Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCCMinutes_2005_05_03 368 Brookings City Council May 3, 2005 The Brookings City Council held a planning meeting on Tuesday, May 3, 2005 at 5:30 p.m., at City Hall with the following members present: Mayor Scott Munsterman, Council Members Tom Bezdichek, Michael Reitz, Tim Reed, Julie Whaley, Ginger Thomson, and Michael Bartley. City Manager Alan Lanning, City Attorney Steve Britzman, and City Clerk Shari Thornes were also present. New Council Members. New Council Members Ginger Thomson, Michael Reitz, and Michael Bartley were presented with their Certificate of Election and were sworn in as City Council Members. Mavor's Council on Communitv Wellness Renort. Patty Hacker, Council Co-Chair, presented the following report to the City Council: City Council's Char�e: • To develop a plan of action that could be implemented by the City of Brookings to: • Prevent disease • Improve health and the quality of life in Brookings • Increase the quality, availability and effectiveness of educational and community-based programs • Mission Statement: Improve health and wellness through lifestyle changes • Slogan for Community Wellness: Get Healthy-Stay Healthy Council Goals: • Develop effective education programs • Improve the environment(e.g. bike and walking paths, increased accessibility to existing programs and facilities) • Identify means to motivate citizens to become healthier and improve wellness • Identify family activities that will contribute to the goals Council Members & Subcommittees: • Education sub-committee • Kendra Kattelman, ,Jo Gibson, Heidi Evers, Patty Hacker • Environmental sub-committee • Randy Hansen, Matt Vukovich, Janet Lord, Matt Bien (who replaced Dr. Scotty Roberts) • Family Activities sub-committee • Corey Anderson, Ann Martin, Matt Vukovich • Motivation sub-committee • David Eggers, Janet Mullen, Erik Peterson, Tyler Nelson, Benda Berseth The Process.• • Council met monthly to discuss progress of sub-committees • Council helped modify a survey used to gather data from Brookings (city and county) residents about their physical activities (part of Department of Health data collection) and barriers to participation in activity and in practfce of good nutritional habits • Council developed a plan of action from each sub-committee to present to the Brookings City Council Hacker reviewed the results of their recent survey. Council's Proposed Plan ofAction: • Based on the work done over the past several months the members of the Wellness Council propose the following Plan ofAction to the Brookings City Council. The plan 369 has four parts, one from each of the sub-committees, but is presented as a complete plan of action. Plan Part 1: Education • Promote healthy selections/portions with Brookings restaurants, grocery and convenience stores. This would include positive reinforcement,possibly through the use of newspaper articles featuring "healthy restaurant of the month, " etc. • Work with Hy-Vee Food Store to add a nutritionist to their staff. • Make good use of Public Service Announcements to inform the public about activity and exercise, good food choices, etc. • Offer classes through the Multi-District (e.g. cooking, exercise, healthy eating, etc.) • Work with Cooperative Extension nutritionist and the services at the hospital to do nutrition education in the communiry. Plan Part 2: Environment • Increase the number and length of existing bike paths • Develop a new Nature Park and Recreation Trails in the area south and west of the softball complex on 22nd Avenue South • Develop cross-country ski courses • Develop frisbee golf courses • Develop a rock climbing wald facility • Initiate racing events (work with existing businesses and clubs) • Increase use of existing facilities for alternative activities such as kayaking • (note information table that is included with the PowerPoint handout) Plan Part 3: Familv Activities • Utilize the survey results to target activities that were a focus in the survey • Enlist community resources to advertise family activities happening in the community (Daktronics boards in high traffic areas, newspaper information, web site links,flyers at public events, human interest stories such as Healthy Family of the Month, activity mailings). Plan Part 4: Motivation • Present the Brookings Buddy Program • Goal is 100 participants for a pilot program • Letter of support from the Mayor, and incentive gifts solicited from Brookings businesses • Commitment is physical activity 3 times per weel� 30 minutes over a 90 day period • Self-report in a log book • Participants would be rewarded for completion or reaching certain goals in the program • Educational component would include classes such as goal setting(preventative lifestyle changes), basac nutrition, cooking class, hunting for health in the grocery store, self-esteem, information on the new food guide pyramid and dietary guidelines • Media involvement to make it more of a community event Wellness Council Recommendations: • The Mayor's Council on Community Wellness recommends that the Brookings City Council accept this proposed Plan of Action, and that the Plan of Action be implemented when possible. • There will be funding issues associated with parts of the plan of action; members of the sub-committees have addressed those issues and are willing to work with the City Council to develop a plan for funding. Where do we go from here? • It is the Council's desire to be part of the implementation of this plan; however, it is recognized that the City Councid holds the key to the action that will take place. We are at your disposal to work at the pleasure of you and the Mayor! � 7Q Discussion: The Mayor asked the City Council to consider action to permanently create a Mayor's Council on Community Wellness. The Council received a$10,000 grant from the SD Dept. of Health to help with the initial implementation of the