Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout7. Approval of Minutes: Sept. 12(6 p.m.), Sept. 20(6 p.m.), Oct. 04 (5:30 p.m.) and Oct. 04, 2005 (7 p.m.) OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL ADJ. REGULAR SESSION SHAKOPEE,MINNESOTA SEPTEMBER 12, 2005 Mayor John Schmitt called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. with Council members Joe Helkamp, Terry Joos, Matt Lehman, and Steve Menden present. Staff present: Mark McNeill, City Administrator (7:10 p.m.); Judith S. Cox, City Clerk; Gregg Voxland, Finance Director; Bruce Loney, Public Works Director/City Engineer; Jeff Weyandt, Assistant City Engineer and Michael Hullander, Public Works Supervisor. Mr. V oxland stated that Resolution No. 6298 sets the proposed maximum 2005 payable 2006 tax levy and is in line with the previous discussions on the budget. The levy would be $11,310,817; the levy last year was $8,683,206. The increase inthe gross levy is $1,627,611 for 16.8%. This is the maximum. The Truth in Taxation hearing will be held in December and the levy can be reduced up that the point, but it can not be increased after this point. This levy would be a 3.2% increase. If there is no market value increase on a parcel, the taxes for the city would go up 3.2% based on estimated numbers. Menden/Joos offered Resolution No. 6298, A Resolution Setting Proposed Maximum 2005 Tax Levy, Collectible in 2006, and moved its adoption. Motion carried 5-0. Mr. V oxland stated that Resolution No. 6299 cancels the debt service levy for the 2004D capital improvement bonds for the public works building. The money for the bond issue debt service will be transferred from the building fund this year. Lehman/Helkamp offered Resolution No. 6299, a Resolution Canceling Debt Service Levy for 2005/06, and moved its adoption. Motion carried 5-0. Mr. Loney presented the public works sanitary sewer, storm drainage, and street construction projects in the Capital Improvement Program for 2006 and 2007. Mr. Loney stated that Mr. Jeff Weyandt, Assistant City Engineer, put together the cost estimates for the CIP projects and is present to answer any questions that Mr. Loney can not. Mr. Loney invited Council members to ask questions during the power point presentation. Mr. Loney then presented the public works sanitary sewer, storm drainage, and street construction projects in the Capital Improvement Program for 2006 and 2007 as identified in the staff memo provided. Page 5. Regarding extension of trunk sanitary sewer to serve area to recently added MUSA, Mr. Loney stated that the decision to bring the pipe down CR 83, now that we have the right-of-way, is a question for City Council. After discussion, it was the consensus of City Council to do the feasibility study for the improvement. Page 11. Regarding reconstruction of the City's river district trunk sanitary sewer line from Rahr Malting to Scott Street, Mayor Schmitt noted that Bonnevista Trailer Park will have to be served at some time. Official Proceedings of the September 12, 2005 Shakopee City Council Page -2- Page 15. Regarding Prior Lake Spring Lake channel improvements, Mr. Loney stated that a new joint powers agreement is being prepared for cost participation. Page 30. Regarding the 2006 street reconstruction project, Mr. Loney stated he would like to look-at pavement management strategy and coordinating a program to keep streets out of reconstruction. The city has received money from the state, but $1.2 million is still needed. Page 31. Regarding Holmes Street, Mayor Schmitt suggested improvements to all four sides around the county jail. Page 32. Regarding 10th Avenue, Cncl.Joos would like input from Mr. Leek on how he sees 10th A venue long term and the impact for a three lane road. Mr. McNeill arrived at took his seat at 7:10 p.m. Page 35. Regarding construction of Hansen Avenue from Crossings Blvd. to CSAH 18, Mr. Loney stated that the county does not want to see assess onto CSAH 18, that access would have to be a right-in, right-out. The connection would improve access in this area. Mr. Loney did not go over projects beyond 2007 and suggested that the Council look at the staff memo provided for information beyond 2007. Mr. Voxland stated that the two enterprise funds' budgets would be coming to Council probably next month. Mr. Voxland reviewed the expenditures listed in the Building Fund 2006-2010 Capital Improvement Program. Mr. V oxland answered questions raised by the Council members. Mr. V oxland noted that funqs are not included for the entrance monument signs nor for the 1 st A venue sidewalk/trail by Dangerfields. If Council desires, the funds for these could come out of the general fund fund balance. Consensus of Council members was to fund the monument signs out of the general fund fund balance. Mr. Voxland reviewed the expenditures listed in the 2006-2010 Equipment List for the Police Department, Fire Department, Engineering Department, Street Department, Park Maintenance, Recreation Department, Sewer Fund and Storm Drainage Fund. Questions raised by the Council members were answered by various staff present. Mr. V oxland stated that the purchases will come back for Council action when the time comes to make the actual purchases. Official Proceedings of the September 12,2005 Shakopee City Council Page -3- Discussion ensued on the recycling schedule of 12 years and the depreciation schedule for 15 years. Cncl.Helkamp suggested meeting with Mr. Hullander and getting the trucks on the appropriate depreciation schedule. Mr. Loney stated that a Vehicle Replacement Plan was passed by resolution about 9-10 years ago with a 10 year replacement, but we do stretch the use of vehicles longer. Mr. V oxland stated that we look at the use of the vehicle not the years, in actuality. Mr. Loney stated that the City could save $3,000 if the single axle dump truck listed on the equipment list for 2006 is purchased prior to September 20,2005. He noted that the City would actually not take delivery until 2006. Discussion followed. , LehmanlMenden moved to direct staff to purchase a single axle dump truck replacing the existing unit #108, 1992 Ford dump truck. Motion carried 5-0. Joos/Menden moved to authorize the City Engineer the discretion to determine the dates and times to allow the suspension of time and dates of the City Code Sec. 10.60, Noise Elimination and Noise Prevention, Subd. 3, Hourly Restrictions on Certain Operations, to complete the testing of SPUC Wells No. 20 and No. 21. Motion carried 5-0. Cncl.Menden questioned if the condition of Holmes Street at 3rd or 4th will stayin its current condition for the winter. Mr. Loney responded that the County is supposed to fix that up under their contract. Helkamp/Menden moved to adjourn to September 20, 2005, at 6:00 p.m. Motion carried 5-0. The meeting was adjourned at 8:27 p.m. (;)l/Jdj d ~ , i';!'