Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout03-21-11-J, WS EN HILLS Approved: April 11, 2011 CITY OF ARDEN HILLS, MINNESOTA CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION—5:00 P.M. _ AND CITY COUNCIL & PARKS,TRAILS & RECREATION COMMITTEE JOINT WORK SESSION MEETING—6:00 P.M. MARCH 21,2011 ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS CALL TO ORDER/ROLL CALL Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, Mayor David Grant called to order the City - Council Work Session meeting at 5:04 p.m. Present: Mayor David Grant, Councilmembers Brenda Holden, Fran Holmes, Nick Tamble and Ed Werner. (Councilmember Tamble arrived at 5:09 p.m.) Parks, Trails & Recreation Committee Members Steve Scott, Harold Peterson, Phil Kramlinger, Nancy O'Malley, Charles Michaelson, and John Peck(Committee Member Peck arrived at 6:31 p.m.). Absent: Parks, Trails & Recreation Committee Members Cynthia Garretson and Rich Straumann. Also present: City Administrator Patrick Klaers; Public Works Director Terry Maurer; Parks & Recreation Manager Michelle Olson; Deputy Clerk Rebecca Brazys; and Parks, Trails &Recreation Committee applicant Don Messerly. APPROVAL OF AGENDA MOTION: Councilmember Holmes moved and Councilmember Holden seconded a motion to approve the meefin2 a ends as presented. The motion carried unanimous) 4-0 . 1. COUNCIL COMMENTS AND REQUESTS There were no comments or requests at this time. ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION—MARCH 21, 2011 2 2. STAFF UPDATES A. Preliminary Review of Joint Meeting Public Works Director Maurer explained that he wanted to review expectations for this evening's joint meeting. He stated that he had made it very clear to the Parks, Trails &Recreation _ Committee (PTRC) members that this would be their opportunity to talk with Council, to ask questions and get direction from the Council. He wanted them to understand that this would not _ be a Staff driven exchange. S. Sheriffs Contract City Administrator Klaers stated that the 2010-2012 Law Enforcement Agreement with Ramsey County was scheduled for renewal at the end of 2009. The agreement is identical to the previous - three-year contract. We are now midway through the contract period without having renewed the contract. He further explained that there is a termination clause in the contract requiring a 9 month notice of intent to not renew. He pointed out that the new Sheriff has plans to monitor the quality of services provided to contract cities. He asked if the Council wants this matter on their next agenda so action can be taken. Councilmember Holden commented that the Council simply wanted the Sheriff to do what they were supposed to do under the contract. Now, she stated, it seems that they are actually enforcing the City's ordinances and she would vote to approve renewal Mayor Grant stated that the Council should give the new Sheriff a chance to improve the services and he agreed that things have been getting better. After some discussion, the consensus of the Council was to place the Sheriff's contract on the March 28th Council agenda under Consent. C. Non-Union Wage Adjustment City Administrator Klaers explained that this matter had been discussed during the budget process. The City has 25 fulI time employees, eight of which are union employees. In 2010 the union employees were granted a 3% increase while there was no increase for non-union employees. He stated now that the union contract negotiations have been completed, he would like the Council to consider an increase to allow the non-union employees to "catch up" in terms of wages. He suggested a I% to 2% increase for non-union employees with I% to be retroactive to January 1 and then a 1% increase effective July 1. He explained that there are monies available in the contingency fund for this increase. Councilmember Werner questioned what surrounding cities are doing as far as pay increases. City Administrator Klaers stated that some communities are not offering any increases, some are giving i% and others, such as St. Anthony, have approved a 2%increase. ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION—MARCH 21, 2011 3 Councilmember Holden stated she doesn't think the Council should be concerned with "catching-up"to Public Works employees;the comparison should be with other like cities. City Administrator Klaers stated that a survey of surrounding cities was not done at this time but the City did recently file for pay equity compliance and found that the internal balance between male dominated classes and female dominated classes has slipped. _ Mayor Grant agreed with Councilmember Holden that we should not be concerned about "catching up" and he too wondered how we compare to neighboring cities. Councilmember Tamble expressed concern that not granting an increase to non-union employees would give the appearance that the Council valued Public Works employees more. Mayor Grant stated that it comes down to "what they make for what they're doing" and in that - regard, we do need to be competitive with other cities. Councilmember Tamble stated that if the Public Works employees were non-union, then all employees would be treated the same. Councilmember