Loading...
City Council - 03/07/2002 APPROVED MINUTES EDEN PRAIRIE CITY COUNCIL THURSDAY, MARCH 7, 2002 7:00 PM, CITY CENTER Council Chamber 8080 Mitchell Road CITY COUNCIL: Mayor Nancy Tyra-Lukens, Councilmembers Sherry Butcher, Ron Case, David Luse, and Jan Mosman CITY STAFF: City Manager Carl Jullie, Parks & Recreation Services Director Bob Lambert, Public Works Services Director Eugene Dietz, Community Development and Financial Services Director Don Uram, City Planner Michael Franzen, City Attorney Ric Rosow and Council Recorder Jan Nelson Curielli I. ROLL CALL / CALL THE MEETING TO ORDER Mayor Tyra-Lukens called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. All members were present. II. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE III. COUNCIL FORUM INVITATION Mayor Tyra-Lukens said the Council Forum has been modified as follows. Council Forum will be held the first and third Tuesday of the month from 6:30 – 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chamber. Please note that this portion of the meeting is off-camera. The Council Forum will consist of two parts: scheduled and unscheduled appearances. 6:30 to 6:50 p.m. is reserved for scheduled participants. If you wish to schedule time to visit with the City Council and Service Area Directors, please notify the City Manager’s office (at 952- 949-8412) by noon of the meeting date with your request. The last 10 minutes of the Forum, from 6:50 to 7:00 p.m. is set aside for impromptu, unscheduled appearances by individuals or organizations who wish to speak the Council. Tyra-Lukens noted that the community has been in a hubbub about the visit of President Bush on Monday. Public Safety was responsible for the planning and logistics to ensure that the visit went well. She said they did an excellent job and everything went very smoothly. On behalf of the citizens of the community she wanted to give a big word of thanks to the Public Safety officers involved in the event. Mosman thought the visit last Monday was grand and impressive, and it ran like a well- oiled machine. She said Police Chief Clark told her they started planning on the Monday prior to the visit and went non-stop until the president arrived. They had help from surrounding communities and an unknown number of federal staff members. She said the local representative of the Secret Service proclaimed it a successful event and extended his compliments to Eden Prairie. CITY COUNCIL MINUTES March 7, 2002 Page 2 IV. APPROVAL OF AGENDA AND OTHER ITEMS OF BUSINESS Luse added items XIII.A.1. Transition within Management and A.2. Resident’s Letter of Concern. MOTION: Case moved, seconded by Butcher, to approve the Agenda as published and amended. Motion carried 5-0. V. MINUTES A. SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING HELD FEBRUARY 15, 2002 MOTION: Butcher moved, seconded by Case, to approve as published the Minutes of the Special City Council Meeting held February 15, 2002. Motion carried 5-0. B. SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING HELD FEBRUARY 16, 2002 MOTION: Butcher moved, seconded by Luse, to approve as published the Minutes of the Special City Council Meeting held February 16, 2002. Motion carried 5-0. C. CITY COUNCIL WORKSHOP HELD FEBRUARY 19, 2002 Case said the last sentence on page 1 should be changed to “The Council in their discussion expressed leanings towards the following three candidates: Scott Neal, Mike McGuire, and Steve Mielke.” MOTION: Butcher moved, seconded by Mosman, to approve as published and amended the Minutes of the City Council Workshop held February 19, 2002. Motion carried 5-0. D. CITY COUNCIL MEETING HELD FEBRUARY 19, 2002 MOTION: Luse moved, seconded by Case, to approve as published the Minutes of the City Council Meeting held February 19, 2002. Motion carried 5-0. VI. CONSENT CALENDAR A. PARKSIDE PLACE by William and Suzette Dupont. 2nd Reading for Zoning District Change from Rural to R1-22 on 1.3 acres. Location: 18390 Dell Drive. (Ordinance No. 6-2002 for Zoning District Change) B. ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 2002-45 APPROVING FINAL PLAT OF PIONEER POINT TOWNHOMES FIRST ADDITION C. ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 2002-46 APPROVING FINAL PLAT OF PIONEER POINT TOWNHOMES 2ND ADDITION CITY COUNCIL MINUTES March 7, 2002 Page 3 D. ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 2002-47 APPROVING FINAL PLAT OF THE PINES AT SETTLERS RIDGE E. ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 2002-48 AUTHORIZING EASEMENT ACQUISITION OF A TRAIL CORRIDOR IN FEE FOR CRESTWOOD PARK IMPROVEMENTS AND TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION EASEMENTS FOR CRESTWOOD TERRACE UTLITY IMPROVEMENTS F. AUTHORIZE AGREEMENT WITH SUMMIT ENVIROSOLUTIONS FOR UPGRADES TO THE CITY’S WELLFIELD SOFTWARE AND HARDWARE AND FOR EVALUATION OF PUMPING INTERFERENCE MOTION: Case moved, seconded by Butcher, to approve Items A-F of the Consent Calendar. Motion carried 5-0. VII. PUBLIC HEARINGS / MEETINGS A. BRYANT LAKE BUSINESS CENTER THIRD ADDITION by Glenborough Realty Trust, Inc. Planned Unit Development Concept Amendment on 2.37 acres, Planned Unit Development District Review on 0.6 acres, Zoning District Change from Regional Commercial to Office on 0.6 acres, Site Plan Review on 0.6 acres, and Preliminary Plat of 2.37 acres into one lot. Location: 7555 Market Place Drive. (Resolution No. 2002-49 for PUD Concept Amendment, Ordinance for PUD District Review and Zoning District Change, and Resolution No. 2002- 50 for Preliminary Plat) Jullie said official notice of this public hearing was published in the January 31, 2002, Eden Prairie News and was sent to 29 property owners. He said this is a simple, straightforward project that involves a parking lot expansion. The Community Planning Board voted 7-0 to recommend approval of the project at the February 11, 2002 meeting. He said the developer’s representative was present to answer questions. There were no comments from the audience. MOTION: Butcher moved, seconded by Mosman, to close the Public Hearing; to adopt Resolution No. 2002-49 for Planned Unit Development Concept Amendment on 2.37 acres; to approve 1st Reading of the Ordinance for Planned Unit Development District Review and Zoning District Change from Regional Commercial to Office on 0.6 acres; to adopt Resolution No. 2002-50 for Preliminary Plat on 2.37 acres into one lot; and to direct Staff to prepare a Developer’s Agreement incorporating Staff and Board recommendations and Council conditions. Motion carried 5-0. B. CRESTWOOD TERRACE AREA STREET AND UTILITY IMPROVEMENTS, I.C. 98-5474 (RESOLUTION NO. 2002-51) CITY COUNCIL MINUTES March 7, 2002 Page 4 Jullie said official notice of this public hearing was published in the February 14 and 21, 2002, Eden Prairie News and was sent to 59 property owners. He said City Engineer Alan Gray would address the project. Gray said staff has been studying this project for street and utility improvements for about four years. This is an existing residential neighborhood of about 47 lots built in the 1960’s and 70’s with on-site septic systems and wells. He said we received a feasibility study of the project a couple of weeks ago. Staff conducted neighborhood meetings while developing the study. Gray said about two years ago we made some changes to our assessment policy to put a cap of $19,600 on assessments, with periodic updates to that amount based on the E&R index. Recently we used that index to raise the maximum to $20,800 for the lateral sewer and water improvements plus the street improvements. He noted this project is estimated to cost considerably more than the amount raised by the total assessment. Gray then reviewed the scope of the project, noting that a unit-benefit philosophy was used to determine the assessment amounts. He said the project includes a proposal to put a trail along the rest of Crestwood Drive, and that is a controversial issue with many of the neighbors. He noted the cost of the project is almost $800,000, not including the $58,000 for the trail improvements that would be built at City expense. Gray reviewed the assessments proposed for the properties included in the project. He noted that those with septic systems would be excluded for five years. It would cost an additional $4300 in access fees to connect up to the sewer and water system. He said this is similar to the Cedar Forest neighborhood that was done a couple of years ago. Gray noted the main issue is to look at the project and decide whether to go ahead with it. The secondary issue is whether to build the additional trail, and that decision could be deferred. Mosman asked if there has been a determination as to whether it would be a bituminous or concrete pathway. Gray responded it was discussed as a bituminous trail in the original survey made of the residents, but it could be either a trail or a sidewalk. Mosman asked if the trail would be built on city-owned right-of-way. Gray said the street right-of-way is 60 feet wide, and we are proposing the new street to be 28 feet wide. He said one of the concerns residents expressed was whether there would be a tree loss. He