Loading...
02/27/1996 - City Council Special MINUTES OF A SPECIAL MEETING OF THE 00056 EAGAN CITY COUNCIL AND ADVISORY PARKS, - RECREATION & NATURAL RESOURCES COMMISSION • Eagan, Minnesota February 27, 1996 A special meeting of the Eagan City Council was held on Tuesday, February 27, 1996 at 6:30 p.m. at the Eagan Municipal Center. Present were Mayor Egan and Councilmembers Wachter, Awada, and Masin. (Councilmember Hunter arrived at 6:39 p.m.) Also present were members of the Advisory Parks, Recreation & Natural Resources Commission, and City Administrator Tom Hedges, Community Development Director Peggy Reichert, Director of Public Works Tom Colbert and Finance Director Gene VanOverbeke. OPUS/PROMENADE/RESOLUTION OF COMMITMENT TO TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENTS After a brief introduction by Administrator Hedges,Awada moved, Wachter seconded a motion to approve the resolution of commitment to the transportation improvements for the Eagan Promenade Project/Opus Corporation. Aye: 4 Nay: 0 (Councilmember Hunter arrived at this time.) 96.16 HOLZ FARM TASK FORCE REPORT Jon Oyanagi, Recreation Supervisor, reviewed the report and recommendations of the task force. He indicated they are looking to restore the farm to a period around 1940. It was a time when the farm was prosperous and it was also a historically significant time, i.e. World War II and the Great Depression. It also fills a niche not addressed by any other historic farm, since most of them date back to the late 1800's and turn of the century. He would like to focus on programs from around that era and have predominantly hands on activities. He reviewed the recommended restoration and funding sources. Lee Markell, Chair of the APRNRC, stressed the importance of this project. IIICouncilmember Awada asked about the funding. Jon Oyanagi noted that the task force prioritized projects as high, medium and low, and spread out the improvements through 2002. Chair Markell pointed out some items in the budget regarding land acquisition for access. Mayor Egan noted that a significant amount of the funding is proposed to come from the Capital Improvement Program. He asked what types of funding mechanisms are being looking at in terms of the CIP. Recreation Supervisor Oyanagi responded that one of the first tasks of the Friends of the Farm group, which is the non-profit group proposed to be formed right away,will be a capital fund drive. He gave examples of some possible sources of funding. Some discussion followed regarding the funding, with concerns raised about the amount of money needed for this project. Councilmember Awada stated she feels there should be more specifics in the funding. Discussion followed on possible purchase of land for access. Councilmember Hunter suggested finding a way to obtain access without spending $300,000 for access. Councilmember Awada stated she feels the city has overspent the Community Investment Fund. She doesn't feel this is an appropriate expenditure for this fund. Councilmembers stressed that there are limited funds in the Community Investment Fund and there are many needs for those funds. After more discussion,Councilmembers concurred with the targeted time period for the farm,programming, and uses, but felt the budget should be stretched over a longer period of time. Councilmembers also concurred with the establishment of a private, non-profit organization. DISCUSSION ON PROPOSED PARK BOND REFERENDUM David Szott,member of the APRNRC,reviewed the recommendations of the commission regarding the park bond referendum. He noted that after considering several dates,they felt the appropriate date would be September 24. The reason for this date is that it was felt more time was necessary to highlight their needs, and get the citizenry educated and involved in the details of the referendum in order to obtain a broad based level of support. It was felt that the formation of a task force is important so there is a cross section of the community to help sell the idea of the referendum to the community. The task force would also keep the subcommittee and APRNRC informed on what parcels of property are most important, and the size of the bond referendum. He gave examples of who could be represented on the task force. EAGAN SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MINUTES; FEBRUARY 27, 1996 059 PAGE 2 IPHe noted that one of big issues discussed was land acquisition versus development of parks. It was agreed that the need for land acquisition should be the priority for the bond referendum. It was felt that available land is decreasing, and land costs are continuing to increase. Acquiring land today will give future city councils and parks commissions opportunities to develop a parks and recreation programs to meet the needs of the future populations. The Land Acquisition Subcommittee has identified 6 or 7 parcels as high priorities. The subcommittee also suggested that a more general approach be used in terms of identifying the land to be acquired, based on the land acquisition chapter in the Park Systems Plan. He indicated that a 15 year bond is being suggested, with an amount of no less than $4 million. He reported on a meeting the subcommittee had with the Eagan Athletic Association Board to hear their needs in terms of park development. Chair Markel) added that they met with the Trust for Public Land who indicated they would work with the city on the acquisition of larger, more controversial properties. They were told that the current trend sees that people are generally in support of creating and maintaining open spaces. Member Vincent stressed the importance of a task force to help best determine the bond amount and help market the bond referendum. Mayor Egan asked if a $4 million bond is approved,when they would come back for other potential referendum capital purchases. Member Vincent indicated that the subcommittee felt that the bond should specifically focus on land acquisition. The second part of the dual track was to come back in 2 or 3 years with another referendum for development. It was felt that by doing the referendums separately, the community will be able to get a clearer picture as to what is being achieved. Mayor Egan asked what the amount of the second referendum would be and Member Vincent indicated it hasn't been decided what the development needs are. Councilmember Hunter