Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout12-20-10-WS <iVN HILLS Approved: January 31, 2011 CITY OF ARDEN HILLS, MINNESOTA CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION MEETING DECEMBER 20,2010 5:00 P.M. -ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS CALL TO ORDER/ROLL CALL Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, Mayor Stan Harpstead called to order the City Council Work Session meeting at 5:02 p.m. Present: Mayor Stan Harpstead, Councilmembers Brenda Holden, Fran Holmes, Dave McClung and David Grant. (Councilmember Grant arrived at 5:50 P.M.) Absent: None. Also present: City Administrator Patrick Klaers; Public Works Director Terry Maurer; City Planner Meagan Beekman; Community Development Director Jill Hutmacher; Cuvuk Engineer Kristine Giga; Civil Engineer Matt Woodruff; and Deputy Clerk Rebecca Brazys. APPROVAL OF AGENDA Mayor Harpstead explained that Councilmember Grant will be late and asked that the Council not discuss Items 2A and 2B until he is present. MOTION: Mayor Harpstead moved and Councilmember McClung seconded, to approve the agenda. Motion carried unanimous) 4-0. 1. COUNCIL COMMENTS Councilmember Holmes thanked the Public Works crew for their efforts during the recent snowstorms. 2. AGENDA ITEMS 2.0 Right-of-Way Ordinance ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION—DECEMBER 20, 2010 2 created questions about what should be allowed in the right-of-way, who is responsible for damage to items in the right-of-way, and who is responsible for maintenance of trees and vegetation in the right-of-way (ROW). She explained that on most properties there is a ten to fifteen foot ROW. Questions about the City's role in maintaining trees in the ROW have been coming up for the past several years. Currently our Public Works Department handles identifying dead, diseased, and damaged trees that need to be removed. The City's regulations pertaining to trees and vegetation in the ROW are found in Section 710 of the City Code. This section states that the planter of trees and vegetation in the ROW is responsible for the ongoing maintenance and care. This section also outlines the process through which a resident would receive a permit to plant a tree in the ROW. Unfortunately, there has not been a consistent historic record of permits being pulled under this section. The current practice is, when there is a question about who planted a tree, the City takes the responsibility of removing it when necessary. City Planner Beckman further explained that the City Code is silent on what other types of landscaping materials (such as retaining walls, planters, boulders, plant materials, irrigation systems) are allowed in the ROW. The City's snow plowing/snow removal policy does address some of these items but the Code does not broadly address this issue. According to our City Attorney, it is within a City's rights to require items located within the ROW between the edge of the road and a resident's property line to be the responsibility of that property owner. City Planner Beckman also referred to the Emerald Ash Borer (EAB) management plan that Staff has begun working on. An inventory of all ash trees located within maintained areas of City parks was completed in the summer of 2010. Staff budgeted in 2011 for an inventory of trees in the ROW to prepare for the ultimate possibility of losing all of the City's ash tree stock. City Planner Beekman stated that Staff believes it is necessary to clarify within the Code which parties are responsible for maintaining boulevard trees and vegetation and, most importantly, who is responsible for their removal in the event of damage or disease. A better understanding of this is necessary before the City can create an EAB management plan. Staff would like to begin working on proposed changes to the Code regarding ROW and would appreciate Council _ direction on the following as they pertain to the ROW: 1. Who is responsible for dead, damaged, or diseased trees/vegetation in the ROW? 2. Should residents be allowed to plant/place things in the ROW adjacent to their homes? If so, should a permit be required to do so? 3. What items, if any, should be allowed to be planted or placed in the ROW by residents? a. Retaining walls, fences, vegetation, landscaping materials, rocks, irrigation systems, trees 4. What responsibility or authority should the City have for items placed or planted in the ROW? For example, should the City be able to prune or remove vegetation that impedes a safe travel area in the ROW? 5. As a policy, should the City ever plant trees in the ROW? Should the City ever require trees to be planted in the ROW for development projects or subdivisions? Public Works Director Terry Maurer explained that there is generally twelve to fifteen feet of ROW adjacent to the roadway, and it is typically grass or other plant materials that is maintained by the property owner. ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION—DECEMBER 20, 2010 3 City Planner Beekman explained that currently when there is a diseased tree in the ROW, the City takes care of it. Mayor Harpstead stated that the City could require the property owner to be responsible for trees - in the ROW. Councilmember Holden suggested that one option would be that if someone registers their tree in the ROW, it would be the City's responsibility. Councilmember Holmes commented that the ROW is a City easement where a property owner plants or constructs at their own risk and any problem is the homeowner's problem. Councilmember McClung stated the underlying issue is who owns the property. City PIanner Beekman stated the City Attorney has referred to the ROW as a sort of "super - easement" but the property owner owns it. Most cities require homeowners to maintain the ROW. Because this issue is vague in our Code, the City tends to pay for problems in the ROW. - Councilmember McClung commented that we need to be clear about whatever we choose to do. He believes that whatever is in the ROW should be maintained by the property owner and diseased trees should be the responsibility of the homeowner. Councilmember Holden questioned if we allow fences and retaining walls in the ROW. City Planner Beekman responded that our Code doesn't allow for fences but we don't prohibit retaining walls or other landscaping features. However, the homeowner would be placing those items in the ROW at their own risk with the City retaining the right to remove those items if necessary at the homeowner's expense. Public Works Director Maurer stated that fences create a problem for snow removal. He believed that homeowners should keep fences out of the ROW. City Planner Beckman added that the City does want homeowners to maintain and improve their front yards. Mayor Harpstead stated the City's objective should be clear. Improvements are wanted but if they're on the ROW, it will be at the homeowner's risk; if something happens, the homeowner should not expect the City to take care of the problem. This should be a community-wide policy. Councilmember Holden did not agree with the Mayor's statement. Councilmember McClung was concerned that if the City takes the position suggested by the Mayor and then proceeds with cutting down all the ash trees, would the homeowners be expected to pay for tree removal? He also stated that whatever decision the Council makes should not pre- suppose extraordinary situations. City Planner Beekman stated that the Emerald Ash Borer plan is a separate issue. ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION—DECEMBER 20, 2010 4 Councilmember Holden commented that the City went through a similar situation with the Dutch elm disease and oak wilt problems in the past and the history of how the City handled those situations should be reviewed. Mayor Harpstead agreed that the ordinance should be somewhat flexible for unusual circumstances. - City Planner Beekman pointed out that the City can go above and beyond the ordinance in extraordinary circumstances. Councilmember Holden agreed that the homeowner should have responsibility for maintenance in the ROW but thought there should be some grace period before the City changes its current practice and abdicates its responsibility. Public Works Director Maurer stated the City has historically taken responsibility for trees in the ROW. Mayor Harpstead added that there has always been money in the budget for this purpose. Councilmember Holmes asked if most residents believe that trees in the ROW are the City's responsibility. Public Works Director Maurer responded that more residents know that than don't. Generally the people who call expect the City to provide the service. Councilmember Holmes stated she doesn't believe the City should be responsible for the Emerald Ash Borer problems. She added that she would like to see the Emerald Ash Borer plan and this ordinance move forward together. Councilmember Holden commented that if there is a diseased tree on someone's property that then spreads to a tree on the right-of-way, the homeowner should be responsible. Discussion ensued regarding what should be allowed in the ROW. The consensus was that only vegetation should be allowed. Community Development Director Hutmacher questioned how situations in which retaining walls are constructed in the ROW to deal with grade issues should be handled. Public Works Director Maurer stated those areas would be treated as an exception. Mayor Harpstead asked about those instances when trees are removed due to a street improvement project. He questioned if the homeowners are charged an additional assessment for tree removal. ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION—DECEMBER 20, 2010 5 City PIanner Beekman explained that the PMP policy is rather vague. She is hoping the ROW ordinance can clarify this as well as updating the PMP policy. Public Works Director Maurer explained that the homeowners would not be charged for the tree removal. The Council agreed this topic should be discussed at their January worksession. 2.D Review of Draft Community Development SWOT Analysis Community Development Director Hutmacher explained that the points listed in the analysis are compiled from conversations with Council and Staff, demographic data included in the 2030 Comprehensive Plan, and her observations over the past six weeks. She added that the draft SWOT Analysis is not a complete or refined document, but is meant to serve as a starting point _ for an ongoing discussion of community and economic development goals and priorities. Councilmember Holden commented that aging housing stock where there is investment should be considered an opportunity rather than a threat. Mayor Harpstead referred to the Economic Development Authority's ability to establish funds for loans to citizens on an as-needed basis. CounciImember Holmes stated that single family rentals are an issue as some residents with rentals are not complying with the City's rental registration program. She also suggested the ordinance be changed to limit single family rentals or to have more criteria. She pointed out that the Traverse area has not been identified in this analysis as a redevelopment area and added that she is not happy with the B2 plan that was previously adopted. She added that she doesn't like apartment buildings everywhere. Councilmember McClung commented that it's been less than five years since the B2 plan was developed and now there's talk of changing it already. City Planner Beekman commented that the development of the B2 Plan was a year-long process involving business owners and City staff and it does not include a lot of apartments. Mayor Harpstead stated that Red Fox/Grey Fox is a potential problem area. 2.A Old Snelling Scoping Document Public Works Director Maurer stated there are three areas of consideration; street improvements, the detached trail, and/or bridge replacement. He explained that according to the 2009 MSA Traffic Count, there are 1,000 cars a day on Old Snelling, 9,000 a day on County Road E, and 4,400 cars a day on Lake Johanna Boulevard. Old Snelling is a State Aid route and will have to be built to state standards to use State Aid funding. Councilmember Holden questioned how many homes there are between Snelling (TH51) and County Road E. ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION—DECEMBER 20, 2010 6 Public Works Director Maurer responded that there are approximately 20 — 22 properties on Old Snelling. Civil Engineer Woodruff, reviewed the five options being proposed for this project. Alternative 1: Urban reconstruction with parking (state aid standard) Roadway improvements $1,574,300 Storm water improvements $ 153,700 Total estimated cost $1,728,000 Alternative 2: Urban reconstruction without parking (state aid standard) Roadway improvements $1,228,400 Storm water improvements $ 133,600 Total estimated cost $1,362,000 Alternative 3: Rural reconstruction(state aid standard) Roadway improvements $1,346,600 Storm water improvements $ 96,900 Total estimated cost $1,443,500 Alternative 4: Rural reconditioning (Reclaim) (state aid standard) Roadway improvements $ 857,000 Storm water improvements $ 5,200 Total estimated cost $ 862,200 Alternative 5: Bituminous Reclaim (non-state aid standard) Roadway improvements $ 452,700 Storm water improvements $ 5,200 _ Total estimated cost $ 457,900 Public Works Director Maurer explained that for Alternative 2 the City could do parking on one side but there would then not be enough room for pedestrians. Councilmember Holden questioned the 8 foot shoulder on Alternative 4. Public Works Director Maurer responded the state aid minimum is 6 feet but 8 feet is what is there now. Civil Engineer Woodruff explained that the storm water improvement costs drop significantly on Alternative 4 because there would be no Rice Creek Watershed District requirements. He further stated that Alternative 5 is the minimal improvement and would not be to State Aid standards which means the City would have to use its own funds. Public Works Director Maurer explained that Alternative 5 is the narrowest option with no allowance for pedestrians. ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION—DECEMBER 20, 2010 7 CounciImember Holden questioned if Old Snelling would continue to be a Minnesota State Aid (MSA) road if the City proceeded with Alternative 5. Public Works Director Maurer explained that it would still be an MSA road, but that state funds could not be used since the improvement would not meet MSA standards. Civil Engineer Woodruff explained that the City had hired Kimley Horn to evaluate the bridge. He stated the bridge will be structurally deficient in a few years and that it is 84 years old. The current estimate is $492,000 to replace the bridge under Alternative 1. If the City chooses a lesser alternative, the cost of the bridge would be less. Public Works Director Maurer explained that unless Council wants a trail across the bridge, there is no need to replace the bridge today. But, he added, the City should be looking for financial assistance to replace the bridge when it becomes necessary. There is room for a pedestrian crossing, but we cannot sign it as a pedestrian crossing. Civil Engineer Woodruff stated there could be a trail add-on on the west side of Snelling, 8 feet wide, detached at an estimated cost of $255,000 to $325,000 including retaining walls and tree removal. Public Works Director Maurer explained that he is looking for guidance as far as when these projects should be included in CIP. He added that the County Road E replacement is scheduled for 2015 which would shift traffic to Old Snelling during construction. Councilmember Holden questioned what is in CIP for MSA funds. Public Works Director Maurer replied that the County Road E street scoping, the County Road E bridge, and the 10 / 96 costs are currently included. The 1694 noise walls could also be funded with MSA funds. Public Works Director Maurer stated the State Aid balance is currently at $785,000 plus $200,000 next year for a total of almost $1 million. Mayor Harpstead asked if there is a maximum the City can accrue. Public Works Director Maurer responded that there is no maximum but we are penalized if we accumulate over $1.5 million. He added the City could probably wait until 2013 to utilize those funds without penalty. Councilmember Grant stated there must be some streets on the Pavement Management Program that qualify for State Aid funds. Councilmember Holden stated the City should consider fixing the grade by McDonald's. Public Works Director Maurer stated he just wanted to make the Council aware of the status of the Old Snelling project. ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION—DECEMBER 20, 2010 8 Mayor Harpstead spoke in favor of Alternative 4. He added that there may be an opportunity to work with Roseville for regional money. Councilmember Grant also favored Alternative 4 and added that he likes the trail option which makes it one more trail section closer to the County Road E bridge and would bring people from South of County Road E into Arden Hills. - Public Works Director Maurer agreed that building the trail on Old Snelling makes sense. Alternative 4 includes the trail and is MSA funding eligible. Councilmember Holden stated she wants to look at other needs before she chooses one of the Alternatives presented this evening. Councilmember Grant stated there are alternatives that make sense and added that it's going to fall on the City since there are so few properties to assess. MOTION: Councilmember Holmes moved and Councilmember Grant seconded the motion to recess the worksession at 6:55 p.m. The motion carried unanimously (5.0). Mayor Harpstead reconvened the worksession at 7.32 p.m. 2.13 Valentine Park Drainage Analysis Review Public Works Director Maurer explained that in February 2009, WSB prepared the Valentine Park Drainage Analysis to better understand the options available for investment in the park given the periodic flooding from Valentine Lake. At that time, neighborhood concerns led the Council to direct Staff to have another consultant review the analysis and render a professional opinion regarding its conclusions. Bolton. & Menk, Inc. (BMI) reviewed the WSB analysis, and in their November 2, 2010, letter summarized their findings, BMI found that the inputs into the drainage model are accurate and the conclusions in the WSB report appear to be appropriate. They do question the Normal Water Level (NWL) in the WSB report of 875.5 versus the Ordinary High Water Level (OHWL) they received from the DNR of 878.8 BMI also suggests the drainage model be rerun after a determination is made regarding which is the appropriate elevation so the City will have an accurate representation of a storm event. Public Works Director Maurer stated that staff also had Roseville's surveyor determine the lowest opening on the homes adjacent to the park. The lowest opening was determined to be a walk-out patio door at elevation 883.9. BMI's review determined that the DNR's highest recorded lake level is 881.1. Industry standards would have the lowest opening elevation a minimum of 2 feet above the highest flood elevation. The above information indicates that there is 2.8 feet between the highest flood elevation and the lowest opening. This would indicate that filling of the park to raise improvements out of flood danger should have no adverse effects on adjacent properties if proper drainage is included in the design. ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION—DECEMBER 20, 2010 9 Public Works Director Maurer further stated that Staff had met with Rice Creek Watershed (RCW) to discuss the outflow from Valentine Lake. RCW staff provided information regarding which portions of the outflow are controlled by the DNR and which portions are controlled by the _ Wetland Conservation Act. He added that staff met with Mr. Don Messerly to get an historic perspective on the park flooding. Public Works Director Maurer stated that Staff will be looking for direction from the Council on how to proceed with the programmed 2011 CIP improvements to the park. Councilmember Holmes questioned if the park is considered to be part of the lake. Public Works Director Maurer responded it is not considered part of the lake according to the Rice Creek Watershed District. He added that the neighborhood does not flood the park but the park floods because the lake is too high. - Councilmember Holmes stated that a lot of water does come from the neighborhood. Public Works Director Maurer explained that the water Councilmember Holmes is referring to is a problem due to the grading in the park. Councilmember Grant asked if the culvert has a check valve. Public Works Director Maurer responded that Bolton & Menk has suggested the City place a flap on the lake side of the culvert that allows the park to drain to the lake but won't allow the lake to back up into the park. This is something to consider, but further design review is necessary. He then suggested that the Staff come back with a concept to put all this together. Staff will spend time reviewing this with Roseville regarding engineering capacity, and will recommend hiring someone to go through the public participation process so the neighborhood has input. _ Councilmember Holmes asked if the culvert coming down from the neighborhood is part of the problem as the water flows right into the park at grade level. Public Works Director Maurer responded that he wants to do the minimum amount of work that will make the Rice Creek Watershed District happy and does not want to over-design the drainage. He added that the whole site needs to be properly graded. Councilmember Holmes stated she still believes that the water from the neighborhood needs to be considered. Councilmember Grant explained that the ball fields used to be on the other side of the park but sank down over time. Public Works Director Maurer stated that drainage will have to be accommodated. He added that he is concerned that the park and drainage co-exist and will meet with Michelle to review. ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION—DECEMBER 20, 2010 10 Councilmember Holden commented that she does not want the focus to be on the baseball field. Public Works Director Maurer stated he will put together a timeframe to share with the Council at their January meeting. _ Public Works Director Maurer indicated that Mn/DOT has made an appointment to the Appeals Board and that the City needs to make its appointment in January. After discussion by the Council, it was suggested that Stan Harpstead represent the City on the Appeal Board. Mayor Harpstead stated that he was open to this appointment. 2.E Staff Updates Council Vacancy City Administrator Klaers stated no new applications had been received to date. Deer Survey City Administrator Klaers explained that the Ramsey County Parks Department has inquired if the City is interested in participating in the aerial deer survey. The City participated for the first time last year. This survey is a "snapshot in time" but the City may still want to be involved in order to monitor trends that may need to be watched. Mayor Harpstead questioned the value of this information. After some discussion,the consensus was not to participate. Public Works Union Contract Discussions City ,administrator Klaers stated on December 10, City representatives met with the I.U.O.E Local No. 49 Area Business Representative, Kent Korman, and City Steward, Tony Nowlan to discuss the Union's requests for a new contract. The City's response to the Union's requests was presented at that meeting. General agreement was reached on a few items and a number of items _ require additional discussions. It was the consensus of the Council to adjourn into an Executive Session to discuss the details of the Union contract negotiations. ADJOURN MOTION: Councilmember Grant moved, and Councilmember Holden seconded, to adjourn the Work Session at 8:10 p.m. and convene to an Executive Session to discuss the Union contract. Motion carried unanimously (5-0.) //� Patrick Klaers David Grant City Administrator Mayor