Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC_Minutes_2007_0723City of i' ~, ;' ~' ~. _' _ _ _~ ~, Minnesota, iTSA Call ®11 Mayor Klausing reconvened in Open Session and called to order the Rose- ville City Council regular meeting at approximately 6:10 p.m. and welcomed everyone. (Voting and Seating Order for July: Pust; Roe; Ihlan; Kough; and Klausing) City Attorney Scott Anderson was also present. 2. r®ve Aden a Councilmember Kough requested the addition of three items to tonight's agenda, with presenters prepared to attend and speak on the first two items: "Consideration of a Mascot for the City of Roseville;" "Consideration of a Motorcycle Patrol for the Roseville Police Department as part of the 2008 Budget;" and "Consideration of reenacting the Assistant City Manager posi- tion, or a combination of that position with the Finance Director position, with his recommendation that Chris Miller serve in that combined position." 1Vlayor Klausing indicated the first two items would be taken up for discus- sion upon the arrival of presenters; and asked that the third item be discussed as time allows. Councilmember Ihlan requested removal of Consent Agenda items 9. a, h, and s for discussion, respectively entitled, "Approve Check Register;" "Au- thorize the City Manager to Execute a Consultant Services Agreement for an Interim Community Development Director;" and "Adopt a Resolution Ap- proving aFinal Plat and Vacation of Certain Easements for Bonten, LP at 23 3 5 ~1V Highway 3 6." Councilmember Ihlan questioned if any members of the public were present to speak on land use issues, items q, r, or t on the Consent Agenda. No one indicated such. Regular City C®uncil eating ®nday, July 23, 2007 Page 2 Councilmember Ihlan asked that, given the length of tonight's agenda Item 12.h, and 12.i, respectively entitled, "City Council Discussion of the Twin Lakes Letter of Credit Disclosure;" and City Council Discussion of Caoals, Strategies and Priorities for the 2008 City Budget;" be moved forward on the agenda or postponed for discussion at a future meeting. Councilmember Ihlan noted that Agenda Item 12.j entitled, "Consider Set- ting aSpecial Meeting for July 3 0, 2007;" was not an open date on her schedule. Councilmember Kough advised that he would also be unable to attend a meeting on July 3 0, 2007. Councilmember Ihlan suggested that discussion of a date for a Special Meet- ing be held at this time, rather than later in the meeting. Mayor Klausing opined that it would be his preference to review calendars later in the meeting, to avoid further delay for public discussions. City Manager Malinen provided a Bench Flandout, requesting an additional Consent Agenda Item, entitled, "Clarification of Resolution 10516: Resolu- tion Identifying Need for Livable Communities Demonstration Account Funding and Authorizing an Application for Grant Funds (PROD-0006)" be added as Item 2. Councilmembers concurred. By consensus, the agenda was approved, as amended. 3® u lic ® ant Mayor Klausing called for public comment by members of the audience on any non-agenda items. a® Eugene a ne ann, 2656 l~ I~e~ingt®n .Avenue Mr. Bahnemann spoke to the natural prairie "weeds" at City Hall, and their proximity to his residence. Mr. Bahnemann also spoke to the poor audio he experienced at home in attempting to hear tonight's in- terviews for the Parks and Recreation Commission on cable televi- sion. Regular City C®uncii eating 1VI®nday, July 23, 2007 Page 3 at y aur, Sextant Avenue Ms. Laur provided a history of and ongoing code enforcement issues with her neighbor, Jenny Turek, 2424 Dale Street, over a ten year pe- riod, and the apparent inability of staff to find resolution to this prob- lem. Ms. Laur provided a synopsis of issues; discussions, site visits, and correspondence with the City's Code Enforcement ®fficer to the property owner; with still no improvements completed. IVIs. Laur ex- pressed her frustration with the process; with the apparent lack of re- sponse from staff and from her most recent correspondence with City Manager Bill Malinen and individual City Councilmembers; and with the overall negative impacts to her property. Ms. Laur advised that her family was relocating from Roseville, and their property was for sale, and the situation was detracting from po- tential sale of the home, which had been on the market since March of 2007. Ms. Laur questioned the point of code enforcement if nothing was accomplished or resolved. Ms. Laur pled with the City Council to provide her with some recourse so she could inform potential pur- chasers that the City was taking action on the situation. Ms. Laur stated that, "I voted for you and I deserve a response to my ques- tions." Mayor Klausing apologized personally for not taking time to respond to Ms. Laur's e-mail yet; and advised that this code enforcement item would be scheduled for the next regular meeting (August 13, 2007) to hear a report from staff and to provide a public response to Ms. Laur and the City Council to seem potential resolution. Mayor Klausing further apologized to Ms. Laur that the situation hadn't been resolved to-date to her satisfaction. Councilmember Ihlan noted that this brought to her attention the need for staff taking administrative actions, rather than needing to seek Council approval to take code enforcement action; and expressed her support for changing that policy. Councilmember Kough thanked Ms. Laur for e-mailing individual Councilmembers to bring this to their attention. Regular City C®uncil eating ®nday, July 2~, 2007 Page 4 Councilmember Pust thanked Ms. Laur for holding the City Council accountable. c. a c e ee, 77 i a ane Ms. McGehee opined that there were a number of code enforcement issues that needed attention in the City, and expressed her apprecia- tion that the City Council was going to work on the issue. Ms. McGehee further opined that tonight's Council Agenda packet was so massive, and included numerous and critical land use issues, it seemed onerous to ask the City Council to digest all that material and make timely and considered decisions. IVIs. McGehee provided her historical perspective on the Twin bakes Redevelopment Area and issues associated with it, for the benefit of City Manager Malinen's brief tenure with the City, and taxpayer mon- ies spent to-date during the ensuing legal process. Ms. McCJehee questioned the process used by the Council majority during the proc- ess, especially some actions when there was pending litigation. Ms. Mc(sehee opined that the City Council needed to pay careful at- tention when making land use decisions; and that consideration of de- cisions and consequences for using taxpayer monies were not taken lightly; and further opined that she hoped the City Council took into consideration those past lessons when reviewing several of tonight's land use issues. 1~rt ueler, 2201 Ac®rn ®a Mr. Mueller asked the City Council's consideration of voting on his land use item, Agenda Item 12.c entitled, "Consider Approving Final Plat and Public Improvement Contract for ®ak Acres (Art Mueller) at 2201 Acorn Road," noting the recent petition sent to the Environ- mental Quality Board (EQB) by adjoining property owners. City Manager Malinen advised that staff and the City Attorney had just been provided information that the EQB had received a petition relative to his subdivision proposal, which may preclude Council ac- tion tonight pending an Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW). egular City C®uncil eetin~ 1VI®nday, July 23, 2007 Pale 5 City Attorney Scott Anderson advised that he had received an n e- mail and copy of the document from City Planner Thomas Paschke; reviewed the duties of the EQB to accept petitions for EAW to deter- mine their validity under the Environmental Protection Act; and rec- ommended to the City Council that no action be taken on the proposal tonight, even provisionally. Mr. Anderson advised that staff would need to present to the City Council, under appropriate rules, the peti- tion for EAW and seek a determination by the City Council, once the EQI3 determines the validity of the petition. Further discussion ensued regarding the process; Mr. Mueller's re- quest for conditional approval, subject to appropriate environmental review; and City Attorney Anderson's recommendation that no action be taken at this time. Pust moved, Ihlan seconded, striking Agenda Item 12.c entitled, "Consider Approving Final Plat and Public Improvement Contract for ®ak Acres (Art Mueller) at 2201 Acorn Road;" from tonight's agenda, due to pending environmental review. ®11 fall Ayes: Pust; Roe; Ihlan; I~.ough; and Klausing. Nays: None. e. any Ne r°as, .1276 dri a .Avenue 1~/Ir. Neprash discussed the status of Little Lake Johanna on the im- paired water list; Total Maximum Daily Loads (TNIDL) implementa- tion studies for Little Lake Johanna; Metropolitan Council responses regarding the Northwestern College land use case and environmental review; and potential funding for such a study. Mr. Neprash requested that the City Council ask the City's Public Works, Environment, and Transportation (PV'VET) Commission to look at this question and forward a recommendation to the City Coun- cil as to whether the City Council should move jointly with the Rice Creek Watershed District (RCWD) in seeking a TMDL Study. Regular Caty C®unc~l eet~n~ IVI®nd ay, .Tuly 23, 2007 Pale 6 Mayor Klausing requested staff to provide a report and their recom- mendation to the City Council as to whether this issue should be di- rected to the City's PWET Commission for further review. Councilmember Pust questioned whether the Cities of Roseville and Arden Hills should work jointly on this, or if only one Regulatory Government Unit (RGLJ) would be involved. Councilmember Ihlan questioned if there were other possible impaired water bodies within the City that should be incorporated into such a study and potential funding. Councilmember Pust concurred that it would be a good opportunity for a lake inventory. Mr. Neprash expressed his willingness to provide more details as de- sired. . C®uncil ® unicati®ns, a®rts and An ®unce a is a. Mayor Klausing provided a public invitation to tour winning homes of the Green Community Award, awarded to residents displaying inno- vative and productive stormwater management uses, scheduled for August 2, 2007 from 12:00 Noon to 5:30 p.m. Mayor Klausing ad- vised that the program was sponsored by the Green Community Pro- gram, and encouraged residents to seek additional information on the City's Website, or by contacting City Fall. . Mayor Klausing read a note of appreciation from BontenlBonestroo for staff s assistance and expertise during the process, naming specific staff members, and celebrating completion of their project and occu- pancy of their building. 5. ec®niti®ns, ®nati® s, C®~n unicati®ns None. 6. Apr®ve inutes a. inutes - Ar®ve 6/1/07 Executive Sessi®n inutes Minutes of the June 18, 2007 Executive Session were amended to in- clude indication that Councilmembers Ihlan, Kough and Roe were in regular City C®uncil eating ®nday, July 23, 2007 Page 7 attendance initially; with Mayor Klausing and Councilmember Pust arriving at approximately 5:50 p.m. It was Council consensus that the meeting minutes be amended, and returned for approval at the next regular meeting. ® mutes - .Approve /1 /7 eguar eating mutes Klausing moved, Roe seconded, approval of the minutes of the June 18, 2007 Regular Meeting as amended. Corrections: oll Call Ayes: Pust; IZoe; Ihlan; Kough; and Klausing. Nays ® None. ce mutes -Approve 7/02/07 Executive Session mutes Minutes of the July 2, 2007 Executive Session were amended to in- clude designated minutes for the ®pen Session; with Mayor Klausing and Councilmember Ihlan moving to open the meeting in Open Ses- sion; and a subsequent 2/1 vote in ®pen Session to appeal the District Court Ruling, with Councilmembers Roe and Mayor Klausing voting in favor; and Councilmember Ihlan opposed. It was Council consensus that the meeting minutes be amended, and returned for approval at the next regular meeting. d.. mutes -Approve 7/16/07 Executive Session mutes Regular City Council 1Vleeting onday, .Tiny 23, 2007 Page ~ Klausing moved, Roe seconded, approval of the minutes of the July 16, 2007 Executive Session as presented. ®11 Call Ayes® Pust; Roe; Ihlan; Dough; and Klausing. Nays: None. e® mutes - A r®ve 7/16/07 Study essl®n mutes Klausing moved, Roe seconded, approval of the minutes of the July 16, 2007 Study Session as presented. ®1 Call yeso Pust; Roe; Ihlan; Kough; and Klausing. Nays ® None. Councilmember Ihlan requested, for public information, identification of members of development team involved in the proposed settlement: Rottlund Homes, Roseville Properties, and Welsch Companies. Klausing moved, Pust seconded, adoption of Resolution No. 10520 entitled, "Resolution 1~ccepting a Settlement ®ffer from Roseville Twin Lakes LLC," attached hereto and made .apart thereof. Councilmember Ihlan spoke against the motion; providing her per- spective of past action and consequences of the Council majority. Councilmember Ihlan opined that, if this settlement is accepted, the City would give up their potential ability to collect monies previously agreed to be paid by the developer for eminent domain proceedings; including other potential liabilities. Councilmember Ihlan further opined that the clause (#4) indicating that the City would provide written commitment that any future de- laegular City C®until 1Vleeting 1VI®nday, .Tuly 23, 200"7 Page 9 velopment applications by Roseville Twin Lakes LLC or either of the members of the limited liability company would be given full and fair consideration, was an attempt by the developer to bind the votes of the City Council and allow for breach of contract claims. Councilmember Ihlan opined that this was not a good settlement for the City, who would be essentially be giving up monies that