Loading...
1h. Ordinance Adopting Official Map for TH 212 Final CITYOF CHANHASSEN •, . . .. • 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937-1900 • FAX (612) 937-5739 MEMORANDUM ' TO: Don Ashworth, City Manager ' FROM: Paul Krauss, Director of Planning DATE: November 28, 1989 ' SUBJ: Approval of 2nd and Final Reading of an Ordinance Amending Chapter 15 of the City Code to Adopt the Official Map of the Hwy. 212 Corridor On October 23 , 1989, the City Council approved the first reading of an ordinance to adopt the official Hwy. 212 Corrridor Map pre- pared by MnDOT. This action is to consider approving the second and final reading of the ordinance. There were no revisions to the map requested by the City Council and none are currently being proposed. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the City Council approve second and final reading of the attached ordinance. ATTACHMENTS 1. Ordinance Amendment. ' 2 . Memo regarding Official Map from Paul Krauss. 3. City Council minutes dated October 23, 1989. 1 1 1 I • I I 11 ORDINANCE NO. CITY OF CHANHASSEN CARVER AND HENNEPIN COUNTIES, MINNESOTA AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 15 OF THE CITY CODE RELATING TO OFFICIAL MAPS THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHANHASSEN ORDAINS: Section 1. Chapter 15 of the Chanhassen City Code is amended by adding Section 15-31 to read as follows: 15-31 Adoption of Map. The map entitled "Official Map of Highway 212" , a copy of which has been prepared by the Minnesota Department of Transportation and is available for inspection at ' City Hall, showing existing streets, proposed future streets, and the area needed for widening existing streets within the City is hereby adopted and designated as the Official Map of the portion ' of the City shown on the map. Section 2. Publication and Filing. The City Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to publish this ordinance in accordance with law and to file a certified copy of this ordinance in the office of the Carver County Recorder. Section 3. This ordinance shall be effective immediately upon its passage and publication. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Chanhassen this day of December, 1989. • ATTEST: Don Ashworth, Manager/Clerk Donald J. Chmiel, Mayor (Publish in the Chanhassen Villager on ) . 1 � I CITY OF g I 4 1 L¢ 1 �l 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 II (612) 937-1900 k MEMORANDUM �' " 1 TO: Don Ashworth, City Manager ►'- lG ,0,/9,8, 1 PROM: Paul Krauss, Director of Planning 0; i:: DATE: October 17, 1989 SUBJ: Approval of the Official Map for Trunk Highway 212 - /z3 42 1 BACKGROUND/PURPOSE 1 As the City Council is aware, planning, design and review of T.H. 212 has been proceeding. A draft Environmental Impact Statement II has been completed and is currently in the review process. A preliminary construction schedule has been prepared by MnDOT. Recent press releases indicated the letting of construction contracts in 1994/95 with construction up to Lyman Boulevard/ II Hwy. 101 by 1997/98. Sections of the road west of Lyman are pro- jected for completion by the year 2000. The Planning Commission and City Council are now being asked to review and approve the II official map of the TH 212 alignment that has been prepared by MnDOT. The adoption of an "Official Map" is a procedure outlined in both I city ordinance and state statute. Its purpose is to identify land that is needed for roadway development or other public pur- poses. Property owners are officially put on notice of the high- II way location and are thus in a better position to make decisions affecting their land. The adoption of an official map enhances the city' s existing ability to identify and require the dedica- tion of land in the corridor when subdivision approval is requested. The official mapping ordinance also creates a mecha- nism that allows the city to deny building permits in the corri- dor if the property owner has other opportunities for economic I utilization of the parcel. Under sepcified conditions, the Board of Adjustments and Appeals may issue variances to grant building permits at which time construction can be delayed for 6 months to II give the city and other public agencies an opportunity to pursue acquisition of the land. The ultimate goal of the procedure is to minimize the cost and disruption associated with the acquisi- 1 tion of land for public purposes. �.. . I 1 I Mr. Don Ashworth October 17, 1989 Page 2 The detailed highway corridor alignment prepared by MnDOT is to serve as the Official Map (see attached information) . The final alignment is the product of a long series of reviews and hearings ' resulting the incorporation of numerous revisions requested by the city. Three public hearings on the alignment were held in the city on January 29, march 26 and June 23, 1987. As a result ' of city input the "north Lake Riley" route that minimizes neigh- borhood disruption in the city, was selected for the "Official Map" alignment. The city then went through a detailed