Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCity Council - 06/21/1988 APPROVED MINUTES EDEN PRAIRIE CITY COUNCIL - TUESDAY, JUNE 21� 1988 7 : 30 PM CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS, 7600 Executive Drive COUNCIL MEMBERS : Mayor Gary Peterson, Richard Anderson, George Bentley, Jean Harris, and Patricia P idcock CITY COUNCIL STAFF: City Manager Carl J . Jullie, Assistant to the City Manager Craig Dawson, City Attorney Roger Pauly, Finance Director John D . Frane, Director of Planning Chris Enger, Director of Community Services Robert Lambert, Director of Public Works Eugene A. Dietz, and Recording Secretary Sue Anderson f PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE ROLL CALL : Anderson absent . ! I . APPROVAL l 1 MOTION: Bentley moved, seconded by Pidcock to approve the Agenda as amended and published. Additions to the Agenda: Under Item X .A.1 Harris placed items relating to communications from Vantage Companies and Flagship Athletic Club . Under Item X.A. 2 Pidcock wished to report on two meetings of the Chairmans Advisory meeting of RTS. Under Item X.A. 3 Peterson requested a discussion on the creation of a Waste Management Board or Commission . Under Item X.8. 3 Scheduling a follow up meeting of Strategic Planning Process . Motion carried unanimously. II . MII9UTES A. GIty Coung1l MeetingT MOTION,: Pidcock moved, seconded by Harris to approve the Minutes of the City Council Meeting Held April 5, 1988 as published and amended . City Council Minutes 2 June 21, 1988 The following changes were made: Page 13, paragraph 2 should read : outdoor planting around entrance . . . . . Page 15, Item VII .A should read : Request for Site Plan Review . . . Page 8, paragraph 3 should read : She believed that what makes cities interesting is not uniformity in color of buildings or height of skyline, but appropriate variances of each and that the spire, while visible from many places in Eden Prairie, may be no less obtrusive than the IDS Building, which is also visible. Page 7, paragraph 8 should read : has watched the development of the church since its inception . Motion carried unanimously. B . Si.tV_..Council Mgetlng hgld Tugaday, April 1988 M!2T I,QN Pidcock moved, seconded by Harris to approve the Minutes of the City Council Meeting Held April 19, 1988 as published and amended . The following changes were made : Page 8, paragraph 3 should read : Bentley opposed on the basis that it was inappropriate to Item IX.A, paragraph 1 should read: Peterson stated that the name of Sue Keller was suggested as someone interested In the school systems and who might possibly represent Eden Prairie. Item X .A, paragraph 1 should read : She suggested involving citizens through homeowners ' associations and other civic groups in the Eden Prairie Spring Clean Up in a formal program to make citizens aware of the degree of pollution being created . Item X.A. paragraph 5 should read: Peterson stated that perhaps one or more of the civic organizations might be willing to co-ordinate this sort of project in the future . Page 4, paragraph 12 should read: original condition as well as they possibly can . Motion carried unanimously. City Council Minutes 3 June 21, 1988 C . City Council Meeting held Tuesday. May 3, 1988 MOTION: Bentley moved, seconded by Pidcock to approve the Minutes of the City Council Meeting Held May 3, 1988 as published and amended . The following changes were made: Page 4 , paragraph 7 should read : unless property was later subdivided . Motion carried unanimously. D . Board of Review Meg&;ing held Monday. May 16, 1988 MOTION: Pidcock moved, seconded by Harris to approve the Minutes of the Board of Review Meeting Held May 16, 1988 as published . Motion carried unanimously. III . CONSENT CALENDAR A . Clerk 's License Lim B. 13-85 to hgngg the Namg of Grantee (Cable TV) C . Purgbg a of Piano for-Senior Centel D . Approval of Rglocs1tion Claim for Clarenre & Lorraine Janke E . Ar>Drovet PartngrahU for Bluff Road F. n No . 89-128, G v Gener,al Fund,Bgdget G . Approve_ Ealans and Snegi fications for Sajait!„py Sewer, Effi- Research Road and Authorize Bida tr y ece ivedo 52- Q � (Resolution No . 88-121) H. Apgrgye School Zone Speed j i, mitt (Resolution Nos . 8.8-122, 88 -123, and 88-124 ) I . prgve watqrmain-and 9treet Improvements--tg " oX. Lz!l Bias to be recgived I ., -112 (Resolution No. 88-125) I 1. 3 City Council Minutes 4 June 21, 1988 J . Reauest to Consider Allowing Private Vendor to Sell at FZ-9—nd Lake Qark on the 4th of July K . TECHNOLOGY P ARK PHASE IV by Technology Park Associates . 