Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2003-11-19 MINUTESREGULAR MEETING COTTAGE GROVE CITY COUNCIL November 19, 2003 OPEN FORUM — 7:15 p.m. Open forum provides a person an opportunity to inform the Council of a problem or to request information related to City business not scheduled for Council action and on the Agenda. Mayor Shiely encouraged persons to limit their remarks to two (2) minutes per issue. Present: Mayor Sandy Shiely Council Member Cheryl Kohls Council Member Pat Rice Council Member Jim Wolcott Council Member Mark Grossklaus Also Present: Ryan Schroeder, City Administrator Ron Hedberg, Finance /Administrative Services Director John McCool, Senior Planner John Mickelson, Deputy Director Public Safety Tom Thompson, City Engineer Les Burshten, Public Works Director Corrine Thomson, City Attorney Majel Carroll, 8100 Ivywood Avenue South, referenced the Cottage Square Shopping Center and expressed concerns regarding the recent development issues with the owner. She stated that the tenants of the Center recently learned of the possibility of the sale of the building adding that when they asked about the possible sale they were told it was only a rumor and not to worry. Ms. Carroll stated that it is obvious to her and the other tenants that a lot has been going on behind the scenes adding that they are very upset that none of this has been communicated to them. She expressed concerns and frustration stating that the tenants have a right to know what is going on adding that this could greatly affect their ability to stay in business. She stated that the tenants met to discuss their concerns and options and asked the Council to oversee the process and ensure that the tenants are informed moving forward. Mayor Shiely acknowledged the concerns of the tenants stating that she did speak with the Manager of the property and he clarified the reason the tenants have not received specific information yet is because the sale is not final. She explained to Ms. Carroll that the City is not directly involved with the sale of the property, as it is a seller /buyer situation between the owner of the shopping center and a potential buyer. Mayor Shiely further clarified that the owners cannot communicate anything until they have a final sale. Regular Meeting — November 19, 2003 Cottage Grove City Council Page 2 CA LL TO ORDER The City Council of the City of Cottage Grove, Washington County, Minnesota held a regular meeting on Wednesday, November 19, 2003, at the Cottage Grove City Hall, 7516 80 Street South. Mayor Sandy Shiely called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m. ROLL CALL Present: Mayor Sandy Shiely Council Member Cheryl Kohls Council Member Pat Rice Council Member Jim Wolcott Council Member Mark Grossklaus Also Present: Ryan Schroeder, City Administrator Ron Hedberg, Finance /Administrative Services Director John McCool, Senior Planner John Mickelson, Deputy Director Public Safety Tom Thompson, City Engineer Les Burshten, Public Works Director Corrine Thomson, City Attorney Mayor Shiely presided over the meeting. ADOPTION OF AGENDA MOTION BY WOLCOTT, SECONDED BY RICE, TO APPROVE THE AGENDA AS PRESENTED. MOTION CARRIED 5 -0. APPOINTMENTS AND PRESENTATIONS A. PRESENTATIONS 1. Swearing in Ceremony: Police Officer /Paramedic Timothy Morning Mayor Shiely asked the City Council to come forward and join in the Swearing in Ceremony for Police Officer /Paramedic Timothy Morning. City Administrator Schroeder provided the Council with an overview of Officer Morning's background and performed the oath of office. Officer Timothy Morning was presented and pinned with his badge by his father, Elton Morning, and his son, Bailey Morning. Public Safety Director Mickelson explained the symbolism of the badge and welcomed Officer Morning to the Cottage Grove Police Department and the City of Cottage Grove. B. APPOINTMENTS - NONE Regular Meeting — November 19, 2003 Cottage Grove City Council Page 3 APPROVAL OF MINUTES A. October 15, 2003 Regular Meeting Council Member Kohls stated that she had a correction to the minutes. She referenced page 18, 5th paragraph, references '$7 billion dollars' should read '$7 million dollars'. Mayor Shiely stated that the minutes stand approved as amended. B. October 22, 2003 Special Meeting. Mayor Shiely stated that the minutes stand approved as presented. CONSENT CALENDAR Council Member Wolcott asked to pull Item 4F. He explained that Item 4F is a resolution accepting a donation from Tennis Sanitation. He stated that Tennis Sanitation has really helped the City of Cottage Grove over the years. Council Member Wolcott publicly thanked them for their donation and for their community support over the years. He stated that the City of Cottage Grove truly appreciates their efforts and donations and thanked him for the quality service they have provided to the City over the years. Council Member Kohis asked to pull Item 4B. She explained that Item 4B is a resolution accepting a donation from Mayor Sandy Shiely. She asked Mayor Shiely how she ended up with a jail cell door. Mayor Shiely explained that she has had the jail cell door stored in her garage for over 30 years. She stated that one of her neighbors, at the time, was a Hennepin County Sheriff and when they demolished the old jail several of the neighbors purchased one of the doors. She stated that she decided to donate the jail cell door to the Recreation Center to use in their annual Halloween haunted house. Mayor Shiely asked to pull Item 4G. She explained that Item 4G is to receive an update regarding the cleanup and abatement at 8724 -95 Street South. She stated that the owner of the property, Joe Murphy, was present adding that she would like to give him an opportunity to speak on the issue. Joe Murphy, 8724 95 Street South, stated that he has been working very hard to clean up his property and deal with the boats in storage on his property. He referenced the notice from the Planning Commission and reviewed his progress of the cleanup with Council. Murphy explained that he has five or six boats yet to remove in addition to completing the yard cleanup. He stated that he had wanted to side his home this past summer but was not able to due to other commitments adding that he would like to be able to store the siding in the backyard area until spring, at which time the siding work would be completed. Murphy explained that he had a privacy fence installed and that he would store the siding in such a way that it would not be visible. He asked the Council to consider an extension of time to allow him to finish cleaning up the property. Regular Meeting — November 19, 2003 Cottage Grove City Council Page 4 Senior Planner McCool explained that Staff has been very actively working on the enforcement of the cleanup in this area for the past ten years. McCool explained that they are looking for the removal of all items including the boats and siding. He stated that they would not accept anything being stored or placed behind the fencing. They did give Mr. Murphy a final deadline of October 1, 2003, which was not met. Therefore, staff made the decision to move forward with the abatement process. MOTION BY RICE, SECONDED BY WOLCOTT, TO: A. ACCEPT AND PLACE ON FILE THE FOLLOWING MINUTES: D. PUBLIC SAFETY, HEALTH, AND WELFARE COMMISSION OF SEPTEMBER 9, 2003. E. PUBLIC WORKS COMMISSION OF OCTOBER 13, 2003. B. ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 03 -262 A RESOLUTION ACCEPTING DONATION OF A JAIL CELL FROM SANDY SHIELY FOR THE COTTAGE GROVE RECREATION DEPARTMENT HALLOWEEN SPOOKYRIDGE HAUNTED HOUSE. C. APPROVE CHANGE ORDER #1 FOR THE PINE ARBOR 1 ST ADDITION UTILITY, STREET AND STREET LIGHTING PROJECT. D. RECEIVE INFORMATION REGARDING MOCK COUNCIL MEETING RESULTS ON CODE ENFORCEMENT FROM SCHOOL FIELDTRIPS. E. RECEIVE INFORMATION ON THE COTTAGE GROVE AREA NITRATE STUDY. F. ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 03 -263 A RESOLUTION ACCEPTING DONATIONS FROM TENNIS SANITATION. G. RECEIVE AN UPDATE ON THE CLEANUP AT 8724 -95 STREET SOUTH AND DIRECT PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR TO PROCEED WITH ABATEMENT. H. ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 03 -264 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING PUBLICATION OF ORDINANCE NO. 748 AND 749 BY TITLE AND SUMMARY. ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 03 -265 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING PUBLICATION OF ORDINANCE NO. 750 AND 751 BY TITLE AND SUMMARY. ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 03 -266 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING PUBLICATION OF ORDINANCE NO. 752 AND 753 BY TITLE AND SUMMARY. RESPONSE TO PREVIOUSLY RAISED OPEN FORUM ISSUES - NONE PUBLIC HEARINGS A. Wellhead Protection Plan. Mark Janovech of Bonestroo, Rosene, Anderlik & Associates, reviewed the proposed Wellhead Protection Plan with Council. He explained that the public hearing is part of the public notice requirement of the Wellhead Protection Plan per Minnesota Department of Health criteria. He stated that the City has received approval of Part 1 of the Wellhead Protection Plan from the Department of Health with the requirement of the public hearing being held before beginning Part 2 of the Plan. Regular Meeting — November 19, 2003 Cottage Grove City Council Page 5 Mayor Shiely asked what the rationale of holding a public hearing before implementing the plan. Mr. Janovech stated that the hearing is more of a public informational meeting noting that they would like to keep the public informed as they move through the process. Mayor Shiely stated that they have not identified the sources and expressed concerns that someone might have questions that they are not yet ready to answer. Council Member Kohls asked if the level of vulnerability is typical in city wells around the metro area and if other communities will see a process similar to this or if this is required due to the soil issues in the area. Mr. Janovech explained that this is a common process and reviewed the vulnerability sources with Council. He further explained that it does not suggest the possibility of contamination. They would prefer to work proactively by putting together a plan to deal with issues as they become apparent. Council Member Kohls asked if Phase II identifies the process the City would take in the event of contamination. Mr. Janovech confirmed that Phase II identifies the processes. Public Works Director Burshten explained that all wells have some degree of vulnerability. He stated that Well #10 is a bit more vulnerable due to its' location and settings. Council Member Rice asked how much topsoil would be needed to improve the area and make it less vulnerable. Mr. Janovech explained that they should have at least 10 feet or more of clay to protect the area. Mayor Shiely opened the Public Hearing at 7:54 p.m. Mayor Shiely closed the Public Hearing at 7:55 p.m. BID AWARDS - NONE UNFINISHED AND NEW BUSINESS A. Consider Approving the Redevelopment Agreement with PHM /Cottage Grove Inc toward Redevelopment of the Cottage Square Property. City Administrator Schroeder stated that on February 13, 2001 the City Council and its EDA created the 365 -acre Gateway North Redevelopment District followed by the creation of a redevelopment Tax Increment District on July 26, 2001. He stated that among other properties included within that district is the 13.1 -acre Cottage Square Shopping Center. Since the creation of the Gateway, the City has been pursuing development options for Cottage Square and highlighted the various options with Council. Administrator Schroeder explained that they have submitted a request for proposals for senior housing adding that the Cottage Square site was one of the identified development sites submitted for a proposal. He noted that the Review Committee selected Cottage Square as the priority site and that two firms submitted conceptual site plans for redevelopment of Cottage Square. He stated Regular Meeting — November 19, 2003 Cottage Grove City Council Page 6 that of the two submitted, the most favored proposal was submitted by Presbyterian Homes noting that the original concept of the project scope has changed. Mayor Shiely noted that the expected efforts for tenant relocation would begin, by the developer, shortly after closing. City Administrator Schroeder confirmed that the relocation process would begin shortly after completion of the development agreement and purchase agreement. He stated that it is their expectation that the relocation process could begin to happen in December and that the developer would be in contact with the tenants in early January 2004. He explained that they intend to consider a partial demolition of the building in the hopes that a portion of the project could be maintained in such a way that operations could continue while construction activities occur. He stated that it is the City's intent to work with the developer during the early stages of the project as it would improve the relocation efforts and provide a longer period of time before this process occurs. He further stated that relocation would be dealt with in the real estate transaction noting that the developer is ultimately responsible. He stated that the current owner and the new owner would share the responsibility of relocation adding that the City would not be involved or responsible for relocation of the tenants. City Administrator Schroeder stated that there have been several, ongoing discussions regarding the streetscape noting that as part of the project the developer has set aside funding for street lighting and signage. He noted that Washington County is the Entitlement County and reviewed the cycle with Council. Schroeder reviewed the acquisition and development costs with the Council noting the job creation and opportunities it brings to the City. He reviewed the characteristics of the various housing styles within the development and the restaurant locations, He stated that the concept plan provides for significant storm water drainage. Schroeder stated that relocation is an important component of the agreement adding that relocation assistance would be provided. He clarified that this does not suggest that all existing tenants would feel better off at the end and assured Council that