Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2016-06-15 MINUTES Cottage J Grove �here Pride and Pr�sperity Meet MINUTES COTTAGE GROVE CITY COUNCIL June 15, 2016 COUNCIL CHAMBER 12800 RAVINE PARKWAY SOUTH COTTAGE GROVE, MN 55016 REGULAR MEETING - 7:00 P.M. 1. CALL TO ORDER The City Council of the City of Cottage Grove, Washington County, Minnesota, held a regular meeting on June 15, 2016 at Cottage Grove City Hall, 12800 Ravine Parkway. Mayor Bailey called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. 2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE The audience, staff, and Mayor and City Council Members recited the Pledge of Allegiance. 3. ROLL CALL The following were present: Mayor Myron Bailey, Council Member Steve Dennis, Council Member Justin Olsen, Council Member Jen Peterson, Council Member Dave Thiede. Also present were: Charlene Stevens, City Administrator; Korine Land, City Attorney- LeVander, Gillen & Miller, PA; Les Burshten, Public Works Director; Joe Fischbach, HR Manager/City Clerk; Jennifer Levitt, Community Development Director/City Engineer; John McCool, Senior City Planner; Robin Roland, Finance Director; Craig Woolery, Public Safety Director. 4. OPEN FORUM Mayor Bailey asked if anyone in the audience wished to address the Council on any item that was not on the agenda. David Blume, 8791 77th Street South, Cottage Grove, of the Southeast Metro Amateur Radio Club, spoke. He stated on Saturday June 25, and continuing for 24 hours, members of the Southeast Metro Amateur Radio Club (SEMARC) will be participating in the National Amateur Radio Field Day Simulated Emergency Exercise; it will be held at Zion Lutheran Church, 8500 Hillside Trail, in Cottage Grove. This event is open to the public, and they extend a special invitation to CITY OF COTTAGE GROVE • 12800 Ravine Parkway • Cottage Grove, Minnesota 55016 www.cottage-grove.org • 651-458-2800 • Fax 651-458-2897 • Equal Opportunity Employer City Council Meeting Minutes June 15, 2016 Page 2 the Cottage Grove City Council, as well as members of the Police, Fire, and EMS Departments. This will be the 83rd year that HAM operators have established radio operations in public locations during the field day exercise, showcasing the science and skills of amateur radio operators. This is the single largest emergency preparedness exercise in the country with over 30,000 operators participating each year. Field Day stresses emergency preparedness and safety while learning to operate in abnormal situations; they operate from tents, shelters, motor or recreational vehicles, using only battery, solar, and generator supply power (no public utilities). Mr. Blume was asked to expound on the critical importance of HAM radio operators, especially during events like natural disasters, and about the role that HAM radio operators play when basically communication is cut off in all other avenues the public is used to. Mr. Blume stated a few years ago, when there was flooding in Marine St. Croix, several operators were there to assess the operations of various pumps, etc. to prevent the flooding, instead of having either City or County employees manning those sites. They communicated with Public Works and Public Safety in the event that something needed to be fixed or there was a problem. SEMARC has also participated in events with the flooding in Fargo, providing communication for the Red Cross and other emergency personnel. As no one else wished to address the Council, Mayor Bailey closed the Open Forum. 5. ADOPTION OF AGENDA Motion by Council Member Olsen, second by Council Member Thiede, to adopt the agenda. Motion carried: 5-0. 6. PRESENTATIONS A. Introduction of K9 Gunnar and Handler Officer Nils Torning Public Safety Director Craig Woolery introduced the newest member of the Police Department, Gunnar, the new K9. Director Woolery asked the members of the Public Safety Board who were present to join them up in the front; he stated the members of the Board were largely responsible for obtaining the previous K9, Blitz, as well as this K9, Gunnar. The Board had previously raised money for Blitz, and in 2013, they donated just under $20,000 to help promote the K9 program. They paid for the purchase of Gunnar, a Belgian Malinois, born in Poland, as well as Gunnar's training, the equipment, and the set up for the squad in this year's budget. Officer Nils Torning graduated from St. Paul's Timothy Jones K9 Academy, that training started in February and was a 12-week academy. The dogs are specially raised and bred for police work. Gunnar is a very active dog and really had it together when he went through his paces on graduation day. Officer Torning and Gunnar are in service in the City; Gunnar is certified in apprehensions and this fall he will be trained in narcotics. Director Woolery thanked the Mayor and Council for their support of the K9 program. Officer Torning City Council Meeting Minutes June 15, 2016 Page 3 stated he'd always had an interest in becoming a K9 Officer; training was quite an experience, and he appreciated the opportunity given to him. Mayor Bailey also thanked the Public Safety Board members for all they do for the K9 program. B. Youth Service Bureau Presentation Bob Sherman, the new Executive Director of the Youth Service Bureau, addressed the Council. He reviewed his past work history and stated he's dedicated the rest of his career to helping young people live healthy, productive lives. He spoke about the work that the Youth Service Bureau does in the east metro, particularly in Cottage Grove. Their mission is to help youth and families learn the skills that they need to be more successful at home, in school, and throughout the community. The three primary programs offered to Cottage Grove citizens are diversion services, youth focused family counseling, and parent education. He explained that diversion is a process that's become