Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2000-05-11 Council MinutesDocument No. 02 Page 1 of 5 May 25, 2000 Adoption Prepared By: Roberta Colotti City of Corcoran Council Minutes – May 11, 2000 CALL TO ORDER/ROLL CALL Mayor Guenthner called the meeting to order at 7:00 PM. • Members Present: Mayor Kenneth Guenthner, Councilors George Gmach, John Bucher and Dixie Lindsley. • Excused: Councilor Ronald Thomas • Staff Attending: City Administrator Roberta Colotti, Public Works Director Pat Meister, City Engineer Vince Vander Top and City Attorney Jeff Carson. • Also Attending: Melissa Braun 7705 Kalk Road Lynn Schwartz 6904 Old Settlers Rd. Tim Jones 9507 Fox Valley Dr. Steve Trippel 21400 Circle Ln. Jim & Pat Erickson 21500 Treeline Dr. Paul Aarsvold 20840 70th Ave. N. Kert & Kathy Rode 10503 Maple Lane Dorwyn & Sharon Anderson 19425 Stieg Rd. Jerry Aksteter 9422 Fox Valley Dr. Marvin Herwig 9410 Fox Valley Dr. Dennis Stieg 19320 Stieg Rd. Bill & Dorothy Theis 9530 Cain Rd. Joanne Faue 21033 Horseshoe Tr. Elwood Faue 21030 Horseshoe Tr. Joel Sandstrom 10643 Maple Lane Brian & Elayne Kramer 10635 Maple Lane Charlene Dixon 10639 Maple Lane E. Bill Hanson 9320 Cain Rd. Kevin Roehl 22440 Rush Creek Dr. Steve Tillmans 22317 Rush Creek Dr. Denise Haechrel 10410 Hage Dr. Erick J. Heinz 9231 Cain Rd. Meggan Dickinson 19725 Hunters Ridge Joe Laho 21536 Homestead Tr. Mike Kariniemi 6855 Willow Dr. Joe Pettit 22933 Co. Rd. 50 Lisa Minks 6925 Old Settlers Rd. Charlotte Mattis 21510 Treeline Dr. Sue Poulsen 21527 Homestead Trail Bob Stashenko 10221 Hage Dr. Randal York 6905 Old Settlers Rd. Pat Cook 9437 Cain Rd. Craig Howey 19621 Country Cr. E. Mike & LaDonna Kartak 9101 Foxline Dr. David Paulsrud 6915 Willow Dr. Matt Faue 6315 Willow Dr. Joe Anderson 21525 Nystrom Lane Lynelle & James Nordquist 19850 Stieg Rd. Bill Halverstadt 6420 Old Settlers Rd. Pat Puhle 10720 Robert Lane N Pat Webber 10600 Bechtold Rd. James Comb 6280 Willow Drive Jeffrey Green 9580 Cain Road John Anderson 7100 Old Settlers Rd. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Mayor Guenthner opened the meeting with the Pledge of Allegiance. APPROVAL OF AGENDA • Motion: DL/JB; all in favor – to adopt the agenda as revised, moving the “Consent Agenda” below the “Planning Report” DUST CONTROL ASSESSMENTS Open Public Hearing Mayor Guenther opened the public hearing at 7:05 PM. Document No. 02 Page 2 of 5 May 25, 2000 Adoption Prepared By: Roberta Colotti City of Corcoran Council Minutes – May 11, 2000 Project Overview Mayor Guenther provided a brief overview of why the council had initiated the dust control assessment. City Engineer Vince Vander Top provided a brief overview of the project, describing the roads to be included and the assessment formula. The roads selected were those that had high levels of voluntary participation last year. He stated that there are three options for handling dust control, (1) Assess the properties as proposed, (2) Assess the properties under an alternative formula, (3) Do not assess the property and allow homeowners to purchase dust control individually. Comment Received In Advance of the Meeting ▪ Call Received 5/11/00 - Chris & Sharyl Aase, 9247 Trail Haven Road said they are in favor of the dust control assessment. ▪ Call Received 5/11/00 - Robert & Joni Kosloski, 9117 Foxline Drive said they are in favor of the dust control assessment. ▪ Call Received 5/11/00 – Ernie Mayer, 21300 Larkin Road said he is opposed to the dust control assessment. ▪ Letter Received – Jody Hoehle, 20740 70th Avenue N., in favor of dust control assessment. ▪ Letter Received – Elwyn Manthel, 23700 Strehler Road, is opposed to the dust control assessment. ▪ Letter Received – Charlotte Mattis – 21510 Treeline Drive, is opposed to the dust control assessment and instead suggests that the city pave all roads. ▪ Petition Received – 10100 to 10422 Hage Drive – generally in favor of dust control assessments. However, they would like to pay the proposed $42.14 under option 2 vs. the $113.10 under option 1. ▪ Petition Received – Bechtold Road, between Co. Rd. 117 & Oakdale Drive, - opposed to the dust control assessment. They suggest that the city assess everyone in the city. Comment Received the Night of the Meeting ❑ Pat Webber, 10600 Bechtold Road – Council is calling this dust control assessment project an experiment. Yet dust control has been done in the past. What criteria are we going to use to judge the success of this program? o Mayor Guenther (K.G.) responded that there are some areas where we had stretches of dust control applied to the roadway. But, we have not had a large enough sample to determine the full impact of dust control. A larger study area is needed. In future years, if we find that dust control saves money, we will be justified in putting general fund money towards dust control. o City Engineer Vander Top (V.V.) responded that the amount of gravel material needed and amount of staff