they would work closely with all tenants throughout the process. Mr. Schroeder explained that this would allow the developer to begin working with the Cottage Square tenants adding that the applicants are asking for Council approval of the development subject to City Attorney approval of the proposal. He explained that the City Attorney drafted the contract for private development by and between the Cottage Grove EDA and PHY /Cottage Grove, Inc. Council Member Kohls acknowledged the tenants concerns stating that she too is concerned about the relocation process and imminent domain. She stated that she would like to see the businesses remain in the community and continue to be successful. She commented that the tenants are protected by federal law in a situation like this and asked the City Attorney to further clarify. City Attorney Thomson clarified the process for Council stating that if it does come to a point where the EDA would have to acquire the property through eminent domain that the EDA would require some assistance. She explained that presently the transaction is between the developer and the property owner and that the developer would have to Regular Meeting — November 19, 2003 Cottage Grove City Council Page 7 seriously consider providing some form of relocation assistance to the current tenants. She reviewed federal law requirements with Council. Gary Spooner, Bulletin License Center, stated that the tenants do have some issues and concerns. He explained that he does not have a lease with the current property owner and asked how his situation would fit into the process. He stated that there are other tenants concerned about the impact and timeframe of relocation, who would be looking for some form of protection. Spooner explained that the State of Minnesota requires that his business be located in the City of Cottage Grove and that any space offered for relocation would have to be approved by the Minnesota Department of Public Safety. He stated that he would have to seriously consider the costs to relocate noting that he recently spent over $30,000 to improve and upgrade his current location. He expressed concerns and frustration regarding the lack of communication adding that due to the current situation, he would not be able to recoup any of his investment for the upgrade to his current location. Spooner stated that he would have several issues to consider when relocating that would include space and computer setup requirements. He stated that he likes the idea of what could happen in the Cottage Square area adding that it would be very beneficial for the community. He agreed that the proposal is a good idea and that it has been long overdue but that the tenants want to be somewhat protected in the relocation process and costs. Mayor Shiely assured the tenants that everyone is committed to ensuring that their business concerns and needs are addressed. She agreed that remodeling the building would be too cost prohibitive adding that this is a very important issue and that the Council is committed to communicating with the tenants regarding the relocation process. Dennis Wolfe, DeMori's Restaurant, provided the Council with a brief history of the area and expressed his agreement that the building should go noting that it is an eyesore to the area. He stated that he has an excellent, long -term lease agreement, and expressed concerns regarding potential changes to his current lease. Wolfe stated that he does not want to relocate noting that he would not be able to move anywhere else for the same price. He asked Council if they would consider allowing the tenants to work out an agreement with the developer before they agree to a purchase price. Wolfe expressed frustration stating that he, along with the other tenants, had no idea the EDA was in discussion on this issue. He stated that he is very frustrated that he has never been contacted regarding this issue and is concerned about the costs. He stated that the potential increase in rental prices could create a situation where he may not be able to stay in business because he cannot afford the current rental prices. He stated that the he and the current tenants would like to rebuild and asked what they could expect from this redevelopment project. Council Member Kohls noted that Mr. Wolfe was a tenant, with a lease and asked him to clarify when he received notification of the relocation. Mr. Wolfe stated that the City notified him of the relocation, not the property owner, on Tuesday, November 18, 2003 when he made application to renew his liquor license. He stated that the current owner has not, at anytime, communicated this information to him nor has he returned any of his phone calls. Regular Meeting — November 19, 2003 Cottage Grove City Council Page 8 Mayor Shiely asked Mr. Wolfe if the property owner had ever informed him that this area has been included in the redevelopment plan for the last two years. Mr. Wolfe reviewed his understanding of the redevelopment plan with Council adding that he has not received any communications from the property owner. City Administrator Schroeder acknowledged that the property owner has been shy about discussing the redevelopment plans. He explained that discussions regarding mixed use of this site began in February 2002 noting that rumors began about that time with respect to possible changes in this area. He stated that it was his understanding that everyone has some knowledge that the property owner was interested in working with the City to redevelop this area. He acknowledged the need to communicate with the tenants stating that this is one of the reasons why Staff has worked to get this issue before Council. He referenced Mr. Wolfe's long -term lease agreement stating that Mr. Wolfe should not expect the current agreement to be replicated. He clarified for Mr. Wolfe that because of his current lease agreement, he has an enhanced opportunity to negotiate with the developer. Mayor Shiely reviewed her understanding of the issues with Council. She noted that they have a willing seller, a willing buyer, and expressed concerns that she is not sure that they could legally do this. City Attorney Thomson clarified that Mr. Wolfe is asking Council not to take action on this issue until the tenants have had an opportunity to work with the developer first. City Administrator Schroeder reviewed the development agreement options with the tenants noting that if this does not work for all tenants the developer would make recommendations to Council to step into the process. Elaine Mitchell, representing Stone Soup, stated that when she came before Council seven years ago she had no idea of the impact they would make on the community with the service they provide. She explained that they have been supported by foundations and by the community adding that their clientele has grown considerably over the last two years. She expressed concerns stating that they do not have a lease agreement adding that it expired in July and has not been renegotiated. She stated that they have tried to find an alternate location noting that it has been very difficult to find a location that they could