Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout05-21-1997 Council Minutes Special Meetinga SPECIAL ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING • MINUTES FOR MAY 21,1997 IZ1TM I The Council met on the above mentioned date with the following members present: Mayor Gabriel Jabbour, Councilmembers J. Diann Goetten, Charles Kelley, Barbara Peterson and Richard Flint. Representing Staff were City Administrator Ron Moorse, City Attorney Tom Radio, Assistant Planning and Zoning Administrator Michael Gaffron, Public Services Director Greg Gappa and Recorder Lin Vee. Mayor Jabbour called the meeting to order at 6:05 p.m. ( #1) SPRING HILL GOLF COURSE EAW - RESOLUTION NO. 3901 Marshal Braman, Tim Johnson, Jack Morrison and Tom Crosby were present representing the Spring Hill Golf Course. Jabbour introduced this item as a continuation of the May 19, 1997 Council meeting, and indicated discussion will center on whether or not the City should require an EIS. He reviewed the EAW process stating that the DNR had requested additional information before making a recommendation on the need for an EIS. • Gaffron reported that the DNR and proposers had met to determine what additional information should be provided to the City to make an informed decision regarding the need for an EIS. After a May 7 meeting, Braman defined five items that the proposers would provide to fill the information gap. These items include: 1. Documentation of the changes and impacts on the Big Woods. 2. Assessment of the habitat changes by cover type throughout the site. 3. Development of a tree protection plan. 4. Protected waters permit. 5. Development of an erosion control plan. The DNR had indicated that once this information is delivered to the City of Orono, it would be unlikely that an EIS would be required. At this point, Council needs to determine if the information provided for the five items is satisfactory. Braman stated that extra people were brought in to compile the additional information requested. This entire group met on site to characterize the existing species, both plant and wildlife, in the Big Woods. Lists of the affected species are included in the information packet. The DNR was also concerned about the DNR protected wetland. The DNR has established the Ordinary High Water Mark for the impacted DNR wetland. The proposers are no longer planning to install a weir on the outlet of the wetland because it is already close to the historic OHWM. Plans for tree protection and erosion control are also included. Braman listed the additional professionals who helped to compile the information. is Aw SPECIAL ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES FOR MAY 21,1997 • Lee Frelich - University of Minnesota, College of Natural Resources, Forest Resources Division - 5 years of work on Doctorate degree on the Big Woods in Michigan in the Savannah and Porcupine Mountain areas (70, 000 acres of Big Woods). 2. Jane Shuttleworth, RUST Environment and Infrastructure - 15 years of work with botanical and biological issues. 3. Thomas Braman - Biologist with Summit Enviro Solutions - Background in plant biology. 4. Terry Jeffrey - Schoell & Madson - Background in trees with a Natural Resources degree from the University of Minnesota with emphasis in tree management. 5. Margaret O'Brien Jeffrey - Schoell & Madson - Degree in Natural Resources with broad range of experience. Jabbour asked if there were any public comments. There were none. Jabbour noted that the City has been very concerned over the Big Woods and much is documentation is included in the EAW regarding the impacts and mitigation of the Big Woods. Jabbour asked if staff was comfortable with the information provided. Gaffron responded that it was very detailed and appeared to adequately provide the information agreed to. Radio agreed that the process had been comprehensive to this point. He asked Braman if, in his professional opinion, they have provided the type and amount of information a scientist or engineer would require to document both positive and negative changes in this area. Braman responded that the information provided is actually beyond what a standard EAW would require. In his professional opinion, the proposer has adequately provided the type and amount of information a scientist or engineer would require to document both positive and negative changes in the area. Radio added that the documentation provides a better understanding of what is being lost and how to preserve what is there in the future. Flint asked for clarification on the three dates the golf course concept plans were done. Morrison responded that January 12, 1995 was the preliminary plan, September 11, 1996 is the intermediate and the final plan is dated January, 1997. The basic elements are final in the January plan but there may be minor changes such as movement of a sand bunker. No structural changes are anticipated. Flint questioned placement of the access - Spring Hill Road vs. County 2 • Aft SPECIAL ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING • MINUTES FOR MAY 21,1997 Road 6. Morrison responded that the access issue will not change the design of the actual golf course. If access is off of County Road 6, a road will run parallel to a fairway. The existing plan shows access from Spring Hill Road. Jabbour noted this issue will be part of the conditional use permit and does not affect the determination of the need for an EIS. Radio commented that if the Council approved a plan during their CUP /variance review that was substantially different from the current proposal that the EAW process would be repeated. Morrison explained how access from County Road 6 could be achieved noting that it would not affect any wetlands and is along a practice facility on high ground. Jabbour asked again if there were any public comments. Dick Krueger, 1175 Willowbrook Drive, asked if the DNR had reviewed Schoell and Madson's report. Jabbour responded that if the DNR has, they have not communicated so to the City. The DNR asked that the information be submitted to the City. Krueger questioned if