Loading...
2022-02-22 CC Meeting MinutesMOUND CITY COUNCIL MINUTES February 22, 2022 The City Council of the City of Mound, Hennepin County, Minnesota, met in regular session on Tuesday, February 22, 2022 at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers in the Centennial Building. Members present: Mayor Ray Salazar; Council members, Paula Larson, Sherrie Pugh, and Jason Holt Members absent: Phil Velsor Others present: City Manager Eric Hoversten, City Clerk Kevin Kelly, City Engineer Brian Simmons, Michelle Herrick, Joe Bruns, Mary Davis, Kevin Johansen, Michael Border, Jerry Jerome and Anders Kemppainen. Consent agenda: All items listed under the Consent Agenda are considered to be routine in nature by the Council. There will be no separate discussion on these items unless a Councilmember or citizen so requests, in which event it will be removed from the Consent Agenda and considered in normal sequence. 1. Open meeting Mayor Salazar called the meeting to order at 7:01 p.m. 2. Pledge of Allegiance 3. Approve agenda Hoversten added additional pages 473.1 through 473.6 to Consent Item 4F. MOTION by Holt, seconded by Pugh, to approve the amended agenda. All voted in favor. Motion carried. 4. Consent agenda Larson requested that Item 4B be pulled from the Consent Agenda. MOTION by Larson, seconded by Holt, to approve the amended consent agenda. Upon roll call vote, all voted in favor. Motion carried. A. Approve payment of claims in the amount of $43,290.80 B. PULLED. C. RESOLUTION NO. 22-18: RESOLUTION APPROVING PUBLIC GATHERING PERMIT FOR USE OF SURFSIDE PARK AND BEACH AS WEIGH-IN STATION FOR 2022 ANNUAL MINNETOKA CLASSIC FISHING TOURNMENT ON LAKE MINNETONKA ON SATURDAY, JUNE, 4, 2022 D. RESOLUTION 22-19: RESOLUTION APPROVING PUBLIC GATHERING PERMIT FOR USE OF SURFSIDE PARK AND BEACH AS WEIGH-IN STATION FOR 2022 MNBN TEAM TRAIL FISHING TOURNMENT ON LAKE MINNETONKA ON SUNDAY, AUGUST 13, 2022 Mound City Council Minutes — February 22,2022 E. RESOLUTION 22-20: RESOLUTION APPROVING PERMITS FOR 2022 TOUR DE TONKA ON SATURDAY AUGUST 6, 2022 AND REDUCING FEES DUE TO PUBLIC PURPOSE OF GATHERING F. RESOLUTION 22-21: RESOLUTION APPROVING AMENDMENT TO PUBLIC LANDS PERMIT TO MODIFY STRUCTURE ON DEVON COMMONS ADJACENT TO 4717 ISLAND VIEW DRIVE AND TO AUTHORIZE IMPROVEMENTS AS PROVIDED BY CITY CODE SEC. 123-35 (B) (5) RELATED TO NON -CONFORMING USES G. Approve Pay Request #1 in the amount of $29, 585.18 to Empire Pipe Services for the 2021 Sewer Televising Project, PW 21-04 4B. PULLED. Approve minutes: February 8, 2022 Regular Meeting Larson requested the City Council 02-08-22 regular meeting minutes be revised on Page 436, top paragraph, lines 4 and 5. Larson said the minutes should read that the school board member did not call back Larson instead of the Superintendent didn't get back to Larson. MOTION by Larson, seconded by Pugh, to approve the February 8, 2022 regular meeting minutes. All voted in favor. Motion carried. 5. Comments and suggestions from citizens present on any item not on the agenda. Michelle Herrick, 2630 Westedge Blvd., said she spoke with an architect and developer who work in the Twin Cities who told her that waiting for the plan amendments to the Northland Mound development is a substantial change of more than 10% and best practices should allow for the project to be opened back up for public comment which the Council should consider. Herrick said the project should be subject to the limitations of the 120-day rule and she thinks a reapproval process of the project should be able to go through both the Planning Commission and City Council and be accomplished by the end of March. Michael Border, 5440 Three Points Blvd., said he is a member of Our Lady of the Lake (OLL) Church. Border said she and others are studying documents from previous meetings and believe there is a gross misinterpretation regarding the parking at OLL as well as there is no overflow parking and no land for sale at OLL. Border said one issue relates to traffic congestion in the area, noting a vehicle recently ran into the OLL brick wall. Border said the Council should be in receipt of letter from food shelf coordinator Michelle Bottomfield addressing traffic at the Grace Center. Border said the parking plan for the development is grossly inappropriate for the area. Border said he would be interested in the number of homes and the number of low-income homes in Mound and said forces from outside the city and from the State are placing their problems on Mound. Border reminded the Council that they were elected by the public to their seats and they are not part of the State but are a part of Mound and are supposed to look out for the citizens here. Mary Davis, 3021 Inverness Lane, said she wanted to reiterate the traffic and parking issues and said she didn't get any answers from the last meeting and was would like to know about the next steps in the process. Salazar said on March 2nd Brian Farrell, the Northland Mound developer, has a meeting