Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout03-28-2016 Council MinutesMINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, March 28, 2016 7:00 o'clock p.m. ROLL CALL The Orono City Council met on the above-mentioned date with the following members present: Mayor Lili Tod McMillan, Council Members James Cornick, Jr., Lizz Levang, and Aaron Printup. Representing Staff were City Administrator Jessica Loftus, Finance Director Ron Olson, Senior Planner Michael Gaffron, City Attorney Soren Mattick, and Recorder Jackie Young. Mayor McMillan called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m., followed by the Pledge of Allegiance. APPROVAL OF AGENDA CONSENT AGENDA Item Nos. 3, 4, and 8 were added to the Consent Agenda. Printup moved, Levang seconded, to approve the Consent Agenda as amended. VOTE: Ayes 4, Nays 0. APPROVAL OF MINUTES *2. CITY COUNCIL MINUTES OF MARCH 14, 2016 Printup moved, Levang seconded, to approve the minutes of the Orono City Council meeting of March 14, 2016, as submitted. VOTE: Ayes 4, Nays 0. PUBLIC COMMENTS None PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR/CITY ENGINEER REPORT *3. WELL #1 REHABILITATION Printup moved, Levang seconded, to accept the quotation in the amount of $24,245 from Bergerson-Caswell, Inc., for rehabilitation of Well #1. VOTE: Aye 4, Nays 0. PUBLIC SAFETY REPORT *4. DISPOSAL OF FORFEITED VEHICLES Printup moved, Levang seconded, to dispose of a 2004 Ford Explorer, VIN#1FMDU73K64UA45031; a 2003 Land Rover/Range Rover, VCN# SALME11413A139796; a 2004 Ford Explorer, VIN# IFMOU73K84UA45031. Vehicles to be auctioned through the Auto Auction. VOTE: Ayes 4, Nays 0. Page i of 17 MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, March 28, 2016 7:00 o'clock p.m. 5. RESOLUTION TO SUPPORT APPROPRIATIONS FOR U.S. HIGHWAY 12 PROJECTS, RESOLUTION NO. 6600 Police Chief Farniok stated approximately 16 months ago the Highway 12 Safety Coalition was created, which is a combined effort with law enforcement and cities along a 38 -mile section of Highway 12 as well as collaboration and partnership with MN/DOT and county engineers to identify and work on safety issues along that corridor. A safety audit conducted by MN/DOT has identified some safety issues and shows what areas should be improved. Farniok stated over the past 16 months, 22 people have lost their lives and countless others have suffered serious injuries. Highway 12 through the City of Independence experiences nearly double the average traffic of any similar road in the state, which was pointed out to the MN Senate. This section of Highway 12 through Independence was built in the 1930s with one upgrade in the 1950s, which makes this section of highway at least 60 years old. There is also no center median at all through this section. The area of focus is located in Hennepin County that goes through the cities of Independence, Maple Plain, Orono, and Long Lake. That section consists of 10.51 miles but it has contributed to 39 percent of all fatal crashes. County Road 92 has been identified as one area for improvement. In that area the intersections are not aligned and have no dedicated turn lanes which makes it necessary for traffic to sit in the through portion of Highway 12, which has resulted in a number of rear -end accidents. Farniok stated the approach of the Highway 12 Safety Coalition was to aim for zero deaths. It is a multi- faceted approach consisting of education, law enforcement, emergency medical services, engineering and creating a partnership with the various cities to respond as quickly as possible. In addition, the State Patrol has come on board with policing the area in conjunction with local and sheriff departments. Famiok noted North Memorial provides emergency medical services to this area and they have now implemented an automatic start for air care due to the history of fatal crashes in this area. Farniok presented a slide show showing the various accidents and the victims killed or injured in those crashes. Farniok stated the high number of accidents that are occurring is because of people crossing the centerline. As a result, MN/DOT is requesting $15 million for a concrete barrier that will extend out to Baker Park Road due to the crossover crashes. Other two elements of the bill are requesting safety upgrades at the intersections of County Roads 90 and 92. Farniok stated before the City Council tonight is a resolution asking for the Council's support in this project. The resolution will be sent to the MN Legislature. Council Member Printup asked when the next opportunity will be to attend a committee meeting. Farniok stated the next one will be a presentation to the MN House of Representatives on March 30 at 5 p.m. The meeting will be held in Room 10. Information on the legislation and the upcoming meeting will be on the Orono Police Department's website as well as the website for the Highway 12 Safety Coalition. Farniok indicated the same information that was presented tonight will be provided to the MN House of Representatives. Council Member Levang asked if the information was well received. Page 2 of 17 MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, March 28, 2016 7:00 o'clock p.m. 5. RESOLUTION TO SUPPORT APPROPRIATIONS FOR U.S. HIGHWAY 12 PROJECTS, RESOLUTION NO. 6600 (continued) Farniok indicated it was and that the legislation received unanimous support from the committee. The legislation will now proceed to the Finance Committee. Printup asked if the 34 percent includes the entire county or is regional. Farniok indicated it is 39 percent of all crashes in that 38 -mile section and that one-third of the accidents in this section result in a fatality. Farniok stated this section of Highway 12 has not been improved in over 50 years and that in most areas it would result in a 4 -lane highway. There were no public comments regarding this item. Council Member Cornick noted the