Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout5.F.2. Approval of Minutes: June 06, and June 07, 2006 OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL REGULAR SESSION SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA JUNE 06, 2006 Chief Dan Hughes and Office Cody Homer gave a demonstration ofthe Shakopee Police Department's new SUV service vehicle as well as all of the equipment and technology integrated into the vehicle. Mayor John Schmitt called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. with Council members Steve Clay, Terry Joos, Steve Menden, and Matt Lehman present. Also present were Mark McNeil, City Administrator; Kris Wilson, Assistant to the City Administrator; Jim Thomson, City Attorney; Judith S. Cox, City Clerk; R. Michael Leek, Community Development Director; and Bruce Loney, Public Works Director/City Engineering. The Pledge of Allegiance was cited. Mayor Schmitt asked if there were any additions or deletions to the agenda. Mark McNeil stated that 5.C.5 should be added to the agenda, Authorize Surveying Services for Cemetery Access Issue. JooslMenden to approve the agenda as amended. Motion carried 5-0. --'-~scnmltt deleteCll1ieMayor's report oecause oflne long agenc1a------------------------------- .. "._n_ There was a presentation of a grant from Xcel Energy for the Quarry Lake Park Project. Mark Themig introduced Pat Kline, Manager of Community and Government Relations of Xcel Energy and John Davis of the Prior Lake Water Ski Association. The two presented the city with a check for $30,000 to be used toward the continuing development of the Quarry Lalce Park Proj ect. Lehman/Joos offered Resolution No. 6430, a Resolution of the City of Shako pee, Minnesota accepting an Environment Grant from Xcel Energy for the Quarry Lake Park Project, and moved its adoption. Motion carried 5-0. Mayor Schmitt asked if there were any additions, deletions, or corrections to the Consent Agenda. Cncl. Menden asked that 5.B.4 be taken off the consent agenda. encl. Menden also requested that 13.C.3 and 13.F.2, 13.F.3 and 13.F.5 be added to the consent agenda. Cncl. Lehman asked that 13.F.4 be added to the consent agenda as well as 5.C.5. Cncl. Joos asked that 5.B.2 be taken off the consent agenda. Menden/Joos moved to approve the Consent Agenda as amended. Mr. McNeil read the consent agenda business for the record. Motion carried 5-0. MendenlJ oos offered Resolution No. 6431, a Resolution of the City of Shalcopee, Minnesota, accepting a Donation of $8,000.00 from the Shakopee Men's Softball League, and moved its Official Proceedings of the June 06, 2006 Shakopee City Council Page - 2 - adoption; and offered Resolution No. 6437, a Resolution of the City of Shako pee, Minnesota, accepting a Donation of $3,600.00 from the Shakopee Co-Rec. Softball League, and moved its adoption. (Motion carried under the Consent Agenda). Menden/Joos moved to authorize payment of$1,250.00 (Invoice No: 0000824837) from the Natural Resource Profession Services budget and entering into the Intergovernmental Agreement between the Metropolitan Council and the City of Shakopee to participate in the volunteer lake sample study. (Motion carried under the Consent Agenda). Menden/Joos moved to authorize the Semi-final payment for Greenfield West Neighborhood Park to Sunram Construction Inc. for the total of$3,388.98, contingent on the contractor's submittals of required testing results and lien waivers. (Motion carried under the Consent Agenda). Menden/Joos moved to authorize appropriate city staff to renew the City's Microsoft License Service Agreement through LOGISfor an amount not to exceed $22,859.42 from the IT budget. (Motion carried under the Consent Agenda). Moved to approve the request of Frank Marzario, 2328 Pike Lake Road, for the waiver ofthe subdivision criteria regarding the City's lot size and frontage requirements to create two 10 acre parcels. (Motion carried under Consent Agenda). Menden/Joos offered ResolutionNo. 6436, A Resolution Accepting Work on Valley View Road, from the East Plat Line of Greenfield Addition to C.R. 83, Project No. 2004-3, and move its adoption. (Motion carried under the Consent Agenda). Menden/Joos offered Resolution No. 6433, A Resolution Accepting Bids on the CSAH 83 Trunk Sanitary Sewer Extension, from Church Addition to River Valley Estates 2nd Addition, Project No. 2006-6, and move its adoption. 