M I N U T E S COMMITTEE-OF-THE-WHOLE WORK SESSION February 22, 2011 City Hall Conference Room Immediately Following Council Meeting
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
M I N U T E S COMMITTEE-OF-THE-WHOLE WORK SESSION February 22, 2011 City Hall Conference Room Immediately following council meeting PRESENT: Mayor Stiehm, Council Member-at-Large Janet Anderson, Council Members Jeff Austin, Brian McAlister, Roger Boughton, Steve King, and Marian Clennon ABSENT: Council Member Judy Enright STAFF PRESENT: Public Works Director Jon Erichson, Administrative Services Director Tom Dankert, and City Administrator Jim Hurm. ALSO PRESENT: Austin Post Bulletin and Austin Daily Herald. Mayor Stiehm opened the meeting. Item No. 4. Update on community conversations program – Council discussed the progress of the application for the LMC’s Community Conversations program, which is due on Friday, February 25. The four partners are in place: Chamber of Commerce, Riverland Community College, Mower County Senior Center and KSMQ-TV. Specific information is still needed for Riverland. Council Member Enright is the contact person, but due to her surgery this information was not gathered. Council Member Boughton offered to complete the information for Riverland. Council Member McAlister will work with Mower County Senior Center Director Sara Schafer to gather their information. Council Member-at-Large Anderson completed much of the application and asked Council for feedback on some of the questions. In the application, she noted that the community conversations – the discussions being general in nature – would be used as a foundation to the Vision 2020 program, which is specific to Austin. The application asks for preferred timing of the four community conversation events; Council Member-at- Large Anderson noted that we would be fairly flexible but would want these events to take place in spring or early summer as a lead-in to Vision 2020 which is just in its early planning stages now. Mayor Stiehm noted that the Vision 2020 organizers have asked the Mayor to represent the City as the City is seen as a major part of Vision 2020. KSMQ-TV will co-host the last community conversations. That event will be used as a summary, rap-up conversation and will be televised. Item No. 2. Garbage corral – The City has received a request for a garbage corral from the new business owner at the former Austin Drug location (501 1st Street NW). The new business owner will be moving his business, Top 10 Nails, adding a restaurant, and providing space for another business. Since the building occupies the entire footprint, there is no room for a garbage waste container onsite. The owner has three options for garbage: building modification, property acquisition or using property from the City. City Engineer Jon Erichson said that at this point, acquisition of property is difficult. The property owner has spoken to two adjacent property owners to acquire additional property with no success. Mr. Erichson said the City could offer two stalls for this use in the Austin Drug parking lot south of this property. This is a heavily used parking lot at 84% occupancy rate. Eleven stalls are leased to the public at $15 per month, an d that rate has been established for a long time. Mr. Erichson said Council should note the owner’s hardship, the property owner’s investment in downtown, as well as the effect on the parking lot of losing two stalls. There would be a cost to lease this space. Mr. Erichson provided a picture of an enclosed garbage corral owned by Qwest just west of the parking lot property. He said the enclosure would not need to be as substantial as this as it could be quite costly, but there should be a requirement of a solid fence or wall. He reminded Council of the complaints from Oak Park Village of debris from the restaurant in the strip mall. Mr. Erichson noted Council Member Enrights’s questions on this proposal. The questions and Mr. Erichson’s responses are as follows: 1.) I would not expect them to modify an existing building since it would at considerable expense. 2.) What did Austin Drug do for a dumpster location? I think they had a cart that was on the west side of the building that encroached on the adjacent property. I would also think that the volume was less 3.) I am concerned about them hauling garbage across a busy city street. Restaurants often have a lot of garbage. Based on their request I think they feel this is the best option 4.) We would lose parking for the actual dumpster and its corral plus enough room for a garbage truck to get in and out with ease (wouldn't want parked cars to get hit). How many stalls would we lose? Projected to lose 2 stalls 5.) Is there an adjacent owner willing to give them space or sell them space for a dumpster? Based on their request it did not sound like it. It might also be a case where they don’t want to pay the price 6.) What do think it would be worth to the city in terms of a lease? We currently lease these parking stalls for $15.00/month 7.) No matter where it is located I believe it needs to be in a corral like the photo you attached because of the type of waste they will be having. (food waste, cartons, etc.) I agree and that is why we enclosed a picture of one that is well done. We have certainly had enough complaints regarding the garbage at Oak Park Village.I don’t think they will want to do something this nice but I don’t think it should be an option 8.) Should we be concerned about odor? Complaints from people who habitually use that parking lot? They will need to have regular service and potentially the lease can provide for enforcement Mr. Erichson noted that the parking stalls in the Donut Connection lot are all owned by that property owner. Council Member Boughton thought the City should be as helpful as possible but felt there should be a long-term agreement. Council Member King said the structure should be something substantial because of it being a restaurant. Council Member Clennon expressed concerns of safety being that they would need to cross a heavily traveled street (4th Avenue). Mr. Erichson noted that there is no other city property to offer, and also noted that he thought the garbage would be taken out at the end of the work day. Mr. Erichson said there may be the possibility of obtaining an easement from the Donut Connection. If the City did provide the parking stalls, we would own the property and lease out the stalls – similar to the Hormel hangar lease, another investment on city-owned property. He would recommend a 10-year lease. Mayor Stiehm said he would like the requirement of a lock on the container. Council Member Clennon disagreed with the proposal but acquiesces if nothing else can be negotiated. The Committee-of-the-Whole agreed by consensus to have City Engineer Jon Erichson negotiate something with the property owner and bring back to Council. Carried. Item No. 3a, Hormel hangar lease – The Hormel hangar is a private building on city property. Their 10-year lease is up and they wish to extend that lease. Mr. Erichson said he is not aware of any concerns with this arrangement. Council Member Clennon asked what the charge is for renting the hangar. Mr. Erichson said that through our agreement with the airport manager, the manager has the right to rent out the hangar; it is an action between two private parties. We just rent out the land. The Committee-of-the-Whole agreed by consensus to extend the Hormel hangar lease and bring back to Council. Carried. Item will be added to the next council meeting. Item No. 3b, Anderson farm lease – When the airport runway was extended, the City bought the property owned by Gary Anderson for the airport runway lights. The property 35.73 acres and is located just south of County Road 3. The City then entered into a two- year lease agreement for 2009 and 2010 with John Scott to farm the land. Mr. Scott would like another two-year lease, and Mr. Erichson noted the arrangement works well. The lease is at $150 per acre. Mr. Erichson recommends an increase to $175 per acre, which is the going rate. The Committee-of-the-Whole agreed by consensus to recommend to Council approval of the two-year lease for years 2011 and 2012. Carried. Item will be added to the next council meeting. Item No. 1, Yellow Ribbon Community Program – SFC Tom Eustice would like to set up a Yellow Ribbon network, which is a new program in Minnesota to help deployed service families get what they need. Approximately 40 soldiers are currently deployed. A guard unit is deploying in May to Kuwait and Iraq. Mr. Eustice is also asking the County, business people, people in the health and mental health fields, and public service people to make up the committee. Services to these families would vary from plowing driveways to helping find someone in a crisis. Mr. Eustice is not asking for funding, just permission to talk to the community. The program will not be managed by the City, but representatives from city government will be involved as they have the contacts. A survey of military families found that the top five areas of concerns included quality employment. Mr. Eustice said they are asking Hormel Foods’s HR Department to teach how to write resumes, for example. He noted Rochester has a quality program in which an individual calls for assistance and the process goes into motion.