Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCCMinutes_2005_09_20 458 Brookings City Council September 20, 2005 The Brookings City Council held a meeting on Tuesday,Septeniber 20,2005 at 5:30 p.m.,at City Hall with the following members pYesent: Mayor Scott Munsterman,Council Members Tom Bezdichek, Michael Bartley,Julie Whaley,Tim Reed, Ginger Thomson (asrived at 6:25 p.m.) and Michael Reitz. City Manager Alan Lanning,City Attorney Steve Britzman,and City Clerk Shari Thornes wete also present. Resolution No. 77-05—Verizon Cell Phone Tower. A public hearing was held on Resolution No. 77-05, a Resolution Of Intent To Lease Real Property To Sanborn Cellular, Inc.,D/B/A Verizon Wireless for a 60'x 20'parcel on the Southwest Quarter (SW'/4), Except Lot H-4 in Section Thirty-one (31),Township One Hundred Ten (110) North,Range Foxty-tune (49) West of the 5th P.M.,City of Brookings,Brookings County, South Dakota. No comments were teceived. A motion was made by Whaley, seconded by Reitz, to appxove Res. 77-05. All pxesent voted yes;motion carried. Resolution No.77-05 Resolution Approving Lease Of Real Property To Sanborn Cellulat,Inc., D/B/A Verizon Wireless BE IT RESOLVED by the Govexnuig Body of the City of Brookings,South Dakota,that the City of Brookings approves a Lease for a site for placement of a Communications Tower,with Sanbom Cellular,Inc.,d/b/a Verizon Wireless,Lessee,fot a period of Five(5)yeats,renewable for Four(4) additional five(5)year periods,commencing upon the first day of construction of the site or the first day of the month following execution of the Lease,whichever occurs•last,and pertaining to the following described propetty: r160 foot by 20 foot poxtion of the real ptoperty legally described as follows:The Southwest Quarter(SW'/.),Except Lot H-4 in Section Thirty-one(31),Township One Hundted Ten(110)North,Range Forty-nine(49)West of the S�'P.M.,City of Brookings,Brookings County,South Dakota. 3M Patk r�ddition to the City of Bxookings,Brookings County,South Dakota. Resolution No. 78-05 —Verizon Cell Phone Tower. A public hearing was held on Resolution No. 78-05, a Resolution Of Intent To Lease Real Pxoperty To Sanbarn Cellular, Inc.,D/B/A Verizon Wireless for a 60'x 60' on the West One-half of the Southwest Quaxter (W'/zSW'/a),Except Lot H-1 thereof, and except Lot H-2 thexeof, of Section Thirteen (13),Township One Hundted Ten (110) North,Range Fifty (50)West of the 5`h P.M., City of Brookings,Bxookings County, South Dakota. No comments were received. A motion was made by Bartley, seconded by�Uhaley,to approve Res. 78-05. All present voted yes;motion carried. Resolurion No.78-05 Resolution Appioving Lease Of Real Property To Sanborn Cellular,Inc., D/B/A Verizon Wireless BE IT RESOLVED by the Goveming Body of the City of Brookings,South Dakota,that the City of Brookings approves a Lease fox a site fox placement of a Communications Tower,with Sanborn Cellular,Inc.,d/b/a Veuzon Wireless,Lessee,for a period of Five(5)years,xenewable for Foux(4) additional five(5)year periods,commencing upon the first day of construction of the site or the first day of the month following execution of the Lease,whichever occurs last,and pertaining to the following described property: A 60 foot by 60 foot portion of the real property legally described as follows:The West One-half of the Southwest Quarter(W'/ZSW'/,),Except Lot H-I thezeof,and except Lot H-2 thereof,of Section Thuteen(13),Township One Hundred Ten(110)North,Range Fifty(50)West of the 5�'P.M.,Ciry of Brookings,Biookings County,South Dakota. Community Partnershi�Agreement—DM&E. The City Council was provided a summary of the agreement by the city manager and ciry attorney. DM&E has offered to enter into a Community Partnership Agreement with the City of Brookings which is an offer to participate with the City concerning safety devices within the city to be installed in conjunction with the Powder Rivex Expansion Project. The Grade Crossings provisions provided in Section 1,and as detailed in the Appendix, are of paramount importance and provide an agreement for the eventual"Whisde Free" designation of the crossings listed in the Agreement. To achieve that status the following measutes will be undextaken. 1. Fencing along the designated portions. 2. Installation of 2-arm crossings,with additional infrastructute needed to complete 4-arm cYOSSings. 3. Support by both the City and DM&E for the designation of"Whisde Free" crossings provided requited improvements are made by the respective parties and approvals are awarded by the appropriate State and federal agencies. 1 459 The STB examined the requests from the City of Brookings during the Environmental Impact Study and essentially placed 2 specific mitigation requirements upon DM&E: 1. Signage at the bikepath. 2. Look at the 6`'' St. overpass. (I'he draft Final EIS did not require an overpass.) Lanning said this agreement is being considered by the Brookings City Council because it presents an opportunity to provide the safest possible envixonment for our citizens. Further negotiation is not available to the City and no further requirements will be considered by the Surface Txansportation Board. Lanning noted that Brookings is the only remaining community to not have signed an agreement with DM&E. He clarified that this is not an instrument for negotiation,but an offer to Brookings. The process has been completed on DME's part because the Surface Transpoxtation Board has ruled on all issues. DM&E has offered to paxticipate with in-town track fencing without city financial participation. That fencing will be needed to gain approval for whisde- free quad gates. The City would have to financially paxticipate at some level to install additional wiring. Britzman said the focus of this agreement is as a supplement to the numerous mitigation requiYements to the whole project that apply along the entire line. 