the developer had agreed to pay, in addition to unspecified future risks, Councilmember Ihlan further opined that the City should take no further action until an independent legal counsel were sought. Councilmember Ihlan further opined that she was against this settle- ment; that it would call for public accountability for taxpayer respon- sibility; and these consequences fell on Mayor Klausing and Coun- cilmembers who voted on issues from the beginning of the project when there was pending litigation and no protection to the City, in ad- dition to the Council majority who authorized Quick Take eminent domain action and put the City at risk. Councilmember Ihlan requested that actual Court Orders be made public on the City's website and available for public review and un- derstanding. Councilmember Kough spoke in opposition to the motion; noting his minority opposition position throughout the eminent domain process; and opined that the redeveloper needed to take responsibility, as per the contract and through the City recovering funds through the Letter of Credit. Councilmember Kough recognized the requirement for the City to pay the redeveloper $827,650 in accordance with the Court Order; however, was not willing to pay any additional funds, with ad- ditional attorney fees still pending. Councilmember Roe concurred with Councilmember Ihlan's concerns about a settlement not allowing for the most optimistic outcome for the City. However, Councilmember Roe opined that this represented the best route to pursue, given recent court rulings, and under present circumstances. Councilmember Roe opined that, while this may not be a great deal, there didn't appear any obvious alternatives that would provide a better settlement for the City; and it would be better to get something rather than nothing, or much less. Councilmember e~ular City C®until eetin~ l~®nday, July 23, 2007 Pale 10 Roe further opined that, based on adverse decisions to-date by the Court against the City of Roseville, it didn't appear the City was go- ing to be able to collect any additional monies from the developer, and sought to be realistic in any future potential negotiations. Council- member Roe noted that, if future claims could be quantified and their magnitude was such that this settlement agreement seemed inappro- priate, or if the claims could be successful for the City of Roseville, then it would cause the agreement to be a bad idea. Councilmember Igoe opined that Settlement term #4 regarding future development applications by the developer be given full and fair con- sideration, seemed to be a reasonable request of the developer. Councilmember Roe spoke to public accountability, opining that there was more than sufficient accountability for this project; however, fur- ther opined that responsibility needed to be shared by other parties who had originated the lawsuit, and there appeared to be plenty of blame to share. Councilmember Roe suggested that, rather than re- hashing the past, it was in the City's best interest to make a settlement and move forward. Councilmember Pust spoke in support of the motion, and provided her historical research and perspective on events leading up to this situa- tion prior to and during her service to the City Council; opining that there were many years of discussion on how to develop the Twin Lakes area; negotiations with the developer; and the binding obliga- tions required in the contract negotiated between the City and the de- veloper. Councilmember Pust noted that it was the intent of the con- tract language that it protected any potential liability for the City and the developer if the threatened lawsuits by Friends of Twin Lakes were pursued. Councilmember Pust opined that, once the lawsuit was filed, the City spent good money defending the City, also using tax- payer monies, and that the City originally won the lawsuit until it was pursued by appeal and ultimate adverse rulings against the City, cost- ing additional money, at which time the situation changed for the de- veloper and the City; and eventually with the developer pulling out of the project. Councilmember Pust opined that it was unfortunate that the District Court had agreed with the developer; but noted that the Regular City C®uncll Meeting 1Vi®nday, July 23, 2007 Page 11 City was defending its interests throughout the process, however un- fortunate and costly that defense became. Councilmember Pust concurred with advice of City Attorney Reuvers that it was now in the best interest of the City to settle with the devel- oper, rather than to continue litigation and additional attorney fees. Councilmember Pust concurred with Councilmember Ihlan that the taxpayers should hold their City Council representatives accountable in this and all issues before it; however, noted that every action taken by the City Council had been done on majority vote, even though made up of different individuals who were voting in what their opin- ion was the best interest of the City. Councilmember Pust opined that perhaps additional lawsuits would be forthcoming from special inter- est groups again; however, noted that such litigation did impact their neighbor's tax dollar as well. Councilmember Pust further opined that it was time to get over it, bring closure to the project, and move for- ward as a City Council and a community; and to determine as a com- munity what was best for the Twin Lakes Redevelopment area; and what prop®sal provides investment in the community. Councilmember Ihlan responded to her perceived inaccuracies of Councilmember Pust's statement and historical review of the process to-date. Councilmember Ihlan noted that the Friends of Twin Lakes litigation had already been initiated when the Council majority voted to sign the development agreement, despite her reiterated words of caution from some public comments and her personal concerns about doing so. Councilmember Ihlan opined that one vote that had been consistent throughout the process had been that of Mayor Klausing voting to go forward. Councilmember Ihlan further addressed the Council majority vote to enter into C~uick Take Eminent Domain action, and her consistent votes in opposition, along with Councilmember Kough. Council- member Ihlan provided rationale for her opposition due to the uncer- tainty of the situation, and risk to the City. Councilmember Ihlan pro- vided her interpretation of the City's contractual obligations regarding eminent domain; and environmental review issues at issue. Council- member Ihlan opined that it was inappropriate for the Council maj or- Regular City C®uneil eating 1VI®nd ay, July 23, 2007 Page 12 ity to proceed on such a controversial issue, without Council consen- sus; and further opined that this was due to a lack of leadership. Councilmember Pust, in response to Councilmember Ihlan's indica- tion that the City was contractually bound for Quick Take Eminent Domain proceedings, suggested that members of the public personally review contract language, Section 3.2, and the City's legally binding obligations. Councilmember Pust opined that the City Council could have breached the contract at that point; however, the Council maj or- ity determined that it was prudent to comply with the terms of the contract. Councilmember Pust defended her vote to proceed with Quick Take Eminent Domain actions; and noted that no one was forc- ing the City to make this settlement; and opined that each Council- member needed to make their own decisions on what they personally thought was in the best interest of the City, with taxpayers having the right to hold each Councilmember accountable. Mayor Klausing opined that the settlement agreement seemed to fol- low the Twin Lakes project itself, and compared idealized goals pre- ferred to be realized and realities now before the City Council. Mayor Klausing further opined that each Councilmember was doing what was best in their opinion, unfortunately, situations often degenerated into personal politics. Mayor Klausing further opined that, while each Councilmember may reach a different conclusion in their own way, it was his intent to vote in support of the proposed settlement agreement as presented. Councilmember Ihlan encouraged the City Council to consider hiring independent counsel before taking action on the settlement agreement, to allow pursuit of other options. Councilmember Pust opined that such consideration would be moot point at this time, and spoke in opposition to such a motion, noting that the, noting the timeframe provided in Item # 1 of the terms of the settlement offer. Mayor Klausing spoke in opposition to pursuing independent counsel; noting that there was a history of allegations of "tainted" legal coun- egular City Council eeting onclay, July 23, 2007 Page 13 sel; and questioned the value of seeking another set of attorneys to re- view the case and provide their opinion. Ihlan moved, Kough seconded, authorizing hiring of independent counsel to review the case. ®11 Call [ n e en e t ®unsel] Ayes: Kough; and Ihlan ays: Pust; Roe; and Klausing. ®ti® fails . ® Call es®luti® acce Ling Settle a t] Ayes m Pust; Roe; and Klausing. ayso Ihlan and Kough. ®t® Carrie . Following review of ordinance language from eight other first-ring metropolitan suburbs, staff recommended additional language to City Code, Section 505.10, Use of Bow and Arrow, specifically barring their use except in a small number of circumstances. Captain Math- wig advised that language from ordinances for the Cities of Maple- wood and Golden Valley seemed most applicable to what the City of Roseville was attempting to accomplish. Captain Mathwig noted a typographical error on page 3 of the proposed language, line 15, changed from "Fed" to "bowed." Councilmember Ihlan spoke in support of the proposed language addi- tion; however sought further clarification of the technical definition of "bow and arrow," specific prohibitions, and careful limiting of cir- cumstances for their allowance. 12e~ular City C®uncil eetin~ 1VI®nday, July 23, 2007 Pale 14 Councilmember Pust questioned if there had been any reported inci- dents of injuries, noting the densely-populated urban Roseville area; and noted prohibition in other municipalities of bows and arrows. Captain Mathwig advised that the majority of metropolitan munici- palities prohibited use of bows and arrows; differences in indoor and outdoor uses and practice ranges; and determining that ten pounds of pull appeared to be the crucial factor. Mayor Klausing opined that this wasn't just a ministerial change; not- ing that there were many backyard ranges with wooded areas, where safety procedures were followed; and sought time for additional pub- lic comment prior to adoption. Councilmember Pust also asked, if there were to be no action tonight, that staff provide a list of approved and safe uses on private property, not just for training in schools; at the discretion of the Chief. Coun- cilmember Pust noted that archery was an ongoing program in area schools in teaching hand and eye coordination. Mayor Klausing requested staff to provide additional City Code as referenced, to the Council could have that information before them when they considered the issue again. Mayor Klausing noted that the City of Richfield permitted bow and arrows, and. suggested a copy of their code as well. Councilmember Kough noted that there were two different types of archery bows and arrows: those used for hunting and those used for target practice; and further noted that Senior Olympics planned arch- ery qualifications next year; and that public comment should be sought prior to adoption of such an ordinance and actual interest. Councilmember Ihlan concurred with the initial framework of the proposed ordinance; and with seeking additional public comment; as well as a definition ruling out children's bows and arrows. 1Zegular City C®uncil eating 1VI®nday, July 23, 2007 Page 15 Staff was directed to provide additional information as discussed; make minor language corrections in the draft ordinance; and to allow time for public comment on the ordinance at the August 13, 2007 regular meeting. Councilmember Roe addressed a philosophical question regarding de- lineating specific rules for private and public parking lots; or whether a set of rules was needed for all parking lots in Roseville to provide consistent standards across the board (i.e., designated "Police De- partment Only" parking at Rosedale Shopping Center). Councilmember Pust spoke in support of "firefighter only" parking designation; however questioned if the public would be aware if they were in a public versus private parking lot in all instances. Councilmember Roe asked, if action were going to be delayed, that staff provide additional clarification as to public and private parking lots and existing prohibitions. It was Council consensus that additional clarification of the proposed ordinance amendment, .and review of overall parking restrictions in public and private lots, was prudent at this time and requested that staff provide the additional information as noted, and return for action at the August 13, 2007 regular meeting. IZe~ular City C®uncil eetin~ ®nday, .Tuly 23, 2007 Pale 16 Mayor Klausing noted the advantage of items such as the last three ordinance amendments coming before the City Council at their Study Sessions for a first review. Pust moved, Klausing seconded, approval to the proposed change to Section 404.02, ®pen Burning Section of the Roseville City Code, al- lowing Burn Permits to be issued by the Fire Marshal without the re- quirement for City Council to direct the issuing of each permit. Councilmember Ihlan opined her agreement with the intent of the re- vision to City Code, Section 404.02; however advise that she couldn't find ordinance specifics to burning in the staff request, and questioned why burn permit revisions were only being sought as they related to prairie grasses and/or vegetation burns. Chief Gasaway clarified that those two (2) items were simply used as examples, and that staff used State Statute provisions as cited. C'®cil e~cea~ Ibla s®bt aditi®al if~~° ati® ®n we~°e ~°aa ~°ie pass u~ns~t, and specific c®de p~®visi®s. Floe moved, Pust seconded, a friendly amendment to amend proposed wording, page 1, Section B, to read as followse "B. Exceptions: Recreational campfires, fires for the purpose of bona fide Fire Department training, as approved by the Fire Chief, and open burning of trees resulting from extensive storm damage, at a central collection site, [or,~ e_ scribed burns for the management of designated pra6rie grass areas], ap- proved by ...." Public C® ent ick I,a hart, X00 renner Avenue Mr. Lambert thanked the City Council for their ongoing work. I~e~ular City C®until li~ieetin~ ®nClay, J6~ly ~~, 2®®7 ~a~e ~7 Mr. Lambert concurred with Chief Gasaway's suggestion; however, noted that current City Code didn't address prairie grass; and ques- tioned if it was the City's intent to endorse prairie grass burns on resi- dential lots; and questioned the impacts to residences in the immediate area, noting potential health issues, and notification provisions for neighbors with 250 or 500 feet of such a burn. Mr. Lambert provided written comments as a Bench Plandout, listing his concerns regarding the burn permit issue. After further discussion, it was Council consensus to hold taking ac- tion until the August 13, 2007 regular meeting, following additional clarification of discussion items by staff. 