design study of the Hwy. 101 alignment and 101/212 interchange that ' resulted in a modification to the draft official map. A detailed copy of the Official Map is available for review in the Planning Department. Other information concerning the alignment supplied by MnDOT is attached to this report. On July 24, 1989, the City Councl gave preliminary approval for the TH 212 official map. The Planning Commission reviewed the plan at their September 14 , 1989, meeting. They also considered the impact of the map on the ' City Comprehensive Plan. Ultimately, the Commission recommended that the City Council adopt the Official Map. ' The City Council is now being asked to hold a final public hearing and adopt the Official Map. Impact of the Official Map on the City Comprehensive Plan The direct effect of the official map on the Comprehensive Plan is difficult to assess. TH 212 has been a consideration in the development of plans for the city for many years and an alignment is illustrated on the current plan. A detailed study of the Hwy. 101 realignment and 101/212 interchange has been prepared and ' has been incorporated into the Official Map. This study contains a land use element that is designed to be taken into con- sideration with the overall Comp Plan update that is currently under study by the Planning Commission. The city is fortunate to ' be involved in the plan update since it will allow for timely adjustments to the plan to respond to the Official Map. Given the present situation we do not believe that adoption of the official map will have a detrimental effect on the Comp Plan. Preservation of Land Located Within the Highway Corridor ' Ideally, land located within the corridor would remain undeveloped or in its current state until MnDOT is ready to proceed with acquisition. However, due to the length of time that is involved, it is probable that property owners will make decisions that would create development pressure on many parcels located in the corri- dor. 1 -- I Mr. Don Ashworth October 17, 1989 Page 3 When a p arcel comes under development pressure, the cit y has ser- veral courses of action. If a subdivision is proposed, the city can require dedication of some or all of the proposed right-of-way. In cases where the requirement of dedication is feasible, we believe it is in the public interest to do so. There may be prac- tical limits to the amount of dedication that can be required due to ordinance and court cases. Building Permits: The city will be obligated to deny any permits to construct or expand structures lying within the corridor. The property owner could appeal the decision to the Board of Adjustments and Appeals. The Board may grant a variance to issue the building permit ony when it finds that: (a) the entire prop- erty of the appellant of which the area designated for public purposes forms a part cannot yield a reasonable return to the owner unless such a permit is granted, or (b) that balancing the interest of the city in preserving the integrity of the official map and of the comprehensive city plan and the interest of the property owner in the use of his property and in the benefits of ownership, the grant of such permit is required by considerations of justice and equity. The official mapping process gives the city an opportunity to restrict development in the corridor. However, if variances to allow the issuance of building permits are approved as outlined previously, the city and other government agencies have up to 6 months to initiate acquisition of the land. In theory, the city County or MnDOT could purchase the property if funding is available, however, due to funding constraints it is unlikely that this method would be utilized extensively. , Recognizing the problems and burdens that identifying and pre- serving highway corridors place on government and property owners, the state legislature has created the Right-of-way Acquisition Load Fund (RALF) . The RALF program allows the Metro Council to require up to a 1 5/100's of a mill levy to create a revolving loan fund to be used by city' s to purchase and hold land located within the official highway corridors. The fund is to be used to acquire land threatened by development and parcels where the designation of the corridor has created a hardship for the property owner. The prop- erty owner must agree to a sales price established by an appraisal certified by MnDOT. If the loan is approved by the Metro Council, the city would acquire and hold the land until MnDOT is prepared to proceed with acquisition. All net rents and proceeds from the sale of the property to MnDOT are returned to the Metro Council when acquisition is completed. Full details on the program are attached to this report. Staff has been contacted by several property owners who are ' investigating the use of RALF funds to acquire portions of the 11 II II Mr. Don Ashworth October 17, 1989 Page 4 I right-of-way that cross their property. We have also been in contact with the Metropolitan Council regardig the program. We anticipated bringing the program requests before the City Council- ' for reveiw and authorization in the near future. STAFF RECOMMENDATION I Staff recommends that the City Council adopt the Official Map for the TH 212 corridor. I ' I _ y . 