2nd Reading of Ordinance No . 19-88-PUD-3-88, Planned Unit Development District Review, with waiver, and Zoning District Change from Rural to PUD-3-88-I -2 on 13 acres; Approval of Developer 's Agreement for Technology Park Phase IV; and Adoption of Resolution No . 88-101, Authorizing Summary of Ordinance No. 19-88-PUD-3-88 and Ordering Publication of Said Summary. 13 acres into one lot and two outlots for construction of 162, 860 square feet of industrial use in two buildings . Location: West of Golden Triangle Drive, north of Nine Mile Creek, east of Smetana Lane . (Ordinance No . 19-88-PUD-3-88, Rezoning; Resoluticn No . 88-101, Authorizing Summary & Publication) L . BLOSSOM RIDGE, 2ND ADDITION by G. William Pearson. 2nd Reading of Ordinance No. 20-88, Zoning District Change from R1-22 to R1-13 . 5 on 6 . 32 acres; Approval of Developer 's Agreement for Blossom Ridge 2nd Addition; and Adoption of Resolution No . 88-106, Authorizing Summary of Ordinance No . 20-88 and Ordering Publication of Said Summary. 6 . 32 acres into 14 single family lots and road right-of-way. Location: South of Blossom Road, east of Windsor Terrace . (Ordinance No. 20-88, Rezoning; ( Resolution No . 88-106, Authorizing Summary & Publication) \. M. Wyndham Knoll Park,, Willow Park, an Eden Lake School Park N. CHESTNUT APARTMENTS , Resolution No. 88-112, Recording Conformance with and Releasing from Conditions fo Mitchell Heights Developer 's Agreement for Chestnut Apartments . 0. MESON POINT. Resolution No . 88-113, Recording Conformance with Developer 's Agreement for Wilson Point (aka Wilson Learning Center ) i i P. BARTH ADDITION by Bill Barth . Request for Preliminary Platting of 1 . 55 acres into two single family lots within the R1-22 Zoning District . Location : 16481 Hilltop Road. (Resolution No. 88-114 Preliminary Plat ) 0 . ) by John B. Bergstad . Request for Preliminary Platting of 9 . 1 acres into one lot . Location: South of Anderson Lakes Parkway, north of Hai 1. 1 Lake, west of Center play extension . (Resolution No. 88-115 Preliminary Plat ) R . CDBG DAYCARE Resolution Authorizing Hennepin County to Administer CDBG Daycare Program on Behalf of Eden Prairie (Resolution No . 88-110) C. f City Council Minutes 5 June 21, 1988 S . Fina_j v P Park Eatates tteil Point) ( located north of_rftill Lake ,Rgotltb of AndgrsQn Lakgs P w a vSojilevard (Resolution No . 88-118 ) T. ove ReimburseMent to MX . Dan Hughea. 10310of n ha Trai U. At_pDrove Acireement with MnDOT for Engineering Services for TH 5 fgom CSLkHeri E!Kairir. tg CSAH 17 In Chanhi2aseo V. Award for Re qgg Hauling Service from City Fggilities W. Cumming/Grill. Homestead MOTION: Harris moved, seconded by Pidcock to approve the Consent Calendar Jullie reported that Item Q and S should have the name changed from Neil Point to Lake Park Estates. t Peterson commended the Staff for the report and material on Item H . x Bentley questioned when the school zone posting will occur and requested an update on how the enforcement is proceeding . e Pidcock commented that summer school is in session now, so the speed limit should be in effect now. Peterson commented that the speed zone should be in effect 12 months a year, not just during the school year . Lambert reported that Item J was recommended for denial by the Parks Commission for private vendors to sell at the 4th of July Celebration even with a permit . Peterson questioned if selling would be limited to civic and City organizations . Lambert replied that the direction from the Commission was to recommend that the Council deny any permits for any private vendors . Harris questioned the rationale . Lambert stated that the rationale was that if the City were going to be promoting private booths and art and craft booths, then it should be encouraging this type of sales and not just allow anyone who came up to City hall to be issued a permit . The Commission believed this type of sales would take away from the Old Time 4th of July kids games, which are basically free . City Council Minutes 6 June 21 , 1488 Pidcock questioned why just civic organization were being promoted . Lambert replied that the profits from civic organizations comes back into the community. Bentley stated that he would like to see an increase of activity, an increase of things to do . He believed that it should be promoted and based on a planned concept . Bentley would be prepared to deny the request, with the understanding