9® C®nsider C®nsent to s At the request of Mayor Klausing, City Manager Bill Malinen briefly re- viewed those items being considered under the Consent Agenda. ver X5,000 ep®rt - A pr®ve C®ntracts/1'urc saes an Sales Surplus ®®s in Excess ®f X5,000 Kough moved, Ihlan seconded, approval of general purchases and/or contracts as follows: Vendor Item/®escription e4mount Metro Fire Thermal Ima in Camera Re lacement $9,029.00 Upper Cut Tree Services Diseased and Hazardous Tree Removal Program 10,000.00 Anderson Irri ation Irri ation S stem Renovation @ Arboretum 14,970.00 Kath Fuel Oil Blanket Purchase Order for Fuel 100,000.00 Councilmember Pust requested staff to provide information on the status of the previous thermal imaging camera. equipment, and what happened to it that it needed replaced. ®il Call Ayes: Pust; Igoe; Ihlan; Kough; and Klausing. Nays: None. Regular City C®uncil 1Vleeting ®nday, July 23, 2007 Page 1~ c. usiness Licenses - Ar®ve usiness Dice ses Kough moved, Ihlan seconded, approval of business license applica- tions for the period of one year, for the following applicants: pplACant/Location Type of License Erica Kobett @ Mind Body & Soul Massage Therapist 1740 Lexin ton Avenue Lisa Strommen # Mind Body & Soul Massage Therapist 1740 Lexin ton Avenue Sharon Petro @ Juut Salon; 2480 Fairview Avenue Massa e Therapist Heather Froth @ Rocco Altobelli Massage Therapist 1655 Count Road B Diane Pagel @ Rocco Altobelli Massage Therapist 1655 Count Road B Roseville Tobacco Inc., 2805 Hamline Avenue N Cigarette/Tobacco Products American Academy of Acupuncture and Oriental Massage Therapy Medicine Establishment 1925 W Count Road B-2 Bangwu Zhang @ American Academy of Acupunc- Massage Therapist ture and Oriental Medicine 1925 W Count Road B-2 Gretchen West @ Mind Body & Soul Massage Therapist 1740 Lexin ton Avenue Petco #602, 2575 N Fairview Avenue Veterinarian Examination & Inoculation Center Crystal Lenzen @ Mind Body & Soul Massage Therapist 1740 Lexin ton Avenue AKM Grocery & Deli, 2216 W County Road D Gasoline Station Cigarette/Tobacco Products Off-Sale 3.2 Malt Liquor ®1 Call Ayes: Pust; Roe; Ihlan; Kough; and Klausing. bays: None. ®il Call Ayes: T'ust; Roe; Ihlan; Kough; and Klausing. Regular City C®unc~i eating 1VI®nday, .Tiny 23, 2007 Page 19 Nays ~ None. ®11 Call yes® Pust; Roe; Ihlan; Kough; and Klausing. Naysa None. Finance Director Chris Miller advised, that while one or more mem- bers of the City's Police Department may belong to this association; they were not involved in any way with the lawful gambling opera- tions, and there was no potential conflict of interest concern. ~/Ir. Miller further advised that gambling activities at this facility had been ongoing and most likely represented Mr. Senser's advocacy for police associations in general. Mr. Miller noted that information regarding other gambling activities (Bingo) at the facility was included for gen- eral Council reference only; and that this activity was related to pull tab operations. Kough moved, Ihlan seconded, adoption of Resolution No. 10521 en- titled, "Resolution Approving a Lawful Gambling Premise Permit to the Suburban Law Enforcement Association," approving the renewal application for Suburban Law Enforcement Association to conduct lawful gambling activities at Joe Senser's Restaurant, located at 2350 Cleveland Avenue in Roseville, for the license term from September 1, 2007 to August 31, 2009. Regular Cgty C®uncil Ii~Ieeting IVI®nclay, July 23, 2007 Page 20 Councilmember Pust requested that staff provide her with a list of or- ganizations that benefit from various gambling operations throughout the City. ®1 Cal Ayes: Pust; Roe; Ihlan; Kough; and Klausing. ays: None. ® Call Ayes: Pust; Roe; Ihlan; Kough; and Klausing. Nays: None. Kough moved, Ihlan .seconded, adoption of Resolution No. 10523 en- titled, "Resolution Adopting the Operating Fund Reserve Policy for the City of Roseville." ®1 Call Ayes: Pust; Roe; Ihlan; Kough; and Klausing. Nays: None. e~ular City Council eetin~ Monday, July 23, 2007 Pale 21 the option of donating $50.00 to a school, police or fire department in their local community. ®1 Call Ayes: Pust; Roe; Ihlan; Kough; and Klausing. ays: None. ®1 Call Ayes: Pust; Roe; Ihlan; Kough; and Klausing. bays: None. ®1 Call Ayes: Pust; Roe; Ihlan; Kough; and Klausing. l~Tays: None. eject ids - eject all i s ®r the Central ark ale Street I'enci r®ject Kough moved, Ihlan seconded, rejecting all bids and authorizing staff to re-advertise for bids for the installation of a concrete maintenance strip, fencing and tree removal project for the two Central Park Dale Street Athletic fields as outlined in the Request for Council Action dated July 23, 2007. ®11 Call Ayes: Pust; Roe; Ihlan; Kough; and Klausing. l~Tays: None. Regular City C®uncil eating IVI®nday, .Tuly 23, 2007 Page 22 Kough moved, Ihlan seconded, authorizing the Mayor and City Man- ager to execute a Fold harmless Agreement with Dan Westlund, lo- cated at 3077 Fairview Avenue, for the benefit of the City's Fire and Police Department training, scheduled to include live burn training, which will conclude with fully burning some o the properties. ® Call Ayes ® Pust; Igoe; Ihlan; Kough; and Klausing. Nays. None. Chief Clasaway advised that the Roseville Fire Department and Lake Johanna volunteer Fire Department, currently had a verbal agreement to provide reciprocal emergency services (i.e., each community's fire department responds to the neighboring community for reported struc- ture fires, rather than waiting for a call for assistance -Mutual Aid - Regular City C®uncil eating ®nday, July 23, 2007 Page 23 from that specific department). Chief Gasaway advised that this pro- vided immediate and automatic staff and equipment (one unit) re- sponses to structure fires, thereby improving efficiencies of each de- partment, as well as contributing more favorably to the staff compo- nent scoring of the Insurance Services Office (ISO) evaluation and subsequent rating of the City's fire protection. Chief Gasaway de- tailed this "frontloading" of staffing and benefits beyond that realized through Mutual Aid Agreements with other departments, and in meet- ing the challenges of all Fire Departments with daytime staffing is- sues, estimating that this involved an average of 12 - 15 structure fires annually, with a net increase of 4-5 additional calls for the Roseville Department above and beyond Mutual Aid responses. Kough moved, Ihlan seconded approving the Reciprocal Emergency Services Agreement between the City of Roseville Fire Department and the Lake Johanna Fire Department, Inc. for the purpose of provid- ing automatic aid to reported structure fires. Councilmember Pust requested that the department's periodic reports to the City Council include cumulative and segregated data related to this reciprocal emergency services agreement; location of calls (Lake Johanna service area includes Arden Hills, Shoreview and North Oaks); and benefits for staff supplementation during daytime staffng hours. ®1 Call Ayes: Pust; Roe; Ihlan; Kough; and Klausing. Days: None. ®11 Call Ayes: Pust; Roe; Ihlan; Kough; and Klausing. 1®Tays: None. Regular City C®uncil eating ®nay, July 23, 2007 Pale 24 ®11 Call Ayes: Pust; Roe; Ihlan; Kough; and Klausing. Nays: None. ®1 Call Ayes: Pust; Roe; Ihlan; Kough; and Klausing. Nays: None. Kough moved, Ihlan seconded, adoption of Resolution No. 10526 en- titled, "A Resolution Approving a Variance to the Roseville City Code, Section 1004, for Joann Kurtz at 301.5 S ®wasso boulevard (PF07-036)." ®11 Call Ayes: Pust; Roe; Ihlan; Kough; and Klausing. Nays: None. Regular City C®uncil eetln~ ®nday, July 23, 2007 Pale 25 Nays: None. Councilmember Ihlan asked, and Economic Development Associate Jamie Radel advised, that these grant funds were being sought for the Har Mar Apartment Rehabilitation project. Kough moved, Ihlan seconded, adoption of Resolution No. 10527 en- titled, "Resolution Identifying the Need for Livable Communities Demonstration Account Funding and Authorizing an Application for Grant Funds." ®1 Call .Ayes: Pust; Roe; Ihlan; Kough; and Klausing. Nays: None. regular City C®uncil eating 1VI®nday, July 23, 2007 Page 26 ®nsi erati® ® a ®sevie asc®t ®®ucil a er ®ug Councilmember Kough advised that this presenter was apparently not available for tonight's meeting. Mayor Klausing requested staff to schedule attendance of the pro- posed roseville Mascot representative on the next available agenda. Mayor Klausing noted that specific City departments were already aware of Councilmember Kough's requests as previously discussed; and requested that staff provide information on those specifics as more detailed budget discussions resume. 1 ® si er to s e ®ve fr® ®nsent Regular City Council 1Vleeting 1Vlonday, July 23, 2007 Page 27 Councilmember Ihlan questioned staff on how Twin Lakes-related expenses would be paid now that the City has approved the Settlement Agreement; identifying these items from tonight's Check Register, as well as those going forward. Staff was requested to provide this information to the City Council and for public information. Roe moved, Pust seconded, approval of the following claims and pay- ments as presented. ACI-I Payments $1,948,369.43 47868-48280 724,451.61 ®tal 2,67,2® ®1 Call Ayes o Pust; Roe; Ihlan; Kough; and Klausing. IV~ays. None. City IVlanager 1Vlalinen advised that he had contacted four to five (4-5) consultant firms with some unable to provide their services as this time; consulted with former Community Development Director Stark on the department and city-wide needs, staff expertise„ current and projected workloads and day-to-day operations; considered internal and external options; and personally met with S.E.H. representatives who presented their proposal. lVlr. Malinen advised that this was his recommendation to meet day-to-day needs and operations during the, hopefully, short-term recruitment process. Councilmember Ihlan questioned how he had determined the "not to exceed" amount. Regular City C®uncii eetan~ l~®nday, July 23, 2007 Page 2~ City Manager Malinen advised that this amount was based on normal office hours as per the proposed schedule; the firm's availability for Planning Commission and/or City Council meetings, as well as Dous- ing and Redevelopment Authority (HRA) meetings; and based on ac- tual mid-line expenses for afull-time Community Development Di- rector. Mr. Malinen opined that he anticipated that the position could be filled within five months. Councilmember Ihlan recognized that hiring of a Community Devel- opment Director was under the authority of the City Manager; how- ever noted that when a position becomes vacant, it is a good opportu- nity for the City Council to review the position itself, which was within the City Council's authority. Councilmember Ihlan opined that the interim time would provide a good opportunity for City Council and public discussion of the role of a Community Development Direc- tor for the future, and that such discussions would hopefully shape the recruiting process. Councilmember Kough observed, the elimination of the Deputy Police Chief and Assistant City Manager positions; and questioned the day- to-day workload of the department and current staffing levels. Coun- cilmember Kough further noted the Community Development Direc- tor's role on the PEA as Executive Director. City Manager Malinen noted that the City and IRA were processing down a path to have the Community Development Director serve as Executive Director for the EIZA; however, noted that this had yet to be finalized. Councilmember Kough opined that "$50,000 was a lot of money for a short-term Sltuatlon;" and observed that staff was competent enough and had gotten along in the past. City Manager Malinen noted that while staff was more than capable to "carry on," there were unintended consequences and impacts to work- loads and programs; and his goal was to ease up staff workloads to al- low them time to adequately serve the needs of the community and City Council and pursue other disciplines for the long-term health and viability of the community. 