resolution described Orono's area as being between Wayzata Boulevard and County Road 6, which leaves out the entire area west of County Road 6. Cornick noted there have been at least two fatalities in that area and that perhaps the description should be to Highway 29. Farniok stated at the time the legislation was introduced, the audit identified that section. At the committee meeting, MN/Dot indicated they would be looking at carrying the concrete barrier further west. Farniok stated MN/DOT did not want to stall the process so they left the description as is for the immediate upgrade. Cornick stated in his view the City should support that entire section and add it to the resolution. Farniok stated in his view it would not harm the legislation by amending the resolution. Cornick indicated he has no issue with the spirit of the language. Levang stated it probably should say to Orono's western border since the boundary does not quite go to Highway 29. Levang moved, Printup seconded, to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 6600, a Resolution in Support of Appropriations for U.S. Highway 12 Projects, with the language being amended to read to the western border of Orono. VOTE: Ayes 4, Nays 0. PLANNING DEPARTMENT REPORT 6. #15-3774 MICHAEL STEADMAN ON BEHALF OF IRWIN JACOBS, 1700 SHORELINE DRIVE, EXTENSION OF HERITAGE LANE: AUTHORIZE CITY PURCHASE OF WETLAND CREDITS Gaffron stated the applicants are requesting approval of the City making an application to acquire wetland credits for the extension of Heritage Lane. Preliminary plat approval was granted in December. A portion of a small wetland within the right-of-way of Heritage Lane is proposed to be filled. Page 3of17 MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, March 28, 2016 7:00 o'clock p.m. 6. #15-3774 MICHAEL STEADMAN ON BEHALF OF IRWIN JACOBS,1700 SHORELINE DRIVE, EXTENSION OF HERITAGE LANE: AUTHORIZE CITY PURCHASE OF WETLAND CREDITS (continued) Senior Planner Gaffron noted the area outlined in blue on the overhead is the wetland. The area in yellow is the area that will be filled, which is roughly half of the wetland area. Staff initially expected, because the fill would be less than 1,000 square feet that it would not have to be mitigated. If it was required to be mitigated, it could be done within the Jacobs' property. In January, based on the findings of the Technical Evaluation Panel, the existing right-of-way extension is being considered a separate project from the subdivision. The result of this determination is that because the portion of the right-of-way being filled exceeds five percent of the City -owned portion of the wetland, the fill does not qualify for the deminimus exemption and must be mitigated. As a result of the wetland area being filled extending almost to the boundaries of the road right-of-way, there is no area available on the right-of-way to accomplish that mitigation. Gaffron stated while mitigation could physically be accomplished within the Jacobs' property, it is not clear whether the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District would accept that mitigation. Therefore, the developer is pursuing purchase of wetland credits for this impact. The developer has located wetland credits within the state wetland bank and has provided the paperwork for City execution. The City is considered as the applicant since the impacts are to a wetland on City property. There are three documents to be executed by the City: 1. Wetland credits purchase agreement between the Seller Jeff Richards and the City of Orono. This needs to be signed by an authorized representative of the City as "buyer". The City Attorney has concluded that this agreement must be considered as a contract, which requires Council authorization to proceed. In addition, the City will be required to provide a check for $500.00 as earnest money with the purchase agreement. This money will be refunded by the developer. 2. BWSR transaction form for withdrawal of credits from Minnesota Wetland Bank. 3. Joint Application form. This form is submitted to the MCWD and other agencies for approval of the use of wetland credits for mitigation and requires Council authorization. Gaffron stated if it is approved by the MCWD and the BWSR, the City would have a balance due to the seller at closing of $1,320.81 and a fee due to BWSR of $115.63, which will also be reimbursed by the developer. Staff is recommending approval of the documents. Printup asked if there is going to be a section of the road that will be private. Gaffron indicated there will not be. Gaffron stated as approved in the preliminary plat resolution, that entire road up to and including the cul-de-sac will be public and maintained by the City. It will also contain city sewer lines. Gaffron stated whether or not the existing cul-de-sac gets changed or removed or left as is remains to be discussed. Page 4 of 17 MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, March 28, 2016 7:00 o'clock p.m. 6. #15-3774 MICHAEL STEADMAN ON BEHALF OF IRWIN JACOBS,1700 SHORELINE DRIVE, EXTENSION OF HERITAGE LANE: AUTHORIZE CITY PURCHASE OF WETLAND CREDITS (continued) Michael Steadman stated he has nothing to add to Staff's report. Mayor McMillan asked if anyone from the public would like to comment on this application. Kevin Kokesh, Attorney -at -Law, stated he represents Dr. Komer, who resides at 1005 Heritage Lane. Kokesh stated he has reviewed these materials and that there are a couple of items that he would like to address. Kokesh stated it is a little upsetting that the City is now going to help the developer get the wetland credits but that he can understand the developer doing it. Kokesh stated everything that was told to the residents about deminimus exception or exemption is apparently not true anymore and that there is a problem with the wetland being filled. Kokesh stated he would not expect the City to stand in the