Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout7. Approval of Minutes: February 17, 2004, February 23, 2004 and March 03, 2004 OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL ADJ. REGULAR SESSION SfUU{OPEE,N.ONNESOTA FEBRUARY 17, 2004 Mayor Schmitt called the meeting to order at 8:00 p.m. with Council members Menden, Joos, Lehman and Helkamp present. Also present: Mark McNeill, City Administrator; Judith S. Cox, City Clerk; R. Michael Leek, Community Development Director; Bruce Loney, Public Works Director/City Engineer; Gregg V oxland, Finance Director; Jim Thomson, City Attorney; Paul Snook, Economic Development Coordinator; and Tracy Schaefer, Assistant to the City Administrator. The pledge of allegiance was recited. The following item was deferred to the February 23, 2004 meeting. l5.C. 7. Award of the Contract for Dean Lakes Improvements, Project 2004-4. Helkamp/Menden moved to approve the Agenda. Motion carried unanimously. Mayor Schmitt noted he attended the governor's State of the State address. He noted he attended the Shakopee Rotary Club and gave a speech there. He noted those folks were interested in what was happening with the City. The following item was added to the Consent Agenda. I5.C.2. Approve Plans and Order Advertisement for Bids for 2003 Street Reconstruction Project No. 2003-3 and 15.F.5. Health Care Facilities Refunding Revenue Bonds:- St. Gertrude's Health Center. The following items were removed from the Consent Agenda. l5.E. 2. Completion of Probation - Lori Hensen, Records Clerk and l5.F.2 Purchase of New Chairs for Council Chambers. Helkamp/Lehman moved to approve the Consent Agenda as modified. Motion carried 5-0. Mayor Schmitt asked if there were any citizens present in the audience who wished to address any item not on the agenda. Ken Kimmes, Store Manager for Wal-Mart, approached the podium to introduce himself to the new City Council members and asked if there was anythingWal-Martcould do to be a better leader in the community? He noted how much Wal-Mart had contributed to the community in 2003. Cnc1. Lehman thanked Mr. Kimmes for what Wal-Mart had done last year for the community . Helkamp/Lehman moved to approve the meeting minutes for December 16,2003, January 20, and January 26, 2004. (Motion carried under the Consent Agenda). Helkamp/Lehmanmoved to approve the bills in the amount of$360,334.73 plus $185,137.17 for refunds, returns and pass through for a total of$545,471.90. (Motion carried under the Consent Official Proceedings of the February 17,2004 Shakopee City Council Page -2- Agenda). [The list of bills is posted on the bulletin board at City Hall for one month following approval]. Mr. Snook stated that at the February 10, 2004 Economic Development Advisory Committee meeting it was unanimously decided to make a recommendation to the Council to approve a downtown farmers market that would be implemented by the Vision Shakopee Downtown Partnership. The purpose of the market would be to: 1) contribute to the economic vitality of the community and 2) help the downtown revitalization. The new farmers market was proposed to be held in a City parking lot in downtown Shakopee, on Saturdays from June to late August from 6:30 a.m. to 1 :00 p.m. Mr. Snook noted there was no City Code that related to this type business venture in the B-3 zoning district. Mr. Leek, Community Development Director, noted in this case there were two options available to the Council. These were: 1) the zoning district regulations could be amended to allow a farmers market to be a permitted use or 2) the use could be interpreted that it was a permitted use with a conditional use permit. Mr. Snook noted that he had a draft agreement between the City and Vision Shakopee that detailed the specific use of the parking lot and other details relating to the farmers market. Laurie Glenn, representing Vision Shakopee, gave a presentation on the farmers market. She noted many people in the City of Shakopee would benefit from a farmers market here in town. She noted that when she spoke to the Economic Development Advisory Committee, they suggested to her that the farmers market include more than just fresh produce. She noted that Mr. Snook had reviewed the overall guidelines of the farmers market. She noted that right now an approximate 70/30 split was being considered for the make-up of the possible items for sale. This would mean approximately 70% fresh produce and 30% crafts. She noted that advertising the farmers market had been talked about with the Vision Shakopee committee. She noted there would be some service opportunities for some local groups. Cncl. Lehman was concerned about the parking and how this parking would affect the residents living in the area around where the farmers market was being proposed to be in the City. Ms. Glenn addressed this question. Cncl. Lehman noted he would like to see this use be permitted under a conditional use permit and when Huber Park was done he would like to see this venture moved to Huber Park. He did like the idea. Cncl. Helkamp noted the clause in the agreement for an insurance policy to hold the City harmless; he was concerned about what the City needed to do. Mr. Thomson addressed this question. Official Proceedings of the February 17, 2004 Shakopee City Council Page -3- Ms. Glenn noted the chair of the farmers market would be policing the fanners market to see that all requirements were met. She noted it would be a priority to have the produce at the fanners market. The crafts would be a secondary item to be sold at the farmers market. Mayor Schmitt asked if this zoning area should be treated like other areas that permitted nursery sales during the growing season. Mr. Leek addressed this question. Helkamp/Lehman moved to approve the establishment of a fanners market at the 2nd Avenue parking lot in downtown, contingent upon completion of all final plans, agreements, and pennits as required and that this fanners market be allowed by the City Council by using a conditional use permit. There was discussion that this conditional use permit for the farmers market should be reviewed by the City Council after one year at least for the first year. Mr. Snook noted the agreement between the City and the fanners market was set up for just one year also. Motion carried 5-0. Helkamp/Lehman offered Resolution No. 6011, A Resolution Accepting Work On The LED Installation Of Traffic Control Signals In The City Of Shakopee, Project No. 2003-7, and moved its adoption. (Motion carried under the Consent Agenda). Helkamp/Lehman offered Resolution No. 6012, A Resolution Approving Plans And Specifications And Ordering Advertisement For Bids For The 2003 Reconstruction Project No. 2003-3, and moved its adoption. (Motion carried under the Consent Agenda). Helkamp/Lehman moved to authorize payment of $10,050.00 to Shakopee 62 Partnership for Parcel No.1 (P.I.D. No. 27-906018-0) for an easement associated with the 2003 Reconstruction, Project No. 2003-3. (Motion carried under the Consent Agenda). Mr. Loney, Public Works Director/City Engineer, reported on the approval of Agreements on right-of-way acquisition and temporary surface drainage with. United Properties on the 2003 Street Reconstruction, Project No. 2003-3. Mr. Loney identified the area of the Street Reconstruction Project No. 2003-3. He noted right-of-way was needed to widen 4th Avenue and Sarazin Street. Mr. Loney noted United Land LLC (United Properties) owned a significant amount ofland where the Street Reconstruction Project No. 2003-3 was proposed to go. Mr. Loney stated that in the feasibility agreement pertaining to this project it was recommended that the City purchase the right-of-way that was needed on 4th A venue from United Properties and that the right-of-way on Sarazin Street would be dedicated or donated. Mr. Loney stated that the agreement before the Council tonight included the right-of-way for 4th Avenue and Sarazin Street. Official Proceedings of the February 17,2004 Shakopee City Council Page -4- Mr. Loney stated the other agreement before the Council tonight was a temporary surface drainage agreement. This agreement would allow the City's storm sewer system on 4th Avenue to drain onto United Land property. At this point, there was no good storm sewer in that area. Eventually a storm water pond and storm water system would be developed for that area. Mr. Loney noted the City is working with United Properties to put in a storm water system along 4th Avenue. Mr. Loney noted that there were some wording modifications that still needed to take place between the City Attorney and the attorney for United Land LLC for the temporary surface drainage agreement. There were some items that still needed to be incorporated into this agreement. Mr. Loney noted that the City would be getting the right-of-way from United Land LLC for 4th Avenue that the City would have requested from a future plat. Mr. Loney noted that if the City wanted more right-of-way at the time of platting then the City would not be obligated to pay for extra right-of-way. Mr. Loney also stated that United Properties would be allowed to discharge directly into the City's storm sewer system on 4th Avenue and United Properties would agree jointly with the City on a ponding site where the City would oversize the pond and treat the water from 4th Avenue and from the land south of 4th Avenue as well as United Land LLC land. Mr. Loney noted that when United Land LLC developed their land they would then pay the same fee for the use of the storm water facility that every other user paid. Mr. Loney noted the time schedule for the Street Reconstruction Project No. 2003-3. It was noted that there was time to have the temporary surface drainage agreement redrafted and brought back before the Council. Mr. George Burkards,United Properties, approached the podium and noted that he had a long and excellent relationship with City staff and the community. He stated that he did want to discuss the trails with the City Council. He did not think the trail served a purpose that was being proposed on the industrial property site. There was going to be a sidewalk on the other side of the street and there was no continuity to the east with the proposed trail. Mr. Burkards noted that if the trail was going to be extended to the east and everyone was paying the same he would not object to the trail. He noted that the land granted to the City with the easements and the right-of-way; that land physically supported the location of a trail. He did think this was a fair situation. Mr. Leek addressed the alignment ofthe trail with the City's current Parks