.,. . . ','0 . -. . J dith s. Cox City Clerk OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL ADJ. REGULAR SESSION SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA SEPTEMBER 20, 2005 Mayor John Schmitt called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. with Council members Joe Helkamp, Terry Joos, Matt Lehman, and Steve Menden present. Also present: Mark McNeill, City Administrator; Kris Wilson, Assistant to the City Administrator; Judith S. Cox, City Clerk; and R. Michael Leek, Community Development Director. Mr. Leek explained that there have been activities going on toward the ends of implementing the recommendations of the Unified Transit Management Plan (UTMP), which Shakopee undertook in partnership with the City of Prior Lake, Scott County, the Shakopee Mdewakanton Sioux, Minnesota Valley Transit Authority and the Metropolitan Council. He stated that he wanted to bring the Council up to speed and get consensus on whether or not to proceed. Mr. Leek talked about Park and Ride site acquisition, operation and maintenance. The UTMP suggested that there was a need in the future for 1100 vehicles worth of parking spaces in park and ride facilities. Two sites were recommended by one of the experts at the Met Council, Craig LaMothe. He recommended that two sites out of five that had been identified and studied for traffic impacts as part of the CR 21 EIS were sites that we should defmitely pursue. The first and primary site, which is proposed to be acquired and operated on a temporary and permanent basis, is on the east side of CR 18 and in the Southbridge Crossings east area north of Home Depot. Mr. Leek stated that the second site, which is looked at as a longer term site, is farther to the west and to the south, south of Eagle Creek Boulevard (CR 16). It would be a 20 acre parcel created ultimately in conjunction with the construction of CR 21. CR 21 is currently in the County CIP for construction from Southbridge Parkway doWn to CR 16 in about 2009. This site is intended to accommodate about 500 vehicles. It is located in what is called the Shutrop South area. Mr. Leek stated that he would like to get answers from City Council in regard to the Park and Ride sites. Does the Council want staff to proceed with continued negotiations for an agreement for the acquisition, operation, maintenance and marketing of the Park and Ride sites? All parties would have to approve the agreement. In response to a question from Councilor Lehman. Mr. Leek stated that we do not know acquisition costs at this time. Cncl.Lehman asked what happens if the funds from MVET should dry up. Mr. Leek stated that the agreement will address what happens to the site in the event that there are no funds for Prior Lake, Scott County, and Shakopee to operate transit. Mr. Leek asked Council if they were comfortable with committing Shakopee transit dollars, which come from MVET (vehicle excise tax), to the acquisition of Park and Ride sites? They can legally be used for that purpose, the only restriction is that those funds have to be used for a transit purpose. Mr. Leek reiterated that these are the two questions for City Council so that staff can determine whether or to move forward. Discussion followed. Official Proceedingsofthe September 20, 2005 Shakopee City Council Page -2- There was a consensus for staff to continue to negotiate on an agreement and to use transit dollars toward the acquisition of a Park and Ride site. Mayor Schmitt expressed reservation on the second site, south of CR 16 (Shutrop South). Mr. Leek noted that the site on CR 18 is viewed as the primary site and will handle up to 1100 , vehicles, the site on CR 16 is viewed more as a secondary and overflow facility for the future. If another site is found, then the CR 16 site would be offered for private and probably residential development. Mr. Leek stated that, if the CR 16 site were acquired, there is the potential that three or four years down the road it may be decided that it is not the right site and Prior Lake comes up with a site that makes more sense. Lehman/Joos moved to direct staff to continue working on the Transit Management Plan site orientation and funding options. Motion carried 5-0. Mr. Leek addressed transit service design. He stated that in the Unified Transit Management Plan it is proposed that Scott County, which currently operates Shakopee's Dial-A-Ride as well as their own, to a large extent overlapping services, would take over all Dial-A-Ride services within the County. This leaves for Shakopee and Prior Lake as the local transit providers, and opt outs, to provide express and circulator service. Mr. Leek explained that he has been working with George Bentley, who the City uses as a consultant on transit scheduling and planning activities. Mr. Bentley has provided two options for providing express service: 1) utilize the existing Park and Ride facility at Seagate and use existing and some expanded local circulator bus runs as feeders to that site and 2) run all three or four of our morning express services to the CSAH 18 site beginning in 2006 down Tn 169 and into Minneapolis. He feels that the second alternative is probably the best one for a couple of reasons. If we are successful with the service, he is concerned that it might overwhelm Seagate' outside of the property that the city owns where there are currently only 85 park and ride spaces. In addition, the feeder system does cost more to operate. Given the uncertainty for the acquisition cost for a park and ride site, it may be better to focus on the express service that connects at the proposed CSAH 18 Park and Ride facility rather than spend money on circulators. Mr. Leek asked City Council if the City should go ahead with the acquisition of the 40 foot coaches that would be used for the express service? The money would come from regional transit capital funds to which the City of Shakopee would be entitled. He also asked if the City should use the Park and Ride at CSAH 18 or the Park and Ride at Seagate with circulators as feeders into that? Consensus was to acquire the 40 foot coaches and to use the Park and Ride site at CSAH 18. Mr. McNeill stated that the City Council has a reason to go into a closed session for the purpose of discussing pending litigation. Official Proceedings of the September 20, 2005 Shakopee City Council Page -3- Lehman/Menden moved to recess for an executive session to discuss pending litigation, at 6:30 p.m. Motion carried 5-0. Mayor Schmitt re-convened the meeting at 7:23p.m. Councilor Lehman announced that the Council took no action during the executive session. Menden/Joos moved to adjourn to Tuesday, September 20,2003 at 7:23 p.m. Motion carried 5- O. The meeting was adjourned at 7:23 p.m. G2JJL J. 0/- J dith S. Cox City Clerk )1v~M~ ! ~tJ ~v , OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL SESSION SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA OCTOBER 4, 2005 Mayor John J. Schmitt called the meeting to order at 5:34 p.m. with Council members Joe Helkamp, Terry Joos, Steve Menden and Matt Lehman (6:30 p.m.) present. Also present were Mark McNeill, City Administrator; Judith S. Cox, City Clerk; Kris Wilson, Assistant to the City Administrator; R. Michael Leek, Community Development Director; and Bruce Loney, Public Works Director/City Engineer. Present representing the Shakopee Public Schools were: Jon McBroom, Superintendent, Mary Romansky, School Board Chair; Steve