stated he feels it would be good to get a feeling for what that amount would be and when marketing the referendum, find out whether people would prefer to have one referendum or two. Member Vincent noted that the APRNRC would like some direction from the Council as to whether they concur with the date of the referendum, and permission to go ahead with forming the task force and assist in selecting members. Councilmember Wachter indicated he would like to see as many voters as possible turn out 40 for the referendum and he feels it should be done in conjunction with the election. It would save money and get a good voter turnout. Councilmember Masin concurred, stating it could be done at the primary election. Councilmember Hunter stated he wants to see a true opinion on this. Councilmember Awada argued against doing it on September 24th, because she feels the taxpayers will feel like the city is trying to slip something through by having it two weeks after the primary. She also argued against doing it with the primary because only one political party will be represented at the polls. Considerable discussion followed concerning the date, how a non-vote on the referendum is calculated, and the advantages and disadvantages of having it with the general election. Mayor Egan pointed he would like to have a good voter turnout also; but he would rather have a smaller, but more educated public voting on this. The referendum would be buried on the back page of a general election ballot. Councilmember Wachter agreed with that, and pointed out that the city used to have an off-year election for that very reason, but changed it to save money. After more discussion, the consensus was to hold the referendum on August 6. The Council also concurred with the formation of a task force. Discussion followed on the makeup of the task force, how to market the referendum, and how much active and passive park land the city currently has. Parks and Recreation Director Vraa responded that the city has about 1,200 acres of park land. Out of that, about 400 is active. Councilmember Wachter suggested that signs be posted on passive park land identifying it as park land. Councilmembers felt this was a good suggestion. Administrator Hedges noted that at the last City Council meeting, action was taken on an item that was contrary to the APRNRC recommendation, and the APRNRC Chair indicated an interest in getting some feedback from the Council relative to that decision. Lee Markell,APRNRC Chair,indicated that the APRNRC was unanimous in wanting to do whatever possible to protect the water resource at Blackhawk Lake. They were surprised to see that decision reversed. Councilmember Hunter indicated this was debated for a long time, and the way it explained by staff, if the city kept feeding the outlet of Fish Lake into the pond, it wouldn't degrade Blackhawk Lake—it would stay the same. The Council didn't want to create a slime covered pond in the middle of high cost homes. Member Vincent asked whether the Council would be interested in having an APRNRC representative attend the Council meetings as often as possible, so there is a resource there if there is a question, and the 40 commission's recommendation could be better conveyed. Councilmember Hunter stated he feels that is an excellent suggestion,and other commissions have done that from time to time. Councilmember Wachter suggested that whenever something comes up that the commission has a particular interest in and feel there is more EAGAN SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MINUTES; FEBRUARY 27, 1996 00060 PAGE 3 . information they would like to express to the Council,that they feel free to come to the Council meetings. He added that when making his decision, he put himself in the position of a potential home buyer in that area, and he wouldn't want to see a green pond. Chair Markell indicated that a lot of money is being invested in Blackhawk Lake, and the commission feels the city needs to do everything possible to maintain that water quality. The commission is trying to protect that resource at the least possible cost. Another APRNRC member indicated the commission looked at the cost of the bypass versus the cost of other potential cleanup that could be done at Blackhawk Lake. He indicated that in addition to answering questions for the Council, an APRNRC representative could bring feedback back to the commission for future decision-making. Councilmember Awada stressed that the commission's recommendation made sense from their standpoint and objectives. It is the commission's job to protect those resources. The Council needs to take other things into consideration as well when making decisions. Mayor Egan added that Rich Brasch represented the commission's interests very well. Most of the Councilmembers looked at the quality of housing there and felt there are things that can be done to improve Blackhawk Lake, but there is little that can be done with a stagnated pond. Discussion followed concerning the goals of the APRNRC and whether they are realistic and on-line with the Council's goals. WATER RESERVOIR -ANTENNA INSTALLATION LEASE AGREEMENTS Director of Public Works Colbert indicated he has been inundated with requests to install more antennae on the city's water towers. He would like some direction as to how many of these the Council wants, what fees and/or other rate structure should be established for antenna installations, and to what extent the Council wants these to be encouraged or simply allowed. He pointed out that the Council just approved an extensive logo application on the Deerwood reservoir. Councilmember Awada stated she feels this is the wave of the future, and there will be more and more of these requests. She feels the city should take advantage of this revenue source. Councilmember Wachter concurred,suggesting that perhaps this revenue could be earmarked for the Holz Farm. Councilmembers indicated a preference to having these on the reservoirs rather than having them free standing. They also indicated a lack of knowledge as to what is appropriate to charge. Councilmember Hunter suggested the city should charge$1,000 per month. Director of Public Works Colbert indicated that several companies felt that was too high and wanted to negotiate a lower price. He feels that in some situations, companies will opt to build a free standing antenna if