'I'here are 147 requirements stipulated by the STB and this would be in addition to those requirements. The focus of this agreement is gxading crossings,which are intersections where a train crosses the street. The City is waiting for Federal rulings on whisde-fxee requirements. The safety devices have not been issued yet and we don't kriow what requirements will apply. Some communities have achieved a whisde- free status,but few in numbers. In order to achieve whistle-free status four"quad" gates plus an effective median to prohibit traffic axound the gates would be required. The Citq would need to coopexate with DM&E to develop rules fox a whisde-free designation. The City must pass an ordinance in order to implement whisde-free sta.tus which is developed over time after getting the infrastructure in place. Bartley asked what type of offer DM&E made to Pierte and requested details on their cxossing agreements. Britzman said Pierre's agreement contemplates grade separations that already exist. He noted that he hasn't reviewed their agreement. Reitz asked if the fence would be part of a whisde-free crossing. Yes, a fence is part of the mitigation but a different level would be xequired for whistle-free. Further clarification on the fence is specifications are needed. Bezdichek noted that the agreement references an exposure index beginning with 20 million net tons (11 trains per day) and upon achieving 50 million net tons DM&E would calculate exposute and mitigation requirements. In the beginning is there much they have to do for the chain link and crossings? No. What is the difference between 50 million net verses gross tons? He commented that the Main Avenue and 22°d Avenue crossings are issues. He would like to know moxe about emergency coordination plans between the fire department and the Hospital when a train is coming through. Britzman said one point that is made in the agreement in that there is a desire to move forward as soon as funding is available. Until the 50 million ton limit is reached, the City of Brookings can be on the list requesting state or federal assistance for the grading crossings. If those funds are available, a signed Community Parmetship Agreement would help Brookings in moving forward to apply early and get funding to construct additional safety improvements. Munsterman asked what happens if the Ciry signs the agreement and six months later finds that we don't like the agreement. Britzman said Brookings could terminate the agreement,which is unusual and but would allow us to reverse with no attachments other than providing notice. Public Comment: Donna Burns asked the Council to teview the Appendix 1.disclaimer. She said even if Brookings signs the agreement,DM&E doesn't have to. And,if both entities sign it the agreement is still subject to DM&E Board approval. She suggested the agreement had propaganda value for the DM&E. Britzman said the Community Partnexship Agreements did form a substantial component in DM&E's submission to the STB. The second submittal on environmental analysis refers repeatedly to the levels and te�ms of the Community Partnership Agxeements. The overall plans of the project submitted to the STB really contemplated this type of agreement. If DM&E wasn't going to honor or use the Agreements in a meaningful way, they would not have utilized them in the STB submittals 2 4b0 so significandy. There are limitations;in the agYeement due to it's naYrow in scope addYessing grade crossings. Bartley commented that it is a document that could be used for propaganda. Until it's signed it can't be used. Britzman said that was true. . Gary Aguiar questioned the rush to take action on the agxeement and how the city would be hurt if it doesn't sign. Lanning said the agxeement was recentiy presented to him by DM&E officials xequesting city action. He noted that DM&E recendy received approval fxom the STB to ptoceed with the ptoject. He believes it is in the city's best interest to sign the agteement. Bardey said the document was presented to the Ciry Council in executive session. The Council felt it was judicious to bring it to two public meetings. He reviewed the history of previous mitigation requests by the city and the STB's response. He noted that the City chose to not sign anything in � the past and lost. Brookings now has no moxe bargaining power. DM&E has offered this agreement with short deadline. Brookings can chose to not sign it and get nothirig,which is what we have now. . Aguiar argued that it has pxopaganda value and that everything is negotiable. He asked the City to look at other options and educate the public. He didn't see any value in sigtung the agreement. Munsterman asked what impact not having an agreement with DM&E would have as the project moves forward. Lanning said an agYeement between the entities gives Brookings the ability to work and address concerns in a reasonable manner. There may be gxants available in the futute to address 22°a Avenue. An agreement gives Brookings and DM&E some common ground to paxticipate together. Britzman noted that the agxeement's focus is narrow but beneficial. The City could later enter into additional agxeements with DM&E. This is a good starting point. It was clarified that the bypass north of town was voted on and lost. That is no longer an option. There was discussion Yegaxding the potential cost of the fencing and gates and city and railroad contribution levels. Thomson arrived at 6:25 p.m. � No action was taken. Adjourn. A motion was made by Bardey, seconded by Reed, to adjourn. All present voted yes; motion carried. Meeting adjourned at 6:35 p.m. Ci Sco unstexman,Mayor o� , . ' �;• "`0��.•�� y: o%G �� i.C� �� O•. �W.O o: �•• ••� � oGTy.. hari Thornes,City Clerk 3