and Trail Plan that was part ofthe City's Comprehensive Plan. He noted there was a proposed transportation trail that would continue all the way along 4th Avenue to County Road 83 and then continue south to 12th A venue. He explained that it is city policy to have a sidewalk on one side and a trail on the other along collector streets. Mayor Sclunitt suggested that staff go back and relook at the trail plan in this area so issues like the one before the Council tonight could be dealt with comfortably. He would like to see a trail plan for this whole area of town and h()wthis trail would serve all of the people in the area. Official Proceedings of the February 17,2004 Shakopee City Council Page -S- He noted that in the future the industrial parks would have trails in them because the trails in the industrial parks were quite well used. Mayor Schmitt invited Mr. Burkards to work with the City with some strategic planning for trails in the area and other City improvements. It was noted that the trail issue was separate from the right-of-way acquisition and temporary surface drainage easement agreements between the City and United Land, LLC that were proposed tonight. Lehman/Helkamp moved to authorize the appropriate City officials to execute the agreements regarding right-of-way acquisition and temporary surface drainage easement between the City of Shakopee and United Properties for the 2003 Street Reconstruction Project No. 2003-3 contingent on staff and approval of the City Attorney. Motion carried 5-0. Mr. Burkards noted that he had some objection to the amount of storm sewer assessment and water main assessment that he was being assessed for Sarazin A venue relative to the benefit he was receiving. He noted that he knew there was an assessment hearing and that he would be at the assessment hearing. Lehman/Menden moved to authorize payment of $47,093.00 to United Land, LLC, the owner of Parcel No.5 (P.I.D. No. 27-90502l~0) for easements associated with the 2003 Street Reconstruction, Project No. 2003-3. Motion carried 5-0. Helkamp/Lehman offered Resolution No. 6014, A Resolution Restricting Parking On 4th Avenue, From Naumkeag Street To Shenandoah Drive; And On Sarazin Street, From 4th Avenue to C.R. 101 Project No. 2003-3, and moved its adoption. (Motion carried under the Consent Agenda). Mr. Loney reported on the relocation of overhead power lines on 4th Avenue that was part of the 2003 Street Reconstruction Project. Mr. Loney stated this was an overhead power line issue for the City Council to determine. The Council needed to determine if these power lines were to remain above ground or be undergrounded at this time. Mr. Loney stated there were overhead power lines along the north side of 4th Avenue from Marschall Road to Sarazin Street and then to Shenandoah Drive where the lines then crossed over the street. The power lines needed to be relocated because of the reconstruction of 4th A venue making it considerably wider and the addition of sidewalk and trail. Mr. Loney stated the City had the option, at this time, to require the undergrounding of those power lines. Shakopee Public Utilities (SPUC) estimated the cost for the undergrounding of the power lines to be $200,000 and the approximate cost of the overhead relocation would be $50,000. Mr. Loney stated that SPUC had come up with a mechanism to fund the undergrounding of power lines if the City Council determined that the lines needed to be undergrounded. Mr. Loney stated there was not enough right-of-way behind the trail in 4th Avenue; the power lines would need to be in the boulevard area if the lines were relocated above ground. Official Proceedings of the February 17, 2004 Shakopee City Council Page -6- Helkamp/Joos moved the existing overhead power lines along 4th A venue, from Marschall Road to Shenandoah Drive be relocated and placed underground. Lou VanHout, Shakopee Public Utilities, approached the podium to answer questions. Mr. VanHout explained the mechanism to fund the undergrounding of the power lines. Motion carried 5-0. Helkamp/Lehman moved to declare the 1997 Chevrolet Blazer, VIN 1 GNDT 13 W6V2 1 18295 as surplus property. (Motion carried under the Consent Agenda). Helkamp/Lehman moved that Anita Davis has successfully completed the one-year probationary period and moved to grant her regular part-time status as receptionist effective February 18, 2004. (Motion carried under the Consent Agenda). Mr. McNeill reported on Shakopee Public Utilities (SPUC) application to join the Minnesota Municipal Power Agency (MMP A) so SPUC could purchase wholesale power. Mr. McNeill noted that MMP A was a consortium of eleven cities at this time. SPUC thought the MMP A would be a good supplier of electricity at competitive rates for the City. Mr. McNeill noted there was no financial liability to the City ifSPUC joined the MMP A.The law required the governing body to approve the application submitted. Mr. VanHout noted that the MMP A submitted a proposal to SPUC and SPUC had an engineer analyze the costs of electricity over the years. Due diligence projected that MMP A would be less costly than Excel Energy over the years. HelkamplMenden offered Resolution No. 6016, A Resolution Of The City Council Of the City Of Shako pee, Minnesota Concurring In Resolution No. 754 Of The Shakopee Public Utilities Commission Approving Membership In The Minnesota Municipal Power Agency, and moved its adoption. Motion carried 5-0. Mr. McNeill explained the records clerk position held by Lori Hensen for the City of Shakopee. Ms. Hensen performed the records clerk position for the City Clerk for one-half of her time (four hours) and she performed the records clerk position for the Public Works Department the other half of her time (she was a full time records clerk in two different departments). Lehman/Menden moved to approve the successful completion of the one-year probationary period and moved to grant Lori Hensen regular full-time status as records clerk effective February 18,2004. Official Proceedings of the February 17, 2004 Shakopee City Council Page -7- Motion carried 5-0. Mr. Loney reported on the Mechanic's Assistant job position for the Public Works Shop Division. He noted for 2003 there was a full-time temporary person as a mechanic's helper to assist the full time mechanics in maintaining the City's fleet of vehicles. This Mechanic's Assistant job position was identified in the budget for 2004. Mr. Loney explained the position. Mr. Loney stated that the final salary range still needed to be negotiated with the Public Works Union. Mr. Loney noted the Public Works Union had authorized this Mechanic's Assistant job position until sometime in 2004. In the near future this Mechanic's Assistant job position would again need to be discussed with the union and it would be decided then if this would be a full time hiring. Cncl. Joos noted that this Mechanic's Assistant job position would mostly be d.oing the routine preventative maintenance on City equipment. Cncl. Lehman noted that it was because the Public Works Department was now involved with the maintenance of the Fire Department equipment that this position was budgeted for in the 2004 budget. Cnc1. Lehman would like this position to help with the maintenance recording keeping on the fleet equipment. Mr. Loney stated there might be some need in the future to buy some additional tools for the mechanics. Lehman!Helkamp moved to approve the Mechanic's Assistant job description andto authorize staff to advertise filling of this position. There was discussion on the City buying more tools for the mechanics. Mayor Schmitt suggested that this issue be tabled until it was decided how the City was going to handle the tools for the mechanics. Mr. McNeill noted he would follow up with this issue regarding mechanics tools with the Public Works Union and would report back to the Council at their next meeting. Joos/Helkamp moved to table the Mechanic's Assistant job description and authorizing staffto advertise filling of this position. Motion carried 4-1 with Cncl. Lehman dissenting. Helkamp/Lehman moved to approve the successful completion of Brad Eller's probationary period and grant him regular full-time status. (Motion carried under the Consent Agenda). Helkamp/Lelunan moved to accept James Paulson's resignation from the Shakopee Fire Department with regrets. (Motion carried under the Consent Agenda). Helkamp/Lehman moved to approve the Officers of the Shakopee Fire Department to work with Scott County Personnel Department to advertise and recruit applicants for the position of firefighter with the City of Shakopee. (Motion carried under the Consent Agenda). Official Proceedings of the February 17, 2004 Shakopee City Council Page -8- Helkamp/Lehman moved to approve the applications and grant an off sale beer license and a tobacco license to Holiday Stationstores Inc., 8002 Old Carriage Court North, conditioned upon the issuance ofa Certificate of Occupancy. (Motion carried under the Consent Agenda). Mr. McNeill reported on the proposed purchase often new chairs for the Council Chambers. Mr. McNeill stated that there was a concern about the chairs in the Council Chambers and there was a Council consensus that some new chairs were needed ($527.50/chair plus sales tax). Cncl. Lehman felt the cost of the new chairs was too high. The cost of the chairs was high because ergonomic requirements needed to be met. Helkamp/Menden moved to authorize the appropriate staff to purchase ten Aeron chairs. from Herman Miller for an amount not to exceed $5,617.88. Mr. Helkamp noted this price was considerably lower than what these chairs normally sold for; this was a good opportunity. The reason these chairs could be sold at this reduced price was because this company outfitted the police department with chairs. Motion carried 4-1 with Cnc!. Lehman dissenting. Mr. McNeill reported on the follow-up from the January 26, 2004 workshop regarding strategic planning. He was requesting that requests for proposals (RFP) be sent out to firms that specialized in strategic planning efforts by cities. He anticipated these RFP's would be sent to about six firms. He noted he would report back to the Council on the RFP's after the RFP's had been received back and reviewed. Cncl. Lehman stated that he did not think the City needed to go out and do a full-blown strategic 2020 Vision Plan. He thought the City Council, staff and the Planning Commission needed to sit down and figure out how much growth the City could absorb and still provide adequate service for. Then the services maps that the City already had could be looked at and the City