Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC 04-11-2005 . . . ~ ",^~HILLS Approved: April 25, 2005 CITY OF ARDEN HILLS, MINNESOTA REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING APRIL 11,2005,7:00 P.M. CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS, 1245 WEST HIGHWAY 96 PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE CALL TO ORDER/ROLL CALL Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, Mayor Beverly Aplikowski called to order the regular City Council meeting at 7:04 p.m. Present: Mayor Beverly Aplikowski, Councilmembers David Grant, Gregg Larson, Lois Rem, and Brenda Holden. Absent: None. Also present were City Administrator, Michelle Wolfe; City Attorney, Jerry Filla; Director of Operations & Maintenance, Thomas Moore; Finance Director/Treasurer, Murtuza Siddiqui; Community Development Director, Scott Clark; City Engineer, Greg Brown; City Planner, Pete Hellegers; and Recording Secretary, Kathleen Altman. 1. APPROVAL OF MEETING AGENDA MOTION: Councilmember Grant moved and Councilmember Holden seconded a motion to approve the meeting agenda as presented. The motion carried unanimously (5-0). 2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES A. March 28, 2005 City Council Work Session B, March 28, 2005 City Council Meeting C. March 21, 2005 City Council Work Session D. March 14, 2005 City Council Meeting E, March 14, 2005 City Council Work Session Councilmember Holden requested the following changes: None. Councilmember Grant requested the following cbanges: Page 5, March 28, 2005 City Council Work Session Minutes, last sentence to read: Councilmembcr Grant noted they needed to be aware that Council should not be emailing each other as a wav to conduct discl!~sions outside of official meetings. \ \Earth\Admin \Council\i\1inuteslRegular\2005\04-11-05.doc . . . ARDEN HILLS REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES APRIL 11,2005 2 CounciImember Rem requested the following changes: None, CounciImember Larson requested the following changes: Page 4, March 28, 2005 City Council Work Sessi0n Minutes, seventh paragraph, first sentence to read: Councilmember Larson stated he was comfortable with the goal of not burdening... Page 4, March 28, 2005 City Council Work Session Minutes, seventh paragraph, last sentence to be deleted and replaced with: "Therefore, the best goal would be to limit levy increases to the rate of inflation." Page 3, March 28, 2005 City Council Meeting Minutes, last paragraph, last sentence to read: He acknowledged the role of the late.,. Mayor Aplikowski requested the following changes: None, Ms. Wolfe requested the following changes: None. MOTION: Councilmember Larson moved and Councilmember Holden seconded a motion to approve the March 28, 2005 City Council Meeting Minutes as amended, the March 28, 2005 Council Work Session Minutes as amended, the March 21, 2005 City Council Work Session as presented, the March 14, 2005 City Council Meeting as presented, and the March 14, 2005 City Council Work Session as presented. The motion carried unanimously (5-0), 3. CONSENT CALENDAR a, Claims and Payroll b, City Hall Summer Hours c. Authorization to Begin the Recruitment Process for Two Operations and Maintenance Department Employees d. Authorize to Prepare Plans and Specifications for the 2005 Seal Coating Project MOTION: Councilmember Grant moved and Councilmember Larson seconded a motion to approve the Consent Calendar and to autborize execution of all necessary documents contained therein. The motion carried unanimously (5-0). 4. PUBLIC INOUlRIES/INFORMATIONAL None. 5. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. 2005 PMP Red Fox/Grev Fox Assessment Hearinl! Mayor Aplikowski opened the public hearing at 7:11 p.m. ARDEN HILLS REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES APRIL ll, 2005 3 . Mr. Brown stated the feasibility report for the 2005 PMP was received by Council on January 10,2005 and a public hearing was conducted on February 14, 2005, The design of the project is nearly complete. Final plans were sent to MnDOT on April 8, 2005 for review and approval to allow for the use of State Aid Funds. The project scope includes overlay of Grey Fox Road, Red Fox Road and Northwoods Drive, reconstruction of Dunlap Street and reconfiguration of the access to TH 51 from Grey Fox Road as well as a cul-de-sac for the west end of Red Fox Road. No sidewalk improvements are proposed with the project. Storm drainage and watermain improvements are included throughout the project area. Councilmember Holden asked if they went with option two would they have to reconstruct the right turn lane also. Mr. Brown replied no, the turn lane would match up to the edge, so the turn lane was an additional cost with this option. Mayor Aplikowski invited the public to make comment. . John Ritt, Co-owner of property at 1315 Red Fox Road, indicated he has owned his property for 15 years and they have never had any issues with access or egress on the property. He stated their