Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCCMinutes_2007_09_11 383 Brookings City Council September 11, 2007 The Brookings City Council held a meeting on Tuesday, September 11, 2007 at 4:00 p.m., at City Hall with the following members present: Mayor Scott Munsterman, Council Members Tom Bezdichek,Julie Whaley,Mike Bartley, Ryan BrunneY,Tim Reed and Ginger Thomson. City Manager Dennis Falken, City Attoxney Steve Britzman, and City Clerk Shari Thornes were also present. Report on Research Park(,Growth Partnership) &present final building designs. T'eresa McKnight, CEO & Executive Director of South Dakota State University Growth Partnership and South Dakota State Univetsity Innovation Campus,presented an update on the Research Park project and the fmal building plans. Pro�osed Plan on Railroad Safety Mitigation. Presentation by Mayor Scott Munsterman on "Proposed Strategy to Address Rail Safety and Quality of Life in Brookings." "Some highlights of the railroad and City of Brookings ovex the most recent years have included: 8 years of discussion of a Rail Expansion ProJect, STB and FEIS have fmalized decisions/reports, Community Partnership Agreement for Btookings was referxed and defeated,an Ad Hoc Safety Committee was formed and reported its fmdings to the City Council, and DM&E Railroad was sold to Canadian Pacific. How do we proceed from here? The main focus of all involved xevolves around Safety,Quality of Life,and Economics. There are many factors that help define the focus: 1) Railroad,Economics, Safety (STB), 2) STB, Rulemaking, FEIS, 3) Federal Law,Preemptions,Railroad Economics, Safety Funding, 4) Ciry, Safety, Qualiry of Life, and 5) Economics, SD DOT, Safety Funding. We have to have a balance of control. We need to create a vision and a plan in mind. We can do so with a two-prong approach: Governance and Financing. Brookings Regional Rail Authority will provide for many things. First and foremost is Governance (Quasi-Govexnmental Agency). This would allow for a fair process and hearing of all residents within tlze region (city and county alike). Their primary function would be to design, fund and implement a Regional Rail Irnpxovement Plan, consisting of Safety, Quality of Life and Economic Development. The second provision is Financing. Creating a Taxing and Bonding Authority to make funding requests to the State of SD. Local Tax Base funding can be provided through properry taxation pet 49-17A-22. However, the level of funding for a large project needed in a few areas across the state (namely Brookings and Pierre) may Yequire.moxe funding than what theit regional authorities can raise. Addirional legislation may be requixed. Proposed Legislation for a `Rail Corridor Financing District'. There is Legislation providing for a state-wide tax incxement financing district along the tait coxridor. The Financing district boundaries would include any economic development occurring along the rail line. Development investment (Rail Expansion) and added economic development along the rail increases property valua.tion, resulting in an increased tax base. A percentage of the net increased tax base (within the Ra.il Corridor TIF�is set aside to fund: Safety and/or quality of life developments in communities of need,when the financial need is gxeater than the regional authorities can provide,Local Economic Development (Cluster) projects, and Rail Improvements. State of SD Departtnent of Revenue DOT Railroad Board The Bxookings Regional Rail Authority (Governance)would have ta�ng and bonding authority. They would develop a Regional Rail Improvement Plan with focus on safety, Quality of Life and Economic Development. Rail Corridor Financing District Legislation would allow pYOperty tax use for: Safety/Quality of Life Projects, Economic Development, and Rail Infrastructure Improvement Within the State Department of Transportation, the Railtoad Authority and the Railroad Board would fall direcdy under the control oE the Governor, along with the Transportation Commission, the Aeronautics Coxnmission, and the Secretary of Transportation. 384 We need to build a partnexship and seek collaboration across the state of South Dakota. The Development of Local Rail Authorities would include: Cities, Counties,Townships, and School Districts. The State of South Dakota's involvement would include the Governor and Legislature, the SD Dept. of Transportation/Dept. of Revenue,and the Railroad Board/Rail Authority. There would also be involvement from our Congressional Delegation and the Railroad itself in the form of Community Partnership Agreements and Financial Contribution/Responsibiliry." In conclusion,Mayor Munsterman referenced State Statute fox Railtoad Tax Laws and Regional Rail Authorities. Thomson asked if the boundaries would be defined like a tax increment financing district. Munsterman said yes,there is state