2. Approved a 5% contingency amount on this project for use by the City Engineer in authorizing chance orders or quantity adjustments on this project. .3. Authorized the appropriate City officials to execute an extension agreement with WSB & Associates, Inc. to provide surveying and construction engineering assistance, as needed for this project. 4. Approved payment of $50,000.00 to the Shakopee Mdewakanton Sioux Community for the temporary easement along CSAH 83. (Motion carried under the Consent Agenda). Menden/J oos moved to authorize the appropriate City officials to execute the County Cooperative Agreement for turn lanes on CSAH 83 at Valley View Road. (Motion carried under the Consent Agenda). Menden/Joos offered Resolution No. 6434, a ResolutionAccepting Work on the 2003 Street Reconstruction Project No. 2003-3, and move its adoption. (Motion carried under the Consent Agenda). Menden/Joos moved to authorize the appropriate City officials to execute and extension agreement with WSB and Associates, Inc. for surveying services associated with the proposed Official Proceedings of the June 06, 2006 Shakopee City Council Page - 3 - access road to the cemetery off of County Road 16 with funding to be from the Capital Improvement Fund. (Motion carried under the Consent Agenda). Menden/Joos offered Ordinance No. 762, Fourth Series, and Ordinance of the City of Shako pee, Minnesota, Amending Chapter 9 by Adding New Section 9.09, Relating to the Authority of Community Service Officers to Enforce Disabled Parking Restrictions, and move its adoption. (Motion carried under the Consent Agenda). Menden/Joos moved to authorize the retention of, Matt Schlenk, Dave Giddings, Darren Giese, Scott Davis, Mick Korba as Fire Fighters for the City of Shakopee. (Motion carried under the Consent Agenda). Menden/Joos moved to authorize the hiring of Jean Link as a probationary records technician, at 40 hours per week, a Grade 3, Step E. at $15.993 per hour, subject to the satisfactory completion of pre-employment medical and psychological examinations. (Motion carried under the Consent Agenda). Menden/Joos moved to authorize hiring Raoul Boudreau for the position of IT Specialist at Grade 6, Step F of the 2006 City Pay Plan, contingent on the successful completion of the City's required pre-employment screenings. (Motion carried under the Consent Agenda). Menden/Joos moved the following: 1. Approved job descriptions for the Assistant City Administrator and Human Resources Technician positions, and action to fill and post those positions. 2. Authorized a title change for Payroll Benefits Coordinator to Human Resources Coordinator position. 3. Offered Resolution No. 6435. A Resolution amending Resolution No. 6338 which adopted the 2006 pay schedule for the officers and non-union employees ofthe City of Shakopee, and moved its adoption. (Motion carried under the Consent Agenda). (CC Document No. 411) Menden/Joos moved to accept the successful completion of Ryan Hughes's probationary period and grant him regular full-time status. (Motion carried under the Consent Agenda). Menden/Joos moved to approve the bills in the amount of $524,864.90. (Motion carried under the Consent Agenda). Menden/Joos moved to approve the minutes of April 18, 2006 and April 26, 2006 City Council Meetings. (Motion carried under the Consent Agenda). Menden/Joos moved to approve the applications and grant on sale and Sunday on sale intoxicating liquor licenses to EI Toro of Shakopee, Inc., 1120 First A venue East, conditioned upon a Certificate of Occupancy issued by the Building Department and evidence of insurance. (Motion carried under the Consent Agenda). Menden/Joos moved to authorize the proper city officials to execute the assessment agreement with Scott County for the 2007 assessment year in the amount of $132,900.00. (Motion carried under the Consent Agenda). Official Proceedings of the June 06, 2006 Shakopee City Council Page - 4 - Menden/Joos moved to set a hearing for Wednesday, July 5, 2006, at 7:00 p.m., or as soon thereafter as possible, to review the actions of alcohol licensee: Saba Entertainment LLC, 911 East First A venue. (Motion carried under the Consent Agenda). Menden/Joos moved to declare items listed