scheduled with John Biglow and Father Peter from OLL along with the owner of Paddle North. Salazar said this was information he received this morning from Mr. Biglow. Salazar said the topic of the meeting will be ingress and egress through the private easement and parking. Mound City Council Minutes — February 22,2022 Davis wanted to know when the development proposal will return to Council as the item was tabled. Salazar said the item was tabled without a date. Davis said she wanted to know when the meeting would be noticed. Salazar said there isn't a set date as the issues of reducing the size of the building and traffic egress and ingress need to be addressed by Farrell, noting Farrell can request action on his proposal to be extended to a date to be determined. Davis said if there is no decision made by the Council by a specific date than the development proposal will be approved. Hoversten said he expressed to Farrell that the developer needs to make the extension request in writing and the extension must include their revised plans. Salazar said if there is no action from the developer on a formal extension, then the absolute last date for consideration would be 3/31/2022. Hoversten said the developer needs to supply the Council the revised concept plans that the Council requested and if the developer is unresponsive than the application will most likely be rejected. Davis asked if there is a statute which explains all of this. Hoversten there is statute with timelines and requirements of the City on planning applications. Holt asked if this project would go back to the Council or PC. Hoversten said this depends on what comes back from developer and if there are similar or new uses or different physical parameters as this project has already been vetted by the PC as a multifamily project. Salazar said the last right of refusal is in the hands of the Council and if there are any questions they can be addressed by the City Attorney. Davis said what happens after March 2nd and Holt said there are the March 8 and March 2211 Council meetings unless there is a formal extension letter. Davis and Salazar discussed as to whether there would be another public hearing held to give input and Salazar said the public hearing requirement has been met. Davis asked if there isn't a public hearing shouldn't there be one when something significantly changes to which Salazar said the ultimate decision is made by the City. Salazar said if the 104 units are reduced by more than 10% it doesn't need to go through planning as it was already approved at 104 so a lower number of units wouldn't affect the process as it has already been approved by PC. Davis commented that this project appears to be a done deal based on a comment Farrell made at the last meeting to which Salazar reiterated the Council ultimately makes the final decision and this project has already gone through PC. Davis said she would plan to be at each of the March meetings and asked how would she know if the development is on the agenda. Hoversten said City staff will do the standard planning notification of mailing the agenda item to properties within 350 feet of the development. Hoversten added the Council meeting agenda is posted on the city website the Thursday before the next Council meeting. Hoversten and Davis discussed the public noticing of the January 25th meeting and Salazar noted the Council tabled the Purchase Agreement (PA) on the sale of City owned property to Northland and Farrell came back to the Council with an offer to pay the appraised value of the land or at least $50K if the appraised value was less. Hoversten said staff were not required to do a special public notification of the development at that time. Hoversten said the notification letters were sent out for the original planning application which was brought to the PC on January 4th and was tabled. Hoversten said the Council then determined whether to accept the purchase agreement. Hoversten said the February 1 st PC was noticed and the 2/8/2022 Council Meeting was noticed due to the public hearings and staff met the different timelines for notification which were published in the Laker and those notices also went to affected properties within 350 feet. Mound City Council Minutes — February 22,2022 Hoversten said the PA wasn't subject to special public notification requirement and was acted on by Council at the January 11th and January 25th regular Council meetings. Joe Bruns, 2630 Setter Circle, asked if an environmental impact study has been done on the project by the developer. Hoversten said it has not been and it is up to the MPCA at the state level to determine a need for one. Bruns asked what triggers the MCPA. Hoversten said a Phase I Environmental Assessment has been done and doesn't know whether a Phase Environmental Assessment will be required. Bruns said the traffic study is six years old and a lot has changed to traffic patterns on Commerce Blvd. and it should be redone. Salazar said Hennepin