the standard practice for Police Departments; police can choose to send youth to the Youth Service Bureau instead of through the court system, which is cheaper and more effective in getting kids back on track. It allows most young offenders to be dealt with outside the judicial system, avoiding the negative effect of a criminal record. Schools can also refer youth to them in lieu of suspension, which keeps kids in school while performing restitution work and working with counselors, who help them understand how their behavior affects themselves and their families. Two diversion specialists are based in Cottage Grove, and there is a network of community connections to provide work service opportunities for the kids, some of which are the Cottage Grove VFW, Goodwill, and area churches. The specialists develop an individualized program for each young person and screen for issues that can go beyond the behavior for which a young person was referred. He stated In 2015, in Cottage Grove, they received somewhat fewer diversion referrals than in 2014, but the number of diversion and counseling services provided increased fairly significantly. There is a new program, Parent Education, which has really grown in the past year. The focus of this program is on parents and teens and pre-teens. The goal is to help parents and grandparents navigate challenges with them successfully. Youth Service Bureau statistics show that 7 out of 10 kids referred resolve their issues and 8 out 10 kids who participate in diversion programs do not reoffend in Washington County. Every dollar invested in early intervention with young people saves a community $8 in future social costs associated with things like adult crime and social service needs. He thanked Chief Woolery and his Officers, as well as the City Council for their past support of the Youth Service Bureau. There is a proposal for the City to continue its support in the amount of $7,000 for this year, for which they'd be very grateful. He welcomed any questions from the Council. Council Member Olsen asked to hear about their fundraising events; Mr. Sherman advised they had previously had a golf tournament, but they would not be doing that this year because it was a bit more labor City Council Meeting Minutes June 15, 2016 Page 4 intensive for their staff than made it worthwhile. They'll be initiating a program where Board members and others in the community have the opportunity to host events in their homes to talk about the Youth Service Bureau. They'll be bringing people who have benefited from their services, program officers, and others and inviting members of the public to attend and learn more about their efforts. Mr. Sherman stated they're always looking for good Board members if anyone is interested in serving in that capacity. He thanked the Council and the City of Cottage Grove for all that they do for our youth. C. Strawberry Fest Council Member Thiede stated the Strawberry Fest will take place from June 16 through June 19. For more information, go to www.cottaqeqrovestrawberryfest.com for more information. Many items are now available online, including carnival tickets, and if you get pre-sale tickets, you'll get better deals. Pre-sale tickets are also available at City Hall. The entire schedule for the Strawberry Fest is available online, on the home page. All of the different events are listed, and if you click on any of those, you'll get more information about it. There are about 90 entrants for the parade, which will be on Saturday. It begins on 80th Street and ends at the Cottage Grove Middle School. Live entertainment will be on both Friday and Saturday. Hot air balloon rides are also available. There will be a kids' tractor pull, a medallion hunt, a pet show, a petting farm, tournaments, a talent show, strawberry pie eating, a Top Chef contest, the Strawberry Fields marketplace with more crafters, many food vendors, etc. Mayor Bailey stated the car show is back, and there will be bingo on Saturday afternoon/early evening, by the Stone Soup Thrift Shop. Besides the Strawberry Fest Committee, there are many companies and organizations that help to make this event a success and help to put on the fireworks on Saturday night. Mayor Bailey added that there will be fresh strawberries for sale, as well as buttons and shirts. Mayor Bailey thanked Council Member Thiede and all the festival committee members for working so hard to make this a successful event. 7. CONSENT AGENDA A. Approve the June 1, 2016 City Council Special Meeting minutes. B. Approve the June 1, 2016 City Council Regular Meeting minutes. C. Approve the placement of a temporary all-way stop at the intersection of 95th Street and Jamaica Avenue. . D. Appoint Christina Brekke to the Comprehensive Plan Update Steering Committee as the representative from the Environmental Commission and accept the resignation of Mark Nelson from the Committee. E. Approve First Amendment to Third Party Agreement — Oak Cove. Motion by Council Member Peterson to approve the Consent Agenda, second by Council Member Dennis. Motion carried: 5-0. City Council Meeting Minutes June 15, 2016 Page 5 8. APPROVE DISBURSEMENTS A. Approve payment of check numbers 196533 to 196710 in the amount of $688,837.86 and EFT Payment of $398,921.54. Motion to approve disbursements by Council Member Thiede, second by Council Member Dennis. Motion carried: 5-0. 9. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. Junction 70 Grill Liquor License —Authorize issuance of an On Sale Intoxicating Liquor License to J70 Operations, LLC DBA Junction 70 Grill, 6933 Pine Arbor Drive South. City Clerk Joe Fischbach stated in April, the Council had approved the plan for this building, and this public hearing is just to consider the liquor license application. The City did a background investigation on the proprietor, and there was nothing negative found. Mayor Bailey opened the public hearing; as no one wished to speak on this, Mayor Bailey closed the public hearing. Motion by Council Member Thiede to authorize issuance of an On Sale Intoxicating Liquor License and Special Sunday Intoxicating Liquor License to J70 Operations, LLC DBA Junction 70 Grill, 6933 Pine Arbor Drive South, second by Council Member Peterson. Motion carried: 5-0. Mayor Bailey asked the proprietor if there was any idea on when construction might begin; he replied they were anticipating breaking ground soon. 10. BID AWARDS — None. 11. REGULAR AGENDA A. Approval of the Dominium Development Agreement Consideration of a motion to: 1) Recommend approval of the Developers Agreement with Dominium, and authorize the City legal counsel to make any necessary language modifications to address the proposed building configuration from 100% affordable senior housing to 80% affordable senior housing/20% affordable non-age restricted housing. 2) Recommend approval for pominium to provide proof of parking on the site plan due to the change in senior unit count configuration. The developer will be required to provide all appropriate landscape, payment of tree mitigation, and storm water management as per the requirements of the City Code. City Council Meeting Minutes June 15, 2016 Page 6 Community Development Director/City Engineer Jennifer Levitt stated tonight they're looking at the Dominium Developers Agreement, which is the next phase of the project located at 6977 East Point Douglas Road. She reviewed the previous history of this development and stated at the next Council Meeting they'd be looking at vacating drainage and utility easements to allow Dominium to construct their project and will be rescinding a Developers Agreement from 1999 when that parcel was created. This is a four-story senior housing project with 184 units and 132 underground parking spaces. They have surface parking on the site, on both sides of the building, for visitor and resident parking. This will all be captured in minimum improvements, and the EDA will have to approve the construction plans. It was approved by the EDA at their meeting yesterday to move forward with the Developers Agreement. There are changes regarding the Hill-Gibson parcel, which wasn't part of the original development, some outstanding tree mitigation funds, the park dedication, and then some public improvements related to East Point Douglas Road. The Agreement indicates that construction must start by June 1, 2017, and it must be completed by December 31, 2018. Dominium desires to have one unit available for building tenants' visitors to rent. There is a Letter of Credit Requirement to ensure the landscaping, shrubs, and irrigation are installed and maintained appropriately. There is also a declaration regarding income restrictions, which indicates that 40% of the rental housing units will be occupied by qualifying tenants, whose income is 60% or less of the area median gross income. The qualifying tenants must certify their income each year, and Dominium is required to certify that to the City by February 15 of each year. The Developer is requesting a change; initially, they were going to have 100% affordable senior housing and they're requesting a change to 80% affordable senior housing. Senior housing indicates that all rental units must be occupied by at least one person who is at least 55 years of age at time of initial occupancy. The Applicant is requesting the remaining 20% not be age restricted but still be affordable. They're looking at getting bond proceeds in August and then in January, which is also one reason why the start date of the project had to move back to accommodate that. The only change staff sees as a potential concern is with parking if there's a change in age restriction, as there might be more than one vehicle per tenant so parking could become an issue. Staff has asked that they provide proof of parking with this change to a ratio of 1.35 spaces per unit, which adds 27 stalls. If we move forward with the 80%/20% change, one recommendation from staff is that the Developers Agreement be modified to include that they have to outline when the proof of parking would be constructed; they would also then have to pay the necessary tree mitigation, adjust for landscaping, and ensure that storm water management is appropriate for that additional parking surface. At this time, staff is recommending City Council Meeting Minutes June 15, 2016 Page 7 approval of the Developers Agreement and is also recommending the proof of parking. The Applicant is present to answer any questions. Council Member Thiede asked if they'd be losing the park where the Hill-Gibson house was located; Director Levitt stated the intent is to have educational components on the interior of the building, in the lobby, but they had provided a walking trail to wrap around the building. There were hopes to maybe reuse the barn structure, but that has not yet been determined and could potentially be impacted. There will be additional tree loss with the proof of parking if it was necessary to be installed, which is why there would be additional tree mitigation necessary and additional landscaping would also have to be installed. Council Member Thiede asked if the parking area could be moved at all; Director Levitt stated at this point staff was only trying to assure the proof of parking can be done, as demonstrated. If the City requires it be installed, final details of placement can be reviewed with the revised site plan. Mayor Bailey stated regarding the Hill-Gibson house and the timeframe shifting a bit, that would give them more time. He wanted to know what was going on with that house or what could still happen with that house. Director Levitt stated that Dominium is still looking to close on that property this year; there might be an opportunity to further the search for a site. Mayor