City
Council Meeting Minutes
March 29, 2010
1. Roll Call
Mayor Klausing called to order the
Roseville City Council regular meeting at approximately 6:00 pm and welcomed
everyone. (Voting and Seating Order for March: Roe; Pust; Ihlan; Johnson; and
Klausing). Mayor Klausing noted that Finance Director Chris Miller would be
serving as Acting City Manager at tonight’s meeting, as City Manager Malinen
was on vacation. City Attorney Mark Gaughan was also present.
2. Approve Agenda
Councilmember Ihlan requested
removal of Consent Agenda Item 7.e entitled, “Approve 2010 Conference
Attendance.
By consensus, the agenda was approved
as amended.
3. Public Comment
Mayor Klausing called for public
comment by members of the audience on any non-agenda items.
a.
Gary Grefenberg, 91 Mid Oaks Lane
Mr. Grefenberg requested that the
City Council post the current 2010 budget and allocations on the City website
to facilitate civic engagement in the decisions made by the City Council on
behalf of the community.
Acting City Manager Miller advised
that this would be done.
4.
Council Communications, Reports, Announcements and Housing and
Redevelopment Authority (HRA) Report
Mayor Klausing announced several upcoming
meetings: a multi-city meeting scheduled for April 1, 2010 at 6:30 pm at the
OVAL with presentations and discussion on the Emerald Ash Borer problem; and Roseville
University providing a behind-the-scenes look at city government, offered as a
seven (7)-week course, beginning on Thursday, April 15, 2010 with information
and interaction with all City departments (registration deadline March 31,
2010), with additional information on upcoming meetings available on the City’s
website or by contacting City Hall.
Councilmember Roe announced
communication scholarships available from the City’s cable franchisee Comcast,
through the North Suburban Cable Commission (NSCC), with an application
deadline of April 9, 2010, and additional information available at CTV15.org.
Councilmember Pust announced the
upcoming Roseville Clean-up Day scheduled for April 24, 2010, encouraging all
residents to plan on participating, and noting that additional information
would be forthcoming.
Mayor Klausing thanked Councilmember
Johnson for serving as Acting Mayor at last week’s meeting while Mayor Klausing
was on vacation.
5. Recognitions,
Donations, Communications
a. Proclaim April 30,
2010 Arbor Day
Mayor Klausing read a proclamation
designating April 30, 2010 as Arbor Day in the City of Roseville.
Pust moved, Ihlan seconded,
proclaiming April 30, 2010 as Arbor Day in the City of Roseville.
Roll
Call
Ayes:
Roe; Pust; Ihlan; Johnson; and Klausing.
Nays: None.
6. Approve Minutes
a.
Approve Minutes of March 22, 2010 Regular Meeting
Roe moved, Johnson seconded,
approval of the minutes of the March 22, 2010 Regular meeting as presented.
Roll Call
Ayes: Roe;
Pust; Ihlan; and Johnson.
Nays: None.
Abstentions:
Klausing
Motion
carried.
7.
Approve Consent Agenda
There were no additional changes to
the Consent Agenda than those previously noted. At the request of Mayor Klausing,
Acting City Manager Chris Miller briefly reviewed those items being considered
under the Consent Agenda.
a.
Approve Payments
Johnson moved, Roe seconded, approval
of the following claims and payments as presented.
|
ACH Payments
|
$52,652.22
|
|
58010 – 558078
|
85,590.74
|
|
Total
|
$139,242.96
|
Roll Call
Ayes:
Roe; Pust; Ihlan; Johnson; and Klausing.
Nays: None.
b.
Approve General Purchases and Sale of Surplus Items Exceeding
$5,000
Johnson moved, Roe seconded,
approval of general purchases and/or contracts as follows:
|
Department
|
Vendor
|
Item/Description
|
Amount
|
|
Recreation
|
Scharber &
Sons
|
Utility Tractor / Pathway Machine
*will be offset by trade-in
|
$116,349.47
|
|
Recreation
|
Americana Fireworks
|
Fourth of July fireworks**
**$5,340 of this amount covered
by donations
|
11,340.00
|
Johnson moved, Roe seconded,
approval of the sale of surplus vehicles and/or equipment as follows:
|
Recreation
|
1973 Tree Spade
|
|
Recreation
|
1988 Tractor
|
|
Recreation
|
Bauer Rainboy turf sprinkler
|
|
Recreation
|
2 field liners/painters
|
|
Recreation
|
Soap Box derby car trailer
|
|
Recreation
|
5 Soap Box derby cars
|
|
Recreation
|
Felling trailer
|
|
Recreation
|
1996 Holder Pathway machine
|
|
Recreation
|
MT Trackless pathway machine
|
Roll Call
Ayes:
Roe; Pust; Ihlan; Johnson; and Klausing.
