Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout04-06-81 CITY OF LAKEVILLE COUNCIL MEETING April 6, 1981 The meeting was called to order by Mayor Lekson at 7:30 p.m. The pledgee:- of allegiance to fiche flag was given. Roll call was taken., Present; CounCilmembers 'Spande, Zaun, Sindt, Nelson,` and Mayor Lekson, Also present: Roger Knutson, City Attorney; Jim Johnson, Consulting City Engineer; David Licht, Planning Consultant; Patrick McGarvev, City Admnis- trator/Clerk. 81.132 _Motion was made by"Nelson, econded by Zaun to approve. the .minutes of the March 2 1981 'council- meeting.. Roll call was .taken on the. motion. Ayes, Sande, Lekson, Zaun, Sindt & Nelson. 81.133 .Motion was made by Zaun, seconded by'Spande to approve the minutes of the March 16, 1981 council .meeting.. Roll .call was taken on the motion. Ayes, Lekson, Zaun, Nelson & Spande. Nays, none. Sindt abstained as she was absent from the meeting. ,81.134 Motion was made by Zaun, seconded by Nelson t6 approve the claims for payment as presented. 'Roll call was. taken on the motion. Ayes, Zaun,,Sindt, Nelson, Spande & Lekson. Staff reports: There were none. 81.135 Motion was made by Zaun, seconded by Snande to receive the minutes 'of the - city advisory committee meetings, including the April 2,..1981 Planning. Commission. meeting 'minutes. Roll call was taken on the motion. Ayes, Sindt, Nelson,. Spande, Lekson & Zaun. At this time Mayor Lekson ook up tY~e question of concept a?~proval on the application of M,id~°America E'estivals -for the Renaissance Festival and future commercial-office and residentialydevelobment of a'156 acre parcel of land located at the northwest corriery~of_ Minnreg Road and Interstate 35.` Mayor Lekson explained that this would be-t~i~ council°s night to discuss the matter, ask any questions,. and then vote 'on it, as .'there had been. ample opportunity at past council meetings and>advisory committee meetings for both the applicant and the op?aanents to tY~,e proposition to be heard. Mayor Lekson explained that each councilrnember would have the opportunity to explain what they. had considered in v' wing the application, and that what they, had to say may not necessarily in cate how they might vote on the _issue. Councilman Nelson stated that his consideration had centered around four areas of major concern, the opinions of,;various citizens, traffic and road projections, the compatibility with the surrounding area and-legal questions. Councilmember Sindt thanked each grouij for their concise .way in which they put together their ~re~ent°ation and_stated.she liked the future PUD uses. of commercial-office develox~ment and'xesdential but had concern about the proposed. Renaissance: Festival. Councilman Zaun stated that his concern was,. with the compliance with the City comprehensive plan .and zoning ordinance, traffic considerations, and environmental Questions. He stated that a PUD zoning can be' allowed in all zoning districts, .and his .understanding is that PUD is-_primarily fore a large area with mixed uses, higher intensity and allows for changes in setback requirements,; for example. He also stated that in his opinion a PUD should be in an area where there is city sewer and water, and that -1- • ~ • ~ ..CITY OF LAKEVILLE COUNCIL MEETING April 6, 1981 a PUD involves three stages of City review and approval, the general concept stage, the developmentstage and the final plan stage.. Mr. Zaun stated his concern for the traffic involved with the Renaissance Festival in the immediate area. He also, stated. that he had talked to present and former councilmembers in the City. of Shakopee and .businessmen on the main street of Shakopee concerning the Renaissance Festival. He stated that he `talked to former, c~unca~lmember,,Ron ~e~ard, who spoke highly of the Renaissance Festival and. to the present mayor., Mx. Walt Harbeck, of Shakopee. He also>talked to Scott C"aunty Commissioner, Toni Worm, who had :voted for the festival in Scott Gounty., which is located in his district. Mr. Zaun stated'`he alsp talked to Dick Hullander on the present Shakopee City Council who said it was a definte..plus, and that Shakopee had adopted a theme park ordinance ;when Valley.