afford. Ms. Mitchell stated that they are truly concerned at this point as to what they would be able to do noting that they could not afford to be out of business during the construction period. She expressed frustrations that the property owner never communicated any information to them regarding the relocation. Majel Carroll expressed her agreement with Ms. Mitchell and asked City Attorney Thomson if they could put together a conditional agreement between the tenants and purchaser that would be legitimate. City Attorney Thomson stated that she does not have any information at this time that would indicate their willingness to work out a conditional agreement with the tenants. She explained that it is legally possible to develop a conditional agreement adding that the purchase agreement probably has several contingencies included that would have to be considered. She asked if the Council was in a position to defer their decision. Regular Meeting — November 19, 2003 Cottage Grove City Council Page 9 City Administrator Schroeder acknowledged the tenants concerns regarding relocation costs. He assured the tenants that they have included a significant allocation of funds in the project budget to be used for tenant relocation. He stated that there is an understanding that both the developer and the City want to come out of this with everyone succeeding at some level. Ms. Mitchell explained that one of the main concerns is the timeline and asked if this could end up with a short-term notification to move. She expressed frustration regarding the lack of communication and stated that they would like to receive more notice on the expected timeframes. City Administrator Schroeder acknowledged Ms. Mitchell's concerns and explained that as they start to move forward with the planning process and the developer has received actual authority, they would then be required to contact the tenants. Ms. Mitchell clarified her understand that if the agreement is made as early as December that demolition could begin in January. City Administrator Schroeder stated that it would not happen that soon. He explained that there is an approval process that is required and reviewed the process with Council. Ms. Carroll asked if they have any indication as to what end of the building they would begin to work on first. City Administrator Schroeder stated that they would begin working on the south end of the building first. Council Member Kohls expressed her concerns for the tenants adding that she is disappointed that the developer and property owner are not present this evening. City Administrator Schroeder clarified that the developer did offer to attend the meeting and explained that due to prior out of town commitments he was not able to attend this evening. Council Member Kohis stated that this is a very complicated process adding that it is can be very overwhelming to grasp for those not familiar with the process. She stated that she understands the need to make a decision and expressed concerns regarding the negotiation process for relocation of the tenants. She stated that she is very disappointed in both the property owner and the developer that the tenants had to learn about this project through the local newspaper today. She noted that she normally does not agree to a process like this and explained that she is in support of this project because she believes that this is for the public good and that the community truly needs redevelopment of this area. She stated that the Council would try to be involved when possible and asked City Administrator Schroeder to discuss these concerns with the developer and property owner. She asked City Administrator Schroeder to encourage the property owner and developer to communicate with the tenants. She also asked that a contact be made with each of the tenants. City Administrator Schroeder assured the Council and tenants that the developer is interested in working with the tenants. Council Member Kohls stated that she is concerned for the tenants and wants to be sure that Staff is ensuring that communication is happening throughout the process. She stated that she does not want any surprises in April regarding negotiations with the tenants. City Regular Meeting — November 19, 2003 Cottage Grove City Council Page 10 Administrator Schroeder assured the Council that they would work to maintain open lines of communication with the tenants. MOTION BY GROSSKLAUS, SECONDED BY WOLCOTT, TO APPROVE THE CONTRACT FOR PRIVATE REDEVELOPMENT BY AND BETWEEN THE COTAGE GROVE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY AND PHM /COTTAGE GROVE, INC. MOTION CARRIED 5 -0. Council Member Grossklaus stated that he wanted to clarify to the tenants that this would not be the only time this issue would come before the Council. He explained that Staff would be in touch with the Council throughout the entire process and encouraged all of them to contact Council Members with any issues, concerns, or questions. B. Consider Placement of a Stop Sign at the Intersection of 85 Street and Hadley Avenue. Mayor Shiely stated that Council has repeatedly discussed this issue. She stated that with the changes to Hadley Avenue, which will add to the situation, the residents have contacted her regarding the installation of a stop sign. She explained that the residents have requested that the Public Works and Public Safety Departments review their request and provide a recommendation. She explained that they have been provided a recommendation and suggested providing the residents with a copy for their review before discussing the issue further. Mayor Shiely called a 15- minute break at 9:15 p.m Mayor Shiely called the meeting back to order at 9:30 p.m Mayor Shiely stated that traffic control on Hadley has been an ongoing concern for a long time. She reviewed the request for a stop sign at the intersection of 85 and Hadley with Council stating that the request was then forwarded to the Public Works and Public Safety Departments for consideration. She explained that both departments have recommended denial of the stop sign and reviewed their recommendation with Council. She noted that the report states they cannot use stop signs as a means to control speed. She explained that this ruling is from the State and asked what they could do to control the speed. Public Works Director Burshten explained that they have requested authorization of a study to research options for this stretch of Hadley. He further explained that the study would encompass the entire Thompson Grove area and would include reviews of the entire corridor and all signage in the area. Burshten stated that in reviewing the area for replacement of the signs it became apparent to him that there is no rational procedure in place on the placement of the signs. He stated that there are specific requirements that have to be complied with adding that there are already signs that do not meet the specified requirements. He noted that they have not installed a stop sign in the Thompson Grove area in over 16 years and agreed that there is a need for enhancements and improvements in that area. He suggested that they be allowed to