Loading...
060490 CC WS Min . . . CITY OF SHOREWOOD COUNCIL STUDY SESSION MONDAY, JUNE 4, 1990 COUNCIL CHAMBERS 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD 7:30 PM MINUTES CALL TO ORDER Mayor Haugen called the Council Study Session of Monday, June 4, 1990, to order at 7:30 PM. ROLL CALL Present: Mayor Haugen, Councilmembers Gagne, Watten, Stover and Brance1; Administrator Whittaker; Public Works Director Zdrazil; and Assistant Clerk Niccum AGENDA REVIEW Add these items to the Agenda #4-1 LMCD Public Hearing - June 6, 1990 #4-J Citizen's Request - Water Connection #5-C T1F Notice APPROVAL OF MINUTES March 12, 1990 Gagne moved, Stover seconded, to approve the minutes of March 12, 1990, as written. Motion carried - 5/0. April 30, 1990 Gagne moved, Brancel seconded, to approve the Minutes of the April 30, 1990 Board of Review. Motion carried - 5/0. CONTRACT FOR RECORDING SECRETARY Gagne moved, Stover seconded, to approve a contract between the City and Kathleen M. Snyder, for Ms. Snyder to take minutes at the regular and special meeetings of the City Council and Planning Commission. Notion carried - 5/0. LIQUOR LICENSE - VINE HILL MARKET RESOLUTION NO. 46-90 Gagne moved, Brancel seconded, to a99pt Resolution No. 46-90 - RA Resolution Approving Non-intoxicating Malt Liquor LicenseR for the Vine Hill Market, 12915 State Highway 7. Motion carried by roll call vote - 5/0. LIQUOR LICENSE - MINNETONKA COUNTRY CLUB RESOLUTION NO. 47-90 Gagne moved, Stover seconded, to adopt Resolution No. 47-90 - RA Resolution Approving Intoxicating Liquor LicenseR for the Minnetonka Country Club, 24575 Smithtown Road. Motion carried by roll call vote - 5/0. -1- COUNCIL STUDY SESSION MONDAY, JUNE 4, 1990 Page two . LIQUOR LICENSE - AMERICAN LEGION POST 259 Gagne moved, Brancel seconded, to adopt Resolution No. 48-90 - RA Resolution Approving Intoxicating Liquor LicenseR for American Legion Post 259, 24450 Smithtown Road. Motion carried by roll call vote - 5/0. RESOLUTION NO. 48-90 COMPOST lNG/BRUSH PICK-UPjRECYCLING NEWSLETTER The Council reviewed information from R & W Rolloff Service, Inc. regarding yard waste and brush. Watten moved, Gagne seconded, to approve the disposal of RYard WasteR and RBrushD as presented; and that a one-page notice, in a bright color, be sent out to all Shorewood residents. Motion carried - 5/0. DISCUSSION OF SCHEDULING AND PLANS FOR DISCUSSION OF ELDERLY HOUSING Gagne said the City needs elderly housing. He mentioned the small houses in the City of Minnetonka across from the "Marsh", and encouraged the rest of the Council to look at them. He said they are for people that are still mobile. The zoning is higher density, the pricing is reasonable, the yard work and snow removal is done, and they are close to stores. Stover said if the housing is limited to the elderly - no provisions are needed for children, less open land is needed, and there are usually security measures for people that go south for the winter. .' Gordon Christensen mentioned a similar project done in Waseca, and offered to provide the Council with information. Gagne said he knows several people that are interested. He will do some research and return to the Council with the information. Stover said she felt it important that it \V'as made clear that the units be reasonably priced. Haugen asked Administrator Whittaker to research the constraints. Whittaker said the zoning district does not allow density this high at this time. He also said there could be special standards for elderly housing (i.e. parking). Whittaker also said Larry Blackstad provided some information last year on elderly housing and he will check into this. Watten said it would be nice if the housing could overlook a wildlife area. Haugen mentioned various properties in the City as possible locations. IRON REMOVAL STUDY - SCHEDULE AND PLANS Gagne mentioned a letter he received, and the feedback he has received, and said he feels this should be the only item on the agenda the evening it is discussed~ . Whittaker asked the Council if they want to discuss this with Vogen first? -2- . . . COUNCIL STUDY SESSION MONDAY, JUNE 4, 1990 Page three IRON REMOVAL STUDY - SCHEDULE AND PLANS Brancel asked that Tonka Bay be contacted to find out if they are satisfied with their system, and if not, why not, and what the problem areas are. Whittaker will check on this. Whittaker mentioned the questionnaire sent to S.E. Area residents, and said 60%-75% didn't respond. He said its possible that the majority