Schneider, School Board Clerk; Kevin Carstens, School Board Treasurer; Kathy Busch, School Board Director; and Todd Anderson, School Board Director. Present from Shakopee Public Utilities were Lou Van Hout, Manager and Joe Adams, Engineering and Planning Director. Mark McNeill, City Administrator, opened by announcing that the purpose of the special session was to discuss with the Shakopee School Board and Shakopee Public Utilities the proposed location(s) of future school sites. Jon McBroom, Superintendent of Schools, addressed the Council. He explained that the school board has been working to locate sites for new school buildings. On November 8, 2005, the public is being asked to give the school board permission to open two additional school buildings; the first anticipated opening is 2007. Mr. McBroom is also hoping that the bond referendum will pass to allow the school board to be proactive with money to purchase a site. In an aggressively developing city it has become more difficult to locate 20 acre parcels for future school buildings. One of the challenges the school board is facing is the availability of utilities. Mr. McBroom informed the council that there are three potential sites that the school board is looking at and showed a map of the locations. Also shown on the map was a 40 acre parcel owned by the school district that they are hoping to use in the future as a site for a secondary school. Also being discussed by the school board is the purchase of neighboring properties. Mr. McBroom noted that two potential sites (Site 1 and Site 2) are not within the cities limits; they are in Jackson Township and would require annexation. He also noted that all three sites'are undeveloped properties; therefore, infrastructures would be required. Site 1 is the farthest outside city limits and city utilities. [Site 1 - west of CR15 and north of CR 78, Dr. Horton Development/Ryan Contracting; Site 2 - east ofCR15 and north ofCR78, Countryside South, Tollefson Development; Site 3 - south of CR16 and east of future CR2I, Shutrop South, Tollefson Development.] Mr. Broom informed that council that the school board has received written offers on Sitel from Horton & Ryan. There are some financial incentives involved with the offer (i.e., makes a provision for some, if not all, infrastructure). There are no written purchase agreements at this point. OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL SESSION SHAKOPEE,Ni~SOTA OCTOBER 4, 2005 Mayor John J. Schmitt called the meeting to order at 5:34 p.m. with Council members Joe Helkamp, Terry Joos, Steve Menden and Matt Lehman present. Also present were Mark McNeill, City Administrator; Judith S. Cox, City Clerk; Kris Wilson, Assistant to the City Administrator; R. Michael Leek, Community Development Director; and Bruce Loney, Public Works Director/City Engineer. Present representing the Shakopee Public Schools were: Jon McBroom, Superintendent, Mary Romansky, School Board Chair; Steve Schneider, School Board Clerk; Kevin Carstens, School Board Treasurer; Kathy Busch, School Board Director; and Todd Anderson, School Board Director. Present from Shakopee Public Utilities were Lou Van Hout, Manager and Joe Adams, Engineering and Planning Director. Mark McNeill, City Administrator, opened by announcing that the purpose of the special session was to discuss with the Shakopee School Board and Shakopee Public Utilities the proposed location(s) offuture school sites. Jon McBroom, Superintendent of Schools, addressed the Council. He explained that the school board has been working to locate sites for new school buildings. On November 8, 2005, the public is being asked to give the school board permission to open two additional school buildings; the first anticipated opening is 2007. Mr. McBroom is also hoping that the bond referendum will pass to allow the school board to be proactive with money to purchase a site. In an aggressively developing city it has become more difficult to locate 20 acre parcels for future school buildings. One of the challenges the school board is facing is the availability of utilities. Nir. McBroom informed the council that there are three potential sites that the school board is looking at and showed a map of the locations. Also shown on the map was a 40 acre parcel owned by the school district that they are hoping to use in the future as a site for a secondary school. Also being discussed by the school board is the purchase of neighboring properties. Mr. NicBroom noted that two potential sites (Site I and Site 2) are not within the cities limits; they are in Jackson Township and would require annexation. He also noted that all three sites are undeveloped properties; therefore, infrastructures would be required. Site 1 is the farthest outside city limits and city utilities. [Site 1 - west ofCR15 and north ofCR78, Dr. Horton Development/Ryan Contracting; Site 2- east ofCR15 and north ofCR78, Countryside South, Tollefson Development; Site 3 - south of CR16 and east of future CR21, Shutrop South, Tollefson Development.] Mr. Broom informed that council that the school board has received written offers on Site I from Horton & Ryan. There are some financial incentives involved with the offer (i.e., makes a provision for some, if not all, infrastructure). There are no written purchase agreements at this point. Official Proceedings of the October 4, 2005 Shakopee City Council Page -2- Mr. McBroom indicated there isn't a specific offer for Site 2. On Site 3, there is a written offer from Tollefson, which is on the other end of town. Mr. McBroom indicated that there are , advantages to Site 3 in that the school board has worked with Tollefson in the past. He also noted that the preliminary offer is less than market value and it is being offered to bring utilities to that site. In addition, the school board has had discussions about a potential school site and how it would be laid out in their development. Mr. McBroom added that the school board would continue discussions with Tollefson regarding Sites 2 and 3. Mr. McBroom stated the school board is requesting that the Council advise them as to where other developments are going to be occurring and where the students will be. He added that the school board would like to populate the new building in the Fall of2007. Mr. McBroom stated that the school board has looked at other properties further south (on County Road 17). Those sites would not be served with utilities in the short term; it would be very expensive to get utilities there. Cncl. J oos asked if Sites I, 2 and 3 were in any particular order and if there was a preference. Mr. McBroom indicated that the only distinction is cost and the school board would prioritize based on future development. encl. Joos asked if the school board had approached the Sioux Committee regarding possible land acquisition. Mr. McBroom indicated he had made efforts to communicate but it had not been fruitful and it is not an option at this point. Cncl. Menden asked when a decision would need to be made. Mr. McBroom answered that there is money reserved for future site purchases whether or not the referendum passes in November. It is