Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2005-08-10 MINUTES REGULAR MEETING COTTAGE GROVE CITY COUNCIL August 10, 2005 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 Myron Bailey Council Member Karla Bigham Council Member Mark Grossklaus Council Member Pat Rice Also Present: Ryan Schroeder, City Administrator Ron Hedberg, Finance and Administrative Services Director Howard Blin, Community Development Director Jennifer Levitt, City Engineer Craig Woolery, Deputy Public Safety Director Les Burshten, Public Works Director Corrine Thomson, City Attorney No one stepped forward to speak during Open Forum. CALL TO ORDER The City Council of the City of Cottage Grove, Washington County, Minnesota held a regular th meeting on Wednesday, August 10, 2005, 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 Myron Bailey Council Member Karla Bigham Council Member Mark Grossklaus Council Member Pat Rice Also Present: Ryan Schroeder, City Administrator Ron Hedberg, Finance and Administrative Services Director Howard Blin, Community Development Director Regular Meeting – August 10, 2005 Cottage Grove City Council Page 2 Jennifer Levitt, City Engineer Craig Woolery, Deputy Public Safety Director Les Burshten, Public Works Director Corrine Thomson, City Attorney ADOPTION OF AGENDA MOTION BY BIGHAM, SECONDED BY BAILEY, TO APPROVE THE AGENDA AS PRESENTED. MOTION CARRIED 5-0. PRESENTATIONS A. MRPA’s Award of Excellence to the Recreation Department for the Get to Work Program. Mayor Shiely stated that the City Recreation Department is receiving an award from the Minnesota Recreation and Parks Association noting that it is an award of excellence for their program called 'Get to Work'. She stated that Chris Esser, representing the Minnesota Recreation and Parks Association is present this evening along with Jason West and Molly Pietruszewski for the City of Cottage Grove. Chris Esser, Minnesota Recreation and Parks Association, stated that he is happy to be here this evening noting that it is very exciting to be able to present the City of Cottage Grove with the Minnesota Recreation and Parks Association Award of Excellence for the ‘Get to Work’ program. He provided the Council with a brief history of the Minnesota Recreation and Parks Association stating that they were formed in 1937 to help the growth, development and preservation of parks throughout the State of Minnesota. He stated that members come from municipal, county, state, district, commercial and private agencies. He reviewed the purpose of the agency noting that the members represent a cross-section of association members from the State of Minnesota adding that the committee feels it is important to increase awareness of an appreciation for the excellent parks, trails, facilities, recreation programs and services that occur in Minnesota, which is the reason why the Award of Excellence program was created. He stated that the Award of Excellence program is an annual program that was created to recognize agencies and their staff for exemplary projects that occurred in 2004. He congratulated the City of Cottage Grove. Mayor Shiely congratulated the Parks and Recreation Department and thanked Mr. West and Ms. Pietruszewski for their hard work and support. B. Presentation by horticulture interns Myrra Lamb and Alana Shambow. Myrra Lamb provided the Council with an overview of the landscape project, outdoor th projects, recommendations for 80 Street, the process for collection of information and material, use of work time, changes for future internships, and their information resources. Regular Meeting – August 10, 2005 Cottage Grove City Council Page 3 Ms. Lamb and Ms. Shambow reviewed the landscape design projects including Pine Coulee Park, Industrial Buffer, Arbor Meadows, Pine Glen Park, Hidden Valley Park, Nina’s Park, th Industrial Flume and the Highlands Pond Park. They provided recommendations for 80 Street landscaping improvements. They included a review of their Total Time Use Summary that extended from May 16 through July 19, 2005. Ms. Lamb reviewed their recommendations for future internship changes stating that both th she and Ms. Shambow agreed that that less time should be spent maintaining 80 street islands noting that it is a very large project and takes a lot of time to maintain. She stated that eventually more employees would be needed to assist in the maintenance of planted areas that are being added to the City of Cottage Grove. Mayor Shiely thanked them for the good job they did for the City of Cottage Grove. APPROVAL OF MINUTES A. July 6, 2005 Regular Meeting Mayor Shiely stated that the minutes stand approved as presented. B. July 27, 2005 Special Meeting Mayor Shiely stated that the minutes stand approved as presented. CONSENT CALENDAR Council Member Rice asked to pull Item 4E. He stated that Item 4E concerns the appointment of Rebecca Kronlund to an unexpired term with the Planning Commission. He stated that he and Chairman Reese had interviewed two candidates and they had decided on Rebecca Kronlund. He stated that he received a call yesterday informing him that Ms. Kronlund has to get permission from her employer noting that he does not think the appointment would be a problem. He suggested that they hold off on approval. MOTION BY RICE, SECOND BY BIGHAM TO REMOVE ITEM 4E, APPOINTMENT OF REBECCA KRONLUND TO FULFILL AN UNEXPIRED TERM ON THE PLANNING COMMISSION, ENDING FEBRUARY 28, 2006, FROM THE CONSENT CALENDAR AND TABLE ITEM 4E, APPOINTMENT OF REBECCA KRONLUND TO FULFILL AN UNEXPIRED TERM ON THE PLANNING COMMISSION, ENDING FEBRUARY 28, 2006, TO THE FIRST CITY COUNCIL MEETING IN SEPTEMBER 2005. MOTION CARRIED 5-0. Council Member Bigham asked to pull Item 4F. She stated that this is involving the ADA requirements in response to citizen input on disability sensitive construction standards. She referenced the second paragraph noting that it states that the City of Cottage Grove currently makes certain new construction is accessible to handicap residents throughout the initial plan review process and asked what they used to determine this. Regular Meeting – August 10, 2005 Cottage Grove City Council Page 4 Community Development Director Blin explained the process noting that it is all-inclusive. He noted that they follow the International Building Code. Council Member Bigham stated that it was her hope that the Planning Commission would also review this and asked that this be included to their list of ordinance reviews. She stated that she would like an update from the Planning Commission included along with the Human Rights and Services Commission. Community Development Director Blin assured the Council that he would coordinate between the two groups and include updates from both Commissions. Mayor Shiely asked to pull Item 4I. She stated that this item involves a resolution to accept the proposed changes to the City’s hunting ordinance and approve the designated areas to discharge archery and firearms within the City. She noted that last year when the City had issued special hunting licenses to resolve the deer problem in the orchard one of the requirements was that the land owner had to provide the City with proof of insurance and she asked Captain Woolery how the City would know if the property owner is properly insured and the City would not end up with liability issues if something were to happen. Captain Woolery stated that the hunt never occurred last fall adding that when they spoke with the insurance agent they did not know how to draft language addressing that concern. He stated that they are limiting the number of permits the City would be involved with noting that the City of Cottage Grove is the only City in the metropolitan area that issues permits for hunting on private land. He stated that the State Statutes address where an individual can discharge a firearm or bow and arrow, adding that there has never been a permitting process other than an agreement between the landowner and hunter. He stated that the landowner would be responsible for deciding who would be allowed to hunt on their property. Mayor Shiely noted that a previous Council Member, who was in the insurance business, had expressed concerns about liability and this could possibly fall under a liability umbrella that the landowner would have. She asked if the City would potentially take on any of the liability if the City does not ensure or investigate whether the landowner is adequately insured. City Attorney Thomson clarified that the City would not be liable for the conduct of private individuals on private property acting pursuant to, or not pursuant to, property owner permission. She stated that the City would not be liable if someone is trespassing on someone’s property and the City is not liable if they are hunting with permission. She stated that the City has discretionary immunity for the adoption of the ordinance that sets out those limits where hunting is permitted and those regulations. Mayor Shiely asked if the public road is considered a public right-of-way and would the regulations of where an individual could shoot include a road as a part of the right-of-way. Regular Meeting – August 10, 2005 Cottage Grove City Council Page 5 Captain Woolery stated that it would include the roadway and the public easement, which is the ditch. He