Nays: None.
c.
Approve an Optical Fiber and Facility Connections Agreement with
Ramsey County Library
Johnson moved, Roe seconded,
approval of an Optical Fiber and Facility Connections Agreement between the
City of Roseville and the Ramsey County Library Board, Attachment A to the Request
for Council Action (RCA) dated March 29, 2010.
Roll Call
Ayes:
Roe; Pust; Ihlan; Johnson; and Klausing.
Nays: None.
d.
Approve Firefighter Holiday Pay Incentive
Johnson moved, Roe seconded,
authorizing the Fire Department to provide a holiday pay incentive program to
part-time firefighters, including payment for past holidays retroactive to
December 24, 2009, as detailed in the RCA dated March 29, 2010.
Roll Call
Ayes:
Roe; Pust; Ihlan; Johnson; and Klausing.
Nays: None.
8.
Consider Items Removed from Consent
a.
Approve 2010 Conference Attendance (former Consent Item 7.e)
At the request of Mayor Klausing,
Acting City Manager Chris Miller reviewed the Request for Council Action dated
March 29, 2010. Mr. Miller noted that some of the items were coming up soon,
and early registration had already been missed on several conferences. A bench
handout was provided, representing an e-mail from Mr. Miller dated March 29,
2010, listing specific examples of new ideas or innovations implemented as a
result of employees attending conferences.
Councilmember Ihlan requested
future discussion on the 2011 budget of a policy placing restrictions on
out-of-town or out-of-state travel, similar to that restriction used by other
businesses; and requested this type of detail from staff during that budget
discussion. Councilmember Ihlan sought clarification if any carryover funds
were applied to the next budget cycle, or if that next budget built on top of
that carryover money. Councilmember Ihlan opined that the City needed to take
advantage of local opportunities in order to save costs on overnight stays wherever
possible.
Councilmember Pust sought
clarification that the City Manager had already done a first screening of the
items listed.
Acting City Manager Miller advised
that the items listed are included in the 2010 budget in the total amount of
$28,000 and represented an exhaustive list for 2010; however, noted that
depending on the schedule of topics and staff availability, and some unknowns
at this time, all of those items listed may not be attended by staff, which
would represent savings from the total amount, which would be carried over for
appropriation to the following year to reduce costs for that budget cycle in
applicable funds.
Councilmember Roe noted the
differentiation between training and conferences, noting that this list was
exclusive to conferences; and questioned where other training was indicated.
Mr. Miller confirmed that this
list only discussed conferences, noting that training was now only attended
when mandatory, as per City Council direction, and that City employees were not
sent to discretionary training unless for mandatory OSHA or licensing
requirements.
Discussion ensued related to
training versus conferences, with staff defining a conference as more of a
retreat or a multiple-day event with a more comprehensive agenda, and training
more of a ½ day event.
Councilmember Ihlan noted that it
would be helpful for her during the 2011 budget discussions to be aware of what
training was mandatory by law to certify employees or renew their credentials,
with allocations to specific departments or funds.
Councilmember Johnson opined that,
based on his experience, conferences such as those listed in the RCA were
distinguished for the managerial level, not subordinates.
Public Comment
Gary Grefenberg
Mr. Grefenberg thanked the City
Council for their due diligence in reviewing this issue.
Klausing moved, Johnson seconded,
approval of the 2010 Conference Schedule for City Employees as detailed in the
RCA dated March 29, 2010.
Roll Call
Ayes:
Roe; Pust; Ihlan; Johnson; and Klausing.
Nays: None.
9.
General Ordinances for adoption
a.
Adopt an Ordinance Amending Chapter 302, Liquor Control, related
to Conditions of the License and the Civil Penalty
Bench handouts, identified as a
March 26, 2010 email to Councilmembers with an attached Memorandum dated March
10, 2010 related to a history of administrative citations of servers selling to
underage customers; responses by Mr. Mathwig to Councilmember Ihlan’s questions
earlier today; and Councilmember Johnson‘s proposals for violations related to alcohol
sales violations.
