Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout6.a. Minutes of the August 3, 2009 Special City Council ProceedingsMotion by Droste. Second by Bills. Motion to Adopt the Agenda with the three changes. ROSEMOUNT CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING PROCEEDINGS AUGUST 3, 2009 CALL TO ORDER Pursuant to due call and notice thereof a special meeting of the Rosemount City Council was held on Monday, August 3, 2009 at 7:30 p.m. in the Council Chambers at City Hall, 2875 145t Street West, Rosemount. Mayor Droste called the meeting to order with Council Members DeBettignies, Shoe Corrigan, Weisensel and Bills attending. Staff members present included City Administrator Johnson, City Clerk Domeier, Director of Parks and Recreation Schultz, Chief of Police Kalstabakken, Community Development Director Lindquist, Senior Planner Zweber, Director of Public Works /City Engineer Brotzler, City Attorney LeFevere and Assistant City Administrator Foster. The Pledge of Allegiance was said. ADDITIONS OR CORRECTIONS TO AGENDA City Administrator Johnson stated that additional information was provided for items 6.c. Minutes of the July 15, 2009 City Council Work Session Proceedings; 9.c. Brockway Park Play Equipment; and 9.d. Contract for Professional Services CNH Architects for St. Joseph's Church. Ayes: 5 Nays: 0. Motion carried. PRESENTATIONS, PROCLAMATIONS AND ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS 3.a. Receive Donations Parks Recreation Dept. The City Council acknowledged the donations received from America's Fitness Center for events during Leprechaun Days. Motion by Shoe-Corrigan. Second byDeBettignies. Motion to approve receiving the following donations: $250 from America's Fitness Center to be used for Run for the Gold event and $9.25 remaining from the Leprechaun Days Blarney Store Hunt to be redeposited into the Leprechaun Days Donation Account. Ayes: DeBettignies, Shoe Corrigan, Droste, Weisensel, Bills Nays: None. Motion carried. 3.b. Receive Donation Police Equipment Fund The City Council acknowledged the donation received from AAA Auto Salvage for the purchase of police equipment. Motion by Shoe- Corrigan. Second byDeBettignies. (a Of ROSEMOUNT CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING PROCEEDINGS AUGUST 3, 2009 Motion to accept a donation in the amount of $7,000.00 to the Police Equipment Fund from AAA Auto Salvage. Ayes: Shoe Corrigan, Droste, Weisensel, Bills, DeBettignies. Nays: None. Motion carried. CONSENT AGENDA Council Member Weisensel pulled item 6.g. City Phone System for staff recognition. Mayor Droste pulled item 6.k Authorize Union Pacific Quiet Zone Agreement, City Project 418 for discussion. Motion by DeBettignies. Second by Shoe-Corrigan. Motion to approve the Consent Agenda with 6.g. and 6k being pulled. a. Minutes of the July 7, 2009 Regular City Council Proceedings b. Minutes of the July 7, 2009 Special City Council Work Session Proceedings c. Minutes of the July 15, 2009 City Council Work Session Proceedings d. Minutes of the July 21, 2009 Regular City Council Proceedings e. Bills Listing f. Declaration of Surplus Property g. City Phone System h. Expenditure Approval from the Donation Account Parks Recreation Dept. i. Brockway Park Authorize Encroachment Agreement with Magellan Pipeline Co. j. Receive Quotes /Award Contract Downtown Sidewalk Project, ENG 0149 (Resolution 2009 -36) k. Authorizc Union Pacific Quiet Zonc Agrccmcnt, City Projcct 1 118 L County Road 73 Street Utility Improvement Project, City Project 399 Agreements Ayes: Droste, Weisensel, Bills, DeBettignies, Shoe Corrigan Nays: None. Motion carried. 6.g. City Phone System Council Member Weisensel recognized the initiative by staff to save money on the City's phone system. Motion by Weisensel. Second by Bills. Motion to approve obtaining the necessary signatures to proceed forward with the execution of the attached proposal for the City's phone system. Council Member DeBettignies stated that the cost savings would be approximately $36,000 per year. Ayes: Weisensel, Bills, DeBettignies, Shoe Corrigan, Droste Nays: None. Motion carried. ROSEMOUNT CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING PROCEEDINGS AUGUST 3, 2009 6.k. Authorize Union Pacific Quiet Zone Agreement, City Project #418 Mayor Droste directed Director of Public Works /City Engineer Brotzler to provide an update on the quiet zone project. Mr. Brotzler highlighted the crossings that would be improved including the crossing at County Road 46. Mr. Brotzler also provided a summary on quiet zone improvements and the process moving forward. Council Member Bills questioned what other cities in the area had quiet zones. Mr. Brotzler stated that Hastings had gone through the quiet zone process but it was a significantly less number of crossings compared to Rosemount. He added that Northfield was in the process of obtaining quiet zones