the City had the expertise to determine if the DNR concerns had been sufficiently satisfied. He also felt that Schoell and Madson's opinion could be biased since they are hired by the proposers. Jabbour noted the DNR had been asked to assist the City in obtaining information. He did not necessarily • agree that the DNR's idea of cataloging and documenting was parallel with the City's philosophy of preserving. Krueger reiterated that a professional opinion should be made by an unbiased scientist regarding the information provided. Jabbour responded that the City is the final decision - maker. • Morrison noted the developer has been continuously working with the DNR. The DNR had been invited to attend this meeting but they did not feel it was necessary, and they had indicated that an EIS would not be required. Kelley moved, Goetten seconded, to approve the completed EAW and that an EIS is not required for this project. Discussion continued. Kelley noted that a key word, "not ", was missing from the resolution, quoting from Page 1, "Whereas, the Environmental Assessment Worksheet for the Spring Hill Golf Course Project has been reviewed by the City Council of the City of Orono to determine whether an Environmental Impact Statement is required for the Project ". Flint asked if Kelley was proposing to adopt this resolution. Kelley agreed. Radio suggested a motion to adopt the proposed Record of Decision with the attached findings, conclusions and determinations. 3 dw SPECIAL ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES FOR MAY 21,1997 • Kelley amended his motion to adopt the proposed Record of Decision with the attached findings, conclusions and determinations. Radio recommended the following technical changes: Page 5 of 8 - Finding 4 (i) - add "both voluntarily and to be required as conditions by the City to the conditional use permit" following "efforts made to mitigate the impacts." The purpose is to assure the Council's ability to address any additional environmental concerns in the conditional use permit. Crosby suggested this may also be addressed on Page 7 of 8. Page 6 of 8 - Finding 9 (a) (iv) - In the middle of the paragraph concerning agricultural chemicals, the sentence beginning "The Proposer has indicated a commitment to sound environmental management..." should be changed to read, "The Proposer has indicated, and the City will likely require, a commitment to sound environmental management ...." Page 7 of 8 - Finding 9 (c) (ii) - Regarding agencies with authority to deal with degradation of surface or groundwater, "the City" should be added; Flint recommended adding "the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District" as well. • Page 7 of 8 - #1 under Conclusions and Determinations should read, "The proposed Project taken in its entirety as a 200 -acre site and considering various mitigating factors, both those voluntarily undertaken and those required by the City Council and other agencies, ..." Page 3 of 8 - #4 (d) - The word "no" should be changed to "minimal" legal protections. Flint agreed with these corrections. He questioned #4 (f) (iv) on Page 4 of 8. Gaffron responded that this is an attempt to protect the Big Woods, i.e. not being able to take 8% of the property. Crosby added that normally in a subdivision the City could designate wetlands and ask for conservation easements. Since this is not a subdivision, technically the City couldn't ask for these. However, these easements will be granted by the proposers. Radio indicated the statement was correct and agreed that a subdivision does give greater ability to the City to require trails, easements, etc. Flint suggested eliminating this item as it indicates an EIS might be necessary because subdivision provisions do not exist. Radio agreed this item was not critical to the Record of Decision. Flint amended the motion to adopt Resolution No. 3901 approving the proposed Record of Decision on the Spring Hill Golf Club Project Environmental Assessment Worksheet with the attached findings, conclusions and determinations eliminating Item #4 (f) (iv) on Page 4 of 8. Ayes 5, nays 0. • 4 SPECIAL ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING • MINUTES FOR MAY 21,1997 Crosby continued discussion of the access issue. He noted there was initial objection from the County to have access off of County Road 6. They have since met with the County Engineer in charge of access and the Engineer would not recommend using Spring Hill Road unless the access was moved west 150'. The County cannot find the permit for access to the Conference Center, so the access probably existed prior to the Conference Center. Today there are different regulations regarding the permitting process. Crosby stated a turn lane would be constructed on County Road 6 and a permit submitted to the County for access off of County Road 6. He was reasonably sure the County would approve access off of County Road 6 in the existing location. A recess was called from 7:00 p.m. - 7:30 p.m. ( #2) MEETING WITH HUNTINGTON FARM HOMEOWNERS REGARDING THE COUNTY ROAD 6 UPGRADE AND THE CITY'S COMMUNITY MANAGEMENT PLAN Charles Kelley was not present for discussion of this item. Several residents were present including Larry and Jan McCartney of 755 Hunt Farm Road, Jeff and Robin Martin of 760 Hunt Farm Road, Dave Wilson of 840 Hunt Farm Road and Mark Sprenger of 870 Hunt Farm Road. • Steve Theis and Jim Grube represented Hennepin County. Jabbour stated that discussion of this item was to address some of the issues raised in a letter received from some Huntington Farm residents affected by the County Road 6 upgrade. He explained some of the background and role of Orono's Comprehensive Plan which was developed in the mid -70's. McCulley Road was designated as a bypass route for Orono to encourage traffic to use Highway 12 versus County Road 15. Moorse provided excerpts from the Comprehensive Plan adopted in 1980 that refer to McCulley Road or Ring Route, and the Engineer's report from October of 1977 regarding the Ring Route concept. A reporter from the Lakeshore Weekly News asked if this