explained that it clearly states that an individual cannot discharge a firearm within 500 feet of a public right-of-way or bow and arrow within 300 feet of a public right-of- way. Mayor Shiely stated that she questions the map and clarified that the designated areas represent the areas of the City where firearms are allowed. Captain Woolery confirmed and reviewed the map with Council. He explained that it is the same language that was in place before and explained that the proposed changes in the ordinance is to not have the City involved in the permit process and to keep it between the landowner and the person requesting the hunt. th Mayor Shiely asked what the rationale is for the small piece of property next to 100 Street. Captain Woolery indicated that they held two public meetings last year noting that the landowner is Gene Smallidge. He explained that this language was specifically grandfathered in on the original firearms ordinance since 1985. He stated that Mr. Smallidge attended all of the public meetings and was very adamant about keeping the language in place. He assured the Council that they have had no problems or complaints with this property. He suggested that they leave the language in and keep everything in place as an AG1/AG2. He provided the Council with an example of the map used in 2002 and reviewed the firearms areas that were in affect through 2003. He referenced the southwest and northwest area of Section 28 noting that it is a quarter section and that Mr. Smallidge has had no problems with the property so he left the language as is. He acknowledged that it would be Council’s prerogative if they choose to remove the language. He explained that each year the map is updated based on development patterns and is reviewed by both the Public Safety Commission, Community Policing Teams and finalized by City Council. th Mayor Shiely referenced Ideal Avenue and 100 Street and expressed concerns stating that this is a very busy, well-traveled area. She explained that her concern is that a stray bullet could hit someone traveling in this area. She asked what would happen if other property owners in the area would ask for the same privileges and would the City do this for all the other similar properties. Captain Woolery reviewed the surrounding areas with Council and assured them that they would not look at starting any new properties in the area. th Mayor Shiely stated that the City did receive some complaints from residents along 110 Street about the fact that firearms are allowed in the area. She stated that this is something that should be considered. Council Member Rice stated that he does not think this is any different than along County Road 19. Regular Meeting – August 10, 2005 Cottage Grove City Council Page 6 Captain Woolery explained that the statute protects the discharge of firearms adding that they have also included language that defines the projectile and agreed that this is something to evaluate on an ongoing basis. He stated that with the way things are changing they would agree removing it from the map if any complaints are received. Council Member Bailey asked if the City would have to wait a year to pull the area if something does occur in the area. Captain Woolery recommended that any occurrence should be acted upon immediately and put on the next Council agenda for discussion. He explained that the City would have to deal with the person because they have committed a crime at that point because they have violated the ordinance by allowing the projectile to leave the property. He stated that the landowners do not want any problems on their property any more than the City does and are willing to work through issues if they occur. He stated that this is a longer-term approach noting that he had Wildlife Management officials from the State of Minnesota attend their meetings noting that they do recommend and agree that archery is a recreational and safe way to address the safety issues with deer on the roadways. Mayor Shiely noted that when the Council considered the West Draw request they acknowledged that they did have a deer problem and agreed that all of the development has increased the problem. She stated that it is unfortunate that the City does not have some kind of access for hunting that would cut down the deer population that is coming out on Highway 61. Captain Woolery agreed adding that the City could bring in hunters to control but it would not have that big of an impact because it is a long-term issue. He suggested that they continue to watch the firearms noting that long-term this would eventually move out of the City. He suggested leaving it to archery as a means of control as recommended, keep it to five-acres, require that the hunters are in a stand, have written permission from the owners and have identification. He stated that this would allow some access to this area noting that it would also have to be outside the MUSA boundaries and it would have to be a semi-rural area. He noted that most suburban areas typically utilize archery to address this issue. Council Member Bailey referenced the Comprehensive Plan changes out to Kimbro and asked if this would impact these areas. City Administrator Schroeder stated that as they get closer to development in this area this would be removed. Community Development Director Blin clarified that once the area is rezoned to a residential district it would be outlawed. Council Member Bailey stated that his only other concern for the future would be the area thth west of Military and the small piece of property between 80 and 90 Street. He stated that Regular Meeting – August 10, 2005 Cottage Grove City Council Page 7 this should be reviewed at the time they begin to develop the South Washington County Service Center. Council Member Bigham referenced a discussion the Public Safety Commission had last year in regard to the special permit noting that there were concerns expressed regarding the direction of shooting. She asked if anything would be done to make neighbors aware of hunting on the property. She asked if this would be publicly discussed. Captain Woolery stated that he is not sure how they would be able to draft language to address that concern. He reviewed past permit process with Council noting that the process itself became so cumbersome that people stopped applying for the permits. Council Member Bigham suggested that the City issue an informational update to the residents that would help to educate the residents on the changes. Captain Woolery stated that he did include an outline of the community education process they plan to do if the changes are approved and reviewed with Council. City Attorney Thomson asked if approval of the Consent Agenda includes Item 4I. Mayor Shiely confirmed that it does. City Attorney Thomson stated that there was discussion by the Council regarding the issue of the MUSA boundary and asked if it is the Council’s desire to switch it based on zoning and not the MUSA boundary. The Council agreed that this was their desire. Mayor Shiely stated that this should be acted upon separately. MOTION BY BAILEY, SECOND BY RICE, TO EXCLUDE ITEM 4I, A RESOLUTION AND ORDINANCE RELATING TO HUNTING REGULATION; AMENDING TITLE 5, CHAPTER 3, SECTION 1 AND 6 OF THE COTTAGE GROVE CITY CODE, FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA FOR A SEPARATE VOTE. MOTION CARRIED 5-0. Council Member Bailey stated that what he would like to do is make the change as discussed and change it from the MUSA Boundary and to do it by zoning. City Attorney Thomson referenced the third page of the ordinance under Section 5 as it relates to archery hunting stating that in two different places it references that AG zoning has been stricken, this language should be reinstated. She stated that in paragraph 2C where the language regarding the zoning has been stricken in the first clause should be reinstated. City Attorney Thomson asked if it is Council’s intention that there wouldn’t be any shooting allowed within 300 feet of a property zoned other than AG-1 or AG-2 or R-1. She stated that this would be the change made to sub-paragraph 1. She suggested striking the first portion Regular Meeting – August 10, 2005 Cottage Grove City Council Page 8 and state that within 300 feet of any property with a zoning classification other than AG1, AG2 or R1. She stated that this would accomplish their intent because they would be restricting archery hunting only to AG1, AG2 or R1 properties and instead of referencing MUSA they are simply saying that the individual can’t hunt within 300 feet of a property that has any other zoning classification. Council Member Bailey stated that he would be willing to make the motion based on the recommended changes. MOTION BY BAILEY, SECOND BY RICE, TO ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 05-118 RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING SUMMARY PUBLICATION OF ORDINANCE NO. 777 AN ORDINANCE RELATING TO HUNTING REGULATION; AMENDING TITLE 5, CHAPTER 3, SECTION 1 AND 6 OF THE COTTAGE GROVE CITY CODE AND TO INCLUDE AMENDED LANGUAGE STATING THAT AN INDIVIDUAL CANNOT HUNT WITHIN 300 FEET OF A PROPERTY THAT IS NOT ZONED AG1, AG2 OR R1. MOTION CARRIED 5-0 AS AMENDED. MOTION BY BAILEY, SECONDED BY RICE, TO: A. ACCEPT AND PLACE ON FILE THE FOLLOWING MINUTES: i. PLANNING COMMISSION OF MAY 23, 2005 AND JUNE 27, 2005. ii. PUBLIC SAFETY, HEALTH AND WELFARE COMMISSION MAY 17, 2005 AND JUNE 21, 2005. B. ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 05-113 AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF A GRANT AGREEMENT RELATING TO THE ADMINISTRATION AND IMPLEMENTATION OF A TRAFFIC SAFETY PROGRAM BY THE COTTAGE GROVE POLICE DEPARTMENT. C. ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 05-114 APPROVING FINAL PAYMENT IN THE AMOUNT OF $85,936.58 TO ARCON CONSTRUCTION COMPANY ON THE HARDWOOD AVENUE CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENT PROJECT. D. ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 05-115 GRANTING A VARIANCE FROM TITLE 11-15- 7A, EXPANSION OF AN EXISTING STRUCTURE, AND TITLE 11-15-8, DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR THE MISSISSIPPI RIVER CORRIDOR CRITICAL AREA OVERLAY DISTRICT TO ALLOW CONSTRUCTION OF A DECK AT 8327 RIVER ACRES ROAD 93 FEET FROM THE RIVER BANK WHEN 100 FEET IS REQUIRED. E. ITEM REMOVED AND TABLED TO FIRST CITY COUNCIL MEETING IN SEPTEMBER 2005. F. RECEIVE RESPONSE TO CITIZEN INPUT ON DISABILITY SENSITIVE CONSTRUCTION STANDARDS. G. AUTHORIZE ISSUANCE OF AN OUTDOOR EVENT PERMIT TO MITCHELL METCALF TO CONDUCT A WRESTLING SHOW AT COTTAGE GROVE VFW POST 8752, 9260 EAST POINT DOUGLAS ROAD SOUTH, ON AUGUST 27, 2005, CONDITIONED ON THE APPLICANT MEETING INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS Regular Meeting – August 10, 2005 Cottage Grove City Council Page 9 ESTABLISHED BY THE CITY CLERK’S OFFICE AND RECEIPT OF THE LICENSE FEE PAYMENT. H. ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 05-116 AND RESOLUTION NO. 05-117 AUTHORIZING THE REAPPORTIONMENT OF ASSESSMENTS ON PINECLIFF ADDITION. I. REMOVED FOR SEPARATE VOTE. J. ACCEPT 2004 TIF REPORTS K. APPROVE THE AMENDED PERSONNEL POLICY TO CLARIFY ANNUAL LEAVE ACCRUAL FOR REGULAR PART-TIME EMPLOYEES WORKING LESS THAN TWENTY HOURS PER WEEK. L. APPROVE THE AMENDED PAY PLAN TO INCLUDE POLICE CAPTAIN POSITIONS ISSUED A CITY VEHICLE OR ALLOWED A CAR ALLOWANCE. MOTION CARRIED 5-0. RESPONSE TO PREVIOUSLY RAISED OPEN FORUM ISSUES PUBLIC HEARINGS NONE BID AWARDS A. Consider Awarding the Contract for the East Point Douglas Road Sidewalk Project to O’Malley Construction, Inc. in the Amount of $140,562.48. City Engineer Levitt provided the Council with a brief overview of the proposed project noting that Staff has reviewed the bids and is pleased to know that O’Malley Construction has done streetscape projects similar to this in Roseville, St. Louis Park, St. Michael and Mankato. She stated that with all of their background Staff is recommending that they be awarded the bid. Council Member Bailey asked for the timeframe of the project. City Engineer Levitt stated that they plan to schedule a pre-construction meeting for next week noting that the project has a fall completion date. MOTION BY RICE, SECOND BY BAILEY, TO ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 05-119 AWARDING BID FOR THE EAST POINT DOUGLAS ROAD SIDEWALK IMPROVEMENT PROJECT TO O’MALLEY CONSTRUCTION, INC. IN THE AMOUNT OF $140,562.48. MOTION CARRIED 5-0. UNFINISHED AND NEW BUSINESS A. Consider Authorizing a Reversion of the Title to the Park and Ride Property to the State of Minnesota and a Levy for Trunk Utility Costs against the Property. Regular Meeting – August 10, 2005 Cottage Grove City Council Page 10 Community Development Director Blin stated that there are two separate actions to this request. He stated that the first is to transfer the title that the City currently holds with the County for the park and ride property back to the State of Minnesota. He explained that the City originally acquired the property, along with Washington County, in 2002, with the understanding that the County would build a South Service Center on part of the property with the remainder of the property be leased to the Metropolitan Council. He stated that since that time the County has decided not to build a Service Center at this location and Metro Transit has determined that they would like to have title to the property. He explained that the City has to send the title back to the State of Minnesota so they can pay the County and gain title to the property. He stated that the City, the County and the Metro Transit have agreed to $600,000.00 as the purchase price for the property. Community Development Director Blin stated that the second action is to levy special assessments for area sanitary sewer, water, and storm sewer charges against the property. He explained that this action is necessary for the City to recover these costs. Council Member Bigham asked if this means that they could shut it down or close it at any time. Community Development Director Blin confirmed noting that they could also shut down operations, like they discussed earlier this year, at any time. He stated that the fact that they don’t hold title to the property now does not mean they can’t stop serving the property. Mayor Shiely asked what would happen if the Red Rock Corridor moves forward and this is the site that is chosen for the train station, which would be the responsibility of the City. Council Member Bigham agreed stating that this is what she is concerned about. She stated that she does not want the City to lose any authority with this property. Community Development Director Blin stated that in terms of Red Rock and the City having control of the property as a station site they are assuming that the Metropolitan Council would allow this location to be used as a station site. Mayor Shiely stated that the City and local community are expected to do the planning and there are expenses involved. She stated that it is expected that there would be a small lean- to for protection and anything better than that would incur additional expenses. Council Member Bigham expressed concerns stating that if they were to shut that site down they could make the City change locations. City Administrator Schroeder explained that the property can only be used for public purposes and if they were to shut the site down it could not be used for investment purposes. He noted that the Metropolitan Council would be responsible for operating the rail transit operation and the City would be responsible for the capital costs of the transit station over Regular Meeting – August 10, 2005 Cottage Grove City Council Page 11 and above a certain level. He assured the Council that there would be some form of transit station at this location whether the City owns the property or not. He explained that the City agreed, in 1999, to assist the Metropolitan Council and MnDOT in identifying sites that could be used for rubber-tire transit and rail transit. He stated that the reason this has been brought to Council at this time is because of after three years of negotiating this portion of the agreement it was decided that something had to come to conclusion. He stated that they are interested in acquiring free title of the land and the City was in a position where there were no alternate options other than to finish out the agreement. He stated that as a result of this the school district comes out the winner in all of this in that as a result of this transaction they would be netting approximately $170,000.00. Mayor Shiely provided the Council with an update on the Red Rock Corridor project noting that approximately one month ago they had a meeting with two speakers. One spoke about transit stations and how they are expanding; the other speaker discussed how the bus services are being cut back and it caused her to question why they are building more transit stations and yet they are cutting back their services. City Administrator Schroeder explained that the operator is Metro Transit, which is part of the Metropolitan Council. He stated that MnDOT subsidized the transit services in this area out of their operating budget until the June or July timeframe, which afforded the opportunity for the expansion and continuation of the expansion for a direct line of service to Minneapolis. He stated that this funding has now expired and the Metropolitan Council has continued to operate the service. Mayor Shiely stated that the Union Depot is going to be revamped and is going to become a center adding that when that is completed and the North Star is in place, Red Rock Corridor is the next one on the plan. She stated that they also have money available now for a study on high-speed rail between the Twin Cities and Chicago. She stated that this is very exciting noting that this is becoming a reality and is really going to happen. MOTION BY GROSSKLAUS, SECOND BY BAILEY, TO ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 05-120 ALLOWING TITLE OF THE PARK AND RIDE PROPERTY TO REVERT TO THE MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE FOR ACQUISITION BY THE METROPOLITAN COUNCIL. MOTION CARRIED 5-0. MOTION BY RICE, SECOND BY BIGHAM, TO ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 05-121 ADOPTING ASSESSMENTS FOR UTILITY IMPROVEMENTS SERVING COTTAGE GROVE PARK AND RIDE LOT. MOTION CARRIED 5-0. B. Accept the Final Report for the Recreation Facility Needs Study Mayor Shiely explained that this is the result of some work that was done on behalf of the City of Cottage Grove looking at future needs for the City