Bailey confirmed that the Preservation Alliance that was working on that had not been able to find a suitable location or the ability to move the house, but this would give them a bit more time to keep looking. If not, they'll move forward with the plans for incorporating some of the historical messaging and such within the facility. The Applicant, Patrick Ostrom with Dominium, 2905 Northwest Boulevard, Plymouth, Minnesota, answered questions from Council Members. Council Member Peterson stated she liked the idea of changing the percentage of senior housing from 100% to 80%, as there was definitely a need for affordable rental housing with other populations, other than seniors. She wondered how that would be determined as far as one-, two-, and three-bedroom units. Mr. Ostrom stated they'd selected specific units to split up the mix at this point. He expected this would most likely operate as a senior project, age 55 and over. Council Member Peterson asked if it would or would not be open to families or people with children; Mr. Ostrom stated it would be open, but they expected the majority of the applications received would be from the older population. Motion by Council Member Peterson to recommend approval of the Developers Agreement with Dominium and authorize the City legal counsel to make any necessary language modifications to address the proposed building configuration from 100% affordable senior housing to 80% affordable senior housing/20% affordable non-age restricted housing, second by Council Member Olsen. Motion carried: 4-1 (Nay by Council Member Dennis). Motion by Council Member Olsen to recommend approval for pominium to provide proof of parking on the site plan due to the change in senior unit count configuration. City Council Meeting Minutes June 15, 2016 Page 8 The developer will be required to provide all appropriate landscape, payment of tree mitigation and storm water management, as per the requirements of the City Code, second by Council Member Council Member Thiede. Motion carried: 5-0. Mayor Bailey asked Council Member Dennis if he'd like to comment on this, as he was part of the EDA that voted on this yesterday. Council Member Dennis stated he had some concerns with the proposal for different age groups as opposed to it being all senior housing. However, as the City is not substantially full spectrum with our housing, he felt this would help the City fill that end of the spectrum. B. Sunrise Solar Garden — Zoning Text Amendment, Conditional Use Permit, and Variance Accept the Planning Commission's recommendations and adopt Resolution 2016-117 denying Sunrise Development, LLC's zoning text amendment, variance, and conditional use permit applications for their proposed five megawatt community solar garden as shown on their revised site plan prepared by Sunrise Development, LLC dated May 19, 2016. Planner John McCool stated Sunrise Development has made three planning applications: 1) A zoning amendment to the City's solar collection systems to change the amp that's in that ordinance to include an additional 101 acres of land within the area that's been designated for community solar gardens. 2) A variance application to allow for the host development to not abide by a minimum setback requirement on boundary lines. The property consists of two separate pats and parcels; both parcels are in the same ownership, but the development plan that they've proposed would have a zero lot line on the common boundary line between the two parcels. 3) A conditional use permit application for a five-megawatt solar garden. The property is on two parcels of land, with the same ownership. Planner McCool reviewed the zoning ordinance for solar collection systems and the 101 acres of land on which the Applicant is proposing to develop solar collection systems. He stated the 101-acre parcel of land is located at 11576 Point Douglas Road, in the southeast quadrant of the community. Access to the property is currently off of Highway 61. The majority of the property is agricultural land, and he reviewed photographs of the property with the Council. The only tree removal that they had proposed was in the center of the property; about one acre of trees would be removed for the solar collection system. Planner McCool reviewed the site plan that was presented to the Planning Commission at their main meeting; as part of their revised site plan, they proposed to relocate a section of solar arrays to the north part of the property. They proposed to plant conifer trees in the northeast corner of the property and also along the Highway 61 corridor, to the south of the property. A revised plan was received from the Applicant on June 9; on all of the area located in the southerly portion of the property, they would be relocating those solar panels to the north of the property. As a result, there would be no development that would take part in the south part of the property. On June 13, they City Council Meeting Minutes June 15, 2016 Page 9 had also provided a letter authorizing the extension of the 60-day review period that the City is undergoing; this is the second 60-day review extension that they have granted the City at this point in time. Prior to that, June 30 was the deadline for the City to take action, but they have extended that for further consideration by the City. The Applicant has indicated they'd like to address the Council this evening regarding the change in their revised site plan. On May 27, 2016, the Planning Commission reconsidered their previous recommendation from April, where they had recommended approval of the text amendment, but in May their recommendation was to deny the ordinance amendment that's being proposed this evening. William Weber, Sunrise Energy Ventures, 601 Carlson Parkway, Minnetonka, addressed the Council. He asked that the Council consider their revised site plan or perhaps even delay their