Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCity Council - 08/21/1990 EDEN PRAIRIE CITY COUNCIL APPROVED MINUTES TUESDAY, AUGUST 21, 1990 7:30 PM, CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS, 7600 Executive Drive COUNCILMEMBERS: Mayor Gary Peterson, Richard Anderson, Jean Harris, Patricia Pidcock and Douglas Tenpas CITY COUNCIL STAFF: City Manager, Carl J. Jullie, Assistant to the City Manager Craig Dawson, City Attorney Roger Pauly, Finance Director John D. Frane, Senior Planner Mike Franzen, Director of Parks, Recreation & Natural Resources Robert Lambert, Director of Public Works Gene Dietz, City Engineer Alan Gray, and Recording Secretary Roberta Wick PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE ROLL CALL Present: Gary Peterson, Richard Anderson, Jean Harris, Douglas Tenpas. Absent: Patricia Pidcock I. APPROVAL OF AGENDA AND OTHER ITEMS OF BUSINESS MOTION �. Anderson moved, seconded by Tenpas, to approve the agenda. Jullie requested the addition of Item R to the Consent Calendar, the Second Reading for the Farber Addition and Developer's agreement. Jullie also requested the Council consider moving Item O, the Ordinance relating to Development Moratorium by the Landfill, to Ordinances and Resolutions, Item VI.C. Under Petitions, Requests and Communications, add Item VII.C. Petition Opposing Bike Trail to Prairie View Elementary School. Under Item E, Report of Director of Parks, Recreation, and Natural Resources, Add Item 5, Clean Water Partnership Grant Application for Bryant Lake. Under Item X.A., Reports of Council Members, Harris requested: (1) Update on the status of the MCA traffic study; (2) an update on what was happening with the Reuter Recycling facility. Anderson requested Item X.A.3, Crosswalks. Motion to approve the agenda as amended carried 4-0. II. MINUTES A. Joint City Council/Historical & Cultural Commission meeting held November 14, 1989 City Council Minutes 2 August 21, 1990 MOTION Anderson moved, seconded by Tenpas, to approve the minutes of the Joint City Council/Historical & Cultural Commission meeting held November 14, 1989. Harris asked Jullie what had happened with the local government certification authorized by the Council. Jullie said it was still in process. Motion approved .1-0. B. Special City Council Meeting held November 14, 1989 Tenpas moved, seconded by Harris to approve minutes of November 14. Minutes approved as prepared 4-0. III. CONSENT CALENDAR A. Clerk's License List B. INTERNATIONAL SCHOOL. PHASE II by International School of Minnesota Inc. 2nd Reading of Ordinance No. 4-90, Zoning District { Amendment within the Public District; Approval of Supplement to Developer's Agreement for International School; Adoption of Resolution No. 90-205, Authorizing Summary of Ordinance No. 4-90 and Ordering Publication of Said Summary; and Adoption of Resolution No. 90-211, Site Plan Approval (Ordinance No. 4-90 - Zoning District Amendment; Resolution No. 90-205 - Authorizing Summary and Publication; Resolution No. 90-211 - Site Plan Approval) ( C. Resolution with State of Minnesota for Bicycle Trail Easements (Resolution No. 90-190) D. Commendation Congratulating Girls 16 and Under Fast Pitch Softball Team F. Authorize Acquisition of Utility and/or Street Easements for Properties Along Summit Drive. I.C. 52-166 (Resolution No. 90-215) F. Authorize Acquisition of Easements for Construction of Mitchell Road, LC. 52-156 (Resolution No. 90-123) G. Authorize Acquisition of Utility and _Drainage Easements Over Property at 11500 W. 78th Street (Resolution No. 90-214) H. Resolution Declaring Costs to be Assessed and Ordering Preparation of Proposed 1990 Special Assessment Rolls and Setting Hearing Date (Resolution No. 90-212) City Council Minutes 3 August 21, 1990. I. approve C1nange Order No. 1 for Bluff Road, I.C. 52-144 J. Approve Change Order No. 1 for Cedar Ridge Storm Sewer, I.C. 52-152 K. Approve Change Order No. 1 for Country Glen. I.C. 52-171 L. Receive Petition and Order Feasibility Study for Local Improvements for Cedar Ridge Road and Corral Lane, I C 52-212 (Resolution No. 90-208) M. GUILLE ADDITION by David & Linda Guille. 2nd Reading of Ordinance No. 24-89, Rezoning from Rural to RI-13.5 on 1.47 acres; Approval of Developer's. Agreement for Guille Addition; and Adoption of Resolution No. 90-191, Authorizing Summary of Ordinance No. 24-89 and Ordering Publication caf Said Summary. (Ordinance No 24-89 - Rezoning; Resolution No. 90-191 - Authorizing Summary and Publication) N. Approve Fignal Plat for Guille Addition Located at the Southeast Corner of Twin Lakes Crossing a;ad Starrwood Circle (Resolution No. 90-209) O. (See Item VIX). P. Resolution No. 90-216 Proclaiming September 9-16, 1990 as "Senior Awareness Ueek" Q. Approve Plaits and Specifications for I.C. 52-197 Deleaard Properties Sanitary Seger and I.C. 5 -198 Loscheider Property Sanitary Sewer (Resolution Yo. 90-204) R. Second Reading of Ordinance *2-90, Rezoning from Rural to R1-22; Approval of Developer's Agreement four Farber Addition (Resolution No. 90-217) MOTION Tenpas moved, seconded by Anderson, to approve the Consent Calendar as modified. Approved 4-0. IV. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. VILLAGE KN06LS by Argue Development. Request for Planned Unit Development Concept Review on 42.7 acres, planned Unit Development District Review with waivers on 8.7 acres, Zoning District Amendment within the RI-13.5 District on 8.7 acres, Preliminary Plat of 42.7 acres into 23 single family lots, 2 outlots and road right-of-way for a I City Council Minutes 4 August 21, 1990 I residential development. Location: East of Homeward Hills Road at Silverwood Drive. (Resolution No. 90-166 - PUD Concept; Ordinance No. 21-90-PUD-9-90 - PUD District and Rezoning; Resolution No. 90-167 - Preliminary Plat) (Continued from July 17, 1990) Peterson said there had been a request for this item to be continued to September 18, and asked why this matter should be continued. Jullie said the proponent wanted to be properly positioned to explore any other options that were available. Anderson asked why this could not be delayed until the MPCA Board makes Council a judgment on the landfill. Pauly said that with regard to the plat, Council had to take action within 120 days or it would be deemed to have been approved, so it was not possible to continue something indefinitely without the approval of the applicant. Pauly also said that he understood that the proponent was considering the possibility of withdrawing the proposal. Harris said she understood that the proponent was continuing to a date certain when the Council might impose a moratorium, and that she would vote for that later in the meeting. Tenpas said that the Council would not have to make a decision on a moratorium if there was no proposal before it. Peterson said with respect to this Item A, it would be inappropriate for Council to deny the request. The only alternative was to continue to September 18. MOTION Tenpas moved, seconded by Anderson, to continue this item to September 18, 1990. Motion approved 4-0. B. CEDAR RIDGE ?ND ADDITION by Westar Properties, Inc. Request for Zoning District Change from Rural to R1-13.5 on 23.37 acres with variances to be reviewed by Board of Appeals, and Preliminary Plat of 23.37 acres into 54 single family lots and road right-of-way. Location: North of Country Road 1, west of Cedar Ridge Estates at Rogers Road (Ordinance No. 28-90 - Rezoning; Resolution No. 90-210 - Preliminary Plat) Jullie said notice for this public hearing was sent to owners of 25 properties in the project area and published in the August 10, 1990 issue of the Eden Prairie News. Bob Smith, representing Westar Properties, Inc. explained thew details of the project. There were 54 lots requesting a Zoning District Change from Rural to R1-13.5. Franzen reported that the Planning Commission had recommended approval of the project. The proponent had revised plans in accordance with the Commission's recommendations. City Council Minutes 5 August 21, 1990 Lambert said this was reviewed by the Park, Recreation and Natural Resources Commission at its August 20 meeting and unanimously recommended approval. Peterson asked what provision was made the continued maintenance of both berms and plantings. Smith said this would be the responsibility of the individual homeowners. Peterson asked about the proximity of the homes to the north and the ball field and if this would be a problem. Lamber' said that it was used for T-ball only and so there would be no problem with balls going out of the park. Anderson questioned why there was no direct access from the development to the school grounds. Smith replied that the school was accessible from the first addition. The school district did not want access in the new area was because young children would be using the playground, and to have a gate or access there would leave the potential of children getting out of the school area where they would not be supervised. Smith explained that there would be an eight-foot bituminous trail along Pioneer Trail plus several sidewalks. The school wanted to maintain and control the access points. Lambert pointed out that in all other City schools, parks were used as playgrotinds. This one was different in that the school owned the property used for the play area. Tenpas and