Councilmember Roe, as a
subcommittee serving with Councilmember Pust in drafting this proposed
ordinance, briefly summarized how it was prompted by a previous issue with
Davanni’s Restaurant serving alcohol during license suspension, and the
presumed penalty indicating revocation and subsequent discussion raised about
needing more of a middle ground, in addition to other penalties for serving to
minors in line with peer communities and current State Statute. Councilmember
Roe noted the updated table and additional language related to the number of
violations and subsequent penalties; the recently-held Public Hearing and
further revisions following comments from license holders in the community;
clarification of mandatory training as city-approved, not city-provided
training, and transfer of controlling interests in licensed establishments; as
represented in the most recent draft included in the RCA dated March 29, 2010.
Councilmember Roe noted, in the memorandum from Acting Police Chief Mathwig,
that specific penalty for the server was not included in the proposed
ordinance, as it was addressed by State Statute and addressed as an
administrative penalty set aside in another part of City Code, with penalty of
$250 (Section 314).
Councilmember Johnson expressed
appreciation to Councilmembers Roe and Pust for their time and effort in
reviewing this issue, and providing a proposed ordinance, and offered his support
for the majority of the ordinance, with the exception of violation penalties.
Councilmember Johnson opined that there was a need to differentiate between
grocery stores/restaurants (on-sales), and off-sale liquor stores; as the
proposed violation for a fourth offense would ultimately put an off-sale
establishment out of business permanently, since they were dependent on those
sales exclusively.
Discussion ensued related to tiers
for off-sales and on-sales; length of suspension; and owner/management actions
versus employee actions and when management was the issue or when they were at
the mercy of their employees.
Councilmember Ihlan addressed her
concerns related to paragraph 3 on page 4 of the proposed ordinance related to
potential impacts for violations occurring within a twelve-month period and
accelerated calculations over a thirty-six month period that may impact a
business that otherwise had a good compliance record.
Councilmember Pust reviewed the
items under discussion, and rationale for the Council subcommittee presenting
the proposed language as revised and those areas not revised, following input
from business owners; with an attempt to define behavior that the community
wanted and the lack of need for more tiers; with current language broad enough
for the City Council to deviate upward or downward on that penalty provision.
Further discussion ensued related
to penalty calculations; application to the licensee versus a third party;
reasonable responsibility of management; and perspectives in reviewing
statistics to-date showing the few violations within a three-year period.
Mayor Klausing opined that he was
in agreement that the City Council being able to consider extenuating
circumstance; however, since the community felt so strongly about this issue,
he didn’t see occasions that they would deviate downward. Mayor Klausing concurred
with Councilmember Ihlan, and suggested that it would be better not to deviate
up or down, but to increase the third suspension penalty from five to fifteen
days.
Klausing Amendment
Klausing moved, Johnson seconded,
to move the presumptive penalty for a third violation from 60 days to 15 days,
changing the chart accordingly.
Roll Call
(Klausing Amendment)
Ayes:
Roe; Pust; Ihlan; Johnson; and Klausing.
Nays: None.
Councilmember Ihlan suggested a
future discussion related to looking at future enforcement efforts related to
how a licensee contributes to drunk driving.
Acting Police Chief Rick
Mathwig
Acting Chief Mathwig advised that
their enforcement of such instances usually went from the event backwards to
the bar and interviews.
Councilmember Pust concurred,
noting that it was usually the result of a court case related to wrongful death
or personal injury.
Ihlan Amendment
Ihlan moved, Klausing seconded,
elimination of item # 3 on page 4.
Discussion included scheduling of
compliance checks based on officer availability and completed at random twice
annually; and potential confusion of this paragraph when attempting to clarify
City Code through this revised ordinance.
Councilmembers Roe and Pust
provided their rationale and intent in proposing this paragraph.
Roll Call
(Ihlan Amendment)
Ayes:
Ihlan; Johnson; and Klausing.
Nays: Roe
and Pust.
Motion carried.
Pust moved, Roe seconded,
enactment of Ordinance No. 1390 entitled, “An Ordinance Amending Title Three,
Section 302: 302.08 C Manager and Server Training; and 302.15 B (Minimum)
Penalty;” (Attachment A); as amended.
Mayor Klausing and Councilmembers
Ihlan and Johnson thanked Councilmembers Roe and Pust for their extensive work
on this issue.
Additional discussion included
participating in server training and those programs likely to meet city
approval.
Councilmember Roe thanked Acting
Chief Mathwig and Officer Arneson for their research and assistance.