way of that but for the City to go out of their way with a joint application is a little bit disturbing since the Council knows the residents do not want this access. Kokesh stated in the residents' view there is an alternative access from Shoreline and that there is already a road going through the back of the property. Kokesh stated the other point he would like to raise is about the application itself. Kokesh noted on Page 8 there is a section under avoidance, which states, "The applicant has to show alternatives that could be done that would avoid having to fill this wetland." It clearly states that no feasible alternatives for access exist, which is a false statement. Kokesh stated he can understand the applicant saying that, but for the City to be making a statement like that is dicey when they know there is an alternative. Kokesh stated at the very least the application should be changed to reflect the facts of the situation and not contain an intentionally misleading statement. City Attorney Mattick stated the reason for the joint application is because it is a public road and is a city - owned street. Since the City will have an interest in it, they need to sign off on the application. Mattick stated he understands there is a disagreement on whether that road should be used but that is what the City approved. Because it is a public road, the City is a joint applicant on the wetland credits. In terms of the alternative access, Mattick stated he understands Mr. Kokesh's point, but that access utilizing the county road has been rejected. In order to extend that road through that corridor, it needs to be filled in. It was considered a deminimus project right up to the point where the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District said this is two separate projects. Mattick noted it should be pointed out that the developer is paying for all costs associated with this. Kokesh stated the assumption in the application that the right-of-way is there to connect to the neighboring plat is not correct as well. Kokesh stated when you plat out subdivisions and you put a road in, you start at one end of the subdivision and you continue to the other end of the subdivision. Kokesh stated the intentionality of it to connect to the Jacobs' property is an assumption that was made and that nobody knew that the person who platted it originally wanted to connect to the Jacobs' property. Kokesh stated that road was never done and never approved, so the idea of avoiding a landlocked parcel is not correct. Page 5 of 17 MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, March 28, 2016 7:00 o'clock p.m. 6. #15-3774 MICHAEL STEADMAN ON BEHALF OF IRWIN JACOBS, 1700 SHORELINE DRIVE, EXTENSION OF HERITAGE LANE: AUTHORIZE CITY PURCHASE OF WETLAND CREDITS (continued) Mattick stated that is a very common platting principle. When someone plats a piece of property, they extend at least the road right-of-way but not necessarily the road so there will be continuous connectivity to other parcels should they choose to be subdivided at some point. Mattick stated as far as whether it is an assumption that it is going to be subdivided is unknown at this point but that it is good planning, which is what occurred here. Kokesh commented he also did not like the fact that the $500 earnest money is already in the City's check register before there is even a chance for the Council to discuss it. Mattick noted the applicant is required to submit that money as part of the application and would have been returned if it was denied. Dennis Libby, 1000 Heritage Lane, stated in the extension from the right-of-way, which he is not contesting, there is a substantial amount of distance from the perimeter of the actual platted property line into the actual cul-de-sac. Libby stated as a point of information and partially as a question, he would like to know whether an arrangement has been made privately or publicly with the Jacobs to incorporate part of the private access that will extend into the cul-de-sac. Libby noted that will need to be maintained by private services but that there needs to be an egress and the ability for the school bus and snow plow to turn around. Libby asked whether that has been addressed. Gaffron stated the extension past the property boundary and to the new cul-de-sac is being platted as dedicated roadway and will be a city road from the start. The plat has never contemplated that that extension would be private, and in the preliminary plat approvals, the cul-de-sac is public, which means that service vehicles would have every right to use it along with the residents. Libby stated he has a concern with the runoff since his property sits lower in elevation from the wetland delineation. Libby noted when he originally purchased his property, he experienced problems with water intrusion, and in order to remediate that, he came to the City and it was recommended he consult with an engineer. Libby indicated he spent thousands of dollars correcting that water intrusion, but that with the changes that are being proposed, such as the regrading and the addition of the road, whether he should assume, given the developer's commitment to remediate any changes, that any costs or inconveniences that would be associated with that right-of-way extension would be borne by the developer or whether it would be the City since they really are the owner of the right-of-way. Mattick stated it is a developer project and that the developer will assume the cost to put in the road. Mattick indicated he is not sure what Mr. Libby means by inconveniences but that the developer is responsible for constructing the road. Libby stated the water and runoff was removed from his property by virtue of swales and drainage that move it towards the pond. Libby stated if there are elevation changes to put a roadway in, there will have to be a substantial amount of fill put in there. Libby