Anderson said that they would like to receive some indication from the School Board on the availability to use the playground facilities when school was not in session. There were no further comments from the audience. MOTION Anderson moved that the public hearing be closed and the first reading of Ordinance 20-90 for Rezoning. Seconded by Harris. Motion approved 4-0. MOTION Anderson moved that Resolution No. 90-10 approving the preliminary plat and directed staff to prepare a Developer's Agreement incorporating Commission and Staff recommendations, and that the agreement be sent to the School Board for its comment and recommendation on trail access to the property. Seconded by Harris. Motion approved 4-0. City Council Minutes 6 August 21, 1990 MOTION Anderson moved that the request for issuance of an early grading permit be granted the proviso that all risks and responsibility go to the developer. Seconded by Harris. Motion approved 4-0. V. PAYMENT OF CLAIMS Anderson moved the payment of claims, seconded by Harris. Anderson requested clarification of payments to a medical foundation shown on Page 1998A. Jullie replied that it was payment to one of the experts in the contested case regarding the landfill expansion. Roll Call vote: Tenpas, Harris, Anderson, Peterson all voting "AYE". Motion carried 4-0. VI. ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS A. BORUChI ADDITION by Jim Borucki. Request for Preliminary Plat of 0.62 acres into 2 single family lots within the r1-13.5 Zoning District with variances to be reviewed by the Board of Appeals. Location: 6:517 Rowland Road. (Resolution No, 90-200 - Preliminary Plat) (Continued from August 7, 1990) Jullie said consideration of this request for Preliminary Plat was continued from August 7, 1990. At that time the Council had asked Staff to do some research to determine if the Borucki parcel had ever been depicted as two lots during the planning process. The site was not shown in official documents as being proposed for two lots. In the preliminary plat the lot was shown to be planned at 20,400 square feet, but when the final location of Fallbrook Road was determined with the final plat, the property increased in size to 27,000 square feet, a change from the preliminary plat. Frank Cardarelle, representing Mr. Borucki, said that Rowland Road had deterred consideration of two lots because of poor sight distances. The proponent realized Rowland Road must be upgraded. The feasibility study was not ready and therefore the proponent needed to ask for a 30-day delay until the driveways could be designed. He discussed their plans for the design of the driveways, the berms, and the plantings. Peterson said that his initial reservation about support of this request was that the division of this particular lot into two lots was a violation of the expectation of the adjoining property owners. Inasmuch as it was never proposed as two lots, he found the statements provided by staff compelling: that the lot size was inconsistent with lot sizes in the immediate area; density would be 3.2 lots per acre when ordinance allowed only 2.5; access was a problem; and the timing was premature. City Council Minutes 7 August 21, 1990 i enpas agreed and said he would vote against it. Peterson said that the fact that this was an existing, developed neighborhood and a proposed division of a lot was inconsistent with the remainder was a point to be considered. Anderson agreed with Peterson and Tenpas and said he would vote against it. MOTION Tenpas moved, seconded by Harris, to deny the request for Preliminary Plat of .62 acres into 2 single family lots within the R1- 13.5 Zoning District. (Resolution No. 90-200). Motion approved 4-0. B. Summary of Findings on the Proposed Flying Cloud Airport Noise Abatement Plan (Resolution No. 90-171) (Continued from July 17, 1990) Jullie said this item was considered by the Council on July 10, 1990, and was continued in order to add language regarding noise / abatement. The Flying Cloud Airport Advisory Commission discussed 4 the noise abatement plan earlier in the summer and it believed that the plan proposed by the MAC represented a good beginning but that further improvements could be made. Jullie said that Jay Olson, President of the Airport Business Association, and the MAC wished to address the Council about this resolution. Crary Schmidt, Manager of Reliever Airports of the Metropolitan Airports Commission spoke regarding noise abatement plan at Flying Cloud Airport. He addressed the Commission's objections to the proposed resolution: (1) The noise abatement elan relied completely on voluntary compliance with no mandatory controls. In regard