2006 03-20 CC PACKET - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

CITY OF GEM LAKE MINUTES OF CITY COUNCIL MEETING 20 MARCH 2O06 The March, 2006 regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Gem Lake was called to order by Mayor Emeott on Monday, 20 March 2006 at 7:18 PM in the first floor meeting room of Tousley Ford immediately following the NPDES 2006 Annual Meeting. Mayor Emeott, Councilors Bosak, and Watson and Clerk Magnuson were present. Also present were Special Project Engineer Dave Mitchell (SEH), Jim Lindner of the Planning Commission, Gretchen Artig- Swomley, Holly Watson, Jim McNulty and Bryan Hansen. Following Mayor Emeott's request for additions, deletions, or corrections, the following actions were taken: 1) unanimous approval of the 21 February 2006 Minutes of the City Council meeting as presented on Motion by Watson, Second by Bosak; 2) unanimous approval of the 20 March 2006 Agenda of the City Council meeting as amended on Motion by Bosak, Second by Watson. The Clerk then presented General Announcements. The report of the Planning Commission was presented by Mayor Emeott in the form of a letter from the Chairman to Mayor Erneott, said report having been distributed electronically to the Council in advance. Specific additional comments were as follows: 1) Mr. McNulty submitted his corrections to the Chairman's minutes in the form of a letter to the Mayor and City Council, a copy of which is attached hereto. Staff reports were presented by the Clerk and included comments as follows: 1) The application for a variance submitted by Mr. Macalus remains incomplete and it is noted for the record that Mr. Macalus failed to appear before the Planning Commission and present supplemental data as requested. Notice to Mr. Macalus will be sent again. 2) The pending application by Flanagan Properties of 1567 East County Road E and Enterprise Car Rental has been delayed due to unexpected terms included in the lease by Enterprise. The matter may still come before the Planning Commission and City Council in April. Mr. Mitchell was recognized and presented for discussion the draft Feasability Study for Public Improvement Project No. 2006-01, Residential Road Improvements to Big Fox Road, Little Fox Lane, Haven Lane and Tessier Road. The draft proposal indicates roadway reconstruction costs to Big Fox Road and Little Fox Lane of $344,500 or $18,132 per residence (19 total residences) and to Haven Lane and Tessier Road of $137,400 or $9,814 per residence (14 total residences). Additional costs shown included installation of sanitary sewer main and water main. Following discussion, City Council and Engineer Mitchell recommended a public hearing for Big Fox/Little Fox residents be convened on 10 April 2006 and a public hearing for the Haven/Tessier residents be convened on 12 April 2006 and that at the hearings the City should present three (3) scenarios for improvements: 1) a one year patch and hold with attendant costs and determination of alternative funding; or, 2) a five to ten (5-10) year plan for mill and overlay with attendant costs; or, 3) a thirty to forty (30-40) year plan for total reconstruction with attendant costs. In the interim, City Engineer will develop the costs and also a Local Improvement Policy for consideration by the Council. Motion by Watson, Second by Bosak to adopt Resolution No. 2006-07 was unanimously approved. Mr. Mitchell was again recognized and presented for discussion the draft Feasability Study for Public Improvement Project No. 2006-03, Business Road Improvements to South Scheuneman Road from County E north to Highway 61 and including: road reconstruction, widening to thirty-two (32') feet, and installation of curb and gutter; storm sewer installation; city water installation; and, sanitary sewer replacement. Discussion followed regarding the proposed drain pattern for storm sewer and determination is needed as to whether the drainage under Barnett represents a public or private easement. It is clear that filtration will be necessary to manage potential pollutant delivery to Gem Lake. Discussion of the Highway 61 ditch indicated it may be adequate to satisfy the NURP requirements for the district. Relative to funding, Mitchell sees this area as less problematic. Mayor Emeott asked if the City has adequate funds in the Sewer Investment Fund to pay for the sewer replacement and the answer from the Clerk was yes. Following discussion, City Council and Engineer Mitchell recommended a public hearing for Business Residents/Property Owners be convened on 24 April 2006 and that at the hearings the City should present findings along with a Public Improvement Policy. Motion by Bosak, Second by Watson to adopt Resolution No. 2006-08 was unanimously approved. Mr. Mitchell and the Council agreed that he develop a Local Improvement Policy document with "fill in the blank" type decisions for the Council's consideration and that same be presented and supported by State statutes supporting the decisions. The matter will be heard at the 17 April 2006 City Council meeting. Page I of 13