Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout02-10-14-R - R EN,HILLS Approved: March 10, 2014 CITY OF ARDEN HILLS, MINNESOTA REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING FEBRUARY 10,2014 7:00 P.M. - ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS CALL TO ORDER/ROLL CALL Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, Mayor David Grant called to order the regular City Council meeting at 7:00 p.m. Present: Mayor David Grant, Councilmembers Brenda Holden, Fran Holmes, Dave McClung, and Ed Werner Absent: None Also present: City Administrator Patrick Klaers; Assistant City Engineer John Anderson; Park and Recreation Manager Michelle Olson; City Planner Ryan Streff; Associate Planner Matthew Bachler; and Finance Analyst Kyle Howard PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE 1. APPROVAL OF AGENDA MOTION: Councilmember Holmes moved and Councilmember Holden seconded a motion to approve the meeting agenda as presented. The motion carried unanimously (5-0). 2. PUBLIC INQUIRIESANFORMATIONAL Jack Perry, Briggs & Morgan representing TAT Properties, discussed the recent PUD Amendment denial in Planning Case 13-017 that the Council would be confirming this evening. He reported that he submitted a letter to the City this afternoon regarding this matter. He reviewed the concerns of the applicant and questioned why the Council did not address the conditions for approval at its previous meeting. He explained that his client supported 22 of the 24 conditions as recommended by staff. He then discussed the Council's defects in their decision making process. He reported that the building size and traffic concerns were not grounds for denial of the PUD. Mr. Perry anticipated that this matter will proceed to the court of appeals. He recommended that the Council reconsider the decision made on the PUD or that action be tabled to a future meeting. ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL – FEBRUARY 10, 2014 2 Richard Wenzel , 1931 Noble Road, questioned why the Arden Hills gateway sign on the triangle property at 3151 Lake Johanna Boulevard was not put out for public bid. He believed this went against State Statute. Mayor Grant commented that staff would investigate this matter further. Parks and Recreation Manager Olson stated that the City does not need to acquire bids if expenses are anticipated to cost less than $100,000. Dan Flaherty , Flaherty’s Arden Bowl, thanked the City’s Public Works Department for working on a water line breakage near his property on Super Bowl Sunday. He appreciated their efforts and encouraged the City to review the drainage near his east entrance, due to the amount of ice buildup. He discussed the B-2 Feasibility Report as well as the amount his property would be assessed ($34,000) if the plan were completed as proposed. He recommended the B-2 Feasibility Plan include only restriping of Connelly Avenue. Mayor Grant thanked Mr. Flaherty for his comments. He recommended that the City Engineer review the drainage at this property. 3. STAFF COMMENTS A. TCAAP Update City Administrator Klaers stated that staff will be meeting with the Rice Creek Watershed District (RCWD) this week to discuss the upcoming surface water management study. The City will ask for RCWD’s input on the Scope of Work. The planning consultants are compiling feedback from the City Council, Planning Commission, Joint Development Authority, developer interviews, and the public open house on January 22, 2014. The project management team will meet at the end of this month to discuss public feedback. Due to the cold weather, little work is occurring on-site at this time. Ramsey County reports that a frost depth of five feet is hampering in-ground work. He then discussed recent action taken by the County Board. 4. APPROVAL OF MINUTES A.December 26, 2013, Work Session B.January 13, 2014, Work Session C.January 21, 2014, Work Session Councilmember Holmes requested a change to the January 21, 2014, work session minutes on page three, fourth paragraph from the bottom, stating that her comment should read that she has seen pedestrians walking on the north side of the bridge. MOTION: Councilmember Holden moved and Councilmember Holmes seconded a motion to approve the December 26, 2013, work session minutes and the January 13, 2014, work session minutes as presented; and the January 21, 2014, work session minutes as amended. The motion carried unanimously (5- 0). ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL—FEBRUARY 10, 2014 3 5. CONSENT CALENDAR A. Motion to Approve Consent Agenda Item - Claims and Payroll B. Motion to Approve Findings of Fact and Decision Regarding Application of TAT Properties, LLC for a PUD Amendment for Property at 1201 County Road E MOTION: Councilmember Holmes moved and Councilmember McClung seconded a motion to approve the Consent Calendar as presented and to authorize execution of all necessary documents contained therein. The motion carried unanimously (5-0). 6. PULLED CONSENT ITEMS None. 7. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. TCAAP Development Discussion Opportunity for Residents Mayor Grant stated that under the Public Hearing section, citizens have an opportunity to discuss ideas regarding the TCAAP development. Mayor Grant opened the public hearing at 7:20 p.m. With no one coming forward to speak, Mayor Grant closed the public hearing at 7:21 p.m. B. Franchise Fees City Administrator Klaers stated that the City Council requested that the franchise fee public hearing presentation include information on the City Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) so it is clear what capital improvements the City plans to complete as well as why the City is exploring options for generating additional revenues. Accordingly, just under half of the presentation will be dedicated to the City CIP and the remainder of the presentation will be about franchise fees. He explained that the information in this report was previously reviewed by the Council at work sessions in 2013. City Administrator Klaers reported that the purpose of the public hearing was to present information on the City CIP and on franchise fees and to receive public feedback on the proposal. Staff then provided the public with a detailed presentation regarding the CIP and franchise fees proposal. He explained how the City was no longer generating park dedication funds to assist with park and trail improvements. It was noted that the proposed franchise fees could assist the City with improvements in these areas, in addition to street improvement projects. Assistant City Engineer Anderson reviewed the City's Pavement Management Plan (PMP) and street projects as proposed for the next 20 years. ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL—FEBRUARY 10, 2014 4 Park and Recreation Manager Olson discussed typical park improvements stating that play structures are replaced on a 20 year cycle. The expense for these structures ranges from $40,000 - $100,000 and the structures have to remain in compliance with ADA requirements. She reported that the City has 11 play structures to maintain. She discussed the enhancements planned for Freeway Park and the expense of hard court and ball field reconstruction. It was noted that construction of a dog park could be another possible use for these funds. Park and Recreation Manager Olson reported that Arden Hills has 17 miles of City maintained concrete, bituminous and natural trails. The PTRC has recommended another 15.5 miles of pathways to be incorporated into the City's trail system. Eight miles within this system have been given a high priority for safety reasons. She indicated that the cost per mile to construct a six foot concrete sidewalk is $500,000 per mile or$800,000 - $1.25 million for an 8 to 10 foot bituminous trail per mile. City Administrator Klaers reviewed the balances of the park reserve fund and the PIR reserve fund. Due to the near zero balance in the park reserve fund, the Council has been considering options to fund park and trail improvements. The Council is looking for additional ways to generate revenues. These options include increasing property taxes, a park referendum, or franchise fees. After discussing these options, the Council expressed an interest to explore franchise fees as a source for additional revenues. City Administrator Klaers stated that franchise fees are allowed by State law and the City would coordinate the details with Xcel Energy. He reported that a number of cities have instituted franchise fees to make up for the loss of LGA, or to finance capital and street projects. He discussed the number of cities currently collecting franchise fees, noting Mounds View, New Brighton, Shoreview and Maplewood all have franchise fees. City Administrator Klaers reviewed the benefits of franchise fees noting that all utility customers would be impacted, providing the City with a broader tax base than what is covered by property taxes. He reported that 43% of the City is comprised of tax exempt properties and the franchise fees would diversify the City's revenue sources. He commented that franchise fees are a flat fee and are not based on usage. He reviewed the disadvantages of franchise fees stating that the fees can be viewed as regressive in nature and are not tax deductible. City Administrator Klaers stated that after much discussion by the Council in work session, the Council is looking at a $3.00 electrical franchise fee and a $1.75 gas franchise fee per month for residential property owners. The proposed franchise fee rates would generate $439,000 annually. Staff reviewed the franchise fee rates for commercial and industrial properties along with how a property tax increase would more adversely impact property owners over the long run. He commented that Xcel was willing to work with local business owners to establish fair and equitable franchise fee rates. He explained that if the franchise fees are approved, the Council discussed that it would not go into effect until 2015. Councilmember Holden requested further information on the PMP between the years of 2017 and 2022. ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL—FEBRUARY 10, 2014 5 Assistant City Engineer Anderson stated that only a few projects are planned between 2017 and 2022. He discussed the budgeting cycle noting that the City plans to spend an average of $1 million per year over the next 20 years. Councilmember Holden explained that the dog park would be located at the hockey rink and not in the open space at Hazelnut Park. She requested that staff discuss the goals and objectives of the PTRC. Park and Recreation Manager Olson discussed at length the priorities of the PTRC noting that the group meets once per month and is currently seeking new members. Mayor Grant commented that the City recently purchased a parcel of park land for Hazelnut Park that was previously owned by the adjacent church. He further discussed the franchise fees noting that the proposed rates would provide a starting point for discussion and that public input is being accepted tonight. Councilmember McClung asked what the implications would be to the PIR if the City could not wait until 2021 to reconstruct the Indian Oaks neighborhood. Assistant City Engineer Anderson reported that without additional funding,the City would have to bond for these projects. Mayor Grant reviewed the public hearing process. He explained that there will be a second public hearing on February 24, 2014. He requested that people keep their comments respectful as there will be differing opinions. He welcomed