Holden stated that there are some staff members who have specialized jobs and if those staff members choose to leave the City, the cost to train replacements would be higher than the proposed pay increase. Mayor Grant pointed out that staff members continue to receive step increases until they are at the top of their pay grade. Councilmember Holden stated that step increases have been suspended at times, and she added that there is no such thing as bonuses in the public sector as there is in the private sector. Councilmember Holmes commented that based on what is going on in the economy and what other cities are doing, she doesn't see how the Council could give more than a 1% increase. She added that federal employees aren't getting an increase and many businesses are not increasing pay. Councilmember Werner agreed with Councilmember Holmes. Councilmember Holden stated that since the non-union employees received no increase last year, the Council should consider giving a 1% increase effective January 1 and a 1% effective September 1. Councilmember Tamble stated that if this would be considered a cost of living increase, it should be parallel among all employees. City Administrator Klaers commented that giving some increase in 2011, after giving no adjustment in 2010, would be considered a show of faith and support for non-union employees. ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION—MARCH 21, 2011 4 After some discussion, the consensus of the Council was to grant a 1% increase effective January 1 and revisit this topic in July. Staff was directed to place this matter under Consent on the Council's March 28 h agenda. 2.1) I-694/TH 51 Interchange Project Public Works Director Maurer explained that on February 9, Senator Goodwin and Representative Knuth held a meeting with MnDOT, Ramsey County, and Arden Hills officials to discuss the I-694/TH 51 Interchange Project. He reviewed a follow-up letter from MnDOT addressing the City's 14 conditions for denying municipal consent. He also reviewed a letter from Joe Lux of Ramsey County clarifying three of the conditions addressed in MnDOT's letter. He stated the key points in each letter are: I. On Condition #2, MnDOT states that the City is no longer pursuing the noise wall so - they will remove it from the construction plans. Staff has talked to MnDOT and informed them that this is not what was said at the meeting on February 9. Staff reminded MnDOT that we indicated our feeling that the City would forego the noise wall if freeing up approximately $1,000,000 of MnDOT funding would help with MnDOT funding needed traffic improvements on Lexington Avenue. 2. On Condition#3, regarding using excess material generated on the project for building berms to help with noise mitigation; MnDOT gave a more detailed explanation at the meeting that the need to build storm water ponds, limited right-of-way, and topography of the excess right-of-way made it impossible to build berms of sufficient length and height to provide significant noise mitigation. With this more detailed explanation, it was agreed that building of berms was no longer needed. 3. On Condition 45, MnDOT basically has given the same answer about potential City costs with their project. Ramsey County's letter clarifies even hither potential cost from a County project on Lexington Avenue. It appears that the City costs for both projects will be modest. 4. Condition #6 deals with MnDOT committing funds to help Ramsey County with needed improvements on Lexington Avenue due to the interchange project. Staff has had several conversations with Mr. McBride and Jim Tolaas regarding this issue. Mr. McBride has been very clear that MnDOT policy prohibits them from committing in writing to having funding available for the County project as the funds come from a competitive program at MnDOT. Mr. McBride did tell staff that MnDOT would do everything it could to help the County with the Lexington Avenue improvements. Staff asked Mr. McBride to call Jim Tolaas to discuss this and then ask Mr. Tolaas to call the City. Staff did receive a phone call from Mr. Tolaas stating that he talked to Mr. McBride and that the County is fully committed to making the necessary improvements to Lexington Avenue and they feel MnDOT will help with funding. 5. Condition 47 deals with making improvements to the Lexington Avenue Bridge to lengthen the left turn lanes. MnDOT has committed to making this change including the adjustments to the signal systems at each end of the bridge and to do the work ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION—MARCH 21, 2011 5 concurrent with the interchange project and to totally fund it with Trunk Highway dollars. This is an estimated$400,000 project. 