complete the study stating that he also has concerns along Hadley. Regular Meeting — November 19, 2003 Cottage Grove City Council Page 11 Mayor Shiely clarified that Public Works Director Burshten is asking the Council to make a motion on the study. Public Works Director Burshten clarified that he would like to get cost estimates and come back to Council at next the meeting to present recommendations from the study. Mayor Shiely asked Public Works Director Burshten to check with the residents in audience and be sure to contact them with any issues. Council Member Kohls asked how long the study would take. Public Works Director Burshten stated that it would take approximately three to four weeks. Lester Johnson stated that it appears as if the problems in this area of Hadley began to occur with the detour and rerouting of traffic. He stated that he has noticed a higher level of police presence during this period adding that the increase in traffic and the speed is a real problem. He asked if the signs could be used to control traffic versus speed in the area. He also asked if one of the detour signs could be placed at the south end of Hadley to help redirect some of the traffic. Public Works Director Burshten acknowledged Mr. Johnson's suggestions stating that they are good suggestions and that it is his hope that his suggestion would be included as one of the recommended comments in the study. Mr. Johnson stated that he would also like to see the load limits enforced. He stated that there has been an increase in heavy load traffic along Hadley noting that they are moving large amounts of dirt and expressed concerns that this could destroy the streets. City Administrator Schroeder acknowledged Mr. Johnson's concerns and his request to redirect traffic. He explained that Hadley is a collector street and to divert traffic would be very inappropriate. He clarified that Public Works Director Burshten would like to determine how the traffic currently flows and how it should flow along Hadley adding that, the study is a good suggestion. Mr. Johnson stated that it was his understanding that Hadley is not a collector street. City Administrator Schroeder further clarified stating that Hadley is an MSA, Minnesota State Aid street and that it has to follow State guidelines. Mayor Shiely noted that just because it is an MSA street does not mean that people should be allowed to speed. She stated that she would prefer to leave the issue where it is now and allows the Public Works Director to move forward with the study. Council Member Kohls stated that speed has been a problem along Hadley Avenue for a long time. She expressed concerns that even with the number of complaints the City has received, nothing has been done to address the issue. She agreed with the study stating that something has to be done soon to address this issue. Council Member Grossklaus asked if they could add more patrols to the area during peak times. Regular Meeting — November 19, 2003 Cottage Grove City Council Page 12 Council Member Rice stated that they have the same issues in other areas that also should be addressed. He stated that adding patrols and stops signs at every corner is not necessarily the right answer and agreed that the Public Works Department should move forward with the study. MOTION BY RICE, SECONDED BY WOLCOTT, TO DENY THE REQUEST FOR THE PLACEMENT OF A STOP SIGN AT THE INTERSECTION OF 85 STREET AND HADLEY AVENUE AND APPROVE THE PROPOSAL TO CONDUCT A TRAFFIC STUDY IN THE THOMPSON GROVE AREA. MOTION CARRIED 5 -0. C. Consider Variances to Density Standards in the Mississippi River Corridor Critical Street South. Senior Planner McCool stated that Jay and Suelin Werner, 7641 -113 Street South, have applied for a variance from the density standards of the Mississippi River Corridor Critical Area Overlay District and to the 100 -foot minimum structure setback requirement from the bluff line. He stated that the Werner's own approximately 10.73 acres of land at 7641 -113 h Street South and currently reside in the single - family home that is located on the east half of the property. He stated that the Werner's propose to construct a new single - family home on the west half of the property. Senior Planner McCool stated that the Planning Commission held a public hearing on the variance applications at their October 27, 2003 meeting. The only public testimony received was from Pieter Bierma, 7653 110 Street South, who expressed concerns about an accessory structure located in the northeast corner of Werner's property that encroaches onto his property. McCool explained that Mr. Bierma believes this encumbrance would not allow clear title to his property if it was sold. The Planning Commission sympathized with Mr. Bierma's situation adding that they were not able to offer any solution since it is a private matter between two property owners. McCool reviewed the Planning Commission's concerns with the Council noting that several Commissioners disagreed with the Planning Staff's recommendation to deny the variances even though the City's approval of this lot split in 1987 stipulated that the vacant parcel would be unbuildable. McCool noted that some of the Commission members supported the variance to allow the construction of the single - family home on the vacant lot adding that there were varying opinions on whether or not a variance should be granted to the 100 -foot minimum bluff line setback requirements. The Commission members reviewed the information on the variance applications and were not successful in formulating a recommendation that was supported by a majority vote. McCool reviewed the motions with Council stating that the Planning Commission instructed Planning staff to forward Mr. Werner's variance application to the City Council without any formal recommendation by the Planning Commission. He explained that Staff has developed three options for Council to consider. Mayor Shiely expressed concerns stating that this is one of the most confusing packets she has had to review. She stated that these are the houses that are visible from the river itself Regular Meeting — November 19, 2003 Cottage Grove City Council Page 13 and explained that visibility from the river is one of the four main criteria from the Mississippi River Corridor. She explained that the houses on the south side of 113 Street were built prior to 1978 and grandfathered in as far as their current location along the bluff. She stated that if anything happened to these houses they could not rebuild in the same exact location along the bluff line. Mayor Shiely stated that in order to meet the current guidelines the structure would have to move back from its' current location along the bluff line. She stated she is very hesitant and expressed concerns regarding the implications this request could have in the future. The 100 -foot setback request is her biggest concern. She asked Senior Planner McCool if the Fredrickson property at 8291 River Acres Road had to move the house back from the bluff when they rebuilt their home. Senior Planner McCool stated that he did not recall the specifics about the variances involved. Mr. Werner stated