thought the trail or sidewalk could be put in without having to take out any trees. Luse asked how Gray arrived at the total $21,320 assessment for most of the lots involved. Gray said the total includes the cap of $20,800 plus the trunk fee of $520. CITY COUNCIL MINUTES March 7, 2002 Page 5 Luse asked Gray to explain the parcels that will be assessed as four units and three units respectively. Gray explained the location and rational for the unit assessment of those parcels. Luse then asked what the assessment would be for Lot 53. Gray said that is the Marshall property that was assigned a subtrunk benefit as 30 units. The total amount for that property would be $172,596 less a credit for capped amount for the existing home, or a total of $167,659 for that property. Luse asked if the sidewalk or trail were to be built, would it be part of the assessment. Gray said the trail would not be part of the assessment. Butcher asked whether the street might remain at 32 feet in lieu of the trail or sidewalk. Gray said the existing street is 32 feet, and he was not sure why it was built that wide. It may have been considered a residential collector street when it was built, however, it is a normal residential street that should be 28 feet in width. He noted some of the residents prefer a 32-foot roadway, but staff believes that 28 feet is adequate. Case asked if any of the costs would be deferred until subdivision for Lots 48, 49 and 53. Gray said they would be deferred with interest in accordance with our assessment policy. Luse asked if we have a policy regarding areas that are redeveloped in the City. Gray said we look at each project as it comes in and make recommendations through a review process. Lambert noted there is a City policy on trails and, depending on through streets, we recommend either a sidewalk on both sides or an 8-foot wide trail where we think there is enough traffic. Lambert said we try to provide trails to allow access to parks, to the bus systems and to other trail systems. Tyra-Lukens asked if we have ever retrofitted a neighborhood for sidewalks. Gray said we did that in Cedar Forest. He said we have usually not included the trails as part of the project. Tyra-Lukens noted that trails are also for people going through the neighborhood using the trails. Bert Skatrud, 9810 Crestwood Terrace, said the proposed project will cut down the size of the cul-de-sacs, and he was not sure everyone was aware of that. Gray said the existing cul-de-sacs are 100 feet in diameter, and our standard is 80 feet. Staff is proposing that we construct the new cul-de-sacs at 80 feet, which would be adequate for snow removal and more reasonable from a cost standpoint. Skatrud said he has been here since 1974, at which time the street was a gravel road coming in from Pioneer Trail. He said they had to pay for the 32-foot wide street to be paved. Matt Haley, 9656 Crestwood Terrace, said he was in favor of the sewer and water. He said he is getting a lot of the trail going through on his property, and it will CITY COUNCIL MINUTES March 7, 2002 Page 6 make his driveway very steep. He noted realtors have said the value of properties will go down. He asked why we couldn’t connect at another point and not have the trail go through their neighborhood. He liked the idea of keeping the 32-foot wide street and not putting in a trail. He didn’t think the City should spend the $58,000 to build the trail. Steve Rasmussen, 9820 Crestwood Terrace, was in favor of the 32-foot wide street in lieu of the bike trail. He said, whether right or wrong, the kids will cut through the properties to get to the park. He didn’t think the kids would use the bike trail. He also liked the larger cul-de-sacs. Tyra-Lukens asked what the additional cost would be to do a 32-foot wide road and whether it would be more than the cost of a trail. Gray said it would probably be a little more, especially including the cul-de-sacs, since the street has a thicker construction than a trail. He said there is an additional cost to maintain the streets over their life cycle. He noted we want to make decisions about streets based on their use for transportation, not as a play area. He thought we should have another informational meeting with the neighborhood to discuss some of the issues raised about street width, cul-de-sacs and trails. Case asked if the incremental cost of the cul-de-sacs is in the ball area. Gray said that was true. He said 80-foot cul-de-sacs are quite large, but the 100-foot diameter is what the neighborhood is used to. Case noted there would be about 44% more