Roll Call
Ayes:
Roe; Pust; Ihlan; Johnson; and Klausing.
Nays: None.
Klausing moved, Pust seconded, enactment
of Official Summary of Ordinance No. 1390 entitled, ““An Ordinance Amending
Title Three, Section 302: 302.08 C Manager and Server Training; and 302.15 B
(Minimum) Penalty;” (Attachment B; as amended.
Roll
Call
Ayes:
Roe; Pust; Ihlan; Johnson; and Klausing.
Nays: None.
10.
Presentations
a.
Automated Meter Reading (AMR) Presentation
Public Works Director Duane
Schwartz provided a Power Point presentation of Automated Meter Reading (AMR)
options. The presentation addressed background information on this technology,
with more detailed financial and implementation information available at a
later date if the City Council is supportive of this system.
The presentation addressed the
City’s current water distribution history and age; staff-consuming process in
door-to-door meter readings with approximately 10,500 meters read every quarter
within a 14 square mile area, with one section billed every month throughout
the cycle; commercial and residential reading; and manual read issues.
Mr. Schwartz addressed two
different AMR systems: drive-by or fixed-based systems; AMR communication
types: one-way or two-way systems; and staff’s rationale for delaying this
technology and review of past versus current technologies. Mr. Schwartz noted
benefits to the City and its customers through implementation of an AMR.
Mr. Schwartz estimated that .75
FTE staff time and an additional vehicle were included in the cost of meter
reading, including Workers Compensation risks; and estimated that the cost was
$1.5 - $1.7 million over a 5-10 year total implementation period, with commercial
and hard-to-read accounts first with an initial $200-300,000 expenditure, and
then the remainder of residential meters. Mr. Schwartz advised that additional
information could be provided in the future related to meter and AMR costs as
they related to cost-effective purchasing of a meter and reader as a package or
bid out separately; and estimating an approximate 19 year payback
Discussion included costs over the
life of the meter based on battery life span; similar replacement
considerations for meters; costs incurred regardless of the system in place
(i.e., meter purchases); improved customer service and accuracy of lost water;
and building costs into the fee structure, with some funding already built into
the current fee structure as a capital improvement, making the increase in fees
significantly less.
Further discussion included other
communities that have implemented this type of equipment and their experiences;
improving technologies; compatibility of those meters recently replaced
throughout the City with this proposed AMR; and staff’s intent to bid to
non-proprietary vendors with various meter brands.
Mayor Klausing expressed his
interest in moving forward as a community to become more cost-effective and efficient;
however, he requested more specific cost breakdowns per household; payback information
over the 19 year period; and actual savings on tangibles and quantifiable
items; and cash flow information.
Councilmember Pust spoke in
support of the system as an investment in the community’s infrastructure; and
expressed appreciation to staff for not suggesting implementation initially until
current technologies and improvements were available.
Councilmember Johnson concurred.
Mr. Schwartz advised that staff
would return in April with more detailed and specific information.
11.
Public Hearings
a.
Public Hearing for a Minor Subdivision Creating an Additional Residential
Parcel at 2764 Aglen Street (PF10-008)
Associate Planner Bryan Lloyd reviewed
the specifics of the request for approval of a MINOR SUBDIVIISON creating one
additional residential parcel at 2764 Aglen Street, as detailed in the RCA
dated March 29, 2010 and recommended approval, with several minor conditions.
Mayor Klausing opened and closed
the Public Hearing at 8:02 p.m. for the purpose of hearing public comment on
the proposed MINOR SUBDIVISION; with no one appearing for or against.
12.
Business Items (Action Items)
a.
Consider a Minor Subdivision Creating an Additional Residential
Parcel at 2764 Aglen Street (PF10-008)
Councilmember Ihlan requested and
Mr. Lloyd provided confirmation of the 500’ mailed notification area; and
confirmed that staff had not received any written or verbal comment to this
proposal.
Klausing moved, Pust seconded, approval
of the proposed MINOR SUBDIVISION at 2764 Aglen Street; based on the comments
and findings of Sections 4 and 5, and the recommendation of Section 6 of the
Request for Council Action (RCA) dated March 29, 2010.
Roll Call
Ayes:
Roe; Pust; Ihlan; Johnson; and Klausing.
Nays: None.
b.