the price is too high. This happened when U.S. West decided to build a free standing antenna. Staff tried to point out the benefits of having the antenna on the reservoir, but he didn't feel the Council shared that preference, and the Council gave them the permit to build a free standing tower. Councilmember Wachter pointed out that the Council has more information now and are better able to indicate a preference. He feels the reservoirs are an ideal location for them and are not objectionable. He feels people will accept them more on the reservoirs. Mayor Egan expressed a concern about adopting and implementing a policy at the same time. Director of Public Works Colbert questioned how the location on the reservoir should be handled and how these requests should be prioritized. Discussion followed concerning whether or not they should be allowed on the logo. The consensus of the Council was to minimize the antennae on the logo, but if there are conflicts, compatible paint will be required. The consensus of the Council was also to encourage antennae on the reservoirs rather than free- standing. Director of Public Works Colbert reminded the Council that the auxiliary structures around the reservoir need to be considered as well. The Council consensus was to require screening for any auxiliary structures in residential areas. Director of Public Works Colbert indicated that the city has previously been able to negotiate for phones and auxiliary storage buildings as part of the agreement. He also indicated the Council can consider a flat rate per panel. Considerable discussion followed concerning what to charge. The consensus was to charge$1,250 per year per panel, that they be allowed on all reservoirs, that compatible paint be used for any antennae placed on the logo or lettering,that there be adequate screening for accessory structures,that the leases be for five years, with an option to renew, and that there be a termination clause in the lease. ELECTION SIGNS Administrator Hedges distributed a letter from Gary Morgan that was received relative to this issue. Mayor SEgan indicated he would like to bring Eagan into conformance with other cities and Dakota County. He feels signs should be out of the public right-of-way and beyond the boulevard. He doesn't see any harm in restricting their use on public property. Councilmember Awada noted that that will eliminate signs on any public property such as the 00061 EAGAN SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MINUTES; FEBRUARY 27, 1996 - PAGE 4 • corner of Pilot Knob Road and Yankee Doodle Road, which has traditionally had a lot of signs. Mayor Egan indicated that perhaps zones could be established to allow them in areas where people have traditionally put a lot of signs. Shannon Tyree, Planner, noted that both Pilot Knob Road and Yankee Doodle Road would be governed by Dakota County. She reviewed a letter from the Dakota County Attorney's office that city police departments are authorized to enforce county ordinances within the municipality, including enforcement of ordinances on election signs. Councilmember Awada stated that as a candidate, it is nice to be able to put signs on public property, rather than having to get permission from each individual property owner. Planner Tyree reviewed typical right-of-way areas along highly traveled roads in Eagan. Finance Director VanOverbeke stated that most people think if they put their signs on the other side of the bike path, it is outside the right-of-way. Usually, it is still within the county right-of-way, but the city doesn't typically remove them. Then, right before the election, someone could place 15 signs next to the curb. The city would remove those signs because they are within the right-of-way, but actually the city is selectively deciding where the right-of-way is just by where the bike trail is,and technically,all of the signs are in the right-of-way. There has been inconsistent application of the law because it isn't really known where the right-of-way is. Councilmember Awada questioned whether this is really a problem. Councilmember Hunter suggested the city adopt a policy that election signs must be three feet from the bike trail. Councilmember Awada noted there aren't bike trails on every street. Councilmember Awada stated she feels the county should enforce their ordinance and the city should set a distance from the curb for city streets. Discussion followed concerning what other cities do on this issue. Councilmember Awada noted that occasionally there are complaints about the number of signs, but she would rather see them on main roads than in the neighborhoods. Planner Tyree noted that there is also the issue of public property. Some people feel that public property is for their use. Councilmember Awada suggested signs be allowed in the public right-of-way unless it obstructs visibility. Mayor Egan referred to the letter from Gary Morgan, noting he doesn't feel there was any intentional singular treatment in the case of his signs during the last election. His signs were clearly in violation. He doesn't feel there is a major problem with the current enforcement. Councilmember Awada suggested signs be allowed no closer than 10 feet from the curb for any public right-of-way. Councilmembers concurred. Awada added that the county should enforce their own ordinance within the City of Eagan, and the Police Department will enforce the city's rules on county roads. Director of Public Works Colbert suggested the ordinance state that it be outside the bike trail, but no closer than 10 feet if there is no bike trail. The Council agreed to that. Councilmember Awada stressed that the 100 foot from a polling place rule should be enforced. Discussion followed concerning charging parties to get confiscated signs back. Finance Director VanOverbeke suggested the city could hold the signs for 10 or 20 days and then destroy them. Councilmember Hunter suggested they should be held until after the election. He feels it should be somewhat punitive. After some discussion, it was felt that not much would be gained by holding them until after the election. Finance Director VanOverbeke indicated he will prepare an policy according to the Council's direction and have the City Attorney make sure it isn't in conflict with our ordinance. The meeting adjourned at 9:28 p.m. DLP February 27, 1996 • Date City Clerk S