in the May 25,2006 memo from John Peterson as surplus property. (Motion carried under the Consent Agenda). (CC Document No. 412) Menden/Joos moved to authorize out-of-state travel by Telecommunications Commissioner Mary Hillegas to attend NATOA's 26th Annual Local Government Telecommunications Conference August 22-25, 2006 in Lake Buena Vista, Florida. (Motion carried under the Consent Agenda). MendenlJoos moved to receive and file the updated City Goals and Objectives (dated 06/02/06). (Motion carried under the Consent Agenda). Menden/J oos moved to 1. Authorize the appropriate City officials to execute the agreement with the Gene and Virginia Hauer for a permanent wetland conservation easement for the wetland mitigation associated with CSAH 21 and Pike Lake Road improvements, subject to the City Attorney's approval. 2. Authorize the appropriate City officials to execute the conservation agreement between the Hauer's, Scott County and the City of Shako pee, subject to the City Attorney's approval. 3. Authorize the appropriate City Officials to execute an extension agreement with WSB and Associates, Inc. for final construction plans and services for the Hauer mitigation site. (Motion carried under the Consent Agenda). Menden/Joos moved to accept the tentative 2007 budget calendar. (Motion carried under the Consent Agenda). Menden/Joos moved to appoint Police Chief Dan Hughes as Shakopee's representative to the County's Visioning Advisory Commission. (Motion carried under the Consent Agenda). Menden/Joos offered Resolution No. 6432, A Resolution Adopting an Information Technology Policy for the City of Shakopee. Minnesota, and move its adoption. (Motion carried under the Consent Agenda). Mayor Schmitt asked ifthere were any interested parties in the audience who wished to speak on a matter not included on the agenda. There was no response. Joos/Menden moved to open the public hearing for the 2006 Bituminous Overlay for lOth Avenue and Holmes Street, Project No. 2006-5. Motion carried 5-0. Bruce Loney, Public Works Director/City Engineering provided information pertaining to the project. The project consists of a bituminous overlay of 10th Avenue from Harrison Street to Marschall Road, which is approximately 2.1 miles of street, 60 feet in width for most of the road with the exception of an area in front of the High School, which is 68 feet for approximately 800 feet. Also added was bituminous overlay on Homes Street from 10th Avenue to 3rd Avenue. A Official Proceedings of the June 06, 2006 Shakopee City Council Page - 5 - feasibility study was conducted and council accepted it and the public hearing was scheduled. Mr. Loney said there was an information meeting on May 25, 2006 with the property owners affected by this project. Approximately 17 residents attended the meeting with a majority of them in favor of the project. Mr. Loney then showed a Power Point presentation of the project area. The proposed project will consist of milling two inches of existing pavement off along with some full depth patching in certain areas. There will also be some minor repairs to curb and gutter where there are drainage problems. Mr. Loney stated that this is not going to be a reconstruction project where all curbs and driveways are replaced. There will be some minor storm sewer repairs but the intent is to restore the pavement. Shakopee Public Utilities will be repairing 13 water manholes prior to the bituminous project. Mr. Loney said that the usual lifespan of an overlay is around 20 years. Mr. Loney stated that in another 20 years when the overlay would need to be replaced, the curb and gutter would then need to be replaced too. He said that curb and gutter usually last 60 to 70 years. Mr. Loney said that the cost of the project is 1.1 million for street improvement, storm sewer estimated with fixing some of the curb and gutter as well as adding some catch basins for an additional $102,000.00. Total cost of the project $1,202,000.00. Costs will be covered by assessments for $158,000.00 and State aid funds for $850,000. Funds of$102,000.00 from the Storm Sewer Fund will also be used for this project. Mr. Loney spoke of the assessment fees that would be collected. He said that assessment fees will be 25% of a standard 45 width street, which is the width of Holmes