Approve a City Abatement for Unresolved Violations of City Code
at 1748 Galtier Street
Permit Coordinator Munson reviewed
the request for abatement as detailed in the RCA dated March 29, 2010;
providing a visual update on the property as of today of this single-family, detached
home. Mr. Munson advised that the current owner is Carol Armstrong who lives
at the property. Mr. Munson noted that this complaint was generated by the public,
not staff; and that staff had been unable to contact the owner, even with multiple
attempts and sources. Mr. Munson advised that the owner had no listed telephone
number; no response was found to in person attempts at the home; and no
response had been received to the administrative ticket, yet unpaid.
Mr. Munson summarized the proposed
abatement, consisting of removal of garbage stored in bags on the rear steps of
the home, at an estimated cost of $250.00; and recommended that the Community
Development Department be authorized to abate the unresolved City Code
violations at 1748 Galtier Street.
Discussion included the repetitive
nature of this issue; regular refuse pick-up weekly at this address, but
storage still done on the back steps as offensive to neighbors; other recourse
if this doesn’t work.
Councilmembers discussed with staff
whether this abatement would solve the problem permanently; while recognizing
the need for permanent resolution of this issue on the part of the property
owner and for the benefit of the neighbors.
After discussion, it was the
consensus of the City Council to hold off action at this time; and the City
Council directed staff to attempt direct communication again with the property
owner after regular business hours in an attempt to encourage compliance; with
the City Council supporting abatement action in the future if this issue is not
resolved through staff efforts.
c.
Consider Request by Twin City Chinese Christian Church for
approval of a Zoning Text Amendment to allow Contemporary Church uses in
General Business (B-3) Districts (PF10-006)
Associate Planner Bryan Lloyd briefly
reviewed the request of the applicant, fully detailed in the RCA dated March
29, 2010 and recommended options available for City Council consideration.
Councilmember Roe noted the
difficulty in considering this proposed use and the strict interpretation of
Comprehensive Plan land use designations, and lack of available placement for
Institutional uses other than in Mixed Use areas; and opined that they were too
restrictive. Councilmember Roe noted that the Comprehensive Plan addressed
Parks and Open Space land uses allowing them in any area not specifically
excluding them and suggested that Institutional uses be treated similarly and
consistently.
Discussion ensued between
Councilmembers and staff on those designated areas available for Institutional
uses in residential versus other potential land use designated areas.
Mayor Klausing concurred with
Councilmember Roe’s observations; and spoke in support of allowing
Institutional uses in a broader range of spaces; however, he noted the
problematic broad range of permitted uses within that Institutional category;
and concerns with smaller neighborhood churches versus a larger mega or
regional church and where they were applicable.
Mayor Klausing focused tonight’s
discussion on the options available and necessary immediately as it related to
this application and longer-range issues and potential revisions of the City’s
zoning ordinance.
Councilmember Ihlan opined that,
in order for this request to be granted, it would be necessary to amend the
Comprehensive Plan, as the first order of business; noting that this issue did
not come up at the Steering Committee level, and that larger community
discussion was necessary prior to making any amendment.
Councilmember Roe spoke in support
of a specific designation for Institutional use in the Comprehensive Plan and
Zoning Code, determining those uses as appropriate and allowed by definition in
those locations; and for current church use be in a multi-family designated
area.
Councilmember Pust noted the need
to address other types of school uses (EFCA and Charter; and specialty
schools).
Further discussion included notice
requirements and super majority requirement for a Comprehensive Plan Amendment;
urgency of the current application based on their pending Purchase Agreement
options; and timing for such an Amendment through the City and Metropolitan
Council processes.
Ron Wong, 2340 East 121st
Street, Burnsville, MN, Chair of Trustee Committee at Twin City Chinese
Christian Church (T4C)
Mr. Wong addressed the timing
concerns of the applicant, based on the Purchase Agreement drafted with the
seller and ready for signature depending on City action; and the applicant
verbally advising them of another and higher offer that may cause them to lose
this property to another buyer.
Mr. Wong suggested that
recommendations 8.2 and 8.3 of the RCA be done in parallel, recognizing the
need for a public process in amendment of the Comprehensive Plan. Mr. Wong
opined that the City Council consider that churches are not an actual excluded
use at this time on the existing zoning chart and that the revised zoning code
could more clearly define uses.
Mayor Klausing spoke in support of
the T4C project; however, noted the need for consideration of establishing precedents
and the Comprehensive Plan Amendment public process needing to be followed.