that this would be reviewed for next year ' s 4th of July or other celebrations . Lambert believed the Commission would support that; it should be promoted and everyone would have the same chance. Harris questioned if the ordinance specified special events where the City would not detract from traditional activities, but might also have the opportunity to encourage variety, which attracts more people . Harris believed the issue needed further study. Peterson commented that the City needs to be careful in the restriction cf private enterprise . Pidcock commented that this starts getting into censorship as to what companies are allowed to do good deeds for the City. The State Fair is what it is today because of the private vendors that are there . Peterson commented that Item K was before the Council for the Second Reading . Meetings have been held in an attempt to resolve the remaining concerns . This matter would not be opened up for Public Hearing; however, after Enger 's summary if Frank Smetana or Ed and Marcella Smetana wished to make a brief statement, they would be allowed to. Enger reported on two items on the Developer 's Agreement . 1 ) In the revised exhibit the central through road that accesses the Cherne property does not have an accompanying Item in the Developer 's Agreement that requires the developer to provide an easement for the said access . This was an omission . The Staff would add this and Hoyt has agreed. 2 )The two items which the Council and the Commission focused on were : whether or not Smetana Lane should continue through and what transition would occur between the industrial and residential areas to the south and west . It was decided not to continue Smetana Lame through, and that there should be a transition for the areas to the south and west. Enger reported that after working with the property owners, the following was understood : Both Ed and Marcella Smetana and Frank and Mary Smetana were concerned about the form in which the project was approved. The Smetana 's were concerned that there not be traffic from the Tech IV development through private easement and City Council Minutes 7 June 21, 1988 across the front of their property to the west on Smetana Lane . Frank Smetana was concerned about the screening from his home to Tech IV. Enger presented the solution reached to date to include a berm along the eastern end of Smetana Lane, which results In the closing of Smetana Lane to through traffic and creates the landscaping transition to Frank Smetana 's property. Enger pointed out that this is not a perfect solution in that Ed and Marcella Smetana do not have access to Smetana Lane, their only access would be through the Tech IV parking lot, which Hoyt would be granting . Ed and Marcella Smetana ' s property does not now front directly on Smetana Lane . This solution does, however, address all the concerns of the Council . Bentley asked Enger if these changes had been written and signed . Enger replied the agreement, Exhibit B, was concluded yesterday and Hoyt had signed all three copies, which are now part of the Developer ' s Agreement . Frank Smetana, stated disappointment in the results of the May 17th Council Meeting . He stated that one option that may come available to him in the future would be the combining of his property with the Cherne property. Frank Smetana supports the transition and the closing of Smetana Lane as proposed now. Spencer Klyegel, representing Ed and Marcella Smetana, stated that when they deeded the Technology Park property to Helle a portion of the property was dedicated as an easement for access to the public road, otherwise they would be land locked . Klyegel understood that there was not access being provided for these Smetana 's and Indicated that he felt the City could not properly cut Ed and Marcella Smetana off from Smetana Lane . . Peterson stated that the access would be through the parking lot south of Tech IV. Klyegel replied that now he realizes an access would be provided, but questioned why berming could not be extended to include Ed and Marcella Smetana 's property. Peterson replied that this possibly could have been done, but Ed and Marcella Smetana had not indicated a concern about sight lines and had requested access and easement through the road and parking area, which they have received . Klyegel stated that they may not have had concerns about sight lines to the industrial use, but did have a concern about rights of access to the public road . Peterson