~'air~came into the-community. Mr. Zaun alao stated ;he had spoken with. six business people in downtown Shakopee.: on April 6„and a l said they wanted to see the Renaissance Festival stay near their community. Mr. Zaun stated he also had concern with the comrercial activity which is occurring in eastern Scott County;-;near La~:eville which .appears. to be in violation with .the Scott County land use `laws, and for mossble commercial activity. occurring in Lakeville"in a'resdentialzone, Mr. Zaun stated that key question in `his consideration was, Should the.. City allow a Plai~ned`;Unit~Devel©xrment in an unsewered area? He also stated the City of Lakeville should adopt a theme ,nark ordinance if such a .commercial endeavor were attempted in Lakeville, Mayor.Lekson ,fated what in his opinion the City had the authority to put many controls on any Planned Unit'Development<agreement with which could assure the City Ghat .the project would be developed and operated in accordance with City x"equirements. The mayor also stated that in his o?~inion several other'state, regional and federal ,agencies would have to give their approval to the project in addition to the City of Lakeville which-would allow f_or problems to be worked out in a satisfactory manner,. or the approvals .would. not be forthcoming, The mayorbointed out, for example, that;ap?~roval of the modifications to I-35 would require the Minnesota Department of Transportation and the Federal Highway Administration to give-their approval before"they can be made, which would indicate they felt .the traffic could-be adequately accommodated..: The mayor also: pointed out that Minnesota state law gives the City the right to adopt City ordinances on the control of these type of events, which Lakeville would do. The mayor pointed out that the .reason the, City entertained the request undex"the Planned Unit Development-was that a PUD is to provide the ~itv flexibility into land use,-including the use of interim development, and allow both the land. owner/developer and City to be more creative in their development process. The mayor then read some of the conditions which the City would require if City approval were ..ever granted. to the .proposed Renaissance Festival. Last, 'the .mayor. pointed. out his concern over property owners':~ights. .Councilman-Spande stated that the other cauncilmembers had already addressed some of his concerns-and that he was concerned with the traffic, :property owners' rights and the amount. of revenuethat`a Renaissance Festival from property taxes and other: sources would generate for the community _ .....and to the `City; ; At this time Mayor Lekson stated that Roberts Rules of Orders stated that a motion must be made in the affirmative. 81.136 Motion was made by.Lekson, seconded by Spande to grant concept approval .for phases one,' two and. three as proposed by Pod-America Festivals,-Inc.' subject to conditions. to be set ,forth by the City Council of Lakeville. -2 • ~ • • . CITY OF LAKE~FILLE"COUN~lL'MEETING.. ..April 6, 1981' , Roll call was taken on the motion. Ayes, Nelson, and Lekson. Nays, Spande, Zaun and Sndt. :Councilman Zaun stated that the reason he voted no was because of the City ordinance provision prohbitin,,g development of a Planned Unit Development project in unsewered areas. He also .stated he would ask the City Council to consider pursuing the application for a Renaissance Festival under alternative procedures. At this time Mayor Lekson opened the publc<hearing on the application of Mid~America Festivals°for an on-sale liquor license and Sunday sale liquor license for the former Honeywell Country Club buildingto be.known as J.J. Brackett°s and operated by Mid--America Festivals, Inc. The City Clerk attested to the legal notice on the hearing.. 81.137 There-being no one present wishing to speak on the matter, a motion was made by Zaun,.seconded by Spande to close the public hearing. and grant approval of the on-sale and Sunday, sale .liquor licenses to Mid-America.: Festivals, Inc. Rohl .call. was taken.. on the. motion. Ayes, Spande, Lekson, Zaun, Sindt & Nelson. At this .time the City. Council took up consideration of an ordinance amending... the City zoning ordnance, Secton'6.2, Subdivision 12, pertaining to urban development and availability...:of public ervices for Planned Unit Developments. Councilman Zaun stated that he; did nat feel Planned Unit Developments should be approved where there is no city-sewer; and he did: not support the ordinance. 