County did the traffic study and they do them as necessary. Bruns asked for the statute number that Hoversten cited earlier in the meeting which Hoversten said was 15.99. Bruns asked if the Mound Fire Department (MFD) was consulted regarding the ability to get into the area with the new development. Salazar said the MFD was consulted as on any new project, noting during the Villages of Island Park development discussion the MFD determined their current fleet of fire vehicles could get into any new development. Salazar said the development is in the preliminary stages and is not approved yet. Holt said it was talked about in the last meeting and Hoversten said the road design will be reviewed by the MFD. Bruns asked what happens if Council Member Larson recuses herself and there is a tie vote to which Salazar said it dies. Herrick reiterated best practices in most cities would repeat the PC process if there is a change of 10% or more in the project. Herrick said she would like to know the date the three people who are part of the City development sub -committee met. Salazar said he thought it was in November. Herrick said she wanted the initial proposal to the PC from Northland. Hoversten said if Herrick wanted material from previous PC meetings and if the information she was seeking wasn't on the website Herrick could contact staff. Herrick asked if the appraisal has been completed and Hoversten said it is in progress and is due in mid -March. Larson said she thought if there were any changes to an application then the process starts over with a new application but she said she realized that is not the case. Larson said she thought a 10% change will automatically trigger re -application and asked who is going to determine if a new application is needed if the change is substantial. Salazar said the City is following state statute and the determination is in the hands of the City. Salazar said if the development went from 104 units to 50 units why would you need to go to back to the beginning of the process and Salazar said the City will ask the City Attorney's for their view on the matter. Larson and Salazar discussed the term "best practices" as they apply to development projects to which Salazar said the City will follow the law/state statute. Larson said she is concerned about an arbitrary decision from Staff regarding the application. Salazar said the developer has checked the boxes regarding the 104-unit building proposal and he doesn't see a need to return to the PC for approval if the number of units is lowered. Salazar Mound City Council Minutes — February 22,2022 and Larson discussed how the 50 feet height could be approved by the City Planner when it is higher than design standards and not require a variance. Hoversten said the mixed use Planned Unit Development (PUD) was designed to create the flexibility needed in complex developments in these districts. Hoversten said the guidelines are approved through a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) which is how zoning works in mixed use districts. Hoversten said Staff uses the guidelines defined in code for the mixed -use district and provides advice to the PC and Council. Hoversten said the height of the elevator shaft and the other three areas was discussed and staff recommendation was that it is allowed as part of the PUD and CUP for the project as those areas are set back from the front of the building, noting the final approval rests with the Council and not Staff. Holt noted when the plan was first heard at PC it was thought that it required variances but through further discovery it was determined a variance was not needed. Holt and Larson said they heard during the last Council meeting that the proposal had to go through PC again but Salazar said there was no requirement for PC review again. Larson asked if there are two different deadlines for a planning application and for the Plat and Hoversten said the Plat is a straight 120 days and the planning application is 60-days with an option for an additional 60-day extension. Hoversten added the applicant can extend the timeline for both the Plat and planning application if they chose to. Hoversten said the City has a 60-day window and an additional 60-day extension in place for the sub -division, CUP and PUD in the rights allowed in MN statute 15.99. Larson asked how many times can the developer extend projects and Hoversten said it could be as many times as needed as the developer was directed to bring back a new plan for the area by the Council. Larson asked how many development proposals for the same area have come before the current proposal. Hoversten said there were a total of four in recent years which included Trident, Lifestyle Communities, another speculative developer for something similar to Lifestyle and none of those made it through the due diligence process of the developers. Hoversten said Brian Farrell was the first developer to submit an application. Hoversten said he has received