that the location of the house on the official zoning map is in the River Acres area. He reviewed the area with Council stating that the actual river corridor area that is used by the public is located approximately a mile and a half away from his property. Mayor Shiely clarified that his property does lie within the designation area of the Mississippi River Corridor Critical Area, adding that most variances reviewed along the river corridor is a long way from the river. She explained that she is concerned about the views from the river. She stated that her concern is that once approval is given the property owner could remove the very foliage that prevents the views from the river, and the City would not be able to do anything about it. Mr. Werner provided a topographic overview of the area to Council. He noted from the diagram every house is at or very near to the bluff line in that area. He explained that he is asking for the same consideration that has been given in the past for the variance and setback requests. He acknowledged that he was aware, at the time that the property lot split in 1986 was not to be a buildable area. He stated that had he known the specifics in the River Corridor Act he would have done the lot split differently. He stated that the rules have been changed several times and that he is only asking for two variances that would allow him to build his new home in the same location along the bluff line. He stated that the building would not affect the view from the river. Council Member Wolcott asked Mr. Werner what they plan to do with the current house once the new one is completed. Mr. Werner stated that they plan to sell the current home once the new one is finished. Council Member Wolcott asked Senior Planner McCool to clarify the conditions. Senior Planner McCool reviewed the previous conditions for the lot split with Council. Council Member Kohls asked Mr. Werner to clarify his intentions with the lot split requested in 1986. She asked Mr. Werner if it was his intent all along to come forward at some point and build. Mr. Werner confirmed that this was his original intent once the utilities were brought out to the area. Council Member Kohls clarified that Mr. Werner agreed to the rules of the subdivision in 1986, anticipating that in time the densities would be there and he would not have a problem Regular Meeting — November 19, 2003 Cottage Grove City Council Page 14 building. Mr. Werner clarified that he had no choice but to accept the rules of the subdivision at that time noting that Council included it until certain conditions occurred in the future. Mayor Shiely expressed concerns stating that to grant the setback from the bluff line would mean granting variances, in essence, to every house along the bluff line in that area. Mr. Werner acknowledged that this could set a precedent adding that there are no other vacant lots in his specific area. Council Member Kohls noted that the Chair for the Planning Commission was present and asked for further clarification of the rationale some Commissioners had to allow these variances. Myron Bailey, 7788 Jasmine Avenue, Planning Commission Chair, clarified for the Council. He explained that some of the Commissioners did not feel the view from the river was an issue and that the Commissioners wanted to stay with the setback requirements. He stated that there was a definite split adding that most of the Commissioners did want to help with the decision but could not come to a consensus on the 20 -foot bluff line setback proposal. He reviewed the Planning Commission discussion with Council. Mayor Shiely asked if they discussed the setback from the bluff and building on the other lot separately. Commissioner Bailey stated that they did discuss each issue separately noting that the unbuildable portion was more related to the Critical Corridor Area Act. He explained that most of the Commissioners believed that a home could be built on the property and that their main concern was the bluff line setback. Mayor Shiely clarified that the intent of the Corridor Critical Area Act with Council adding that it is not due to a concern for people being able to see the home down by the river as much as the ability to view of the home from the river. Council Member Wolcott clarified that the only issue is whether to allow or not allow the 100 - foot setback. Mayor Shiely agreed stating that subdivision of the lot is not an issue. She stated that her issue is with the setback because there are too many homes in the area that are subject to the same restrictions and they would be affected by this decision if they decide to build another house. She noted that there is an agency that could come forward and not allow this regardless of what the City allows. Council Member Wolcott asked if there are any other lots along 113` Street that would have the same potential issues. Senior Planner McCool stated that he does not know of any other parcels south of 113` that are vacant, except that it appeared some of the larger lots might be able to be split if a variance to the density requirements was granted. Council Member Kohls asked Mr. Werner if he would still choose to build on this site if the setback request is not approved. Mr. Werner stated this is a tough question to answer. He explained that their attraction to this lot is because it is on the river. He stated that the house would be less desirable if they had to build back 100 -feet from the bluff line. He stated that it Regular Meeting — November 19, 2003 Cottage Grove City Council Page 15 would create a strange location for the house adding that he is not sure he would go forward with the build. MOTION BY WOLCOTT, SECONDED BY KOHLS, TO ADOPT A RESOLUTION GRANTING THE 20 -FOOT VARIANCE WITH A ONE -STORY HOME WITH PRESERVATION OF THE TREELINE WITH THE POTENTIAL FOR FINE IF TREES ARE REMOVED. Council Member Grossklaus expressed concerns regarding the trees and site line of the home from the river and suggested including a stipulation in the resolution that addresses the view. Mr. Werner stated that the Corridor Critical Area Act includes a rule regarding the cutting of trees and reviewed with the Council. City Attorney Thomson stated that they could include verbiage that would address the view and could be a condition of the variance once the house is built. She stated that the variance could be recorded and placed on file for notice to future property owners. UPON VOTE BEING TAKEN, MOTION FAILED 2 -3. (AYE: RICE, WOLCOTT; NAY: GROSSKLAUS, KOHLS, SHIELY) Mr. Werner explained that he is presently in a position where he would have to present his proposal again to Council or take this issue to court. He clarified his understanding that the Council's only concern is the density and the only reason they want to deny his request is because he wants to build on the bluff line. He explained that his argument is that if his original home was built on the bluff line and it burned, he should be allowed to replace it in its original location. City Attorney Thomson clarified that a motion was on the floor to approve the density requirements and to approve the variance for the