81.138 ...Motion was made by Spande, seconded by Nilson to adopt Ordinance No: 180 amending the zoning ordinance, Section 6.2, Subdivision 12. `Roll call was taken on the motion.. Ayes, Spande, Lekson,.Sindt, Nelson. Nays, Zaun. At this time Mayor Lekson took-up the application o~ Naegele Outdoor Adver- tising Company to rezone a parcel of property from R-l,-.Low Density Single Fami7.y to R-6, Medium Densty.Resdential, located west'of I-35, outh`of County Road 64 and north of County Road 70. At this. time the,PRayor recog- nized Mr. John Rapinger, a resident on 210th Street,. who stated he was representing 40 people of the 6~estland Homeowners Association. Mr. Raplinger presented the council with copies. of a petitonwith 40 signatures against aproposed-rezoning, and read the reasons on the petition for which they, were against it. He also indicated that the association had .obtained the services of Mr. Tom Manthy, an attorney. Mayor Lekson pointed out that the City Council. had adopteda new City- .:comprehensive plan in September,-1979, and that prior to the adoption the council. had several 'neighborhood meetings. to seek out citizen input into the plan,-and that there had been very poor attendance at'any of these"meetings, including the one for Mr. Rapinger's area. Mr. David Licht, City planning consultant,,. stated ..that an environmental ..assessment worksheet does not'have to be done at the time a rezoning is proposed, but that one for the property `in question .would. have to be done when formal platting... of the property. is pursued in the future.. Mr. .Licht pointed out the-reasons for which he•recommended`the proposed rezoning be approved in his'memora~:dum dated March 16, 1981,°a copy of which the council had received..`~He stated that the rezan~ng ree~uests had-been reviewed. under the 1979 comprehensive .plan and the.::1980 zoning ordinance,.. and that in his opinion, mid-density zoning is a'transition zone. .,.,r r: ` At this time Mr. Leonard Tuma spoke and stated that the Planning Commission, minutes of .March 19,` 1981 ;did not convey the fact that there was opposition to the request,:which ha felt .they should have. ' eg_ s. • • • . CITY OF LAKEVILLE COTJI3CIL MEETING April 6,..1981. Mr. Licht explained that there is an additional City zoning ordinance. requirement that for oach dwelling unit in an R-6 zone, there be 2500 square feet of land area which fora 12 unit structure requres:.30,000- `square-feet of'landarea for the structure, not the 10,000 square feet which is 'in another part of the zoning ordinance°. At this time Mr. William Cooley, representing :the 'applicant, spoke and stated that they had purchased the property in 1972- and had attended .the: public meetings prior to the adoption of the 1979~comprehensive plan. Mr`. Cool.ey'Statedthat in his'opinon the City of Lakeville had .some of the most .stringent development requirements of any city in the , metropolitan area, ,and that before any develppment,and construction on the property. in question could be initiated, future 'approvals of the -City Council would be'necessary. Mr. Cooley stated that., his original request was for a rezoning from R-1 to 5-4,•General Business,. and that the application had met :with opposition from the nearby property owners. It~is his understanding that a compromise had been reached for a rezoning to R-6. He stated that he is presently trying to meet with l2 property owners to the.: east of this property `in attem?~t to get most of ahem to support and. sign up f_or the extension of city water and .sewer, and that he requested the proposed plat om this property to be laid over for.. now until he has time to'accomplishthis. 