stated despite his appeal on several occasions before the City Council, he has never really gotten an answer from anyone. Instead, the developer has diverted the conversation away from these basic principal questions. Page 6 of 17 MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, March 28, 2016 7:00 o'clock p.m. 6. #15-3774 MICHAEL STEADMAN ON BEHALF OF IRWIN JACOBS, 1700 SHORELINE DRIVE, EXTENSION OF HERITAGE LANE: AUTHORIZE CITY PURCHASE OF WETLAND CREDITS (continued) Libby stated while the Mayor is a champion of private property owner rights, he is a private property owner that is going to be impacted by this development and that he would like to get some answers on this from the developer. McMillan asked if Mr. Libby is wondering whether he would seek damages from the city or from the developer if problems arise because of the road being put in. Libby stated he is not really asking for compensation. McMillan stated her understanding of what Mr. Libby is asking is who he would turn to if there are problems on his property as a result of the road being built. Mattick stated it will depend on what happens. If there is a fundamental flaw in the design, the City will review it with the developer and it will need to be revised. Mattick stated he is not sure where the developer is at with the road design but that he has yet to see a road design that does not look at the runoff. Mattick stated he cannot comment on the road design and whether there will be water runoff but that the developer or Staff could address that. Libby stated given his 30 years of experience in real estate, he has a clear understanding of road plans and that the ponding requirements and some of the other elements of the development are known to him. Libby stated what is not clear is the drainage, which could impact his capital investment and that he is not looking for compensation. McMillan stated she understands that Mr. Libby would like to know who he can contact if something wrong happens and that she appreciates Mr. Libby alerting the City to the issues with this property. McMillan stated she is hopeful the City Engineer and Staff will be confident that the road design will not impact Mr. Libby's property. McMillan noted Mr. Libby is on record about the past water issues and the repairs that were made previously. Libby stated in the past he has typically concentrated on the impacts to the neighborhood, but that this was an opportunity to encourage the Council to look at this from a private property owner's perspective. Levang moved, Cornick seconded, to authorize execution of the Wetland Credits Purchase Agreement, Transaction Form and Joint Application Form. Cornick asked if there is a process where the City could have an agreement with the developer that would protect Mr. Libby somehow. Mattick stated they are at the preliminary plat stage right now and that there will be a development agreement executed at some point. Mattick stated all road plans will be reviewed and approved by the City Engineer, which is one of the fundamental terms of the development agreement. Mattick noted one of the issues that is reviewed as part of that is the runoff. Page 7 of 17 MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, March 28, 2016 7:00 o'clock p.m. 6. #15-3774 MICHAEL STEADMAN ON BEHALF OF IRWIN JACOBS,1700 SHORELINE DRIVE, EXTENSION OF HERITAGE LANE: AUTHORIZE CITY PURCHASE OF WETLAND CREDITS (continued) Cornick asked whether Mr. Libby would be protected if the worst situation happens and the water goes onto his property. Mattick stated it would depend on what happens and the reasons for the flooding. Mattick noted the flooding that occurred along Lake Minnetonka was unavoidable. In this situation the City has an obligation to review the plans to make sure that at a planning level the water is being directed where it should go. Following construction of the road, it will also be inspected to make sure it was put in correctly. VOTE: Ayes 3, Nays 1, Printup opposed. 7. #16-3807 TOM GONYEA, ESTATE DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION, 425-595 OLD CRYSTAL BAY ROAD NORTH, PRELIMINARY PLAT APPROVAL — DRAFT RESOLUTION AND COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT, PRELIMINARY PLAT APPROVAL, RESOLUTION NO. 6599 Gaffron noted on March 14 the City Council voted to direct Staff to draft a resolution for preliminary approval of an amendment of the Orono Comprehensive Plan to allow development of the property at a density of approximately three units per acre for adoption on March 28 and submission to the Metropolitan Council for review and approval. Council also directed that a resolution for preliminary plat approval be drafted for review and consideration. It was noted that while the Council supports the rezoning to RPUD, the rezoning would be enacted later as part of final plat approval. Staff did receive comments from Hennepin County and include the following: The County has indicated they will issue a permit for relocating westward of the Dumas Orchard farm road access at the northwest corner of the preserve property. 2. No additional right -0f --way nor easement is required. Support for the proposed pedestrian connection from the northeast cul-de-sac to the Old Crystal Bay/Wayzata Boulevard intersection and support for a future connecting sidewalk on the west side of Old Crystal Bay Road north of Wayzata Boulevard. 4. Guidelines for a future access to Wayzata Boulevard should the Dumas property develop. 5. Suggested reconsideration of the trail along the north side of Wayzata Boulevard that is proposed as part of the turnback roadway project design. 