comments from the public and requested that residents keep their comments to three minutes. Mayor Grant opened the public hearing at 8:01 p.m. Gregg Larson, 3377 North Snelling Avenue, stated that it was refreshing to hear both the advantages and disadvantages of franchise fees. He encouraged the Council to consider if the franchise fees are going to be used for an essential need of the City. He discussed the recent park improvements the City has completed without the use of franchise fees. He commented that the City is not fully developed, and as the TCAAP property develops, so will a great deal of park dedication funds. It is his opinion that the franchise fees will be generated for wishes and not needs. He recommended that essential needs of the City be covered by property taxes and not franchise fees. He stated that for 62 years the City has not needed a franchise fee and he does not feel that the City should pursue this option now. Steve Freimuth, 1200 Ingerson Road, thanked the PTRC for their volunteer service. He reported that he is a 30-year resident of Arden Hills and does not support the franchise fees. He is not in favor of expanding the City's parks and trails, but does want to see that the roads are maintained. He questioned why Arden Hills is trying to change a fully developed City into something that it isn't. He expressed concern with how the franchise fee would negatively impact the City's businesses. He then discussed the road replacement on Ingerson Road. He encouraged the Council to consider the City's needs and not just its wants. ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL—FEBRUARY 10, 2014 6 Beverly Aplikowski, 1443 Bussard Court, does not support the franchise fees. She suggested that property taxes be raised marginally to cover the City's necessary capital improvements. She fears how the non-profit agencies would be impacted by the franchise fees. She is happy with the parks in their current condition. John Stenglein, 1785 Lake Valentine Road, is against the franchise fees. He is of the opinion that the parks are in fine condition. He encouraged the Council to further review the City's needs versus wants. He appreciated that the Council was allowing the public the opportunity to speak to the issue. Paul Trites, 1858 Indian Place, explained that he spoke with the City Administrator regarding the proposed franchise fees. He commented that he is very familiar with franchise fees and their contracts. He encouraged the City to proceed cautiously through the legal process of creating the franchise fees. Rich Rheault, 1139 Tiller Lane, discussed the difference between needs and wants. He is pleased with the condition of the City parks; however, he would support a $57 increase in his fees to the City so long as it is tax deductible. He suggested that a 401(c)(3) be created to improve the City's parks. Debbie Dondlinger, 1761 Gramsie Road, loves the City's parks and trails; however, she is opposed to the franchise fees. She supports the large non-profit organizations in the community as these organizations are keeping property values high. She is concerned how elderly residents would be able to continue to pay their utility bills if the rates were to increase. She suggested that the community come together to generate funding for park improvements and that the franchise fees not proceed. Jerry Moehnke, 1463 Bussard Court, reported that he is a 20-year resident of Arden Hills. He loves the City's parks but does not support the franchise fees. Greg Schmitz, 1471 Bussard Court, explained that he has been a resident of Arden Hills for the past 35 years. He thanked Gregg Larson for the comments he made this evening. He questioned why the City has the authority to raise private utility rates. David Sorley, 1125 Edgewater Avenue, appreciates the presentation from staff this evening. He is surprised that the City is proposing to double the amount of trails. He appreciates the City's trails, but does not feel it is necessary to increase the number of trails. He does not support the proposed franchise fees and feels the parks and trails are fine as is. Linda Swanson, 1124 Ingerson Road, commended the Council for holding a public hearing and for taking comments from the residents. She is pleased that the City is in good financial standing. She reported that she likes the City's parks and trails, but also takes advantage of the local County and State trails. She is not in favor of the franchise fees and suggests that if a fee were to move forward that it be tax deductible. Nancy O'Malley, 1851 Gramsie Road, reported that she has lived in Arden Hills for the past 24 years. She stated that she is a bicyclist and she supports increased trails in the City. She ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL—FEBRUARY 10, 2014 7 commented that there are a lot of unsafe areas in Arden Hills that are in need of trails. She thanked the Council for considering the franchise fees. Mark Kelliher, 3712 Chatham Court, explained that he sent an email to the Council prior to this meeting. He supports the recent improvements that have been made to the City's parks but opposes the regressive franchise fees. He suggests the Council raise property taxes instead. John Naumann, 1887 Stowe Avenue, stated that the parks in the City are a good thing and he walks the trails of Schmidt Park often with his wife. He opposes the franchise fee and suggests that a property tax levy be sought for additional park improvements. John Van Valkenburg, 1475 Royal Lane, reported that he serves on the PTRC. He supports the franchise fee and improved parks and trails. He finds this to be a great opportunity to generate additional resources from non-profits that benefit from the City's services. It is his opinion that the City needs to