81.139 Motion was made_by Spande, seconded by Sindt to adopt Ordinance No. 181 rezoninga`parcel of x~roperty from R-1, Low Density Single Family,`to- R-6, Medium Density Residential. Roll call was. taken on the motion. -Ayes, Lekson, Zaun, Sindt and Spande. - Nays, .Nelson. At this. time Mr-. William Sando, the new'Representative for the City of; Lakeville in District 16 on the Metropolitan Council, introduced himself to the City Council and discussed matters with mutual interest. -The mayor and-several counclmembers expressed their. concern over the growing authority of the Metropolitan Council and asked. Mr. Sando to do what he could to change the`drection things were going in. At his time thee. City Council took up consideration of a future ordinance which would amend the requirements .presently in the City zoning ordinance on mobile home tie-downs and changing the deadline for compliance with the tie-down. installation for mobile homes, as well as possibly providing for a variance or exception to ;the requirements. Councilman Spande `stated that he and counclmember Sindt had met with-some residents of mobile home parks on March 25th„ and it was their ox~inion that a change in the present City laws. should be considered.. and adopted. ,The City Administrator. explained that these requirements. are in the zoning ordinance, and that a public hearing would be necessary in front of the Planning Commission prior to the adoption of any ordinance by the City Council amending the zoning ordinance. The administrator pointed out that a public hearing had been called. in front of the Planning Commission. on April.. 15, 1981 at 7:30 p.m. to take up consideration of an ordinance amending scone of the tie-down requirements and extending the deadline. Citizens present at the council meeting. were advised to .attend. the public .hearing at ahe Planning Commission if they so desire on this matter. $1.140 Motion was. made..by Spande, seconded by Zaun to receive the engineer°s report on the bids received for improvements to the Viking Sctuare Addition. Roll call was taken..'. on the-motion. Ayes, Zaun, Sindt, Nelson; Spande & Lekson. .81.141 Motion 'was :made. by Nelsons seconded by Zaun to award the contract to Parrott Construction, Inc.. in the amount 'of $124,507.Fib for`the Viking Square Addition improvements. 'Roll call was taken on the motion. Ayes, Sindt, Nelson, Spande, Lekson & Zaun. -4- s.~ • • • ~ ` CITY OF LAKEVILLE COUNCIL MEETING April 6, 1981 At this time Mr. David Licht presented. a report,concerning,the changes in the Gity comprehensive plan, addressing :the concept of a land bank,-for the area of future development in Lakevilleforthe period of 1980 to. 1990. Mr. Licht stated that in his opinion, the City and metropolitan council - staff were .near agreement on the acreage. figures and sanitary sewer flow figures and on the concept of a`land bank'for some of the acres of urban development. Mr. Licht: recommended the council give approval to the acceptance of the land bank and the concept..for now. :81.142 Potion was. made: by Zaun, seconded by Spande ,to approve Mr: Licht's report and to approve the land bank concept and land .lease plan changes for gages 70 to 74-d as drafted by bor. Licht.. Roll calf was taken on the motion. Ayes, Nelson,. Spande, Lekson, Zaun & Sindt. At this time the City Administrator_expl:aned that he public hearing that had been called for the.. 202nd Street,.Alternate A, storm drainage improve- meat project involving the.. assessment .just tt~ City. owned property ,;could be cancelled due to the fact that the Git~T bond-attorney'had issued an opinion that bonds. could not be sold-when- the assessments were only going to be against City awned property for an improvement. The City Administrator pointed out that the project could still goaahead for the scope of work as presented in Alternate A and previous y...approved by the council. 81.143 :Motion-was made .by Spande, seconded by Sndt to authorize the improvement under the plan known as Alternate A forthe 202nd Street storm drainage and take payments for-tho'cost of the improvements from the general fund. of the Ctv. Roll fall was taken on the motion. Ayes, Spande, Lekson, Zaun, Sindt & Nelson. 81.144 Motion was made by Zaun, `seconded by Nelson to authorize Consulting Engineers Diversified to do a preliminary engineering report on the extension of sanitary sewer and road improvements on Ipava Avenue to serve the new Lakevl~lle Elementary School at the corner of,175th Street and Ipava Avenue for a,Icost not to exceed $500.. Ro11 call was taken on the motion. Ayes, Lekson, Zaun, Sindt, Nelson &Spande. 81.145 Motion. was'made by Zaun,. seconded by Spande to approve a raffle license for St. Mkchaehs Home and School .Association of Prior Lake and to waive the bond ~eauirement. Roll call was taken on the motion. Ayes,.Zaun, Sindt, Nelson,.Spande & Lekson. 