legislation to define the geographic area over time. Rules would be written contiguous to the rail line. A percentage of the tax would go into a designated fund for economic development,life safety and mitigation efforts. Brunner asked who would have authority to distribute money raised by the tax increment financing district and how would priorities be established. Would Legislative approval be requixed? Falken noted that there is currently a rail authoriry board between Brookings County and the Ciry of Volga. Funds derived from that rail authority are loaned and approved by that rail authority board. In that case the rail authority's purpose is for upgrade of the line for an economic development project. Munstexman noted that the proposed railroad mitigation projects are very expensive and cities won't accomplish a lot without a mechanism in place and financing goals. Thomson asked if this were established,would it result in higher taxes to the railroad. Munsterman said the threshold is reached depending on how much traffic the railroad has and, depending on how quickly they reach that threshold,the tax credit goes away. A statewide rail authority would be an incentive to bring the railroad to the table and hopefully create more of a balance between the thtee entities. Right now it's very much one sided. Baxtley noted that this is a legislative process and it could take four to five years to achieve passed legislation. He noted that several projects are several years out. Cities have always been told that property values would go down along the rail line, and felt this legislation could potentially take awa� a tax base from the rural school districts. This would be a taxation authority with the ability to tax. The rail authorities are set up to guarantee that the railroad would pay back to the communities. A railroad authority guarantees that payment and increases the mil levy to the county to cover the difference. In his opinion it's a risk, but a good one. He noted that it's always a concern when ta�ng authotity is given to anyone. Bartley asked if these issues would be referable to the voters. Britzman said yes, a rail authority would be recognized as a governmental entiry and subject to the state referendum law. The types of decisions made that would be made by a rail authority boaxd, such as imposing taxes,would be a referable subject area. � Bardey clarified that he's not saying this plan isn't possible;he has concerns that all the"eggs ase in one basket" and there's no `Plan B'. He noted that the Canadian Pacific group's goal and vision is to work out the financial and trustee position issues within 8 to 12 months and until that is completed, they have a hands-off attitude with the communities along the line. It may be one year before the city and Canadian Pacific can visit. Canadian Pacific is aggressively building into the Powder River Basin and they won't build in South Dakota if they can't make a profit. He said the city can't wait until a rail authority is in place to start rail safety mitigation. Even if the City doesn't talk with the new railroad for two years,it should still move forward on plans to install the infrastructure. He feels the city needs to act quickly,noting it won't be easy. Munsterman asked Bartley what timeline he was proposing for starting the in-town rail safety mitigation measuxes. Bartley said that would be based on the desites of the citizens for safety and the city's ability to bond for those expenses. In a short amount of time the city may,need to have mitigation measures installed and in thxee yeaxs it could be built and done. Munsterman didn't think it would take as long as Bardey proposed to establish a rail authority. Britzman said it would take 60 days to establish a local authority. Falken noted that a rail authority was already established years ago. 385 There needs to be a short-term plan in place along with a long-term solution. Munsterman said the financing piece from the statewide rail authority might give an opportunity on the time frame. Bardey asked fox clarification on the rail authority's ability to guaYantee loans and where the Ioan would come fxom. Munsterman said it would be on limited resources on a local level and agreed that both plans should be in play,but didn't anticipate the same timefxames. Bardey asked if$3 million was borrowed from a regional rail authoxity in a loan,who is paying it back and what is theix taxing structure (mil levy, bondin�. Reed said the city should have two plans in place (statewide and local) in order to get safety measures in place to the extent the city can afford and get done. Luanne Napton thanked the Council for being included in the discussion,but cautioned that the ruxal citizens would be severely affected if a bypass was installed. She encouraged all entities affected to take part in the discussion and planning