pavement for 100-foot wide cul-de-sacs. Gray said it would cost about $6,000 to $7,000 per cul-de-sac for materials. Case said he understood that cul-de-sacs are not playgrounds, but we are also trying to emphasize the concept of neighborhoods and the use of cul-de-sacs for play helps promote that concept. Luse said he did not understand why we would not require the same kind of pedestrian access through every redevelopment of an infrastructure just as we do in a new development. He understood the alternatives here would be to walk on the neighbors’ yards or walk on the street. Gray said, from a staff perspective, that is why we recommend a trail or sidewalk. He said if this were coming through as a new project, we would recommend a trail or sidewalk. Lambert said that is our City policy, and that is what we always recommend. He said it is up to the Council whether to do it in this case. He said staff will always recommend trails be put in, if only for the purpose of safety. He said there are always concerns about lowering property values, but a study done several years ago of six different neighborhoods comparing homes that sold with trails next to them and those with no trails showed there was no difference in sale prices. He said once the trail system and the parks were completed, the value was increased. Butcher thought this is an important issue. She had some other concerns for the residents that live on the cul-de-sacs and have to walk down either side to access the park. She asked if we could put a small trail to provide access to the park. She CITY COUNCIL MINUTES March 7, 2002 Page 7 thought it would be a good idea to turn this back to the neighborhood and have them discuss it among themselves. Gray agreed it would be good to hold another neighborhood meeting as we go into the design process. Butcher thought the issues have been outlined tonight, and there would be enough information to have a new discussion. Tyra-Lukens said one of the issues is building a 28-foot wide street or a 32-foot wide street. She asked if we could go into the design process before we make a decision on the street width. Gray said we could. Mosman said she is envious of cul-de-sacs. She thought they would still be used even if they were 80-feet wide. She thought the safety of a trail is undeniable. She asked we ever consider having the street 32-feet wide with the trail painted off and whether that would be as safe. Lambert said back in the mid-70’s the City formed a bike task force with members from all over the city to talk about the trail issue. He said the conclusion was that a four-inch wide painted line wouldn’t stop a car from hitting a kid, so we have always gone with separated trails or sidewalks in Eden Prairie. Luse thought we should spend more time on the different issues. He thought this is a safety issue and is not about the dollars. He suggested in the future we have more tools or guidelines available so that these kinds of issues are discussed up front. He also thought there might be a way to provide a path to the park. Tyra-Lukens said there are two issues: the primary issue to go ahead with the project, and the secondary issue of the trail and the road width. Don Rasmussen, 9696 Crestwood Terrace, said he filled the survey out but there was no envelope or address available to send it. His question is how does the trail tie into the park system as it exists today. He said this is an existing neighborhood, and he thought it would be somewhat different than a new development. He asked what the effect of the 8-foot trail would be on the water runoff. Gray said the survey results had 20 in opposition to the trail and nine who were in favor of a trail or sidewalk. He said the trail would mean there was slightly more impervious surface, but the real question is are we going to provide a pedestrian facility. Sheila Johnson, 9695 Crestwood Terrace, said her understanding was that there was a survey of residents regarding the sewer and water project, and it was voted down. She wanted to know how many of the 49 residents wanted the project. Gray replied there was a survey a couple of years ago, and there were more people in favor of having the sewer and water brought in than not. He said there was no survey done recently to poll those in favor of the sewer and water. Case said during the last two years the Council has had workshops with the Public Works director to discuss the issue whether we, as a developing suburban city, want to adopt a plan to connect 100% of our homes to the City sewer system. He CITY COUNCIL MINUTES March 7, 