Mr. Wong reviewed the limitations
on the church in moving forward without the security of a Council determination
on whether this use was permitted; opining that the City’s current Comprehensive
Plan would permit churches by virtue that it did not specifically exclude them.
Councilmember Roe observed that
the City’s existing zoning code didn’t comply with it’s Comprehensive Plan at
this stage, and questioned legal counsel on whether one additional minor
revision would have any ramifications, once the zoning code is made consistent
with the updated Comprehensive Plan.
City Attorney Mark Gaughan
questioned whether two wrongs made a right; and based on Section 5.2 of the
RCA, opined that creating another inconsistency could provide further
complication in the future.
Councilmember Ihlan recognized
practical issues with this application; however, she opined that State law
dictated that the City’s Comprehensive Plan governed, and the first step needed
to be an amendment to that plan before proceeding further. Councilmember Ihlan
cautioned fellow Councilmembers of similar issues related to the Twin Lakes
Redevelopment Area and legal implications. Councilmember Ihlan expressed her
interest in a way for the applicant to proceed with their plans.
Councilmember Johnson noted the
advice of legal counsel; and questioned if any other options were indicated
that would provide leeway for the City Council on this issue.
City Attorney Gaughan suggested
that the problem may not be of a legal nature at this time; but may become one
in the future if the City Council chose to make a zoning text amendment before
a comprehensive plan amendment.
Councilmember Pust spoke in
support of the need to amend the Comprehensive Plan first based on legal
counsel and past experience, even while speaking in support of this application
proceeding,
Further discussion ensued related
to inconsistencies between the current zoning code and the updated Comprehensive
Plan; and determining the practical versus technical issues.
Mayor Klausing suggested directing
staff to look at amending the Comprehensive Plan to address Institutional uses
in various land use categories, keeping in mind this issue; and looking at text
amendments to ordinance; but holding off on the text amendments until the Comprehensive
Plan Amendment was in place.
Mr. Lloyd reviewed the Public
Hearing process for consideration of a Comprehensive Plan Amendment and public
notification, with the April Planning Commission unavailable based on meeting
those publication and mailed notice deadlines, with the May Planning Commission
the first opportunity for hearing; and reminded Councilmembers of the need for
a 4/5 or super-majority vote for any such amendment; with the City going
forward as the applicant for this city-initiated process.
Roe moved, Klausing seconded,
directing staff to initiate the process for Comprehensive Plan Amendment to
address Institutional uses in various land use categories and which land use
categories were appropriate to those Institutional uses and where those
Institutional uses should be included in those specific definitions.
Roll Call
Ayes:
Roe; Pust; Ihlan; Johnson; and Klausing.
Nays: None.
Mayor Klausing apologized to the
applicant for the necessary delay based on legal requirements that the City
needed to follow.
Mr. Wong thanked the City Council
on behalf of the T4C Church.
Recess
Mayor Klausing recessed the meeting at approximately 9:12
p.m. and reconvened at approximately 9:23 p.m.
d.
Request by Clearwire LLC for approval of a 125-foot telecommunication
tower facility in Acorn Park, 266 County Road C, as a Conditional use
(PF09-032)
A bench handout was provided,
dated March 26, 2010, from Parks and Recreation Commission Chair Bob Willmus
outlining previous Commission action related to this issue.
Associate Planner Bryan Lloyd briefly
summarized the RCA dated March 29, 2010, updated upon advice of the City
Attorney. Mr. Lloyd suggested a policy discussion in the near future by the
City Council to provide direction to staff.
At the request of Councilmember
Roe, Mr. Lloyd reviewed the original application of the applicant and staff
recommendation for co-location of equipment to reduce multiple tower locations
in the community.
Discussion included rationale for and
promotion of co-location of equipment and towers within the community.
Mayor Klausing noted that the
recommendation for denial was a lose-lose proposition for the community, in
still having the visual impact of a tower located on private property and
receiving no benefit of revenue.
Councilmember Ihlan spoke in
support of future policy discussions; however, she expressed concern with the
proposed findings as a basis for denial and recommended additional findings for
denial, including:
§
Not consistent with Acorn Park Master Plan;
§
Not compatible with adjacent park and residential uses;
§
Construction and maintenance would have negative environmental impacts
to Acorn Park; and
§
Unanalyzed environmental impacts and health concerns with locating
a microwave tower in a park and wooded area, as addressed in the City’s
Comprehensive Plan as it related to parkland uses to maintain the environmental
health of the community.