6. On Condition 414, dealing with the County Road E Bridge, MnDOT states the bridge could be advance constructed and commits to working with the County and City to develop the project. Ramsey County's letter indicates they are working with MnDOT _ on the project, will be applying for STP funding, and the application will include pedestrian facilities the City sought in 2009. Public Works Director Maurer stated that Staff believes MnDOT has moved a significant amount from their original response to the City's 14 conditions and that this is the best deal we are likely to get with the commitment to making bridge improvements and getting potential assistance with the funding of County improvements on Lexington Avenue. He explained that Staff would like direction from Council regarding the noise wall and whether or not MnDOT's current - response is acceptable for granting Municipal Consent. He then stated if the Council is not agreeable,then they would move forward with the Appeals Board process. Councilmember Holden questioned what the Appeals Board considers. Public Works Director Maurer explained that the Appeals Board will only look at things in the lay-out and pedestrian facilities would be outside that scope. He added that the State Transportation Commissioner can ignore the Appeals Board ruling if it would be in the best interest of the state transportation system to do so. State law gives the Commissioner that authority for projects on the Interstate system. Councilmember Holden stated that if the City decides not to proceed with a noise wall then that should be communicated to the residents in that area. Mayor Grant stated that it was 6:00 p.m. and time for the Joint Work Session with the PTRC. Mayor Grant moved and Councilmember Tamble seconded the motion to move to item 3.A on the Agenda. Motion carried unanimously (5-0). 3.A 2011 PTRC Goals and Work Plan Parks, Trails & Recreation Committee Chairman Steve Scott commented that more people work in Arden Hills than live in the City and that there is full use of all recreation opportunities within Arden Hills. He stated that the number one amenity in cities is their recreational and green space area. He stated there are 14 parks in Arden Hills. He then asked each PTRC member to introduce themselves and talk about where they live in Arden Hills. Committee Chairman Scott then reviewed the 2011 Goals for the PTRC: GOAL 1. Review and analyze the impact of establishing a fee structure for field use in the City and bring a recommendation to Council. ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION—MARCH 21, 2011 6 Councilmember Holden stated she doesn't like having to charge fees, but there are non-residents that use our fields and a lot of maintenance is required so she believed that the PTRC should look into establishing fees, including fees for leagues. Councilmember Holmes stated that fees for park use should also be reviewed; particularly for = residents as compared with non-residents. Councilmember Tamble noted that enforcement of such fees would be difficult and that enforcement could result in people feeling discouraged about using parks. Mayor Grant stated he would support fees for outside organizations. He added that neighboring cities have a fee structure and that the fees could help offset the expense of maintaining the parks and fields. - Committee Chairman Scott listed the second goal and asked if the Council would welcome comments from the PTRC on this issue. GOAL 2. Recommend future enhancements for the 5 year Capital Improvement Program. Councilmember Holden stated that park renovations and tennis court maintenance and parks and trails related facilities need established guidelines for maintenance. She then referred to a 2002 Parks and Open Space Plan and asked if there is a more current version. Parks and Recreation Manager Olson stated that the document was updated and included in the 2030 Comprehensive PIan. However, public input has not been solicited since that time. Mayor Grant commented that the Council would welcome PTRC requests for CIP funds but reminded the PTRC members that the Council has to consider many such requests. (PTRC member John Peck arrived at this point of the meeting—6.31 p.m.) Councilmember Holden noted that the National Guard is building a Community Center in the near future which will be open to uses by the City. She asked if the PTRC had considered what uses could be added to that site, and, if not,maybe it should. Committee Chairman Scott then discussed the next PTRC goal. GOAL 3. Research, review, comment and recommend approval on the following specific projects: a. Bench Implementation and Location b. Valentine Park Improvements c. Adopt a Garden Program d. Trail Maintenance Plan ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION—MARCH 21, 2011 7 Committee Chairman Scott explained that the PTRC would like to highlight committee activities such as the bench donation program through the City Newsletter to inform residents and solicit input. He also suggested the Committee could write or suggest articles for the Newsletter, possibly quarterly. Councilmember Holden suggested that the PTRC work with local businesses to establish a bench donation program. She also suggested that they consider extending the trail to allow students access to the high school property. Councilmember Holmes commented that the PTRC should focus on bringing the Crepeau Nature Preserve back to its original intent. She also talked about the triangle shaped property that Presbyterian Homes will be donating to the City and thought that might be a good place for a garden area. - Mayor Grant commented that some of the