setback. She stated that the motion failed and new law now provides that a failure to approve a motion is in affect a denial and that Council should state their reasons for denial. She explained that the Council should take affirmative action to grant the variance setback adding that no house can be built at this point and asked if this was Council's intention. Council Member Kohls explained that she does not have a problem with the Werner's building a new house. She stated that her issue is with the setback request. She clarified that they do not have to be 100 -feet away noting that presently she is not prepared to specify a distance from the bluff line, only that she is open to reviewing options. She stated that until they come back and present other options she stands to deny the setback request due to current City Ordinance. City Administrator Schroeder stated that Council could direct staff to work with the Werners to determine other options adding that they do not want to create a situation that would require the creation of a new application. Regular Meeting — November 19, 2003 Cottage Grove City Council Page 16 Senior Planner McCool stated that they could apply for a building permit so long as the house is 100 -feet away from the bluff line. City Attorney Thomson suggested to Council that it might be more appropriate to consider the third resolution recommended in their information packet. She suggested modifying it by removing all references to the setback areas and split the two questions to address the density. She stated that the Werners could have a variance that allows them to build on the second lot and the issue as to where the house would be located on the lot could be tabled for further discussion. She stated that in the interim the Werners could work with Staff to come up with a recommendation for Council to consider. Mr. Werner asked if the recommendation would include returning to the Planning Commission for their review and to determine a specific distance. Senior Planner McCool agreed that it should go back to the Planning Commission for further discussion. Council Member Kohls asked if time was an issue. Mr. Werner stated that to some degree time would be an issue. He explained that the builder they are considering is 8 months out on their construction schedule. MOTION BY SHIELY, SECONDED BY KOHLS, TO ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 03 -267 A RESOLUTION GRANTING A VARIANCE TO TITLE 11 -15 -813 TO DEVIATE FROM THE FOUR UNITS PER QUARTER /QUARTER SECTION REQUIREMENT. MOTION CARRIED 5 -0. MOTION BY KOHLS, SECONDED BY SHIELY, TO TABLE THE REQUEST FOR A VARIANCE TO TITLE 11- 15 -8C(1) TO ALLOW CONSTRUCTION OF A HOUSE LESS THAN 100 FEET FROM THE MISSISSIPPI RIVER BLUFF LINE AT 7641 -113 STREET SOUTH. MOTION CARRIED 5 -0. City Attorney Thomson clarified Mr. Werner's consent to tabling this matter until they have a date. Mr. Werner agreed and clarified that the soonest it would come up for review would be within the 30 -60 day extension from tonight. D. Consider Approving an Interim Conditional Use Permit to allow Aggregate Industries to Construct a 3,400-foot long Earthen Berm along the South Side of Lower Grey Cloud Island. Senior Planner McCool stated that Aggregate Industries has applied for an interim conditional use permit to allow construction of a 3,400 -foot long earthen berm in the Mississippi River floodplain at the Nelson Mining Pit on Lower Grey Cloud Island. He reviewed the earthen berm with Council stating that the berm would act as a filter to keep silt, floating debris, trees and other large objects out of the active mining area in the event of a 100 -year flood. He stated that the berm would not be visible to the public except from certain viewpoints from the Mississippi River. He stated that the proposed berm would be a minimum of 200 feet from the normal water elevation of the river and that the area between the proposed berm and the river is a wooded mass of mature trees that would be protected. He provided the Council with a brief overview of the request noting that the Planning Regular Meeting — November 19, 2003 Cottage Grove City Council Page 17 Commission held a public hearing on October 27, 2003. He reviewed public testimony with Council noting that the Planning Commission unanimously approved the Aggregate Industries mining permit but modified Planning Staff's recommendation by deleting condition #9 as the Commission believed that this condition had no relationship to constructing the earthen berm and that this particular issue would be best addressed in the mining permit application. He stated that the Army Corps of Engineers did not have any comments since the berm material is below the floodwater sensitivity level and does not affect the wetlands. Mr. Berago stated that they agree with Staff's recommendation. MOTION BY KOHLS, SECONDED BY RICE, TO ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 03 -268 A RESOLUTION APPROVING AN INTERIM CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO ALLOW AGGREGATE INDUSTRIES TO CONSTRUCT A BERM IN THE MISSISSIPPI RIVER FLOODPLAIN AT THE NELSON MINING PIT ON LOWER GREY CLOUD ISLAND. MOTION CARRIED 5 -0. E. Consider Approving the 2004 Mining Permit to allow Aggregate Industries to continue Mining Operations at the Nelson Mining Pit on Lower Grey Cloud Island. Senior Planner McCool stated that Aggregate Industries has applied for their annual mining permit for their mining operations on Lower Grey Cloud Island. He reviewed the application request with Council and provided them with an overview of the discussion from the Planning Commission's public hearing, held on October 27, 2003. Mayor Shiely asked if they have considered the cost to hire an arborist and if so what the cost would be. Mr. Berago stated that he thought the costs would be more than the placement and reviewed with Council. Council Member Wolcott stated that if Mr. Berago is not aware, Public Works Director Burshten would be discussing reconstruction of the causeway adding that it is their hope that he would be able to assist the City in getting this done by next spring. Mayor Shiely stated that they would appreciate his assistance in locating a site on the island for a boat launch. Mr. Berago stated that a location for a boat launch was discussed at the Planning Commission meeting adding that their landlord is not too desirous for them to create a boat launch. Council Member Kohls stated that she would go along with the 250 trees adding that it seems to counter what she would consider. She asked Mr. Berago to further clarify their plans with the larger trees. Mr. Berago reviewed stating that it would make more sense for them to hire an arborist. He stated that the arborist would work closely with them to help the trees survive the planting. Council Member Kohls stated that it is a good plan. She stated that next year she would like to receive a report from the arborist that identifies how many trees, out of the 250, they expect would survive. Regular Meeting — November 19, 2003 Cottage Grove City Council Page 18 MOTION BY WOLCOTT, SECONDED BY RICE, TO ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 