already have home treatment. Watten suggested making it a requirement of future development contracts to have the developer install water treatment in the homes. Whittaker will contact McNulty to see if they put water treatment systems in the Amesbury homes. Stover discussed the assessment policy, saying she attended a meeting a long time ago when Staff discussed this. She said no decision was reached, and the discussion took 8 hours. Whittaker suggested an informational meeting to get input from the citizens. on this proposal for iron removal in the S.E. Area. There will be a meeting on Iron Removal on Monday, July 16, 1990. GLEN ROAD DRAINAGE - SCHEDULE & PLANS Gagne said there is a meeting tomorrow evening, June 5, at 4:30 PM, at the Minnetonka Community Center. Glen Road Drainage is the second item on the agenda. He will do his best to attend. Gagne asked Whittaker to send copies of the May 10, 1990, report from the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District to David Littlefield, and the neighbor to Littlefield's east, stating that it is informational material. Gagne said we are going to do something - who is going to pay? Haugen said OSM has suggested for many years that we have districts, and those districts encompass the area from which the water flows, and the areas to which the water flows. Stover said this would have to include areas in other cities. It could be more than one city's problem. Gagne asked Whittaker to check with Golden Valley and see how they assess. Watten said he feels the City has an obligation to protect the people in situations like this. Haugen said there is a method to assess for surface water problems over a period of years. It has to be spent within a certain period of time on certain projects. The Nephew water problem was discussed. Watten suggested having the City Attorney determine what the City can do. Stover said the Council has to determine how much to set aside, and how to -3- COUNCIL STUDY SESSION MONDAY, JUNE 4, 1990 Page four . GLEN ROAD DRAINAGE DISCUSSION - continued determine who is elibible. Whittaker said the General Fund ~lill not support an overall City storm ~Jater program. Gagne said he wants to get Engineer Norton involved. Whittaker will ask Norton to get estimates together, if it isn't too expensive, for the next meeting. He will also remined him of the Shorewood Apartment owner's offer to give land for a pond, and ask him to consider whether a smaller, deeper permanent pond would work. The Council \Jill vlait for comments from tomorrmJ's meeting. They \vill continue discussion at the next meeting. DISCUSSION - OPTION ON BISHOP PROPERTY Whittaker said the Staff has had difficulty dealing with Mr. Bishop. Haugen asked Zdrazil to talk to Bishop and ask him to have his attorney contact the City. The Council will continue the discussion after Zdrazil talks to Mr. Bishop. . Council Break - 9:00 - 9:09 PM COUNCIL POSITION ON ISSUES RAISED BY THE PARK COMMISSION . Use of Park Planner/OSM for Park Projects Whittaker said the role of the City Engineer has to be defined better. We have to decide if an Engineer is needed for parks and, when will we get as good, or better, service from and landscape architect, park planner, or other expert. We should decideifOSM is the best engineer for the job. We paid considerably more than some projects than \Je thought it should cost and still had an enormous number of problems. This issue came up again this Spring when the Park Commission considered irrigation in Freeman Park. The Park Commission asked for an estimate, from the Park Planner, to review the irrigation specifications that were prepared by Taro and presented by George Haun and see if they were adequate and if they could be bid out. Whittaker called Watten that Friday and asked if that would be adequate or if we would need proposals from OSM and the Park Planner? He thought they agreed that they didn't want to have a bidding contest every time there was a project, and a landscape architect could handle the irrigation. They also discussed whether a landscape architect cound do irrigation, trails, fences, and other park related projects. Whittaker said Van Doren Hazard Stallings, particularly Koegler, has probably done lO-I5 of these in the past 5 years. Watten said, but, they also have civil engineers who can sign off on the plans, if necessary. Whittaker said there is a civil engineer \vith that firm. ~-lhittaker then asked Koegler for an estimate. At the next meeting