parks. Regular Meeting – August 10, 2005 Cottage Grove City Council Page 12 Greg Ingraham, Ingraham and Associates, provided the Council with a brief overview of the Recreation and Facility Needs Study findings and recommendations noting that an in depth presentation was given at an earlier Council work session. He reviewed the study process, summary recommendations that include current needs, future needs and recommended focus areas. He reviewed the findings including system evaluation; existing facility needs; population growth and forecast; future facility needs by 2020; existing park system map and service area ratios; access passive, open space and natural areas; facility needs including recreational access to the Mississippi River, additional trails and a community center. He indicated that it was found that the parks are very well maintained adding that the City could improve their handicapped accessibility noting that the DNR does have grants available to help with the improvements. He noted that other improvement recommendations include renovation of park shelter buildings, light of athletic fields, invasive plant species control, adult facilities access, add some flexibility for recreation trends to insure use if trends change. He reviewed short-term recommendations to address current needs that include building soccer fields at West Draw Park, add second indoor ice sheet, add planned softball and baseball fields at Hamlet Park. Mayor Shiely asked if he is suggesting that the City keep their current ice arena and add another ice arena. Mr. Ingraham clarified that they should put an additional rink into the existing arena or look at a separate, new, two-rink complex. He stated that he would not recommend building one rink in another location because there are a lot of efficiency and use issues with that option. Mr. Ingraham stated that other short-term recommendations include implementing the East Ravine Park and open space recommendations and continue to acquire land for parks, trails and open spaces. He stated that improving boat access and a fishing pier at the Mississippi River would be good in addition to addressing shelters and invasive species plant controls. He noted that the City is well on their way in adding trails as land dedications noting that this is a phased process. He recommended preparing a land acquisition strategy for a sports complex, which would include looking at land now and the funding sources. He explained that the recommendations are for a large piece of land and it would make sense to look beyond the MUSA for that and tie it up now. He stated that as the MUSA evolves the land prices tend to increase rapidly and he does not have any clients that have regretted purchasing parkland prior to development. Council Member Rice asked what would be included in the strategy and how large would the facility be. Mr. Ingraham explained that a sports complex would be a concentration of organized fields and facilities for organized athletics. He stated they discussed, with Staff, the idea of having a facility for adult athletics and allowing the City to reconfigure and renovate another park area to service the youth athletics program, which would provide a focal complex for each of the two components of sports activities. He recommended 80 acres or larger noting that one of the options would be to add 40 acres to the existing complex or look at an 80 acre site at Regular Meeting – August 10, 2005 Cottage Grove City Council Page 13 another location. He stated that they wouldn’t have a lot of utility needs and could use the site during a utility phase in process. Mr. Ingraham provided the Council with an overview of the ongoing and long-term recommendations including continuing the acquisition of land for parks and open spaces. He provided an overview of the area map recommending future park service areas, which includes the study/plan recommendations. He recommended continuing to preserve open space and natural areas in rural areas; enhance partnerships with the school district; consider acquiring a site for an off-leash dog area; improve cultural arts, performing arts and public arts opportunities. He stated that the study includes a number of options to consider for a Community Center and suggested that the Council look at the market niche to determine what would work best for the Community. He stated that they have a great system noting that the highlights of the system are the community parks and greenway connections. He stated that if the City can keep that up with the East Ravine it would help to build value for the community. He urged the City to continue to enhance and expand partnerships and continue working to add trail connections. Council Member Bigham stated that she was very impressed with how thorough the study was adding that they did a very good job. She stated that she likes the dog park recommendation and the community center. Mayor Shiely referenced the ice arena options and asked if Mr. Ingraham sees this as separate from the sports complex. Mr. Ingraham stated that he does not see the ice arena as a separate item from the complex noting that if they went with a new two-sheet ice arena in a different location it could be included as a part of the sports complex. He explained that the City’s growth in 2020 and beyond could actually put the City in need of a third sheet of ice noting that he did not recommend this because it is dependent upon trends. He stated that the City should be aware of this when considering future needs. Mayor Shiely clarified that they are talking about three separate buildings, the ice arena, the sports complex and another building for the community center. Mr. Ingraham explained that he provided them with a summary of various community centers. He stated that it could be one complex noting that they would need a relatively large site to include indoor and outdoor activities. Mayor Shiely stated that she really feels that the Council should discuss the need for a community center again. She noted that they have discussed this in the past and can’t seem to come to an agreement on what a community center should look like. She stated that the Council should really discuss this further and make a decision based on all of the input that they have received. Regular Meeting – August 10, 2005 Cottage Grove City Council Page 14 Council Member Bailey stated that from a cost effective standpoint he is looking at doing something next to the current facility. He stated that if they looked at doing something for a community center the process would be to designate land or have land available for a third sheet if it ever became necessary. He stated that it is still a bit early to be considering what hockey would be like in twenty years. He stated that he agrees that it is time for this Council to define what they believe a community center should look like. He agreed that the Council does have to work to define the river access points for the Mississippi River and suggested that the City work together with the County and the DNR to define something for this area that would be open to the community. Mayor Shiely agreed stating that the City of Cottage Grove has more shoreline along the Mississippi River than any other City in the metropolitan area and yet there are no access points or park areas. Council Member Bigham suggested an open workshop to discuss the community center. She stated that they have a lot of information from this study and possibly utilize a workshop to chart out a timeline. She noted that this was something that the Council had identified as one of their goals for the year and suggested a workshop in September or October. Mayor Shiely agreed stating that the Council does need to sit down and discuss all of these issues. She stated that she would also like to thank the Parks Commission for all of their work on the research they have done on community centers in the metropolitan area. Council Member Bailey stated that he was very happy to see the recommendations addressing the dog park area and the preliminary design for outdoor park for the performing arts. MOTION BY RICE, SECOND BY BIGHAM, TO ACCEPT THE FINAL REPORT FOR THE RECREATION FACILITY NEEDS STUDY. MOTION CARRIED 5-0. C. Consider a Variance to Allow Construction of a 1,248 Square Foot Garage at 8886 Greystone Avenue South when 1,000 Square Feet is the Maximum Allowed by City Code. Community Development Director Blin stated that this is a variance request to build a garage that exceeds the 1,000 square foot maximum allowed in this zoning district. He noted that the original staff recommendation was to deny this request and explained that it was their belief that there was no hardship involved or unique circumstance with the property that would warrant this request. He stated that the Planning Commission reviewed this request at their last meeting and they recommended approval in a 4-2 vote. He stated that the prevailing opinion was that since there was no attached garage on this structure and someone in this district could build a fairly large attached garage and in addition to that build a 1,000 square foot detached garage, it was averaged and determined that this structure would fall within that range, which was the basis for their recommendation. He stated that the