replied that they have access to the east, but not to the west, which is what they requested . Marcella Smetana stated that they had voiced concern about how far the building would be from their driveway and that City Council Minutes 8 June 21, 1988 the access would have to be through the parking lot to get to Golden Triangle . Ed and Marcella Smetana then stated that they want continued access to the public road via Smetana Lane . Klyegel questioned if the berm could be moved to accommodate the Smetana ' s request . The easement is owned by the Smetana ' s and the property could be deeded over . Peterson replied that this project had been under consideration for several weeks with negotiations continuing between the first and second reading . It would be difficult for the Council to start over again . Property owner minds have changed apparently. Klyegel stated that between readings decisions have been made about cutting off Smetana Lane . Peterson replied this was done in response to objections regularly voiced by Frank and Mary Smetana at Public Hearings . The Council does not have any recorded objections to anything from Ed and Marcella Smetana . Marcella Smetana stated that they had said they did not want Smetana Lane closed . They wanted access to Valley View Road from Smetana . Ed Smetana said that the proposed access to his property. Marcella Smetana said that the access through Tech IV was just to be an emergency exit . C Bentley commented that normally there is no discussion with the public on Consent Calendar items . Bentley asked Jullie if there was a way to accommodate both parties . Jullie replied that it would be physically possible to move the berm so that none of the traffic from Tech TV could get on to Smetana Lane and still give access to Ed Smetana . An emergency access would have to be arranged with Hoyt . Peterson requested a recess for the involved parties to meet with Staff and City Attorney Pauly, to sort out the confusion . Peterson requested an amendment to pull Item K and consider Under Item VII .C . As shown later in the minutes, this action occurred . Peterson requested further consideration of Item V. There are two recommendations : 2 ) that Council accept the low bid 2 ) that waste from City facilities be directed to the Reuter facility. Peterson wished to accept the first item, but to defer the second part until the Council finishes its deliberations relative to the direction of other waste to Reuter or elsewhere . Bentley stated that he was not in favor of this . Tastes ! from City parks now are taken there and this would only City Council Minutes 9 June 21, 1988 4 Increase the amount . This practice could always be changed in the future . Peterson believed it was premature for the Council to designate the City waste to a Facility that is under consideration and yet not decided for own solid waste program. Bentley believed that if it had not been for the necessity of Public Hearings in regard to the ordinance for licensing that the majority of the Council would have directed the City' s waste to the Reuter facility at the last meeting . Peterson stated that he would have been the dissenting vote because of unanswered questions that he believes need to be addressed before a decision is made . Harris commented that in light of the fact that a portion of the City' s waste is already being delivered to the Reuter facility, this will only be increasing that amount sent by the City to the facility Harris believed this to be the first step in beginning to separate the materials and divert them away from the landfill . MOTIQN: Bentley moved, seconded by Harris to amend the previous motion and to approve items A through I and L through W on ( the Consent Calendar . Motion carried unanimously. '1 MOTI QN: Bentley moved, seconded by Harris to deny Item J on the grounds that it will be referred to the Parks and Recreation Commission and Staff for a review and analysis of how private vendors can be brought into public events and that it is understood that the Council Is not in favor of denying private vendors from access to these events as long as it can be done in a regulated way. Motion carried unanimously. MOTION : Bentley moved, s•,�conded by Pidcock to move Item K to VII .C. Motion carried unanimously. Pidcock commented that she was glad the Senior Citizens received their piano . Harris commended Staff on their excellent handling of City resources . I V. PuBL I Q HEj%g I Ngs A. HIDDEN GLEN IV by Derrick Companies . Request for Planned Unit Development Concept Amendment on approximately 68 acres, Zoning District Amendment within an existing RM-6 . 