the Council said to get an estimate from OSt-1. vlhittaker -4- 4It 4It 4It COUNCIL STUDY SESSION MONDAY, JUNE 4, 1990 Page five COUNCIL POSITION ON ISSUES RAISED BY THE PARK COMMISSION Use of Park Planner/Osm for Park Projects - continued said he feels Koegler is better qualified to do this work than OSM because they specialize in this field. OSM are primarily civil engineers and their main work is in sewer, water and streets. Watten said as long as OSH has the engineering contract, he thinks they should do all the engineering. He felt that otherwise RFP's should be sent out. Haugen said that was basically done with the parks because of the problems that happened with the fences and the ballfields. Watten and Stover both said that Koegler had been retained as the "Park Planner". Brancel asked what role each has, she said she did not think it was the intention that OSM would supervise Van Doren Hazard Stallings. She said because the Park Commission did not like the results they were getting from OSM, they asked the Council to hire someone else to do the work in the parks, someone that had more park experience. She thought the intention was to put them side by side, so the Park Planner/Landscape Archi tect vwuld do the park work, and OSM would do the other vlOrk, and they would be on an equal level. Wattensaid the City could go to the registering body in the State and get the determination on what the responsibilities are. He thinks the Council should have definitions if they are going to talk about it, otherwise they are just opinions. Gagne said this whole thing came up because we have a City Engineer that, in the Park Commission's opinion, was not doing what they were supposed to be doing, and when they did it, they did it at three times the cost of anyone else. He said it partly their opinion and partly his opinion that they were overpaying and running into numerous problems. They then said let's see if we can get a firm to do work on parks. He said the RFPs were put out. Gagne said time after time he has been concerned about the cost with OSM. Watten said OSM is the City Engineer and he has aa contract. ~lhi ttaker said he does not think OSN is the right engineer to do things efficiently and well in the parks. There has been poor design, poor inspection, outrageous costs. We asked George Haun's opinion because he was independent of Shorewood. We asked if it was a good design? Is this what should have happened here? Is this adequate now? All the answers to these questions were no. Watten said they run into that all the time in his business. There is always someone that can do it without certification. Haugen said Haun had been supervising park projects in St. Louis Park for many years. Watten said there are all kinds of opinions out there. Haugen said that's why they have experts in different fields. Watten said he thought NOrton and his boss should sit and discuss this vvith the Council. tvhittaker said he thought the Council should agree on its position before inviting the Engineer to react. Watten didn't feel the Council needed to take a position before they talk to OSM. Gagne said a decision has to be made on Park Projects. He said for a year he represented the Park Commission and listened to a lot of the things going on. He was involved in a portion of the interviews. He said the Council knows that the Park Commission is and advisory body to the City, but they are also 7 people that have good common sense. They kept drawing Gagne's attention to the fact that too much was being paid. The firms interviewed were asked what the fence work would cost. -5- . . . COUNCIL STUDY SESSION MONDAY, JUNE 4, 1990 Page six COUNCIL POSITION ON ISSUES RAISED BY THE PARK COMMISSION Use of Park Planner/OSM for Park Projects - continued and they were all half cost or less. He said you would think someone else would be high, or close, but no one was. Then he started thinking - these people on the Park Commission are all in business in the real world, we are representing our citizens, and we have to think we are doing it right. Gagne moved, Brancel seconded, that because Van Doren Hazard Stallings was hired to do the work in the parks, that they be allowed to do all work in parks, including engineering. Haugen said it has been her experience over the years that many firms will set their prices low to begin with, and raise their prices after they are established. She said she is not saying Van Doren Hazard Stallings is going to do this, she is