key consideration for Council is whether a garage of this size is in character for this Regular Meeting – August 10, 2005 Cottage Grove City Council Page 15 neighborhood, which is a single-family neighborhood with small attached or detached garages. Mayor Shiely asked if the City has control of what goes on inside the garage, such as a home business. Community Development Director Blin confirmed that the City would have control noting that the City does not allow home occupations to be operated out of accessory structures. Kevin McCarty, 8886 Greystone Avenue, stated that after some discussion the Planning Commission recommended approval of the variance request. He indicated that height restrictions were included as part of the approval adding that pictures were included with the report. He explained that the reason for the size is to allow parking for all of his vehicles. He stated that he currently does not have enough room to park all of his vehicles noting that height restrictions have been included noting that he would not be able to accomplish this without the variance. He stated that roof heights were also included and outlined in the report noting that the City Code now would allow 18 feet to the peak. He stated that his variance request was for the extra square footage of the facility adding that he planned to keep within the 18-foot height requirement, but with the recommendations from the Planning Commission it knocked him down to the peak of the roof, which he would not be able to meet. Mayor Shiely assured Mr. McCarty that the Council has reviewed the report and pictures. Mr. McCarty assured Council that he does not have any intention of operating a home occupation business out of his garage. Mayor Shiely explained that she is not concerned specifically with his intention but she is concerned about the possibility if someone should purchase the home from him in the future. Mr. McCarty stated that he drove through the surrounding neighborhoods and took pictures of buildings in his area that are larger than the structure he is proposing. He stated that some of the structures are located in his area and reviewed with Council. Council Member Rice expressed concerns. He stated that he cannot approve this request. Council Member Bigham explained that her concern is that Staff did not find anything indicating a hardship. She states that this shows that the applicant does have the land to meet the minimum requirements and she acknowledged that the purpose is for storage but it does not demonstrate a hardship. Mayor Shiely noted that there are a lot of people looking for a place to park additional vehicles and she is concerned stating that this could become a problem by repeating itself. Regular Meeting – August 10, 2005 Cottage Grove City Council Page 16 Mr. McCarty clarified that if he were to add this to his house he could attach it with 1500 square feet and he is asking to build an unattached 1,248 square foot building. Council Member Grossklaus stated that if they look around in the neighborhood there are several two-car garages with 1,000 square foot accessory buildings behind them. He stated he could go up to 1,000 feet which would put him at 1,500 square feet. He acknowledged that they plan to get rid of the current garage adding that he does not understand the issues if, according to Mr. McCarty, he could have a bigger garage if it were attached to the house. He stated that the Council should consider the size they want for the structure. He referenced City Code stating that there is nothing in the ordinance that specifically states 1,000 square feet is the maximum allowed. He expressed concerns stating that someone picked a number. He noted that according to the report it could be as large as 3,000 square feet, which goes back to prior variances. He stated that there is a house on Hadley that has a garage that is at least 1,500 square feet. He questioned the requirements stating that this has to be considered. Mayor Shiely asked if the height was addressed and whether Council Member Grossklaus has seen any of the structures higher than the house. Council Member Grossklaus indicated that the garage on Hadley is larger than the house. He stated that his question is that in this neighborhood how do they keep this viable if they only allow a one-car garage. City Administrator Schroeder clarified that what he is allowed to build now is a 1,000 square foot, detached garage, which is a five-car garage. He stated that if they consider a two-car garage minimum at 20 by 20 this is a 1,000-foot garage and if the ordinance allows for a five- car detached garage, this is not a hardship. Council Member Grossklaus stated that it does not make sense to him that it would be different if it were a detached garage. Mr. McCarty clarified that the only issue is the height of the structure. He stated that he would be able to build 18-feet high and assured Council that he would not be able meet that. Mayor Shiely explained that the height of the structure is driven by the square footage that he wants adding that if it were smaller it would not be as high. She clarified that what the Planning Commission passed this on the applicant has already determined that he would not be able to fulfill what the Planning Commission had approved. Mr. McCarty explained that at the time of the meeting they did not know what the actual height of the building would have to be. Community Development Director Blin explained that if they were to build a detached garage within the 1,000 square foot limit they could build to 18 feet in height adding that the Planning Commission said that if they build beyond the 1,000 square feet that it would have Regular Meeting – August 10, 2005 Cottage Grove City Council Page 17 to be less than 18 feet in height. He explained that their concern was that the building not standout in the neighborhood. Mayor Shiely agreed noting that it would be out of place no matter what. She stated that Council Member Grossklaus has suggested that there are others and she plans to take a trip through the area. Council Member Bigham clarified that what the Planning Commission recommended for approval the applicant cannot do. Mr. McCarty confirmed stating that in order to that the garage door would have to be 16 feet in height. City Administrator Schroeder stated that they would be able to do it but they wouldn’t be able to do it with the standard two by four truss. Council Member Bigham suggested that it might be worth reviewing this further before they continue with a decision. Council Member Bailey asked if they would have the room to build a 1,500 square foot attached garage. Community Development Director Blin confirmed that it would be possible to configure it in some way to make it work. Council Member Bailey asked the applicant why he would not consider this option. Mr. McCarty explained that they do not want the garage attached. He further explained that the cost to attach it to the house would triple the cost of the project. Council Member Bailey asked what his specific reason is for requesting the variance. Mr. McCarty explained that the reason he asking for the variance is due to the height requirement. Council Member Bailey asked if the Council were to approve a 1,000 square foot garage would he consider the garage or attach it to his home. Mr. McCarty stated that he would build the garage but it would be 18-feet tall. Council Member Bailey clarified that he is not concerned about the pitch but he is concerned about the footprint of the structure, which is why he is asking if the applicant would be able to build the 1,500 square-foot garage. Regular Meeting – August 10, 2005 Cottage Grove City Council Page 18 Mr. McCarty stated that the footprint would be approximately the same but deeper. He stated that if he actually built it bigger the height of the building would be less. Mayor Shiely stated that her opinion is that the applicant stays with the 1,000 square feet noting that even though the roof is higher than they want it is still lower than the maximum. Council Member Bailey stated that his opinion is that the applicant would be able to get more of the square footage that they want if they were to attach the garage to the house noting that the applicant does not want to do this. Mr. McCarty confirmed that he could build an attached garage and build an additional 1,000 square foot structure and all he wants to do is build one structure at 1,248 square feet. Mrs. McCarty noted that several of the houses in her neighborhood have similar structures and reviewed with the Council. Mr. McCarty stated that he does not understand the issue between 1,000 square feet and 1,248 square feet noting that most of the building would take up the back area of the property. He asked Council if they would have to make any decisions on this if he did not have any issues with the height recommended by the Planning Commission. Council Member Bailey stated that Council Member Rice was concerned that the Planning Commission did not review the footprint of the building. He stated that he does understand that the applicant does have the opportunity to build a 1,500 square foot attached garage and come back at a later time and build a detached, 1,000 square foot accessory structure. He stated that he does not see this as a