2002 Page 8 said it becomes more difficult to get the remaining percentage of the city connected, but the Council made the decision that it was eventually to get the entire city in compliance with sewer and water. He noted that what the neighborhood wants is very important for us to hear, but we, as a Council of a suburban city, made a decision that every home should have city sewer and water. Butcher said she remembered that discussion, but remembered that there was impetuous by the County to require us to get all of the property in Eden Prairie connected to sewer and water. She said this is something we really have to do. Gene Heir, 9816 Crestwood Terrace, was concerned with the bike trail or path. He thought it would be costly for the properties on the cul-de-sacs. He asked how it would be constructed along the curve of the cul-de-sac, because he thought the trail was meant to be a path with no interruption in the trail by traffic. Grey responded they would bring the trail up to the curb on the cul-de-sac, and people would walk on the street across the end of the cul-de-sac. Heir asked who would be responsible for maintenance of the trail. Lambert said the City is responsible for clearing a trail or sidewalk, but the City does not commit to clearing all of the sidewalks because we have only one vehicle for sidewalk clearing. We clear only those sidewalks that lead to bus stops. John Kustritz, 9824 Crestwood Terrace, said he spoke to the affirmative in order to move forward with the project to bring City sewer and water to the neighborhood. He said the septic systems and wells in the neighborhood are getting old, and if the project is delayed, the neighbors are at some financial risk. He said he certainly wanted to have the water brought in, and he thought we could work out the other issues. He said this is a fairly large economic expense for the neighborhood, but it is already more expensive because of the increased cap. MOTION: Mosman moved, seconded by Butcher, to close the public hearing and to adopt Resolution No. 2002-51 ordering Crestwood Terrace Street and Utility Improvements with the understanding that Staff will continue to hold neighborhood meetings to discuss the issues of the planned trail system and the width of the street and cul-de-sacs. Case thought the Council should offer some direction for Mr. Gray as he goes back to the neighborhood to discuss the issues brought up tonight. He believes any neighborhood that has a road through it owes a certain responsibility to neighborhoods on the other sides. He thought this is an opportunity to connect neighborhoods. Our bike/trail system is a big amenity, and this is a very important issue when we come into a neighborhood like this. He liked the trail, but he understood there are complications and it might be wise to make the impact less on the south side where the trail is planned. He thought we also need to look at things like putting a connection between two lots to connect to the park because the park serves a one-mile area in the community. He thought the 28-foot road makes sense with a trail, but staff needs to work with the neighborhood on that. CITY COUNCIL MINUTES March 7, 2002 Page 9 Luse said he had three points to make: 1) Any surveys done in the future should include a return envelope; 2) Because of the cost involved, we should not put in the lot line pathway; 3) He would like to see an amendment to the motion regarding the trail system, since it should be a part of the project as a precedent for future projects. Case thought we could make the trail system a condition of the motion. He thought we might want to leave it up to the people in the neighborhood whether they want a trail to lead to the park, but he thought we should consider access to the parks in future projects. Rosow said the engineering department could go ahead with plans and specifications once the motion has passed, and the motion could include a condition regarding working out the details of the proposed trail system and the width of the street and cul-de-sac. Tyra-Lukens asked about the logistics of the trail going around Mr. Haley’s property. Gray said we would work those design details out with individual property owners. The consensus was to include the condition regarding further discussions with the neighborhood about the trail system and the width of the street and cul-de-sac. VOTE ON THE MOTION: Motion carried 5-0. C. 2001 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT FUNDING (CDBG) RECOMMENDATIONS (RESOLUTION NO. 2002-52) Jullie said official notice of this public