first notice of any of this activity was after the last hearing which was last week of March, 2005. He further noted that apparently the mailings were sent out to an address they used in 2002 and they no longer used that address. He indicated that they have been receiving their property tax notices, but they had not received these project notices, He asked why the project had reached the enormity that it had. Mr. Brown replied in the feasibility report they outlined their pavement management policy and this neighborhood needed rehabilitation and it had been in the Capital Improvements Plan for a few years. He indicated this was a part of the normal process and this area had been identified as needing reconstruction. He stated Dunlap would be a reconstruction and Red Fox and Grey Fox were going to be an overlay. He noted there were drainage and access issues in this area and that this reconstruction would alleviate these issues. He stated fixing the drainage would allow for improved water quality within the City, Mr. Ritt asked that by improving water quality, where the water would flow. Mr. Brown replied the water flows to Bethel ditch, which then flows to Lake Valentine. He noted this project would slow the water down and settle out some of the sediments, which would improve the quality of the water flowing in Lake Valentine, Mr. Ritt asked where trllcks made U-turns. Mr. Brown noted turns were being made on the frontage road and this blocked other traffic. He stated the intersection functioned, but this was not an ideal intersection, Mr. Ritt expressed concern about access for fire protection and emergency vehicles. He noted if there were cars on the railroad track, it would affect access. Mr. Brown replied any emergency vehicles would access the property via Lexington Avenlle or Grey Fox, He noted that was the reason the Grey Fox access was the desirable access, . Mr. Ritt expressed concern about the cul-de-sac and if emergency equipment could turn around in the cul-de-sac. Mr, Brown replied all emergency vehicles, including large semi trailers would . . . ARDEN HILLS REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES APRIL I I, 2005 4 be able to turn in the cul-de-sac. He indicated street parking would be allowed on Red Fox with no parking on Dunlap or Grey Fox. Mr. Ritt asked if they could not condemn property along the roadside for the pond and keep everything else the way it was. Mr, Brown noted this area rose very steeply and when they were dealing with water, they would be building a pond in ground that was higher than the surrounding area, He noted they would also need to install a large wall with this suggestion, which would be expensive, He stated the proposed pond would be grading a little bit into that slope, but not right into the building. Mayor Aplikowski asked for clarification on the mailing of the notice. Steve Ritt, Co-owner 1350 Grey Fox Road, stated someone in his cOlmnercial brokerage firm had faxed him the information after the March 21 hearing and therefore they never had any say for the proj ect. He indicated he contacted the City and changed the address at that time and addressed his concerns as to why they were not notified. He stated the address they sent the address to was 1578 University and that business did not forward the letter to them for at least a month. John Comalo, rcpresentative of eight properties in the area, stated he was in approval of the project, but asked for an explanation of the assessments, Mr. Siddiqui replied they would have 30 days from today to pay the assessment in full and if they chose not to pay it in full they could spread the cost of mill and overlay for five years and for reconstruction for ten years, with interest. Mayor Aplikowski closed the public hearing at 7:38 p.m, Mr. Filla asked for the property which had not received the notice, what process did the City follow for notices. Mr. Moore replied that staff sent the first notice to an address they had received from Ramsey County. When that notice was returned, staff then sent the notice to the utility billing address, He noted this was a standard process that staff followed. it was only after they received the correct address from the property owner, that they changed their records to that address. John Ritt asked if Council could hold off making a decision on this for a couple of weeks until they had the opportunity to look at this in more detail, Mayor Aplikowski replied she did not believe they could hold the project because it was on a time schedule. Council member Holden stated she would not change the way she voted because they had looked at different options and she believes this is the best option for the area. John Ritt asked what options he had since they did not receive sufficient notice. Mr. Filla replicd if they wanted to appeal this, they needed to object to this in writing at tonight's meeting. . . . ARDEN HILLS REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES APRIL ll, 2005 5 AI. APPROVE RESOLUTION #05-27 ACCEPTING PROPERTY ASSESSMENTS FOR THE RED FOX/GREY FOX 2005 PMP PROJECT MOTION: Councilmember Larson moved and Councilmember Grant seconded a motion to adopt Resolution 05-27, A Resolution Adopting the Final Assessment Roll for Red Fox/Grey Fox 2005 Pavement Management Program, The motion carried unanimously (5-0). Mayor Aplikowski mentioned that assessments paid after the 30 days from the assessment adoption date will be subject to an interest charge of 7.75%, which is 2% above today's prime rate, 6, NEW BUSINESS A. PURCHASE OF TWO REPLACEMENT TRUCKS - VEHICLES #002 AND #013 Mr. Moore stated the City Council and staff began preparing for the 2005 Budget on June 2], 2004, The process concluded on December 13, 2004 with Resolution No. 04-69, adopting the 2005 budget. A component of the 2005 Budget is in the Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) which included the proposed purchase of two replacement trucks, a Ford F450 and a Ford F350, There were four Council meetings devoted to CIP discussions, During one of those Work Sessions, the two trucks were on display in the City Hall parking lot. He recommended Council approve the purchase of a new 2005 Ford F350, Super Heavy Duty, 4x4 Truck and a 2005 Ford F450, Super Heavy Duty, 4x4 Truck painted according to Arden Hills' specifications and installation of proper truck utilities, at a cost not to exceed a final combined total of$99,187.07. Councilmember Grant asked what was the high maintenance cost and front end repairs refer to. Mr. Moore summarized what he considered front end repairs and that was due to the plowing and the vehicles not being sized to the job they were doing. He indicated that changing to super heavy duty trucks should cut the maintenance cost of the vehicles. Councilmember Grant asked if the vehicle maintenance history had been set up. Mr. Moore replied the Ramsey County maintenance system was in and all oil change or other fluids were measured and registered on each vehicle. He stated that City staff did not have in place yet their own maintenance system but he was working on this program. MOTION: Mayor Aplikowski moved and Councilmember Larson seconded a motion to approve purchase of a new 2005 Ford F350, Super Duty, 4x4 Truck and a 2005 Ford F450, Super Heavy Duty, 4x4 Truck painted according to Arden Hills' specifications and installation of property truck utilities, at a cost not to exceed a final combined total of $99,]87.07. The motion carried unanimously (5-0). ARDEN HlLLS REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES APRIL 11, 2005 6 . B. PURCHASE OF WORK TOOLS FOR THE OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE DEPARTMENT Mr. Moore stated this will be the first major tool purchase for the 0 & M Department since 1986. Currently, tools are replaced on an indi'lidual basis and only when funds are available. Over the past 19 years, tools have not been replaced due to a shortage of funds. In addition, 0 & M staff has been bringing their personal tools from home to complete City projects. This is especially the case with any automotive work. He indicated the tools would be purchased from Sears and would be from the Craftsman line. This will be the first 0 & M purchase that does not use the Minnesota Cooperative Purchase Venture (CPV). Sears was able to beat the price of the vendor that holds the State contract, Snap-On Tools. He noted the City Council has allocated $10,500 in the 2005 Budget for the possible purchase of tools for the 0 & M Department. Based on the final total cost of $8,945.52 for the purchase of new tools, there would be a cost savings realized of $1 ,554.48. He recommended the City Council authorize the purchase of new tools for the 0 & M Department at a cost not to exceed $8,945.52, . Councilmember Holden asked how much was usually spent on work tools. She asked what would happen as the year went on and other tools might be needed, Mr. Moore replied this was funding was coming out of the Capital Improvement Plan and this was a one time purchase and staff did not expect any other tools being needed. If they needed additional tools, they would purchase that particular tool at the hardware store and this would come out of the General Fund. Ms, Wolfe stated it was her understanding that they did not have a complete set oflools on hand and that she did not foresee a need to have a large expense like this again in the near future. She also stated that as tools needed to be replaced, they would be replaced on an individual basis. MOTION: Councilmember Grant moved and Councilmember Holden seconded a motion to authorize purchase of new tools for the 0 & M Department at a cost not to exceed $8,945.52. The motion carried unanimously (5-0). C. PLANNING CASE 05-06: CITY OF ARDEN HILLS. 