and noted many other cities in the country also have quiet zones. Motion by Shoe Corrigan. Second by DeBettignies. Motion to Approve an Agreement with Union Pacific Railroad for a Quiet Zone and Authorize the Necessary Signatures. Ayes: Bills, DeBettignies, Shoe Corrigan, Droste, Weisensel Nays: None. Motion carried. OLD BUSINESS 8.a. Second Reading of the Arcade Parlor, Billiard Hall, and Dance Club Business License. Ordinance Senior Planner Zweber provided an update on the changes generated from the first reading of the proposed ordinance. Discussion items included the background checks for workers, interior lighting levels, amendment procedures, persons ineligible for a license and changes to the fee schedule. Skylar Rekstad, a resident that has submitted a CUP application for a dance club, thanked the Mayor, City Council, Eric Zweber and Gary Kalstabakken for their cooperation in completing this process. Mr. Rekstad felt the ordinance was discriminating against teen dance clubs. He also stated the purpose of the ordinance did not always match the conditions of the ordinance. Mr. Rekstad stated that while background checks are a good idea he still questioned if those checks were being done for anyone working a teen night at the middle schooL He also expressed concern about the lighting levels that were checked at local establishments on a Tuesday night versus a Friday night. He explained his experience working at Shenanigan's and the amount of lighting was adequate. Mr. Rekstad also stated it would be expensive to change a manager with the proposed cost of the amendment fee. He believed the fee schedule costs were reasonable for a liquor license but for a business hypothetical in nature the fees were too expensive based upon the state of the current economy. Mr. Rekstad offered the following comments and suggestions on the proposed Ordinance: 3 -2D -2: BILLIARD HALL: Mr. Rekstad questioned where the number five came from and whether the bars were not subject to the same ordinance. ROSEMOUNT CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING PROCEEDINGS AUGUST 3, 2009 3- 2D -44: CONTENTS OF INITIAL APPLICATION: Mr. Rekstad thought providing 10 years of residency was not necessary. He added that supplying all that financial information would slow down the process. He noted that having to provide an exact legal description would require hiring a surveyor and architect which would create an additional expense for starting a business. He did not believe that providing any financial and owner interest would help protect public safety and welfare and thought it would only create more paperwork He did not agree with having to supply a description of the proposed business as some of the information would be confidential relating to the business plan and others could find out more than they need to before the business opens. He also felt that under Sections I. and J. there wereconditions that were open ended and vague. 3 2D 5: LICENSE FEES: Mr. Rekstad stated it was the City staff's job to go over the application and they should not be charging fees for their typical work. 3 2D 6: GRANTING OF LICENSES: Mr. Rekstad stated that applicants were to be of good moral character and he found that requirement to be a very vague statement. 3 2D 7: PERSONS INELIGBLE FOR LICENSE: Mr. Rekstad questioned why a person would not be allowed to own an arcade and a billiard hall. Under Section C. he raised concerns about the types of "grinding" that may take place at a dance club. He further questioned what dancing would not be considered a violation of the ordinance. 3 2D 9 CONDITIONS OF LICENSE: Mr. Rekstad was concerned about how he would identify a City official. He also questioned if background checks should be necessary for City employees to enter the club. He added that the security and surveillance language included vague terms and questioned who would have the right to see the records. Mr. Rekstad found the age restrictions to be discriminatory in nature for the dance club portion. He thought that .5 foot candle lighting would be sufficient. Based upon Section 10, he questioned if an electrician would not be allowed on the premise during non business hours. Mr. Rekstad also questioned Section 13 and if the Police Department should be involved if someone is intoxicated and if the call would generate a police report would it count against his business. He further questioned why the loitering language was not included for arcade parlors or billiard halls and what garbage his business would be responsible for four hours after closing. Mr. Rekstad further questioned the special events section and stated that the City Council should be approving the administrative permit instead of the Community Development Director and Police Chief. 