hearing was published in the January 24, 2002, Eden Prairie News. The purpose of this hearing is for the City Council to review and approve the annual allocation of CDBG funds. These funds come from the Federal Government through Hennepin County. The amount to be allocated for this year is $234,000. The City review committee which is made up of staff from several of the service areas has reviewed the needs and the priorities as set by Hennepin County and have recommendations for the Council on how the funding would be distributed. He said David Lindahl was present to answer questions. Case noted these numbers seem similar to those presented in the last few years. MOTION: Butcher moved, seconded by Luse, to adopt Resolution No. 2002-52 approving the use of funds for the 2002 Urban Hennepin County Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) program as recommended by the Human Services Review Committee (HSRC). Motion carried 5-0. Mosman asked Mr. Lindahl to review how we get our money for this program. Lindahl said it is based on a formula that looks at population, poverty level and housing in the City. Butcher noted we review all the needs and how we meet the needs. CITY COUNCIL MINUTES March 7, 2002 Page 10 D. PROPOSED ISSUANCE OF MULTIFAMILY HOUSING REVENUE BONDS IN AN AGGREGATE PRINCIPAL AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $26,500,000 FOR THE HEIGHTS AT VALLEY VIEW PROJECT Jullie said this item was scheduled some time ago but, because of some issues raised at the Planning Board by the neighbors and Commission members, the developer has requested that we continue this to our April 16 meeting. Luse stated he would not comment on this project and would abstain from voting on the issue. He said the same holds true for item IX. A. MOTION: Butcher moved, seconded by Case, to continue the Public Hearing until the April 16, 2002 City Council meeting. Motion carried 4-0-1, with Luse abstaining. Case asked if the issues raised were regarding Section 8 housing. Lindahl said the proposal was for 20% affordable housing, but we are using other forms of public financing that would be at least 33%. Case thought there was some confusion regarding the words “at least.” He said scattered site has been a prominent issue, and we have tried not to cluster the affordable housing units. Lindahl said this is the model we would prefer to a model that is all affordable because we prefer to scatter the units throughout the development. He noted we have had this discussion many times. We kept this project at 32 units, but part of the issue is that it was financed by tax credits. VIII. PAYMENT OF CLAIMS MOTION: Case moved, seconded by Butcher, to approve the Payment of Claims. The motion was approved on a roll call vote, with Butcher, Case, Luse, Mosman, and Tyra-Lukens “aye.” IX. ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS A. RESOLUTION NO. 2002-53 CALLING FOR A PUBLIC HEARING APRIL 16, 2002, TO CONSIDER ESTABLISHING A TAX INCREMENT (TIF) DISTRICT FOR HOUSING (THE HEIGHTS AT VALLEY VIEW) Jullie said the purpose for establishing the proposed TIF District is to help finance the construction of 67 workforce (affordable) rental units on a site located at Valley View Road and Flying Cloud Drive in the Golden Triangle. A resolution calling for a public hearing to consider establishing a new TIF district must be passed by the Council before an actual hearing is held. Staff is proposing that April 16 be set as the date for a public hearing on this matter. MOTION: Butcher moved, seconded by Mosman, to adopt Resolution No. 2002- 53 calling for a public hearing April 16, 2002 to consider establishing a new Tax Increment Financing district. Motion carried 4-0-1, with Luse abstaining. CITY COUNCIL MINUTES March 7, 2002 Page 11 X. PETITIONS, REQUESTS AND COMMUNICATIONS A. REQUEST FOR 42-INCH WIDE GRAVE MARKER AT PLEASANT HILLS CEMETERY Jullie said the City owns and operates the Pleasant Hills cemetery. The rules and regulations regarding the operation of the cemetery include several restrictions on the markers. Richard Biniek reviewed his request to put a 42-inch wide marker at his wife’s gravesite. Case asked if the material for the markers is an issue. Stu Fox replied we do not stipulate whether the markers should be granite or bronze. Our concern is that the larger the marker, the more potential there is for damage. He said all markers are put into a concrete apron. Butcher was concerned about uniformity. Fox said this grave site is in Section 3, and that section has 64 markers, nine of which are 36” and two of which are 