continue to invest in its parks and trail system to keep young families moving into Arden Hills. He wants to see better connections between the City to improve safety for students and young children. He sees the $60 franchise fee to be a minimal charge for the numerous benefits that will be gained by the City. Jason Kirchoff, 2015 Thom Drive, expressed concern with the comments voiced by the Council regarding the franchise fee. He encouraged the Council to change its perspective and make further budget cuts before coming after the residents with additional fees. Tim O'Malley, 1851 Gramsie Road, thanked the Council for holding an open discussion on the franchise fees. He is in favor of improving the City's parks and trails for residents and students. He stated it would improve connectability and safety. He supports the Council looking into franchise fees for improved parks and trails. Clifford Nimis, 1485 Glenhill Road, explained that he has lived in Arden Hills for 59 years. He discussed the recession of 1929 and the unemployment rates in the 1930's. He suggested that the City work to maintain what it has built and not further expand its facilities. The expansion of the City's parks and trails would increase long-term expenses. He did not want decisions made today to burden the City in the future. He believes that now is not the time for additional park amenities and facilities. Vaughn Morin, 1889 Grant Road, supported the City's parks and trails, noting he lives on a trail. However, he does not support the franchise fees. He suggests the City find funds in another manner. He encouraged the City to find better ways to manage pet waste. Ms. Aplikowski, 1443 Bussard Court, appreciated the conversation provided this evening. She suggested that the Arden Hills Foundation be directed to enhance the City's parks. Laura Myers, 1383 Arden Place, opposed the franchise fee. She fears that all of the objections raised this evening will not be considered by the Council, as was the case when her road (Arden Place)was replaced. ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL—FEBRUARY 10, 2014 8 Patricia Jacobsen, 3530 Ridgewood Road, supported the City's trails but opposes the franchise fees. She recommends Old Snelling be replaced prior to the City considering new trails. She feels that infrastructure needs are more important than parks and trails. Robert Jacobsen, 3530 Ridgewood Road, loves the City's parks and the wildlife within them. He recommends that the City move Old Snelling higher up on its priority list. He suggests that the City further pursue the endowment idea for bettering its parks and trails. He fears that the franchise fees will only continue to rise as utility rates increase in the coming years. There being no further comments, Mayor Grant closed the public hearing at 8:57 p.m. Councilmember Holden was disappointed by the emails and calls she had received from residents prior to this evening. However, she was pleased with the constructive comments received this evening. She reported that the Council has not decided on the franchise fees and would continue to take comments from the public for the next two weeks. She expressed concern that those on public assistance would still be responsible for paying the franchise fees. Mayor Grant discussed the economic downturn and how this has impacted the residents of Arden Hills. He reported that he has heard these concerns from residents and wants to acknowledge them. He reviewed the expense of replacing Old Snelling noting that the City is applying for bridge funding to assist with reducing the expense of this roadway. He understands that the roadway is in poor condition. He explained that the County Road E bridge over Old Snelling would be replaced in 2015. He thanked everyone again for their comments this evening and for the respectful manner in which the comments were presented. Councilmember Werner went on record stating that he is opposed to the franchise fees as it is a regressive fee. Mayor Grant discussed the Arden Hills Foundation and noted that this is a new organization. Councilmember McClung asked if the same presentation would be provided at the February 24, 2014, City Council meeting. Mayor Grant was in favor of having the full presentation made again at the next meeting to all for a full public dialogue. Councilmember McClung was pleased that the Council would be holding two public hearings to take comments on this issue. He appreciated the number of conversations he has had with residents regarding this matter. 8. NEW BUSINESS None. 9. UNFINISHED BUSINESS A. B-2 County Road E Feasibility Report ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL—FEBRUARY 10, 2014 9 Assistant City Engineer Anderson stated that this item was tabled at the December 9, 2013, Council meeting. He reported that Marcus Thomas from Bolton & Menk, Inc. was present to make a brief presentation of the County Road E Feasibility Report and to answer Council questions. He commented that following the presentation of the County Road E Feasibility Report and questions/answers, the Council has three options for further action: 1. Direct staff to make changes to the Feasibility Report and present it for action on a future Council agenda 2. Adopt Resolution 2014-013 Receiving the Feasibility Report (with minor changes directed by the Council) and Authorizing the Preparation of Plans and Specifications in the matter of the County Road E (B-2 District) Improvements 3. Adopt Resolution 2014-013 Receiving the Feasibility Report (with no changes) and Authorizing the Preparation of Plans and Specifications in the matter of the County Road E (B-2 District) Improvements. Marcus Thomas, Bolton & Menk, presented the final feasibility report to Council for the County Road E improvements. It was noted