03 -269 A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE 2004 MINING PERMIT FOR AGGREGATE INDUSTRIES, INC. MOTION CARRIED 5 -0. RESPONSE TO PREVIOUSLY RAISED COUNCIL COMMENTS AND REQUESTS - NONE COUNCIL COMMENTS AND REQUESTS Council Member Grossklaus referenced an article in the Sunday Pioneer Press that addresses the livable wage issue. He suggested that the EDA review the article and provide recommendations regarding the minimum wage levels in Cottage Grove. Council Member Wolcott clarified the average wages with Council stating that the EDA would review the article. Mayor Shiely suggested that the Council set a date for their 2004 Goal Setting Session. She suggested scheduling a session before the Truth and Taxation hearing scheduled on December 9, 2003. Council Member Wolcott stated that due to a prior commitment he would not be able to attend the session. Mayor Shiely asked Council Member Wolcott to forward his specific goals to her before the meeting. PAY BILLS MOTION BY WOLCOTT, SECONDED BY RICE, TO APPROVE PAYMENT OF CHECK NUMBERS 131922 THROUGH 132126 TOTALING $2,326,961.87. (CHECKS 131922 — 131971 TOTALING $116,725.11 ISSUED PRIOR TO COUNCIL APPROVAL.) MOTION CARRIED 5 -0. Mayor Shiely called a ten - minute break at 10:47 p.m. Mayor Shiely called the meeting back to order at 11:03 p.m. WORKSHOP SESSION — OPEN A. 2004 -2008 Capital Improvements Plan Finance Director Hedberg provided the Council with an overview of the 2004 -2008 Capital Improvements Plan. He stated that the CIP draft is a planning document based on the results of the 2004 budget discussions during the past summer. He reviewed the document stating that the Council should review and consider the projects so that a plan could be brought to the Planning Commission for a public hearing. He explained that after the Planning Commission holds their public hearing a final draft would be brought back to the City Council for final adoption. Hedberg stated that the remaining steps to be completed for the 2004 -2008 CIP draft is this workshop, the public hearing with the Planning Commission and the final draft for review and Regular Meeting — November 19, 2003 Cottage Grove City Council Page 19 approval by the Council. He reviewed the expenditure packets with Council. He explained that this is a planning document noting that the CIP serves as a work plan for the next two years. He explained that the projects listed for 2004 and ending in 2005 are the projects Staff prepares for now. He assured the Council that this would not be the last time they would take action on any of the projects listed. He stated that they would be bringing several back for further consideration throughout the process of each project. He explained that the largest piece is the area funds noting that most of the projects have multiple funding sources. Mayor Shiely clarified that the numbers include the potential sale of the Oakwood property. Finance Director Hedberg confirmed and reviewed the summaries for all projects by funding source with Council. He stated that many of the identified projects include the park areas, the seal coating and the subdivision utility projects. He stated that it would not include any taxpayer impact. Hedberg reviewed the existing debt service for all pavement management projects with the Council noting that it projects out over 15 years. He provided the Council with an overview of the debt services amounts stating that in 2003 they did some restructuring. He reviewed the levy requirements and capacity, the utilities, pavement management projects and bonding requirements with Council. Council Member Wolcott referenced the water tower and asked the Public Works Director, when they find out about the land, to place a sign in the area so residents are aware of what is going on. He stated that this is an issue noting that issues concerning the water tower should be advertised so that residents are not surprised when it actually happens. Public Works Director Burshten confirmed that this would be done. Council Member Kohls asked Finance Director Hedberg to email her with information regarding the stormwater issues. She stated that she would like a history of five to six years that includes the amount of money they have projected to spend. She stated that she would like this information for every year for the next five years. She explained that she would like to know more about the stormwater issues and how they would be addressed. She asked if a referendum is something that should be included in the CIP. Finance Director Hedberg clarified that if it is done by a referendum it would not have to be included in the CIP. He stated that they do identify this type of project in the CIP. Council Member Kohls stated that she could see the Council reviewing the need for a new City Hall in the near future. She asked if the costs for this service would be included. Finance Director Hedberg referenced the graph relating to the levy. He explained that if they stick to the 5% growth tax base it would come out of the levy. He further explained that if they want to deviate from this through a referendum it would cause the amounts on the debt service levy to go up. City Administrator Schroeder clarified that the graph is, overall, conservative. He stated that if Council wants to continue to buy down or set aside dollars they would have to acknowledge Regular Meeting — November 19, 2003 Cottage Grove City Council Page 20 that they could not build a public facility without using other cash resources and reviewed with Council. Council Member Kohls clarified that her only reason for discussing this is that, in the future, Council is going to have to deal with new City facilities. She stated that they have issues with the current facility that should be addressed and she is trying to get a feel for where it is, for priority, in the CIP. City Administrator Schroeder clarified that it is included on a list of items that require addressing but not with high priority. Mayor Shiely stated that they included facilities as an issue in one of their goal sessions earlier this year. She expressed concerns stating that a year has gone by and they still do not have a plan in place or a funding source identified. Council Member Kohls agreed stating that Staff and Council should begin having these discussions. She stated that they could continue to delay but nothing positive would be accomplished. She stated that they should have some form of a financial plan in place to address these issues. City Administrator Schroeder acknowledged her concerns stating that he would like to feel a bit more confident before putting too much effort into the planning process. Mayor Shiely asked when the CIP became a two -year work plan. Finance Director Hedberg explained that it is actually a one -year plan and clarified that planning for projects such as the pavement management planning should begin a year ahead of the start time. WORKSHOP SESSION — CLOSED - NONE ADJOURNMENT MOTION BY WOLCOTT, SECONDED BY RICE, TO ADJOURN THE MEETING AT 11:30 P.M. MOTION CARRIED 5 -0. Respectfully submitted, Bonita Sullivan TimeSaver Off Site Secretarial, Inc.