a number of calls which have gone no further than the initial consideration by those developers. Larson said she has talked to Pugh about being able to sit in on the development committee meetings but not speak at them. Hoversten said if there is a quorum then it becomes a public meeting and developers don't want to divulge their business intentions publicly so early in the process of fact finding. Larson said she has talked about the procedure on when developers come to town with Pugh and asked why can't the Council review these proposals. Hoversten said developers are able to pursue opportunities if they can privately bring a proposal to the City for feedback without public disclosure in order not to affect their ability to negotiate a purchase price on private or public land. Hoversten said the City has learned that it is in the investors best interest is to keep their initial interest from being publicly disclosed. Larson said the development sub -committee feels like a boy's club and she would like more transparency in the process. Larson claims she was shut down by Hoversten when she wanted to sit in on the development meetings. Salazar said a public notice of a quorum must be made and everything is out in the open and there is no confidence from the developer in that scenario. Mound City Council Minutes — February 22,2022 Salazar said developers come to the City with their ideas and zoning for a property and the sub- committee gives input and in this case the developer was told that the development was kind of big and there were traffic issues at the site. Salazar added this application was discussed at the last Council Meeting and is contingent on many factors. Salazar said the developer is in a private negotiation like anyone else buying private property. Larson stated there could be Indian Mounds on the property. Pugh said the issue around best practice and the challenge for Mound is that it is a small town and there aren't many opportunities. Pugh said in the non-profit world nothing started without a community meeting regarding development. Pugh added developers come to the City with their projects and are not asking up front what we would like to see from a community vision standpoint. Pugh said some of the questions of the public regarding this project are legitimate and some are based on non -truths but this is part of the conversation. Pugh said the City must follow the law and if a developer wants to resubmit an application the city processes should be more effective and inclusive and we need the citizens to bring some civility to the process and not diminish others. Salazar said the community vision was developed in the Comprehensive Plan (Comp Plan) and there was a lot of public input back in 2017 and 2018 and citizens came forward so there was public input. Salazar said the input was in the Comp Plan and now the City is getting some pushback and that the Council has a balancing act between process and public input. Holt said if the developer meets on March 2"d and comes up with a proposal is the City sending out the 10-day notification letter. Hoversten said the City will make notice to people within 350 feet prior to the Council meeting when this item is on the agenda. Hoversten said that Public Hearing rules are different from a regular meeting notice. Holt said the development will be on the agenda on March 22"d or beyond if there is an agreement between the parties on the traffic and parking. Herrick said best practices are a corporate thing and said she works with legal counsel and high-level people and was appalled by this development process. Herrick said she would like to see a best practice process with due diligence, adding the City should change their processes and the Northland project should go back to PC who should hold another public hearing. Herrick said she feels shut down from commenting and not sending the project back to PC is a way to further shut down public comment. Salazar said he never would shut down public comment. Herrick said the public perception is that they are being shut down. Salazar said the last meeting went to midnight. Herrick said the City should follow the correct legal practices because the developer likes to bring legal challenges. Salazar said he is talking to the City Attorney and the City is following proper processes. Herrick said if the developer comes back and the Council denies this how long does he have before he can come back to the City. Salazar said the developer would have to start the process all over again. Herrick said she doesn't want to bad mouth the developer and the City needs to understand who we are doing business with. Larson said she didn't get a notice at her home or her business. Davis said it is interesting that when Farrell presented his plan before it was public you were concerned about traffic and parking in the area. Davis said Farrell said he talked to OLL about getting parking spots from them. Salazar said Farrell asked about parking