5 J City Council Minutes 10 June 21 , 1988 Zoning District on 8 . 5 acres for the construction of 40 twinhome units . Location: South of Townline Road, west of Dell Road, east of Highway 101 . (Resolution No . 88- 116, PUD Concept Amendment to the Overall Hidden Glen North Planned Unit Development Concept; Ordinance No . 16- 88 - Zoning District Amendment within the RM-6 . 5 District; Resolution No . 88-117 - Preliminary Plat) City Manager Jullie reported that notice of the Public Hearing had been sent to owners of 58 surrounding properties and published in the June 8, 1988 issue of the Eden Prairie News . Jullie stated that Resolution No .88- 117 for approval of Preliminary Plat should be removed . Roger Purdy, representing the Derrick Company, presented the proposal . Purdy believed that this should not be referred to as Hidden Glen IV, but that it is actually part of the existing plat for Hidden Glen III . The changes to the proposal are of an architectural nature only. The partners have changed with Frontier Midwest Homes being the current partner . The main concern of the neighborhood was what type of screening would be provided . Purdy stated that there would be a mixture of 10 ' to 12' conifer trees and 4" caliper shade trees . The neighbors are requesting that the screening be started before the development starts . Purdy stated that they will do this, but because of lack of rain there may be a problem at this time of year and asked the Councils understanding . Proponent did agree with the landscaping principle . Enger reported that at the May 23, 1988 Planning T Commission recommended the approval of the Zoning k Amendment on a 5 to 1 vote subiect to the Staff Report dated May 20, 1988 . The recommendations include the following : 1 ) Modification to the landscape plan, which has been done . 2) Modification to the architectural diversity, which has also been completed . 3) A Cash Park fee . 4 ) Homeowners ' Association documents to be submitted for review by the City prior to Building Permit issuance. 5 ) Landscape screening to be installed prior to Building Permit issuance or in the case of a poor planting season the next best available time, which would be the Fall . Enger stated that this Item was not reviewed by the Parks and Recreation Board. Bentley requested clarification: the Council did not have to approve a Preliminary Plat because the Proponent is using and existing one and the proponent already has Zoning in place . The Proponent can do what they want to Without a Zoning Approval because it is already Zoned . Enger replied the zoning approvals were based on a specific plan that contained a completely different architectural and site planning approach and technically t City Council Minutes 11 June 21, 1988 that has to be changed by the Council in some way. Bentley asked Pauly if there is any action necessary by the Council other than an approval of. a Developer 's Agreement Pauly replied that the conditions and provisions of the Developer 's Agreement are part of the zoning, thus , Council action is necessary because the site plan is being changed . NOTION: Harris moved, seconded by Pidcock to close the Public Hearing and adopt Resolution No. 88-116 for PUD Concept Amendment . Motion carried unanimously. MQu ON: Harris moved, seconded by Pidcock to approve Ist Reading of Ordinance No . 16-88 for Zoning District Amendment . Motion carried unanimously. NOTIQN• Harris moved, seconded by Pidcock to direct Staff to prepare a Development Agreement incorporating Commission and Staff recommendations and Council conditions . Motion carried unanimously. B. Y-ACATIQN 88-03 - -DRAIDIAGE AND u:ri rTY EASEMENTS AMERICAN FAMILY ADDITION (Resolution No . 88-126) R Bentley moved, seconded by Pidcock to close the Public Hearing and adopt Resolution No. 88-126 to vacate the easement . Motion carried unanimously. C. - INT TY10 (Resolution No. 88--127) MOT I ON: Bentley moved, seconded by Harris to close the Public Hearing and adopt Resolution No . 88-127 . Motion carried unanimously. V. PAYMENT OF CLAIMS MOTION Harris moved, seconded by Bentley to approve Payment of Claims No . 