process. Kaxen Cardenas, Committee for a Safer Brookings, also expressed appreciation for the work done on a rail authoxity concept and said she was extremely positive about the idea. She appreciated the fact that the discussion on this topic had been reconfigured and was moving forward. She noted that the Committee has been working with the Surface Transportation Board envitonmental chief about reopening discussions regaxding Brookings. Ed Hogan, Chair of the Railroad Safety Committee, commended the Mayot fox the ideas and woxk. He reiterated what Bardey said in that the city can't wait for a statewide rail authority and should start mitigation effoxts now. Reed noted that there is a balance between what is wanted and what the City can actually do. Hogan encouraged the city to fight for the big picture and total project rather than the bare minimum. He recommended the city hixe a negotiatox or big name attorney when negotiating with the railroad. He said we need people that can play on that field. The City of Bxookings is suddenly in the major league and in need of our own players. Whaley said a firm price is needed on the cost of gates and fences. The City needs these details and needs to sit down with the County. T'he City is setting aside money in the budget for safety mitigation. There's a new opportunity now with the new railroad. There's an opportunity to work with them rather than fight. Bardey commented that any time there is a negotiation process;there is always a bottom line. In the public arena,we need to tell them what the bottom line is. It needs to be established and very clear. Is it all or nothing? Safety through the community is the bottom line. The railroad won't abandon every line in town. The City must take care of the gates in town no matter what and he'd like to see it start there. Bardey reiterated that he'd like to start the process right now for gated crossings. Bartley said the City has to get to a starting point of working right now with what we have. We need to start with gates and grade sepaxations and woxk from there. Munsterman asked if it would be alright to seek the County's feedback on the concept. Brunner responded saying it was very impoxtant for moxe people to see the proposal. It could also help streamline the legislation and make it easier to present to legislators. ACTION: A motion was made by Reed, seconded by Whaley, to authorize the Mayor to continue discussions regarding the pxoposed Rail Authority Strategy with all organizations and intetested parties and that the Council a.�so schedule cliscussion of a plan for the in-city route by the end of the year. All present voted yes;motion carried. 386 . Town Hall Meeting/VisioningProcess. During their annual goal setting meeting on June 5``', the City Council established the goal of holding a town meeting this fall and another next spring to seek input on key issues and input during the budget process next year (Goal #5: Governance/Open Government). On August 28`h A1 Heuton, BEDC &Chamber Executive Director,presented a plan for a "visioning meeting" to be held on October 11,2007. It has been suggested that the City Council utilize this meeting as its fall town meeting. ACTION: A motion was made by Munsterman,seconded by Thomson,to provide $5,000 in funding for the Visioning Event sponsored by the BEDC on October 11,2007. All present voted yes; motion carried. De�artment of Trans�ortation Pro�ertX U�,date Mayor Munsterman updated the Council on recent discussions with the Governor's Office staff regarding the upcoming purchase of the Department of Txansportation property located at the northeast intersection of I-29 and Highway 14. Munsterman reported that the Governor would allow for a 2008 purchase rather than the original December 31, 2007 deadline. Falken noted that a new contract would be needed to extend the purchase timeline. ACTION: A motion was made by Baxdey, seconded by Brunner,to direct the city manager to prepare a new contract between the Ciry and the State of South Dakota regarding the purchase of the DOT property located on I-29 and Highway 14. All present voted yes;motion carried. Review of 6:00 p.m. meeting to�ics. The City Manager responded to questions pertauung to the action items on the agenda. City Clerk Reports. Shari Thornes,Brookings City Clerk,provided a briefing on future agenda items and upcoming invitations and obligations. City Council Member introduction of touics for future discussion ACTION: A motion was made by Reed, seconded by Whaley, to request a report from the City Attorney rega.rding revisions to the local Campaign Finance Ordinance to include reporting by political action committees,with discussion to occur before 12/31/07. All present voted yes; motion carried. 