1245 W. HIGHWAY 96; CITY CODE OF ORDINANCES AMENDMENT FOR THERAPEUTIC MASSAGE . Mr. Hellegers requested the Council consider Ordinance #356 which would repeal the existing Section 330.03 of the Arden Hills Code relating to Massage, Rap, and Sauna Parlors and add Section 330.04 and is subdivisions to the Arden Hills Municipal Code. In addition Ordinance #356 would amend Sections 5(E) and lO(G) of the Arden Hills Zoning Ordinance No, 291 which refer to massage businesses. He also requested Council consider Ordinance #361 which would ARDEN HILLS REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES APRIL 11, 2005 7 . repeal the eXlstmg Massage Parlor/Sauna fees and create new fees for Massage Therapy Establishments and Massage Therapists, He indicated the Planning Commission recommended approval. MOTION: Councilmember Larson moved and Councilmember Grant seconded a motion to adopt Ordinance #356 repealing the existing Section 330.03 of the Arden Hills Code relating to Massage, Rap, and Sauna Parlors and add Section 330.04 and its subdivisions to the Arden Hills Municipal Code, and amend sections 5 (E) and 10 (G) of the Arden Hills Zoning Ordinance No, 291 which refer to massage businesses. The motion carried unanimously (5-0), MOTION: Councilmember Larson moved and Councilmember Grant seconded a motion to adopt Ordinance #36l repealing existing Massage Parlor/Sauna fees and creating new fees for Massage Therapy Establishments and Massage Therapists. The motion carried unanimously (5-0). D, PLANNING CASE 05-07: CITY OF ARDEN HILLS, 1245 W. HIGHWAY 96: ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENTS FOR IO-FOOT FRONT YARD EXCEPTION TO FRONT AND SIDE-YARD CORNER SETBACKS IN R-I AND R-2 ZONING DISTRICTS . Mr. Hellegers requested Council consider Ordinance #357 which would amend Section 6.C2.a of the Zoning Ordinance and insert new section 6.C.2.d into the Zoning Ordinance, allowing for front porches of up to ten feet and with a minimum setback of 30 feet from the front or side-yard comer property lines, which meet design standards to be allowed subject to staff review and approval and to consider Resolution #05-29 which would add the front porch language and Front Porch Design Guidelines to Appendix A of Zoning Ordinance #291. Mayor Aplikowski asked if they had any design standards for steps, Mr. Hellegers replied the City did not have design standards for steps. . Councilmember Larson stated he liked front porches and they did a lot of enhance neighborhoods and property values as well as helping keep crime down, but he believed the setbacks established in neighborhoods for homes were intended to provide for a consistent look as to where the houses were on the property as well as sight line concerns, He stated if this was an open porch proposal, he would not have a problem with the proposal, but he expressed concern about enclosed porches. He asked if the Planning Commission had discussed this. Mr. Hellegers replied the Planning Commission had decided they would go with the recommendation to allow the homeowner to have some design flexibility. He stated there is a little bit of difference between a glassed in porch and an open porch, but even with a glassed in porch, it would be limited as to use because of the winter weather. Hc noted this would allow more flexibility for an inviting front entry way, while still maintaining some of the setback. He . . . ARDEN HILLS REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES APRIL 11, L005 8 noted this would change the look of the homes some, but he believed the Planning Commission wanted the residents to have some flexibility. Councilmember Rem left the meeting at 8:12 p.m. Councilmember Holden stated it was nice to have windows to keep the rain out. She asked if there was any size limit to the porch. Mr. Hellegers replied as it was worded right now a porch could run the entire length of the house. Councilmember Grant asked what had been changed between the Planning Commission and the Council meeting as notcd in staffs report. Mr. Hellegers replied grammatical changes had been made, but the intent and body of the Ordinance was the same as the Planning Commission had approved, Councilmember Larson expressed concern about extensions being allowed into the side yard, Mayor Aplikowski suggested they not deal with this any further tonight due to the concerns expressed and discuss this at a future work session. MOTION: Councilmember Larson moved and Councilmember Grant seconded a motion to table Ordinance #357 amending Section 6.c'2.a of the Zoning Ordinance and insert new section 6,C.2.d into the Zoning Ordinance, allowing for front porches of up to ten feet and with a minimum setback of 30 feet from the front or side-yard comer property lines. The motion carried unanimously (4-0), E. PLANNING CASE 05-08: CITY OF ARDEN HILLS. 