3 2D 10: SPECIAL CONDITIONS: Mr. Rekstad inquired what the special conditions include and stated the conditions should be clearly identified in the ordinance; it was too open-ended. He requested that the conditions should only be added by the City Council. ROSEMOUNT CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING PROCEEDINGS AUGUST 3, 2009 3- 2D -12 -1: GROUNDS FOR REVOCATION: Mr. Rekstad stated in regard to Section A he would like more flexibility to trim staff according to the attendance on any given night the club is open. He added that the language Section D would scare away prospective business owners. He further questioned for Section E and the liability he faces should a customer bring alcohol into the club. He wanted further clarification on the condition. Mr. Rekstad thanked the City Council for their time. Mayor Droste asked the City Council if they had any comments following the public comment. Council Member DeBettignies stated that the term club was used exclusively in the terminology and questioned how to move from that term being used most often in the key points. Mr. Zweber replied that other than having the term in the actual definition, club could be replaced with premises. The loitering language was also discussed and it was determined that the term dance club should be changed to establishments. City Attorney LeFevere explained the concept of discrimination and that it was not an unlawful discrimination to regulate a specific type of business. Some of the provisions apply to either all three of the uses or maybe only one use. The uses do not have to be treated equally. Council Member DeBettignies commented on the ages set forth in the ordinance. Mr. Rekstad stated he was satisfied with the 16-21 year old age gap but was concerned there was no ordinance for 21 and over clubs or 12 and under. Mayor Droste questioned the re gulations that prevent Shenanigan's Pub from having to receive a license for every activity whether dances or pool tables at their establishment. Mr. LeFevere explained that the proposed ordinance exempts businesses that have liquor licenses. The restrictions that apply to liquor licenses are governed by state law. Mayor Droste questioned if background checks were performed on those who work a teen night event; such as the teen dance run by the City. Mr. LeFevere stated the proposed use is not a school activity and that the ordinance requires that the background checks be performed according to state law. Director of Parks and Recreation Schultz added that all of the staff working teen night events are subject to background checks along with the City employees and police officers. He also explained that the teen night events are in a controlled atmosphere. Mayor Droste requested that staff respond to the questions related to dancing. Mr. LeFevere stated that the language was not unique to this ordinance. This is the same language that is used in the adult use section of the zoning ordinance. There is grinding that violates the law and some grinding that is the expected normal. He stated that discretion and common sense should be applied. Council Member Bills expressed concern about regulating the dancing. Council Member Shoe Corrigan stated that she didn't expect that staff would come to the establishment looking for violations on this provision. She added it ROSEMOUNT CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING PROCEEDINGS AUGUST 3, 2009 would be expected that Mr. Rekstad's staff would use discretion and best judgment. Council Member DeBettignies stated that he would be more concerned about the parents who would hear stories of what was taking place in the dance club. Mr. Rekstad stated that by no means did he want to allow inappropriate grinding but he didn't want people to interpret the grinding as being a violation of the ordinance. Chief of Police Kalstabakken explained that the police officers would not go into the club looking for that type of behavior but if rumors were circulating the community about what occurs at the dance club; it would be expected. He explained that revoking a license was a slow process. The officers would approach the management and provide notification of the violation. Depending upon how often the violation occurs it would be handled through the administrative process. Mayor Droste questioned if the City would provide a list of employees that would be entering the premises. Mr. Kalstabakken explained that typically police officers would be in uniform and if not would produce a badge. He added that City employees also carry identification as well. Mayor Droste questioned who would be allowed in the dance club during off operational hours. Mr. Kalstabakken explained that any contractor hired to perform work on site would be considered a contract employee. Therefore, that contractor could be allowed to perform a service during those off operational hours. Mayor Droste inquired about the 10 year look back period on a background check. Mr. Kalstabakken explained