decision to consider the revised site plan. They've pushed the collectors as far north as they can go; their intention had been to accommodate the City's interests and needs in land development to the south of the site, including the possible extension of 114th Street. With this configuration, there are approximately 24 acres left open on the south end of the site. They felt there was sufficient land to the south for the City to accommodate it short term, as well as for long-term planning, including the Comprehensive Plan, and alignment for 114th Street, while allowing them to put their property to a reasonable use. He stated solar collectors are temporary, interim, semi-rural land use, and Sunrise would have a contract with Xcel Energy for 25 years, after which point in time the collectors could be picked up and moved. The long- term development of the site would not be impeded by this project, and the short-term development of the site would be kept open by their configuration. Mr. Weber urged the Council to consider this layout, even if ineant delaying the decision further. Council Member Olsen stated he knew they'd been working with the property owner for some time to find common ground with the City to work within the confines of the current ordinances, but stated solar collectors are a bit new to everybody. He asked Mr. Weber to give a brief snapshot of other projects they'd done that might give them some information about their business processes and how they work with other communities. Mr. Weber stated they'd tried to do the right thing all along; they're trying to be respectful of the neighbors and of the City's planning needs. He thought they went above and beyond with their landscaping efforts to screen from the neighbors to the northeast and from the viewing public passing by on Highway 61. They have a number of other projects throughout the country, and he asked Dean Leischow, CEO of Sunrise Energy, to speak about that. Mr. Leischow stated they'd spoken with City staff and talked about some of the challenges, some site issues they might have, as well as concerns of the neighbors, to whom they had spoken to address those things. He thought the neighbors would attest to the fact that they were very accommodating, listened, and adjusted their plans to make the best of both worlds. They've got about 15 projects of similar size in the greater metro area, which will be City Council Meeting Minutes June 15, 2016 Page 10 community solar gardens and will be available for subscriptions; the vast majority will be open to residential clients. Council Member Olsen asked why this location versus a location that's in the approved area, as it is right next door. Mr. Leischow stated they had an application to move it just to the north, into the approved area. Mr. Leischow stated they look for sites with available land, near distribution lines that have the capacity, and natural screening, all of which this site has. He stated they'd be using 40- to-50 acres of the 100-acre site, and it's an interim use. Mayor Bailey stated that this was not a public hearing, but he asked if there was anybody in the audience who wanted to speak on this item. Jim Pederson, 11300 Point Douglas, Cottage Grove, who lives immediately west of the property being discussed, addressed the Council. He stated he thought it was a good idea; leaving the land untouched would be a great asset to the City. Mr. Pederson stated that yes, he would benefit greatly by it, but so does everybody else who gets 10% savings on energy. Gene Smallidge, 10992 Point Douglas Drive, Cottage Grove, stated to the best of his knowledge 100% of the neighbors surrounding this site have given it a stamp of approval. Neighbors were given an opportunity to have input on how it would least affect any of their properties. He stated that some of the sites that had previously been approved constitute some of the best farmland in Cottage Grove; in this case, it's a site that's very marginal farmland. Mr. Smallidge stated it had been implied that perhaps the highway frontage of this site needed to be saved for some future commercial development, as the drainage way had been previously spoken about, but all of the frontage on Highway 61 that's part of this property is a drainage way. He stated he didn't believe there was any practical way of using the frontage on that property for future commercial development. Mr. Smallidge stated this project is environmentally sound, it was a practical site, which was well screened, and he didn't even think it had to be screened from passersby on Highway 61. He thought the company had been very cooperative with the neighbors and had tried to appease the City. He urged that the Council give consideration and approve this site. Greg Stang, 61 st Street, Stillwater, Minnesota, stated their company, K & R Land Holdings, is a property owner. He supported this business and stated Sunrise is a very solid and reputable company, who wanted to bring a clean business to Cottage Grove. He stated he's dealt with them since last year, and they've been fantastic. He stated there was everything going for this project with the property owners and neighbors, who approved this, and a company that might be off the property in 25 years. Mr. Stang thought there was plenty of room on the front part of that property to still have what the City wanted and still have this project. He stated as a property owner, he supported it and thought it was great for Cottage Grove. He encouraged the Council to approve this site. John Myers, 10990 Manning Avenue South, stated he's probably the closest residence to this project. He said he'd been to all of the meetings that they've had and has supported it. If they were concerned about lost development potential for property along City Council Meeting Minutes June 15, 2016 Page 11 the highway frontage, he thought they should worry about