42.” Tyra-Lukens asked if the Council gave the larger ones variances at the time. Fox said the 36” markers have been placed after the date that the City was given the deed to the cemetery. Since the monument company sets the markers, we don’t see them until we get into some situation like this. Fox said none of the markers over 30” were approved by the City except for the Hodge marker. Luse said he feels strongly that our ordinances are very important. We have some precedent in these issues, and he thought it was unfair to staff to have to put all this information together where we would be making a decision based on a previous Council’s decision or that of a prior organization. He thought we need to deal with this based on respect for the fact that it is a cemetery. Case asked if the funding for care is enough to cover damage to head stones. Lambert said it is funded enough to cover the cost of digging the grave, burying it, and maintaining it. We do not have funds to replace gravestones. He said other cemeteries have similar rules. If we want to allow the exception for a larger gravestone and there is a danger of it being damaged, he thought we would want to provide an option to increase the funding. He said staff recommends that the Council go with the 36” marker as a new maximum, and make that the rule so that we don’t have to come in every six months or so to deal with similar requests. Case agreed we are making policy for the cemetery by the seat of our pants year by year, and he understood the need to be more consistent. He wanted to know what is the history of damage to 36" and 42" markers. He thought the more consistent we become the better, so he would be comfortable with a consistent 36” policy. Butcher thought we might want to have a lengthy discussion about this at a workshop meeting instead of making a decision tonight. CITY COUNCIL MINUTES March 7, 2002 Page 12 Luse thought we ought to have such a meeting, but he thought we have allowed a number of 36” markers and have allowed some 42” markers to go in. He thought we have quite a lot of precedence in this situation. Luse asked Biniek if he would be comfortable with funding the extra expense for damage. Biniek said it was $1700 for the marker, and he would be willing to fund that. Mosman noted the only time we allowed the exception was for the one 42” marker. Luse thought we have set precedents by not doing something about the 36” markers that were placed after we took over the operation of the cemetery. MOTION: Luse moved, seconded by Case, to approve the request to install a 42 inch marker by Richard Biniek as an exception and based on a revision to the Cemetery Rules and Regulations fee structure that will allow the installation of a 42 inch marker (maximum) provided that a fee is paid to the City equal to the cost of the marker and its installation and which will be placed in escrow to fund any future damage to the marker. Case said there are aspects of this that he is comfortable with, but the $1700 in escrow didn’t make him comfortable because there are other instances where the marker could break. There is a potential for ongoing breakage. He agreed with Butcher that we need to tighten this so that the “cemetery board” does not have to convene as often. Butcher said she wanted to state that we made the exception last time because of the three names on the stone. She thought we need to go back and review that when we have a workshop. Tyra-Lukens asked Biniek the reason for his request for a variance. Biniek said he wants a memorial for his wife. Luse asked if we meant to include installation costs. Fox said staff recommends the cost of the marker and installation because we currently do not set markers out there. VOTE ON THE MOTION: Motion carried 5-0. Tyra-Lukens directed staff to set a workshop to finalize this issue. Case asked staff to bring data about Eden Prairie Cemetery and other cemeteries in our price range. XI. REPORTS OF ADVISORY BOARDS & COMMISSIONS XII. APPOINTMENTS A. BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS CITY COUNCIL MINUTES March 7, 2002 Page 13 Tyra-Lukens noted there were 19 applicants for Boards and Commissions this year. 1. Community Planning Board MOTION: Butcher moved, seconded by Case to appoint to the Community Planning Board Ken Brooks, Vicki Koenig, and David Steppat – Terms to expire 3/31/2005. Motion carried 5-0. 2. Board of Appeals and Adjustments MOTION: Case moved, seconded by Butcher to appoint to the Board of Appeals & Adjustments Cliff Dunham, Michael O’Leary, Randy Stroot and Anthony Ramunno – Terms to expire 3/31/2005. Motion carried 5-0. 