43018 to 43122. Roll call vote with Bentley, Harris, Pidcock and Peterson voting "Aye" . vI . Qg DINANCES RESOLUTIONS x City Council Minutes 12 June 21, 1988 vII . PETITIQNS. ,REQUEST'S 6 COMMUNICATIONS A . Wooddale Church - Reauest for Release from condition of Developer 'A AggegmeLit for bus garages Jullie reported that the Wooddale Church is requesting a release from Developer 's Agreement to provide a bus garage . John Uban, representing the Wooddale Church stated that after discussing this issue with the neighbors, they came up with other solutions . The Church has the buses stored currently in a niche which can only be viewed by one neighbor . The neighbors indicated that they did not want to see a bus garage. The following suggestions were made : 1) Screen the buses and parking area. 21 Store the buses by the Junk yard . 3 ) Build the bus barn . The Church would prefer to build the living screening or wait until the parking deck is built . Peterson asked Uban if there would be more buses as the Church grows . Uban replied that if there were more buses In the future they could be parked in the deck and the Church is comfortable with three buses . The buses are only used on special occasions . Bentley stated that it was specific .at the time of the original approval that no buses were to be stored on the site until adequate facilities were provided . The buses have been stored illegally. Bentley believed that the best solution would be to have the buses stored elsewhere . The zoning district the Church is in does not permit outside storage . Uban replied that the Church is not x trying to shirk its duty. The Church is willing to B proceed along with original plan to build the bus garage as a part of Phase III, but believed after discussions with the neighbors that a better solution was possible . Bentley stated that he would not be in favor of changing the Developer 's Agreement. Pidcock would like to have seen input from the neighbors directly affected . Peterson stated that there is a principle involved . The City has an ordinance . If the on-site presence of the buses were essential he might be willing to make a change . Peterson favored screening rather than a garage . Pidcock stated that the Council has been struggling with and Ordinance with recreational vehicle outside storage. The Council has to treat everyone the same . a I V City Council Minutes 13 June 211, 1988 Bentley stated that the Council is not charged with enforcement . The Council is to respond to the request . Bentley stated that he could not go along with the Council taking direct action to change the language in the agreement, but if the Church wished on its own to provide additional screening this would be fine. Harris questioned if when the parking deck was constructed could this be in lieu of a bus barn . Bentley replied that the architectural features of the bus barn were not identified . Uban commented the deck construction was at least 10 years in the future . Bentley encouraged the Church to find an alternate location for long term storage of the buses . MT I ON Bentley moved, seconded by Harris to deny the Wooddale Church request . Motion carried unanimously. B. Earl I0..gram Sagadi0q ParMit_R.eagg`t Jullie reported that Staff had recommended that because of the dramatic change in the shoreline along the 'Weston Bay shoreline that it would be appropriate to delete the scenic easement and have the area conform with the rest of the lakeshore . The change in the water level had a dramatic effect, which killed all the trees . The area need to be cleaned up. The property owners on the lake have a reasonable regard for the scenic beauty of the area, Jullie believed that it was not reasonable to leave the area as it is . Jullie recommended removing the scenic easement and relying on the good intentions and reasonableness of the property owners to deal with the area . Pidcock asked Pauly to give a definition of a scenic easement . Pauly replied that it is a conversation easement by statue. rt prohibits the destruction of natural vegetation, the planting of vegetation not natural to the area and grading and/or removal or filling of earth . Pidcock asked if the easement had anything to do with public access. Pauly answered it did not. Harris questioned what procedures the City had in place to protect the shoreline and what is the public access to this lake . Pauly replied that the legal procedures other than the scenic easement would be the zoning regulations, which included the shoreland development portion, which precludes building within 100-150 feet of the shoreline . Lambert replied that there is not a public access to the lake at this time; there is an access planned with the development of Miller Park . Pidcock commented that there City Council Minutes 14 June 21, 1988 is a homeowners access at this time . Lambert commented that two accesses for the homeowners are present . Bentley questioned if this had been reviewed by the Park and Recreation Commission of the Planning Commission . Lambert replied no. Bentley commented that this is a significant public policy issue, not something to be taken Tightly. There are several areas throughout the City which have scenic easements . Scenic easements are hard enough to enforce . Bentley believed the Council should not take action, but refer this back to the Park and Recreation Commission and the Planning Commission for review . Peterson stated that the request was for a grading perm>t and questioner' what the immediate effect would be if there was no action taken tonight. Jullie replied that the property owners have started the clean up and would like to be able to continue and to plant grass . Jullie suggested the Council direct staff to work with the property owners in the interim. MOTI©N Bentley moved, seconded by Harris to refer the scenic easement matter and potential vacation thereof to Staff for the purpose of review by the Planning Commission and the Parks,Recreation, and Natural Resources Commission and, further, to direct Staff to work with the property owners to get the necessary grading and planting done to finish ongoing restoration work . Motion carried unanimously. C. Technology Park IV. Pauly reported that the present position of Ed and Marcella Smetana was the objection to the blocking of access to Smetana Lane on the Hoyt/Frank Smetana property line of Smetana Lane . Ed and Marcella Smetana are willing to permit the extension of the berm to the front of their property, which would preclude them from using the Tech IV parking lot as an alternate access . Frank Smetana 's understanding of the agreement would then be modified, because an ultimate vacation of Smetana Lane may not occur with this revision. Klyegel stated that Ed and Marcella Smetana were in agreement with the addition of the proposal by Hoyt to flatten the curb so that in the event of an emergency Ed and Marcella could use the parking lot . Hoyt stated that he is agreeable . Peterson stated then that the berm is not for screening, but to stop traffic. City Council Minutes 15 June 21, 1988 Harris questioned if Frank Smetana 's was comfortable with _ the new agreement . Frank Smetana replied that was disappointed and now just wanted to sell his property. Bentley stated that he did not want to see Smetana Lane accessible to thru traffic. The road would still be accessible with the curb cut and just having the road planted in grass . Hoyt stated that there would be a post and a locking chain across the road . MOTION Bentley moved, seconded by Pidcock to approve the 2nd Reading of Ordinance No . 19-88-PUD-3-88 . Motion carried unanimously. NOTION Bentley moved, seconded by Pidcock to approve the Zoning District change from Rural to PUD-3-88-I-2 . Motion carried unanimously. MOTION : Bentley moved, seconded by Harris to approve the Developer ' s Agreement for Technology Park Phase IV per the final negotiated settlement . Motion carried unanimously. MOTION Bentley moved, seconded by Harris to adopt Resolution No. 88-101 . Motion carried unanimously. VI I I . REPom OF Amon cOMMj$si 1s IX . APPOINTMENTS Peterson reported that he had been asked by Frank Gibbs to serve on a County Recycling Committee . MOTION• Harris moved, seconded by Pidcock to approve Mayor Peterson to serve on the Recycling Committee . Motion carried unanimously. x. A. Reports of Council Mem ers Harris noted that Council had received two communications and asked what responses were taking place . vantage Companies had sent a letter stating its opposition to tax r r City Council Minutes 16 June 21, 1988 Increment financing in the proposed downtown area . Bentley said he had sent a letter back to Vantage explaining the City's position . The second communication came from representatives of the Flagships Athletic Club regarding water storage and flood elevations in the Purgatory Creek Recreation Area floodplain . Lambert said these issues would be scheduled for the July 5th Council Meeting. Peterson asked to have Staff prepared to discuss water ban and how to receive uniform compliance at the next Council Meeting. Pidcock reported that she had attended two meeting of the . Regional Transit Board Chairman ' s Advisory Board. She talked at these meeting about the plight