to the airspace around Flying Cloud Airport, federal legislation existed which pre- empted the MAC from adopting certain mandatory noise abatement procedures or assuming jurisdiction over the airspace. The Commission expected both local and transient pilots to comply voluntarily with the noise abatement policy. (2) No noise monitoring system was proposed. In development of the master plan, the noise issue was reviewed and the impact of unconstrained forecasted traffic the Ldn standard used by FAA, HUD, and the Department of Transportation was used. The findings were that the noise levels were within Accepted federal standards and should not have a- serious impact on the surrounding community. To City Council Nlintztes 8 :august 21, 1990 call for a perm;.-inent monitoring system at this airport was unwarranted and unreasonable. (3) No specific procedure to disseminate the noise abatement plan to transient and local pilots. Pilots flying into an unfamiliar airport would most likely contact the airport facility directory as published by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Association or similar publications. The directory listed pertinent information for the pilots. It was the intention to publish the noise abatement procedures for the Flying Cloud Airport with a number to call for additional information. The control tower would use the noise abatement procedures whenever traffic permits. Approximately 90% of traffic was forecasted to occur during the hours of tower operation. (4) Preferred runway for jet aircraft would create increased noise on the east side of the airport where housing density was high. The noise abatement plan would have the opposite effect. All turbine traffic would be restricted to Runway 9 Right 27 Left with the preferred runway being 9 Right. This way they would fly over the sparsely-populated river basin. (5) Preferred runway for jet aircraft of 9 Right for departing and arriving flights may create an increase for potential for bird strikes over the Flying Cloud Landfill. Turbine aircraft were currently using Runway 9 Right 27 Left for arrivals and departures. Mitigating measures taken by landfill operators had proven effective and there had been no problem with bird strikes. (6) Wider Traffic Patterns. These would be restricted to the south side of the airport where noise impact would be minimal. Schmidt requested that the Council not approve the proposed resolution but approve the noise abatement Flan and further to direct City staff to continue working with the Metropolitan Airports Commission to make the airport's safety procedures as environmentally compatible as possible. Jay Olson with Thunderbird Aviation spoke and expressed his surprise in the City's change in attitude from last year. He believed the MAC's noise abatement plan was workable and from the operator's standpoint he believed the MAC plan was a good one. He emphasized that the operators want to maintain a good neighbor policy and a good working relationship, and requested Council to reconsider the Resolution. The next speaker was Alan Lindquist of the Federal Aviation .Administration and the tower manager at Flying Cloud Airport. Speaking as a person with 24 years of experience as an air traffic controller, he pointed out that the noise abatement plan at Minneapolis International Airport relied on voluntary compliance and many airports in the United States operated in that manner. He 1 �x City Council Minutes 9 August 21, 1990 spoke regarding Item 3 and said that pilots called the airport directly and asked what the noise abatement policy was at the airport. He said pilots took the regulations very seriously and complied with them. On Item 4, having the 9 Right preferred runway for departures and arrivals increasing noise east of the airport, he said there was enough space to the east of the airport over the landfill so the aircraft could turn south and climb over the sparsely-populated river area. On Item 5, objection on bird strikes, he said he had been at Flying Cloud Airport for three years, and he said the birds flying over the landfill were not waterfowl but just general bird populations. Anderson said the one incident with pilots at Flying Cloud this year and the case against Northwest Airlines pilots showed that rules and regulations were needed. He said that he realized the overcrowding at the International Airport and the need for expanded facilities, but also felt a responsibility to the citizens of Eden Prairie to provide a comfortable place to live. He said that certain jets make too much noise. Tenpas asked what was the norm on a national basis for an airport the size of Flying Cloud. Schmidt