1 I 1 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 II 11 . 'City Council Meeting - October 23, 1989 1 understanding that the 72" storm sewer, together with other public roadway 11 and utility improvements will be installed simultaneously with the construction of the buildings; II-the existing catch basin adjacent to Manhold 421 in Market Boulevard should be relocated into the new curb radius; _ -project approval by the Watershed District is required prior to building permit issuance; and II -an erosion control plan acceptable to the city should be submitted prior to requesting building permits. 9. Provide final roadway and utility plans for approval. The existing 10" PVC 1 sanitary sewer shall be placed in an oversized ductile iron casing acceptable to the City. Existing watermains to be abandoned shall be removed. The applicant will submit detailed construction plans and II specifications for approval by the City Engineer and provide as-built mylar plans upon completion of construction. t , 10. Provide written and graphic sign covenants consistent with the description _, II in the October 23, 1989 staff report. The covenants will be filed with the PUD contract. 1 11. Review the site lighting plan to use the ornamental fixtures east of the supermarket and between the two Market Boulevard curb cuts. ' 12. All the conditions must be completed as a part of the general construction of the project and shall not be left to tenants, i.e. rear outdoor storage areas, etc.. I All voted in favor and the motion carried. PUBLIC HEARING: ADOPTION OF OFFICIAL MAP FOR HIGHVAY 212. II Paul Krauss: The City Council is being asked to adopt the official map for I Highway 212 corridor. The official map procedures are designed to assist in the identification and preservation of land that may be needed for highway right-of- way. I'd also point out that Eden Prairie, Chaska and I believe Carver County II have already adopted the official maps for their oam unities. The alignment illustrated in the official map has been reviewed extensively by the City and by area residents over a series of meetings. It incorporates the desire north Lake II Riley routing and modifications to the TH 101 alignment that were advocated by the City. The Planning Cb mission reviewed the map on September 14th and recommended that it be approved. If the official map is adopted tonight, staff expects to have requests for funding using what is known as the RALF program to II acquire and preserve right-of-way. The program allows the City to use a revolving loan fund administered by the Metro Council, funded by the State, for early acquisition of right-of-way in those cases where the property owner has II enminent development or the fact that there's an alignment creates a hardship. I'd also point out that work is proceeding on the envirnamental impact study for the TH 212 corridor. A draft has been developed and it's anticipated that the final document will be ccrcleted and approved by early next summer. Mr. Evan II Green from MnDot is present tonight and can help answer any questions relating particularly to the highway corridor. Thank you. 1 46 1 ' City Council Meeting - October 23, 1989 Evan Green: M, name is Evan Green. I work for the Minnesota Department of Transportation, Golden Valley office. We've been out here many times on this Th 212. I know as Paul stated we've had many meetings and what we brought before you tonight is the proposed official map for a north Lake Riley corridor. The Environmental Impact Statement is still under study. It may be some time before it's completed. b at this map will do will preserve a right-of-way and the City has a, it's up the city whether they want to do this or not and keep it clear of additional development. The other routes along the line are filling up as you're probably aware of. I know I see the plats cane into our department for review all the time and as time goes on I'm sure this area will fill up also with development. If there are any questions I guess I'll try to answer them. At this point that's all I have to say. Councilman Boyt: While you're there, it's my understanding that before the official map can be adopted, the EIS has to be completed. Is that wrong? Evan Green: No, that's not correct. This is an action the City can take on their own. There's a law on the books that they can adopt an official map within the metro area of a proposed highway. It's actually the City's map. " I want you to understand that. This is not MnDot's map. We are cooperating with the City in establishing the alignment and surveying. Councilman Boyt: Okay, I don't see it in here but when we approve the process and basically designated two routes, or Jo Ann didn't we establish some conditions with that? I don't see them in here. Jo Ann Olsen: I don't recall that we did. Evan Green: There