time spent on grading are two measures of success. We have already experienced some savings in staff time from dust control. However, the amount of gravel required has not decreased. Over time it is expected that if we start saving money on gravel, then the gravel budget can be switched to dust control. ❑ Randal York, 6905 Old Settlers Rd. – Stated that we could measure the height of the washboards as a measurement. Asked, who received the assessment notice? o V.V. stated that all commercial and residential units were notified. It was not based on bare land ownership or rental of property. ❑ Melissa Braun, 7705 Kalk Road – If you do Willow & Larkin but not Kalk, what is Kalk going to look like? ❑ Steve Tillmans, 22317 Rush Creek Drive, representing the group from Bechtold Road between Co. Rd. 117 & Oakdale whom had previously submitted a petition - proposed a fourth option be considered by the council. The fourth option would be to assess the entire city vs. the identified benefiting property owners. He said that he believes in dust control. He asked how much it cost to apply dust control. Document No. 02 Page 3 of 5 May 25, 2000 Adoption Prepared By: Roberta Colotti City of Corcoran Council Minutes – May 11, 2000 o V.V. replied that it costs .46 per gallon and 1.05 gallons are applied per lineal foot, for two applications. ❑ James Comb, 6280 Willow Drive – Supports the City’s efforts to reduce maintenance cost. However, he lives a ¼ mile off the road, so the dust control aspect of the project will not benefit him directly. Therefore he would like to be removed from the assessment roll. ❑ Joanne Faue, 21033 Horseshoe Trail – Reported that Polaris Companies traffic has a large impact on her road and they may be willing to help offset the cost of the proposed assessment. She counted 24 cars going west to east in one morning. ❑ Sue Poulsen, 21527 Homestead Trail (off Willow) – Suggested assessing the entire city. The fact that public works staff time is reduced benefits the entire city. ❑ Charlotte Mattis, 21510 Treeline Drive – Assessments are typically for permanent improvements. This has been referred to as an experiment, which she believes has already been done. If the council wants to know if dust control is successful, they should survey those who have had it done in the past. She asked if they would get any money back if the “experiment” fails. ❑ Dennis Stieg, 19320 Stieg Road – Stated that his neighbors and him do not cause the dust problems so why should they pay for dust control? Traffic from Robert Lane to 101 causes most of the dust problems. Robert Lane to Co. Rd. 116 is only about 10% of the traffic. When the King Addition was built it was discussed that Robert Lane should not be installed. However, at that time the council thought the homeowners would use tar vs. gravel roads. Today most of the residents from the King Addition do in fact use Stieg Road, which is gravel. The dust created causes visibility problems for Dennis Stieg when he is driving his tractor, causing near misses. Speed is also a problem on the roadway. His proposed solution is to close Robert Lane and if that is not acceptable to the council then the dust control assessment should be citywide. ❑ Bill Hanson, 9320 Cain Road – Does not want dust control. If it benefits the entire city then the city should pay for it. Dust control is slimy when wet. ❑ Mike Kartak, 9101 Foxline Drive – Stated that the assessment was a good thing. Because it gets confusing for the neighbors when they collect the money amongst themselves. He agrees with the thought that we should assess the entire city. ❑ Jeff Green, 9580 Cain Road – Said that he has four kids and the proposed assessment is too high. He participated last year. But would prefer to be excluded from the assessment this year and pay privately instead. ❑ Kert Rode, 10503 Maple Lane – Has purchased dust control in the past and believes it is cheaper to purchase it individually. Would like to see the entire city taxed for dust control. ❑ Joel Sandstrom, 10643 Maple Lane – Participated in dust control before and would like to continue to purchase it privately. The road has been getting worse over time. He asked if the dust control assessment is tax deductible. o City Attorney Jeff Carson (J.C.) – Stated that the dust control assessment is not tax deductible. Assessments can only be applied to benefiting property owners. When you do improvements that include assessments you often hear requests for everyone in the community to pay. ❑ Jim Erickson, 21500 Treeline Drive – the proposed Trail Haven & Treeline Drive assessment is cheaper than purchasing dust control on their own. The road has had less washboards and dust control is a good thing. He suggested assessing those on a tar road less than those on a gravel road. ❑ Marvin Herwig, 9410 Fox Valley Drive – Favors dust control assessments. Last year was the first year they did it and the road was never better. They