item was an action item. Jabbour responded that it was not since action had been taken some time ago, but this was a time to address the concerns of a group of residents. McCartney expressed appreciation for the opportunity to be heard by Council. He indicated one of the major issues was the decision process, not the actual need for the upgrade. It appeared to him that "the squeaky wheel got the grease" when the actual placement was decided. When the road was staked out, it was obvious that some properties received much more impact than others. The overpass at Highway 12 will be an eyesore. Current access from Hunt Farm Road to County 0 5 SPECIAL ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES FOR MAY 21,1997 • Road 6 is steep. Theis has indicated that a 3' drop in grade is proposed at that intersection. The County had indicated it was the residents' problem to reduce the impacts by discussing such ideas as berms and fencing with the City. No one has contacted the Hunt Farm residents up to this point about easements. Jabbour noted the process did not proceed as it should since there was one very adversarial resident. However, the decision for placement of the road was not influenced by the number of people complaining. Goetten agreed there were a number of meetings with different people in attendance at each and different concerns. The concerns were made known to the Council who tried to compromise and share the impact. Robin Martin expressed her anger at being severely impacted. She had called the City and talked to Public Works Director John Gerhardson to find out if she should attend a meeting. She was told the proposed changes would not affect her and it would not be necessary to attend the meeting. The road has moved 25' into her yard reducing the play area and safety of her children. Jabbour explained that the Public Works Director probably did not know that the Council would • approve changes that would affect the Martin property. McCartney stated that at the next meeting the "blue line" was presented as the most likely placement. However, it seemed to move at a later meeting indicating that if you were at the right meeting, the placement could be changed. He felt the encroachment could be spread more evenly. Jabbour responded that the City passed a resolution to proceed with the road plans and stake the area. They would not make a final agreement until the stakes were in place. McCartney stated it was hard to tell where the stakes were and the impacts in the winter. Jabbour explained the process of the road construction. Hennepin County is in partnership with the City for right -of -way acquisition. The County has certain guidelines where there is nothing they can do to change the road placement. In the Clear Zone, nothing can be in the way. The proposed overpass for Highway 12 is also a concern in the design. Mark Sprenger asked if that meant the road could not be shifted and would have to remain in the current path. Jabbour responded that it would not have to be. Sprenger also stated he received . no notification of any meetings through the mail: Moorse confirmed that residents adjacent to the roadway were notified of the public hearing. Since this affects a property owned by the Homeowners Association, they may not have received individual notification. • 6 SPECIAL ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING • MINUTES FOR MAY 21,1997 McCartney questioned the overpass and how it would affect the properties in Huntington Farms. Jabbour responded the overpass has been contemplated since 1989 and has been discussed at many meetings. Goetten added there were many variations discussed on the Highway 12 route with County Road 6 being involved in every route. Much information has been published. Jeff Martin asked what the process was for making the shifts. Jabbour stated a public hearing was held. At that time, the design was only a sketch plan. There was some opposition to the whole road being done but the County had plans to make some type of improvement. Some residents voiced their opposition to losing trees and other impacts to their property. Based on feedback at the initial meeting, Hennepin County presented revised drawings. Martin said it seemed Council was talking only to those affected by the changes. Jabbour responded they were talking to everyone who attended the meetings. McCartney noted that had they been at the meeting that the road was moved closer to the Martins, they may have been able to change that design. Jabbour commented that the City has signed a contract with Hennepin County and the working • drawings are being developed. The affected properties have been identified. Theis stated he would be willing to go over the meaning of the stakes on site again with anyone who was interested. Robin Martin stated he did not know that information the last time he was on site. Theis responded that he was able to tell them where the property line and outlot lines were and the approximate location of the road. They also discussed the concerns of lowering the road and the affect it would have. McCartney asked to have the shoulder identified and the location of the pavement. Jeff Martin asked why the roadbed had to be moved over. Jabbour responded that it was to limit the amount of impact on several properties on the proposed curve that were substantially affected, and to make sure the wetlands were not affected. Theis stated the road needs to connect at Orchard Park Road. A curve needs to be in place because of the design speed. McCartney questioned the placement of the overpass. Theis felt that when the Highway 12 design was complete, there would be reconstruction of this intersection. Any design of the interchange and overpass at this time is only speculation. The current County Road 6 project has to end and merge with the existing pavement. 