replied that Flying Cloud was a. basically utility airport which meant that it served some business needs, but the majority of the traffic had to do with pleasure flying or instruction. Most noise abatement plans were for transport category airplanes meaning commercial traffic. These airports were also under the same regulations that they cannot adopt rules and regulations for the airspace around the airport. That jurisdiction was with the FAA. The City did not have jurisdiction over the airspace. Peterson said he would not vote for a resolution that had unenforceable and improper conditions. But on the other hand, when appropriate the City should have as much guarantee as possible and legal. He suggested that this be referred back to staff and Flying Cloud Airport Advisory Commission and that Anderson represent the Council in the review. Tenpas asked for recommendations from the City Attorney as to what were the limits to provide more guidance to the Council on this resolution. MOTI N Tenpas moved, seconded by Harris, that this matter be referred back to Staff and the Flying Cloud Airport Advisory Commission, and that ,%nderson be invited to participate. Motion approved 3-1, with Anderson voting Nay. { City Council Minutes 10 August 21, 1990 ` C. 1st Reading of Ordinance No. 31-90, Declaring Moratorium on Development by the Landfill Judie said this was the item to declaring moratorium on development near the landfill, and asked the City Attorney to update the Council on the background of the issue. Pauly asked Franzen to show the areas that would be affected. Franzen explained there were only a few plots which were actually yet able to be developed. The larger piece of property that could be impacted by the moratorium was the Laseski property. Pauly said that the Council had been provided with testimony of Dr. Clyde Hertzman and Dr. Vincent Garry previously, there was also a memorandum by Franzen which summarized the testimony of Dr. Hertzman. Essentially the testimony was that Dr. Hertzman conducted a test of the Upper Ottawa Street Landfill in Canada and the test related to the effects of the landfill upon workers and surrounding residents. Dr. Hertzman had been retained by the City in connection with the Flying Cloud Landfill contested case hearing and he had likened some of the pollution of the air and soil with gasses and other emissions to the conditions found in the Canadian study. That study tested for a number of conditions including mood conditions, respiratory conditions and others described in the summary, and found that there was a higher incidence of symptoms and conditions found among residents in that study area, which was about 700 meters from the landfill, when compared to the general population. Dr. Hertzman had recommended that if the Flying Cloud Landfill were reopened it would be prudent to conduct additional studies to determine the potential for airborne pollutants to reach the areas near the landfill. Dr. Hertzman's conclusion was that while his study did not extend beyond 700 meters that some further exclusion of development might be appropriate. Hertzman also recommended that a 2700-foot boundary might be prudent for a moratorium. Pauly stated that the Council had before it a letter from Dr. Clyde Hertzman dated August 17, 1990 which was a portion of the record for this matter. Anderson asked Pauly if he thought the Council had the legal right and would it be prudent to pass a moratorium on development in this area until the situation with the landfill had been decided. Pauly said that the State Planning Act specifically provided that if the study of an area had been ordered for purposes of determining revisions to the City's guide plan, zoning, and/or subdivision ordinances, that a moratorium might be authorized and might be adopted by the City for a period of 12 months and from time to time, additional time not to exceed 18 months. In the light of the questions which had been posed by experts in the hearing, he believed it would be appropriate and prudent to do so. Peterson asked why the Council was considering a moratorium at this point when it was not known whether or not the landfill would City Council Minutes 11 August 21, 1990 :. And bre..___ .]