program. Bezdichek asked if the Council was working with existing programs in town in the creation of their goals to ma.ke sure they aren't duplicating efforts or services. Yes. Thomson asked what the Council's timeline and plan for funding was on this project. The program would be ongoing and the Council would seek grants to help supplement the program. Reed said he'd like to see the Council formally established. Bartley asked if the creation of another board would be creating a secondary park and recreation program. He was not in favor of creating a second organization that duplicates services or that might cause problems for the Park and Recreation Dept. to obtain grants. Allyn Frerichs, Park,Recreation and Forestry Superintendent, suggested the Council make a similar presentation to the Park and Recreation Board. He noted that some of the Council's ideas are already in planning stages (i.e. bike extension,Nature Park). He also did not want to see duplication as far as funding, administration or services. Hacker said the Council tried to evaluate pieces of information and determine what the City of Brookings could do to develop a healthy community,recognizing it already has in place entities that can take care of many pieces. Action: The Council was directed to meet with Allyn Frerichs and Alan Lanning to determine how a new Council would mesh with the existing Park and Recreation Board, Department, and budget and make a recommendation to the City Council. Presenting the report to the School Board was also suggested. Apuatic Center. Allyn Frerichs and Rick Salonen,Banner and Associates, reviewed the final plans for the Hillcrest Family Aquatic Center. The Bid opening date is May 27 with Council action early June. Brookings Municinal Airnort. Jackie Lanning, City Engineer, and Patrick Dame,Airport Manager, gave the following report. Status of Commercial Service Subsidv There was an article in the April 18, 2005 issue of the Regional Aviation Partners (R.A.P. is an organization for politically assisting airports with their Essential Air Service) stating that Brookings Municipal Airport may be in jeopardy of losing our Essential Air Service. In the article, it stated that President Bush is trying to make drastic changes to the FY06 budget to the Essential Air Service program. We have been in discussion with R.A.P. to ensure that we are getting as much help from them as possible. They wrote in their Week RAP Up that Brookings could become the eleventh airport that could potentially lose their commercial air service. It is not because of a lack of funding of the Section 32S bill or a lack of use, it is because the FAA is considering reassigning the designation for Siowc Falls Airport. Currently, Sioux Falls is considered to be a Non-Hub Airport. With recent improvements in their service and additional air carriers, the FAA is considering reclassifying Sioux Falls as a Small Hub Airport. Under Section 325 of the EAS bill, the President is saying that airports that are 75 highway miles from a Small Hub Airport will be eligible only for surface transportation subsidies and must contribute no less than SO percent. If FAA succeeds in reclassifying the Sioux Falls Airport, the City of Brookings would be asked to contribute almost $550,000 per year to maintain our commercial air service. 37I Timing is critical on this issue. We are in the project layout phase our Master Plan development, which will outline projects that will enhance our airport. We anticipate SDSU will utilize the commercial service more with their athletic program and proposed research park. It is very important for our legislators to know the City's wishes for the airport and to ensure we have a voice in Washington. It appears this will be our last chance to keep our Essential Air Service. The City has a valuable asset to the community that people are just starting to utilize, and our passenger levels have been increasing. A document of support from the Mayor and Ciry Council will be more persuasive than from the ciry staff. We need to do everything possible to let the President know we want to keep our air servicee. Aircraft Rescue and Fire FiQhtin�Repuirements Even though there is a possibility of losing the subsidy for the commercial air service, the City must proceed with meeting FAA requirements for the service we currently have. The regulations we must meet are described as follows: FAR Part 139 Requirements: The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) has made changes to the Federal Aviation Regulation (FAR)Part 139 requirement for airports providing commercial service. Under the new changes, the airports are to convert their current Airport Operation Manual (AOM) to an Airport Certification Manual (AC1l� and comply with the new ARFF(Aircraft Rescue and Fire Fighting� requirements. Under new Part 139 requirements, airports providing commercial sef-vice have to provide a certain Index level. The index level is determined by the length of the aircraft. Brookings Municipal Airport is served by a Beechcraft 1900 which is considerably less then 90 feet long, so the airport is considered Index A. Under this index, the ARFF personnel most be able to respond to the center point of the furthest commercial service runway and be dispensing agent (water,foam, or chemical) in three (3) minutes. At this time, the Brookings Volunteer Fire Department may be able to meet the time requirement; however, they are not trained for ARFF. The City of Brookings must comply with all ARFF Index requirements no later than June 6, 2007. Due to the length of time for us to receive a fire truck, the FAA is urging us to proceed as quickly as possible to bid the ARFF vehicle and building. ARFF Truck: In order for the airport to insure that we are meeting these requirements, the FAA is committed to provide us with a grant in the amount of$600,000 to purchase a truck and a building to house it at the airport. With