVED TO APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA WITH THE ADDITION OF AGENDA ITEM 47. ROGER CARLSON SECONDED THE MOTION. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 6. Consideration of items removed from the consent agenda for discussion. None. 7. Consideration of approval of final plat and development agreement for Hillside Farms. Added to the consent agenda. Council Minutes - 5/27/03 8. Consideration of a request for concept stage planned unit development and preliminary plat approval for Carlisle Village. Applicant: Shadow Creek Corporation. Dan Licht from Northwest Associated Consultants reviewed the proposed development with the Council. The development consists of 80 acres lying south of County Road 18 and east of the Rolling Woods development. The applicant was requesting rezoning of the property from A -O (Agricultural Open) to R-1 A, R-2 and R -2A, concept stage PUD approval, development stage PUD approval and preliminary plat approval. The developer is proposing the south 40 acres for development of single family homes meeting the R-1 A standards and smaller lot single family homes and townhomes on the north 40 acres. One of the main issues with this development is density. The Planning staff prepared a series of unit counts and how they were arrived at. The Council would make the determination which of these density levels would apply to development. If the . entire 80 acre site was developed to R-1 A standards the development would have 184 units. If the south 40 acres were developed to R-1 A standards and the north 40 acres were developed with a maximum of 3 units per acre the development would contain 196 units. Based on an acreage split of 37 acres R-1 A and 43 acres at -3 units per acre, the density would be 205 units. The applicant stated that by design the R-1 A area to preserve more trees they sacrificed 5 lots and they want the 5 sacrificed lots transferred to the north portion of the development. If this was done there would be 210 units in the development. The applicants feel that only 29 acres meet the R-1 A standards and 53 acres should be considered at 3 units per acre. This would create a development with 220 units. The applicant in planning the development established 3 units per acre for all 80 acres which would give a density of 240 units. City staff recommended a density of approximately 196-220 units. The Planning Commission's recommendation was to approve the rezoning requests and concept stage PUD approval and to table the preliminary plat and development stage approval of until the issues raised in the review of the development were resolved. Dan Licht added that the Planning Commission had approved the development stage PUD for the south portion of the plat but that staff had recommended that the development stage approval be tabled for now and be considered with the preliminary plat and development stage PUD for the north portion of the development. Dan Licht noted that the developer had made changes to the plans but at this time neither the City Engineer or City Planner had an opportunity to review those plans. Another issue on the south portion of the development related to tree preservation. The plans do not show the extent to which the developer has taken measures to preserve the trees. The developer has requested a 50' right of way but they have not indicated how many trees would be preserved by having the 50' right of way instead of the 60' right of way. The other concern is the process that will be put in place to maintain the preserved trees. Mike Gair representing Lucinda Gardner, the developer, made a presentation to the Council on the proposed development of Carlisle Village. He stated the developer has substantially incorporated all the changes that have been articulated by staff but in his presentation he wanted to emphasize the .49 Council Minutes - 5/27/03 merits of the plan. Mike Gair stated that the delineation of the area as R-1 A led to the expectation of high quality homes in an area with natural amenities. However, a good portion of the site does not have any natural amenities. He felt the R-1 A designation is intended to encumber land that has natural amenities and of this 80 acre site only 29 acres had amenities such as woods or rolling topography. Mike Gair reviewed some of the changes that had been made to the plans including changes in street and cul-de-sac configuration. Mike Gair presented a tree inventory plan which showed the trees that would be preserved and the trees that would be removed. The roadway pattern was laid out to try to accommodate the trees and the topography. He estimated that 64% of the quality trees would be preserved. Over 1800 trees 8" in diameter or larger will be preserved. He felt the plan showed an integration in types and style of housing. In addition the