are two routes still under study in the EIS process. Councilman Boyt: But we can't map then, we can't put official maps on anything more than one right? ' Evan Green: Well that's up to you. That's up to the City. Councilman Boyt: So we can officially map both of then? ' Evan Green: Yeah, but we will not provide you with another map for the south Lake Riley. ' Councilman Boyt: What does that mean? We can do it but you won't give us any money? Evan Green: Well you can do it on your own just as you mapped TH 101. You did that alone. Between proposed TH 212 and TH 5. Councilman Boyt: What if, so the advantage of putting this on the official map is that we now, then we qualify for these funds? Evan Green: That plus you have, you can protect that corridor from additional ' development. Councilman Boyt: Without using these funds. I mean we can't just say you can't develop therm? 47 sCity Council Meeting - October 23, 1989 Evan Green: Right, and that's where the rub comes normally. The developer's ready to go and you can't stop him. With the official map adopted, you would have the opportunity to get a loan from the Met Council, interest free to 11 purchase that right-of-way. Councibnan Boyt: Okay, how much money does the Met Council have to help us out here? , Evan Green: I don't have the exact figures. Paul, do you know? Paul Krauss: I don't either. The State has appropriated several million ' dollars several times. In speaking to Ann Braydon at the Metro Council, she indicated that right now there are still funds available but basically that you've got to get it while the getting's good because they anticipate a lot of demand. If I could too Bill, there's also the concern that this official mapping process does more than just make the RALF funding program funds available. It provides a level of certainty or greater level of certainty to property owners as to what will be the impact of the highway. Where will it go or where do we anticipate it going. It also allows for a process whereby when a subdivision comes in, we know what to ask for in terms of dedication. We would be in a position to say, we want to take as much for public purposes as we have a right to. The third thing is that it has that building permit process where it takes a variance to actually pull a building permit for a structure located within the official corridor. ' Councilman Boyt: Well Paul, one, both of these routes are extremely envirorrLental sensitive. Once we do an official map on one of them, then we have by default let the other one go and the interesting question to me is we go through and we do this and then we don't have the money. A developer comes in and says well, now that you've got it, I want to put a hotel in there, or whatever is the maximum that's allowed by the zone so we go and we apply to Met Council for the money and they say, well we'll give you half of it. Or we don't have any to give you. Now what? Evan Green: That could happen. There's all sorts of things that could happen. ' I think what you're trying to do with this official map is look a little bit at the future in trying to protect a possible alignment for that future highway. I know most of the developers along that alignment have been in and I know Chan Hills has platted according to this alignment. I know there are several others along the alignment that are about ready or I don't know where they're at with their developments exactly but it's bound to happen I know that. ' Councilman Boyt: I remember the discussion of about a year and a half ago when the roan was filled with people and there certainly was not any uninemity over whether this should be the north or the south route. One of the key questions was what's it going to do to the wetlands? How are we going to protect the wetlands? What's it going to do to noise in my neighborhood and so on and now I see us doing something that I'm real skeptical that the Met Council has that much money because I know that we're not the only highway in town that's appealing to those funds. I see us making a decision, for good reason. Clearly we've got a lot of pressure from developers and they have a right to know but I don't see the City in a position where we can win no matter what we do. 48 ' City Council Meeting - October 23, 1989 I Evan Green: I don't see where you can lose by adopting it. Councilman Boyt: Because then we take the south route and we say, well we're ' not going to do that. • Gary Warren: If I could add a convent maybe. I guess from my perspective in looking at the process, what we're doing is putting the control in the hands of ' the City, the City Council in particular, to decide once we do official map whether we do want to restrict development there or not because and Paul you can correct me if I'm wrong here, if a plat canes in, a bonafide proposal or ' subdivision and we choose for whatever reason that we don't want to buy the property. I mean we let the plat go ahead right? Just because we've officially mapped it doesn't mean that we have to buy the property. It's our option