could go on that basis to allow growth where the infrastructure services were provided now. Cncl. Menden stated he would like to know where the City was going; at this time that was not clear. Mayor Schmitt noted that whatwas being asked now was to have the residents of Shakopee give their input up front and plan their community. Mayor Schmitt noted he was very uncomfortable doing a City Comprehensive Plan and then asking the public to comment on his work. He would rather use the residents up front and then put strategies in place to make the planning happen. Cncl. Joos stated that he was opposed to having a facilitator and that he was not ready to do away the City's Comprehensive Plan that we have spent time on. Official Proceedings of the February 17,2004 Shakopee City Council Page -9- Cncl. Helkamp noted he would like the residents to be more involved in planning for their City; this had been the case but the residents were not particularly involved when it came to the planning stages. If something could be done to get more public input with the planning of the City he was all for it. Joos/Menden moved to direct the Request for Proposal be sent to prospective facilitators for the strategic planning process. Motion carried 5-0. Helkamp/Lehman offered Resolution No. 6015, A Resolution Calling For A Public Hearing On A Proposal For Financing Senior Housing Facilities Project Pursuant To A Joint Powers Agreement And Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 462C, And Authorizing The Publication Of A Notice Of The Hearing, and moved its adoption. (Motion carried under the Consent Agenda). Cncl. Menden noted he attended a School Board meeting where most of the attention of the meeting was focused on the results of the School Board election that was taking place today. Cncl. Menden noted he also attended an Environmental Advisory Committee (EAC) meeting. He noted the EAC was looking at reviewing the goals of the Natural Resources Plan ofthe City's Comprehensive Plan. Cncl. Joos noted he went to a ShakopeePublic Utilities (SPUC) meeting where the Mimlesota Municipal Power Agency (MMP A) was discussed. He noted he also went to a Railroad Safety meeting and he heard a railroad safety presentation. Cncl. Helkamp noted he attended a Scott County Alliance for Leadership and Efficiency meeting. The topic for this session was a joint training facility for use by Scott County, Townships in the County and Cities in Scott County for training for police officers and firefighters. A steering committee was formed to discuss RFP's, studies and possible funding for construction on ajoint facility. encl. Lelunan stated he. attended the monthly meeting of the fire department. He noted the time frame for insurance paying a fireman's health claim was discussed and also a safety issue pertaining to the remodeling of Fire Station No. 50 was discussed. Cncl. Lehman stated he too went to the Railroad Safety meeting and he noted the railroad crossing at Stagecoach Drive was discussed. This railroad crossing was going to be looked at to see what could be done to make it a safer crossing. He noted that he had been working with State Senator Beard and State Representative Claire Robling and trying to work with Mr. Podemiller for approximately I Y2 years regarding the state freeze on the levy that was imposed on the City last year for 2004 and 2005. He noted the State was looking at a different way of imposing a levy freeze somewhat based on a city's growth. Cncl. Lehman felt the liaison reports should be at the beginning of the meeting when everyone was fresh and more people were listening. Official Proceedings ofthe February 17,2004 Shakopee City Council Page -10- Cnc!. Lehman would like to see an item put on the agenda for the next meeting to discuss what the City proposes to do for the historical features that the City has and where this historical features plan was at this time. Mayor Schmitt noted the results of the School election held tonight. He noted the referendum did pass. Lehman/Helkamp moved to recess for the purpose of holding an executive session to discuss labor negotiations. Motion carried unanimously. A recess was taken at 9:55 p.m. Mayor Schmitt re-convened the meeting at 10:32 p.m. Mr. McNeill noted that the Council would be meeting with the Park and Recreation Advisory Board on Monday, February 23, 2004 at 6:30 p.m. at the community center. The meeting would be done by the 8:00 pm. regular meeting of the Park and Recreation Advisory Board. Councilor Lehman reported that no action took place during the executive session. Helkamp/Lehman moved to adjourn to Monday, February 23, 2004 at 6:00 p.m. at the community center. Motion carried unanimously. The meeting adjourned at 10:32 p.m. ~~ox0 - f4- City Clerk Carole Hedlund Recording Secretary OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL ADJ. REGULAR SESSION SHAKOPEE,NONNESOTA FEBRUARY 23, 2004 Mayor Schmitt called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. with Council members Menden, Lehman and Helkamp present. Absent: Joos. Staff also present: Mark McNeill, City Administrator; Judith S. Cox, City Clerk; Bruce Loney, Public Works Director/City Engineer; Jim Thomson, City Attorney; and Mark Themig, Facilities and Recreation Director. Lehman!Helkamp moved to approve the Agenda. Motion carried 4-0. Mr: Loney, Public Works Director/City Engineer, reported on the contract for the Dean Lakes Improvements, Project 2004-4. He stated that this item was to award the contract for the Dean Lakes Improvements that was petitioned by Ryan Companies U.S., Inc. Mr. Loney stated the bids were opened on February 17, 2004 and the apparent low bidder was Ryan Companies U.S., Inc. with a bid of $2,656,709.70. The apparent second low bidder was S.M. Hentges & Sons, Inc. with a bid of $2,924,482.37. Mr. Loney stated the estimate for the project was $3.75 million. Mr. Loney noted the City did receive a letter from Gary Zajac, S.M. Hentges & Sons Inc., Senior Project Manager, stating S.M. Hentges and Sons would be filling a formal protest against the public bid opening for the Dean Lakes Improvements, Project 2004-4. S.M. Hentges stated that they thought Ryan Companies bid should be disqualified because Ryan Companies had entered into anagreement with the City to build this project under a 429 special assessment petition. Mr. Loney noted WSB was revieWing the bid to see if Ryan Companies was responsible and qualified to do the work; the City Attorney, Jim Thomson, looked into the matter to see ifthere was a legitimate reason for Ryan Companies bid to be disqualified. Mr. Loney also noted that there was a letter from Robert J. Huber, attorney representing S.M. Hentges and Sons from the law firm of Leonard, Street and Deinard, as well as a letter from David L. Lillehaug, the attorney from the law firm of Fredrikson and Byron, P.A. representing Ryan Companies U.S., Inc. Mr. Loney noted there were basically two claims against Ryan Companies U.S., Inc. as to whether or not they should be awarded the contract. These claims were: 1) Ryan Companies had entered into an agreement with the City to build this project under a 429 special assessment petition creating unfair conditions and 2) whether certain MnDOT specifications should apply. Mr. Loney stated that in the project specifications it statedtheMn/DOT specifications did not apply as far as this project was concerned; it was standard that in many City projects the City did not require MnDOT specifications to apply. Mr. Loney stated the City Attorney reviewed the claims and determined that there was no legal basis or reason not to award the contract to Ryan Companies U.S.,'Inc. It was noted that there were different rules for some government decisions versus similar private business decisions. Mr. Loney noted based on the City Attorney's recommendation and because Ryan Companies U.S., Inc was the apparent low bidder and because Ryan Companies US Inc., furnished WSB sufficient information supporting that they were responsible and qualified to do the work, he was recommending that the contact be awarded to Ryan Companies U.S., Inc. Official Proceedings of the February 23, 2004 Shakopee City Council Page -2- Mr. Loney stated there were no State funds involved with this project; the project was 100% assessed to Ryan Companies. Mayor Schmitt asked the audience if anyone else wanted to be heard. Gary Zajac, S.M. Hentges and Sons, Senior Project Manager, approached the podium to explain a couple of things. He stated S.M. Hentges were withdrawing their objection and he stated the City's fair bidding practices were not up to par. He noted it was not standard practice for the City to allow the bidder to sub contract 100% of the work to someone else as Ryan Companies was proposing to do. He was concerned about this instruction being changed for this project. He thought it was very important to have free competitive bidding for any contract. He feltthat he and all the other bidders on this project except Ryan Companies did not have a chance to win this bid because of the 429 special assessment petition Ryan Companies had filed with the City and the City had granted. David Lillehaug, Fredrikson and Byron, P.A., Attorney for Ryan Companies U.S., Inc, approached the podium and asked that the City Council vote according to the advice of the City Attorney and according to law; that would be voting the Council members conscience. He noted that this had been a free and open bid. Cncl. Lehman asked questions that the City Attorney answered. The City Attorney noted the MnDOT specifications clearly were not part of the contract. Mr. Loney noted that this bid was just like any other bid held in the City. Mayor Schmitt noted he had a concern about this project. His concern was that a contractor was being granted a right to use on site fill that was not granted to other developers. Mayor Schmitt noted that after talking to the League of Minnesota Cities he was told that this was legitimate. He stated the difference between the low bid of Ryan Companies and the second low bid of S.M. Hentges was basically the amount of fill. The City Attorney addressed this comment again. The City of Shako pee's reputation was on the line. Mayor Schmitt struggled with this concept but he had to rely on the City Attorney's advice. Steve Menden addressed the soil that was being used in the project for 9-ton roads. Mr. Loney addressed this concern. Helkamp/Lehman offered Resolution No. 6013,A Resolution Accepting Bids On Dean Lakes Improvements Project No. 2004-04 and moved its adoption; to award the contract to the lowest bidder which was Ryan Companies