the property in Cottage Grove. The south side of Highway 61 is mostly open and for sale for development and has been for years, but there's not that much demand for it. He recommended that it be approved. Council Member Olsen stated that he had many questions: Going through the Planning Commission minutes and watching the Planning Commission meeting was very challenging for him, which is generally not the case. He asked the City Attorney what the Planning Commission had done over the course of multiple meetings, and also what options are available based on the Planning Commission's recommendations and the letter of the City Ordinance. He knew they were dealing with a conditional use permit versus an interim conditional use permit, and there were different defining factors for each action. Attorney Land stated she had provided a memo, which outlined the actions that had been taken by the Planning Commission; they held three public hearings on this application. At the first one, they continued it at the request of the Applicant. At the second one, the recommendation from City staff was to deny, as they had a different approach, and they recommended approval of the text amendment. Because of that, staff then had requested that it be continued in order for staff to come up with conditions that would be appropriate for the other two applications. The first text amendment was contingent; that decision needed to be affirmative before the other two actions could be acted upon. So, if the text amendment had failed, the variance and the conditional use permit would also fail. If the text amendment was approved, which staff had not anticipated because their recommendation was for denial, then there would need to be consideration for conditions to be imposed, either on the variance or on the conditional use permit. So, the application was continued. At the subsequent third meeting, she understood that there was continuous discussion, and at the conclusion, they moved to approve and that motion failed. Therefore, they had a motion to reconsider, which was brought by one of the prevailing members of the original motion to approve. At that point, it was a proper motion to make; that motion was adopted, it passed, and then they recommended denial. Council Member Olsen stated it seemed the denial happened because we weren't prepared at the first meeting with conditions for the text amendment to pass because we had recommended that it wouldn't pass, and just assumed that that would be what the Planning Commission would do, but they threw us a curve ball. Attorney Land confirmed that that was correct. Council Member Olsen asked Attorney Land what options, if any, the City Council had relative to the request made by the Applicant, based upon the letter of the ordinance, the law, and the guidance that's been given by the Planning Commission. Attorney Land replied there were several options that the Council could take: 1) Consider their request to extend by an additional 60 days, August 30, for the Council to make its decision. The Council could accept that extension of an additional 60 days to continue the Application for up to the 60 days, August 30, and at that point you could continue City Council Meeting Minutes June 15, 2016 Page 12 the Application for staff to further review their amended site plan, which they have now submitted, and propose recommendations or findings for the Council to consider at a later date. 2) Accept the extension again for the 60 days and recommend that it be resubmitted to the Planning Commission for their recommendation on the amended site plan, and then it would come back to the Council with their recommendations, as well as staff recommendations. 3) Approve the application as submitted, or approve as originally submitted, or approve the amended site plan. 4) Another option would be to deny it. Council Member Olsen stated he thought the easy thing to do was to say this doesn't meet our ordinance criteria, and we should simply deny it. The challenge he had with that was this is a very convoluted situation at this point and it's very confusing. He said it had been made confusing by the Applicant and by the Planning Commission and by the staff not being prepared for what the Planning Commission did. He stated he thought the real issue here was if they were going to do the right thing, what is the right thing? He thought there were many defining factors around what decision they ultimately come to, not the least of which is what the Planning Commission thinks; however, they haven't had an opportunity to look at the revised proposal. He felt this was probably very frustrating for the staff, the Planning Commission, and for the Council. He felt the Applicant deserved a proper hearing on their revised plan in front of the Planning Commission. Council Member Dennis stated they went through a very lengthy process as a City, involving a lot of people on various Commissions, who are also taxpayers and residents of our community. While he appreciated the landowners speaking and input from the company, there have been a lot of people involved. With all of the time and effort spent on this project, Planner McCool kind of put Cottage Grove on the map as far as being able to have this type of process to begin with. He felt with the work Planner McCool did, the Planning and Environmental Commissions did, and the Council did, he felt they should be fair and consistent on how they rule on something. Other people have been turned away, and Sunrise Development had asked for extra time. He disagreed with the comment made about the Council and City staff not having been prepared. Council Member Thiede stated he was at the Planning Commission meetings and it was quite confusing. Personally, he loved the solar energy idea, but he hated to put that area under solar panels for 25 years in case there was another development that came