____t_per 'fit. L�V�1C 11• !'LilllCt LlVtl aCilll Lt. W Ci0 UCl.c11.15C Ct developer CLV JCL C..c1lllC w 1Ltt cal proposal for development and the Council needed to decide whether or not to allow it. Harris said she favored a moratorium until some other questions, such as those relating to the migration of methane gas, have been addressed. Tenpas said he favored a moratorium with a time limit on it. Pauly said the ordinance provided for a 12-month moratorium with the possibility of extending it another 18 months if the Council chose to do so. The Council could also rescind the moratorium if it were to be decided that action would be appropriate. MOTION Harris moved the first reading of Ordinance No. 31-90, Declaring a Moratorium on Development by the Landfill. Seconded by Tenpas. Motion approved 4-0. VII. PETITIONS. REQUESTS & COMMUNICATIONS A. Resident Request Reizarding Sidewalk Facilities on Summit Drive, 4 Nleadowvale Drive and Red Oak Drive.. T.C. 52-166 Jullie said in. March of this year the Council held a public hearing for utility and street improvements in this area. At that time there were differing opinions as to whether or not sidewalks should be included in the project area. Since that time staff had surveyed the owners of property in the area, and Jullie asked Dietz to summarize the findings of the surrey. Dietz said that the survey showed 29 responses representing 38 lots. Generally the vote was 23 to 15 with 18 homeowners not responding. Jerry LaBarre, 8761 Meadowvale Drive, read the letter which he had sent to the Council which stated there were many people that were not in agreement with the need for sidewalks in the neighborhood. The letter also said that if the City- were to install sidewalks, the City should accept the responsibility for maintenance. Claude Johnson, 87.10 Red Oak Drive, said that the neighborhood had trouble getting the survey done by the City, and after the survey was done, he had to make several phone calls to receive the results. He suggested that in some cases developers received concessions about when and where sidewalks were built that were not available to established homeowners. He said that he opposed the sidewalks with the additional liabilities and maintenance imposed on homeowners and urged the Council to vote against it. City Council Minutes 12 August 21, 1990 Steve Richards, 8621 Red Oak Drive, spoke in favor of the sidewalks for safety reasons. John Hoffer, 8711 Meadowvale Drive, spoke in favor of the sidewalks for safety reasons. Marvin Bernstrum, 8611 Red Oak Drive, spoke in opposition to the sidewalks, but said that if the sidewalks were installed, they should be maintained by the City. Linda Hoffer, 8711 Nieadowvale Drive, spoke in favor of the sidewalks for safety reasons. Fred Purcell, 8610 Red Oak Drive, said that he does not want a sidewalk to shovel and would rather go without it. Peterson asked Lambert for a review the City policy on sidewalk maintenance. Lambert said mowing on both sides of the sidewalk was the homeowner's responsibility. There was no City ordinance requiring anyone to remove snow from a sidewalk. The City plows sidewalks and bike trails on a priority basis, the first priority being sidewalks and bake trails used by children to go to school. Second were the bike trails where people walk in the winter. Third were sidewalks where neighborhoods had requested that the City plow. Whether or not the third priority would get done would depend upon the amount and frequency of snowfall during the winter. Dietz said he believed that at the March 13 meeting the Council had approved sidewalks in all locations proposed and the only thing that needed to be decided was which sides of streets, primarily on Summit Drive, the sidewalk would be placed. It was not until Mr. LaBarre called that he had realized that the Council had not fully approved the sidewalks. When he reviewed the minutes, he had found that Peterson had suggested a survey be made but it was not part of the motion. After that, a survey was made. Anderson asked how this neighborhood fit in to the City guidelines for sidewalks and trails. Dietz said in March the trail connection was strongly recommended. On Red Oak Drive and Summit Drive, it wouldn't necessarily be required in the new subdivision areas. It came up for discussion because of the petition from the neighborhood. Peterson said that because most of the residents in the area wanted sidewalks, Council should reaffirm the decision made in March. CAA Council Minutes 13 August 21, 1990 MOTION Anderson moved that the Council reaffirm the decision made last spring with the exception of the cul-de-sac on Summit Drive east of Red Oak Drive. Seconded by Harris. Motion approved 4-0. B. 1989 Audit Report Mr. John Brand from Fox, McCue and Company, spoke regarding the Audit Report. The Company had completed the audit of the City's 1989 financial statements. He referred to the reports issued to the Council and the 7-page letter to clarify the report. Things were generally in good order but several comments were made on the City's internal control structure and he