12egular City C®uncil eeting IVI®nciay, July 23, 2007 Page 29 Councilmember Kough opined that the City Council should be in- volved in the interview process and have the final say. Mayor Klausing advised that a future discussion could be held; how- ever, noted that under Minnesota State Statute, Statutory Plan B Cit- ies, it was the responsibility of the City Manager for hiring and firing, with the exception of the City Attorney and the City Manager posi- tion. Councilmember Ihlan observed that, while there was both internal and external involvement in the previous selection for a Community De- velopment Director, she was not personally kept informed during the process; and opined that individual Councilmembers and the Council as a whole should be included in the process and interactions. Coun- cilmember Ihlan suggested that this be discussed further by the City Council during the interim period. City Manager Malinen encouraged individual Councilmembers to provide him with their input regarding attributes, priorities, skill sets and other areas of interest to seek in potential candidates. Councilmember Pust asked, and City Manager Malinen confirmed, that Councilmembers could provide their comment on the Job De- scription dated May 2006, and included in the Council Agenda packet. Klausing moved, Roe seconded, authorizing the City Manager to exe- cute an agreement between the City of Roseville and Short, Elliot and Hendrickson (S.E.H.) for Interim Community Development Director services in an amount not to exceed $50,000 to assist the City while conducting a search for a new Community Development Director. oll Call Ayes: Pust; Roe; Ihlan; Kough; and Klausing. l~Tays: None. s. esolution - Adopt a esolution Approving a Final Plat and va- cation o Certain asernents for oaten, I,P at 2335 i~ way 36 (Former Consent Item 9.s) egular City C®unc~l eating ®nd ay, July 23, 2007 Page 30 Councilmember Ihlan sought clarification on the actual request and of Section 4.1 of the staff report; and what the approval process had been to-date. City Planner Thomas Paschke provided additional detail to the staff report; clarifying that the parcel identified as an additional lot was the former easement for a City Hall lift station; and noted that the re- quested action clarified further inconsistencies from the initial ap- proval in 2006, and this action. 1VIr. Paschke advised that the review process had been provided as per practice and policy, and a Public Hearing held at the Planning Commission level with their unanimous recommendation to support the proposed changes. Pust moved, Ihlan seconded, adoption of Resolution No. 10528 enti- tled, "A Resolution Approving the Vacation of Certain Public Ease- ments on Property located at 23 3 5, 23 5 5, and 23 61 w Highway 3 6, Bonestroo (PF07-27);" and approval of the FINAL PLAT of Bonten Addition, combining eight lots and/or parcels into four lots, at 2334, 23 5 5, and 23 61 W Highway 3 6 (Bonestroo); based on the comments of Sections 4 and 6, and subject to the condition listed in Section 7 of the project report dated July 23, 2007. ® Call t~yes: Pust; Roe; Ihlan; Kough; and Klausing. ays. None. Public Works Director Duane Schwarz reviewed the scheduled mill and overlay project of Ramsey County on County Road D between Highway 88 and Cleveland Avenue; with the scope of work to include a loop detector replacement, milling, bituminous paving and pavement marking. 1VIr. Schwartz advised that the work is being performed by Ramsey County maintenance crews, and their Project Engineer, had sought City approval for extending working hours due to the heavy egular City C®uncil eating ®nd ay, July 23, 2007 Page 31 volume of vehicles on that road segment, and in an effort to reduce traffic conflicts. Mr. Schwartz advised that a Public Hearing was required for any de- viation to City Code, pursuant to Section 405.04, and related to City Code, Section 405.03 restricting hours of operation for construction activities. ~/Ir. Schwartz noted that there were no adjacent residential properties; but that there several to the southeast of Cleveland Ave- nue; all of whom had been provided mailed notice of tonight's hearing and its purpose. Mr. Schwartz advised that Ramsey County's tenta- tive start date was July 29, 2007; and anticipated it would be ap- proximately two days for milling and two days for paving. Councilmember Pust questioned if the interchange at I-3 5 W and County Road L) would be closed. 1VIr. Schwartz advised that it would not be closed; but that traffic con- trols would be installed to guide traffic. Councilmember Ihlan questioned if area residents would be able to access their homes. Mr. Schwartz advised that access would be open at all times. Mayor Klausing closed the Public Hearing at 8:21 p.m., with no one appearing for or against. Klausing moved, Ihlan seconded, adoption of Resolution No. 10529 entitled, "Resolution Extending Working Hours for Ramsey County's County Road I7 Mill and ®verlay Project;" extending hours from 10:00 p.m. to 6:00 a.m. ®l Call .Ayes: Pust; Roe; Ihlan; Kough; and Klausing. l~Tays. None. ecess Mayor Klausing recessed the meeting at 8:22 p.m. and reconvened at 8:28 p.m. 12. Cher usiness to s regular City C®uncil eating 1VI®nday, July 23, 2007 Page 32 a® nvir®n a tal Assess e t ®r eat ( A - C®nsi er - r®ving an ®r ®rt western ®lee City Planner Thomas Paschke introduced the Northwestern College presentation of their discretionary Environmental Assessment Work- sheet (EAW) related to their Master Plan and request for an Amended Planned Unit Development (P~JD). Agenda packet materials included the EAW; comments from agencies; comments from residents and resident associations and college responses to all comments; as well as a draft resolution provided by staff for Council consideration and enti- tled, "Resolution Establishing Findings of Face, Conclusions of Law and ®rder Issuing a Negative Declaration for an Environmental Im- pact Statement (EIS) on the Development Known as the Northwestern College Master Plan. Mayor Klausing sought Council questions for staff prior to hearing public comment. Councilmember Ihlan asked how tonight's public comment would be incorporated into potential Council action; and who drafted the find- ings of face, and their apparent conclusion that there was no basis for an EIS, with no optional resolution for the Council declaring that there was need for an EIS. City Attorney Anderson advised that the draft resolution was drafted by the City Attorney office, with input from staff, to ensure that the proposed findings complied with requirements under Minnesota State Statute and environmental rulings and acts. Mr. Anderson advised that, from the City Attorney's perspective and based on staffs evi- dence, and their skill and experience, they were proposing a negative declaration, and had asked for his office's assistance in drafting the document. Councilmember Ihlan again stated that the City Council had no docu- ments for any alternative course of action. Mayor Klausing duly noted Councilmember Ihlan's to various agency and public comments to-date; and if the EAW was the same draft pro- vided to the City Council at their last meeting. T~egular City C®uncil eating ®nd ay, July 23, 2007 Page 33 Mr. Paschke advised that the applicant had provided responses to comments; and verified that this EAW was the same draft as provided in last week's meeting packet. Mayor Klausing opened the meeting for public comment; asking that comments be focused on the need for an EIS; or whether the com- ments on the EAW were accurate; and whether the EAW was com- plete or if further, and obtainable, information was needed. u~c ® ant an y Neprash Mr. Neprash clarified that he was speaking as a private citizen and not for the City's Public Works, Environment and Transportation (PV'~ET) Commission, of which he was a member. Mr. Neprash referenced the memorandum by City Engineer Debra Bloom, and her recommendations and comments from the last PV'~ET meeting. In the interest of full disclosure, 1~/Ir. Neprash noted that the PWET voted to support the negative declaration on a 4/1 vote, and that his was the dissenting vote. Mr. Neprash noted that at the PWET meeting, agency and/or public comments were not available, nor were they part of the consideration and recommendation of the PWET, due to timing and process. Mr. Neprash addressed concerns that the college be held responsible for their assurances in their response to comments that they would work toward ensuring that all direct and indirect discharges into Lake Johanna were treated appropriately; and asked for more specific lan- guage and identification by the College of those discharge locations. Mr. Neprash addressed Ramsey County comments related to traffic mitigation issues; College participation and proportionate or total funding; and asked that specific language be included that clarified the College's participation and responsibility for such mitigation. Mr. Neprash addressed concerns, and a recommendation of the PV'VET that consideration be given for payment in lieu of taxes for properties outside the campus proper; since those properties had considerable egular City C®uncil eating ®nday, July 23, 2007 Page 3 market value, and were removed from the tax rolls. Mr. Neprash opined that this would be one of the few times the City would have sufficient leverage to negotiate with the College; and that there was every reason to believe that the college would acquire additional off- campus properties over the next 10-20 years, further impacting the City's tax base. Councilmember Pust questioned if Mr. Neprash thought deliberations, conclusions and recommendations at the PV'VET level would have been different if comments were made available. Mr. Neprash opined that, personally he believed it would have, just the sheer weight of the comments and their substance, including the nature of the entities providing comment. i alag a, 3 ®rew®® a e Mr. Callaghan noted that he lived directly across Little Johanna from the College; and expressed his disappointment with the general nature of the comments, rather than lack of specifics from the College in their responses; opining that they were very incomplete and vague. Mr. Callaghan commented on the various plans presented throughout the review; and questioned which site plan was accurate; specific lo- cation of the proposed ball fields and field house; whether the ball field was proposed to be moved adjacent to Lydia and potential safety impacts to traffic along Lydia and homes in that area; and the existing significant sound buffer of trees in place on the east side of the prop- erty and the questioned the intent for those trees. 1Vlayor Klausing reminded Mr. Callaghan that all plans presented and reworked by the applicant were in concept stage at this point; and that tree preservation; landscaping; and building location would be com- pleted in accordance with City Code and permitting processes and monitored by staff accordingly. Mr. Callaghan reiterated his concerns with potential loss of existing forested areas of the campus; addressed existing and potential noise issues from the campus specific to sporting events, and impacts of any significant tree buffers along the edge of the campus. egular City C®uncil eating 1VI®nday, July 23, 2007 Page 35 Mr. Callaghan questioned mitigation affects on traffic, and what the college was proposing for realistic and affordable mitigation: at the in- tersections at Lydia and Snelling as well as Fairview and Lydia. Mr. Callaghan opined his concern about adding any additional lanes on Lydia and potential impacts to the residential area, including access points, and lights shining into residences along Lydia. Mr. Callaghan further opined that the intersection at Lydia and Snelling was already dangerous, and that eth City Engineer needed to provide a workable plan for public information. Mr. Callaghan noted that the Metropolitan Council had noted designa- tion of five small water bodies on the campus, and whether those na- tive areas were available for water retention purposes; and opined that this question had not been adequately answered. Mr. Callaghan noted that water quality study data was available over the last six years for Lake Johanna, but he had not seen evidence that the study data had been accessed and/or made part of the review and comments. Mr. Callaghan provided photos of erosion on the campus from a pre- vious construction project along the interior road and Lake Johanna; alleged that there were at least five current erosion sites on campus and along the lake; and expressed concern that similar problems would occur and not be addressed during future construction projects. Mr. Callaghan expressed his strong concern about potential environ- mental impacts of the expansion of the College without careful over- sight. err°y eiy, 3 Ii'ai iew Mr. Beilby advised that he often and extensively walked the campus and area where the alleged erosion and gullies were located, and opined that he was not aware of them. Mr. Beilby acknowledged that there was .one in approximately 1992 during construction of the li- brary and changes to the roadway; but that he had observed that the college had taken immediate action to install erosion barriers to alle- viate problems; and that the site had been repaired, and that from his observations, none of the erosion had entered the lake. Mr. Beilby opined that there were areas where natural succession had occurred; but further opined that the extent of erosion was overstated. 1Zegular City C®une~l 1Vleeting 1V~®nday, July 23, 2007 Page 36 Mayor Klausing suggested that comments be kept to the action before the Council tonight, rather than past events. Car®, Stel agen, 96 idgew®® ®ad Ms. Stellwagen commented on the proposed mitigation of noise due to traffic on Snelling Avenue, noting that her backyard abutted Snel- ling, and the noise level continued to increase significantly from in- creased traffic. Ms. Stellwagen suggested two alternative options for the College to consider: 1) Reducing traffic level speeds on Snelling Avenue to 3 5 mph, opin- ing that this would alleviate many problems related to speed, noise, and dissuade use of Snelling Avenue by commuters attempting to avoid more heavily-traveled roadways or freeways. 