1245 W. HIGHWAY 96: SIGN ORDINANCE AMENDMENTS FOR ATHLETIC FIELD SIGNAGE AT BETHEL UNIVERSITY. NORTHWESTERN COLLEGE. AND MOUNDS VIEW HIGH SCHOOL Mr, Hellegers requested Council approve Ordinance #358 (and Ordinance #358 Summary) which would amend Ordinance No. 333 "An Ordinance Regulating Signage Standards within the City of Arden Hills" to establish standards for athletic field signage at Bethel University, Mounds view High School, and Northwestern College where such signage is visible from a public roadway or property outside of these educational institutions. Mayor Aplikowski asked if thcre would be signs on the general fence area. Mr. Hellegers replied there would be one or two spots along the fences that would have signs, The signage would be directed inward toward the sporting event and not outward toward the neighborhood or street. He noted most of the signage would be along the visitor bleachers as well as in the end zone. Mayor Aplikowski asked if the back of the signs would be opaque. Mr. Hellegers replied the back of the signs would be white, . . . ARDEN HILLS REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES APRIL 11,2005 9 Councilmember Grant stated since they were putting the names of the institutions into the Ordinance, what happened if the institution changed its name, Mr. Filla rcplied if the name changed, the Ordinance would need to be revised, He stated they could use Universities, Colleges, and High Schools and not include specific names, Mr. Hellegers replied it was the Planning Commissioners concerns that they did not want signage at Elementary Schools or City Parks, Council reached the consensus to change the wording to Universities, Colleges, and High School fields and not name specific institutions. MOTION: Councilmember Grant moved and Councilmember Holden seconded a motion to adopt Ordinance #358 (and Ordinance #358 Summary) amending Ordinance No, 333 "An Ordinance Regulating Signage Standards within the City of Arden Hills" to establish standards for athletic field signage at the Universities, Colleges, and High Schools where such sign age is visible from a public roadway or property outside of these educational institutions. The motion carried unanimously (4-0). 7, UNFINISHED BUSINESS A. TCAAP - PUBLIC FINANCING POLICY Mr. Clark stated pursuant to direction from the City Council, the Economic Development Commission's (ED C) "TCAAP Public Financing Policy Recommendations" is being considered. He indicated this policy documents includes both the modifications that were discussed at the joint EDC/Council meeting on February 22,2005 and the comments supplied by the City Attorney, In addition, Attachment II in the plan is a flow chart that illustrates how the policy document, and the implementation of its principles, works in the ovcrall TCAAP process. He recommended Council adopt Resolution No, 05-28: Resolution Adopting "TCAAP Public Financing Policy Recommendations" Dated April II, 2005, Councilmember Holden asked how the 25 percent reduction was calculated at the cnd of26 years. Mr. Clark replied Mr. Inman had done this analysis, but they assumed an expenditure cost of I million and new revenue of2.5 million. Councilmember Holden asked if this was based on the additional staff and recreational needs that would be required. Mr, Clark responded that had not been taken into consideration and they were looking at the base operational needs only, He indicated the idea was not to say this was a definitive25 percent reduction, but rather there was a large enough of a gap between revenues and expenditures that the TCAAP project would not affect existing tax payers when, and if, a TIP district is removed. ARDEN HILLS REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES APRIL II, 2005 10 . Councilmember Holden stated it was her understanding when she voted for the framework plan that those cC'sts were part of that vision. Mr. Clark stated in the framework plan, that plan had been changed to eliminate the recreational center and instead they put it in as a potential community civic use, He noted they might or might not have a recreational center on the plan. Council member Holden stated at the time she approved this, she believed this was in the framework plan and she wanted the residents to know that there might not be a reduction. Mr. Clark noted there was enough of a spread that there would be a positive result. Sid Inman, Ehlers & Associates, stated ifthey financed this with the general levy, this was not included in the analysis, but ifthey did not use the general levy to finance this, it was included in the analysis. Councilmember Grant asked for a clarification on page 4 of9 under C. Mr. Filla replied the proposal had to comply with very strict provisions of this policy before they would favorably consider this. He stated there was a legal difference between the two things, He noted this was not a legal commitment. . Councilmember Holden asked if the proposal came in with all of the terms, she would have to agree with it. Mr. Filla replied that was correct, but the Council still had some latitude. He noted all they were doing was approving this document tonight and this was not obligating the City to any amounts. Councilmember Holden asked for clarification on Page 7 of9 6H regarding fees. She asked if fees could only be applied to certain areas of the City. Mr, Filla stated as he read it, there had to be some