just making a statement. Stover said she agrees that neither OSM nor Van Doren Hazard Stallings should have control over the other. She does feel that the engineering responsibilities should be handled by the City Engineer, and those things that are park planning should be handled by the Park Planner. She said you could have a park planner that is not an engineer. Brsncel said that's true, but it should be left up to the Park Planner, if he needs an engineer he can go to an engineer. She did not care who but did not want to pay extra for an outside engineer. Gagne said the Park Planner does have his own engineer, but, you know that the use of this engineer would be included in his price. Stover, using the City Planner and City Attorney as an example, said the Park Planner and the City Engineer should be able to work together and respect each other's opinions. Gagne asked Stover if she thought we are getting the right things from our City Engineer? Stover said she didn't think that was the question right now. Brancel said the Park Planner should ask for the City Engineer's input if he needs it. However, it sounds like he hasn't needed the Engineer yet. If he does, he should work with OSM. Stover said next January the Council has the opportunity to make any changes necessary. Whittaker said actually the Council has that option any time. All the contracts have this type of clause in them. Stover said she didn't think the City should expect a person hired as one thing to do something else. Gagne said he has a different opinion. Watten said he thinks when these people were interviewed by the Park Commission, he feels there was a great amount of pique established in the Park Commission against Norton and his tasks, and lack of completing tasks. Gagne said "thats right". Watten said they vJere looking for a Planner, and he thins, it's an opinion, that the fact that this person was an engineer also had an impact on the selection. Stover said with everyone else that has been hired by the City, the Councia has interviewed them, and has some idea of who they hired, why they were hired, and what they expect these people to do. She said that because the Council didn't have anything to do with this, all she knows is what she thought the City wanted from a Park Planner. She -6- . . . COUNCIL STUDY SESSION ~tONDAY, JUNE 4, 1990 Page seven COUNCIL POSITION ON ISSUES RAISED BY THE PARK COMMISSION Use of Park Planner/OSH for Park Projects - continued thought that had something to do with professionalism in the overall park plan, which the Park Commission has been charged \vith the respons- ibility of doing, and they've done a fine job, they're growing and getting more sophisticated, and this would be an asset, like the Planning Commission having a Planner, the Park Commission would have a Planner. She did not think they were saying let's go out and compete with our Engineering firm in any way, shape or form. She said, as she said before, the Planning Commission Planner and the Attorney work well together, and she thinks it would be very nice if these people could do that. She said Norton suggested sprinkling the whole area. She thinks these are the tinks a Park Planner and the Engineer could sit and talk about. Then they could come together with a unified idea for the Staff and Council, as other Staff does. Stover said she doesn't think the Council should sit and make individual decisions on whether it needs an Engineer. She said this is something the Administrator should know. She said the Council has worked so hard for so long to get the Park Commiss ion to do something vli thout trying to save every dollar all the time. Everything free has always ended up costing money. Watten said in his career he has probably been involved in about 20 schools. They all involve playgrounds, football fields, and the like. In some cases, when new things come up, they go to a Park Planner Con- sultant. The Consultant would then come in and advise them what to do. He was still the Contact person. He said this is the way it should work, if one has the contract, the other is the consultant. Whittaker said he thought it was clear from the beginning that the Park Commission was looking for someone to do most of the work. According to George Haun, and other cities, most of the work does not require engineering. However, the Commission also said they did not want OSM involved in the parks. The Commission believes the Park Planner could complete most of the plans for parks. He