the school board's goal to replace land as it is being used for new construction. Mr. McBroom stated that this year alone saw an increase of300 students. If the referendum passes and people see the need for a new elementary school due to growth, the school board could go into the design phase of building. The school board is hoping to control costs and save time by using the design that has been used in the last two elementary schools. There would, however, be some retooling that may be required depending on roads, utilities, HV AC load, the sun, etc. Mr. McBroom outlined a possible timeframe: get through design phase, bid in spring, start in summer and continue with the same timeframe as Red Oak Elementary School, an 18- month time period. Mr. Broom fIrst needs to obtain approval from community on November 8th and an understanding of which sites are feasible from the City Council. He also requested that a determination needs to be made on whether or not infrastructures will work in one or all of the sites. Mr. McBroom indicated that the 40 acre parcel on the corner of County Roads 78 and 79 is not going to be for an elementary school. The school board is looking at the site for the construction of a future second middle school or possibly a second high school. He added that ifthe 40 acre parcel is used now, it will hurt the school district long term because another site will have to be located for future schools. Official Proceedings of the October 4, 2005 Shakopee City Council Page -3- Lou Van Hout, Manager, of Shakopee Public Utilities, indicated that the Commission is interested in working with community but wants to defer to Bryce McGowan who was absent. Mr. VanHout indicated all three sites are workable. Joe Adams, Engineering and Planning Director of the Shakopee Public Utilities, approached the podium and distributed a brief summary of each site. Site # 1 (A), County Road 78 is at a higher elevation than can presently be served with their storage tank. The water comp plan included a booster station, pump house and wells. The need would be driven by the timeframe for development in that area. Mr. Adams indicated that there should be an accommodation for a pump house in the school district's plan. The electricity would be delivered by the South Shakopee substation which is located across from the Stonebrooke Golf Course. The substation would be the main service point for all loads to the west. Mr. Adams added that the substation would require a second transformer to service additional growth. Site 2(B) falls in the 1st high elevation district and pressure boundaries don't apply. The equipment currently in place would be able to serve school site but not a development. The electrical service would come from the same substation as for Site 1 (A). Site #3(C) created a situation where the site is basically an island. There isa booster station in the vicinity and the site plan locates the school above the boundary so it could fall into the normal pressure zone. An evaluation should be made to determine which pressure zone the school should fall in. There would be an immediate need for a booster station. An alternate would be to extend trunk mains across the Sioux Community's land. Cncl. Helkamp asked whether Site 3(C) would have future lines coming from a substation coming from the County Road 21 corridor. Mr. Adams answered that because it's a small area Site 3 doesn't require a tank; there will be no wells located that far east. Cnd. Helkamp then asked if Site I(A) required a tank and Mr. Adams answered yes. The school would be construction before the tank would be installed but wells and a pump house would be required in the interim. Cncl. Menden asked whether Site 2(B) would require a booster. Mr. Adams answered that there would be a need for either a booster station or a well. Cncl. Menden asked if the area were used ,for a field or activities if there would still be a need for a booster station or well. Mr. Adams answered that there would only be a need if there are structures that require a fIre station or residential supply. Cncl. Joos asked where in the City's development plan these Sites fall into (Phase I or Phase II). R. Michael Leek indicated that both Sites 1 and 2 are in Phase II and that Site 3 is in Phase I. Cncl. Menden then asked about the timing. He asked if a new school in 2007 is a feasible schedule. Mr. McBroom answered that yes, it is a possible timeframe but it would be tight. Official Proceedings of the October 4, 2005 Shakopee City Council Page -4- Mr. Adams added that the planning, design and construction of a booster station would take about a year; a well and pump house would be a little over a year. Cncl. Joos noted that if Site 1 is chosen, the City will have all of Jackson Township. He cautioned that if the City is trying to manage growth, Site 2 is preferable. It also would be more cost effective. Mayor Schmitt stated that with the potential for population growth it is a desirable site. Mr. McBroom added that there will be student transporting no matter where a school is located. Mr. Leek stated that the major areas for growth are in Jackson and Louisville Townships. The City would need to have a specific staging plan for Jackson Township as well as begin discussions with Louisville Township. Mayor Schmitt stated that long term growth will go south and that short term will go east. Cncl. Joos added thatif Site 3 is selected County Roads 16 and 42 are the only options for transporting students. Kevin Carstens, School Board Director, asked if Sites 1 and 2 should be chosen as a package given the fact that they are so close. Bruce Loney answered that Site 2 would be easier to serve sewer than Site 1; there would be minimal amount of extension. A 320 acre plat would need to be approved prior to building on Site 1. There's not a volume savings. Cncl. Lehman entered and took his seat. Cncl. Joos stated that Site 1 presents the City with the opportunity to go to Jackson Township with an annexation agreement. Joe Adams noted that Site 1 is in the second high service district and would require a storage tank or booster station to provide pressure. 