81.146 Motion was made'by Nelson,`seconded by Sndt to approve a bingo license for the Lakeville ..Lions C1ub'and to waive the bond requirement. Roll call. was taken on the motion, Ayes, Sindt, ~lelson, Spande, -Lekson &Zaun. 81.147 Motion was made by Spande,` seconded by Nelson to receive `the appraisal report`f~om Marshall & Stevens on the Lakeville municipal liquor store.` Roll call was taken on the motion. Ayes,. Nelson, Spande, Lekson, Zaun & Sindt. 81.14'8 Motion was made by Zaun, seconded by-Spande to reject the extension of three phase electrical power by .Northern States. Power Comr~any;from'207th Street to 202nd Street to serve the new City fire station, as there was a, cheaper :method of brooding for the needs of the fre,station electrical uses at this time. Roll call was taken on the motion. - Ayes, Spande, Zekson, Zaun, Sindt ~ Nelson. 81.149 Motion was made.. by Spande, seconded by_ Zaun to approve. a rental agreement with Robert J.`Berres for a part of Aronson Parka subject to the agreement including the provision prohibiting the use of herbicides in the farming of the property,-and_that the lessor must .prevent..erosion control into the r5~ • • • czTY o~ T,AKFVILLE couNCIL MEETINr April 6, 1981 .Aronson Park developed area at his expense by placing hay bales along the boundary where necessary. Roll call was 'taken on the motion. Ayes, Lekson, Zaun, Sindt, Nelson &'Spande., 81.150 Motion was made-by Nelson, seconded by Zaun to approve a rental agreement '.with Vern Holc©ck to rent City owned property in Ritter Park. Roll call was taken on the motion. Ayes, Zaun, sindt,'.Nelson, Spande &Lekson. At this time the;: City Council t©ok up consideration. of bills before the Minnesotalegislature which would involve the City government. 81.151 Motion was made. by Lekson, seconded by Nelson to o?~pose any vote which would provide more'state control over the City°s right to approve industrial revenue-bond issues. Roll call was taken on the motion. ..Ayes, Sindt,`Nelson,'Spande, Leksjon & Zaun. 81.152 Motion was made by Spande, seconded by Zaun to support the League of Minn- esota Cities' opposition to a billprovidingfor manufactured:;housinq to be permitted in all city residential zoning districts. Roll call was taken on the motion. Ayes, Nelson, Spande, i,ekson, Zaun,&-Sinc~t. 81.153 Motion was made by Lekson, seconded. by Spande to oopose'a bill which.. would allow the sale of strong beer and wine in grocery stores due to the lessening of control the City would have over the`sale of intoxicating beverages n.the'community especially to minors. Rall call: was taken on the motion. Ayes, Spande, Lekson, Zaun, Sindt & Nelson. 81.:154 Motion. was made by Lekson, seconded by Spande: to oppose the bill known as House file 824 and Senate file- 786 moving-.the City Council. veto power over local fire- fghterpension benefit increases under .certain conditions. Roll call was taken on the mot'Qn. Ayes, Lekson, Zaun, Sndt, Nelson & Spande. 81.155 Motion was made by Zaun, seconded by;'Nelson to approve Change Order No. l on improvement,_pr®ject No 80-13, Forest Hills: Roll call was taken on the motion. Ayes, Zaun, Sindt, Nelson, `Spande &-Lekson. Item #25, approval of Change Order:; No. 2 on project 80-13, was tabled as it was note ready for 'approval. 81.156 Motion. was made by ,Spande, seconded by Lekson to approve. Change `Order No 2 on project 80-11, Oak Hills project. ,Roll call was taken on the ;motion. Ayes,. Sindt,..Nelson, Spande, Lekson &Zaun. 81.15:7 Motion was made by, Spande, seconded by Lekson to approve the plans and specifications for the improvements to The Meadows Second Additionand set the bid date. Ro11 call was taken on the ..motion. Ayes`Nelson, Spande,. Lekson, Zaun & Sindt. 81.158 Motion was made by Ne son,`seconded by Zaun_to approve the three assessment abatements"as recommended by the Dakota. County Assessor's office. Ralf call. was taken-on the motion. Ayes, Spande, Lekson, Zaun, Sindt & Nelson. 81.159 Motion was made by Spande, seconded: by Lekson to extend the meeting beyond the 10:30 adjournment:.time. Rolf. call was taken-on the motion. Ayes, Lekson, Zaun, Sindt, Nelson &Spande. 