kind of a connection between fees and costs, He stated they could structure fees for the TCAAP area only. Councilmember Grant stated one of the goals was to minimize risk to the residents of Arden Hills. He stated he believed this was the one document that future Councils would look back to and he was not comfortable leaving the language on Page 4 of9 with reference to the bonding. He wanted this limited to general non-obligation bonds. Mr. Clark stated the intent was that the primary focus ofthis would be City assessment bonds and that this had been discussed at the February 22 meeting and they had a very general statement in there that the City might consider the issuance of general obligation bonds. Mr. Filla stated when proposals were made to the City for a certain kind of financing tool, the policy indicates that Council would not select one that puts the public at risk and this policy said they would chose the one that would not affect the existing taxpayers. . Councilmember Holden stated if the sole purpose of the policy was to uot affect the existing taxpayers in the community, why would they leave the general obligation bonds in. She stated before they went forward with this she wanted to know if the bottom line would be that TCAAP was going to cost the current taxpayers money. Mayor Aplikmvski stated the actual ARDEN HILLS REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES APRIL I I, 2005 11 . development ofTCAAP would paid for by itself, but the maintenance costs would be shared by both TCAAP and the current taxpayers as a part of the City as a whole. Councilmember Holden stated current citizens would be responsible for emergency services. Mayor Aplikowski noted the cost of maintenance would be shared by all residents within the City. Mr. Clark stated they were talking about two different things, public financing and local resources. With respect to public financing, he believed the majority of discussions constructing the majority ofthe public financing to not affect the existing taxpayer. With respect to general obligation bonds for specific infrastructure improvements this would carry a minimum risk because the bonds carried a senior obligation to any mortgage. The second level of discussion was local resources. He stated the struggle was that they did not have the strategy before them and how did they as a City match up what was a potential shortfall. He stated that was what they would need to resolve in the next few months and this would become a part of the local resources plan. If there was a small amount of taxes to be paid there had to be an understanding that the TCAAP area was not 100 percent segregated from the City because there would be tangible and intangible benefits to the rest of the City. . Councilmember Holden asked for an explanation on Page 8 of9, 7A. She indicated in her opinion this was a meaningless sentence and asked why this was in there. Mr. Clark stated this statement was important to the EDC. Mr. Filla stated whether people agreed with this or not, it was a clear statement and as they need to look at the Master Development Agreement, this documents was only a guiding principal, and unless they changed the wording, the direction was that they shall not put the burden of this project on existing taxpayers and they needed to figure out how to word the Master Development Agreement to reflect this as well as the Resource Plan. Councilmember Grant stated while this was the EDC recommendation, once this was adopted, it would be City policy. Ms. Wolfe stated it was important that with a statement this strong, that would assume that services would stay at the same level. She indicated they had to keep in mind that if they wanted an increase in services, changes in their desire for levels of services may impact the cost of those services citywide. Councilmember Holden stated this sentence was also on Page I of9 and this theme was reflected throughout the entire document. Stacie Kvilvang, Ehlers & Associates, stated with the City bond issue, there were other bonds that could he used also. . Dennis Probst, Former Mayor, 3395 Lake Johanna Boulevard, stated he was probably the first person to suggest that this development not cost the other residents in the City any money and he still stood by that proposal, but cautioned the Council not to segregate the TCAAP area from the rest of the City. He stated with the growth ofresidential areas, this would create some ARDEN HILLS REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES APRIL 11, 2005 12 . incredible recreational opportunities within the community that would be shared by all residents of the community. He stated he believed it was important not to set up two sets of books to divide the north and south parts of the City. He urged Council to proceed with this policy and these details more appropriately belong in the Development Agreements to follow and not in the Financing Policy. He asked Council to support this, but be careful about the wording about