6:00 P.M. CITY COUNCIL MEETING � Consent Agenda: A motion was made by Bartley, seconded by Whaley, to approve the consent agenda which included: A. Agenda. B. Minutes (August 14`�&August 28�'). C. Action on Resolution No. 60-07,authorizing the city manager to sign an opexating agreement renewal for Prairie Lanes (expires 9/23). � Resolution No.60-07 Prairie Lanes Operating Agreement Renewal BE IT RESOLVED by the City of Bxookings,South Dakota,that the City Council hezeby approves a Lease Renewal Agreement for the Operating Liquor Management Agreement between the City of Brookings and Prairie Lanes fox the purpose of a liquoi manager to opexate the on-sale establishment or business for and on behalf of the City of Brookings at 722 Western Avenue,also known as Prairie Lanes. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Managet be authorized to execute the Agreement on behalf of the City,which shall be for a period of five(5)years. D. Action to award bids for surplused city vehicles to Cheyka Motors. Bids were received on 9/4/07 for two (2)police vehicles and two (2) unmarked police vehicles from Cheyka Motors: One (1)—2005 Ford Crown Victoria police vehicle, $5,007; One (1)—2005 Ford Crown Victoria police vehicle, $5,007; One (1)—1994 Ford Taurus,unmarked police vehicle, $225; and One (1) —1985 Chevy Blazer, unmarked police vehicle, $225. No other bids were received. 387 E. Action to approve a revised preliminary plat of Block 11, McClemans Addition (located between 15`'' Street South and 17`" Street South and east of 7`''Avenue South). On the motion, all present voted yes; motion carried. 1s` Reading—Ordinance No. 27-07. First reading was held on Ordinance No. 27-07: Fiscal Year 2008 Appropriation OYClinance, an Otdinance appxopriating monies to fund the necessary expenditures and liabilzties of the city of Brookings for the 2008 Fiscal Year and providing for the annual tax lev-y and annual tax for all £unds. Public Hearing: September 25'� 15`Reading—Ordinance No. 28-07. First reading was held on Ordinance No. 28-07: A conditional use to establish a 4-unit apartment in the Residence R-2 District on Lots 1 and 2,Block 2,Timberline Addition (404/406 and 410/412 Telluride Lane). PublicHearing.• September25`�' 2"a Reading�—Ordinance No. 25-07—Conditional Use Public hearing was held on Ordinance No. 25-07: An ordinance for a Conditional Use to establish a boardinghouse for four (4) persons on the west 35 feet of Lot 14 and the east 28 feet of Lot 15,Block 5,Pleasant Hill Addition (1209 2nd Street). Public hearing.• Al I�oach voiced hi.r ol�jection to the application, noting that the Planning Commi.crion had already turned dou�n thi.r reguest and hoped the Caunczl zvould do the,rame. He cited�iotential probkm.r a boardinghou.re designation could have on hi.r neighborhood, such a.r proximity to the elementary.rchool and,rafety concern.r for.rmall children. F.d Weninger al.ro objected to the application. He dive.t across the.rtreet ared o�rt.r the pmperty next dnor to the propo.ced boardinghou.re. He noted that hi,rpropery i.r a 5 bedroom rental urith only oneper.ron living there. He e.xpre.r.ced concern about decrea.ring,broperty value.r. He al.ro felt a boardinghau.re change.r the dynamic.r of a neighborhood and encouraged the Counczl to turn do2vn the request. �l�u.rtriem, applicant, .raid he and hi.r brother-in-larv.rha�the.rame concerns with the re,rt of the neighborhood and don't tvant any propertie.r lo.ring value. He.raid it svas their full intent to keep uj�grading the p�»perly.ro that it u�ould appr�ciate in value. �Y/herr they,rtarted thi.r proce.r,r, they re,rearched the reguirement.r for 4 perron boardinghou.re designation.r in Brooking.r and their application met all the rule.r. He noted that a boardinghou.re i.rn't ju.rt for .rtr�dents. He underrtand,r the concern regarding more traffic, but didn't fee!that one more�ier.ron�vould generate any more traffic. He ha,r monitored the hou.re over the last 30 day,r twice per day and found no tra�c around the prnperly. Ho2vever, he noted tra�c at neighboring proj�ertie.r. Thom.ron a.rked if the rent ava.c ba.red orr a per perron ba.ri.r. No. Hearing Clo.red. ACTION: A motion was made by Bezdichek, seconded by Thomson, to approve, A motion was made by Bardey, seconded by Bezdichek, to refex this issue back to the Planning Commission for further consideration. Discussion: Bardey expressed concern that this applicant has applied for a petmit and met all the requirements. He recommended the Planning Commission review this issue further and didn't want to overturn the planning commission. Reed noted that there was a quorum of the Planning Coinmission and the action they've done is complete. It's the same process that everyone else has gone through and it wouldn't be fair to change the process now. The Planning Commission did their job. He felt this action would set a bad precedence. It was noted that it would take a super majority (2/3) vote of the Council to overturn the Planning