2) That the College considers installing a sound barrier, even while recognizing the expense of doing so. Ms. Stellwagen requested that the College and City work together to alleviate noise pollution on Snelling. Councilmember Kough noted that he had asked that the College con- sider an access on the north end of the campus; however, was told that the City of Arden Hills had refused to consider such a proposal. Ms. Stellwagen opined that an access on the north would create even heavier traffic intrusions by creating an "island." er isc e, 3100 idgew®®d ®a Mr. Mischke noted that he'd been neighbors of the College for .over 50 years; and opined that the College had been a good neighbor. Mr. Mischke noted his service on the Board of Trustees for the University of St. Thomas, giving him a perspective from the College's point of view as well as a resident and neighbor. Mr. Mischke opined and ob- served that the college's expansion plans had been delayed, amended, and because of their persistence and willingness to compromise, they were attempting to be responsive to neighborhood issues. e~ular City Council IVleetin~ onday, July 23, 2®07 Pale 37 Mr. Mischke remembered past discussion for Lydia Avenue at the in- tersection of Snelling be considered for an overpass to alleviate traffic volumes; and recognized that the intersection had been difficult through the years; and questioned if it could handle two additional lanes, even though they appeared reasonable. However, Mr. Mischke questioned whether the intersection was adequate to support such re- visions; and expressed concern with impacts to the neighbors along Lydia. a c eee, 7 i a a e Ms. McGehee stated that the City Council had voted to authorize the EAW and were ultimately responsible for the EAW. Ms. McGehee questioned why the EAW was done by the proposer without City Council review until its completion. Ms. McCTehee opined that no one was standing up for the citizens; and the computa- tions were provided by the college, not staff. Ms. McGehee noted that the College was located on a limited piece of property; and questioned why square footage considerations were not part of the EAW to meet those rules and thresholds, with buildings and specific locations clearly identified. Ms. McGehee opined that part of the problem was with City Code and policies governing land use issues, and the entire review process; and further opined that this EAW was meaningless. Ms. McGehee addressed the proposed location of the new dormitory to be located too close to the shoreland. Mayor Klausing noted that the latest revised proposal had relocated the dorm to the other side of the existing dorm. Ms. McGehee opined that this proved her point, that nothing in the document was firm; there were no final designs; no known square footages; and noted that the applicant "was so sure no one would look at this, they included the 1986 design for the dorm into the 2007 EAW." Ms. McCJehee questioned the actual environmental steward- ship being done on campus; amount of acreage reserved for cover and vegetation for habitat as requested by the Department of Natural Re- sources (DNR); and questioned the actual acreage claimed by the Col- lege for forest and woodland. I~e~ular City Council eating onday, .Tiny 23, 2007 Page 3~ Curt ally, l®c fr® ca us Mr. Tally advised that he frequently walked the campus; and noted that students and professors had recently removed Buckthorn on cam- pus, providing evidence to him that there was a concern of students and staff for the environment. Mr. Tally opined that no College was perfect; however, rather than distrust, he chose to trust that the Col- lege was increasing their commitment to reducing on global warming and other environmental concerns, not just on campus and regionally, but worldwide, similar to that being done by other businesses. aria C rc ar , 3093 As Ms. Churchward expressed her concerns for increased noise, recog- nizing that growth and expansion were natural and would probably continue. Ms. Churchward opined the need for the City to continue to grow, and that residents were needed to provide input into the City's future. Ms. Churchward noted the ongoing efforts of the College in negotiating with neighbors and addressing their concerns. Ms. Churchward read a prepared statement, in which she encouraged "all to be good stewards and protectors, and to take charge of the land around us; to be sensitive and provide a rightful balance to the future. Ms. Churchward asked that the City Council and College consider impacts for future generations for decades to come; noting the contin- ued traffic and need to address it; and asked that" all would participate with their hearts and minds; and recognize that the college was at- tempting to be a good neighbor;" and asked that "all please cooperate together." Mayor Klausing concluded public comment at this time, thanking residents for their participation. Mayor Klausing provided listed ques- tions for comment and response by staff and/or the applicant. The applicant was represented by various consultants, each in their own area of expertise related to specific areas of the EAW and pro- posed development. Jay inren, ®f ®rsey itney representing t e Applicant; al®n with City Planner 'T® as Paschke responded initially to e~ular City C®uncil l~eetin~ 1Vg®nclay, July 23, 2007 Pale 39 Mayor Klausing's listed questions from public comments. Mr. Lindgren provided responses as outlined in specific areas of the EAW, and pointed out those responses for public information. Mr. Paschke noted that the majority of the items would be part of the PLTL7 condi- tions and drafted in a PUD Agreement to provide monitoring and ac- countability. City Attorney Anderson concurred with Mr. Paschke that generally, the items addressed are conditions of the PUD Agreement. Mr. Anderson noted that the phrase "significant environmental affects" was not defined under the rules, Section 4410.0200, which dealt with land and physical characteristics. Responses were related to discharge issues; payment in lieu of taxes unrelated to tonight's EAW discussion; percentage of forest lands and government agency interpretation and/or calculation of coverage is- sues, specifically related to the ball field and field house; coverage along Lydia Avenue and loss of trees, landscaping and ber- ming/screening issues identified and conditioned in the PUD to be re- viewed by the Planning Commission, and more akin to Site Plan ap- proval. Mr. Lindgren advised that the Site Plan continued to change as environmental and neighborhood concerns were addressed, creating additional revisions and was common for land use approval during the course of the process. Mr. Lindgren noted that this also accounted for relocation of some of the proposed buildings. r. T® s®n, T A C®nsutants Mr. Thompson, representing the College, discussed the trees along Lydia, advising that it was anticipated that there would be tree re- moval, but not in the creek area to the west of the proposed ball field. Councilmember Pust questioned how the College would address po- tential safety issues along Lydia. Mr. Thompson advised that this would need to be discussed and de- sign elements incorporated to sufficiently berm and protect that area, along with possible orientation of buildings and the ball field itself. 12e~ular Caty C®uncli eetin~ ®nday, July 23, 2007 Pale 0 Mr. Roe noted that the buffer area being discussed was primarily across from commercial, rather than residential properties. Further responses related to expansion of Lydia with additional wid- ening and lanes, additional turn lane(s) off Northbound Snelling onto Lydia Avenue, and possible signalization of the Lydia/Fairview inter- section, and practical mitigation issues were discussed; and whether there was sufficient right-of--way. Mr. Lindgren advised that mitigation strategies were reviewed and approved by the City Engineer, and were considered in conjunction with other transportation entities based on best practices. Public Works Director Duane Schwartz addressed mitigation strate- gies, and how to get from the EAW to solidify designs and the trigger- ing mechanisms. IVIr. Schwartz introduced the City's Traffic Analyst from SRF Con- sulting, who had reviewed the work of TKDA Consulting the Col- lege's traffic consultant, to address some mitigation strategies. Cram Vain a , C® sut~n Mr. Vaughan summarized his traffic analysis of the College's pro- posed expansion; turn lanes; and ongoing internal discussions with staff and the college's traffic engineer and college staff throughout the process to find resolution of various traffic impacts and potential miti- gation efforts. Mr. Vaughan advised that this analysis was done "on paper," to determine its feasibility, as well as through a planning level analysis, including recommendations for mitigation strategies for 2018 - 2030 traffic forecasts; how much additional space was neces- sary to accommodate improvements; offset traffic lanes; and overall feasibilities provided by traffic engineers performing due diligence re- lated to development projects. 1VIr. Vaughan concluded by opining that mitigation is possible, that shifting the road east/west along Lydia was the most feasible solution, and given that the college owned prop- erty along Lydia and Lincoln helped significantly, and should not negatively impact residential properties in the area. Regular Cif C®uncgl eating ®nday, .Tuly 23, 2007 Page 41 Councilmember Pust sought clarification on mitigation plans and their timeframe: what was needed now to accommodate improvements at the college and what was scheduled to take place by 2018 - 203 0; and the intent of the college to participate in or fund traffic mitigation is- sues. Mr. Lindgren responded that mitigation was provided for immediate improvements as well as over time to full build-out; and would be driven by traffic engineers for background traffic growth other than the College, as well as improvements on campus. Mr. Schwartz advised that, from his recollection of discussions with the Minnesota Department of Transportation (Mn:D®T), the reviewing City consultant, and the College's consultant, mitigations strategies would be required upon the addition of the first traffic-generating fa- cility; and specific language would be incorporated into the PLTL) Agreement. Mayor Klausing refocused discussion to whether the EAW was suffi- cient or if further study through an EIS was required. Mayor Klausing noted that specific items could be addressed as part of the PUD Agreement, and would come before the City Council for refinement at a future date. Councilmember Pust noted that she understood the process and steps; however, she was analyzing whether mitigation steps and their timing were sufficient as part of her consideration of the EAW. Mr. Paschke noted that he was uncertain whether the EAW could spe- cifically identify time and date, and triggering mechanisms to achieve compliance Wlth mitigation factors; however, he noted that the EAW laid out plans to address those; and that the PUD was the land use ap- proval document that solidified achievement of those mitigation fac- tors, while the EAW served as a general document or guide. City Attorney Anderson advised that during the information gathering process and a determination that potential environmental affects are subject to mitigation by ongoing regulatory efforts, and when details are available indicating such mitigation strategies, they can be in- 12egular City C®uncil eating IVI®nday, July 23, 2007 Page 42 cluded in the PUD along with sequence timing of those mitigation strategies in conjunction with build-out events that require them. Mr. Anderson further noted that a Concept Plan presented less refinement in the process than some EAW situations, and that the proposed 1VIas- ter Plan developed over time. 1VIr. Anderson noted that the PUD Agreement would legally set forth and bind a number of those issues, as negotiated between parties, staff input, and approved by the City Council. Mr. Anderson advised that, once the PUI~ was completed, this would not be the last time the Council would see the issue; and that if future significant changes occurred from those being proposed under the PUD, the City Council could require further environmental revievc~ under those circumstances; noting that this was not an unusual occurrence. Councilmember Igoe opined that, if the Council made a positive decla- ration that an EIS was required, additional detail for building out and traffic mitigation wouldn't be enhanced significantly. Councilmember Pust noted another option would be to delay action for another thirty days, requesting more information. Councilmember refocused discussion on the accuracy and sufficiency of the EAW as presented; noting that the City served as the Responsi- ble Government Unit (RGU) responsible for making that determina- tion. Councilmember Ihlan requested additional City Council discus- sion on the comments of .agencies and the public; noting that several agencies had commented that the EAW was incomplete; and opined that there was not sufficient information to make a negative declara- tion. Councilmember I~.ough commented on the lead time needed for fund- ing by l~~InT~OT for specific projects (i.e., Snelling Avenue), and the immediacy of the proposed dorm and parking facility by the College. Additional discussion, based on EAW comments and responses, in- cluded sound barrier and mitigation plans along Snelling by MnDOT; amount of traffic attributable to College expansion; Concept Plan and phases of environmental review and approval processes; and the over- Regular City C®uncil eating IVI®nday, July 23, 2007 Page 43 all sufficiency of the EAW, with specific of the proposal refined fur- ther in the PLJI~ Agreement. Mr. Lindgren