protecting tee existing community so the City did not become divided. Bruce Kuukel, Arden Road, Chair of the EDC, stated the statement on page 8 of9, 7A was something the EDC discussed at some length and it was something the EDC did not want the City to move away from. He understood Council did not want to split the City, but this was a concept that they wanted to keep in front of everyone in that they did not want the current residents paying for the development of TCAAP. However, with respect to recreational development, if all residents were going to share in the benefits of TCAAP, they would need to look at the financing of those recreational developments to be shared by all ofthe residents of the City, and in the resource plan, the needed to make sure this was not a tax burden on the current residents of Arden Hills. In terms of the general operating expense, the City needed to work with the developer that the development would pay for its own operating costs. Mayor Aplikowski asked if this was addressed in the Resource Plan. Mr. Kunkel replied it was. . Collin Barr, CRR, stated the common mechanism seen for redevelopment was to use General Obligation Bonds secured by TIF and minimum assessment. The burden to pay the bonds back were put on the property owner and not the City, but there were instances where they did not want to iss'le General Obligation Bonds. With respect to the TIF structure, it was his understanding that the EDC put this forth as a challenge for the developer to draft budgets for local services and understand what the costs would be as well as the revenue expected and once they finished their work, they would have firm costs. Mr. Filla noted Council would see how all of this would play out in the Master Development Agreement. Councilmember Grant asked if they used levy dollars for emergency services was that legal. Ms. Kvilvang replied they could not use tax increment levy dollars for emergency services. Mr. Clark stated they could change Page 7, I, first paragraph, to read: To assist reducing TCAAP project expenditures, the City mav Gonsider issuance, as a last resort, of general obligation bonds for infrastructure improvements... Mr. Filla replied he liked the statement the way it was and the Council only had to use General Obligation Bonds if they knew they were not going to affect the current residents of Arden Hills. . Mr. Inman noted Council would have the opportunity to discuss this issue two more times, once in the Master Development Agreement and again if they decided to issue bonds. . . . ARDEN HILLS REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES APRIL 11,2005 13 Couucilmember Holden asked why Council wanted to go with a 26-year TIF District if the development was only going to take 13-15 years. Mr. Inman replied the statues allowed them to go with a 26 year TIF District and they recommend they set it at 26 years in the beginning, but Council could chose to go shorter if they wanted to and then restrict it in the Development Agreement process. Councilmember Holden asked what the cost to the existing residents was going to be. Councilmember Larson stated he would prefer to have other language regarding the cost to existing residents in this Policy because he believed this was creating something that could be impossible and he did not know how they could do this in reality. He stated it made sense that as a Councilmember he would not vote for an increase in levies that would exceed the rate of inflation. He stated he wanted to make sure the Resources Plan developed accomplished this. He noted the City would benefit from what developed at TCAAP, but they might have to wait some time to see that benefit. He stated he was comfortable with the language because it was important to others on the Council and as a goal, it was something they should try to accomplish and he would prefer to see the word burden added, but he would support it as it was. Leslie Reindl, 1233 Ingerson Road, commended the Council for all of the work they have done on this. She stated the City was noted among its residents for its fiscal conservatism and its carcful spending of tax dollars and the residents appreciated that. She believed most of the residents were Ullaware of the enormity of this development and it seemed to her that now they were being presented with a large development that was the largest development in Minnesota. She realized this was a superfund site and it was one ofthe last huge undeveloped sites this close to the inner city that was available and it was desirable land. She asked if they had looked at different developers to get other ideas as to what could be done with the land. She stated it was not clear if there would be any risk to the taxpayer now living in Arden Hills. She indicated it was not a definite thing that there would not be a risk to the residents. She noted they were making decisions that would affect all of the residents in the future and she had not heard any plan tonight that there was a