City gardens do very well while others do not. He hoped that the PTRC would look at fixing up and replanting the less successful City garden sites. Committee Member O'Malley suggested that the PTRC take a look at all the City garden sites when they do their annual park tour. Don Messerly suggested the following as possible PTRC projects: • Garden Club • Bird Club • Rain.Gardens Education • Plant Trees on Arbor Day • Community Survey • Recognize Private Gardens in the City • Park Clean-up Days • Banners • Wild Flowers in Crepeau Park Committee Chair Scott then reviewed the final PTRC goal. GOAL 4. Review the need for trail signage along trail corridors in the City and recommend a trail signage plan. 3.13 CP Rail Mural Contest Recommendation Committee Chair Scott reported that the PTRC had decided not to proceed with the mural contest for the CP Rail railway crossing where there has been so many problems with graffiti. He explained that the committee suggested planting vines to cover the surface or possibly some type of lighting to deter graffiti. Councilmember Holden questioned if a different surface could be placed on the bulkhead that would deter graffiti. ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION—MARCH 21, 2011 S 3.0 Grants for Parks, Trails and Recreation and Overall Regional Trail Analysis Committee Chair Scott stated since the 2002 Parks and Open Space Plan was developed, the PTRC has maintained a list of potential trail segments for development and these priorities are reviewed annually. He explained they would like to discuss priorities with Council regarding grant opportunities as well as the importance of an overall regional trail analysis. He reviewed an _ Arden Hills Pathway map provided to the Council. Mayor Grant encouraged the PTRC to seek grants for all levels of trails as the Council is open to opportunities to stretch City funds. He pointed out that the Safe Routes to School trail is very well used and is a benefit to the community. Councilmember Holden suggested that the PTRC meet with our Public Works Director to identify costs related to each of their priority projects as the cost could be an important factor. - Committee Member Kramlinger questioned if cheaper trails could be built to save costs; such as using crushed limestone instead of a paved surface. Parks & Recreation Manager Olson explained that when grant dollars are used, ADA compliance is mandatory and, therefore, the non-paved surface would not comply. Councilmember Tamble commented that the unfinished surfaces would be difficult to maintain in the winter. Mayor Grant thanked the PTRC members for their participation in the joint work session and the Council returned to their discussion on Agenda Item 2.D. 2.D 1-6941 TH51 Interchange Project Public Works Director Maurer explained that according to MnDOT, there weren't enough noise reduction benefits to justify the cost of the noise wall but they have committed to covering $1,050,000 of the cost of the noise wall with the remaining $475,000 to be the City's responsibility. He explained that there must be at least a 5 decibel reduction per property which is then measured against the cost of the wall to determine if the cost is justifiable. Under the new Federal law, he explained, this wall would never be proposed because it does not meet the cost- effective criteria. Councilmember Holden questioned how the City would come up with the $475,000 balance. There was some discussion about assessments and how many homes would actually benefit from the noise wall. Public Works Director Maurer stated only 30 homes would actually benefit (per MnDOT funding policy) and as far as assessments, that would be difficult in this situation because the benefit of the noise wall varies from one property to the next. ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION—MARCH 21, 2011 9 Mayor Grant permitted some comments from the audience. Pat Haik, 1550 Briarknoll Circle, stated that MnDOT is obligated to pay for the noise wall and that MnDOT is doing the bare minimum. Maurice Gieskc, 1817 Janet Court, stated the noise from I-694 is over standards day and night and as traffic speed increases, the noise will increase. He suggested the City issue bonds and tax all residents to cover the cost of the noise wall. Jolene Poucher, 1548 Briarknoll Drive, stated she has been dealing with this for 15 years with different Councihnembers and that she expects the Council to listen to the concerns of neighboring residents. She also stated there had been a commitment to have a specific surface on the reconstructed area which would reduce noise. - Public Works Director Maurer explained that the entire TH 10 diagonal would be resurfaced by a MnDOT overlay project. John VanBuren, 4276 Colleen Circle, asked the City to continue denying municipal consent. He believed that there are actually over 300 homes that will benefit from noise walls. Don Ortloff, 1803 Janet Court, stated his home is only 40 to 50 feet away from 1-694 and that his wife's day care children can't be outside during the day because of the level of noise. Mayor Grant reminded the Council and visitors that there would be no official action taken at this meeting