that 10 years was a reasonable look back period. The background check will provide information that is relevant to the persons past record and is gathered to verify identification as well. He noted that 10 years was the standard time frame used by the City and typical in most background checks. Mr. Kalstabakken further explained the process for changing managers. Mr. Kalstabakken also addressed the provisions in 3 -2D -9. He stated that the owner is responsible for removing intoxicating persons and in most circumstances the police would be contacted. He added that the business will need to deal with the issue accordingly. He stated that the council "may" take action based upon the number of reports generated but noted that three reports would not mean revocation. He added that if over a six month period the police were receiving several calls related to this provision that staff would want to discuss it further with the owner. Mayor Droste questioned if a business can refuse to supply security tapes. Mr. Kalstabakken stated that for the purposes of taking administrative action against a licensee the proposed ordinance would make the owner turn over the security footage should there be a need to investigate an issue. Mr. Kalstabakken addressed the process for allowing special events. He stated that staff clearly works for the elected officials and that it was timelier for staff to approve a permit. Community Development Director Lindquist added that from a process standpoint it was staff's expectation that the narrative would outline the basis for the business operations. She added that the applicant could list out the special events and staff could use administrative ROSEMOUNT CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING PROCEEDINGS AUGUST 3, 2009 authority to issue a special permit. She noted that at times there can be two -three weeks between City Council meetings and that the applicant may not have enough time to bring a request to the City Council. Ms. Lindquist stated that the applicant would forecast issues in the narrative for the special types of uses. Mayor Droste commented that with the potential location of the dance club next to the daycare there could be conflicts with parking. Ms. Lindquist stated that staff and the applicant could work through those issues upon application of a special event permit. Mayor Droste questioned when the applicant would have to clean up the parking lot. Ms. Lindquist replied that businesses do take care of cleaning up their property. She added that the provision was regulating a common courtesy. Ms. Lindquist addressed the applicant's desire to allow security guards to leave early based upon the dance club attendance. Ms. Lindquist stated that would be perfectly acceptable but that based upon the applicant's narrative the expectation was that 12 security officers would be present. She added that if the applicant wants to vary from the submitted proposal that should be articulated in the narrative. Council Member Shoe Corrigan questioned if the applicant could add that information to the narrative. Ms. Lindquist replied yes and that those types of requests should be articulated into the business plan. Mr. Rekstad agreed Mayor Droste questioned if it was common to inspect the records of the licensee's tax retums. Ms. Lindquist stated that internal discussion was held on the provision and staff would be fine with deleting the requirement. Mayor Droste questioned the creation of a nuisance on the premise. Mr. LeFevere stated that a nuisance is a legal concept defined in the City code. Nuisances are defined in state law. Mayor Droste stated that any nuisance would require police and/or code enforcement involvement. Council Member Shoe Corrigan questioned the regulation of the sale and possession of alcohol. Specifically if a patron snuck alcohol into the club would it be a violation against the owner. Mr. Zweber stated that Mr. Rekstad's proposed security plan includes a bouncer at the door. The bouncer's responsibility is to stop anyone with those types of substances from entering and that if someone were caught with alcohol then the security plan has failed. Mr. LeFevere added that the City can regulate the licensee's conduct but not the conduct of the other people. Council Member Shoe Corrigan requested more information about the proposed fee concerns. Mr. Kalstabakken stated that the fees are based on the amount of time it takes to conduct an investigation. All the staff that touch the application document their time and based upon that, the fee is determined. Additional consideration is added for the ongoing monitoring of the business. Mr. LeFevere agreed noting that the fee cannot be a revenue generator. Ms. Lindquist added that everyyear staff reviews their hourly time to process various applications and an amount of time is allocated to complete the task She noted that fees