hardship and explained that the Council has to follow the guidelines outlined in the ordinance. Council Member Grossklaus stated that this does not make any sense noting that they are always looking for hardships and it would be a financial hardship for him to build an attached garage because it would be more expensive to do. He stated that he does not agree with this noting that it does not make sense when they are trying to keep housing prices up, trying to keep people living in certain areas and trying to keep things out of sight from the driveways. City Attorney Thomson clarified that the State Statute states that economic hardship alone is not a hardship. Council Member Rice noted that approving this would allow someone to build an accessory structure that would be bigger than the footprint of the existing house. Council Member Grossklaus expressed concerns that they are making one part of the City live one way and another part of the City live another way. Regular Meeting – August 10, 2005 Cottage Grove City Council Page 19 City Attorney Thomson explained that the Council would have to state findings for their decision and asked if it was their intention to adopt the findings set forth in the Staff recommendations found on pages one and two of the Staff Report. Mayor Shiely confirmed that her intentions are based on the findings outlined in the Staff Report. Mr. McCarty asked what the actual hardships would be. Mayor Shiely stated that the hardships are explained in the report. Mrs. McCarty clarified that it was said earlier that there is nothing that specifically states what size of the garage could be. City Attorney Thomson explained that the statement was made but it was not accurate. She further explained that the ordinance restricts the size of an accessory structure to 1,000 square feet. She stated that what Council Member Grossklaus was referencing was a statement on page five of the Staff report that corrects a misstatement that was made at the Planning Commission about what the building code requirements are. She indicated that the building code would allow a garage up to 3,000 square feet, but the City zoning law, which restricts the size to 1,000 square feet, controls over that building code provision. Mrs. McCarty stated that she is having a hard time understanding this noting that she could legally build an attached garage at 1,500 square feet with an additional structure of 1,000 square feet but they can’t build one detached structure at 1,248 square feet. Mayor Shiely explained that the Council has to follow what is outlined within the City Code. She stated that this could be open for future discussion but right now Council is not in a position to change the ordinance. She stated that in her opinion, granting a variance for a building of this proportion at this point would open the way for others to make the same request before they could have this discussion and determine if it is reasonable. City Attorney Thomson stated that she asked Community Development Director Blin what the timing would be under the 60-day law and whether the Council would have time to refer this matter to the next meeting for presentation of written resolution for denial consistent with the Council’s discussion. Community Development Director Blin stated that this would fit into the timeline and could be presented at the first meeting in September. Mayor Shiely clarified that from a legal standpoint they need to have it clearly defined. City Attorney Thomson confirmed that the Council does have to adopt written findings and provide the written findings to the owner. She stated that there are written findings in the Staff Report and have been provided to the owner adding that it is more typical for the Regular Meeting – August 10, 2005 Cottage Grove City Council Page 20 Council to act on these types of applications on a written resolution, which is what she is recommending if there is time and it has been established that there is time to do this. Mayor Shiely stated that rather than follow the motion that is on the floor the Council should rescind the current motion and look for a motion to table this issue until the first City Council meeting in September. City Attorney Thomson explained that the appropriate action would be to withdraw the motion and then adopt a motion directing staff to present the Council with a resolution for denial at the next City Council meeting in September. Council Member Rice agreed to rescind his original motion. Mayor Shiely agreed to rescind her second to the original motion. MOTION BY RICE, SECOND BY SHIELY, TO DENY THE REQUEST FOR A VARIANCE FROM TITLE 11-3-3B, NUMBER AND SIZE OF ACCESSORY STRUCTURES IN THE R-3 ZONING DISTRICT, TO ALLOW THE CONSTRUCTION OF A 1,248 SQUARE FOOT ACCESSORY STRUCTURE WHEN 1,000 SQUARE FEET IS THE MAXIMUM SIZE AT 8886 GREYSTONE AVENUE SOUTH. MOTION CARRIED 5-0. MOTION BY RICE, SECOND BY SHIELY, TO RESCIND THE MOTION TO DENY THE REQUEST FOR A VARIANCE FROM TITLE 11-3-3B, NUMBER AND SIZE OF ACCESSORY STRUCTURES IN THE R-3 ZONING DISTRICT, TO ALLOW THE CONSTRUCTION OF A 1,248 SQUARE FOOT ACCESSORY STRUCTURE WHEN 1,000 SQUARE FEET IS THE MAXIMUM SIZE AT 8886 GREYSTONE AVENUE SOUTH AND TO TABLE THE MOTION TO THE FIRST CITY COUNCIL MEETING IN SEPTEMBER 2005. MOTION CARRIED 5-0. D. Consider Ordering Abatement of Nuisance Property at 9451 Grey Cloud Trail South. Community Development Director Blin stated that Staff is requesting authorization to begin the abatement process on the property located at 9451 Grey Cloud Trail South. He stated that he would like to note that there is a misprint in the report that states that the rental license has been withheld since 2000 and it should state for this year only. He stated that they have been current in all other years. He explained that the point of the abatement is to backstop actions that the owner, who is present, is seeking an unlawful detainer on the current tenants who have brought in the items seen in the pictures provided. He explained that the unlawful detainer is currently working its way through the Washington County Court process and if the unlawful detainer is successful then the owner has a means of getting the tenants to leave the property and take their belongings with them. He stated that if they don’t remove the items the City could evoke the abatement process to clean up the property. Council Member Rice asked what kind of timeframe are they working with. Regular Meeting – August 10, 2005 Cottage Grove City Council Page 21 Community Development Director Blin stated that they are within a couple of weeks of a decision on the unlawful detainer. Gordon Nesvig stated that he currently has a bad tenant who came in last fall adding that they did clean up the property, got some free rent and since then it has gone down again considerably. He stated that they have brought in more junk adding that they have been asked several times to remove the junk but have yet to take care of any of it. He stated that there have been criminal incidents, which precipitated this issue. He stated that around the third week of July he started the unlawful detainer action and had the first court appearance on August 2, 2005. He stated that at the first hearing the court was not in the position to hold an evidentiary hearing so the matter was continued to next Monday, August 15, 2005 at 1:00 p.m. He stated that he is confident that the Court will rule in his favor and grant the unlawful detainer. He stated that he believes the problem will take care of itself adding that he is going to ask the Court to assign a specific timeframe of 7 days for the tenants to be off the premise and have all items removed. He stated that in reading the proposed resolution it makes him feel like a criminal through no action of his own adding that he would prefer to not have this on his record. He assured Council that he is very willing to work with Staff to ensure that the property is cleaned up. Mayor Shiely asked if electricity is available to the resident but has been cutoff for non- payment. Mr. Nesvig explained that last spring the tenant owed several thousand dollars in unpaid electric charges and in talking with the electric company he was told that this was the reason the power was turned off. He stated that he found out later, through a conversation with the Revenue Enforcement Officer, that someone had gotten the idea to turn the meter upside down in the socket with the idea that it would run backwards and take kilowatts off the meter. He stated that the problem with that is that it sets off a trigger in the main office that there is a problem with the meter. He stated that when they came out to check the meter and found the problem they removed the meter only to find that the socket had been damaged. He stated that they told him they would not reinstall the meter until a licensed electrician replaces the socket. He stated that the electric company had gone out to the premise a few days later and found that the tenants had connected jumpers in the box where the meter goes and were getting free power. He stated that the electric company then cut the power from the main transformer and have been without electricity or water ever since. He indicated that the tenants were not supposed to be living there according to the order placed