U.S., Inc. Motion carried 4-0. Official Proceedings of the February 23,2004 Shakopee City Council Page -3- Helkamp/Menden moved to authorize the appropriate City officials to execute an extension agreement with WSB & Associates, Inc. to provide consultant services on the 2004-4 Dean Lakes Improvement Project. Cncl. Menden asked if this extension agreement could be entered into on a not to exceed basis. Cncl. Helkamp noted that this expense would be charged back to Ryan Companies so the City did not actually pay this bill. Motion carried 4-0. Helkamp/Lehman moved to authorize a 5% contingency amount for use by the City Engineer in authorizing change orders or quantity adjustments on Dean Lakes Improvements Project No. 2004-04. Motion carried 4-0. Lehman/Menden moved to recess at 6:39 p.m. Motion carried 4-0. Mayor Schmitt re-convened the adjourned City Council meeting at 6:45 p.m. The meeting now became a joint meeting with the Parks and Recreation AdvisoryBoard and the Parks and Recreation Survey Citizen Task Force. Present from the Parkand Recreation Advisory Board were: Gary Hartmann, Brian Madden, Dave Pass, Peggy Dokka- Thorson, Jim Dorenkamp and Arvid Sornberger. Present from the Parks and Recreation Survey Citizen Task Force were: Gretchen Theis, Kitty Hauer, Tim Williams, Steve Czech, Shirley Reinke, and Ben Czech. Present from the Shakopee Hockey Association were: Mike Thelen and Brad Larson. Mr. Themig gave a presentation of the Parks and Recreation Survey results. He noted that the Parks and Recreation Survey Citizen Task Force helped with putting the Parks and Recreation Survey together that was sent to all the households in the City. He noted the Parks and Recreation Advisory Board (PRAB) first saw the results of the survey at their December meeting and asked for time to digest the information that had been gathered from this survey. The open ended questions in the survey, as well as other parts of the survey provided very good insight into what park and recreation services the residents of the City considered priorities, what park and recreation services they used and what park and recreation services they would like to see in the future. Mr. Themig stated that the Scott County Office for Public Affairs helped the City compile the survey . Mr. Themig highlighted a summary of some of the data gathered from the survey. He noted that of 11,500 invitations, 628 households participated in the survey, which is a significant response and the results can be applied to the population as a whole. The general conclusion from the survey was that the community's number one use of public amenities was the biking and walking trails. Eighty percent of the survey r~sPQJ.1dents used the biking and walking.trails in the City. It was noted that trails was a very prominent theme running thru the survey. The survey Official Proceedings of the February 23, 2004 Shakopee City Council Page -4- respondents noted that it was trails and natural areas that they thought the City should focus on for needs. It was noted that children's playgrounds had a needs percentage of under 20 per cent. The survey respondents did see a need for an indoor swimming pool. Mr. Themig did note that over 50% of the respondents to the survey did note that they used facilities outside Shakopee for some of their recreation (most of these facilities offered indoor services that the present Shakopee Community Center did not). Mr. Themig noted some other uses that the residents would like to see indoor at the community center. Mr. Themig noted what enhancements to the community center would be supported according to the survey. There was very high support for more trails, support for land acquisition and for more open space, natural areas and passive parks. Expansion of the community center was fairly high also. It was noted that there was support for enhancements but the question had not been asked if the residents were willing to pay for their suggested enhancements. Mr. Themig noted that the PRAB at their January meeting came up with general or primary conclusion that trails were used the most, they were rated the highest and they had the most support. Mr. Themig stated since that meeting he had time to. digest the open-ended comments and had come up with some more conclusions. He noted community parks were valued in the City and were a desirable future investment and the community park had a higher use than neighborhood parks in the City. Mr. Themig noted the maintenance of the parks was seen in several ways but he thought overall the maintenance of the parks was okay. There was room for improvement, however. There were several comments on the aquatic park and the ice arena by the residents. People were mostly satisfied with the recreation programs overall. Survey respondents stated that they were basically satisfied with the sports associations. . There were some concerns. Mr. Themig noted that the survey did show that some ofthe community was not being reached and this needed to be addressed. Mr. Themig noted that at the January meeting for the PRAB, they did talk about how they could address some of the issues brought forward in the survey. They did talk about the trails needed and current trails. He noted it was time that the trail plan was updated and the PRAB recommended that this be done. Trails and trail connections needed to be continued to be required of developers. If there were no trails in the trail plan where they were needed, it needed to be figured out how these trails and trail connections could become a reality. The future actions for parks, open space and natural areas was that the PRAB recommended that the Parks Master Plan needed to be updated. The City was now developing in areas that the Parks Master Plan did not address. Plans for the community center that were developed as part of the previous referendum in 1999 needed to be relooked at t() see.ifthese plans in part or in total or what other possible options Official Proceedings of the February 23, 2004 Shakopee City Council Page -5- could be used for enhancements to the community center that the residents were looking for. After the plans for enhancements to the community center were decided, there needed to be a repo~ back to the City Council and further recommendations needed to be made so the enhancements could become a reality. Community and neighborhood park improvements showed a significant amount of support. The PRAB stated a pretty good job of this was being done but perhaps some areas that were not addressed in the survey needed to be looked at (accessibility). Mr. Themig stated that he thought the opportunity was now to do something with the community center building. He also thought land acquisition for future park use was important right now. Mayor Schmitt asked if the Park Department had a list of parks that were owned by the City but not developed, at this time, as well as if future trails had been identified. Mr. Themig responded to this question. He noted that the amount of land that needed to be dedicated for park purposes was done on a case-by-case basis using several factors in considering how much land should be dedicated for park purposes. A resident of Horizon Heights. stated that she did have an issue with the park in her area being moved out continuously on the CIP. Mayor Schmitt addressed this issue and talked about double usage of trails. He noted there were many interesting comments from the open-ended questions in the parks survey. Mr. Themig addressed the double usage of trails. Mayor Schmitt noted that from conservations he had with the City of Savage Council members, he was of the opinion that perhaps the Chaska Community Center model was the better of the two models (the Chaska Community Center and the Savage Community Center) because of the cost. Cncl. Helkamp and Arvid Sornberger, PRAB member, extended a thank you to everyone who participated in taking the survey and who worked on putting the survey together. Cncl. He1kamp stated he thought the Shakopee Community Center was lacking and could be made much nicer. However, he was not sure how improvements could be paid for at this time. Cnc1.Lehmanalso stated that the Shakopee Community Center was inadequate for what it was suppose to supply. He was concerned about how the improvements should be made. Cncl. Menden agreed with Cncl. Helkamp and Cncl. Lehman regarding the Community Center itself. Cncl. Menden noted he was quite surprised by the community's response that they wanted more open space. When he used the community center he was impressed with the variety of people who did use the community center. He was concerned about waiting too long to purchase additional property for open space. He thought the land for open space should be purchased first and then the community center could be upgraded. Mayor Schmitt ephoed some of the same comments but he thought some way needed to be fO\lnq. t9 upgrade the community center now. He was concerned Official Proceedings of the February 23, 2004 Shakopee City Council Page -6- about a long-range plan for the community center. He noted there was a tremendous amount of information gathered from the park survey that could be incorporated into a long-range plan. It was noted thafthe community center could not be built in chunks because then the ventilation and heating would not be correct after a while. Mayor Schmitt thought the Park and Recreation Department had many unfinished chunks. He thought progress visible to. the public needed to be. seen for the public to have confidence in the park system. Jim Dorenkamp noted that the PRAB did realize that the park plans needed to be updated and they would like to see this done so they could get all their ducks in a row. He noted many residents did not use the community center because it was inadequate. He noted the enhancements to the community center was not just about getting services that the residents wanted, it was also to close the gap in the amount the City subsidized the community center. He noted there were two things the PRAB wanted to look at. These were: 1) if facilities were added the PRAB would like to see these facilities have function and to pull people in to use the facilities and 2) last year in the CIP several parks were moved forward by about three years so there would be some parks in some of the unfinished areas (they would like to see these parks come to fruition). He noted there was no money to develop the parkland until people started to move into the community where the undeveloped parkland was located. That was just the nature of the beast. Mayor Schmitt noted a neighborhood