3. Heritage Preservation Commission MOTION: Mosman moved, seconded by Case, to appoint to the Heritage Preservation Commission Jennie Brown, Kati Simons and Elise Kist – Terms to expire 3/31/2005. Motion carried 5-0. 4. Human Rights and Diversity Commission MOTION: Butcher moved, seconded by Mosman, to appoint to the Human Rights and Diversity Commission Balu Iyer and Jeffrey Strate – Terms to expire 3/31/2005. Motion carried 5-0. 5. Art and Culture Commission MOTION: Mosman moved, seconded by Case to appoint to the Art & Culture Commission Ann Birt – Term to expire 3/31/2003; Susan Dickman and Cari Grayson – Terms to expire 3/31/2004; Dianne Fesler and Freinde Mills – Terms to expire 3/31/2005. Motion carried 5-0. 6. Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources Commission MOTION: Luse moved, seconded by Case, to appoint to the Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources Commission Dick Brown, Munna Yasiri, Philip Wright, Rob Barrett, Kim Teaver – Terms to expire 3/31/2003; Therese Benkowski, Jeffrey Gerst, David Larson, and Trisha Swanson – Terms to expire 3/31/2004. Motion carried 5-0. B. BOARD OF EQUALIZATION AND APPEALS Jullie said this Board is constituted to review appeals of our assessments. He said the members are citizen volunteers that are active and knowledgeable in the real estate market. The members are recruited by the City Manager and City Assessor and appointed annually with confirmation by the City Council. CITY COUNCIL MINUTES March 7, 2002 Page 14 MOTION: Case moved, seconded by Butcher, to appoint to the Board of Equalization and Appeals Mike Best, Judy Ilstrup, Doug Malam, Annette O’Connor, and Patricia Pidcock. Motion carried 5-0. B. 2002 CHAIRS/VICE CHAIRS OF THE BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS Jullie said the Chairs and Vice Chairs are appointed annually by the City Council following the appointment of members to City Boards and Commissions. MOTION: Case moved, seconded by Butcher, to appoint Frantz Corneille - Chair and Ray Stoelting - Vice Chair of the Community Planning Board. Motion carried 5-0. MOTION: Mosman moved, seconded by Luse, to appoint Cliff Dunham - Chair and Louis Giglio -Vice Chair of the Board of Appeals and Adjustments. Motion carried 5-0. MOTION: Butcher moved, seconded by Case, to appoint Lori Peterson--Benike - Chair and Art Weeks - Vice Chair of the Heritage Preservation Commission. Motion carried 5-0. MOTION: Mosman moved, seconded by Butcher, to appoint Munna Yasiri - Chair and Dick Brown - Vice Chair of the Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources Commission. Motion carried 5-0. MOTION: Luse moved, seconded by Butcher, to appoint Harry Moran - Chair and Philip Young - Vice Chair of the Human Rights and Diversity Citizen Advisory Commission. Motion carried 5-0. MOTION: Case moved, seconded by Mosman, to appoint Diane Fessler - Chair and Susan Dickman - Vice Chair of the Arts and Culture Commission. Motion carried 5-0. MOTION: Butcher moved, seconded by Luse, to appoint Patricia Pidcock - Chair and Mike Best - Vice Chair of the Board of Equalization and Appeals. Motion carried 5-0. XIII. REPORTS OF OFFICERS A. REPORTS OF COUNCILMEMBERS 1. Luse – Transition within Management Luse said he would be like to get some direction and support in trying to organize the work on doing something to show our appreciation for Mr. Jullie’s returning to take on the role of Acting City Manager. He said Councilmember Case has indicated a willingness to work with us on this. CITY COUNCIL MINUTES March 7, 2002 Page 15 Luse thought there should be a Staff liaison to help plus two to four residents of the community that he would be willing to recruit. Tyra-Lukens said Councilmember Luse will recruit the residents, and staff will provide a liaison to help the committee. 2. Luse – Resident’s Letter of Concern Luse said he had received a letter from a resident regarding a particular project and he did not recognize the project. Jullie replied it is Mr. Hustad’s project that is just starting in the process. B. REPORT OF CITY MANAGER C. REPORT OF PARKS AND RECREATION SERVICES DIRECTOR D. REPORT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AND FINANCIAL SERVICES DIRECTOR E. REPORT OF PUBLIC WORKS SERVICES DIRECTOR F. REPORT OF PUBLIC SAFETY SERVICES DIRECTOR G. REPORT OF MANAGEMENT SERVICES DIRECTOR H. REPORT OF CITY ATTORNEY XIV. OTHER BUSINESS XV. ADJOURNMENT MOTION: Mosman moved, seconded by Case, to adjourn the meeting. Motion carried 5-0. Mayor Tyra-Lukens adjourned the meeting at 9:25 p.m.