Councilmember Johnson sought
clarification, and City Planner Thomas Paschke clarified that these towers are
subject to FCC compliance and that they are the regulatory agency.
Mr. Paschke advised that denial
could not therefore be based on health requirements; and cautioned
Councilmembers on including some of Councilmember Ihlan’s suggested findings
for denial. Mr. Paschke recommended the findings as outlined in the RCA as
recommended by legal counsel, predicated on the fact that the City is the
property owner in this case.
Further discussion ensued on
whether to include additional findings for denial.
City Attorney Gaughan spoke in
support of staff’s and legal counsel’s recommended findings alone, without
additional findings, based on research of this issue.
Klausing moved, Johnson seconded, adoption
of Resolution No. 10800 entitled, “A Resolution DENYING a 125-foot Telecommunication
Tower Facility as a conditional Use in Accordance with Sections 1013.10 and
1014.01 of the Roseville City Code for Clearwire LLC and the City of Roseville
(PF09-032).”
Ihlan moved, Pust seconded,
amendment to the motion to include the following additional findings for
denial:
§
Not consistent with Acorn park Master Plan;
§
Not compatible with adjacent park and residential uses;
§
Construction and maintenance would have negative environmental impacts
to Acorn Park; and
§
Unanalyzed environmental impacts and health concerns with
locating a microwave tower in a park and wooded area, as addressed in the
City’s Comprehensive Plan as it related to parkland uses to maintain the environmental
health of the community.
Mayor Klausing and Councilmember
Roe spoke in opposition to the motion.
Roll Call
(Amendment)
Ayes:
Pust and Ihlan.
Nays: Roe;
Johnson and Klausing.
Motion failed.
Roll Call
(Original Motion)
Ayes:
Roe; Pust; Johnson; and Klausing.
Nays: Ihlan.
Motion
carried.
13.
Business Items – Presentations/Discussions
a.
Discuss an Ordinance Amending Title Five, Section 501.16 relating
to Vicious
Animals
Acting Police Chief Rick Mathwig
revised the RCA dated March 29, 2010.
Councilmember Pust noted segments
of the Statute not printed in the materials, and requested that, in the future,
staff include the entire document for Council consideration.
Discussion included expanded
definition of a dangerous animal; and appeal process directed to an impartial
qualified professional as the hearing officer rather than the City Council or
City staff.
Roe moved, Pust seconded,
Enactment of Ordinance No. 1391 entitled, “An Ordinance Amending Title Five,
Section 501.16 Dangerous Animals; 501.16A Definitions; 501.16B Dangerous Animal
Registration; 501.16D Regulation of Dangerous Animals; and Adding Sections
501.16F Notice of Dangerous Animal Determination; and 501.16G Appeal of
Dangerous Animal Determination;” Note effective date: January 1, 2011. (Attachment
A to the RCA dated March 29, 2010.
.
Roll Call
Ayes:
Roe; Pust; Ihlan; Johnson; and Klausing.
Nays: None.
Roe moved, Pust seconded, Adoption
of Ordinance Summary No. 1391 entitled, “A Summary of an Ordinance Amending
Title 5 of the Roseville City Code, Amending Chapters 501.16A, B and D; and
adding Sections 601.16F and G relating to Dangerous Dogs per revised Minnesota
State Statute 47.52 Note effective date: January 1, 2011. (Attachment B to the
RCA dated March 29, 2010).
Roll Call
Ayes:
Roe; Pust; Ihlan; Johnson; and Klausing.
Nays: None.
b.
Finance Department Presentation regarding Imagine Roseville
2025 Topics
Due to time constraints, this item
was deferred to a future meeting.
c.
Discuss Preliminary 2011 Revenue, Tax Levy, and Expenditure Forecast
Due to time constraints, this item
was deferred to a future meeting.
14.
City Manager Future Agenda Review
Acting City Manager Miller distributed
upcoming agenda items.
15.
Councilmember-Initiated Items for Future Meetings
Councilmember Roe requested that a
future agenda include the process for going out for bids on the Recycling
contract and the role of the Public Works, Environment and Transportation
(PWET) Commission in that process, noting that the PWET Commission had only a
few monthly meetings before summer, when the contract was scheduled to go out
for bid.
Pust moved, Johnson seconded, to
extend a charge to the PWET Commission for their consideration and
recommendation of this contract renewal.
16.
Adjourn
The meeting was
adjourned at approximately 9:57 pm.