park needed to be defined, the purpose that park served and how much land was needed to develop that park; then the developer and City needed to work together to develop this park and trails as the community was developed. He thought there was away to get this done. Cncl. Lehman noted some of the policies did not reflect this type thinking and some developers would do only what the law demanded. Steve Czech, task force member, questioned the time line for improving the community center. He wondered if the City waited to long that perhaps some private entity would come in and build a fitness center because it was shown that a fitness center was what the community wanted. He felt the City needed to do something about a fitness center before that opportunity was lost. Cncl. Helkamp wanted everyone to keep an open mind on a model for the community center. Mr. Sornberger stated that he thought the PRAB needed to establish a goal or vision for five/ten years down the road but first of all the PRAB needed to know where they are going. A vision or mission statement needed to be created first. Once this mission or vision statement was determined then he thought the community would start to see progress. He noted the problems that the Shakopee Park and Recreation Department were facing were also seen on the national level. He noted as leaders of the community, a vision needed to be focused on for what the City really wanted to accomplish. He stated that value needed to be incorporated into the plans for what was developed because he tb,01,1Rnt what the residents valued needed to be considered also. Official Proceedings of the February 23, 2004 Shako pee City Council Page -7- Jim Dorenkamp stated that the PRAB was going to get information together and bring back to the City Council what they felt needed to be done to meet the needs of the community. He was talking about parks as well as the community center and all options would be looked at so the full picture could be seen. Mayor Schmitt thought first the PRAB needed to set a mission statement and then the goals and objectives needed to be determined and the priorities of when goals needed to be achieved would basically determine themselves; the community would be receptive to this type plan. Brad Larson, member of the Shakopee Hockey Association, noted he was a member of an out of town sports facilities; he sure thought it would be great to have these services in his own town. He stated that he thought the demographics within the community were changing and he thought the community would probably be receptive to some new ideas now. Mike Thelen, Louisville Township resident, stated he had worked with the PRAB and he thought the challenge of parks and the community center was more challenging for the City of Shakopee than it was nation wide because the City was growing so quickly. He felt the community was going to continue to grow faster than other communities around; this was shown by the school demographics. Cncl. Lehman wasn't sure a 25-year plan could be done. He was not sure how anyone could determine what the operational needs would be 25 years down the road for Parks and Recreation. These needs seemed to change over time. He did not think it was the City's role to tax people for a community center. He felt the City should only tax residents for necessities. He thought the community center was something the people wanted; it was not a necessary item. He felt another way offunding other than taxes neededto be found for the upgrading of the community center, whatever form of upgrading was used. Cncl. Helkamp stated that he thought the worst thing to happen to Shakopee was if nothing was done with the results of this survey. Cncl. Menden asked if a recommendation to the Council to . put together a master plan (including a trail plan, possible land acquisition, other topics discussed at the meeting; community needs and community center needs and possible mechanisms for funding the community center potentially inc1udingLouisville and Jackson Township) would be forthcoming from the PRAB. It was noted that this recommendation would be forth coming. Mr. Somberger stated he would like to see some way in which the citizens of Shakopee could give feedback back to the City and different Boards and Commissions as to what they liked and didn't like that the City was doing. Helkamp/Lehman moved to adjourn to Monday, March 1,2004, at 7:00 p.m. at City Hall in the Council Chambers. Motion carried 4-0. The meeting adjourned at 8:18 p.m. Official Proceedings of the February 23,2004 Shakopee City Council Page -8- (#mx 6 . e;c C' Clerk Carole Hedlund Recording Secretary OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL REGULAR SESSION SEUU(OPEE,NITNNESOTA MARCH 1, 2004 Mayor Schmitt called the meeting to order at 7 :00 p.m. with Council members Helkamp, Lehman, Menden and Joos (7:11) present. Also present: Mark McNeill, City Administrator; Judith S.Cox, City Clerk; R. Michael Leek, Community Development Director; Bruce Loney, Public Works Director/City Engineer; Gregg V oxland, Finance Director; Paul Snook, Economic Development Coordinator; Mike Norton, Acting City Attorney; Tracy Schaefer, Assistant to the City Administrator (7:07). The pledge of allegiance was recited. The following item from the Agenda was deferred to a future meeting. Item No. l5.C. 1. Public Use of Training/Community Room at the Police Department. Helkamp/Menden moved to approve the Agenda as modified. Motion carried 4-0. Mayor Schmitt noted he spoke at the local Jaycee chapter and the Rotary Club meetings regarding the state of the City and some of the opportunities that the City was looking at. He noted he received a favorable response from the Jaycees and the Rotary Club plus they expressed the desire to participate in some of the City's future opportunities. The following item was added to the Consent Agenda. 14.A. Amendment to City Code Relating to the Height of Accessory Structures in the Old Shakopee Residential (Rl C) Zone. Lehman/Helkamp moved to approve the Consent Agenda as modified. Motion carried 4-0. Mayor Schmitt asked ifthere were any citizens present in the audience who wished to address any item not on the agenda. There was no response. Lelunan/Helkamp moved to approve the meeting minutes for February 3,2004. (Motion carried under the Consent Agenda). . Le1un~,el}(al11Pl116\,ed t()appro\,et~e.~ills ill t~eamount of $3 66,? 58.21 plus $34,164.15 for refunds, returns and pass through for a total of $400,922.36. (Motion carried under the Consent' Agenda). [The list of bills is posted on the bulletin board at City Hall for one month following approval]. Cncl. Lehman noted he attended the Fire Department tour with Cncl. Menden and Mayor Schmitt. He noted he attended the Park and Recreation Advisory Board (PRAB) meeting after the PRAB and City Council held their joint meeting on February 23,2004. Cncl. Lehman noted that a developer came to the PRAB meeting and noted this was his plan (changed for about the third time) and he was moving the plan forward just the way it was. Cncl. Lehman noted all the changes were not what the PRAB had peen asking for. In the end a pretty good plan was reached Official Proceedings of the March 1, 2004 Shakopee City Council Page -2- but Cncl. Lehman noted the PRAB was not comfortable with changes being submitted to them at the last minute that needed to be approved. He noted he attended a Railroad Study Committee meeting with Cncl. Joos and at that meeting there was a lengthy discussion on the Apgar Street . railroad crossing and the safety issues involved regarding safety at railroad crossings. Cncl. Helkamp noted the Scott County Alliance for Leadership and Efficiency established a steering committee to work on the joint training facility for Scott County. He noted the committee was discussing whether or not they wanted to do a Request For Proposal (RFP) for needs and a site regarding the joint training facility. He noted he also attended a Transit Review Board meeting. Cncl. Helkamp was elected Vice-Chair of that Board. He noted they were currently working on an RFP for a transit study for Scott County with the possibility of Dakota County coming in as a partner so a really comprehensive study could be done for a large section. The Transit Board was planning on putting more Park and Rides throughout the County. Cncl. Helkamp noted he attended a Chamber Visitors Bureau (CVB) board meeting where their financials and on going plans were reviewed. He noted the Landscape and Remodeling Show would be;taking Place at Canterbury Park, March 13,2004. Mr. Leek noted it was hoped the transit study would provide short-tenn transit service options and provide some good information for a planning document to take to the legislature and. present to them showing what the heeds were for transportation/transit issues South of the River. It was noted that it was time something be done for transit South of the River. It was felt this plamling was very WIse. Cncl. Joos entered the Council Chambers and took his seat. Cncl. Joos noted he just attended the Shakopee Public Utilities Commission (SPUC) meeting where Time Warner was present to see if they and SPUC could come up with a pole attachment agreement tonight. Cncl. Joosnoted a verbal Pole Attachment Agreement had been reached between Time Warner and SPUC. Cncl. Menden noted he toured the Fire Station and he attended the joint meeting with the PRAB and the City Council where the results ofthe Parks and Recreation Survey were discussed. He noted that meeting and the results of the survey were quite iriterestirig~ .H:e.noted that he and Cncl. Helkamp had the opportunity to interview candidates for the various Boards and Commissions in the City of Shakopee. He stated there had been some hard decisions to make in recommending candidates for the Boards and Commissions. He thanked all the candidates who had been willing to volunteer some of their precious time to the City of Shakopee. He noted he also attended the conference for newly elected officials that he found to be interesting and very beneficial. HelkamplLehman moved to recess at 7:15 p.m. for the purpose of conducting the Economic Development Authority meeting. Official Proceedings of the March 1, 2004 Shakopee City Council Page -3- Mayor Schmitt re-convened the City Council meeting at 7: 17 p.m. Lehman/Helkamp offered Ordinance No. 697, Fourth Series, An Ordinance Of The City Of Shakopee, Minnesota Amending Chapter 11.86 Zoning Ordinance Amendments. (Motion carried under the Consent Agenda). Ms. Schaefer, Assistant to the City Administrator, gave an update on the