sidewalk, trail and street layout provided connectivity within the development and to other adjacent developments. Mike Gair noted the first phase of development would include the smaller single family lots, a portion of the townhomes lots and a portion of the R-1 A lots. He added that in the development 39% of the units are townhomes and 61% are single family homes. In the metropolitan area 51% of new units are townhome units. He felt that the proposed development with its landscaping, use of open area, and architectural design provided an aesthetically pleasing development. The developer was requesting that the Council approve density of 240 units for this development. Jeff O'Neill commented that a considerable amount of work had gone into the development of this area and noted there were two main issues with one being the calculation of density. He stated that it was not the City's intent to have the three units per acre be applied across the entire 80 acres. The second issue was what process would be in place to assure the continued preservation of the trees. Nothing has been submitted by the developer that indicates how the 64% tree preservation would be accomplished. Bruce Thielen concurred that the City wants some concrete assurances that the tree preservation would occur and that development would occur in the manner indicated by the developer. Mike Gair responded that when they moved into development stage approval this information will be provided in detail. He stated that in the site grading plan they can provide the limits of the tree preservation. The tree preservation plan is a specific plan that will be provided to the city. Bruce Thielen questioned how the developer would ensure that builders were complying with the tree preservation plan. Mike Gair informed the Council that if a builder wanted to remove a tree in the tree preservation area they would have to request permission from the developer to do so. Bruce Thielen asked who would do the monitoring. Dan Licht indicated that the City's interest would be protected under the PUD agreement. Bruce Thielen felt that there should be some type of penalty for the lost of a tree in the designated tree preservation plan. Robbie Smith noted that there are nine items listed in the R-1 A area, nine items listed in the R -2A area and six items listed in the R-2 area and he wondered if all those items had been taken care of. Mike Gair stated that with the exception of the density issue, the other items had been taken care of. 5 Council Minutes - 5/27/03 Robbie Smith asked about the Wildwood Ridge plat which Lucinda Gardner had also developed. He felt the development was disappointing in that what the City was led to believe would be developed there did not happen. He did not want Carlisle Village to become another Wildwood Ridge. Lucinda Gardner responded that in the Wildwood Ridge development they had made a mistake in putting too many lots in the wooded areas. As a result the building pads were not large enough to accommodate larger style housing. She felt the R-1 A designation would allow tree preservation and a higher standard of housing. The Council informed Lucinda Gardner that they would be voting on tabling development stage PUD approval for the R-1 A portion of the development and asked if she was comfortable with that. Lucinda Gardner indicated that she was okay with that but her primary concern was the density issue and her belief that the density should be set at 3 units per acre over all 80 acres. City Engineer Bret Weiss noted his concern about the Council approving density without having done the stormwater and other development calculations to verify what density can be supported. He didn't feel the City should specify a number of units until it was known what could be supported. Bruce Thielen suggested that the City Engineer and Planning Commission should make the determination on density. He stated that the City could handle the higher density but wanted assurance of tree preservation and construction of quality housing stock. Roger Carlson asked about park dedication. He was informed that the developer was paying cash in lieu of land for the park dedication fee. Roger Carlson asked whether it was premature to act on the rezoning request at this time since it wasn't certain whether there was 37 acres of R-1 A land or 29 acres as the developer claimed. This is something that if approved now, may have to be changed later. Dan Licht suggested using a certain number of units as a beginning basis and then as the technical issues are worked out and the developer shows his compliance to requirements, the City could then look at tree preservation as means to increase density. Robbie Smith indicated that he liked the concept plan but also understood the City Engineer's concerns. Bruce Thielen stated the City is going to ask the developer to prove design standards and compliance in order to get increased density. ROBBIE SMITH MOVED TO APPROVE THE REZONING FROM A-0 TO R-1 A FOR THE SOUTH 37 ACRES OF THE PROPOSED CARLISLE VILLAGE DEVELOPMENT. BRIAN STUMPF SECONDED THE MOTION. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. BRIAN STUMPF MOVED TO APPROVE CONCEPT STAGE PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT FOR THE R-1 A PORTION OF CARLISLE VILLAGE BASED ON THE FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND CITY ENGINEER. ROGER CARLSON SECONDED THE MOTION. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. ROBBIE SMITH MOVED TO TABLE APPROVAL OF THE DEVELOPMENT STAGE PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT FOR THE R-lA PORTION OF CARLISLE VILLAGE AND SEND IT BACK TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION. BRIAN STUMPF SECONDED THE MOTION. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. R Council Minutes - 5/27/03 ROGER CARLSON MOVED TO APPROVE THE REZONING FROM A -O TO R-2 AND R -2A FOR THE NORTH 43 ACRES OF THE PROPOSED CARLISLE VILLAGE. GLEN POSUSTA SECONDED THE MOTION. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. BRIAN STUMPF MOVED TO APPROVE CONCEPT STAGE PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT FOR THE R-2 AND R -2A PORTION OF CARLISLE VILLAGE BASED ON THE FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND CITY ENGINEER. GLEN POSUSTA SECONDED THE MOTION. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. Bret Weiss asked if the Council was recommending a number of units or if they would go with what the Planning Commission came up with. Bruce Thielen indicated the City would establish 220 units with the proof of burden on the developer to show that the development can carry greater density. 9. Consideration of approval of final plat and development agreement for Spirit Hills. Applicant: Maplewood Development. Item was withdrawn from the agenda at the request of the developer. 10. Consideration of preliminary plans for CSAH 75 at Prairie Road/River Street. Bret Weiss reviewed the proposed design for the intersection of CSAH 75 at Prairie Road and River Street. He indicated the City had met with Wright County and as a result of that meeting a new alternative was being proposed. The new plan is proposing to offset the intersecting legs of Prairie road and River Street by 350 feet. This proposal has been sent to Wright County and they are generally acceptive of the plan. The Council was asked to approve the plans and authorize going out for bids. Bret Weiss noted that while the design improves the intersection it is not a perfect solution. At this point the County has not offered much in the way of financial contribution to the redesign of the intersection. The County will be putting in turn lanes and will provide some culverts. The City is still negotiating on the cost sharing for this improvement. Initially the cost estimate was in the area of $50,000 but the City Engineer was not sure how much the changes would add to the cost of the improvement. Bret Weiss stated that when they bring the bids back to the Council it is hoped that they will also have a funding plan in place. Bret Weiss reiterated that because of the number of accidents in this area it is important to take steps to improve the safety of the intersection. BRIAN STUMPF MOVED TO APPROVE THE PLANS FOR THE IMPROVEMENT OF CSAH 75 AT RIVER STREET/PRAIRIE ROAD AND TO AUTHORIZE THE CITY ENGINEER TO PROCEED WITH ADVERTISING FOR BIDS WITH THE COST SHARE AGREEMENT WITH WRIGHT COUNTY TO BE PREPARED PRIOR TO AWARD OF BIDS. GLEN POSUSTA SECONDED THE MOTION. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. VA Council Minutes - 5/27/03 Glen Posusta asked if the design included a passing lane. Bret Weiss indicated it did not have a passing lane but there is a right turn lane. 11. Consideration of approving an increase in park dedication fees. Jeff O'Neill explained the background of this item and also reviewed research done in determining what other communities charged for park dedication fees. He noted that the 4% annual increase in the park dedication fee did not come close to matching the huge increases in land values. In order to close that gap it is being recommended that park dedication fee be increased. There was discussion on land values and what it would take for the City to purchase land if they wanted to develop a facility such as a ballfield complex. At $25,000 an acre, which is what Jeff O'Neill estimated land cost would be, the City would have a difficult time acquiring land based on their current park dedication fees. The Parks Commission had recommended the park dedication fee be increased to $1800/per unit. Mayor Thielen felt this was a little high and suggest $1500/per unit. Brian Stumpf concurred that $1800 was too high and suggested a lower rate. Glen Posusta questioned whether park dedication fee should be applied to commercial and industrial land. He felt development costs for commercial and industrial land in Monticello was already very high and adding park dedication fees would be one more road block in attracting commercial /industrial development to Monticello. He believes residential property should pay for the park development. 