all the way through the process here. It does provide us the control on a plan, methodical basis I think to react with this tool to developments that do came in to the benefit of both parties. Concerning mapping both alternates, if that's a consideration, I think the last thing that anybody wants to do is imply that ' this route that we have foregone any further consideration on the other routes that are being looked at in the EIS but it's I think limited resources game here. MnDot has taken their best evaluation of what they believe in all good ' conscience to be the most preferred route taking in a lot of factors here. That's their decision and they took the effort, survey expense and whatever to plot this map for this route. To look at the other alternates would be city expense I guess obviously to do the surveying and to do the amount of effort that they've done similar to what we did on TH 101 at our expense to officially map it, which we certainly could do as Evan commented here but it's a financial resources game I guess. ' Councilman Boyt: that happens when we get a million dollars in loan? Does that mean that MnDot is now fully cavmiitted? We're not going to postpone this thing? It's actually going to be built? ' Evan Green: I can't say right now that we're fully committed to building the whole route. I do know that we have 9 million in the '93 program, 25 million in our '94 program and 22 million dollars in our '95 program to construct out here. Councilman Boyt: So if there's no legislative cut in your request? Evan Green: That's right and that's where the official map canes in though. I mean you know yourself sooner or later sane sort of a highway's going to be built out here. TH 5 is not going to handle all of the development that's being proposed out here day after day in your city and in Chaska. And I might say, we're committed to making whatever we build there environmentally sound. I mean we're also concerned about the wetlands and stuff and we share your concern ' there so that will be considered in whatever we do out here. Councilman Boyt: This is a very major decision. I hope there's sane public on ' this to cocm,ent. I'm done. Thanks. Mayor Chmiel: Unless someone else has sane specific questions. ' Councilman Workman: Is this a public hearing? i . 49 1 _ City Council Meeting - October 23, 1989 1 Mayor Cmiel: This is a public hearing and I'm waiting for some public comment. I Anyone who's wishing to address this, cane forward and please state your name and your address. Craig Mertz: I'm Craig Mertz. I'm here representing Lakeview Hills Investment Group which owns the Lakeview Hills Apartments. The Lakeview Hills Apartment property is on the east end of Lake Riley Boulevard where it terminates at the 11 Eden Prairie line and the property is bounded on the north by Rice Marsh Lake and on the south by Lake Riley. That's R-12 zoned property. We have 52.8 acres there approximately and about 170 apartment units on that property. When the investment group bought the property, it was with the intention that they would ultimately develop the balance of the property. The history of this property goes back to 1963 when the Chanhassen Town Board approved the plan for the apartment complex and that plan contemplated that there would be 350 additional units on the property and the owners have had that intention of ultimately developing the property to it's full potential. The corridor in question here takes a very wide swath through the property. We believe it results in the loss of virtually all of the building sites on the property. It diminishes the value of the residue which will be located north of TH 212 where we will have no access to that property seriously diminishing the value of that residue. On the southerly portion, which includes the buildings, the apartment buildings, we believe that it also will have an adverse affect on the apartment buildings in that there will be additional noise. We won't be able to have ready access to that particular highway. The character of the project will change as a result of the project. We lose the country living type atmosphere that goes with the project. Our buildings are turned into a highway buffer type of apartment project which has a totally different character from what we are accustomed to doing and in summary, the owners are opposed to this particular alignment because we believe it has such an adverse affect on the value of our property. Mayor Chmiel: Any specific questions? This is a public hearing. I knew you were going to cane up Al. Al Klingelhutz: Why do you think I was sitting here for all night. I'm going to wear two hats tonight. One as a County Commissioner and one as a resident of Chanhassen and the road which really affects my property considerably. First I'm going to be a County Commissioner. Eden Prairie, Chaska have already approved the mapping of this project. Tomorrow at the County Commissioner meeting we will be approving the mapping in Chaska Township and I hope you go through with the mapping here in Chanhassen