the truck and building on site, we widl have no problems meeting our three minute response time, however, we will have to have one ARFF trained fire fighter on site during all commercial service flights. Details about the AARF truck: The FAA has issued guidelines about the type of truck they will pay for. In general, this will be a smaller rype of rescue vehicle with the potential to spray dry chemical,foam and water. The vehicle will be a one person operation with the ability to spray all agents from inside the truck through the use of a nozzle on the front. It is designed specifically for aviation response, with the capabiliry of fighting jet fuel, AVGAS and aircraft. When frghting fires in the aviation environment, water is usually not the best method of fire fighting. Dry chemical and foam are more effective to smother the fire out when sprayed on top. Details about sta ff training The training required for the AARF truck and aviation response is very specific to aviation, and is different from standard fire department training. The City is proposing to train approximately 12 personnel for aviation response, who may include: Airport Manager Patrick Dame Fire Chief Darrell Hartmann Street Superintendent, Koss Delfinis Nine vodunteer fzre department personnel � � � This training is only held in Duluth, Minnesota, and is available upon request for groups of six or more people. Each firefighter will need to attend the initial training, and have recurrent training every 12 calendar months. Equipment requirements: Since aviation fires often involve jet fuel, special equipment is needed to protect the fire fighter. Jet fuel burns much hotter then a standard house or grass fire, so proximity suits must be custom fit to each fire fighter. These suits include pants,jacket, gloves, boots, and helmets. Each suit costs between $1,500 and$2,500. Gloves, boots and hedmets will all be needed prior to attending ARFF training. FundinQ: The FAA has approved funding for approximately$600,000 for Brookings. The grant will be 95%FAA, 2%state, 3%city. The grant must be used this year, or the City runs the risk of not getting it next year. This grant will need to fund: the ARFF truck, equipment, building, suits, site acquisition (existing hangar will be leveled), drainage improvements, and new ta�cilane to the faciliry. Runway Protection Zone (RPZ): The Runway Protection Zone is a trapezoidal-shaped zone at the end of each runway to protect persons on the ground in the event of an airplane crash. According to FAA design standard for airports (Advisory Circular I50- 5300-13), these RPZs extend from the end of the runway on the ground and upward. It also states that these zones should be free of all obstructions (buildings and structures) and purchased by the airport(City) whenever possible. The advisory circular also states that structures of public assembly are prohibited in the RPZ, which include residential buildings, offtce buildings, and fueling stations. According to our past grant agreements with the FAA, the City is required to keep these zones free of all obstructions. The Federal Government has stated that, "As a regulatory agency with the ability to issue permits for construction, the City is responsible for preventing the development in the RPZ according to our past grant agreements". FAA has also made it clear that non-compliance could possibly cripple our ability to attain Federal funding in the future, which includes discretionary funding. The Consultants working on the Airport Master Plan are currently working on options for the airport. These options will include alternate runway alignments (rotating or moving the runway). If the primary runway were moved, the RPZ would change to meet the new runway alignment. If the City would propose to move the primary runway, the FAA may allow the City to continue issuing permits in the current RPZ. We expect to receive recommendations from our consultant in the next two weeks and we will proceed with the information they present to us. ACTION: A motion was made by Bartley, seconded by Thomson,to go ahead and request authoriza.tion for the mayor to represent the City Council with a letter to the appropriate parties. All present voted yes;motion carried. Conflict of Interest Statute. Steve Britzman, City Attorney,provided the Council with a written explanation of the Senate Bill 171 regarding Conflict of Interest and requested the Council revisit this issue in depth prior to July 1 St Update on DM&E Exnansion Proiect. Steve Britzman, City Attorney, reviewed the following information pertaining to horn noise and vibration. DM&E Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement/Pertinent Sections of Draft Supplemental EIS Following Mid States Case - The Mid States case resulting in 2 noise and vibration issues, which require further analysis: The Court specifically upheld the EIS's noise methodology (including development of a noise model, determination of noise contours for wayside, horn and the combination of wayside and horn noise, the use of the 65 and 70-dBA Ldm noise levels for analysis and, the use of aerial photographs to count noise-sensitive receptors within the established noise contours), the Court stated that the Board needed to do more to explain its decision that mitigation for increased horn noise as a result of this project was unwarranted. � / � Second, although the EIS has included analyses for noise and vibration separately, the court directed the Board to address in more detail the City of Rochester's contention "that households experiencing both noise and vibration perceive the effect of the noise to be approximately twice the measured value of the noise. The foregoing two issues are addressed in the following excerpts of the draft Supplemental EIS: 14.1 Horn Noise: In the EIS, SEA determined that thousands of noise sensitive receptors could be exposed to adverse levels of noise due to train horn