6. Developer advised of requirement for Hennepin County permits for work in the right-of-way. Page 8 of 17 MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, March 28, 2015 7:00 o'clock p.m. 7. #16-3807 TOM GONYEA, ESTATE DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION, 425-595 OLD CRYSTAL BAY ROAD NORTH, PRELIMINARY PLAT APPROVAL — DRAFT RESOLUTION AND COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT, PRELIMINARY PLAT APPROVAL, RESOLUTION NO. 6599 (continued) Gaffron indicated the resolution for Concept Plan and Preliminary Plat Approval is in a draft form for Council consideration and discussion. Adoption of the resolution at the March 24 meeting is not recommended as Staff would like additional time to refine it and bring it back for formal action on April 11. Staff does recommend adoption of the resolution granting preliminary approval for the Comprehensive Plan Amendment. Following approval, the amendment, application and appropriate attachments will be forwarded to the Metropolitan Council for their review as soon as possible. McMillan asked if there was any discussion about a trail on the south side of the road. Gaffron indicated Hennepin County did not feel it was necessary to have a trail on both sides of the road as long as there was an internal roadway system. Printup stated in regards to the plan before the Council tonight, he does not really have any complaints, but that the City should at least require an easement along Old Highway 12 for this property and the Dumas property. Printup stated once the Dumas property is developed, it will be inviting for people to try to get up to the stoplight and the crosswalk rather than a midway crosswalk. Printup stated if that day ever comes when the Dumas property is developed, the City can say they planned for it. Printup stated with regard to the County recommendations about reconsidering the trail along the north side of Wayzata Boulevard, in his view the City should strike that from anything being discussed so it does not imply that the City condones something like that. Printup noted the school is not aware of any County reconsideration of the trail along the north side of Wayzata Boulevard. Gaffron stated that recommendation is in letter form from Hennepin County and that it is a question of how much should be included in the City's resolution of approval. Gaffron noted Page 12 talks about street lighting and an internal sidewalk system but that he does not believe there is any other place in the resolution where it talks about yes or no to a trail along Highway 12. Gaffron noted the Planning Commission, Park Commission, and a majority of the Council did not feel a parallel trail along the west side of Crystal Bay was needed but that they did not address whether there should be a parallel trail along Wayzata Boulevard. Tom Gonyea, Applicant, stated as it relates to the sidewalks, in his view it seems like it will be redundant given the internal sidewalk. An easement along Highway 12 would also inhibit his ability to screen things a little bit. Gonyea stated if that internal system continued into the Dumas property, it would offer a way to get up to the intersection along a quieter road and not along Highway 12. Gaffron pointed out the lots along Wayzata Boulevard would have a berm that extends from existing grade up to a high point. Gaffron stated if an additional ten feet is taken, it would push the berm and screening closer to the back yards. Page 9 of 17 MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, March 28, 2016 7:00 o'clock p.m. 7. #16-3807 TOM GONYEA, ESTATE DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION, 425-595 OLD CRYSTAL BAY ROAD NORTH, PRELIMINARY PLAT APPROVAL — DRAFT RESOLUTION AND COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT, PRELIMINARY PLAT APPROVAL, RESOLUTION NO. 6599 (continued) Gonyea stated it could also potentially shrink the elevation. City Administrator Loftus asked how many potential units could be constructed on the Dumas and Eisenger properties. Gaffron stated for the Eisenger property, they are looking at 27 units with the potential for a multi -family building. The Dumas property is guided for seven to ten units per acre, with the potential for as many as 150 units. Loftus questioned if the residents on the corner would be okay with pedestrians from 175 units passing by. Gonyea indicated in other cities, such as Maple Grove, they have designated trails, which would be the situation here. Gonyea stated how heavily traveled it is would be up in the air. Printup stated given the future development of the Eisenger and Dumas properties, that is exactly why the City should obtain an easement on this property. Printup stated another issue that is not fully known at this time is if there are wetlands on those properties and how they will be navigated. Printup stated having a trail along a road where the speed limit is 50 miles an hour is a concern, but the City should have an easement to help plan for the future developments. McMillan stated the turnback committee talked about the trail going all the way down to Highway 6 but that there are some wetlands that would make that difficult. In addition, the school wanted that connection to their back trail. Hennepin County indicated they were okay with the trail going on the north side. McMillan stated she is not sure if they should require a trail on the south side as well. Loftus stated cost -wise now would be the best time to do it. McMillan asked when a decision would be required on the easement. Gaffron stated that is something that needs to be decided in the near future so it can be included in the preliminary plat approval resolution. .McMillan asked if they will be shrinking that road or whether it will be made wider. Loftus indicated she does not believe it will change significantly. Gonyea noted the County has quite a bit of right-of-way in that area and that there are some improvements along that road that are being considered. Gonyea stated right now there is a lot of excess right-of-way there and that it might make sense to approach Hennepin County to ask for a 10 -foot trail along the edge of the road. Levang stated she