Time Warner Franchise. She noted last week there had been a meeting with herself, Bob V ose, Attorney for the Telecommunications Commission for the Franchise Agreement and Time Warner. It was thought that the major impediment to the Franchise Agreement would be a pole attachment agreement with SPUC. Ms. Schaefer noted that Mayor Schmitt and Councilor Joos attended the SPUC meeting and she thanked them for giving her their support. She noted that SPUC and Time Warner had come to an agreement on a pole attachment agreement. She noted that this agreement would be tied to the I5-year franchise agreement that was being negotiated between the City and Time Warner. Everyone felt this was a reasonable agreement and SPUC would be bringing a resolution back, stating the terms of the pole attachment agreement, at their next meeting. She noted there would be a clause in SPUC's Resolution stating that if the franchise agreement between the City and Time Wamer was not settled this pole attachment agreement would need to come back and be re-negotiated. She noted the pole attachment agreement and the Franchise Agreement would be signed at the same time, Ms.. Schaefer noted this verbal pole attachment agreement passed on a 4- 1 vote by SPUC. Kim Roden, Time Warner, approached the podium for questions and noted the City had a hard working staff. Mr. Snook, Economic Development Coordinator, reported on the Heritage Preservation Ordinance and Heritage Preservation Commission that the Economic Development Advisory Committee (EDAC) recommended at their May 2003 meeting. He stated that EDA had directed staff to develop a heritage preservation ordinance to be adopted at a future time. TheEDAC saw the importance for the City of Shakopee to have aHeritage Preservation Ordinance and Heritage Preservation Commission and thought there should be an official process. This Heritage Preservation Commission would oversee, with an additional level of review, that important elements of the distinctive historic and architectural heritage ofthe City of Shako pee would be identified, preserved and protected as well as making sure the historic landmarks and property within the historic districts were conserved and the value of the properties were at least maintained if not improved. Mr. Snook noted that Cncl. Lehman requested that the EDAC recommendation for a Heritage Preservation Ordinance and Heritage Preservation Commission be presented at tonight's meeting. This EDAC recommendation for a Heritage Preservation Ordinance and Heritage Preservation Commission had not come before the Council until tonight because Mr. Snook wanted to coordinate this charge with the Comprehensive Plan Update. The Comprehensive Plan Update Official Proceedings of the March 1,2004 Shakopee City Council Page -4- was currently in the review and comment period and the Comprehensive Plan Update would move forward to the City Council this Spring. Mr. Snook noted the EDAC's recommendation for a Heritage Preservation Ordinance and Heritage Preservation Commission was based on the EDAC's Strategic Plan and the recommendation for a Heritage Preservation Ordinance and Heritage Preservation Commission was also consistent with the 1999 Comprehensive Plan. He noted the January 2004 Comprehensive Plan Update referenced the encouragement and enhancements of the historic characteristics of Downtown Shakopee. It also recommended that the City continue the application of the downtown design standards as a standard for architectural design for renovation and development in the downtown area. Mr. Snook noted that Vision Shakopee Downtown Partnership and the Shakopee Heritage Society were interested in seeing that Shakopee had this formal process of a Heritage Preservation Ordinance and Heritage Preservation Commission. Mr. Snook noted there was enabling legislation for a City to establish this process. However, there was no funding in the 2004 budget for this process, according to Mr. Snook. Staffing would be the major portion ofthe funding costs. There were funding opportunities available at the Stateleve1 through the Minnesota Historical Society but there were criteria that needed to be met by the City to qualify for funding. Mr. Sno.ok noted the Cities of Stillwater and Farrningtonhad a Heritage Preservation Ordinance and Heritage Preservation Commission. He noted that some criteria were established that a Heritage Preservation Ordinance should follow. He stated that typically Cities did the staffing through their planning staff because this work was similar to a planning function. Cnc1. Lehman noted there was $20,000 in the budget today for a Heritage Preservation Ordinance and Heritage Preservation Commission. Mr. Snook stated currently the City of Shakopee had a few properties on the National Register as Historic places, but there was no local program. Cncl. Joos asked how a Heritage Preservation Ordinance would impact the redevelopment of certain areas. Mr. Snook noted this Ordinance would basically provide just another layer of review for properties to make sure the historical integrity of the district was retained. It was noted by Mr. Snook that an overlay district could be a possibility. Mayor Schmitt stated thatan Overlay District was less restrictive than a Historic District itself. Cncl. Lehman stated he wanted this issue on the agenda tonight but the folks from the County and City Heritage Preservation could not make the meeting tonight so. he would like to defer this issue to the next meeting when they would be available to come. Cncl. Lehman noted he was concerned that this issue had not come before the Council until he requested that this issue be put on the agenda at the last City Council meeting. He was of the opinion that this concept should have come before the Council some time ago. He felt the first step should be to put together a volunteer advisory commission to report to the Council after studying the issue. Official Proceedings of the March 1, 2004 Shakopee City Council Page .5. Mr. Snook noted the property owner or the City could request that a piece of property be put on the National Register. Mayor Schmitt thought this Heritage Preservation study could possibly be looked at on April 3 , 2004 during the Planning Goal Setting session for the City. Cncl. Lehman stated that he thought this was something that the City of Shakopee needed to be doing. Mr. Leek, Community Development Director, noted the concept of Heritage Preservation was a recommendation in the current Comprehensive Plan Update. Mayor Schmitt noted that it was note only the property owner that could make application to have their property put on the National Register; the City could do that for them too. LehmanlMenden moved to table the EDAC recommendation for a Heritage Preservation Ordinance and Heritage Preservation Commission until the March 16th meeting of the City Council when folks from the County and the professionals could be present to share some information. Motion carried 5-0. Lehman/Helkamp moved to approve Scott Wirth's request for a waiver of subdivision criteria, for his property located at 1215-1227 4th Avenue West, that would create 37.5 foot wide lots, where 70 feet is the requiredminimum lotwidth; and zerO foot sideyatd setbacks forthat side ofthe structures that would have a common wall, where 10 feet is the required minimum setback. (Motion carried under the Consent Agenda). Lehman/Helkamp moved to authorize the appropriate City official(s) to execute An Agreement Related To The Creation Of A Transit Review Board And Planning Team For Scott County Communities. (Motion carried under the Consent Agenda). Lehman/Helkamp moved to authorize payment of$14,900 to Shakopee Council 1685 Home Association, Inc. of Knights of Columbus, the owner of Parcel No.3 (P.I.D. No. 27-905018-0) for easements associated with the 2003 Reconstruction, Project No. 2003-3; and to authorize payment of$6,550 to Arthur J. and Martyne J. Hatch, owners of Parcel No. 13 (P.I.D. No. 27-906053-0) for easements associated with the 2003 Reconstruction, Project No. 2003-3. (Motion carried under the Consent Agenda). Mr. Loney reported on the plans and ordering advertising for bids for the River District Sewer Line Reconstruction, Project No. 2003-1. Mr. Loney oriented the first phase of the River District Sewer Line Reconstruction, Project No. 2003-1 that he was reporting on tonight and gave some background history of Project No 2003-1. The River District Sewer Line Reconstruction, Project No. 2003-1 was scheduled to be done in three phases. He noted Project No. 2003-1 really ran from Rahr Malting to L16, which was a lift station, and force main near Canterbury Park RV. Mr. Loney noted L16pumped most of the sewage from Shakopee to the Blue Lake Treatment Plan. He noted that staff began to prepare Plans and Specifications, design and permitting but then realized there was a need to contract this work out to get it done with more expertise. He Official Proceedings of the March 1,2004 Shakopee City Council Page -6- noted that these plans have now been completed by Bonestroo, Rosene, Anderlik & Associates, Inc. Right now the area of Project No. 2003-1 that was goingto be worked on was from theLewis Street Bridge to Lift Station L16 down by Canterbury Park RV. Mr. Loney stated essentially the pipe down in the river bottoms would be replaced approximately eight feet away from the existing pipe. He noted the pipe now had very severe leakage through the joints. The new pipe that was being designed was a much higher quality pipe and a manhole system to withstand the flooding of the Minnesota River. Mr. Loney noted that there would be a maintenance trail provided so this pipe could be maintained throughout its life and several storm water outlets would be repaired in this area that had deteriorated along side the sanitary sewer. There would be a realignment of the sanitary sewer in Huber Park so an area in the Park could see some other improvements, as well as there would be the repair of eleven service lines for better security to withstand river infiltration. Mr. Loney noted that there needed to be some riverbank stabilization done in the Huber Park area. There were possible funding opportunities for some of the riverbank stabilization. He noted the project cost was around $1.45 million. He stated this figure included some storm sewer improvements, some sanitary sewer services and the replacement of the sanitary sewer main in the area that served much of Old Shakopee. The intent was to begin construction this summer on Project No. 2003-1. Mr. Loney noted in the second phase of this project there was a sanitary