tonight. I've sat on the TH 212 Corridor Commission upwards of almost 30 years now. It's been a long battle. I personally like the south of Riley Lake alignment better but since all the other communities and Chanhassen has indicated that they prefer the northern route, I'm not going to fight that route even if it very adversely affects my property. I think it's time that we get a cohesive effort and tell the highway department this is where we're going to put this road. If we delay mapping in Chanhassen, it could delay the putting in of TH 212 quite a few years yet. There's been an awful lot of discussion on this road for I don't brow how many times there's been meetings up here. There's meetings over at the Carver County Courthouse and I think it's very important that you go ahead with the mapping of this project tonight. I think there's one thing I'm going to say about, as a citizen and a land owner in the corridor. Especially in the TH 101 corridor. Last spring I had Keith Barts' property for sale. Had four different offers on the property and came up to City Hall here and asked where TH 101 was going to go. 50 City Council Meeting - October 23, 1989 I was pretty much told where it was going to go and when the offer came in, one of the buyers came up to City Hall and they were told it was going to go on a different area. Eventually there were four different alternates for it to go where it is now, where it's proposed it's going to go to the east of Barts' I barn. We didn't lose the sale and I don't know if it's still hanging in there but they said they wouldn't go any further on the purchase of that property until they definitely knew where TH 101 was going to go. That's why I think ., ' it's important for landowners to know what's going to happen and I think it's also important, and I understand the Planning Connission is going to start working on some zoning on same of these areas, that the zoning be completed as ' soon as possible in the areas where this highway is going to go. You can't let everything hang in limbo until someone cones in and says this is what I want to do here. I think the zoning should be put on the property so that developers and landowners know what they've got. Thank you. ' Councilman Workman: That's three hats Al. Resident, realtor, commissioner. Mayor Chtmiiel: Is there anyone else who'd like to address this issue? This is a public hearing. II Councilman Workman moved, Councilwoman Dimler seconded to close the public hearing. All voted in favor and the motion carried. The public hearing was closed. Councilwoman Dimler: I don't have any specific concerns and I'm ready to move on it. Councilman Workman: I think I'll remain silent at this point. Councilman Boyt: It may be difficult to recognize the emotional atmosphere that ' we had a year and a half ago on this issue. I can only guess that the people that wanted this to go through the south route have given up, since we didn't hear from them tonight except for the apartment owners. I can see the need to have an official map. I just, it really, I find it difficult to get pushed into sanething and we really are. Eden Prairie has pushed us into this thing. Our own desire to have the road pushes us into it. Eden Prairie dealt with their ' official map quite sane time ago. Chanhassen didn't. So now we find ourselves with I think very limited options and maybe officially we still have a south option but I maintain that once you drop, we accept this map, we've given up on the south option financially. I can understand the need to do this. I'm real ' relunctant to see us go forward and vote on it. Wle ought to have the EIS done. Mawr Ciniel: Is that it? okay, I guess I feel that the TH 212 has been sanething discussed ever, much of the Minutes that I had read back in 1987. It's been here for a long time. It's been a discussionary item to try to pull the traffic flow coming off through Eden Prairie and of course in adjacent to TH 5 and caning off of the TH 212 corridor. I think as the city's growing and the ' city's progressing, the need basically is there. There's no question. Having problems with TH 5, if any of you drive TH 5 as I do every day, it becomes rather congested and I wouldn't want to see that corridor became anymore congested within TH 212 either. Having another access going through means it's ' going to move that flow a lot better, a lot quicker and it's going to accommodate more of the people within the area to make Chanhassen grow as well. ' 51 1 City Council Meeting - October 23, 1989 I i guess I'm coming from that particular area saying that I think we should move I ahead and have the official map for TH 212 indicated. Any other discussions? Councilwoman Dimler: I guess I'd just like to add that I do believe that W Dot does have our envirorr►ental concerns at heart arc? I think that they will include everything that we would include as far as protecting our environment so I'm really not concerned about that. I can understand Bill's concern about that but I think they're taken care of. Mayor Ordel: I'm assured too that MWDot does look at the environment very closely. Has as much concern as the balance of the state and in all locations they're constantly looking as to how to divert and go past some of those specific real concerns. With that I will entertain a motion. Al Klingelhutz: I know you've approved a portion of TH 101 mapping but have you approved it from that portion to where it connects on the south end of the farm? Councilman Boyt: TH 101? t I Al Klingelhutz: TH 101. Gary Warren: The official map has been approved to the TH 212 connection. Al Klirgelhutz: Not the portion from TH 212 south? To where it turns south to Shakopee again. Gary Warren: It's been approved from TH 5 to Lyman Boulevard basically. Mayor Qmiel: With that I'm entertaining a motion. Councilwoman Dimler: Okay, I move that we approve the official map of Trunk Highway 212 as presented in this report. Mayor Qr►iel: Is there a second? I'll second it. 1 Oouncilran Boyt: This doesn't take a unanimous vote does it? Three-fifths will do it? Mayor Ctniel: Three-fifths will do it. Councilman Boyt: I'm going to vote against it so. ' Mayor Ordel: Roger, clarification? Roger Knutson: A question. Are we going to have any abstentions? ' Councilwoman Dirtier: Are you voting? Councilman Workman: I should probably abstain. Roger Knutson: I'd recocrossxd that the matter be tabled until your next meeting. , Councilman Workman: Maybe I should explain. _._ -- 1 52 ICity Council Meeting - October 23, 1989 Mayor Chmi el• No. Your abstention is understandable because of one of the other positions that you hold. Yeah, why don't you explain it. ' Councilman Workman: How come Workman's so dam quiet during this whole thing. I'm chomping at the bit. I'm the coordinator of the Southwest Corridor - Transportation Coalition which is promoting Highway 212 and the development of.. expanded TH 5 so I've chosen to be quiet and I choose not to vote this evening. Councilman Bout: Maybe I don't have the luxury of voting against this. I'd ' like to but on the other hand, give me an alternative. There isn't one. That's what led to the vote of a year and a half ago and that's what will lead to this thing being approved so if Tom isn't going to vote, then let's be on with it I guess. Resolution #89-114: Councilwoman Dimler moved, Mayor Chniel seconded to approve 1 the adoption of the Official Map for Highway 212 as presented by MnDot. All ti voted in favor except Councilman Workman who abstained and the motion carried. DISCUSSION Of' LAKE LUCY PUBLIC ACCESS. Lori Sietsema: This item has been placed on the agenda to tie up some loose ends on the whole chain of lakes clean up project. I've received verbal notice, nothing in written form yet but I've received verbal notice from the MPCA that the grants for the Lake Riley chain of lakes clean up project will be diverted. The bulk of those funds will be diverted to other projects. They do not feel that the none, can be spent quickly enough for them to keep the funds in that project. They are however leaving enough funds for the project to complete the ' work plan and+all the revisions that are required of the work plan. That's EPA's way of showing that they feel that it is a valid project and that they are supporting it although they can't continue to keep these funds in this project. They've indicated that once the work plan has all been revised and the access is in place on Lake Lucy that funds, another grant can be applied for at a later time. They also did caution however that it is likely that if a future grant is pursued, that the local matching share will very likely be greater than it was ' on this project being as march 25% to 50% of the project. If a future grant is sought, a public boat access will be required to be in place prior to consideration of any application. The EPA has indicated they will not consider the City's offer to fund the Lake Lucy portion of the project as they feel there are benefits that will go to that lake with the rest of the project being done. Given that, three options remain on what to do tonight. We can choose a site or we can choose to do nothing and wait to see if a future grant is applied for. In ' the meantime the DNR has offered to construct a boat access, a temporary access that would be gravel, just extending the gravel road that's in Greenwood Shores. Putting in four parking spaces and a concrete plank ramp into the lake. That ' would be at no cost to the City. What could happen then in doing that, it would allow us to monitor the traffic amounts that this access is going to generate when we look at a long term, permanent access for the lake and reviewing how the ' access is used, we can take that into consideration as we design and purchase property for an access elsewhere. If a temporary access is pursued, it's likely that the Dirk's property will not be available in the future. They have offers on their property or they're looking to build a home on their property and sell ' it. That would limit our choice for a permanent access right now to either 1 53