'He went on to say that Site 2 is the first high elevation service district and a booster station would not be required. Mr. McBroom reminded the CouncIl that the school board has written proposals on Sites I and 3. If Site 1 is selected there will be additional work because the school board is investigating the possibility of combing park land and the elementary school site. Kathy Busch, School Board Director, approached the podium and indicated that the school board has been negotiating with Met Council to get additional capacity and asked if a two-year timeframe fits with Met Council. Bruce Loney answered that he could get approval from Met Council. R. Michael Leek added that the Met Council staff and their representative, Julius Smith, are committed to having capacity to serve that area. Todd Anderson, School Board Director, approached the podium and stated that the purpose of tonight's meeting was to work together to avoid an unpleasant scenario. He added that the school board is eventually going to need a site on the east end of town and on the west end of Official Proceedings of the October 4,2005 Shakopee City Couricil Page -5- town. Ifthe referendum passes, the school board would investigate the possibility of constructing two buildings and the goal would be to put new construction on each end. Cncl. Menden indicated that if it's necessary to meet again, he is available to meet with the school board and deliver the imormation to the City Council. Cncl Lehman indicated he would be available as well. Mr. McBroom stated that the meeting tonight was meant to be informational. If the referendum passes in November, the school board needs to plan for and needs a decision in the not to distant future thereafter. Joos/Menden moved to adjourn to October 5,2005 at 7:05 p.m. Motion carried 5-0. The meeting was adjourned at 6:52 p.m. ~Jct4) &f J dith S. Cox ity Clerk Andrea Bortness Recording Secretary OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL REGULAR SESSION SHAKOPEE,MINNESOTA OCTOBER 4, 2005 Mayor Schmitt called the meeting to order at 7:16 p.m. with Council members Helkamp, Joos, Menden and Lehman present. Also present was Mark McNeill, City Administrator; Kris Wilson, Assistant to the City Administrator; Judith S. Cox, City Clerk; R. Michael Leek, Community Development Director; Bruce Loney, Public Works/City Engineer; Jim Thomson, City Attorney; and Gregg V oxland, Finance Director. The Pledge of Allegiance was recited. Added to the agenda was Item 15.FA., Setting Workshop with Historic Preservation Advisory Commission, Tuesday, October 18, 2005 at 6:00 p.m. Deleted from the agenda was item 14.A. 394 Transfer of the City Cable Television Franchise. Menden/Joos moved to approve the agenda as amended. Motion carried 5-0. Mayor Schmitt reported that there is a new bank in town and he attended the open house on September 26. Also new in town is a Goodwill store and Mayor Schmitt attended their ribbon cutting ceremony on October 1. Added to the consent agenda were Items 9. Setting Penalties for Tobacco Violations, 15.B.2. Approving Plans and Specifications for Dean Lake Outlet Structure, Project No. 2004-4, and 15.FA. Setting Workshop with Historic Preservation Advisory Commission. Lehman/Joos moved to approve the consent agenda as amended. Motion carried 5-0. Mayor Schmitt asked if there was anyone present who wished to be heard on items that are not on the agenda. Gary Wollschlager of Tollefson Development requested that working hours on the County Road 79 project be extended to working on Saturday beginning at 7:00 a.m. instead of9:00 a.m. Mr. Wollschlager pointed out that there is only approximately six weeks remaining of the construction season. Cncl. Helkamp noted that there are not very many homes in the area. Mr. Wollschlager confirmed that there are very few houses and most ofthe homes are on acreage. Cncl. Lehman asked why the request was not submitted in written form. Mr. Wollschlager answered that he had been weighing his options from week to week. Cncl. Menden requested a written request prior to Council approval. Joos/Lehman moved to approve the request to begin construction on the Countryside Project at 7:00 a.m. on Saturday for the next six weeks subject to regular conditions including complaints from the residents. Bruce Loney added that if there are complaints, the Council's decision could be revoked. Motion carried 5-0. Official Proceedings of the October 4, 2005 Shakopee City Council Page -2- LehmanlJoos moved to approve the meeting minutes for August 3, August 16,2005 (5:00 p.m.) and September 5, 2005 (5:00p.m.). (Motion carried under the Consent Agenda.) LehmanlJoos moved for the approval of bills in the amount of $366,635.44 plus $193,382.14 for refunds, returns and pass through for a total of $560,017.58. (Motion carried under the Consent Agenda. ) LehmanlJoos acknowledged receipt of the "Waiver and Admission of Violation" from Hennen's Shell, 807 East First Avenue, for the sale of tobacco to a minor and impose a penalty for the second violation in the amount of$500.00 and a suspension of the license for five days, beginning at 12:01 a.m. on October 14,2005 and ending at 12:00 midnight on October 18, 2005. (Motion carried under Consent Agenda.) LehmanlJoos acknowledged receipt of the "Waiver and Admission of Violation" from Roseen & Roseen dba MGM Liquor, 471 South Marschall Road, for the sale of tobacco to a minor and impose a penalty for the first violation in the amount of $200.00 and a suspension of the license for two days, beginning at 12:01 a.m. on October 14,2005 and ending at 12:00 midnight on October 15,2005. (Motion carried under Consent Agenda.) LehmanlJoos acknowledged receipt of the "Waiver and Admission of Violation" from Speedway Superamerica LLC dba Superamerica #4546, 1298 East Vierling Drive, for the sale of tobacco to a minor and impose a penalty for the first violation in the amount of $200.00 and a suspension of the license for two days, beginning at 12:01 a.m. on October 14,2005 and ending at 12:00 midnight on October 15,2005. (Motion carried under Consent Agenda.) Mayor Schmitt asked for liaison reports. Cncl. Joos.began work on the community build playground, at Huber Park, on Sunday and indicated the need for more volunteers. He said it has been an interesting experience. Cncl. Helkamp reported that he attended the Chamber Board meeting. Discussed at the Chamber meeting was the relocation of their facilities. Another topic of conversation was the transit hub and the fact that the hotel taxes haven't been paid which indicated a decrease in tourism. Cncl. Lehman reported that he attended the Park Board meeting. He also received a letter from a resident regarding the fence at the cemetery site. Mr. McNeill also received a copy of the letter with a petition. The resident was advised that a permit isn't required for a fence less than,6' but, advised it should be set back from property line. Mayor Schmitt reported that care is taken with the existing fence and the grounds are mowed carefully. He added that there are no weeds; they are taking good care of the site. Cncl. Menden reported that he attended an EAC workshop on Greenways. He also attended the recent School Board meeting regarding the referend111l1~ There are two public information Official Proceedings of the October 4, 2005 Shakopee City Council Page -3- meetings scheduled: October 24th at 7:00 p.m. in the Junior High cafeteria and November 1st at 7:00 p.m. in the Sun Path cafeteria. Helkamp/Joos moved to recess for an Economic Development Meeting at 7:35 p.m. Motion carried 5-0. Mayor Schmitt reconvened the meeting at 7:42 p.m. R. Michael Leek opened a discussion concerning the Sever Peterson's com maze sign. Mr. Peterson distributed his proposal to the Planning Commission on September 8. Mr. Peterson requested that he be allowed signage located within ~ mile to % mile of the Highway 169 interchange. The proposed City ordinance allows one sign per event per year and a temporary sign permit would not allow for the sign to be moved to different locations and the sign must remain at a 10' setback from property lines. Mr. Leek noted that the existing sign