because it is simply a work session. Councilmember Holmes stated that when they met with the State, the perception was that berming was not going to work as noise reduction. Public Works Director Maurer explained that MnDOT claims that the area, elevation, and storm water structures make standard berming impossible in portions of this project. They also don't believe much sound mitigation will be achieved by berming. He fixther explained that once the project has been completed, MnDOT will be placing landscaping along the project area. Councilmember Holden commented that the City had Chris Chromy perform a noise reduction review. Public Works Director Maurer explained that the Commissioner of Transportation can ignore the recommendation of the Appeals Board and proceed with the project as proposed because it is an interstate project. He stated if the matter goes to Appeals, the momentum that was gained during the meeting with Senator Goodwin may be lost and MnDOT could simply go back to the 14 conditions as originally presented. He questioned if it would be in the best interest of the City to proceed to the Appeals Board. He further stated that MnDOT has technical experts the City doesn't have and the City needs to be able to make a reasonable argument about the damage to our community caused by MnDOT's project. He added that we run a small risk of losing everything ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION—MARCH 21, 2011 10 if we go to the Appeals Board. MnDOT doesn't want this matter to go to Appeals any more than we do. Councilmember Holden questioned the plans for pedestrian traffic on TH 51. Public Works Director Maurer explained that MnDOT is opposed to building a detached _ pedestrian structure, but there would be room on the roadway for bicyclists. He added that MnDOT has committed to having as much room as currently exists on TH51 for commuter bicyclists. Councilmember Holmes commented that some residents have asked for higher railings on the overpass of the expressway. She also stated that the shoulder of the road on the west side should be the same width as the east side. Mayor Grant asked when MnDOT needs to finalize this project. Public Works Director Maurer stated that MnDOT is proceeding to bids now. Councilmember Holmes suggested that since there are new Council members, it would be a good idea to have Chris Chromy attend a Council meeting to review the benefits analysis of a $475,000 investment for the City in a noise wall. Councilmember Tamble asked if there have been any reports regarding the noise wall post construction. He stated the elevation in that area is much higher and he was concerned that the traffic noise would still be heard even with the noise wall in place. Public Works Director Maurer explained that the noise wall is proposed to be 20 feet high, measured from the ground level. He added that the ground elevations differ significantly over the length of the noise wall. Mayor Grant agreed that the Council should take another look at the reports on this project. Councilmember Holden moved, Mayor Grant seconded a motion to extend the meeting half an hour. Motion carried unanimously (5-0). Councilmember Werner commented that there are noise walls all along the interstate in other areas but none in Arden Hills. After some discussion, the consensus of the Council was to leave the noise wall in the proposal for now, sign off on the Lexington and County Road F proposal from the County and MnDOT, and leave the berming request in the proposal. Staff was directed to place the approval of the Municipal Consent Resolution on the March 281h agenda. Staff was also directed to ask Chris Chromy to attend the April 11 Council Work Session to review the noise reduction report. At that meeting the Council will discuss options for paying for the City's portion of the noise wall expense, and whether or not the noise wall will stay in the proposal. Mayor Grant asked if the Appeals Board scheduled for early April could be delayed. ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION—MARCH 21, 2011 11 Public Works Director Maurer explained that the Appeals Board was originally scheduled for March and he was able to get it moved to April. He doubted that another delay was possible. 2X Staff Updates City Administrator Klaers reported that the remodeling of the front counter at City Hall is moving forward. Councilmember Holden provided a summary of the recent Lake Johanna Fire Department board meeting. Councilmember Holmes stated that she will not be attending the April 11 Council meeting. Mayor Grant explained that he spoke with Doug Schroeder from Northwestern College regarding the College's decision to not renew their lease for the Holiday Inn building. He also asked the status on the antenna request the Council had approved on the Country Insurance building. He then renewed his request to add Gateway Signs to an upcoming Council agenda. In addition, he mentioned that there is a massive church outreach program planned for 2012 and suggested the City participate in some capacity. ADJOURN Mayor Grant adjourned the City Council Work Session meeting at 8:29 p.m. Patrick Klaers David Grant City Administrator Mayor