prefers that option since it would give those homeowners more privacy. Levang asked how much feet belongs to the County. Page 10 of 17 MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, March 28, 2016 7:00 o'clock p.m. 7. #16-3807 TOM GONYEA, ESTATE DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION, 425-595 OLD CRYSTAL BAY ROAD NORTH, PRELIMINARY PLAT APPROVAL — DRAFT RESOLUTION AND COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT, PRELIMINARY PLAT APPROVAL, RESOLUTION NO. 6599 (continued) Gaffron indicated the County has 100 feet further west, with the right-of-way being depicted by the black line on the map. Levang stated 10 feet for the County would not have the same impact as it would for Mr. Gonyea. Gaffron stated the white line depicts the ditch. Printup asked what would make the most sense for the City of Orono. Printup asked if the costs of the trail would come out of the turnback money. Loftus indicated typically the cities are responsible for trails. Loftus stated if it is outside the curb, the local jurisdiction would pay for any improvements. Mattick stated if the developer is requesting to put the trail outside of his property and the County is okay with that, that cost would likely fall on the developer. Gaffron noted the City in the past has given developers credit on park fees when they have constructed a trail. Gaffron indicated the City did obtain an easement from JEM with no expectation as to when or how that trail will be built and that there is an agreement that the City would pay for the trail if they were given an easement. Printup stated in his view it is important to get the easement for the future. McMillan asked if the developer could plant trees on the easement. Gonyea stated down the road any trees planted on the easement could create an issue for the City, and that if trees are planted, it would be better on the County property or within the development. Printup stated obtaining an easement over this property would also help serve as a guide for the properties going westward and that the trail does not necessarily have to be built. Gonyea pointed out the location of the proposed sidewalk within the development. Gonyea indicated he can certainly look at the location of the sidewalk to see if it can be moved south a little bit to provide for some berming. Gonyea asked if they would receive credit for the easement against the park dedication fee. Gaffron stated if a trail is constructed at the developer's cost, then that would be credited, but that they would not get credit for the easement. Gonyea asked whether the City would still want the internal sidewalk as well as a trail. Levang commented that is a good question and that there might be some redundancy there. Page 11 of 17 MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, March 28, 2016 7:00 o'clock p.m. 7. #16-3807 TOM GONYEA, ESTATE DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION, 425-595 OLD CRYSTAL BAY ROAD NORTH, PRELIMINARY PLAT APPROVAL — DRAFT RESOLUTION AND COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT, PRELIMINARY PLAT APPROVAL, RESOLUTION NO. 6599 (continued) Gonyea indicated he could look at constructing the trail towards the back but that the berming is an important feature for the residents abutting Highway 12. Levang asked if he would eliminate the entire internal sidewalk. Gonyea indicated he would eliminate the part that is parallel to the trail but still construct the other portion of the sidewalk. Gonyea noted part of the objective with the layout was to have room to park a car in the driveway, and if the sidewalk is not there, they would have some additional room to work with. McMillan stated a trail that goes to the western boundary would not hook up into the development unless there is a path to it. McMillan stated in her view this neighborhood would not really use the trail. Printup stated they do not want a trail going nowhere, but if that one segment of sidewalk is benefitting 12 homes, the idea of an internal sidewalk is worth pursuing. Printup stated he is an advocate of having the easement regardless of when the trail is built. Gonyea stated if the City decided they wanted the trail along the northern edge of the property at some point, he could provide the money to construct it in at a later date. Gonyea stated it does not make a lot of sense now to put it in until the other properties are developed. McMillan noted there will be a trail on the south side of Old Crystal Bay Road going to the east. If the Dumas property gets developed and continues around the wetland, then an internal sidewalk would be nice. McMillan stated she is usually hesitant about sidewalks but that in this case it makes sense. Mattick stated sidewalks can be located within the public right-of-way and that the City does have the right to make the abutting property owner responsible for clearing them. Gaffron stated as they are currently laid out, they are within the right-of-way just outside the abutting individual plot lines. Gonyea asked if Staff could contact the County in the next few days to see whether they would be open to platting the easement within their right-of-way. Gaffron indicated he can speak with the County about the possibility of a trail on the south side and whether they feel there is enough room within their right-of-way for that trail. Cornick asked if any Highway 12 turnback funds would be available for the trail. Loftus stated the City has been told that the turnback funds will cover the costs of anything that would be replaced but that anything new would fall onto the local jurisdiction. McMillan noted street lighting within this development was also an issue raised by Staff. Page 12 of 17 MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, March 28, 2016 7:00 o'clock p.m. 7. #16-3807 TOM GONYEA, ESTATE DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION, 425-595 OLD CRYSTAL