being used does not meet the conditions in the proposed amendment to the sign regulations. Cncl. Lehman asked if one sign could be placed for traffic traveling east or west. It was determined that the majority of traffic would come from the North and the East and that one sign would suffice. JooslLehman offered Ordinance No. 738, Fourth Series, An Ordinance of the City of Shako pee, Minnesota, Amending City Code Sec. 11.70, Subd. 6, and moved its adoption, including a revision adding a condition that off-premise signs shall not be mounted on trucks or semi- trailers. Motion carried 5-0. R. Michael Leek presented a comprehensive plan amendment to extend MUSA and rezone property from agricultural preservation zone to medium density residential zone for property located south ofCSAH 16, east of McKenna Road and west of Pike Lake Road. Mr. Leek indicated that the Planning Commission reviewed the application at their September 8, 2005 meeting. The Planning Commission recommended approval of the MUSA extension request and the rezoning to urban residential (R-1B) and that the development proceed as a Planned Unit Development (PUD). Cncl. Lehman asked if the planned unit development (PUD) offers flexibility. Mr. Leek answered that the PUD process gives final site plan approval and that there is flexibility in that approval. Mr. Leek added that the ordinance was rewritten specifically to take out some of the restraining language to allow the City Council broader flexibility. Matthew Weiland of Tollefson Development approached the podium. Tollefson has designed a mixed-use master plan and used the City's newly adopted point system to design neighborhoods that would fit the City's conceptual plan. Tollefson has focused their design on a life-cycle Official Proceedings of the October 4, 2005 Shakopee City Council Page -4- housing concept. The neighborhoods would include starter homes, townhomes and empty nester homes. Tollefson's design would include 341 units of residential housing (5.6 units per acre not including senior housing). If senior housing is entered into the equation, the density would be closer to 7 units per acre. Cncl. Lehman voiced his concern with R2 density and that if some of Tollefson's proposed uses don't occur, it's not what the Council intended. Cnc1. Lehman suggested that the end result could be arrived at with an Rl zoning along with a PUD if some of these uses come into play. Mr. Weiland indicated that he is looking to Council for some of their ideas and a general direction for Tollefson. Mr. Leek pointed out that the Planning Commission was supportive of the number and the uses outlined. Citizens from Pike Lake Trail attended the Planning Commission meeting and weren't opposed but they were concerned about the visual impact of attached housing on walking trails. Cnc1. Menden asked for clarification of the pun process. He stated that it's true that the Planning Commission's recommendation is that a pun be implemented but what if the Council isn't certain what is proposed is going to hold true; will future concept plans be restricted. Mr. Leek answered that to a certain extent it is dependent on the timing of the discussions for the school site and the transit station. Mr. Leek reminded the Council that they had given him the authority to continue negotiations with the County and the City of Prior Lake on the transit site. Those discussions may have an impact on the overall Pun in the future ifit doesn't develop as a transit park and ride if someone else has to come in to develop the remaining 23 acres into residential. It could, in the future, result in a PUD. Cnc1. Lehman asked Mr. Weiland about the proposed development's round-abouts shown on the concept drawing. He was concerned that there is only one access point into and out of the development. Mayor Schmitt pointed out that anything in and out of the proposed school must go out of Pike Lake Road or County Road 21. Mayor Schmitt stated it didn't make sense to have all the traffic enter and exit at one end of the development. Mr. Weiland answered that Tollefson is working on another access point off County Road 21. Cncl. Helkamp asked where the City is to date with MUSA and how the MUSA allocation would be affected. He added that this is in Phase II of MUSA allocation and the Council had, according to the comp plan, spoken about allocating Phase I first. At the last meeting, the Council spoke about beginning the 2008 comp plan early and that within 60 days the phasing would be revised in more detail. Mr. Leek responded that he didn't have an exact update on what the MUSA allocation is and would get back to the Council. At the same time Council indicated that they Official Proceedings of the October 4, 2005 Shakopee City Council Page -5- focus on Phase I areas they, from time to time, expressed concern about focusing on the East Shakopee area. Cnc1. Lehman asked if MUSA is not going to be extended to the area in question, would Site 3 be deleted from the school district's list of potential school sites. Mr. Leek answered that if MUSA is not extended to this particular parcel, it means that it will not be serviced with sewer/water so, yes, that would be correct. Cnc1. Menden asked about the timeframe for the project. Mr. Leek answered that November 25, 2005 is the statutory deadline for the review period. Cncl. Helkamp noted that Site 3 can't be presumed as a school site yet because the school board stated that they haven't finalized discussions. That would influence a decision as to how quickly MUSA would be granted. He requested more information. Cncl. Helkamp indicated that he liked the concept plan, the life cycle housing and the architectural controls. He added that he would like to put proper consideration into putting MUSA into R1 or R2 zoning. The Council has learned from Shakopee Public Utilities that this area which includes Site 3 for a new school, is in the 1 st high elevation for water pressure. He questioned if there, is sufficient development to help support a booster station to serve this development. Cnc1. Joos asked ifR-l zoning would work with this plan. Mr. Leek answered that it would be similar to the Southbridge Development whose density is approximately 7 housing units per acre. Mr. Leek offered to compose a proposed revision to the MUSA allocation that would be approved with the comp plan update and suggested that it may be worthwhile to have additional information and table the request. Cncl. Menden would like additional information from staff too and requested tabling the discussion to the November 15,2005 meeting. Gary Wollschlager, Tollefson DeveloEment, and Mr. Leek indicated that it may be problematic to hold discussions until November 15 and suggested that discussions continue at the November 1, 2005 meeting. He indicated that there are contractual obligations to the seller and to the school board. MendenlHelkamp moved to table the discussions based on the need for addition information from staff to November 1,2005 subject to conditions indicated. Motion carried 5-0. Mr. Leek stated that the city has received a request to release an easement located at 2440 Valley View