said in their mind, and in his mind, they did not need OSM to put up fences, for instance. Stover said if an engineer is not needed, that's fine; but, if you do need an engineer, OSM should be used. Whittaker said that ideally this would work; but, if you go to Norton and ask him if an engineer is needed for ball park fences, he will say yes '\-Jhi ttaker, referring to Van Doren Hazard Stall ings, said the capaci ty for engineering was not even there a year ago. They were Park Planners/ Landscape Architects. A partner of theirs in Kansas City happened to be an engineering firm. For years they have been basic park palnners/ landscape archi tects. We vJere nt looking for engineering vJOrk. When we did the RFP's, we said we wanted them to be able to plan, to prepare for public hearins, to help us put together the financial package and sell that. He thinks it was the general opinion of the Park Commission, and everyone else, that you don't need a civil engineer to do these things. Irrigation systems are a little more risky, but they have been putting them in for years, allover the cities. They've diesigned and built entire parks. Whittaker said there seems to be a real territorial problem with OSM. He said if he had gone to the engineer in Lake Elmo and asked if they needed an engineer to do irrigation for ballfields; he'd have said "no, -7- . . . COUNCIL STUDY SESSION MONDAY, JUNE 4, 1990 Page eight COUNCIL POSITION ON ISSUES RAISED BY THE PARK COMMISSION Use of Park P1anner/OSH for Park Projects - continued I don't think so, but be concerned about these three issues, and that's what you have to tell the Planner". He said he did not think you would get that kind of answer from Norton. Haugen said she thinks you are going to find, after a while, a paternal attitude, which is a good feeling, and that's fine. But, the Council has also hired Whittaker to make sure that things are going right. When we hired him, we said we \tanted someone that had experience, and knew what he was talking about, someone who has done certain things in parks, construction, and planning. She siad she is going to change her mind on this. We have a Park Planner and he is doing park projects. That's what we hired him for. When the question is called, she will vote for the motion. Stover said her recollection was that one of the reasons this Planner was hired was because of the potential for a park referendum, and this might require a salaried person, as opposed to the volunteers. Whittaker said we wanted someone \lho knows hmvto market and package. Stover asked for clarification of the motion. Gagne said his motion - after having work with the Park Commission for a year - was to have the Park Planner be totally responsible for park projects. Stover and Watten had a problem with this. Watten said that's a personal opinion after what has transpired in dollars and cents. Watten said you have to look at all the dollars and cents, which he had not reviewed. He said maybe these proposals should be compared to see if there is a difference. Gagne said there's a sharp difference on the prices that he has right in front of him -- Koegler wants a total of $3,000 to do the irrigation. Norton wants $3,700 plus inspection and staking. Koegler's price includes staking and inspection in his $3,000 price. Stover still feels very strongly that the Park Planner should use the City Engineer if engineering is needed. Whittaker said if Norton had not been put on the defensive a year ago, or put himself in a position where he had to defend himself, this conver- sation probably wouldn't even be taking place. Then he would probably be willing to work with the Park Planner like he has worked with the rest of the Staff. He may not have asserted himself as he has on these park issues. But, he has defended what Whittaker said he would consider indefensible positions over the past year. Whittaker says he still thinks he's a very good civil engineer. He's doing a good job on our streets, our water system, our sewer system, our lift stations - the things that a civil engineer does. But he doesn't think he has as much expertise in park projects. We do need somone who can say that, in this design, there is detailed work that has to be done by a civil engineer. We can advise Van Doren Hazard Stallings that adjustments to City systems, like hooking into the water system or other things that require civil engineering must be approved by OSM. Koegler wants to stay in business. He doesn't want to