sewer main that ran under the trailer park. Right now that sanitary sewer main served many residents in the eastern part of Shakopee and was in very bad shape and needed to be replaced. There were plans to realign the sanitary sewer main in that area so the trailer park could be bypassed but there still needed to be some negotiations with some property owners, an agreement with the Metropolitan Council needed to be worked on and permitting with Scott County needed to be obtained. Mr. Loney noted that the current sanitary sewer line under the trailer park would then become a private sanitary sewer line to serve those residents and then the maintenance of the sewer line would become the responsibility of the trailer park. Mr. Loney noted that the second phase would come back before the Council later this year. Mr. Loney stated the current sewer pipe was installed in 1960; the pipe was not that old but the joints of the pipe were not of the quality needed. The new pipe would be a high quality fiberglass concrete centrifuge with very strong joints and reinforced concrete manholes with liners. This system would be very similar to what the Metropolitan Council used in their deep interceptors in a high ground water area. Mr. Loney noted that the impacts to wetlands had been looked at in the design process. All the necessary permits that were needed and environmental studies were done that were needed to be done. Official Proceedings of the March 1, 2004 Shakopee City Council Page -7- Joos/Lehman offered Resolution No. 6020. A Resolution Approving Plans And Specifications And Ordering Advertisement For Bids For Improvements To The River District Trunk Sewer Reconstruction, From The Lewis Street Bridge To Lift Station L-16, Project No. 2003-1, and moved its adoption. Cncl. Lehman noted that when the water table was high in this area the water was infiltrating into the current pipe via the joints and the City was paying to have this infiltrated river water treated. Now was the time to get this corrected; there no longer was reimbursement for this treatment from FEMA. This was not an environmentally friendly situation either. Motion carried 5-0. Mr. Loney reported on the rail safety committee's recommendations. Mr. Loney gave a history of the rail safety committee. He noted this committee had consisted of two council members as well as a member from the Union Pacific Railroad, two members who worked for Mn/DOT and himself. He noted Julie Carr from Mn/DOT prepared the recommendations before the Council tonight along with suggested additions and deletions from Cncl. Matt Lehman. The.committee looked at the railroad crossings in essentially the downtown area. Mr. Loney noted there were ten railroad crossings in the downtown area. He noted five of the crossings had active warning devices; five did not. He noted that two of the five unprotected crossings did qualify for railroad safety improvement funding in 2005. Mr. Loney stated all railroad crossings were reviewed; it was thought that Sommerville Street and Spencer Street railroad crossings would be improved with this money because they are the most highly traveled crossings in downtown Shakopee. Mr. Loney noted from the railroad safety meetings held by this committee some short-term and long term recommendations were forthcoming. Mr. Loney noted what these long and short-tenn recommendations were for the downtown Shakopee area. These recommendations for the long- term were: 1) all crossing were to have active warning devises and 2) the traffic flow in the City needed to be studied. The recommendations for the short term were: 1) signalization at Sommerville Street and Spencer Street, 2) a stop sign at the Atwood Street crossing, 3) possible closure of Apgar Street crossing, 4) education and 5) the possibility. of closing other railroad crossings. Mr. Loney noted Apgar Street had a three-track crossing with restrictive sightlines and it would be difficult and costly to install active warning devices that would protect all three tracks. He noted that this crossing had been considered for closure before by the Council. Mr. Loney stated he would like to see the railroad committee recommendations adopted or some agreement reached as to what should be done and staff provided direction on the short-term recommendations. Cncl. Lehman explained his suggested additions or deletions in the memo. He stated that in his opinion there was too much that needed to get done before June 2004 to get any Official Proceedings of the March 1, 2004 Shakopee City Council Page -8- kind of match from the federal government and he thought traffic patterns and traffic impacts needed to be analyzed before any more railroad crossings were closed. Cncl. Joos noted the north/south entrance on the west end of town into town was cut off when Apgar was realigned a few years ago and he thought the way Hwy 69/169 was configured/reconfigured would also impact the traffic flow in the City of Shakopee. He would like to move ahead with studying the traffic patterns and impacts for the businesses in Shakopee. Cncl. Lehman agreed with Cncl. Joos. Mayor Schmitt noted some of the possible traffic patterns and impacts for the community. He thought this traffic study just suggested should be included in the City's Transportation Plan for the Comprehensive Plan. SchmittlLehman moved to accept the railroad safety study as recommended by the Rail Safety Committee and modified by Cncl. Matt Lehman (no kind of match from the federal govenunent for any railroad closures because of lack time and he thought traffic patterns and traffic impacts needed to be analyzed before any more railroad crossings were closed) and to direct staff to incorporate a study of the traffic flow and impact on Third A venue and Apgar to be done by WSB & Associates, Inc. for a cost of between $2,000 and $3,000 and to direct staff to have a study of the City's traffic flow and traffic impacts to downtown Shakopee incorporated into the City's Transportation Plan tQ be included with the Comprehensive Plan. (CC DocumentNo. 344) Mr. Loney noted Chuck Rickart, traffic engineer from WSB & Associates, Inc. estimated that tIns study would cost approximately $2,000 to $3,000. Mr. Loney noted after the traffic study it would be determined if there would/should be closings and date when a public hearing would need to occur. Bob Micheletti, 800 West 1st Avenue, approached the podium and spoke to the third railroad crossing on Apgar Street. He stated the third railroad crossing was a spur line that Rahr malting used. He noted the spur track was used either in the evening or early in the morning and there were men out on the track with lights for safety purposes. He stated that he thought there might be something that could be done with this spur track but hedid recommend further study. He too wanted to make the tracks safe for the residents of Shako pee. He noted this wouldbe a long study to get an accurate count of the traffic. He was. of the opinion that Rahr Malting allocated $40,000 to the City to have Second Street upgraded so the Apgar crossing would be left open. He stated he welcomed the opportunity to give the Council a tour of the Rahr Malting facility. Mr. Loney noted he would bring back before Council a specific proposal of what streets and railroad crossings would be included in the study done. by WSB & Associates, Inc. It was wondered if the 69/169-intersection area was included in the $2,000 to $3,000 traffic flow study. Ms. Julie Carr, representing Mn/DOT, approached the podium and thanked all who participated in the railroad safety study. She noted safety at the railroad crossings and some possible ways of funding were discussed. Official Proceedings of the March 1, 2004 Shakopee City Council Page -9- Cncl. Lehman stated that he thought the City would be looking at some railroad crossing safety issues in the future. Cncl. Joos thanked Ms. Carr and Mr.. Collins for attending the meeting. Motion carried 5-0. Lehman/Menden moved to directed staff to install stop signs at the Atwood Railroad crossing consistent with the 2nd A venue corridor. Mr. Loney noted he would follow-up on this request to meet the need of the residents. He stated there was an issue with jurisdiction that could possibly determine where the stop sign was put. Motion carried 5-0. Mr. Loney reported on the request to accept the feasibility report for the Holmes Street bituminous overlay from 3rd Avenue to 10th Avenue, Project No. 2004-2. Mr. Loney noted this feasibility study was begun in January 2001. The study was now ready for the Council's consideration. He noted with this type project the policy of the City was that 25 percent of the project was assessed and 75 percent was picked up by the general taxpayer as tax levy. Mr. Loney stated the public hearing date of the Holmes Street bituminous overlay from 3rd Avenue to 10lll Avenue, Project No. 2004-2 would be April 6, 2004. Mr. Loney noted Holmes Street was reconstructed in 1980 and at that time it was decided not to replace the sanitary sewer from 7th A venue to 10111 A venue, only the services were replaced. Mr. Loney noted to dig up this sanitary sewer pipe, reconnect it and replace all services and manholes would be double the cost to re- line the pipe. The re-lining of this pipe should increase the life of the pipe by another fifty years. Mr. Loney felt this was an appropriate use of the liner for a sanitary sewer pipe. Mr. Loney noted there were no sidewalks from Shakopee Avenue to 10th Avenue. The rest of Holmes Street had sidewalks on both sides of the street. This sidewalk situation was in many areas of town. He pointed this. sidewalk issue out to Council in case they wanted to come up with an overall planfor these sidewalks to be constructed in the downtown area. Mr. Loney noted ShakopeeUtilities had looked afthisproject also becausethere was some watermain work that needed to be done in this area. Mr. Loney stated Shakopee Public Utilities would pay for the watermain work. . The total project cost would be approximately $171,426. He noted $71,000 was for the sanitary sewer liner and $100,000 was for Holmes Street improvements. The purpose of this project was to resurface Holmes Street to keep it from totally deteriorating. Mr. Loney pointed out that Holmes Street was still a collector street from 3rd to 6th Avenue. Cncl. Lehman noted that heavy construction truck traffic, for the construction of the new Justice Center, would be using this newly resurfaced Holmes Streetifthe Holmes Street bituminous Official Proceedings of the March 1, 2004 Shakopee City Council Page -10- overlay from 3rd Avenue to 10th Avenue, ProjectNo. 