of the Southwest Metro Transit system. Peterson requested the Council consider the feasibility of the creation of an additional advisory board or commission to serve the Council for the solid waste management . Peterson believed that the management of solid waste would be an on going issue and that the Council would be well served by residents input, research, recommendations, etc. Pidcock questioned what the group 's function would actually be . Peterson replied they could help in the determination of community values relative to recycling, help disseminate information related to actions of this and future Councils relating to recycling, assist the Council to host neighborhood meetings, help publicize the course of action the Council was taking, review policy and process of a number of garbage issues . Peterson was suggesting a group of six to nine people . Bentley agreed in theory, but suggested not limiting it to solid waste and suggested the name of Waste Management Advisory Commission. MOTION : Bentley moved, seconded by Harris to direct Staff to draft an ordinance that would create a Waste Management Advisory Commission and make suggestions as to what the specific duties would be . B. ge2ort of City Manager 1 . Inspections Jullie requested Council support for Staff reorganization. Jullie believed it would be best to streamline and lessen the duties of the Volunteer Chief . Jullie also presented plans to move the Fire Marshal and the Fire Inspector to City Council Minutes 17 June 21, 1988 City Hall under the responsibility of the Director of Building Inspections, thus allowing for better interaction for issuing of permits . Jullie also suggested to consolidate the building maintenance functions and have custodial workers housed at City Hall and supervised by this director . Peterson commented that it all made sense with the exception of having the maintenance under this director . Peterson questioned what would the cost implication might be to have in-house rather than by private contract . Jullie replied that more detail could be provided, and this would not be implemented until 1989 . Currently, staff is familiar with building repairs and could direct workers as to the building repairs and keeping up with safety codes . There would be direct supervision . h9ZLOWUL Bentley moved, seconded by Harris to approve the recommendations as prepared by Jullie . Peterson stated that he would support the motion, but would still like to see the cost figures. Dawson stated that the maintenance just for City Hall is approximately $15, 000 per year . Motion carried unanimously. Bentley complimented Mr . Jullie on this project and on his preparation, organization and details . 2 . lgdate on City Manager Perfgrmal2ce Revigy Process Harris commented that the material presented would be a good management tool . Peterson asked if the department heads reviewed the document . Peterson suggested that it would be a good idea to get the department heads input . Jullie replied that some input had been received . Pidcock commented that this had come from private industries and it has been tested and proven . Bentley suggested attaching a sheet requesting the Staff to evaluate the evaluation form. 3 . Strategic Planning . Jullie stated that Strategic Planning is an ongoing process and this item we.- to be reviewed in six months and City Council Minutes 18 June 21, 1988 It is time to review our departmental goal statements and get a status report and review our mission statement . Peterson asked to have Staff send out a form with options for times when this could be scheduled. C. Report of City Attorney Pauly reported that the Court of Appeals issued the order to deny the City's scope of the contested case hearing. The City can appeal that order . The City has not waived any right to have the issue reviewed . A calendar of events had been set . July 10th has been set for anyone who wishes to intervene must file . November 21st has been set for the hearing. Bentley asked if this item follows a probable court process what time frame could the City expect . When would a possible ruling be coming . Pauly replied possibly March or April . D. Report of Director of Planning. No Report E. Report of Director of Co munitX Services r No Report F. Rj2ort of Digectg3 .pf Public Works ' No Report G. Deport of Finance Director No Report . g XI . NEW BUSINESS XII . Al2JOURNMRNI MOTION: Harris moved, Pidcock seconded to adjourn the meeting at 10 : 05PM. Motion carried unanimously. I