Road. A search by the title company indicated that the easement was created in 1975 in favor of Minnesota Valley Electric Corporation. In 1998, the easement was assigned to the City on behalf of the Shakopee Public Utilities. Since an easement is no longer required, it is being requested that a public hearing date be set so that the easement can be vacated as it relates to all of the lots in Audrella Addition. In addition, it is being requested that the Council authorize the Building Inspections Department to issue a buildin~ permit for Lot 9. Official Proceedings of the October 4, 2005 Shakopee City Council Page -6- Helkamp/Lehman offered Resolution No. 6304, A Resolution Setting the Public Hearing Date to consider the Vacation of an Easement Located Along Valley View Road, and move its adoption. Motion carried 5-0. Jim Thomson, City attorney noted that the Council has discretion as to whether or not to authorize the issuance ofa building permit. Mr. Thomson recommended that the Council grant permission to authorize the issuance of a building permit at the applicant's own risk. JooslLehman amended the previous motion to include authorization of the issuance of a building permit for Lot 9, AudrelIa Addition at the risk of the applicant. Cncl. Joos asked the applicant if , ' he was comfortable with taking such a risk and he indicated that he was. Motion carried 5-0. LehmanlJoos made a motion to recess the meeting at 8:37 p.m. Motion carried 5-0. Mayor Schmitt reconvened the meeting at 8:46 p.m. LehmanlJoos moved to accept the resignation of Erik Wiebold from the Planning Commission and authorize the appropriate City Officials to take the necessary steps to fill the vacancy created by Mr. Wiebold's resignation. (Motion carried under the Consent Agenda.) Lehman/Joos offered Resolution No. 6312, A Resolution Approving the Final Plat of Glacier Estates, and moved its adoption. (Motion carried under the Consent Agenda.) Lehman/Joos offered Resolution No. 6305, A Resolution Declaring the Costs to be Assessed and Ordering the Preparation of Proposed Assessments for the 2005 Street Reconstruction Project No. 2005-1, and moved its adoption. (Motion carried under the Consent Agenda.) Lehman/Joosoffered Resolution No. 6306, A Resolution Declaring the Costs to be Assessed and Ordering the Preparation of Proposed Assessments for the Valley View Road Improvements, from the East Plat Line of Greenfield Addition to County Road 83, Project No. 2004-3, and moved its adoption. (Motion carried under the Consent Agenda.) Lehman/Joos offered Resolution No. 6307, A Resolution Declaring the Costs to be Assessed and Ordering the Preparation of Proposed Assessments for the 2005 Bituminous Overlay, Project No. 2005-4, and moved its adoption. (Motion carried under the Consent Agenda.) Lehman/Joos offered Resolution No. 6308, A Resolution Declaring the Amount to be Assessed, Ordering the Preparation of Proposed Assessments, and Setting the Public Hearing Date for Delinquent Refuse Bills, and moved its adoption. (Motion carried under the Consent Agenda.) Lehman/Joos moved to direct a $45.00 assessment penalty to be added to assessment amounts for City administrative costs, for delinquent refuse bills. (Motion carried under the Consent Agenda.) Official Proceedings of the October 4,2005 Shakopee City Council Page -7- Lehman/Joos offered Resolution No. 6309, A Resolution Approving Plans and Specifications and Ordering Advertisement for Bids, for the Dean Lake Outlet Structure Project No. 2005-7, and moved its adoption. (Motion carried under the Consent Agenda.) Bruce Loney, Public Works Director, approached the podium to give an outline of his request that the Council authorize staff to prepare a feasibility report for a trunk sanitary sewer extension from the Prior Lake interceptor to the Riverside Bluff development. He received letters from the development, Ryland Homes, which indicated their desire for Council to proceed with the trunk improvement project. He also received a letter from Gary Wollschlager of Tollefson Development which offered their support. Mr. Loney explained thatthe developer for Riverside Bluff has offered up to $150,000 towards public construction of the trunk sanitary sewer to help defray any costs that the City may incur by proceeding with an improvement project. Mr. Loney explained three ways to provide sanitary sewer to Riverside Bluff: a 429 assessment project by the City, developers work together and do the project privately, and installation of a temporary lift station. It is the desire on the part of two of the developers that the City proceed with a project. He recommended that the developer for Riverside Bluff enter into an agreement to pay for the design work if the project does not proceed. He noted that the Council would need a super majority to order the project. Cncl. Lehman asked why Riverside Bluff would pay for the development when there are three developers involved in the project. Mr. Loney answered that the three developers would be paying should the project go forward. The reimbursement agreement he's asking for would come from the developer that's requesting it. It's a safety measure that puts the risk on the developer instead of the City. Mr. Loney reviewed the proposed schedule for the feasibility report. He added that in order to construct the sewer by June 2006, the feasibility report would need to be authorized at this meeting. Cncl. Menden asked how the schedule was arrived at; it is a very aggressive schedule. Mr. Loney answered that it was based on a proposal of what it would take to get done by June 1, 2006. Mr. Loney added that the feasibility report would have to be completed and the project authorized. Condemnation proceedings would need to take place, depending upon how willing property owners are to give easements. Cncl. Menden commented that the Council's authority to order condemnation proceedings is not taken lightly and would be used only as a last resort. Official Proceedings of the October 4, 2005 Shakopee City Council Page -8- Cncl. J oos indicated his agreement that condemnation would be the very last resort. He continued by saying that it would be better being sewered by one contractor with one set of plans continuing to get the pipe all the way through; the pipe will serve a large area. Cncl. Lehman clarified that condemnation proceedings are for city-wide benefit and wouldn't take any houses or business only the right of way to allow for the installation of pipe. Randy Noecker, the developer for Ridge Creek, stated he had been involved in a couple of other 429 projects. He sees the need Ryland Homes has to accomplish their goals. It is his hope that they might run a parallel plan so that maybe the goals would be accomplished privately (as opposed to the City doing the project). Gary Wollschlager, Tollefson Development, indicated that they have recently been approached by companies to find out if Tollefson is in favor of the 429 project. He stated that he is in favor of it. He added that this should be a shared cost between City and developers involved and will benefit future properties to the east and south. Mr. Wollschlager indicated