noted that the College had made good faith efforts to provide the City with as much information as possible in order for them to make their decision regarding the land use request. Klausing moved, Roe seconded, suspending Council Rules to extend the meeting curfew to 11:00 p.m., and to complete this discussion and the Cent ventures land use item. Councilmember Ihlan opined the need to limit agenda items and length to avoid overloading agendas in an effort not to routinely exceed the 10:00 p.m. curfew. IVlayor Klausing noted the fact that land use issues had specific review periods and asked individual Councilmembers to consider time efficiencies during discussions. ® fall Ayes: Pust; Roe; Ihlan; Kough; and Klausing. ays® None. Councilmember Ihlan opined that the EAW as submitted was incom- plete, inaccurate, and didn't support a negative declaration; and sug- gested that the City Council delay their decision to request additional information where available. Councilmember Ihlan provided her re- search of EQ~ guidelines and threshold issues. Councilmember Ihlan questioned the individual Councilmember review of agency com- ments, given the late agenda packet delivery; and highlighted, for the record, specific indications of those agencies, opining that it was more prudent to get additional information before proceeding, as was the responsibility of the RCTU, and require an EIS. Councilmember Ihlan discussed specific lake grades for Little Johanna and Johanna Lakes; feasibility of proposed traffic mitigation strategies; stormwater outfall requirements related to loss of woodland habitat; Mr. Lindgren, with respect to Councilmember Ihlan, noted that the applicant had provided responses to agency comments since June 20, 2007 to provide the City Council with that additional information Regular City Council eating onday, July 23, 2007 Page 44 specified by the reviewing agencies, and as outlined in the draft reso- lution's Findings of Fact. City Attorney Anderson reviewed the process for sending the original document to agencies for comment, and noted that the process antici- pated that comments would be made and responses would initially be provided by the applicant and become part of the record. Mr. Ander- son opined that this was the environmental review process at work to improve proposed projects as indicated with revisions to the proposed Site and Master plans. Councilmember Ihlan expressed her opinion regarding additional in- adequacies of the EAW, requiring an EIS, related to the size and loca- tion of structures and square footages of the structures; defining which plan was being presented; and the scope and nature of full-time equivalent (FTE) student calculations and related traffic impacts. Councilmember Ihlan further addressed potential tree removal; wooded habitat and brush and grassland areas; and erosion and drain- age issues. Mayor Klausing recognized Councilmember Ihlan's preference for an EIS; however, expressed his personal opinion and confidence that there was no need for an EIS. Mayor Klausing sought comment from other Councilmembers. Councilmember Roe noted his extensive review of agency and citizen comments and College responses; recognized the importance of the document; and opined his satisfaction that responses to the comments were substantive and applicable; and further opined that the EAW ap- peared to be accurate and complete. Councilmember Roe opined that, at some point, consideration was required to accept expert input on some of the questions; and if there remained particular areas for indi- vidual Councilmember concern that required additional specific in- formation, he was willing to make that request. Councilmember Roe advised that he had read all the letters and responses, and expressed appreciation for the input, and they served to answer the majority of his questions and made reference to responses in the EAW question- naire. iZegular City C®uncil 1V.leeting ®nday, .Tuly 23, 2007 Page 45 Councilmember Pust noted the original concerns raised in various comments regarding vegetation, water quality and runoff; and opined that those concerns were addressed to her satisfaction. Councilmem- ber Pust advised that her only remaining concern was timing of traffic mitigation strategies and triggering mechanisms, as well as cost- sharing for traffic mitigation. Councilmember Pust sought clarifica- tion for the basis of emission statements and other items identified in underlying reports, as referenced on page 5, paragraph 26 of college responses to agency comments. Additional discussion ensued on mitigation measures planned and up- grading of existing conditions in various scenarios; and timing of pro- posed mitigation. Councilmember Pust opined that upon completion of the college's immediately proposed improvements, she anticipated mitigation for increased traffic generation at that time, not ten years later. Council- member Pust clarified that, if she were to vote in favor of the negative declaration for an EIS, her expectations were that the college under- stood that if they were seeking to increase the traffic problem in the neighborhood that she expected them to participate totally in the solu- tion, not just minimal solutions. Mr. Paschke noted that background traffic considerations were in- cluded in mitigation, not just college expansion; however, noted that the PIJL) would solidify triggering mechanisms for improvements. Mr. Schwartz concurred, and noted that the traffic modeling scenarios used assume many different background growth considerations; and included growth assumptions related to Twin Lakes redevelopment as well and impacts to traffic in the area; and may be triggered based on their growth alone (i.e., Lydia at Fairview). Mr. Schwartz opined that regular City Council eating and ay, July 23, 2007 Page 46 turn lanes were much more necessary to College expansion that trig- gering asignal at Lydia and Fairview, which was not indicated by College expansion on its own. Mr. Schwartz noted that based on pro- j actions for campus expansion, improvements at Snelling and Lydia were triggered almost immediately. Councilmember Pust clarified with Mr. Lindgren that it was consistent with the College's understanding that their expansion would immedi- ately trigger improvements to the intersection of Snelling and Lydia and funding for those improvements. 1VIr. Lindgren advised that it was the College's intent to pay their pro- portionate share. Councilmember Ihlan noted comments from Engineer Dan Soler of the Ramsey County Public works Department regarding the intersec- tion of Lydia and Snelling that without campus growth, background growth would indicate little impact to traffic. Councilmember Ihlan questioned the City's jurisdiction for a County road; and assurances that the I'~.TD Agreement could make such traffic mitigation a condi- tion. Councilmember Ihlan further questioned cut-through traffic if a signal were installed at Lydia and Fairview and negative impacts to those immediate neighborhoods and residences. Councilmember Roe opined that mitigation recommendations would actually improve the level of service at the intersection; decreasing the time to process through the intersection, and hopefully decreasing ad- vantages for traffic seeking alternatives to cut-through. Additional discussion included travel demand measures implemented by the college to discourage use of cars; need for students to work on or off campus; and other options being explored to manage travel de- mands. Regular City C®uncil 1Vleeting ®nday, July 23, 2007 Page 47 Mr. Schroeder recognized public transportation challenges; potential of light rail for Snelling and noise impacts; maintaining student hous- ing to reduce commuting traffic; increased prices for parking; on- campus versus off-campus expansion and differing community opin- ions; and competing market factors for a private college. Mr. Schroe- der noted that the traffic study indicated that 85 - 93% of the growth was from background traffic, and 17% from expansion of the College. Councilmember Pust reiterated her concerns, for the record, that the college recognize their responsibility for traffic mitigation costs for their proposed expansion; and that the understanding be clearly de- fined in the PLTD Agreement, with no attempts to avoid that financial responsibility. Councilmember Ihlan addressed her concerns regarding FTE projec- tions; her observance of College billboard advertising encouraging adult and evening student recruitment; and potential environmental impacts from additional commuter traffic in addition to additional dorm space on campus for daytime students. Mr. Lindgren briefly addressed national standards used by the College for their student projections and consistent growth analyses. Klausing moved, Roe seconded, adoption of Resolution No.10530 en- titled, "Resolution establishing Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law and ®rder Issuing a Negative Declaration for an Environmental Im- pact Statement on the Development Known as the Northwestern Col- lege Master Plan." Councilmember Pust offered a friendly amendment, accepted by the makers of the motion, to the draft resolution's Findings of Fact, changing language from "can" to "will" on pages 3, paragraphs 12 and 13; page 4, paragraph 22; page 6, paragraph 29; and correction of a typographical error (spelling of "college") on page 5, paragraph 23. Councilmember Kough, while wanting to support the College, spoke against the motion due to too many unanswered and open-ended is- sues as addressed by Councilmember Ihlan. Regular City C®uncil eating ®nday, July 23, 2007 Page 4~ Councilmember Ihlan spoke against the motion, reiterating her ration- ale from previous comments supporting the need for a positive decla- ration for an EIS and their cumulative threshold affects and impacts Councilmember Pust spoke in support of the motion; opining that her concerns had been addressed and additional information provided as she' d requested. Councilmember Pust further opined that there were a multitude of conditions that should be placed on the PUD Agreement; and expressed her intent to see that they were included in the next phase of approval. Councilmember Pust opined that under statutory criteria, significant impacts were identified, but their affects were sub- j act to mitigation plans as set forth, and that it would be up to the RGU to ensure that those mitigation plans were put in place in the PLTI~, and that the College be held accountable to the mitigation meas- ures they' d identified. Councilmember Roe spoke in support of the motion; opining that he felt sufficient and satisfactory information .had been provided by the applicant in their responses to his questions and agency/public com- ments. ®11 Call Ayes: Pust; Roe; and Klausing. Days: Ihlan and Kough. ®tl®n carried® Roe moved, Pust seconded, suspending Council Rules to extend the meeting cur- few to 11:3 0 p.m. to finish discussion on this item. ®11 Call Ayes: Pust; Roe; Ihlan; Kough; and Klausing. bays: None. Ihlan moved, Kough seconded, to delay City Council consideration of the Northwestern College PUD beyond the August 13, 2007 proposed date; to allow time for additional- information to be brought forward for incorporation in the PUD Agreement. Mayor Klausing spoke against the motion. e~ular City C®uncil eetin~ ®nday, July 23, 2007 Pale 49 Councilmember Pust opined that staff had heard clearly, and if they were not prepared by the August 13, 2007 meeting with an inclusive PUD based on Council discussions, they would not bring the item forward at that time. Councilmember Pust further opined that she didn't want to set a precedent of the City Council determining when specific items came before the City Council at specific meetings. Councilmember Ihlan spoke in support of the motion; opining that the City Council needed to set its own agenda; and it was clear the item would not be ready by August 13, 2007. ® Call Ayes. Ihlan and Kough. ayso Pust; Roe; and Klausing. ®ti® fails . 1VIr. Paschke advised that the City's Traffic Consulting Engineer, IVIr. Vaughan with SRF Consulting, was present to comment on the traffic study; and also noted that John Livingston, Hotel/Restaurant Appli- cant, 2700 Cleveland Avenue, and Robert Hajek, Xtra Lease, repre- senting owner of the trucking site (office address: 3433 Broadway Street NE, Suite 110,1VIlnneapolis, l~~N 55413) were present. Mr. Paschke advised that staff remained consistent in their recom- mendation for DENIAL of the request, based on the findings detailed in Section 11.1 A of the staff report dated July 23, 2007. Councilmember Ihlan questioned whether or not an environmental re- view was required, that the Council's call for a discretionary EAW by the applicant would hold the 60-day calendar versus staffs recom- egular City C®uncil eating ®nciay, .Tiny 23, 2007 Page 50 mendation for the applicant to request a voluntary extension to await completion of the AUAR Update. Mr. Paschke advised that completion of the AUAR had always been on the table for the applicant; however, noted the unwillingness of the applicant to do so. Mr. Paschke noted that, whether the City requests completion of a discretionary EAW, staff remains on record asking that the City Council require the applicant to complete a discretionary EAW, as part of the record from the July 23, 2007 regular City Coun- cil meeting. Mr. Paschke updated the City Council that, following its review of the document, staff had accepted the applicant's traffic study recently submitted; however continued to point to issues em- bedded within Section 11. l .A of the staff report. Councilmember Ihlan opined that if the City ordered the environ- mental review, it would stop the development clock; otherwise, staff s recommendation would be for the Council to deny the case on merits without the opportunity to get information determined needed by staff, and whether that information was readily available. Mayor Klausing noted the benefits in awaiting update of the AUAR to have an analysis of environmental impacts addressed for the entire Twin Lakes development area, rather than on a proj act-wide basis, to allow for overall mitigation strategies. Mayor Klausing opined his preference of the AUAR update, already in process. Councilmember Pust sought clarification that the applicant was not supportive of the City Council requiring an EAW due to timing re- lated to his property purchase not supporting such a timeframe. ® n I~ivingst® ,Applicant lVlr. Livingston advised that he had no provision in his pending Pur- chase Agreement that would allow him sufficient time to complete an EAW without further negotiations with the seller. Councilmember Roe observed that it was conceivable that the AUAR Update process would be completed in mid October, well within the timeframe that an EAW would require. 