spaces. Davis said Mound City Council Minutes — February 22,2022 why is he talking to OLL at all. Davis said that over five meetings Farrell has never fixed the traffic issue and Staff pushed the problems ahead and the Council needs to vet out who is making the proposal. Davis said what kind of person are we dealing with. Davis said it would be nice to trust people and we have had two years of recognizing we can't trust people in the world or in general. Davis said she has spent the last two years waking up to what goes on in the world and when I see it happening in my town, I don't want to see you guys swindled and it is up to us little residents to dig this stuff up. Davis added there is more out there and I don't want to talk about it today. Davis said this has really bothered me what I have heard today is the developer doesn't take it seriously and what good is it for the developer to go to the church when he can't change anything and why is he meeting with the other guy. Salazar said the meeting on March 2nd is to discuss traffic and parking with the owner of Paddle North. Davis and Salazar talked again about traffic and parking and Salazar said Farrell went through the steps, was directed by Council and is now working out a deal with the private entities. Davis claimed Farrell and Staff are ignoring the Council directive at the last meeting. Salazar said he saw the concept in the development sub -committee and they had comments and concerns. Salazar said the Comp Plan allows for 110 units in this district and the Comp Plan had public input. Davis asked about the Metropolitan Council's input in the Comp Plan and Hoversten said there are system statements from Metropolitan Council to guide cities in meeting density targets and how the City meets them is up to the City. Hoversten said the Metropolitan Council reviews the Comp Plan and water, sewer, transportation and recreation infrastructure and provides advisory revisions to the original draft of the Comp Plan. Hoversten said it is a reiterative process which creates a plan which balances resources with fulfilling growth opportunities. Hoversten said the City knows the development can be accommodated by City services. Davis said one of her first experiences in the City was the big storm and bad stuff that went into the lake. Davis said has the developer come up with anything new and Salazar said hopefully new answers will be coming from the developer and to give the gentleman his due. Holt said PC did discuss issues with the north access to the site and the developer did come back with a different plan for that area. Border said he needs to underscore what he said before and there is an incorrect entry in the minutes from the February 1st meeting of the PC. Holt said he will relisten to the minutes as to what he said and thought the meeting minutes are probably not accurate. Holt said he read from a letter from the developer at the PC meeting. Bruns asked if the private easement can be changed. Salazar said it is a private easement which was written for OLL to have access to their property as well as the parcels which are for sale and this access across the property is for perpetuity. Salazar said whether it can be changed is a private real estate matter and in law. Holt said the easement has been registered with the County. Holt said this was discussed at the first PC meeting. Bruns said why was OLL not included in the sale of City land. Salazar said the development is guided for mixed use in the Comp Plan. Larson said she had a question about the DNR and why we contact the DNR and then don't follow their recommendations. Larson said the DNR recommends the denial of the CUP but she Mound City Council Minutes — February 22,2022 said the DNR can't approve or deny an application for development. Larson said the DNR said the open space is below 50% hard cover and the density calculation doesn't meet DNR standards. Larson added the DNR informed her that the developer didn't alleviate the DNR's concerns about the development. Hoversten said the DNR open space comments in the series of letters from the DNR used a total land area for their calculations which didn't include the two Right of Ways or the City parcels which if added would meet the DNR requirements. Hoversten said the area is zoned mixed use and not residential which makes the DNR hard cover calculation inappropriate for this development. Hoversten said the mixed -use district allows the City to require more stringent requirements for the developer to meet, specifically the engineered storm water requirements. Hoversten said the Shoreland Tiering doesn't work for multifamily development and in cases where the DNR does have authority, they waive shoreland tiering for multifamily development. Hoversten said the City doesn't enforce shoreland tiering and this information was provided in the presentation for both PC and Council consideration previously. Hoversten said the DNR was provided this information and was able