soundings. SEA recommended 11 mitigation measures to address potential noise impacts, including measures that will have the effect of reducing horn soundings (i.e., grade crossing improvements, including grade separated crossings in Rochester, Minnesota and Pierre, South Dakota). All of these mitigation conditions were imposed by the Board. However, following its additional analysis for this Draft SEIS and consistent with past cases, SEA continues to believe that additional mitigation for horn noise soundings, including mitigation such as insulation treatments, at the noise receptor locations, or sound walls, is not reasonable or warranted. This decision is based on the following: • train horn soundings are a safety issue regulated by FRA • FRA's Interim Rule establishing train horn sounding regulations and procedures to establish quiet zones now provides all of the communities affected by this project the opportunity to eliminate or reduce train horn soundings without compromising safety through community and railroad cooperation • numerous agreements negotiated between communities along the existing rail line and DM&E address the concerns of the local communities along the new and existing line, including noise • the Board has never imposed mitigation for horn (as opposed to wayside) noise, and • the number of potential receptors, requiring DM&E to mitigate the thousands of sensitive noise receptors potentially affected by horn noise by means such as insulation or sound barriers, would be very costly � sound barriers would also create potential safety hazards and might not be effective • Therefore, SEA does not recommend any additional noise mitigation to address adverse impacts from train horn soundings beyond those already recommended and imposed. 1.4.2 Noise and Vibration Synergies: SEA concduded in the EIS that the proposed project would have potentially significant impacts to noise sensitive receptors due to increases in noise from grater numbers of passing trains and locomotive horn soundings. Additionally, SEA concluded that the proposed project would not have significant effects on noise sensitive receptors due to increased vibration as projected vibration levels would be insufficient to cause damage to nearby structures. Following its additional investigation and analysis, SEA finds no evidence to conclude that, at the levels of vibration anticipated from the proposed project, any increase in the annoyance from or perception of noise would occur. As such, SEA finds no reason to modify its prior noise and vibration conclusions, or include mitigation measures beyond those previously recommended and imposed to address these issues. No action was taken. Discussion regarding Retail and Commercial Development. A motion was made by Bartley, seconded by Reitz,to table item 8B regarding Retail and Commercial Development. All present voted yes; motion carried to table. Second Pennv. The Council was provided a review of the second penny process and reporting methods, including the current format that breaks down the 25%and 75% funds and a new combined format recommended by staff in previous discussions. The new format would combine debt service and lease payments enabling the reader to evaluate the total of a11 leased payments. Reed said he does not have a good understanding of the bottom line. 374 Reed recommended an annual review of second penny funds to coincide with budget process. It was clarified that subsidy requests are different. They have a June 1 St deadline. Changing the second penny policy was suggested. Cash projects that aren't approved should be reflected in a different manner on the report. Scheduling Joint Meetings. PlanningyCommission: The Council discussed the possibly of another joint meeting with the Planning Commission to discuss student housing and zoning. One was held on March 8, 2005. Bartley said there is a danger anytime there is a special meeting on an item that you've already asked for public testimony on. There may be a tendency to prejudice a decision. Decisions must be based on findings of fact. Munsterman said the group could have a philosophical discussion regarding the SDSU Housing Report and not on a specific zoning issue. Reed cited the boardinghouse permits as a good example of an issue where improved communication between the two groups would have been helpful. Bartley noted that separation of the planning commission and city council is designed to remove the political process. Lanning said he favored joint meetings with boards that make critical decisions afFecting the community. It is important to have a philosophical discussion about planning in terms of growth and health of the community. The planning commission is appointed to make an examination of a specific issue. The elected officials are responsible for the direction of the city. He recommended two joint meetings per year with a specific agenda of items rather than a free exchange of ideas. A joint meeting with Planning Commission will be scheduled for June 7�'at 5:30 p.m. Joint Meetin�with School Board: There was consensus from the Council for the Mayor to share information from the Town meeting with the School Board. Executive Session. A motion was made by Reed, seconded by Whaley,to enter into Executive Session at 8:35 p.m. to consult with legal counsel regarding contractual matters with the Council and pricing and marketing strategies with the City Council,Attorney, Manager, and Clerk present. All present voted yes; motion carried. A motion was made by Reed, seconded by Whaley,to leave Executive Session at 9:30 p.m. All present voted yes; motion carried. Adiourn. A motion was made by Bartley, seconded by Reitz,to adjourn. All present voted yes; motion carried. Meeting adjourned at 9:30 p.m. City of Brookings oo�s,ctryQ F �:�,r �;;q;m,� c tt unsterman, Mayor O a,:A 4�'•,A o;� ',o �f z' r�c� �o••, •� //���/f� GpH �s/ Shari Thornes, Brooki gs City Clerk