Commission. Bezdichek recommended changing the name `boaxdinghouse'. On the amendment, Bardey,Bezdichek and Brunnex voted yes and Munstertnan,Reed,Thomson and Whaley voted no;motion failed. Bezdichek asked if all the criteria had been met by the applicant. Review of the adverse impact on the neighborhood is part of the standards. The Planning Commission took that into consideration and that's why it was voted down. Thomson said if the landlord was charging a flat rent for a house it shouldn't matter whether there were three ox four people living thexe. She cited a financial reason for wanting to get the boardinghouse designation. Britzman noted that the economic aspect of rent was not within the criteria of evaluating this location. 388 Whaley noted that the Council relies on the details within the Planning Corrunission minutes for making its decisions and was unhappy with much of the discussion not being included. She expressed concern that detailed comments were not included. Thomson commented there is more of a safety issue with a boaxdinghouse in this neighborhood. There tends to be more people who come to visit. She'd rather see this house as a single family dwelling,but that's not always reality. However, because of the increased traffic a boardinghouse brings to a neighborhood, she'd be voting against this request. Brunner said he had a tough time in voting to overturn the Planning Commission. Reed agreed that the discussion about adverse effects on a neighborhood is very vague. However, he agreed that boaxdinghouses really make a difference in a neighborhood. It's usually younger people who live in them and younger people usually have more people stop by. He noted that he's akeady voted against boardinghouses and feels this is an issue the City must address by taking a hard look at this ordinance. He said from what he read in the Planning Commission minutes, there were adequate fmdings of fact for adverse effect for this application. Munsterman said the communiry has reached a breaking point on this issue of boardinghouses. Density is the real issue which results in a higher decree of social activity at these locations. He said the City Council needs to take a lea.dership position to establish quality of life for our neighborhoods. The Council must examine density to determine what is too much. He said the City needs to stop what it is doing and re-examine this issue. He recommended a moratorium on further boardinghouses until the city comes up with a plan. Dan Hanson,Planning and Zoning Administrator,noted that the boardinghouse ordinance was rewritten with new density defulitions. Prior to that revision,a boardinghouse designation allowed for 4 to 8 unrelated individuals at one residence with no lot area requirements. He cited detailed densiry requirements for rental designations. Parking under these rules is also stricter,requiring hard suxface patking. Bardey felt the issue had been dealt with while still meeting the demands for affordable housing in the community. The Council needs to balance the needs of the community fox housing for workers with the neighborhoods. Boaxdinghouse designations provide�for stricter requirements than a regular rental. It provides more safeguards to the neighborhood. � On the motion to approve Ordinance No. 25-08;Bartley and Bezdichek voted yes and Munsterman, Brunner,Reed,Thomson and Whaley voted no;motion failed. A motion was made by Munsterman, seconded by Reed,to place a moratorium on fuxther boardinghouse approvals until the City Council could put together a housing plan for the city. Motion was withdrawn. A motion was made by Munsterman, seconded by Thomson, to refer the impact of boardinghouses in general to the Planning Commission to evaluate all permitted uses within all residential zones. Discussion: There was discussion regarding the definition of family and unrelated. Density is based on the family definition;however,because of our changing society that definition and household composition is changing dramatically. It was noted that a moratorium would be a zoning ordinance, similar to a temporary zoning control. On the motion;all present voted yes;motion carried. 2°d Reading—Ordinance No. 26-07. Second reading was held on Oxdinance No. 26-07: An ordinance amending article II of Chapter 22 of the Code of Ordinances of the City of Brookings and pertairung to the 2003 International Building Code and International Residential Code with certain amendments Thereto. A motion was made by Batdey, seconded by Whaley, to approve. All present voted yes;motion carried. _ 389 Adjourn. A motion was made by Whaley, seconded by Thomson, to adjourn. All present voted yes;motion carried. Meeting adjourned at 7:18 p.m. � o rookings G`��.pf BRpa�' � � ���JF�� o j °`�' cot . Munsterman, Mayor o: �% .•�o y�'J''•».....�•�•�P C� N C..-'(.�'t/l.i' � / G v/ ` Shari Thornes, City Clerk