be sued by OSM for practicing without a license or signing off on plans and specs he shouldn't have. Koegler is very reason- able, very sharp, and has lots of experience with the planning we are talking about. The Park Commission is comfortable with him. Whittaker said he will advise Koegler that engineering has to be done by OSM at this time. He said he thins sthe basic opinion - leading and planning that the Park Commission wants to do - has to be done by someone other than OSM as the Park Commission is not comfortable with OSM. -8- . . . COUNCIL STUDY SESSION MONDAY JUNE 4, 1990 Page nine COUNCIL POSITION ON ISSUES RAISED BY THE PARK COMMISSION Use of Park Planner/OSM for Park Projects - continued Stover said that's why they decided to hire a Park Planner. Motion denied - 2 ayes - 3 nays (Haugen, Watten and Stover). Stover moved, Watten seconded, that the Park Planner/Landscape Architect do all the work in parks, and is the person hired to do this kind of work without going out for bids, except when an engineer is needed, the City Engineer will be used. Haugen said this is the way it should be until the Council, as a whole, decides they want to change Engineers. Stover said that's why she did not say Norton, she just said City Engineer. Gagne said the Council is approving an "open checkbook". BranceI said they are putting the Park Commission right back where they started. They did not want to deal with Norton at all. Stover said what she is understanding from Whittaker is that the majority of the things the Engineer used to do in the parks can be done by the Park Planner. Gagne said the majority of the Council is ready to support a motion offering an "open checkbook" to aSH, Watten disagreed. Motion carried - 3 ayes - 2 nays (Gagne and Brancel). Irri~ation of Freeman Park Ballfields Ga~ne moved, Brancel seconded, to accept the proposal from Van Doren Hazard Stallin~s for the irrigation system.forthe ballfields in Freeman Park at a cost not to exceed $3000. Watten said he wasn't sure whether or not the irrigation system needed an Engineer. Haugen said from what Whittaker says, they are capable of doing this. Whittaker said he didn't think they would have done an estimate on it if they were uncomfortable with it. Whittaker said vJ'hen he asked Van Doren Hazard Stallings for an estimate on the irrigation system, he was not asking them to bid against aSM. He said the Council requested this at the next meeting. He asked the Park Planner because he thought it was the logical thing to do. Watten said he would like to clarify that he is not specifically refer- ring to aSH. He just feels the engineering should be done by the City Engineer, whoever that may be. Motion carried - 5/0. Park Commission Chairman's Comments Haugen noted that the Chairman of the Park Commission, Gordon Christensen, was present and asked him if he cared to make any comments on the statement "that elected officials would have a harder time adjusting to the decision regarding the Park Planner's role and the Engineer's role. She asked him what he thought. Christensen said yes, he thought this was true. He said the Park Commis- sion had made a strong motion to the City Council stating that they -9- . . . COUNCIL STUDY SESSION MONDAY, JUNE 4, 1990 Page ten COUNCIL POSITION ON ISSUES RAISED BY THE PARK COMMISSION Park Commission Chairman's Comments - continued did not wish to work with aSM in the parks at all. He said he didn't know where the Park Commission would go. He said he had specifically not raised his hand, or tried to interfere in any \lay. However, as long as he has been asked, he said he feels the engineer would be in- volved in nearly every park project, being an engineer himself. He said he doesn't inov,1 \vhat the decision of the Park Commission \vill ul timately be. He knmvs the opinions of the Park Commission. He said the Park Commission had wanted to have their own person because of costs. He said they approached Freeman Park with a whole structured plan which was properly done and fully organized~ They had organizational charts and budgets carefully prepared. He said they encountered gross negligence, malpractice, and just multiple problems. As a result, being an advisory body to the City, our advice was that the City retain a different engineer for the parks - not the City - only the parks. The kind of people we have on the Park Commission -- 3 small business owners, a business executive, an employee at the University of Minnesota Arboratum, and