12egular City Council 1l~Ieeting Monday, July 23, 2007 Page 51 Mr. Paschke cautioned the City Council as to whether it was good business practice to subject concept plan approval on a document not yet reviewed and/or approved by the City Council; and noted staff s other concerns detailed in the staff report. Mr. Paschke noted staff s inability to detail Site Plan recommendations and conditions without having more information. Councilmember Kough noted his desire to see development initiated in the Twin Lakes redevelopment area; noted the attendance of the Roseville Visitor's Association (RVA) Executive Director Julie Lar- son to speak to the project; and questioned the applicant on the status of contamination on the property. Councilmember Ihlan shared concerns raised by Councilmember Kough; and opined that staff's rationale for denial was inadequate, and provided her interpretation of that rationale, again encouraging that the design be considered on its merits. Julie Lars®n, Exec lrect®r, A Ms. Larson advised that she had met with Mr. Livingston and re- viewed his proposal, and that from the RVA point of view, it appeared to complement other motels in the area, the hotel brand was good, and the need was evident that another motel could be supported in the area, particularly hospitality industry focus in the Twin Lakes area. Ms. Larson expressed willingness to be involved in additional discus- sion on the proposal, with a presentation to the RVA Board to provide more information. Ms. Larson advised that the area could support an- other hotel, however, noted that the RVA wasn't endorsing this spe- cific property. Councilmember Pust opined that the City should be in possession of additional environmental studies that may or may not impact this pro- j ect, but certainly the overall area, and opined the need for additional information other than what was currently before the City Council. Mr. Livingston provided a Bench Handout, consisting of a letter dated July 23, 2007 from Cent Ventures, 1660 Highway 100 S, Suite 500, St. Louis Park, l~'IN to the City Council; a Preliminary Site Plan dated 5/5/07 for 2700 Cleveland Avenue N for PUI) Submittal; and a letter Regular City C®uncil eating ~I®nday, July 23, 2007 Page 52 dated July 6, 2007 to John Livingston from Jon Larsen, Principal Planner with the Environmental Quality Board. Mr. Livingston noted the projected tax base and lodging tax that would be realized by the community based on the property's estimated market value. Additional discussion included surface water impacts; underlying con- tamination and whether the City could obtain the environmental re- ports completed by the previous Twin Lakes developer and subject to court order; traffic issues; past practice for meeting the water runoff in the area and requirements of the Rice Creek Watershed District; City Attorney opinion on the process for Preliminary Plat approval and conditions; and need for a mitigation plan for the entire area, based on an updated AUAR. City Attorney Anderson advised that it would not be inconsistent for someone needing to complete and EAW even with an AUAR in place. Councilmember Pust opined that the City Council had bent over backwards to work with the applicant; yet continued to find inadequa- cies in the information reluctantly provided to staff for review and re- commendation to the City Council. ~/Ir. Livingston noted that he has always supported extension of the center island addressed in traffic study; however, opined that staff s representation of conclusions and scope of the traffic study had been misconstrued. Mr. Livingston verbally reviewed his written comment as previously noted. ® art aje 1VIr. Hajek advised that his client couldn't wait any longer with the property remaining dormant. Mr. f-Iajek further advised that the prop- erty would be sold for development or returned to a truck terminal. ~/Ir. Hajek noted that the previous eminent domain was not a pleasant experience and created additional and unnecessary delays. Mr. Hajek cautioned that, if necessary, his client would consider litigation to clear the property for development. Councilmember Pust noted standing comments from the City's traffic consultant regarding unsafe mitigation strategies, and questioned the 12egular City C®uncil eating 1VI®nday, July 23, 2007 Page 53 applicant as to whether he preferred the Council to vote the project down, or to vote in favor of requiring an EAW, and whether more in- formation was readily available. Councilmember Pust recognized IV1r. Haj ek's comments and his expressed concerns; however, noted that she. could not .and would not approve projects based on the threat of possible litigation. Mr. Hajek clarified that he was not making threats, just stating facts, and opined that use of the site for tractor trailers must be considered more dangerous than the proposed project. Councilmember Pust opined that Mr. Hajek would need to make his own determination if that was the highest and best use of the property. NIr. Livingston noted that he had submitted an EAW at the last meet- ing, but that it apparently was deemed insufficient by staff. Councilmember Pust noted the conversations held during the June 18, 2007 meeting; and suggested the applicant review the tape for staff s comments and preliminary review of the document. City Attorney Anderson noted that the applicant's comments indicated that they'd already supplied all the information they intended to sup- ply; and further noted that the City's traffic consultant indicated that the options were unsafe; which provided grounds for denial. Councilmember Ihlan reiterated her preference to hear the merits of the project for hotel/restaurant use in a B-6 zone, and desired eco- nomic development for the area; rather than outright denial. Ihlan moved, Kough seconded, approving the requirement of comple- tion of a Discretionary EAW for this site before final consideration of a Preliminary Plat, Rezoning, and General Concept Planned Unit De- velopment to redevelop the Xtra Lease trucking site into a 120-unit hotel and freestanding restaurant without environmental review based on the outlined in the staff report dated July 23, 2007: 1) Due to the nature and/or location of the proposed project, the pro- j act may have the potential for significant environmental effects, including but not limited to, site specific traffic impacts, contribu- 1Zegular City Council eetin~ IVionday, .Tuly 23, 2007 Page 54 tion to cumulative areawide traffic impacts, and surface water run- off impacts; [and concerns of site ~~°oundwate~ contamination and other studies]; and 2) The language in Section 1005.07(b) of Roseville's City Code (as detailed in the staff ~epo~t). Councilmember Roe spoke in support of the motion in an effort to move forward, rather than outright denial of the project. of Call Ayes ® Pust; Roe; Ihlan; Kough; and Klausing. lays. None. City Councilmembers Kough and Ihlan advised that they would not be available for the proposed July 30, 2007 meeting. It was Council consensus that Administrative Assistant 1Vlargaret - Driscoll poll Councilmembers for their individual availability to find a suitable date for a Special meeting. ~'he folrlowing items were not addressed at tonight's meeting due to tinge con- ~t~aLntJ s a. rdinance -Consider Adopting an rdinance ezoning 2750 Snelling Avenue Frontage 12oad for 'T L evelopnlent Regular City Council 1VIeeting 1Vionday, July 23, 2007 Page 55 13. ®negl a er- itiated Ite s f®r Future eeting~ None other than those previously identified during the meeting. . j®urn The meeting was adjourned at 11:52 p.m. Regular City C®uncil eetin~ 1VI®nday, July 23, 2007 Pale 56 raig I~. Klausing, ayor ATTEST: Williai . Malinen, City Manager 1VIy name is Dick Lambert and I live at X00 Brenner Avenue I have a number of concerns about the burn peranit issue: The code as marked up to permit the Fire thief to issue the perBnits does not allow burning for the purpose of managing designated prairie grass areas Is it the council's intention to endorse prairie grass management burns on residential lots where by definition there are many homes nearby If you decide to specifically allow prairie grass management burns on residential lots I recommend that you address several key issues o l~totification of neighbors - a requirement should be explicitly incorporated in the code to require city notification of neighbors within-250' or perhaps 500' measured from the outline of the lot to be burned. Nationale: there are many health conditions that are adversely, or even critically, affected by smoke. 'These individuals should be allowed time to plan to close up their homes or even vacate .them entirely. The cost for this is minimal. ® Post all prairie grass management burn permits on the city website ® Allow interested citizens the option of subscribing to an email list that would automatically notify them ®f any scheduled burns o I)ue to the increased potential for a serious' fire hazard due to home density, should the city ~ .~~,~~- require prairie grass management burns on residential lots to be conducted by the fire ~~~,'~ s~ ~ department or some other licensed professional, or at least monitored by an on-site fire department official? ~ ~ ~..~ _ "~.,~"~~~- euest for council Action "" ~"~"~"~~~" Date: 07-16-07 ».._~~„~,...._m... Item Number: g,e .~ ~.. . ~ . ~ ~-~ ~m~`._::._:_:~m A , ends Seetiori :__~....w;m~.µ__~..~....._:::.. ,~ _ ~ f ... ,~ c~ ~~~tee ~~~~~:~°~-a~atii~at: 2~~:~ir~~~ erg ~~,~~:t~~~Ya ~~~~~~~.'~_~~~~r~=~~tr~t~c~':~c~t~~-~ ~-~~,~t~.~.~"~~~~ ~~~~~,~~ .:.......::..:.:::: ~. .:. t{....~..... ~,...... l:. ..~~.~~,~_._~ Background: Each year the fire department receives requests for authorization for burn permits ~ :~ forthe purpose o f managing designated Prairie Grass areas. Under the current ordinance, the fire F ~ marshal is only authorized to issue the permits when directed by City Council action. In every C.~ case, the Council has, with the recommendation ofthe fire marshal, directed the permit to be t'~ issued. The ordinance requires the ~ marshal to visit the site prior to the recommendation for the purpose o f investigating whether the burn can be conducted safely. 4~ The optimal time to burn Prairie Grass areas is limited to a narrow window in the spring ofthe ~`~~ year. On occasion, there have been opportunities missed, or° the ideal time forgone, because the ~: timing o f the request to the next council meeting was not in alignment. ~..~, '~~~~ The proposed change would allow .for burn permits tob.e issued by the ,fire marshal without the •~ .,;~ ~F~ requirement. for City Council to direct the issuing o, f each permit. None o, f the other requirements 2'~ will be changed {e.g., the .~ marshal's visual inspection o, f the cite before issuing the permit) ~,_~- ~: a ~;:~ Financial: There are no direct financial costs associated with the proposed changes. .f ..;w.,..,..... Staff Recommendation: Both the Fire Ch ief and the Fire Marshal recommend approval o f the ~:~ _ proposed code changes. .^~ ~~.. :"~~"~ Council Action I~eauested: Motion to approve the pr°oposed change to section 404.02, Open "~ ~ Burning section o f the Roseville City Code. 4 t _~! ,. ~a ~ l 1. 4;i,......_. .... l 1 l l l l l .~~ ~1 n `~ Wl ~~,. 2 ~. r e+ye R 7wf ~a 'l. `~ 4 h, ~ ... ~; ~., . . ~,., ?~ 40 ,.- yip ;> City of Roseville ® INA.I~ICE N®. AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 404.02 OPEN BURNING THE CITY OF ROSEVILLE ORDAINS: SECTION 1: Title Four, Section 404.02 of the Roseville City Code is amended to read as follows: 404.02: F'EN I.J G A. Prohibited: Except as provided lll subsection B, all open burning is prohibited in the City. B. Exceptions: Recreational campfires, fires for the purpose of bona fide Fire Department training, as approved by the Fire Chief, and open bul-ning of trees resulting from extensive storm damage, at a central collection site, when approved by the t~"~~t~~ ~,""`~ ~ r ~`El f i ~:h Chief. The following requirements shall apply to all recreational fires: 1. The minimum distance to a structure or property line shall he twenty-five feet (25'). 2. The inaximwn permitted size shall be three feet (3') in diameter. 3. The permitted fuels -charcoal or one inch (1'°) minimum diameter wood, no trash or garden residue. 4. The maximum duration shall he four (4) hours. 5. No combustible materials shall be placed within a three foot (3') radius of fire. 6. The fire shall be constantly. attended by a responsible adult. 7. A means of extinguishing the fire shall be present (such as a garden hose or a fire extinguisher).. 8. Recreational fires shall be used for cooping, social or recreational purposes. Disposing of trash, debris, grass, tree trilriinings, or similar materials shall not he allowed.: C. Permits Required: It shall be the duty of the Fire Chief and/or Fire Marshal to investigate requests for and to issue open burning permits for the purposes stated in subsection B. D. Institutional Recreation Burning Permits: The ~.