maybe modified after the time assessment has been conducted. ROSEMOUNT CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING PROCEEDINGS AUGUST 3, 2009 Mr. Kalstabakken stated that City staff may put conditions on a license during the renewal process but all renewals are brought before the City Council for consideration. He added that staff may recommend conditions to the City Council but the renewal conditions would be modified by the City Council. Council Member Weisensel questioned why the City would restrict multiple interests. Mr. Zweber explained that the condition was a carry -over from the liquor license. Staff had internal debate would be comfortable removing the condition. The consensus of the City Council was to remove the multiple interest condition. Council Member Bills questioned the ordinance process. Mr. Zweber explained that ordinances have an age to them. Communities regulate businesses in different ways. It is not unique that other communities may not have this type of licensing. He added that the City ordinance will not anticipate all business plans that will be submitted. Mr. Rekstad stated that he had concerns with the ordinance and felt the City was making up the rules as they go. Council Member Shoe Corrigan spoke of how the massage parlor ordinance was changed to allow for professional massage therapists. She added that the City has never had these types of proposed business as part of the business climate and the City Council believes the best way to regulate the use was through a license. Mr. LeFevere added that ordinances are often created and acted upon as a response to a proposal. Mr. Rekstad stated he was concerned with being a long time resident that this ordinance would be so regulatory that it would push business away. He spoke of the business potential in Burnsville but that he wanted to run a prosperous business in Rosemount. Council Member Shoe Corrigan stated that the proposed language was to protect the citizens and to be fair, legal and clear. She added that the City Council expects him to be a good and successful business. Mayor Droste requested that staff explain the different zoning districts. He also questioned if it was necessary to hire an architect or surveyor for the project. Mr. Zweber explained that anyone who is building a commercial business in Rosemount is required to submit the same information. Some of the records are available at City Hall. He added that any renovation done to a commercial space need to be drawn by an architect unless the space is already built out the way the business owner was planning. The business narrative must describe the plans and hours of operation so the City Council has the proper information to act on the application. Mr. Zweber stated that the financial interest information was requested to use in performing the background check. That information will provide the names of the owners and describe who has a financial interest in the business. Mr. LeFevere stated that information is relevant for a background check and that it was part of the business expectations. Mr. Zweber explained the definition of a billiard hall as having more that four pool tables. He also explained the lighting standards and talked about his visits to establishments in Rosemount. He noted that at Shenanigan's it was difficult to recognize faces at the other end of a bar. Mr. Rekstad disagreed stating there was sufficient lighting at Shenanigans. Council Member Bills questioned the light show at the proposed club. Mr. Rekstad stated ROSEMOUNT CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING PROCEEDINGS AUGUST 3, 2009 that light show will go with the music the entire night. It was noted that the lighting from the light show would be included in the minimum lighting required under the ordinance. Council Member Shoe Corrigan was comfortable moving forward with staff making the appropriate changes. Mr. Zweber outlined the four changes to include 1)replacing the word "club" with "premises" as necessary; 2) 3 loitering clause should replace "club" with the word "establishment; and 3) the removal of paragraphs 3 -2D -7 A. (multiple interest), 3 2D- 9.A.17 (records); and 4) replacing 3 -1 -9 with 3 2D 9. Council Member DeBettignies told Mr. Rekstad that the success of the business would fall on his shoulders and that he would have the general public expecting the facility to be a place safe for children to attend. Council Member Bills questioned if applicants would be required to pay for special event permits. Ms. Lindquist explained that the administrative permit would allow for special exceptions. The applicant would be required to formally apply for the permit and that no fee was proposed at this time. She noted that over time the special events would become more routine and part of the narrative requiring less administrative review. Council Member Weisensel questioned