myself, a registered professional engineer -- we aren't a group of people that just want to pass things through regardless of the way the City is affected. He said he doesn't know what will happen when the joint meeting comes up. Haugen said they'll find out when they get there. Gagne said the final decision is made by the Council, whether he agrees with it or not. Christensen said that's absolutely right - he is just replying because he was asked for comments. He said the only reason he is here is because he is replacing Wilson as liaison. Update on Master Plans, Authorizin~ overall Trail Plan, and Completin~ Park Capital Improvement Plan Whittaker explained that the Park Commission is currently getting estimates from the Park Planner to bring the. master plans of the parks up-to-date, to include all proposed improvements. The Planner will also present estimates for an overall trail plan for the City, and one for completing the .Park Capital Improvement Plan. 1990 Capital Projects Whittaker said the major 1990 priority items are: Silverwood Park.... .... ... ...$ 150,000 (Completed) Cathcart Park............ .... 40,000 (Ballfield relocation & pkg.) Freeman Park-Little League... 24,000 (Completion) Freeman Park-Irrigation...... 40,000 (Completion - three softball) Total.......$ 244,000 Haugen asked if all the items in all the parks have been prioritized? Watten said these are items the Commission thinks should be done in 1990, this doesn't mean they have to be done today. Gagne said when the S.E. Area questionnaire was sent out, the priorities were set for Silverwood Park. He also pointed out that the majority of the people in that area don't want the park done "piecemeal". Whittaker said there are also people who have lived next door to parks for 20 years and seen very little improvement. -10- . . . COUNCIL STUDY SESSION MONDAY. JUNE 4. 1990 Page eleven COUNCIL POSITION ON ISSUES RAISED BY THE PARK COMMISSION 1990 Capital Projects Watten suggested Staff estimate the impact of a referendum on parks for property owners, it might not be very much. Gagne said the Park Planner was hired to get everything together for a referendum. This may take a year or longer. Niccum said the Park Commission is working on it now, they want to up-date the master plans, prepare a capital improvement plan, and bring the entire plan to the Council. Gagne said the Park Commission feels that there should be more than a atrickle of money set aside for improvements. Niccum said this can't be accomplished with park dedication fees alone. Stover said, given the current economic conditions, if this is done for parks, something else will have to be removed from another area. Gagne said the Park Commission knows that there are some funds available. Watten said there has to be money available somewhere. Commission By-laws Haugen asked the staff to review the By-laws and present the recommended revisions to the Council. Whittaker said Mound's by-laws make it clear Park Commission recommendations are advisory. He said the clause on planning recommendation is not as clear, but it's understandable. He said applications for appointments normally go to the City Council, rather than the Commission. The Council usually picks a group of applicants, and then the Commission screens them. Watten asked how the Planning Commission works. Stover said the Council does the whole thing. Whittaker suggested: 1. Applications will go to the Council for review - they will then pass the ones they think are suitable to the Commission for review. 2. Resignations will go to the Mayor. 3. The Council will inform the Commission of vacancies. 4. The City Staff will consult with the Chairman on the agenda. Whittaker will outline this for the Park Conmission, then return to the Council with their comments. Operatin~ Bud~et to include maintenance of facilities This will be included in the budget discussion. Use of Parks for Political Groups Haugen said a political group called her and asked if they could hold a political function in the park. Council expressed concern over clean- up and legal problems. Haugen asked Whittaker to check with Mound. Council discussed a permit. Whittaker cities often require a permit and a bond for group reservations in the park. -11- COUNCIL STUDY SESSION MONDAY. JUNE 4. 