through, although he wasn't sure if the 25 years was a definite amount of time. He heard there was potentially some data they could look at that gave solar compatible area ranges that were in the ordinance and would indicate what kind of capability or efficiency it had, and he'd like to see some of that data. He thought they should delay it and potentially get some more information, then send it back to the Planning Commission and then back to the Council. Council Member Olsen stated the owner of the company said the revision to their revision put the solar panels in the designated area; he asked if he had heard that City Council Meeting Minutes June 15, 2016 Page 13 correctly. He was advised that that was incorrect and it was not in a designated area. Council Member Olsen asked where the revision would place the solar panels, and if it would all be moved. Mr. Leischow stated the first revision of the panels proposed on the southerly part of the property was to relocate those panels; the more recent revision added the additional panels to the north. Council Member Olsen confirmed that the panels would still be placed in an area that was adjacent to the approved area but not within the approved area. Mr. Leischow advised that was correct. Council Member Olsen asked how far it was from the approved area. Mr. Leischow stated it abutted the common boundary line, and Council Member Olsen confirmed that was literally within feet of the approved area. Council Member Dennis stated if this could be put into the approved area, he would say yes; however, it's not in the approved area. With the lengthy process, over a year down the line from when the process began, he was concerned if they opened that door, how many applications for additional variances were going to come flooding in. He felt they were already stretching City staff very, very thin, and he didn't believe they had the capacity to go down that road and open that Pandora's box. He stated the next thing we'd know solar panels could be running over the entire area. Council Member Olsen questioned the business owner, Mr. Leischow, if he was literally within feet of the acceptable boundary; he confirmed that. He asked him why they couldn't move those few feet and save everybody a lot of headache. Mr. Leischow stated they had submitted an application because they had property immediately across that line, just to the north, in the approved area, which is making its way through the process. Mr. Leischow felt because of the close proximity, because it's going to be one or the other, they thought that was a better site for all of the reasons previously stated. Council Member Olsen asked if the adjacent property was owned by the same property owner; Mr. Leischow stated it was not. Council Member Olsen confirmed that his company felt this area should have been included in the approved zone; Mr. Leischow stated he felt if they had had the information that they had provided at the time that decision was made, he thought they would have put it in the approved zone. Mr. Leischow stated Council Member Dennis had mentioned that this would open the floodgates. There are no more five megawatt projects in the State of Minnesota, behind Xcel Energy, as their capacity is full, which is why the City hasn't seen any more applications anywhere for solar projects in the zone or out of the zone. He stated that's simply not going to happen. Council Member Dennis stated that he begged to differ on the number of inquiries they would receive and didn't want to argue with him. Council Member Olsen asked Planner McCool why solar gardens were such a hot topic today. He stated that the Minnesota legislature had adopted programs that required Xcel or private utility companies to provide for a certain percentage of the energy from solar by a certain date. The City did not have to approve an ordinance for solar collection and we weren't required to accept them into the community. Through that process of creating an ordinance, the City Council, Planning Commission, and staff City Council Meeting Minutes June 15, 2016 Page 14 supported the idea to allow for solar in the community. The ordinance stated solar had to be outside the urban service area and that it not be located in any transition planning area in the City's Comprehensive Plan. Planner McCool stated he knew the property being discussed tonight is within inches of the boundary area, but that was the criteria that had been developed for the ordinance and, for those reasons, the recommendation was made for denial. Also, if they want to allow solar gardens in the transition areas, they need to remove that condition from the ordinance. Mayor Bailey stated he had watched the two Planning Commission meetings, and he agreed there was probably some confusion at the beginning because they voted to approve it and then had a conversation about the other changes; he thought they were confused and then they thought they'd back up and consider it. Staff said they'd go back and make some recommendations or conditions for approval. At the next meeting, there were some changes, but after reading and looking through all that, the Planning Commission said that they didn't agree with it. At that point, one of the Commission members suggested they rescind the vote. Mayor Bailey said Sunrise Development sounds like a good company, and he'd spoken to homeowners who are in that area, but he's concerned about changes to the zoning. He felt they had to draw a line somewhere on a map. He stated if this was two years from now, it might be a whole different ballgame; the reason for that is they're in the process of the Comprehensive Plan and they're reassessing all of the boundaries and deciding locations of housing and businesses, etc. Cottage Grove has been getting a lot of accolades in the press because we were one of the first cities to come up with these types of solar areas, etc. Mayor Bailey stated he's in support of solar and other sources of renewable energy. He stated personally he would find it difficult to vote to approve this, and he didn't feel the need to send it back to the Planning Commission. Council Member Olsen stated he also could not support the Application. Council Member Dennis made a motion to accept the Planning Commission's recommendations and adopt Resolution 2016-117 denying Sunrise Development, LLC's zoning text amendment, variance, and conditional use permit applications for their proposed five megawatt community solar garden as shown on their revised site plan prepared by Sunrise Development, LLC dated May 19, 2016, second by Council Member Olsen. Motion passed: 5-0. 