guarantee that this would not affect taxpayers. She stated if there was a risk, the residents needed to know there was a risk and they needed to be presented with the benefits. She noted they had not addrcssed the "non-benefits" of developing this property, such as increase of traffic. She stated they have not let the residents know how many additional residents would be added and what this would mean to the existing residents. She stated she did not understand the recreational opportunities they were discussing and she had not seen any recreational opportunities. MOTION: Councilmembcr Larson moved and Mayor Aplikowski seconded a motion to adopt Resolution No. 05-28: Resolution Adopting "TCAAP Public Financing Policy Recommendations" dated April 11,2005. Councilmember Larson stated Council needed to think about what they were doing tonight. Council was not approving TIF financing for TCAAP or a timeline for TCAAP and they were not approving any form of public financing for TCAAP. He stated they were adopting a policy that said if public financing was needed in the future, it would have to meet certain criteria, . . . ARDEN HILLS REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES APRIL 11,2005 14 which criteria would minimized the risk to the City of Arden Hills and he would support adoption ofthis policy. Councilmember Grant asked if this EDC recommendation would become a City policy. He indicated it would and this would guide the financing of the development and it would form the basis for negotiations with the developer to construct the business terms for this development, which would form the foundation of those discussions. He stated this was a major policy and probably one of the more important policies the City has or might ever adopt. He stated the alternative was that the City could elect to not do the project, in which case the GSA would put the project up for public auction and it would be difficult to say who would buy it and the City would need to control the development through the Codes and the City would be unable to design what they wanted on this development. He stated ultimately, they ended up with a community based plan. He indicated at this point he did not want to tie the negotiating team with the developer, so he would not object to the bonding language. He asked if this document would be used for the smaller TIF districts used for the next 26 years. Ms. Kvilvang replied they were looking at the development in full and they intended on working with the Council to get these things resolved. Councilmember Holden stated they had already identified that there was a public financing need and by passing this they were approving public financing, even though they were not specifically approving the public financing tonight. She expressed concern of the real interest to the current taxpayers of Arden Hills. Mayor Aplikowski stated she would vote for this as written, but she would have preferred to have addressed the operational costs and this was an important next step to get tbem to where they needed to go. The motion carried unanimously (4-0). B. TCAAP VERBAL UPDATE Mr. Clark updated the Council on recent TCAAP developments and upcoming events. Councilmember Holden asked if there was any update on the wildlife corridor and the sports field. Mr. Clark replied they had discussed the sports field today and this was a slow process, but it was progressing. With respect to the wildlife corridor, no discussions had taken place yet. Mayor Aplikowski stated she had received a suggestion that they incorporate the word "Prairie" into the description of this property. She asked all residents to make any suggestions for this area. . ARDEN HILLS REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES APRIL 11, 2005 15 CITY COUNCIL REPORTS Ms. Wolfe - None. Councilmember Holden - None. Councilmember Grant - Stated they have been in the new Maintenance Facilities for a half year and he asked staff to approach Ramsey County for the operational costs and if those costs were tracking to the budget they were originally presented with. Mr. Siddiqui replied based on the bills submitted they were on target at this point. He stated the bills were not consistent month to month so he believed they were calculating bills each month. Councilmember Larson - Updated the Council on the agreement with the Lake Johanna Volunteer Fire Board. Mayor Aplikowski - Stated she had met with the Mayors and City Admini,trators from the surrounding Cities to bring everyone up to date on what was going on in their Cities. She noted they were losing bus service in the City of Arden Hills and asked how many people this impacted. She asked residents impacted to let staff know how it impacted them. . Mayor Aplikowski adjourned the Regular City Council Meeting at 10:02 p.m. . ~;;th~' Beverl :1I..pl" owski Mayor Michelle Wolfe City Administrator NOTICE OF MEETINGS The next Council Meeting will be held Monday, April 25, 2005 at 7:00 p.m. at the Arden Hills Council Chambers.