Street. Assessments are also on a per-lot basis. Large parcels such as the school and Shakopee Public Utilities were converted those non-residential properties to equivalent residential lots using 60 feet as a front footage and given the equivalent number units times a lot assessments. The remaining costs we are proposing would be paid with state aid funds. One hundred percent of the storm sewer improvements would be paid by our general storm sewer utility fund. The estimated assessment rates per lot would be $774.29. The time line for the project would be after Derby Days, the second week in August and have it finished before school starts at the end of August. Mayor Schmitt asked if the assessment fee of $774.29 is for a full frontage lot. Mr. Loney stated it was for a full frontage lot. Mayor Schmitt then asked if someone had a comer lot on 10th A venue would the assessment fee be half of $774.29. Mr. Loney stated the fee would be half of the interior lots. Council may want to revisit the comer lot assessment policy. Mr. Lehman asked if striping for Holmes Street or 10th Avenue was included in the price. Mr. Loney stated the price is included on the cost estimate. Mr. Loney also stated that in the future if different striping or added striping is needed Public Works has a striping machine and the city could do it for a minor cost. Official Proceedings of the June 06, 2006 Shakopee City Council Page - 6 - Mayor Schmitt then asked if anyone in the audience had any questions regarding the bituminous project on 10th Avenue and Holmes Street. No one responded. Menden/Joos moved to close the public hearing. Motion carried 5-0. Lehman/Clay moved to offer Resolution No. 6428, A Resolution Ordering an Improvement and preparation of Plans and Specifications for the 2006 Bituminous Overlay, Project No. 2006-5, and move its adoption. Motion carried 5-0. Joos/Menden moved to open the public hearing for a Currency Exchange License at Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. Motion carried 5-0. Judy Cox, City Clerk stated that Wal-Mart Super Center has made an application to the Minnesota Department of Commerce for a currency exchange license. Current law requires the City to approve or deny the issuance of a license after publishing notice and a public hearing. Wal-Mart has provided the State with the required $10,000 Currency Exchange Surety Bond. The Shakopee Police Department advised that they have found no reason to object to the granting of the license. Cnc1. Lehman asked what a Currency Exchange License is. Ms. Cox stated that a Currency Exchange License allows the business to cash payroll checks and other limited business regarding banking. Ms. Cox also stated that there is a fee that the user must pay for this service. Cncl. Menden asked if there were other retail business in town that have currency exchange license. Ms. Cox stated that there are two other businesses that also have currency exchange licenses. Mayor Schmitt asked if anyone in the audience wished to spealc No one responded LehmanlJoos moved to close the Public Hearing. Motion carried 5-0. Clay/Lehman offered Resolution No.6427, A Resolution Approving the Application ofWal-Mart Stores, Inc. fora Currency Exchange License, and moved its adoption. Motion carried 5-0. Mayor Schmitt stated that there were two items removed from the Consent Agenda that need to be discussed, the first being an Amendment to City Code Section 11.28, Low Density Residential (R-IA) Zone. Community Development Director, R. Michael Leek stated that it was not staff s expressed intent to reduce the square feet of buildable area. The depth of a lot was reduced by focusing on the area. We could add five feet to the front and side if there is a desire for a larger lot. Cncl. Joos asked Mr. Leek if there was a larger lot the builder could have a larger building. Mr. Leek stated that was correct. Mr. Leek also stated that the lot area is a minimum and not a mandated lot size. Cnc1. Joos stated that at 12,800 square feet the minimum is 3900 square feet for the builder. Mr. Leek stated that was correct for a first floor footprint including the garage. Official Proceedings of the June 06, 2006 Shakopee City Council Page - 7 - Cncl. Lehman stated that he was comfortable with what was stated in the proposed ordinance. Lehman/Menden