1990 Page twelve . Meetin~ Len~th - 11:00 Rule The Council discussed the 11:00 Rule. Haugen said the Council has never restricted the time citizens have to speak. Watten said public comment could be limited. Stover said it may be difficult to put a time limit on all public input. Watten said he would be willing to liik at Council rules of order to shorten meetings. Stover would like the time to be a little later, like an 11:30 rule. Haugen suggested going by the tape times: two hour segments. Gagne moved. Watten seconded. to adopt the 11:00 rule with the condition that the topic under discussion be concluded; and the normal closing procedure be observed - payment of bills and adjournment. Motion carried - 3 ayes - 2 nays - (Brancel and Haugen). Stover moved. Watten seconded. that the 11:00 rule can be over-ridden by a 4/5 vote. Motion denied - 2 ayes - 3 nays (Brancel. Gagne and Haugen). The Council asked Whittaker to draft rules of order for Council meetings. Locatin~ Clay Tile . Whittaker said he discussed this with the Engineer, Attorney and Planner, and their feeling was that the City shouldn't get involved. Whittaker suggested calling Witrak and advising him to use Visu Sewer. He also said the law requires preserving the drainage tile. The Attorney will be asked to report on the law. Policy on Code Violation Complaints Haugen asked if violation letters should be sent out? Gagne said he understands the City works on a Complaint basis only. The Council agreed to leave it this way. Whittaker said if you are not persistantly pursuing every code violation, you can be accused of discrimination. . LMCD - Lon~ Term Mana~ement Pro~ram Gagne said there is a meeting at the Minnetonka City Hall on June 6, Wednesday - with one meeting at 1:00 and one at 7:00, to receive public input. Rascop said if this thing is going to work, everyone will have to give a little bit. Haugen said she went to every meeting they had, and her opinion was that the LMCD was bullying what they wanted through. She said the LMCD consultant appeared to disregard the requests of the Mayors and City representatives. They also wanted to expand the board membership to include the DNR, Hennepin County, Hennepin County Parks, and the Watershed Districts, when the City representatives said bring some money with you, the organizations said they didn't have any. Haugen said Brad had been asked to review and see if anything conflicted with Shorewood Ordinances. She would like that information as soon as possible. WELL CONNECTION CHARGE - ASSESSMENT REQUEST Bob Berg, of 26900 Beverly Drive, is disabled, his well went dry, and he is asking for an assessment to be spread over a period of years to -12- 4It 4It 4It COUNCIL STUDY SESSION MONDAY, JUNE 4, 1990 Page thirteen WELL CONNECTION CHARGE - ASSESSMENT REQUEST - continued Gagne moved, Watten seconded, to assess Bob Berg, 26900 Beverly Drive, for $4,000 plus 8% annual interest for a period of 5 years for hooking up to City water on the Boulder Bridge system. Motion carried - 510. SUBURBAN RATE AUTHORITY Gagne moved, Stover seconded, to refuse the invitation of the Suburban Rate Authority to join their organization. Motion carried - 510. GLEN ROAD AND MANITOU ROAD DISCUSSION Gagne will tell Mrs. Wendt, who is complaining about speeding, that the Council disagrees with the stop sign, but they will have the police department patrol the area on Friday and Saturday nights, from 7:30 to 9:30 PM. RECYCLING PLASTICS AND GRASS CONTROL Brancel said most programs now are pilot programs. In 1991, the cities recycling contract will start a pickup (weekly) of recyclable plastics. The cost will be $.30 per household per month. The Council felt this should be conveyed to the residents. They feel the residents have to be educated regarding recycling. Brancel said this should be turned back over to Kennelly, as she is dealing with the company. Brancel said she thinks grass over 6" should have to be cut, and this should be written into the Ordinance. Brancel moved, Gagne seconded, to direct Zdrazil to pick up the debris and cut the grass at 25535 Birch Bluff Road. The cost is to be certified to the taxes. Motion carried - 510. The Council t~ill discuss the grass issue at another meeting. ADJOURNMENT Gagne moved, Stover seconded, to adjourn to an executive session 11:57 PM to discuss pending litigation and employee discipline. carried - 510. The Council reconvened Watten moved, seconded Motion carried - 510. at Motion the Regular City Council meeting at 12:06 AM. by Gagne, to adjourn the meeting at 12:07 Mot. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED, Sue Niccum Assistant City Clerk Laurence E. Whittaker City Administrator/Clerk