2004-2 were done now. There was discussion as to when this project shouldbe done. Mr. Loney noted that this project was in the budget for 2004, but it was possible to delay the project if that is what Council wanted. Mr. Loney noted there had been some discussion on a sidewalk along Holmes Street from Shakopee A venue to 10th Street but the sidewalk was not included in the feasibility report. Mayor Schmitt though that the high school changing to a junior high would alter the traffic in the area. He thought there would be more pedestrians in the area when that happened. He thought this project being deferred for one year may not be a bad idea and perhaps putting a sidewalk in at the time of the Holmes Street overlay may be a consideration that the Council would want to look at. Mr. Loney noted that staff was looking at combining the Holmes Street Bituminous Overlay Project No. 2004-2 and the Prairie View Bituminous Project No. 2004-2 together in an effort to save the City money. Mr. Loney noted he would follow-up with the County to find out the time line for the construction of the Justice Center. Mr. Loney noted the City spent money on maintenance to roads so the street life of a road could be prolonged. Mr. Loney noted the reconstruction of streets in Shakopee had always been delayed for as long as possible; he noted the Public Works Department was looking to upgrade their street management program. Helkamp/Lehman moved to defer the Holmes Street bituminous overlay from 3rd Avenue to 10th Avenue, Project No. 2004-2 unti12005. Motion carried 5-0. Mr. Loney reported on the request to accept the feasibility report for Prairie View Additions bituminous overlay of streets, Project No. 2004-2. He noted that these were streets that were left out of the 1997 Overlay Project. He noted that now he wanted to raise the streets with a bituminous overlay, build the edges up, enhance the streets, and add life to the streets. He noted thatthese streets were located in the subdivision known as Prairie View. He noted he was also looking at doing some storm sewer improvements to those streets for approximately $32,000. Some of these storm water improvements were: 1) to fix up the catch basins that needed to be replaced and 2) install some more permanent storm water structures. The estimate for the bituminous overlay for the street was $209,000bringing the total of the Prairie View Additions bituminous overlay of streets, Project No. 2004-2. to $241,000. Mr. Loney stated 25 percent of this project cost was assessed. The City was looking at assessing this project on a unit basis. Mr. Loney noted the storm sewer improvements would be paid out of the Storm Sewer Fund. Mr. Loney stated Project No 2004-2 was in the CIP. Official Proceedings of the March 1, 2004 Shakopee City Council Page -11- Lehrnan/Helkamp offered Resolution No. 6022, A Resolution Receiving A Report And Calling A Hearing ForThe Prairie View Additions Bituminous Overlay, Project No. 2004-2, and moved its adoption. Motioncarried 5-0. Mr. Loney reported on the request to accept the feasibility report for Weinandt Acres 1st Addition Street Reconstruction, Project No. 2004-1. Mr. Loney noted these streets were built in 1980 and are part of Weinandt Acres 1 st Addition. This is a rural subdivision and the street conditions had pretty well deteriorated on 29th Ave. to the point where the City had to haul in gravel last year. He noted the residents ofWeinandt Acres petitioned the City to put this project in the 2003 CIP but the City could not accommodate that request at that time. Mr. Loney noted that this was a street reconstruction and not an overlay so the cost was higher for the amount of the street that was being done. The estimated cost of the project was $ 322,000. This amount was for 29th Avenue, Marcia Lane and Maxine Circle in Weinandt Acres 1 st Addition. The City was looking at assessing this project on a per lot basis. He noted the policy was to assess 25 percent ofthe project to the residents and the City would pick up the other 75 percent of the remaining cost as.tax levy. After orienting the site via the document camera, Mr. Loney recalled there was a drainage .issue with the property owner to the north of the Weinandt Acre 1 st Addition residents. He noted this proj ect did hot address that drainage issue. The purpose of the proj ect was to rebuild. the streets. Mr. Loney noted, through an analysis with his soil engineer, the area of the reconstruction project where gravel had to be brought in was where the drainage problem was at and with the reconstruction of 29th Ave. the drainage problem should be alleviated. He noted how the street was proposed to be reconstructed. Lehman/Menden offered Resolution No. 6023, A Resolution Receiving A Report And. Calling A Hearing For The Weinandt Acres 1st Addition Street Reconstruction Project, Project No. 2004-1, and moved its adoption. Mr. Loney noted that right now the character of the area was going to be left the way it was - a rural area but the streets were designed so curb and gutter could be put in if that was desired.in the future. Motion carried 5-0. Mr. Loney asked for authorization for an additional Engineering Technician. He noted after looking at the projects being proposed for 2004 and the projects that were left from 2003, it was apparent that there was not enough staff now to do all the inspections that were needed. He noted that consultants would need to be hired to help the staff with the workload. There was a need for consultants to help with inspections, plan design and coordination with the Public Works Department for mapping needs. An option suggested by Mr. Loney was to add another Official Proceedings of the March 1, 2004 Shakopee City Council Page -12- Engineering Technician II position in the City Engineering Department. There was a possibility that the City may have a person on board to fill this need after they completed the application process and interview for the proposed Engineering Technician II position. He noted this salary would be around $17.00 an hour and the City would have to pay $65.00 an hour for a consultant. The proposed Engineering Technician II position would not totally replace the City's need for a consultant but would help to minimize the need for one. Hiring a seasonal inspector was also an option. Mr. Loney noted that the proposed Engineering Technician II would most likely be put on the reconstruction projects so some of the costs for consultants would be minimized. Mr. Loney stated it was for the City's best interest that there be good inspections. He1kamp/Menden moved to authorize the hiring of an additional Engineering Technician II position for the Engineering Department and include the proposed 2004 budget reductions (utilize consultants as little as possible and not hire an intern this summer). Motion carried 4-1 with Cncl. Lelnnan dissenting. LehmanlHelkamp moved to authorize the hiring of Kevin Olson as a probationary police officer, at Step 1 ofthe current labor contract, at a monthly rate of $3,358.58, subject to the satisfactory completion of pre-employment medical and psychological examinations. (Motion. carried under the ConsentAgenda). LehmanlHelkamp moved to approve the application and grant a Consumption and Display Permit to Great Lakes, Inc. dba Shakopee Ballroom and Banquet Hall, 2400 East 4th Avenue. (Motion carried under the Consent Agenda). LehmanlHelkamp moved to approve the applications and grant temporary on-sale liquor licenses to the Church of St. Mary, 535 South Lewis Street, for March 14,2004 and June 26-27, 2004, conditioned upon meeting all requirements of the City Code. (Motion carried under the Consent Agenda). Mr. McNeill reported on the appointments to the various Boards and Commissions for the City of Shakopee. . Mr. McNeill noted that fourteen applicants were interviewed. The two Council members who were on the interview committee (Cncl. Menden and Cncl. Helkamp) noted that there were many outstanding candidates and many hard decisions needed to be made when it came time to make recommendations. They noted there were still were some vacancies for the City's various Boards and Commissions. Mr. McNeill noted the appointment of Cncl. Joos as a member ofthe Shakopee Public Utilities Commission was on a temporary basis. Mr. McNeill noted the City Attorney reviewed the wording of Resolution No. 6017 and was satisfied as well as the Shakopee Public Utilities Commission on the wording of Resolution No. 6017. Lehman/Helkamp offered revised Resolution No. 6017, A Resolution Appointing Individuals To Various Boards and COIlll1,1issions, and moved its adoption. Official Proceedings of the March 1, 2004 Shakopee City Council Page -13- Motion carried 5-0 with Cncl. Joos abstaining from voting on number 1 in Resolution No. 60170n the appointment to Shakopee Public Utilities. LehmaniHelkamp moved to authorize the purchase of a Mitel 3300 VOIP phone system for the Public Works Building, at a cost of $8,404.48, to come from the Telecommunications Fund. (Motion carried under the Consent Agenda). LehmanlHelkamp offered Resolution No. 6018, A Resolution Providing For The Issuance And Sale Of $4,225,000 General Obligation Improvement Bonds, Series 2004A. (Motion calTied under the Consent Agenda). Lelunan/Helkamp offered Resolution No. 6019, A Resolution Providing For The Issuance And Sale Of $2,280,000 General Obligation Building Refunding Bonds, Series 2004B. (Motion carried under the Consent Agenda). Cncl. Helkamp noted a Council concern regarding all the illegal signage that was appearing in the City. Cncl. Joos noted that funding to enforce Code requirements heeded to be addressed. It was suggested putting a sticker on the illegal signs that noted what ordinance the sign was violating and where the fine could be paid. Cncl. Joos noted he was concerned about the number of business closures in town, especially in the Crossroads Shopping Center. Cncl. Menden noted he heard about safety concerns at the community center and residents questioned if there were discipline policies in place to take care of certain behavior. Lehman/Menden moved to recess at 9: l7 p.m. for the purpose of conducting an executive session to discuss labor negotiations. Motion carried 5-0. Mayor Schmitt re-convened the meet{ngat 10:25 p.m. Mr. McNeill reported that the Council just met in executive session to discuss labor negotiations. No action was taken. LehmanlHelkamp moved to adjourn to Tuesday, March 16,2004 at 7:00 p.m. Motion carried unanimously. The meeting adjourned at 10:26 p.m. ,~d- S:f ~ S. Cox, City Cle k Carole Hedlund, Recording Secretary