offered Ordinance No. 763, Fourth Series, An Ordinance of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota, Amending City Code Section 11.28, and move its adoption. Motion carried 5-0. Mayor Schmitt stated that the second item removed from the Consent Agenda was the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) for the Acquisition of Land for Park and Ride Facilities. Cncl. Menden stated that he was the one that asked for this item to be pulled off the Consent Agenda. Cncl. Menden stated that his concern was the parcel on County Road 16 and the fact that Prior Lake is picking up 60 percent of the cost of that but because the property is in the City of Shakopee then why is Prior Lake picking up 60 percent of the cost. If the reason for Prior Lake picking up 60 percent of the cost is because the residence of Prior Lake would utilize the Park and Ride more then is there a more suitable place for the Park and Ride closer to Prior Lake. Mr. Leek stated that knowing that the parcel designated for the Park and Ride (along County Road 16) was going to be divided by County Rmid 21, this left a 23 acre residential remnant. When the Transit Planning Team, which is the staff group that grew out of the transit study, identified sites, CR 16/21 was one of five sites that was looked at. Mr. Leek also stated that the Met Council did some site evaluation on each of the sites. There were no other identified sites in the City of Prior Lake. There was strong interest on the part of the City of Prior Lake and having a site within their boundaries but a specific potential site was not identifiable at that point. When evaluated there was a ranldng and County Road 18 was the most preferred site and the site in question being (along CR 16) the second ranked because of where they fall with the present and future travel shed. Cncl. Menden's otller concern is that with Park and Rides there are some commercial aspects, which is what he doesn't like to seewith every residential area. Mr. Leek said that the Memorandum of Understanding doesn't malce decisions about the land use concern that has been brought up. Mayor Schmitt pointed out that the staffs report is in error. The MOD should state that Shakopee's cost share would be 60% and Prior Lalce would be 40%. Mr. Leek concurred that the memo was in error and Shakopee's cost share would be 60% and Prior Lake's share would be 40%. Clay/Menden moved to authorize the appropriate City officials to. enter into a Memorandum of Understanding between the City of Shakopee, City of Prior Lake, and Scott County for acquisition, ownership and construction of the CR 18 site and acquisition of the CR 16/21 site. Motion carried 5-0. Mayor Schmitt asked for Liaison Reports. Official Proceedings of the June 06, 2006 Shakopee City Council Page - 8 - Cncl. Lehman talked about the visit to the Training Facility in Jordan. Cncl. Lehman spoke about some concerns he brought up to staff regarding the fees cities and the county will be paying to use the facility. Cncl. Lehman then spoke about the Board of Review and Equalization for market values. A few properties were lowered in value. Cncl. Lehman also said he attended a Chamber Meeting. Cncl. Menden said that he attended the Downtown Partnership Meeting. An item he wanted to discuss is an Agenda item. Cncl. Joos attended a Utility Commission Meeting. He said that residents from Hillside Estates talked about their water issue and the costs involved. Also discussed was the approval of the Franchise Agreement with the City of Prior Lake on electrical use. Cncl. Joos also stated that he attended the Training Center in Jordan. He says he agrees with Cncl. Lehman on the financing ofthe facility. Cncl. Clay attended the County Transit Board which covered a lot if information regarding the Park and Ride sites. R. Michael Leek stated that at the last Council Meeting the Council provided him with direction to respond to concerns regarding Amending to City Code Chapter 11, Creating a Mixed Use Zone for the properties in the First A venue/Riverfront Area. Concerns from the last meeting were: . Making the change in the use of an existing structure (e.g. single-family house to commercial/retail use) a condition use; . Maldng residential uses with densities between 8 and 12 units per acre a conditional