7 SPECIAL ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES FOR MAY 21,1997 • Martin asked why the road had to move 25'. Theis stated it was only 8.5', not 25'. Grube clarified that the Homeowners Association wanted to be "isolated" as much as possible from the road and that the residents felt they had to deal with a berm, fencing, etc. on their own. Theis suggested the Association get together to decide what they want. Grube suggested the County would work with the Association. Jabbour commented that the Association could ask the County to move dirt from one area to another to create a berm as the City has no right to be on their land and would need easements. McCartney thought lowering the road 3' would have a big impact. He felt the road needed to be lowered and a berm and fence would greatly reduce the impact and improve safety. Grube reiterated that lowering the road would be good news to the Association and working with them to move the dirt would resolve that issue. Council urged the Association to continue to work with Hennepin County to develop a workable solution. Theis commented that there is a constraint to stay within the outlot used as a common area. The County agreed to work with the Homeowners Association to do as much as possible to lessen the impact of the road in the Huntington Farms area. Jan McCartney asked if the whole road by three of the homes she indicated is to be lowered or • just the entrance to Hunt Farm Road. Theis responded that there are some variables. Grube added that it may not be lower at each of the three spots. By lowering the intersection at Hunt Farm Road and County Road 6 by 3', the "hump" will be taken out of the road. Those areas at the low points, also called sag or trough, may come up a little. Martin asked if there was any reason the road couldn't be moved back to the previous layout. Theis responded that Layout 02 was acceptable and the road could be moved back to that design, however, Council has approved Layout 03. Martin noted this change was approved at the meeting he did not attend. Mrs. Martin reiterated that she had been told by the City that it was not necessary to attend that meeting. Jabbour responded that staff cannot predict what Council will do. Mrs. Martin asked who she could call to find out such information if not the person who signed the letter. Jabbour thought it would be best to attend any meeting that involved their property. Flint agreed adding it would be difficult to know when any determination would be made regarding Highway 12. Jabbour explained that throughout the public process Layout 02 was preferred by the County and staff, but Council directed the County to develop another plan to "spread the pain" more equally and Layout 03 was designed. Mr. Martin noted that the property across the road actually gains property. 8 • SPECIAL ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING • MINUTES FOR MAY 21,1997 Wilson asked what the process would be to move the road. Jabbour responded that the whole road would have to be moved, not just a portion. Council would have to reconsider their decision. Jabbour was not in favor of this. Grube added that a contract had been entered into between Hennepin County and the City. He expressed his wish to continue with the currently approved layout adding that what appears to be a minor move in one location actually tilts the whole design and impacts other areas. Unexpected "kinks" in the road affect the motorist. He reiterated his offer to work with the Homeowners Association in moving dirt to accommodate the process. Wilson asked again what the process is to have the Council reconsider the road layout. Jabbour responded that they would have to convince the Council to do so. He did not think the Council would agree to reconsider. The City would not benefit by reconsideration and there would not be any new information to present. The vote to approve this layout was 5 -0. Wilson asked what the vote would have to be to reconsider. Jabbour responded it would be 3 votes which is the majority. Jan McCartney asked if the decision of a previous Council held to a new Council. Goetten responded that there were three people on the previous Council who voted for Layout 03 who are • also on the current Council. This would indicate that the current Council's position would not change. is Jabbour felt it was poor policy for a Council to change their decision unless there was new evidence to consider that would change the outcome. Wilson felt more meaningful input had been received from the constituents. Goetten responded that some of the concerns would be addressed by the County such as the elevations and berm. Jabbour stated he would stand by his decision and felt Charles Kelley would also. Jeff Martin stated the Council did not hear their input because they were kept out of the meeting. Jabbour took exception to that comment. Jan McCartney asked if the road design could be moved 1' or 2' even if Council did not change their position. Jabbour responded that the road has been designed and approved. No more changes could be made to the design but there is some flexibility in working with buffers, berms, curb and gutter, etc. 0 SPECIAL ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES FOR MAY 21,1997 • Larry McCartney asked to have the County come to the site and review the meaning of the stakes and discuss berm placement. Wilson asked to have acquisition and assessment information. Grube responded that he would check with the real estate division to see when they will be available and then let the President of the Association know so he can inform the others. Another resident asked what the estimated timeline is for the project. Grube stated the property owners should be in the process of being contacted about easements so they are a little behind in this aspect. Theis added they would start to build the road next spring. Flint stated that they had concurred on a couple issues including the road being lowered and the decision to berm. He encouraged the County to look at additional ways to help the neighbors when they are on the site. Wilson noted the decision to berm will be discussed by the Association along with other issues so that has not actually been agreed upon. ADJOURNMENT Mayor Jabbour adjourned the meeting at 9:08 p.m. Gabn Jabbour, Mayor ATTEST: is 10 0