will purchase it on their own if the city does not do it. ❑ Bill Halverstadt, 6420 Old Settlers Road – Generally in favor of dust control as it holds the dust down (thereby preventing pollution), along with preventing washboards. He asked if there were any environmental issues with dust control. Document No. 02 Page 4 of 5 May 25, 2000 Adoption Prepared By: Roberta Colotti City of Corcoran Council Minutes – May 11, 2000 ❑ Steve Trippel, 21400 Circle Lane (Oakdale & Co. Rd. 30) – Favors doing dust control privately. Last year the five neighbors did it and the road was in the best condition ever. The better conditions resulted in greater speed of travel. New gravel applied this year will increase dust. ❑ John Anderson, 7100 Old Settlers Road – Why does the city issue new home permits for homes that lead onto existing gravel roads? The City of Independence does dust control for the entire city at a lower cost. ❑ Mike Kariniemi, 6855 Willow Dr. – His driveway is long so he is not concerned about dust. However, he is concerned about the washboard effect on roads approaching his home. He agrees with the idea of a citywide assessment. Asked if there is a refund from dust control if the road is tarred. ❑ Matt Faue, 6315 Willow Drive – Saving from dust control is great but the cost needs to be spread citywide. Suggested doing dust control citywide and having everyone pay. ❑ Lynn Schwartz, 6904 Old Settlers Road – This is to be a pilot project. Yet we have had dust control for a number of years already. Why not look at the records for gravel and grading. Close Public Hearing • Motion: JB/DL; all in favor – to close the Public Hearing at 8:00 PM. Council Discussion Council reviewed the various points brought up during the public hearing. Stating that they have a commitment to reviewing the cost savings and possible city wide general fund tax payment in future years. They decided to remove those roads that have few people along them. It was felt that these roads should have some type of city participation. However, we are not prepared to participate at this time. Resolution No. 2000-25 • Motion: GG/JB; all in favor – to adopt Resolution No. 2000-25 “Adopting Special Assessments for Dust Control” as amended. CONSENT AGENDA • Motion: DL/JB; all in favor – to adopt the consent agenda as presented. Approved as Consent Agenda 1. Minutes of April 27, 2000 2. Claims pending payment #351-400 totaling $30,534.95 and prepaid claims #15878, 15879, 15915, and DW10PAY totaling $17,374.49 for a combined total of $47,909.44. 3. Monthly financial report. PLANNING REPORT • City Attorney Jeff Carson advised the council to approve all C.U.P. applications and then set conditions. The conditions may be so restrictive as to make the project unattractive to the applicant. Thereby effectively denying the project. • Motion: GG/DL; all in favor – to adopt Resolution No. 2000-26 “Approving a Land Division By Joe Pettit to allow the Subdivision of 85 Acres into Two (2) Parcels located at 22933 County Road 50 – PID#29-119-23 22 0001. • Motion: JB/DL; all in favor – to adopt Resolution No. 2000-27 “Approving the Conditional Use Permit for Jim Welch to Construct a Tennis Court at 19725 Schutte Farm Road.” • Jeff Carson stated that property owners have the right to request a C.U.P. for a home occupation that will have outside employees working out of an accessory structure. However, the City’s past precedent has been to deny applications for employees to be located in accessory structures. Document No. 02 Page 5 of 5 May 25, 2000 Adoption Prepared By: Roberta Colotti City of Corcoran Council Minutes – May 11, 2000 • Motion: (Favor – K.G./D.L./G.G. & Opposed – J.B.) – to adopt Resolution No. 2000-28 “Granting a Conditional Use Permit (C.U.P.) to allow a Home Occupation in an Accessory Structure, on Property Located at 6645 County Road 19” with the following findings of fact added to the presented resolution: - Property is in the midst of other commercial properties. - Property is located off a tarred, county road that has high traffic volumes. - Property has large acreage. - Employees proposed for this particular business are deemed to have minimal impact on the surrounding neighborhood. - The proposed business does not have sales onsite, warehousing on site, has minimal deliveries, and the business is based on an electronic exchange with creative energy of employees running the business. • Council was clear that this permit runs with the business. That the existing business is not permitted and is still a non-conforming use. COUNCIL & MAYOR’S REPORT • Councilor Gmach reported that the dirt work and curbing for the playground would be done soon. The Fibar 312 System with drain and 12” Fibar is $23,607.41. The play curbs, mats, etc. are $10,502.62. (Funded by: Park Playground Fund) ADJOURNMENT • Motion: DL/JB; all in favor – to adjourn at 9:27 PM Submitted by: _______________________________ Roberta Colotti City Administrator