011ie Koropchak reported that the IDC had recommended that city staff put a model together showing land costs with and without park dedication fees. The IDC was concerned about being competitive with surrounding communities. Bruce Thielen suggested acting on the park dedication fee for residential property tonight and look at whether to apply it to commercial and industrial land at a later date. The Council asked how a proposed park dedication fee increase would impact current developments. Jeff O'Neill stated that any development going to final plat this year would receive the current rate but any new developments or new phases of current development would receive the new rate. Dan Licht informed the Council they had done a park dedication analysis for the City of Otsego. The City of Otsego has set their park dedication fee at $2100 per unit for residential and also applied the park dedication fee against commercial and industrial property. Parks Commission Chair, Larry Nolan, stated that with land costs continuing to rise, it was important that the park dedication fee more closely match the rate of growth in land values. The current park dedication fee does not do that. The Parks Commission felt the proposed increase to $1800 was not out of line with what other communities charged and the Parks Commission also felt the park dedication fee should be applied against commercial and industrial land. ROBBIE SMITH MOVED TO INCREASE THE PARK DEDICATION FEE TO $1600 PER UNIT FOR RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY EFFECTIVE AUGUST 1, 200-3. E'3 Council Minutes - 5/27/03 ( Motion died for a lack of a second. Brian Stumpf stated the Parks Commission was proposing an increase of almost 100% in the park dedication fee and he felt that was too steep. Bruce Thielen stated that developers understand the value that parks and trails add to the development. GLEN POSUSTA MOVED TO APPROVE AN INCREASE IN THE PARK DEDICATION FEE FOR RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY TO $1200 PER UNIT EFFECTIVE JANUARY 1, 2004 AND INCREASE TO $1500 PER UNIT EFFECTIVE JANUARY 1,2005 AND THEREAFTER ADJUSTED ANNUALLY FOR A COST OF LIVING INCREASE WITH THE COUNCIL TO ACT AT A LATER DATE ON WHETHER PARK DEDICATION FEES SHOULD BE APPLIED TO COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL LAND. BRIAN STUMPF SECONDED THE MOTION. MOTION CARRIED WITH ROBBIE SMITH VOTING IN OPPOSITION. 12. Consideration of payment of bills for May. BRIAN STUMPF MOVED TO APPROVE PAYMENT OF BILLS FOR MAY. ROGER CARLSON SECONDED THE MOTION. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. Added Items: Shade Tree Program - Glen Posusta indicated there were funds in the tree planting program and asked whether the City wouldn't consider planting some trees along the boulevard of the City owned parking lot to enhance the area. Bruce Thielen indicated he had met with a group who would also like to see the tree planting program revived and may possibly make a financial contribution to that cause. He added that the Parks Commission had also listed the tree planting program as one of their priorities. Meetings - The Council discussed setting a meeting date for the performance review of the City Administrator. Brian Stumpf suggested doing it at 6 p.m. just prior to the June 9, 2003 regular Council meeting. It was suggested that a meeting with the developer of the Towne Centre site be set for 6 p.m. on June 23, 2003. On the follow up meeting regarding collaborative efforts between the school districts and other entities, 011ie Koropchak reported that the school district suggested June 11 "', June 18`" or June 25"' at 7 p.m. The Council selected June 18, 2003 at 7 p.m. as the follow up meeting date. The Council also discussed setting a workshop to review the priorities set for by the various city commissions. A workshop was set for July 14, 2003 at 5 p.m. A meeting will be set up with township regarding annexation issues once the township informs the city of a date that will work for them. Jeff O'Neill also alerted the Council that there will be a need for a workshop on the interchange design for County Road 18. Bruce Thielen suggested that this be incorporated into a regular meeting of the Council. 13. Adjourn GLEN POSUSTA MOVED TO ADJOURN AT 9:25 P.M. BRIAN STUMPF SECONDED THE MOTION. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. Recording Secretary E