BAY ROAD NORTH, PRELIMINARY PLAT APPROVAL — DRAFT RESOLUTION AND COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT, PRELIMINARY PLAT APPROVAL, RESOLUTION NO. 6599 (continued) McMillan indicated she drove through the Stone Bay development tonight to see how many streetlights there are and that she can where streetlights might be desired at the road intersections. McMillan stated she would prefer that the rest of the development not have a lot of streetlights. Gonyea stated other cities will typically have a streetlight every 400 feet in addition to ones at intersections and cul-de-sacs. Gonyea stated that is done primarily from a safety standpoint and that it provides a sense of security in a neighborhood like this. Gonyea stated the streetlights do not have to be as high as they normally are and could have more of a decorative design. Gonyea stated he would like direction from the City on that. McMillan asked if individual lots could have their own security lights. Gonyea indicated he would prefer it to go into the electrical system underground and then charged back to the property owners. Gaffron noted the City's Code does not have a specific standard for street lighting and that he would suggest the developer provide a proposed lighting plan as part of the final plat review. Gonyca stated they could also look at more downcast lights as well. Levang noted the City may have a new lighting ordinance in the near future and that perhaps they should look at that to see how it would impact this development. Levang commented Orono is considered more of a dark sky environment. Gonyea stated in a more urban setting, such as this development, people tend to be out more at night and that there is a greater need for street lighting. McMillan asked who would be billed for the lighting. McMillan noted in the Stone Bay development it is charged back to the homeowners association. Gaffron stated that will need to be another point of discussion. Gaffron noted the stormwater facilities are within private lots and that it is not fair to make the person abutting that maintain it. Gaffron stated the stormwater maintenance should probably be a homeowners association responsibility or else the responsibility of the City. Mattick stated it is not practical to say that each of those homeowners will be responsible for a portion of the pond and that typically either the City does it or there is a homeowners association. Mattick stated a stormwater pond is one of those deferred maintenance things that is starting to come up more and more and that the City has taken responsibility for it upfront as part of a stormwater management fee. Gaffron noted there will be 39 new lots paying toward the quarterly stormwater management fee. McMillan stated her thought was to have the City be responsible for it. Page 13 of 17 MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, March 28, 2016 7:00 o'clock p.m. 7. #16-3807 TOM GONYEA, ESTATE DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION, 425-595 OLD CRYSTAL BAY ROAD NORTH, PRELIMINARY PLAT APPROVAL — DRAFT RESOLUTION AND COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT, PRELIMINARY PLAT APPROVAL, RESOLUTION NO. 6599 (continued) Mattick noted the City would also require access to that area. Gonyea stated it is his recollection there is a wider easement in that area. It was the consensus of the City Council to have the City maintain the stormwater pond. Gaffron stated on Page 18 of the draft resolution, an item of discussion is whether an escrow for design work should be required for the sewer. Gaffron stated to his knowledge the City Engineer has put together a breakdown of the engineering estimate for the design work but that he does not have that available tonight. Gaffron indicated he will follow up on the points raised by the City Council and will bring it back for Council review and approval at the first meeting in April. Gaffron stated the only other point is if the Metropolitan Council delays the Comprehensive Plan Amendment until the City guides other properties for higher density, then the City will have to make some progress on that fairly quickly. Cornick asked whether a 7.5 foot setback will be part of the plan. Gaffron stated the chart on Page 7 of the draft resolution illustrates the RPUD standards and will need to be changed since there was a discussion about having a 7.5 foot setback. Printup moved, Levang seconded, to adopt RESOLUTION NO., a Resolution Granting Preliminary Approval of Amendment #4 of the Orono 2008-2030 Community Management Plan, 425-595 Old Crystal Bay Road North, File No. 16-3807. Cornick asked whether language needs to be added to the resolution about the possible easement. Gaffron indicated Staff will review with the County possible options for a trail along the south side of Wayzata Boulevard and bring that item back for discussion at the next City Council meeting. *8. REVIEW OF SPECIAL EVENT PERMIT — "LONG LAKE ROWING CREW" PERMITTING AUTHORITY: HENNEPIN COUNTY SHERIFF'S WATER PATROL Printup moved, Levang seconded, to direct Staff to send a letter to the Sheriffs Water Patrol approving issuance of the Special Event Permit for the Long Lake Rowing Crew for the 2016 season subject to the conditions recommended by Staff as outlined in the March 23, 2016, Staff memorandum. VOTE: Ayes 4, Nays 0. Page 14 of 17 MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, March 28, 2016 7:00 o'clock p.m. MAYOR/COUNCIL REPORT Levang stated given the nice spring weather, the golf course will open tomorrow and that they are hoping for a very good season. Levang stated the golf course has a Groupon coupon available right now and that they are attempting to market the season passes. Levang stated the next City newsletter will be out next week. Levang reported the Navarre Community Initiative Committee met again last week and that they are in the process of planning the second annual