to give its advisory opinion. Salazar said this is a legitimate deal and there is no clandestine stuff going on. 6. Approve Resolution(s) Approving Plans and Specifications, and Ordering Advertisement Bids for: a. Lynwood Watermain Improvement Phase 2: Birch to Southview; PW 22-01 Simons presented the approvals for the watermain improvement project phase 2. Simons said both projects presented to Council have revised engineering estimates. Simons said the Lynwood Watermain is a trenchless watermain rehabilitation. Simmons said there is $615K budgeted and the cost estimate of $519K was revised to $547K as labor shortages and market conditions are causing costs to rise. Simons recommend moving forward as this is a critical infrastructure item. Salazar said the Council is aware of the current economic conditions and everything is going up and is in inflationary mode. Salazar and Simmons discussed costs in the immediate term are not going down. Simons noted there are contingencies built into the bids. MOTION by Pugh, seconded by Holt, to approve the following resolution. All voted in favor. Motion carried. RESOLUTION 22-23: RESOLUTION APPROVING PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS AND ORDERING ADVERTISEMENT FOR BIDS FOR LYNWOOD WATERMAIN IMPROVEMENT PHASE 2: BIRCH TO SOUTHVIEW b. 2022 Liftstation Improvements Project; PW 22-03 Simons presented the liftstation improvement project and noted again that cost estimates have changed. Simmons said this is the lift station at end of Island View Drive. Simons said the capital budget for the project is at $570K and the feasibility estimate was at $517K and has now increased to $567K. Simons said this project is part of capacity building to allow proper treatment of sewer so there isn't the problem of dirty water being dumped into the lake. MOTION by Larson, seconded by Holt, to approve the following resolution. All voted in favor. The Motion carried. Mound City Council Minutes — February 22,2022 RESOLUTION 22-24: RESOLUTION APPROVING PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS AND ORDERING ADVERTISEMENT FOR BIDS FOR THE 2022 LIFT STATION IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT 7. Information/Miscellaneous A. Comments/reports from Council members/City Manager: • Hoversten said spring break for Westonka School district is approaching • Council Workshop on April 19th at 6:30 p.m.- Departmental Reports Holt said communication is important with people and the new City web site was added last year but good or bad a lot of people get their information on social media. Holt said a lot of communities in the area put an alert out of what is going on at City meetings through social media. Holt said he would like to discuss using Facebook for meeting notices at an upcoming meeting. Holt said he uses Facebook for work and the City could use it. Holt added Facebook can be a good thing as the Mound Fire Department and Orono Police Department use it and they do a good job. Holt said the City would have to leave the public comments on. Salazar said you mentioned you would have to leave the comments on and Hoversten said there would need to be a City social media policy created with input from the City Attorney. Holt said if someone put malicious comments on a City social media site they can be deleted but there would have to be a social media policy. Holt said no one knows what is going on and to push out the agenda on Facebook is a good thing and it is a very positive thing and other cities are doing it. Salazar said this was discussed by the Council previously and decided by Council at the time to not go through with a City social media site. Salazar said it takes extra duties by staff to do it. Holt said he does his own social media at work and it is very doable. Pugh said the more communication with the community in a less formal way would be helpful. Pugh added the City website is nice but there isn't a lot on it to draw people in and she doesn't get a sense of what is the going on in the community from the website. Pugh said with the new park coming it will be helpful to promote events which will happen there. Larson said she wants to look at that. Holt said he will present a file to the City Manager regarding social media and would like to look at other cities to find out about their social media policy. Pugh said the Parks Commission reviewed the new community park and event center in the Harbor District. Hoversten said the Parks Commission had an interesting conversation about the city center park area which is going to be one of the most exciting things to happen in Mound. Larson asked if there is a name for the park to which Pugh said not yet noting Harbor Place was the most popular when the City was taking public input on the park. B. Reports: Engineering Costs — 12-31-21 YTD C. Minutes: D. Correspondence: 8. Adjourn ACTION by Larson, seconded carried. Attest: Kelly, ler by Holt, to adjourn at 8:55 p.m. All voted W avor. Motion Mayor Raymond J. Salazar