referred to Pages 4-7 of the report regarding deficiencies in the City's budgeting, purchasing property and equipment, and some Capital projects recording. They found no material weaknesses in the City's internal control structure. There were a couple legal compliance exceptions. Tenpas if there was anything in the compliance report that was recurring. Brand referred to Page 5 of the report where these were listed. The findings that have been continued in the internal control structure dealt with property and equipment, accountability, budgeting, and purchasing. The only new condition developed this year had to do with capital project reporting. Jullie commented that he and Frane had met with Brand on the report. There were certain on-going projects that put a burden on the staff, and the 1991 budget request reflected a request for additional help in this department. z C. Petition Opposing Bike Trail to Prairie View Elementary School z Lambert said a petition had been received from nine property owners who live in the area adjacent to Prairie View School, the Sterling Fields neighborhood. In the early 1980's, a one-rod-wide cartway was received as a gift from the Eden Prairie Foundation and dedicated to the City for trail purposes. In the 1989 referendum it was proposed to build the trail and positive comments had been received from the neighborhood during that time. The reason the petition now opposing it was done was that the City had sent a letter on August 7, 1990 to notify people that construction on the trail would begin; several residents were surprised that the Council had approved money in the 1990 budget for construction of that section of trail. The entire neighborhood had not been notified of this Council Item, only those people who signed the petition opposing the trail. The reason it had been put on the agenda was that construction was about to begin and Council direction was needed as to whether or not to continue. City" Council Minutes 1.1 August 21, 1990 2 ttnA Fi447 R�v.i Avenue, Lam. a:.. a ♦L a--_ •t rr• o.....7i ... v ..,, wYv.�a- ais Vl+i.+V.�71L1V1► LV b11C L1 Ctil• it i:a concern was about trail maintenance and he did not see the need for the trail. Roland Rasmussen spoke in opposition to the trail because there was a sidewalk on the north side of the Boyd Avenue. Access to the school could be from Boyd Avenue or Barberry Avenue, neither of which were heavily travelled. He believed the trail to be a waste of City money and an invasion of privacy. He also was concerned that the trail would not be maintained. Anderson asked what plowing priority this trail would have. Lambert said that it would be one of the first priority trails if people used it to get to the schools. If the Council determined that Boyd Avenue was safe for walking, then this trail would be a waste of taxpayer dollars. Lambert said he believed most of the people asking when the trail would be put in lived north of Duck Lake Trail. The other option would be to put a sidewalk in front of the homes on Barberry, but because this cartway was donated for this purpose, it made sense to put it on City property. Anderson asked if it was safe to walk from Boyd Avenue to the school. Lambert said if Boyd Avenue were constructed today a sidewalk would be put on one side because it was a through street. +( Joy Vivian lived on the corner of Duck Lake Trail and Boyd and said that the children used the bus to get to school and did not cross that street. Harris asked Lambert if the area around the school would be used as a recreational area during the summer. Lambert said that it would be used as a park in the summer for summer programs. i Tenpas asked Lambert if some of the issues should be studied further or if he was comfortable with putting the trail in how. Lambert said that he recommended the trail be constructed for a safe connection to the school and to eliminate the need for children to walk in the street. MOTION Harris Moved, seconded by Peterson, to construct the bike trail leading to Prairie View Elementary School. Motion approved 4-0. VIII. REPORTS OF ADVISORY COMMISSIONS Ili. APPOINTMENTS w City- Council Minutes 15 August 21, 1990 3 X. REPORTS OF OFFICFRS. BOARDS &_COMMISSIONS A. Reports of Councilmembers 1. Update on status of MCA Traffic Study Harris asked about the status of this study. Jullie replied that the City was trying to satisfy the concerns of the property owners and the consultant had been directed to male some final changes. The property owners have been informed what these would be. 2. Update on situation at Reuter Recycling Center Harris said she wondered whether the PCA's new permit conditions would have any