the zoning districts that would be affected by the ordinance. Mr. Zweber stated that the proposed ordinance was not a zoning ordinance but part of the City Code that would encompass all areas of the City. Motion by Shoe Corrigan. Second by DeBettignies. Motion to adopt the Business License Ordinance regarding Arcade Parlors, Billiard Halls and Dance Clubs with the striking with sections discussed as well as amending the language modifications as appropriate as discussed. Ayes: DeBettignies, Shoe Corrigan, Droste, Weisensel, Bills Nays: None. Motion carried. (Ordinance XXI.19) Motion by Shoe Corrigan. Second by Weisensel. Motion to Adopt a Resolution authorizing the publication of the Ordinance amending Title 3 of the Rosemount City Code concerning Arcade Parlors, Billiard Halls, and Dance Clubs. Ayes: Shoe Corrigan, Droste, Weisensel, Bills, DeBettignies Nays: None. Motion carried. (Resolution 2009 -37) Motion by Shoe Corrigan. Second by Bills. Motion to Adopt a Resolution Amending Resolution 2008 -108 A Resolution Approving Amendments Setting the 2009 Schedule of Rates and Fees. Ayes: Droste, Weisensel, Bills, DeBettignies, Shoe Corrigan Nays: Motion carried. (Resolution 2009 -38) Motion by Bills. Second by Shoe Corrigan. ROSEMOUNT CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING PROCEEDINGS AUGUST 3, 2009 NEW BUSINESS 9.a. Request to Approve the Central Park Expansion Study Senior Planner Zweber summarized the information provided in the staff report regarding the improvement and/or expansion of Central Park. Discussion items included Central Park design alternatives and the public involvement process. Mayor Droste emphasized that staff has worked with the business owners mentioned within the plan. He also spoke of potential relocation areas in Rosemount. Mr. Zweber stated that staff intends to communicate periodically with the businesses to learn of any changes in their business plans. Motion by Bills. Second by Shoe Corrigan. Motion to approve the Central Park Expansion Planning Study. Ayes: Weisensel, Bills, DeBettignies, Shoe Corrigan, Droste Nays: None. Motion carried. 9.b Ordinance Relating to Maintenance of Rosemount Veterans Memorial Walk Director of Parks and Recreation Schultz provided a summary of the staff report and draft ordinance. The City Council was asked to hold a first reading of the proposed ordinance and schedule a second reading for August 18, 2009. Motion by Weisensel. Second by Shoe Corrigan. Motion to hold the first reading of the Ordinance and schedule the second reading of the Ordinance for August 18, 2009. Ayes: Bills, DeBettignies, Shoe Corrigan, Droste, Weisensel Nays: None. Motion carried. 9.c. Brockway Park Play Equipment Director of Parks and Recreation Schultz provided a summary of the staff report related to the purchase of new play equipment at the Brockway Park. The City Council was asked to consider approving the purchase of the play equipment from Flanagan Sales for Little Tykes Equipment. Council Member Weisensel questioned the warranties included in the standard contract. Mr. Schultz explained the different warranties included for installation, standard warranties and the manufacturer warranties. ROSEMOUNT CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING PROCEEDINGS AUGUST 3, 2009 Motion to approve the purchase of play equipment for Brockway Park as submitted by Flanagan Sale for Little Tykes Equipment. Ayes: DeBettignies, Shoe Corrigan, Droste, Weisensel, Bills Nays: None. Motion carried. 9.d. Contract for Professional Services CNH Architects for St. Joseph's Church Director of Parks and Recreation Schultz requested that the City Council consider contracting with CNH Architects to provide the architectural and engineering services for improvements to the former St. Joseph's Church as outlined in the proposed contract. Mr. Schultz explained the areas that are in need of repair including the minor repairs to the support beams. Council Member Weisensel questioned the contracted services agreement. Mr. Schultz explained that only the five projects included in the July 8, 2009 cost analysis update are included in the contract. He stated that all cost percentages were based on that July 8 cost estimate. Motion by DeBettignies. Second by Droste. Motion to approve the attached professional services contract with CNH Architects to provide the architectural and engineering services for upgrading the former St. Joseph's Church to accommodate public assembly. Ayes: Shoe Corrigan, Droste, Weisensel, Bills, DeBettignies Nays: None. Motion carried. ANNOUNCEMENTS Mayor Droste stated that the next regular City Council meeting will be held on Tuesday, August 18, 2009. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business to come before the City Council and upon a motion by Droste, second by Bills, the meeting was adjoumed at 10:33 p.m. Respectfully Submitted, Amy Domeier, City Clerk