Navarre festival. Printup noted there will be a meeting at the state capitol on Wednesday, March 30, at 4:30 regarding the proposed Highway 12 improvements. CITY ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT 9. PROSECUTING ATTORNEY — REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL (RFP) Loftus noted in January there was discussion about establishing a rotating schedule for RFPs. Staff has drafted an RPF for prosecuting attorney services for Council input. Also laid out in Staff's report are some typical steps in this process. Loftus stated she is looking for Council input on the timeline and how the Council would like to be involved. Loftus noted the entire Council could be involved in the interview process. Printup asked if Council Member Walsh has provided any comments about the process. Loftus stated she did receive an e-mail from Council Member Walsh about how he would like the service contract to read, which will not occur until later in the process. Council Member Walsh recommended that the contract contain a good termination clause. McMillan stated in her view the whole City Council should receive the proposals and provide input on which firms they would like to interview. McMillan recommended Staff also put down their recommendations and then consolidate the two lists. McMillan indicated the Council could have a special work session to conduct the interviews. Levang noted Police Chief Farniok provided some important background information about the role of the prosecuting attorney in the past and that perhaps that kind of background could be prepared for Council review. Levang noted there are a limited number of people in the community who really focus in this area. Loftus stated she attempted to draft the RFP to specifically request the firm address their local relevant experience. Loftus stated one of Chief Farniok's points was that it is extremely important that the prosecuting attorney is independent of political influence and has impartial judgment. Loftus stated in Staff's view an annual report to the Council would be very important and is detailed in the RFP. Cornick stated as a former law enforcement officer, he understands the importance of continuity with the prosecutor, which should be taken into consideration rather than simply taking the lowest bidder. Page 15 of 17 MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, March 28, 2016 7:00 o'clock p.m. 9. PROSECUTING ATTORNEY — REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL (RFP) (continued) Printup stated he understands the spirit of that but that the Council is not going into the process 100 percent impartial. McMillan commented no one can ever be totally impartial. Printup stated he struggles with giving added weight to somebody who has done the job in the past. Loftus stated the current firm will likely score high on the criteria C1, which relates to their experience, but that there are opportunities to rate the various firms on different factors. Cornick stated if this is being done every five years and there is a different low bidder every time, the prosecutor will be rotated quite often, which could turn into a bad situation. Printup stated reviewing it every five years helps keep the process honest. McMillan stated it will depend on what someone's criteria are. Levang noted the Council agrees to the RFP and that it is a healthy thing to do, but that the issue of good service also needs to be recognized. Printup moved, Cornick seconded, to approve the Request for Proposal for the City of Orono prosecuting attorney for advertisement. Levang asked if the list of local firms contains all the law firms within the area. Loftus stated this is a list of local law firms that will be provided the RFP but that the RFP process would be open to any law firm that is interested. VOTE: Ayes 4, Nays 0. *10. CLAIMS/BELLS Printup moved, Levang seconded, to approve payment of the All Funds Account. VOTE: Ayes 4, Nays 0. CITY ATTORNEY'S REPORT Mattick stated he had nothing to report. PUBLIC COMMENT (continued) Printup moved, Cornick seconded, to open the Council meeting up to public comment. VOTE: Ayes 4, Nays 0. T7 Bonnett, 40 Smith Avenue, stated he is here tonight as a disenfranchised citizen and that he would like to talk about the project that is going on next to his property. Page 16 of 17 MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, March 28, 2016 7:00 o'clock p.m. PUBLIC COMMENT (continued) Bonnett stated he is disenfranchised because the homeowner has lied to him on a number of occasions about his project. The homeowner said to the City Council that they have a growing family which is why they want to do the project, that it would merely be a second floor remodel, and that the height of the windows would not change. Bonnett stated those have turned out to be untrue. Bonnett stated the neighbor also indicated to him that they will not be addressing any drainage problems. Gaffron stated he has not been involved in any of these issues. Bonnett stated they have also asked the neighbor to pick up debris in their yard and he told them to call the builder. Bonnett stated he wishes the Council would address these variance issues and that he is here tonight to let the Council know that they feel very badly about this project and this process. Bonnett stated they had a great life here in Orono until the variances were approved. CLOSED SESSION Levang moved, Printup seconded, to enter into Closed Session as permitted by the attorney-client privilege (Section 13D.05, Subdivision 3(b) to discuss litigation between Go Green Energy versus City of Orono. VOTE: Ayes 4, Nays 0. McMillan noted there will be no official City business discussed after the closed session except to adjourn the meeting. (The City Council went into Closed Session from 8:48 p.m. to 9:07 p.m.) ADJOURNMENT ATTEST: e Tiegs, City Cl,---kCI Lili Tod McMillan, Mayor Page 17 of 17