impact on this plant and what problems the City was having with the facility. Jullie said the City was attempting to set a meeting with Jim Reuter regarding the City's concerns. Anderson said that he would favor taking all legal means necessary to relieve this problem. Peterson said that originally the doors were to be closed but now it had been said that this procedure would cause a dust problem. Jullie said the facility was designed with a system of negative air pressure, but the deodorizing system that was also supposed to be in place was not very effective. The doors had been left open because of the summer heat. MOTION Tenpas moved, seconded by Anderson, that if the meeting with Mr. Reuter did not result in a satisfactory plan to address the problems in plant operations, the Council would direct that staff take appropriate enforcement action. Motion approved 4-0. 3. Crosswalks Anderson said he would like the crosswalks marked before school starts for safety reasons. These were on city, state, and county roads. Ile encouraged the City to take appropriate action on this. B. Report of City Manager 1. Set Special 1 City Council meetings Jullie referred to Page 2051 of the packet regarding the schedule for special meetings. City COUncil Minutes 16 August 21, 1990 MOTION Tenpas moved, seconded by Harris, to approve the special meeting dates in Jullie's memo dated August 15, 1990. Motion approved 4-0. C. Report of City Attorney D. Report of Director of Planning E. Report of, Director of Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources 1. Cooperative Agreement with School District to Improve Backstops for Baseball and Soccer Fields at Round Lake SchoolPark Lambert said the City's cost on this proposal would be $8,5O0. MOTION Anderson moved, seconded by Tenpas, to enter into the Cooperative Agreement with the School District to Improve Backstops on the Baseball and Soccer Fields at Round Lake School Park. Motion approved 4-0. e, ( 2. Proposal for ConsgUant Services for Acquisition of Property and l Easements Necessary to Proceed with the First Phase of the Purgatory Creek Recreation Area 8 1 MOTION Anderson moved to accept the staff recommendations. Seconded: by Tenpas. Motion approved 4-0. 3. Review Policy on Permits for Temporary Shelters, Tents and Canopies in City Parks MOTION Harris moved, seconded by Tenpas, to accept the staff report. Motion approve 4-0. 4. Consider-Options for Tours of the Minnesota River Valley Lambert recommended a bus tour of this area and asked the Council to set a date and time to do this. He said it would take about 2-1/2 hours. A time of 4:00 on a Friday sometime in September was suggested. . i y City Council .Minutes 17 August 21. 1990 MOTION Tenpas moved, seconded by Harris, that staff make arrangements as discussed for the Council to take a tour of the River Valley. Motion approved 4-0. 5. Clean Water Partnershiu Grant Application for Bryant Lake Lambert recommended the City apply for this Partnership Grant for Bryant Lake. MOTION Harris moved, seconded by Anderson, that the Council accept the Staff recommendation on this item. Motion approved 4-0. F. Report of Finance Director G. Report of Director of Public Works 1. :sward Contract for Water Plant Instrumentation Maintenance Service, I.C. 52-210 (Resolution No. 90-206) Dietz recommended this contract be awarded to Bentec for $19,874 plus $910 for additional work. MOTION Tenpas moved adoption of Resolution No. 90-206, seconded by Harris. Motion approved 4-0. 2. Award Contract for Fire Hydrant Painting, I.C. 52-211 (Resolution No. 90-207) Dietz recommended awarding the contract to Aerial Painting for $15,988. MOTION Tenpas moved, seconded by Anderson, to adopt Resolution No. 90- 207. Motion approved 4-0. 3. Dipcussion on Undated Cost for Pedestrian Bridge at the Intersection of T.H. 5 and CSAH No. 4 Dietz said the decision to build this bridge was based on the information on the pedestrian bridge near the High School and Round Lake which cost about $160,000. The cost estimate was now up to $580,000. Dietz said he believed this to be a lot of money for a bridge that did not meet warrants for pedestrian and grade separations. Y City Council Minutes 18 August 21, 1990 Anderson said that in his opinion this bridge could riuL ue justified because there were already signals at this intersection. Tenpas suggested that the spots where such bridges might be needed in the future could be identified already. MOTION Tenpas moved, seconded by Harris, that this bridge not be built. Motion approved 4-0. XI. NEW BUSINESS XII. ADJOURNMENT MOTION Anderson motioned to adjourn at 10:45 p.m. Seconded by Tenpas. Motion r approved 4-0. ' E 4 t I