on the building by Building Official Bob LaBosse. He noted that Building Official LaBosse initially felt that there was some improvement but that has since stopped and he has decided that he has to get these people off the premise. Mayor Shiely asked if the tenants are paying rent. Mr. Nesvig explained that the tenants were current with the rent through July 15, 2005 th adding that when he asked for the July 15 rent the tenants told him that they felt they shouldn’t have to pay rent because they aren’t supposed to be living in the house. He stated Regular Meeting – August 10, 2005 Cottage Grove City Council Page 22 that he plans to get the tenants out of the house with the help of the courts noting that he does not think that the abatement process is necessary. He stated that he is also uncomfortable with the proposed abatement process as it makes him look like a criminal adding that if it were up to him he would like to see this tabled for a month and if it isn’t straightened out within that time he would have no objections with the City implementing the abatement process. Community Development Director Blin stated that it would not be a problem if Council would prefer to continue this for one month. Council Member Bigham asked Mr. Nesvig when he filed the unlawful detainer. Mr. Nesvig stated that he applied for the unlawful detainer on either July 21 or 22. He stated that they would have already been out had it only been for non-payment of rent but they brought up additional issues that caused it to be rescheduled for Monday. Mayor Shiely asked if Mr. Nesvig had other tenants prior to the current tenant that left it in bad shape for the current tenants. Mr. Nesvig explained that he purchased the property in 1999 and the former owner continued to live there with their family for a couple of years and left it in a bad state when they moved on. He indicated that another tenant moved in for a short time noting that they did clean up the house before they moved on. He stated that the current tenant did clean up most of the items outlined by Mr. LaBrosse initially, but then they brought in more junk and the property ended up worse than before. He stated that he discussed this with the tenants on several occasions but they would not comply adding that his only choice is to evict them from the property. Council Member Bailey asked Mr. Nesvig if he expects to have the property cleaned up within a month if the Council gives him the month to work through this. Mr. Nesvig stated that he was sure that they would be able to get the property cleaned up within the month and reviewed with Council. Mayor Shiely stated that if these people have been paying rent through July wouldn’t he, as the property owner, take some of the rent and go in and clean up the property. She clarified that everything on the property belongs to the current tenant. Mr. Nesvig confirmed that everything they see in the pictures belongs to the current tenant. Council Member Bigham asked if the house would be habitable again. Mr. Nesvig stated that he would be able to clean up the property and would review the electrical work and plumbing before he would rent the home again. Regular Meeting – August 10, 2005 Cottage Grove City Council Page 23 Community Development Director Blin stated that the house would need some electrical, plumbing and exterior work done. He stated that the home would be inspected and a City Inspector would sign off on it when it is deemed habitable. Mr. Nesvig stated that he is not sure what he is going to do at this point noting that if it is going to cost too much to renovate he would have the home removed completely rather than spend too much to renovate. Council Member Rice stated that he is not willing to hold off on the abatement process for one month. He stated that he would prefer to put the abatement process in place and Mr. Nesvig can continue to work through the issues from his end. Council Member Bailey stated that in looking at the pictures and hearing Mr. Nesvig’s concerns he would be willing to grant the one month noting that if nothing has changed within the month that he would be in full support of abating the property as quickly as possible. Mr. Nesvig stated that he would be in agreement with that suggestion noting that when he read through the resolution it only gives him 10 days and even through the courts he can’t get them out that fast. He stated that the court hearing is Monday and he is sure that the court is going to give them 7 days. Council Member Grossklaus stated that he would be willing to go along with Council Member Bailey’s suggestion noting that it is a rather tight timeline. He stated that if they can get this taken care of in a short amount of time he doesn’t have a problem with the month. MOTION BY RICE, SECOND BY SHIELY, TO ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 05-122 ORDERING THE ABATEMENT OF CONDITIONS CREATING A NUISANCE AT 9451 GREY CLOUD TRAIL. AYES-2 (RICE, SHIELY) NAYS-3 (BAILEY, BIGHAM AND GROSSKLAUS) MOTION NOT CARRIED. City Administrator Schroeder suggested adopting the resolution with a 30-day effective date. City Attorney Thomson stated that this would be an option noting that the resolution currently provides ten days for abatement and the Council could extend that to thirty days. City Administrator Schroeder stated that he would like it noted that Mr. Nesvig is a sophisticated property owner that shouldn’t have gotten to this point. He stated that an unlawful detainer should have been filed a long time ago. Mr. Nesvig stated that he would have done what he had to do noting that the electrical meter issue is what had precipitated this whole situation. He indicated that none of this would have happened had they maintained the property and kept the outside of the house looking decent. He stated that had they done this no one would have cared or bothered them but they abused the area so bad that it came to this. Regular Meeting – August 10, 2005 Cottage Grove City Council Page 24 Mayor Shiely stated they have people who live in the City of Cottage Grove who are working to keep their properties maintained adding that she does not want this property looking like this. She stated that the issues are not just around the electrical and water problems noting that if they had neighbors the City would be receiving complaints regarding the lack of paint, the windows and everything on the lot. She stated that the Council expects the residents and property owners in the community to keep their property maintained. She stated that the property should have been totally cleaned out before new tenants moved in and for him to have new tenants move into the property in October and expect them to clean it up is not appropriate. Mr. Nesvig stated that this is not the way it happened He stated that they came to him and asked if they could move in and clean up the area for three months rent. He explained that he agreed to this and when they moved in all of the windows were repaired and the housing was acceptable noting that Bob LaBrosse approved it. He stated that after the tenants moved in everything changed. Council Member Bailey stated that he would like to be sure that he is able to do what City Attorney Thomson suggested and asked if it could be held for thirty days. City Attorney Thomson explained that City Administrator Schroeder was suggesting that in paragraph four of the resolution instead of saying that if the conditions are not abated within ten days that it would state a longer period, other than ten days, so that it would give the owner more time to go through the court system, to see if the tenants clean it up and also give him time to clean it up himself adding that if it is not done the City could then act City Administrator Schroeder stated that adoption of the resolution would backstop Mr. Nesvig adding that he could also use this in court as evidence in getting approval for the unlawful detainer. Council Member Rice stated that he was concerned that this could open the opportunity for this to drag on for an extended period of time. Council Member Bailey stated that this is not what he would want to have happen, which is why he wants to be sure they word the motion to reflect an appropriate timeframe. He stated that he would like a date included that states when everything has to be completed. Council Member Bigham suggested that they require that everything be completed by September 7, 2005. Mr. Nesvig asked the Council to just table this item until September and consider it at that time if nothing happens. Mayor Shiely clarified that Council is considering ordering abatement of the nuisance property located at 9451 Grey Cloud Trail South to take effect on September 7, 2005. Regular Meeting – August 10, 2005 Cottage Grove City Council Page 25 City Attorney Thomson stated that the wording would change so that paragraph four would read that if the owner does not abate the nuisance conditions by the later date of ten days after service and publication of this resolution or September 7, 2005; and the rest of the paragraph would remain the same. She explained that the effect is that it would be served and published, the ten days would pass and he would have until September 7, 2005 to get it cleaned up. She stated that if it doesn’t happen by that date the City