12. COUNCIL COMMENTS AND REQUESTS Council Member Dennis stated many people have been wondering when Carbone's is going to begin their expansion project. He spoke with the manager today and they're hoping to have their expansion completed by November 1. Council Member Dennis stated the Cottage Grove Chamber of Commerce will be having a happy hour at the River Oaks Golf Course, at the new Eagles Bar and Grill; City Council Meeting Minutes June 15, 2016 Page 15 that will be on June 22, it's open to the public, and there will be complimentary food and a cash bar. During that time, the City would love to receive input on a proposed upcoming ordinance that will deal with breweries, tap rooms, and food trucks. Council Member Olsen wanted to thank the Strawberry Fest volunteers for all their hard work and effort, as people don't usually realize it's a year-round effort to make it happen. The festival committee takes the input they receive during the event and use that to make the next year's event bigger and better. He also stated the local businesses deserve much credit, as they are the ones who actually make it happen with financial aid, manpower, goods, and services, and he thanked them for all they do. Council Member Olsen thanked City staff for all of the hard work regarding the road construction on Hadley Avenue, near 90th and 95th Streets. They've received feedback from residents and questions have been raised through social media, and staff has been extremely reactive; they're very quick to answer questions and respond to concerns. Council Member Olsen stated when residents have a question or a concern or if there's something that's unclear to them, the best think they can do is to reach out to one of the City staff inembers or elected officials who are there to serve your needs. He stated when that's done, they will receive an accurate response. Staff and elected officials will take all the time necessary to get the questions asked and/or answered. Misinformation often occurs throughout the community, through rumors, which sometimes take root on social media and can be very disrespectful. Council Members try to be engaged and engaging, and the City staff has been pushed to adopt that same mentality and they do a great job with that. So, if there are any questions, make a phone call to 458-2800, which is the phone number to City Hall, or call any of the Council Members directly, as they will also field your questions. Council Member Thiede stated the City staff is so very involved with the Strawberry Fest that it wouldn't be the same without them, and he wanted to recognize all of them for their contributions. Mayor Bailey stated Community Development Director/City Engineer Levitt had provided him with information on the South Washington County Relay for Life, which took place on June 10 at East Ridge, and as of today, they've raised $153,900. They have a goal of $180,000, and online donations are being accepted through August. The City's group, "Cancer's Answers," raised $6,217, which puts them in 4th place out of 79 teams in fundraising. If you'd like to donate, reach out to the City and they'll direct you to the website where you can make a donation. He thanked everyone from the City who was involved in this year's fundraiser. Mayor Bailey stated on June 23 he will be at the ribbon cutting grand opening ceremony of Cedarhurst Meadows Park, and he invited everyone to join him. There will be refreshments, backyard games, a chance to meet neighbors, and you'll be able to City Council Meeting Minutes June 15, 2016 Page 16 check out the new playground equipment. There are now a total of 34 parks in Cottage Grove. Mayor Bailey stated if you don't trust what a Council Member is saying, contact a City staff inember. There have been concerns expressed in neighborhoods with all of the construction going on, but there are new travel paths as people are being re-routed and there are concerns about speed and pedestrian traffic. He asked that everyone please be cognizant of the neighbors and neighborhoods you're driving through, as children might not be accustomed to their streets being busier and not think to look for traffic. If there are concerns, reach out to Council Members or ask police to do some extra patrols; please use the non-emergency Dispatch phone number, 651-439-9381. He received an E-mail today regarding the area near Pine Hill School, and he was able to advise the sender why the 90th Street intersection was temporarily closed, etc. and she was very thankful for that information. 13. WORKSHOPS — OPEN TO PUBLIC - None. 14. WORKSHOPS — CLOSED TO PUBLIC A. Closed session pursuant to Minn. Stat. 13D.05, Subd. 3(a), to conduct a performance evaluation. Mayor Bailey stated there will be a performance evaluation of the City Administrator, Charlene Stevens, to which she had agreed when they hired her, to offer her any feedback and also give her the opportunity to do the same. 15. ADJOURNMENT Motion by Council Member Olsen, second by Council Member Peterson, to adjourn the meeting at 10:00 p.m. Motion carried: 5-0. Minutes prepared by Judy Graf and reviewed by Joe Fischbach, HR Manager City Clerk.