Minutes - Council - 07/12/2022 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Councilmember Woestehoff stated he won’t be supporting this because he felt they should spend more time looking at the stadium and the relation to Central Park and if there is a better way to utilize all of that area between all of the organizations. He asked if Councilmembers would be amenable to a friendly amendment that there be an additional condition around the development agreement between PACT and the church regarding shared uses. Councilmember Musgrove asked if the agreement that PACT would have with the church is a part of Staff’s comments that is already something that is integrated to their concerns to ensure that the stormwater retention pond has the size and ability to manage the water. City Administrator Hagen asked City Engineer/Interim Public Works Director Westby if they are going to need a stormwater maintenance agreement on this project. City Engineer/Interim Public Works Director Westby replied this would be a maintenance agreement between two private property owners which the City isn’t typically party to those. He stated he didn’t recall that they require those agreements to be built into the development agreements. He stated they could be as far he knew. City Administrator Hagen commented he didn’t think it would hurt, and if they could establish that there is an agreement between two property owners and Staff has an opportunity to review it, it may prevent future questions of whether the pond for the school can be on church property. Councilmember Heineman commented that he will be supporting it. He stated he thought PACT has done a great job of addressing resident concerns and that there are solutions and several organizations reviewing the plans. He thought a better location couldn’t be found than next to a park. Councilmember Specht asked if the question was if the City would have a chance to review the shared agreement. He stated he has confidence in that and it has to pass the Lower Rum River. Mayor Kuzma asked if Councilmember Specht was agreeing to the friendly amendment. Councilmember Specht replied yes if it just that the City can review it without additional requirements. Councilmember Woestehoff commented the point of having the City involved is to be a known advocate for residents affected by this, especially those on the drainage side so if something were to happen the City would have the confidence to say that these two parties did agree to maintain this and the City has reviewed it. Councilmember Musgrove commented she was okay with accepting the friendly amendment. She stated she believed it was standard practice that cities do make sure that it stays with the property owner or owners. Councilmember Specht asked for feedback from the church or school because it is a private sale. City Council /July 12, 2022 Page 18 of 22