to Ryland Homes that he would contribute toward a feasibility study. He said that the City needs to determine if this is the time to move forward. Brian Sullivan, Ryland Homes, approached the podium as a follow-up with what Mr. Wollschlager spoke about. He is in concurrence with Bruce Loney's recommendation to go ahead with a 429 project. He added that a 429 project provides the best security to put the sewer in timely and correctly and it benefits and promotes growth in the direction the City wants it to go. He expressed concern that putting in the sewer as a private process will take until fall of next year. To show their seriousness, he offered to put the cost for a lift station toward the cost of the project, if the assessment process does not cover all of the costs. J ooslLehrhan offered Resolution No, 6310, A Resolution Order the Preparation of a Feasibility Report for a Trunk Sanitary Sewer Extension, from the Prior Lake Interceptor to the East Plat Line of Riverside Bluffs, and moved its adoption. Motion carried 5-0. Lehman/Joos moved to authorize the appropriate City officials to execute an extension agreement with WSB & Associates for the preparation of the feasibility report as outlined'in their attached proposal for a trunk sanitary sewer extension from the Prior Lake Interceptor to the Riverside Bluff s Development; and, to authorize the appropriate City officials to enter into a reimbursement agreement with Ryland Homes, Inc. for the preparation of a feasibility report of the Trunk Sanitary Sewer Extension, from Prior Lake Interceptor to the east plat line of Riverside Bluffs as prepared by the city attorney. Motion carried 5-0. Lehman/Joos moved to authorize the appropriate City officials to execute an extension agreement with WSB & Associates, Inc. to perform a preliminary design survey for the 2006 Reconstruction, Project No. 2006-2. (Motion carried under the Consent Agenda.) Official Proceedings of the October 4, 2005 Shakopee City Council Page -9. Lehman/Joos moved to authorize the appropriate City staff to 'enter into the grant agreement with the Minnesota State Patrol for the project entitles Operation NightCap during the period from July 1,2005 to September 30, 2005 for the amount awarded by the Minnesota State Patrol. (Motion carried under the Consent agenda.) Mark Themig, Recreation and Facilities Director, approached the podium to discuss Rotary donations for Huber Park. He stated that the Shakopee Rotary Club has requested that the funds they had donated to the City for the park development (originally to go toward the performance area) be used toward the community built playground. The request provides $30,000 in funding to the playground now and would give the Rotary Club naming rights for the playground as top sponsor. Mr. Themig indicated his desire to purchase rubber mulch for the playground area. The Rotary Club wishes to donate $30,000, $28,300 of which is being already held in escrow and would donate an additional $1,700. The City would then be able to purchase the rubber mulch for surfacing at a cost of $40,200 and The Playground Committee would cover the difference. Cncl. Lehman asked if the rubber mulch is environmentally friendly. Mr. Themig answered that it is. Cncl. Lelunan clarified that the naming is still guided by the guidelines of the city. Mr. McNeill indicated that the naming would be consistent with park naming policy. Yvonne Anderson fromShakopee Rotary Club approached the podium. She stated that in 2001 the Rotary Club had committed $50,000 to Huber Park and the City has $28,300 in escrow to utilize in an effective manner. She said the Rotary Club would like this to go toward the playground. Menden/Joos moved to authorize the use of the $28,300 that the Shakopee Rotary Club has donated to the City for use on the community built playground. Helkamp/Lehman offered an amendment, that if the appropriate City officials deem that it is not possible to provide the $28,300 to the Community Built Playground Committee, to authorize the purchase of rubber mulch surfacing material for the community built playground from Rubberecycle in the amount of $40,200 plus sales tax, with the remaining balance coming from the Community Built Playground Committee. Motion carried 5-0. Helkamp/Lelunan moved to authorize the appropriate City Officials to enter into the hold harmless agreement between the City of Shakopee and the Shakopee Rotary Club for the community built playground in Huber Park. Motion carried 5-0. Mr. Themig stated that the playground build began over the weekend and the Committee is still looking for volunteers, particularly this weekend~ Th,e MN Vikings were at the park and also 140 Official Proceedings of the October 4, 2005 Shakopee City Council Page -10- kids from Pearson Elementary. Mr. Themig asked that volunteers call 445-6808 or 223-9500. There are four hour shifts from 8 a.m. to 8 p.m. from October 5-9, 2005. There will be a Grand Opening celebration at approximately 4:00 p.m. on October 9, 2005. Mark Themig then addressed other sponsorship opportunities for the park. The final design for Huber RlverfrontPark is proceeding as scheduled this fall. The Park Board has secured $92,000 from the DNR in the form of a grant and previous work on project reductions results in a potential savings of$288,600. During capital funding discussions, there was an interest in approaching individuals who either have an interest in the performing arts or are long-time residents of Shakopee. The consensus at the Park Board meeting indicated that the campaign should be community driven instead of staff driven. ,The Park Board will be designing information on sponsorship programs for individuals to review. Discussion followed. Lehman/J oos moved to direct staff to work with the design cOm.n1ittee and community members to launch a Huber Riverfront Park redevelopment funding campaign. Motion carried 5-0. Lehman/Joos moved to acknowledge the satisfactory completion of probation and authorize the retention of Clay Johnson as Police Sergeant effective October 6,.2005. (Motion carried under the Consent Agenda.) Lehman/Joos offered Resolution No. 6301, A Resolution Appointing Judges of Election and Establishing Compensation, and moved its adoption. (Motion carried under the Consent Agenda.) Lehman/Joos moved to authorize the release of payment of $4,129.45 to Navigators Insurance Company, and declare the Downtown Fire Station reproofing project finaled. (Motion carried under the Consent Agenda.) Lehman/Joos moved to designate a workshop to discuss Visioning and Greenways, to convene at 6:30 p.m. on Monday, November 14, 2005. (Motion carried under the Consent Agenda.) Lehman/Joos moved to set the workshop meeting with the Historic Preservation Advisory Commission at 6:00 p.m. on Tuesday, October 18, 2005. (Motion carried under the Consent Agenda. ) Cncl. Menden received a comment concerning the new website. Citizens would like to see the Planning Commission agendas on line. JooslHelkamp moved to adjourn to Tuesday, October 18,2005 at 6:00 p.m. Motion carried 5-0. Th~j ~~umed at 10:01 p.m. @:th S. Cox, City Clerk drea Bortness, Recording Secretary