81.160 Motion was made ;by Nelson, seconded by Spande to approve the engineering feasibility report for a bike trail from the Lakeville business district -6- _ • • CITY OF LAKEVILLE COUNCIL MEETING. April 6, 1981 to Antlers Park and to the Lakeville'High School area for a cost not to .exceed $500. Roll call was taken on the motion. Ayes, Zaun, Sindt, Nelson,. Spande &Lekson. 81.16]- P4otion was made by Zaun, seconded by'Nelson to approve a raffle license for, the pan-O-Prog board and to waive the bond requirement. Ro11 call was taken on the motion. Ayes, Sindt, Nelson, Spande, Lekson.& Zaun. $1.162 Motion was made by Spande,' seconded by Zaun to approve a purchase agreement with Bernard Murphy. in the amount of $24,500 for parcel B forathe new City fire'station at 'the corner of 202nd Street and"Holyoke Avenue. ,Roll call was taken on the-motion. Ayes, 'Nelsen,.Spande, Lekson,. Zaun.& Sndt. 81.163` Motion,. was-made by Zaun, seconded by Spande to approve a conditional use permit to allow a new house to be built on lot 2, block '2, Ken Con Estates 1st Addition as recommended by ;the building inspector and Planning `Commission. Roll-.call was taken on the motion. Ayes, Spande, Lekson, Zaun,;Sindt & Nelson.. 81::164 Motion was made, by Spande, seconded by Zaun ta~approve 'a conditional use permit to build a new house on lot 8, block 4,..Ken`Con Estates lst'Addition as recommended by the bui7.dnq inspector and Planning Commission. Roll-call was taken on the motion. Ayes, ;Lekson, Zaun, Sindt, Nelson &Spande. `81.165 Motion was made by Nelson, seconded by Spande to approve a purchase order in the amount of $4,175 for a Clevus-Multrum'on-site sewage disposal System. for the .Orchard. Lake park rest~oom`faci=lity. Ro11 call was. taken on the motion. Ayes, Zaun, Sindt.Nelson, Spande &Lekson. 81.165 Motion was made by Zaun, seconded-by Nelson to approve a construction easement agreement 'for $1 to Donald'F. Pillen &.Joan Pllen for lot 19, .block 3, Oak Hills 3rd Addition. Roll call was .taken on 'the motion. Ayes, Sindt, Nelson, Spande, Lekson &Zaun.. 81.16`7 Motion was made by Spande, seconded by Nelson to approve $3,200 for a utility easement from Peter.Friedges for project 80-10 as recommended by the City attorney. Roll call was taken on the motion. Ayes, Nelson, Spande, Lekson, Zaun & Sindt. 81.168 Motion was made by Nelson, seconded by Spande to authorize the City attorney to proceed with. condemnation on parcels necessary to construct projects 8D-1,'80-1Q and 80-13 where necessary,' by'adopting Resolution No. 81-18a. Roll call was taken an the motion. Ayes, Spande, Lekson, Zaun, Sndt & Nelson. At this time M;r George Warweg and Dick Lorentson appeared before the council and questioned the pending-assessment fora the City utility projects along 202nd Street to Mr. Warweg's property, which is located on the north side. Mr. Lorentsonexplained that in their opinion, most if not all"of the property owned by Mr. Warweg would receive sewer service by installation. of future dines that ..would connect. to the new .City trunk--line recently nstahedalong Trunk. Highway 50. For that reason, he did not feel. that' the City .should make `any assessments `for the sewer wine being ,installed ,along 202nd Street against Mr. Warwe9'0s property. `The City Engineer, Mr. Jim Johnson, explained that it .might be best to serve the. property Mr. Warweg 'owns adjacent to 202nd Street by putting in services from the water and sewer lines being. installed along 202nd Street now,-but that it would depend on the development plan layout for Mr. Warweg°s property. The City Administrator. pointed out that P4r. ~aarweg's property located east of Antlers'Park and south. of Trunk Highway 50 -7- . . . • CITY OF LAKEVILLE COUNCIL MEETING April 6 1981 was not .assessed for any trunk foot benefit for the project 79-1, and that: if the"property were to access. that line when developed in the future, it would have to pay. the front foot benefit o be determined. It was the consensus of a1.1 present that Mr. Warweg should bring forth at least~'a sketch plan on how the ;property might be laid out for development in an effort to determine what, if any, utility benefit there is to the property from project 80-IO, - 81.169 motion was made by Nelson,'seconded by Sindt to adjourn the council meeting., Roll ca11'was taken on the motion. Ayes, Lekson, Zaun, Sindt, Nelson<& S~aande. Time : 11:05 p, rd. Respectfully submitted, f atrck E. McGarvey,.City Cl Gordon Lekson, ayor r, -8-