~+~~ ~ ~ ~~ ~"~~~`t~ i ~rkft~r ~'~.~~~ ~~. a~~E b~n;~~ Fire Chief and/or Fire Marshal may issue institutional recreation burning permits for schools, social clubs and other organizations, in situations where unique circumstances preclude the ability of the institution to meet the standards of the Code. Conditions maybe attached to the permit. (Ord. 1152, ~-2G-94) 1 SECTION 2: Effective date. This ordinance shall take effect upon its passage and 2 publication. 3 4 Passed by the City Council of the City of Roseville this day of ,2007. ~~ REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION Date: 07/23/2007 Item l~To: Sew. apartment .Approval: City anagar approval: Agenda Section: Consent Items ascription: Clarification of Resolution 10516: Resolution Identifying Deed for I~ivabla Co~n~nunities I)a~onstration account Funding and authorizing an application for Grant Funds ~'R®J-0006) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 1°0 Requested action 1.1 Clarify language in Resolution No. 10516-Resolution Identifying Need for Livable Communities Demonstration Account Funding and Authorizing an Application for Grant Funds. 2e0 background 2.1 On June 18, 2007, the Council unanimously approved Resolution No. 10516, which identified the need for Livable Communities Demonstration Account Funding and authorized an application for grant funds. 2.2 In their review of this grant application, Metropolitan Council staff noticed that a required element was omitted from this resolution. Missing information includes the reasons and supporting facts that the City has undertaken reasonable and good faith efforts to procure funding for the project component for which Livable Communities Demonstration Account funding. (Attached is a draft resolution that includes this language.) 300 Suggested Council action 3.1 By resolution, approve the clarified resolution identifying the need for Livable Communities Demonstration Account funding and authorizing an application for grant funds. Attachments: Draft resolution Prepared by: Jamie Radel, Economic Development Associate CCHT Need of Funds and Application Authorization -Page 1 of 1 EX'I' CT' I' INIT'TES ~ A E'TN~ ~ 'I' CITY F l~ SE LICE Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, a regular meeting of the City of Roseville, County of Ramsey, Minnesota, was duly called and held at the City Hall on Monday, the 23rd day of July 2007, at 6:00 p.m. The following members were present: ; and the following were absent: Council Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: ~I.TJ'TIN N . XXXXX SI,TJ'TI N I EN'TIF G T E NEE i' I.V LE C 'T'ES E NSA' 'TN A,CC T I+, NG AITT Z G APPI.IC~.T N F G T I+' ~ E .~S the City of Roseville is a participant in the Livable Communities Act's Housing Incentives Program for 2007 as determined by the Metropolitan Council, and is therefore eligible to apply for Livable Communities Demonstration Account funds; and W AS the City has identified a proposed project within the City that meets the Demonstration Account's purposes and criteria and is consistent with and promotes the purposes of the Metropolitan Livable Communities Act and the policies of the Metropolitan Council's adopted metropolitan development guide; and E AS the City has the institutional, managerial and financial capability to ensure adequate project administration; and E AS the City certifies that it will comply with all applicable laws and regulations as stated in the grant agreement; and E t~S the City agrees to act as legal sponsor for the project contained in the grant application submitted on July 16, 2007; and AS the City acknowledges Livable Communities Demonstration Account grants are intended to fund projects or project components that can serve as models, examples or prototypes for development or redevelopment projects elsewhere in the region, and therefore represents that the proposed project or key components of the proposed project can be replicated in other metropolitan-area communities; and E AS only a limited amount of grant funding is available through the Metropolitan Council's Livable Communities Demonstration Account during each funding cycle and the Metropolitan Council has determined it is appropriate to allocate those scarce grant funds only to eligible projects that would not occur without the availability of Demonstration Account grant funding. NW T E F ~E IT' SIB that, after appropriate examination and due consideration, the governing body of the City: 1. Finds that it is in the best interests of the City's development goals and priorities for the proposed project to occur at this particular site and at this particular time. 2. Finds that the project component(s) for which Livable Communities Demonstration Account funding is sought: (a) Will not occur solely through private or other public investment within the reasonably foreseeable future; and (b) Will not occur within two years after a grant award unless Livable Communities Demonstration Account funding is made available for this project at this time. 3. Represents that the City has undertaken reasonable and good faith efforts to procure funding for the project component for which Livable Communities Demonstration Account funding is sought but was not able to find or secure from other sources funding that is necessary for project component completion within two years and states that this representation is based on the following reasons and supporting facts: (a) The Roseville Housing and Redevelopment Authority has already earmarked funding for other elements of this project; (b) Project specific, on-site storm water management are not funded through the City's Capital Improvement Fund; and (c) State and federal grants are not available for this portion of the project. 4. Authorizes its Community Development Department to submit on behalf of the City an application for Metropolitan Council Livable Communities Demonstration Account grant funds for the project component(s) identified in the application, and to execute such agreements as may he necessary to implement the project on behalf of the City. The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by Council Member ,and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor: and voted against: WHEREUPON said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. n Cent i/entures 1660 Highway 100 South, Suite 500 St. Louis Park, MN 55416 (612) 272-1246 July 23, 2007 City of Roseville City Council City Hall 2660 Civic Center Drive Roseville MN 55113-1815 RE: 2700 Cleveland Avenue N. Mayor Klausing and members of the City Council: v' E ~ V ~~~~ G` ~~ We again in front of you to ask for approval of the hotel and restaurant application for 2700 Cleveland Avenue having provided the additional information and completed the report requested by Council Member Pust when we last met. Let me summarize the three principal areas of discussion. Traffic. Mr. Schwartz was able to have the entire scope requested by staff was completed by SRF and reviewed in time for tonight's meeting. The report concludes that the proposal's impact allows for acceptable levels of service during all years requested. Staff's paraphrasement, in 10.2 and 11.2 of the packet, of SRF's suggestion is a mis-construction of the conclusions provided. Further 11.1 A.3 implies that that study relies on un-approved data. Nothing in the scope undertaken by SFR supports that suggestion. With regard to SRF's improvement suggestions I do agree that it is desirable to extend the center island and install a no-u-turn sign as a part of our development. Discretionary EAW: As per staff's request we supplied them with all available information on the EAW form in early June. We have not received any comments or questions from staff regarding the information supplied. I have provided staff with a letter from the EQB dated July 6t" which 1 also note is not included in your package. Design: Our meeting with staff and the City's design consultant on May 24th defined what additional information needed to be reflected on the submission drawings. On June 5t" the modified drawings were delivered to staff with items discussed added. I have a copy of that plan with me tonight if you'd care to see it because I noticed it wasn't included in your packet by staff. In it you would see Page 1 of 2 that, contrary to staff's report item 12.1.A.2, all the connections requested for pedestrian connections and included. In the published packet staff requests inclusion of the Design Principals as a component of the PUD. The Design Principals they speak of address Twin Lakes in general and can not be accomplished, in their totality, within any individual site. It is also clear the Design Principals were never made a part of City code and have not been required for approval for other projects in this area. The project we propose is intended to serve the citizens and business community of Roseville. During its construction I would expect it to employ and average of 50 - 60 people during its 12 month development. Upon opening, in addition to the city's portion of the real estate taxes, it is projected to collect over $350,000 per year in lodging tax. The restaurant is estimated to be worth about 2 million dollars and will employ a large number of full and part time employees and contribute to the local economy as well. Without your approval it is likely the site will return to its approved use as a truck storage facility. ,. Let me conclude my remarks by saying I believe this development would be a ~ useful addition to the business' in Roseville so I hope you will approve these applications. Respectfully John Livingston Cent Ventures Page2of2 7/23/2007 i i i i i i ---"`~ \ ~ -_ 1 '~ I \1 I , 1 I' I\I ____,~~~ I/ \ ~ ~ ~ ~ I ~i ~ ii ~-~~ ii \ ii I ~ ii 1 ii ( I ~ ~ 1 ii \ i ~ ii ~ i ~. ~- o ~~ ~, ~~ 0 e ~ ®® ® ~ On ~ Q1 //y.~ 4 vi/ R a 6m C ~A®, W //bo~on bin q\ V A~ 6 M ~~s~i~anantal aal~~ aar~d 658 CEDAR STREET" ST. PAUL, MN 55 155 PHONE: 65 I -297- 1 257 FAx: 65 I -296°3696 Trr: 800-62 7-3 5 29 W W W. EQ6.5TATE , M N . US July 6, 2007 John Livingston Cent ventures 1660 I~i~h=away .~ 00 ~loutrg .~~;ite .5D0 fit. Louis Dark, Minnesota X5416 Imo: 2700 Cleveland Avenue North 1Vlr. Livingston: Gregg Downing has referred your letter to rne, and ~ will try to respond. 'There is limited detail in your letter, but we are able to give you some observations and information on the usual interpretatiou of tie st~t~ .e~a~~~a~~t~~ ~-~~T~~~~T ~~~. First of all., every potential ~.esponsi'ble Governmental Unit (~.GU) that has authority to permit or approve a project can make a discretionary decision to order an EAi~1 for any project not previously reviewed if evidence known to it demonstrates that the project may have a potential for signi~.cant en~rir~anmental effects. ~h~r~ are t~c~ exce~tior~s to this discretionary power; 1. ~.f the pru~ec~ mew or exceeds any mandatory tlireshotd for a required EA~1(or EIS) the 1Z.GU must order an EAR, and 2. If the project is below the applicable exemption threshold. (if any) for the type of pro~iect in ~uestiun7 t~~e ~GU .may ~~t ~~d~~- ~ ~~~~j F~rn~ the narrative of your letter, ~.t does not appear to be y®ur poslti®n that your proposed project is likely to be so small as to be exerr~pt from consideration far reviewp or that as your new project, it may have already been reviewed in an EAR (as a prior projects where only the ownership has changes). ~.,rta~e~ issue ~v~cr~d 6e the comparison of ~.is project to any ofthe applicable scenarios evaluated in the AUAl.2. covering this area. Leaving aside the question of the need to update the AUAIZ. after f ve years have passed, ~f this project 1S Consistent with the development assumptions 1.n t,~e .a~plic,~b~,e ~~~aria ~ ~~ ri~,r ~aJT ,ea~s~de~- fat the project has received environmental review. ~Iowever, it is still the judgment of the I~GU whether this oje~. is sufficiently sin~.iiar or identical. to what is analyzed in the AUAR. ~ ~ STATE AND COMMUNITY SERVICES tQ exempt it From further review. ~f not, the ~.~I~ would ha~re ~.e op~ron of dating the AT.JAF~. to account far this project, or review this project separately in an EAi~T. The updating of the A~[.TAIZ. w®uld also be a way to address the eve year requirement at the same ti~a~ a~ ~~a~g~~g it to ~ac~eo~t far t~~ p~-o~es$. It also appears that part of the issue that needs satisfactory resolution is the basis upon which the decision to require an EAV~ is made by the city. The E(~13 rules do not dictate the manner of that decision; that is a local matter. The form of the decision that the rules prescribe is a retard of decision including finding of facts that lead to the conclusion of ordering an EA'G~. An l~C~tT may exercise that authority through the operation of decision made ~y a ~oarcl or council tcity council, planning can~niss~ioz~ or oth~j or delegate that authority to single individual (mayor, city manager, planning director, or city develapment coordinator). host cities retain that authority to the city council and the c~€cis;a~ i~ f~-~~ue~t~y ~~pressed ~s .a resolaat~on or motion of the council. used on tl~e limited. information in your letter, it seems probable that the ~.~13 d©es have the discretionary authority to order environmental review of this project; and furthermore at its discretion, decide if that review should be an EAST or be covered in the AUAR.. Although it appears that the city has cornrn.unicated to you that EA~I is necessary, it isn't possible to say, from your letter, how that decTSYOn was rz~ade. ~Iat may he ate tssae that you will need to clarify with the city. E~F3 rules do not specify how the decision is made or who makes it; only the basis of the decision as found in the rules. I hope this information is helpful. Please feel free to call or have any of the parties from the city call with further questions. ~.y number is 65l -2~l -2477 "incerely, ~~~.- 3on Larsen, Principal Planner