could order the work to be done without any further Council action. Mr. Nesvig stated that this raises an issue that hasn’t come up before. He expressed concerns stating that he feels like a criminal noting that he has read the resolution and he really does not want it published. He stated that he has a strong incentive to get this all done before the next Council meeting and he does not want to see this published. He stated that he has a reputation to maintain and this came about beyond his control. He stated that the tenants are being evicted and he will be able to straighten this out. He stated that he does not see how this would change anything whereas if they continue this to the next meeting and if it is done they don’t have to deal with and if it is not done they can pass the resolution and be done with it. He stated that it is only a difference of two weeks and he really would not like to see this published. He assured Council that he wants it cleaned up before the next Council meeting. Mayor Shiely asked if the County Board is involved or the Court. Mr. Nesvig stated that it is taken care of through the District Court. Council Member Bailey clarified that the only reason Mr. Nesvig is before Council tonight is because of the electrical meter issue noting that the trash has been accumulating for a long time. He stated that Mr. Nesvig, as the property owner and landlord, is ultimately responsible for the property. He explained that he didn’t go with Council Member Rice and Mayor Shiely because he is trying to get it cleaned up. He stated that he could have evicted these people a long time ago because of the accumulation of trash and didn’t. He stated that his effort is the only reason that he is making the suggestion to give him the additional time to address this situation. Mr. Nesvig agreed stating that in hindsight he should have reacted sooner but he didn’t and now it has stacked into a bigger issue. He stated that it is his belief that he has enough evidence to be able to remove the tenants adding that he is very uncomfortable with passing this resolution because it gets into the publication issues. He acknowledged the City’s concerns. He stated that he wants the tenants out and as long as the Court gives him the th support on September 8 they will be off the property. City Attorney Thomson explained that it would be served and published. She stated that Staff could wait until ten days before September 7, 2005 before doing that service and publication, which would give him some time to get something done. Regular Meeting – August 10, 2005 Cottage Grove City Council Page 26 Community Development Director Blin stated that they could wait until ten days before September 7, 2005. MOTION BY BAILEY, SECOND BY BIGHAM, TO ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 05-122 A RESOLUTION ORDERING THE ABATEMENT OF CONDITIONS CREATING A NUISANCE AT 9451 GREY CLOUD TRAIL AND TO APPROVE CHANGING THE 10-DAY PERIOD FOR IMPLEMENTATION TO A 30-DAY PERIOD FOR THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE ABATEMENT PROCESS. MOTION CARRIED 5-0. E. Northern Natural Gas Expansion Permit Request Mayor Shiely noted that Council has received information provided by Public Works Director Burshten and asked for an update. City Engineer Levitt stated that this involves three right-of-way permits noting that there would be a lot of construction activity taking place. She stated that the first right-of-way site th is located at 90 Street and Janero noting that currently they have a gas pipeline located in this area and reviewed the location with Council. She referenced the existing fence noting that they are proposing an addition of 15 feet in one direction and 30 feet back. She explained that they were concerned about with issuing this permit is that with this expansion they want the opportunity to provide additional screening. She explained that one method of screening they were hoping to utilize would be a black vinyl-coated chain-link fence. She stated that the gas company has indicated that they have also been working with the adjacent landowner to provide additional screening in the back with vegetation. City Engineer Levitt stated that the second site is on East Point Douglas Road, next to Menards. She provided the Council with an overview of the location stating that the site would be expanded to approximately 140 feet by 40 feet and would go from easement line to easement line. She stated that they would like additional screening in this area noting that additional vegetation would be difficult due to the easements. City Engineer Levitt stated that the third site is located in a rural area by 100 and Lehigh. She stated that this location has two projects taking place at two different stations. She stated that they would be adding additional fencing in the area and reviewed with Council. She stated that their main concern is that the City is getting a new fence with additional screening. She stated that these are the three projects that would be taking place with Northern Natural Gas noting that two representatives are available to answer any questions. Mayor Shiely clarified that this was precipitated by the fact they have asked to expand noting that the facilities have been in place for a long time and have been grandfathered in. Leland Mann, Northern Natural Gas, stated that the reason for the expansion is that they are regulated by the Department of Transportation, Code of Federal Registry 49, and Chapter 192, which requires that they assess the integrity of the pipeline every seven years. He explained that they are taking the existing facilities and adding to them so that they can drill Regular Meeting – August 10, 2005 Cottage Grove City Council Page 27 the line with water and hydrostatically test it to make sure that it meets its intended purpose or run an internal inspection through the pipeline. He explained that they are committed to the safety of their facilities and their neighbors, which is why they are proposing to expand the stations east of the City. th Mayor Shiely asked if they recently assessed the station located at 113 Street. Mr. Mann explained that this was the hydro site test to make sure they could get the inspection tool through the pipeline to the Mississippi River. Mayor Shiely stated that it is her understanding that Northern Gas did not let the City know about their work activity noting that it would be good to at least let the City or the Public Works Department know of the work they plan to do. Mr. Mann stated that he could provide the Council with a copy of the permit they received from the Public Works Department if they need to review it. Mayor Shiely stated that she only wanted to be sure that the Northern Natural Gas is being a good neighbor within the City adding that the City does want to bring the facilities up to current standards. Mr. Mann stated that if it weren’t for the security measures that have been adopted since 9/11 they would want Cities to notify them if there are any problems with their facilities. He stated that this is one of the reasons why they do not like a lot of vegetation around the facility. Council Member Bigham asked if they have notified the residents of the work they were doing in the area. Community Development Director Blin stated that a notice was not mailed to the residents because there is no permitting process for the work they are proposing to do nor is there a public hearing process or conditional use permit required. Mr. Mann stated that they are notifying and talking to the neighbors and affected property owners adding that they have not gone door to door. Council Member Bigham stated that it would be nice if they would make their best effort to send a letter to the residents listed on the map and update them on the work they are doing. Mr. Mann stated that this is something they could do noting that they don’t want the residents to have to contact the City questioning what they are doing in the area. RESPONSE TO PREVIOUSLY RAISED COUNCIL COMMENTS AND REQUESTS A. Receive Information on Variances Approved from 2003 to 2005. Regular Meeting – August 10, 2005 Cottage Grove City Council Page 28 COUNCIL COMMENTS AND REQUESTS Council Member Bigham addressed the Police Department stating that it is very apparent that there is more patrol in the park and ride area. She stated that they appreciated Officer Schoen’s flyers on the cars. Mayor Shiely stated that she would like to thank the employees of the City of Cottage Grove for volunteering to spend the day planting trees in the Industrial Park. Council Member Grossklaus stated that Staff should go through the ordinances, get them cleaned up and updated. He stated that this evening it obviously shows that there are different standards for different parts of the community and should be more consistent. PAY BILLS MOTION BY BIGHAM, SECOND BY GROSSKLAUS, TO APPROVE PAYMENT OF CHECK NUMBERS 141050 THROUGH 141342 TOTALING $1,017,279.02. (CHECKS 141050 – 141075 IN THE AMOUNT OF $99,982.51 ISSUED PRIOR TO COUNCIL APPROVAL.) MOTION CARRIED 5-0. WORKSHOP SESSION – OPEN NONE WORKSHOP SESSION – CLOSED NONE ADJOURNMENT MOTION BY BIGHAM, SECONDED BY BAILEY, TO ADJOURN THE MEETING AT 10:23 P.M. MOTION CARRIED 5-0. Respectfully submitted, Bonita Sullivan TimeSaver Off Site Secretarial, Inc.