that stakeholder meetings have been held regarding the implementation plan. The proposed improvements along County Road E have been reviewed with the Council. He reported that the five lane roadway would be maintained but the lane widths would be narrowed to increase the shoulder width. This would create a safety buffer for pedestrians while also creating space for bicycles. The project proposes to add another left turn lane at County Road E and Lexington which would add capacity to this turning movement. Mr. Thomas reviewed the signal improvements planned for the corridor along with the pedestrian lighting systems. The improvements planned for Connelly Street were discussed and would be completed as part of the County Road E improvements. The estimated expense for the improvements is $1,786,642. He reports that Mn/DOT would be responsible for $14,402, the County would cover $915,674 of the expenses and the City would need to fund $856,566 of the project. He discussed the City's assessment policy for this thoroughfare and suggested that $428,283 of the project costs be assessed. Councilmember Holmes stated that the lighting expense of $575,000 was too high. She suggested the City pursue additional lighting options through Xcel Energy. She recommended the report not be approved until this expense was decreased significantly. Assistant City Engineer Anderson commented that the lighting could be adjusted according to the Council's expectations, whether this be a specific dollar figure or an aesthetic appeal. Councilmember Holmes was in favor of safe and efficient lighting, but she does not see the need for an elaborate model light along this corridor. Mayor Grant requested further information on the lighting. Mr. Thomas reported that the public provided comment on the lighting along the corridor. He stated that he was offering flexibility with a lighting system that would be owned and operated by the City. The lights were proposed to be placed every 100 feet along the corridor at a height of 15 ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL—FEBRUARY 10, 2014 10 feet. He explained that an Xcel lighting system would provide the City a lower up-front cost, but would come with a flat rate for maintenance over the next 25 years. He indicated that the Xcel lighting schematics would have the lights placed every 200 feet along the corridor. It was his opinion that there would be an aesthetic difference between the lighting if spaced between 100 feet and 200 feet. He stated that this corridor was a unique system in which the City owns the lights along the County roadway. Councilmember Holmes stated that she still did not understand why the lighting expense was so high. She wanted to see the lighting expense reduced by 50%. Mayor Grant questioned how the lights were currently spaced. Mr. Thomas stated that the lights were spread quite far at this time, around 200 hundred feet apart. Mayor Grant was in favor of reducing the lighting expense. Councilmember McClung stated it would be difficult for the Council to determine a proper amount for the lighting from the bench this evening. Instead, the Council would have to determine what look and feel was appropriate for the corridor. Mr. Thomas stated that he could provide the Council with estimated illumination amounts based on proposed lighting plans. Councilmember McClung reported that he was not able to support the feasibility report until the lighting concerns were further addressed. Councilmember Holmes agreed stating she could not approve the plan until she had further information to make an educated decision. Councilmember Holden expressed concern with the traffic congestion with vehicles trying to make a left hand turn from County Road E to Lexington Avenue. She then requested further information regarding the improvements proposed for Connelly Street. Mr. Thomas reviewed the configuration of this roadway in further detail with the Council. Mayor Grant noted that the feasibility report discussed decorative medians where appropriate. He questioned where these would be placed within the plan. Mr. Thomas provided the Council information on the proposed decorative medians explaining that they could have colored concrete all the way through. Mayor Grant asked if the Council had time to further review the lighting options. Mr. Thomas stated this would not be a concern as the City was still working to acquire easements. ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL—FEBRUARY 10, 2014 11 Councilmember Holmes wanted to see more lighting options within the feasibility report including a lighting system from Xcel Energy. Mayor Grant stated that there was consensus among the Council to hold off approving the feasibility report this evening until further information could be provided on the lighting plan to reduce the expense. MOTION: Councilmember Holmes moved and Councilmember McClung seconded a motion to table formal action on this item to the February 24, 2014, City Council meeting. The motion carried (5-0). 10. COUNCIL COMMENTS Councilmember Werner stated that he wrote a letter to the editor on January 27, 2014, regarding the proposed franchise fees. He read this letter to the Council. Councilmember Holden reported that she received a snow removal concern from a resident. She passed this request on to City staff. She commented that residents have had a tough time with the snow on Lake Lane. Mayor Grant explained that he has received some complaints about the snow on the trails. These complaints were passed along to staff. ADJOURN MOTION: Councilmember Holmes moved and Councilmember Holden seconded a motion to adiourn. The motion carried unanimously (5-0). Mayor rannt adjourned the regular City Council meeting at 10:15 m. Ila Patrick Klaers David Grant City Administrator Mayor