use; and . Making certain neighborhood commercial uses that have the potential for negative traffic, noise, light or other impacts condition uses. Mr. Leek highlighted the changes he made in Ordinance No. 759, Fourth Series, SEC. 11.25 Mixed Use Zone (MU). Cncl. Joos asked Mr. Leek what he sees as a vision of opening up the riverfront by the changes that were made to the amendments of Creating a Mixed Use Zone. Mr. Leek said that the riverfront is made of R -1 C and R - 2 and B-1. What the change would accomplish is doing away with rezoning issues under the current Code. Cncl. Lehman had a concern with G, 1 of the Ordinance, which states "shall not be a water tower or electrical substation or a building constructed to house sanitary lift station controls." He questioned if there would ever need to be a lift station at the Riverfront site in the future. Mr. Loney responded by stating that there would be no need for a lift station currently because it all runs to the Sanitary Sewer Interceptor over to L16 and then is pumped out. Official Proceedings of the June 06, 2006 Shakopee City Council Page - 9 - Cnc1. Lehman's second question was regarding making residential uses with densities between 8 and 12 units per acre a conditional use. As a conditional use what would prevent having over saturation of this use when it's the vision of the City of Shako pee to open up tlle Riverfront? Mr. Leek stated that the decision would be up to the Council on a case-by-case basis to impose conditions to encourage harmony with single family uses. Mayor Schmitt noted that conditions can be set for a conditional use but not so the use can not exist. He was uncomfortable with the proposed mixed use zone. He suggested the need for the Council members to develop a vision forthe area. Lehman/Clay offered Ordinance No. 759, Fourth Series, an ordinance of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota, Amending City Code Chapter 11, Zoning, by creating a New Zoning Classification, to wit Mixed Use Zone, and moved its adoption. Motion defeated 2-3 with Council members Joos, Menden and Mayor Schmitt dissenting. Lehman/Clay moved to table rezoning properties in the Riverfront/First A venue area to a mixed use zone. Motion carried 5-0. Mr. Leek presented the Council with Associated Capital Corporation's (ACe's) request to re- guide property from Rural Residential to Single Family Resident; rezone from Agricultural Preservation (AG) Zone to Urban Residential (R-1A); and Extension of MUS A. The property is bounded on the east by Marschall Road and on the north by County Road 78. To the north is property that's already been extended MUSA, about 25 acres in size and rezoned to R-1B. The property is owned by the same entity. Mr. Leek stated that City Staff has recommended a consideration ofR-lA, which is also what the Planning Commission has recommended. Mr. Leek stated that the applicant is in agreement with the use ofR-lA zoning on this property now that the lot sizes have been changed. Mr. Menden asked if there was some understanding that SPUC may need to cross this property for a future extension. Mr. Joos stated that the question Mr. Menden asked was correct. He also said that SPUC tries not to run the infrastructure through the County Road right-away if they can avoid it. Mr. Menden asked Mr. Leek what the maximum number of homes that could be put into this parcel. Mr. Leek said that the R-1A zone allows up to three units per acre. Typically in other parcels zoned R-1A it's been around 1 to 1.5 units per acre. Joos/Clay offered Resolution No. 6422, a Resolution of the City of Shako pee Approving a Request to Amend the Comprehensive Plan to Re-guide Property from Rural Residential to Low Density Residential, and to Extend MUSA to Said Property, Which is Located West ofCSAH 17IMarschall Road and South of CSAH 78, and moved its adoption (subject to Metropolitan Council consent or waiver as required); and, offered Ordinance No. 757, Fourth Series, an Ordinance of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota, Amending the Zoning Map Adopted in City Code Sec. 11.03 by Rezoning Land Located West ofCSAH 17IMarschall Road and South of CSAH 78 from Agricultural Preservation (AG) Zone to Low Density Residential (R-IA) Zone, and moved its adoption. Motion carried 5-0. Official Proceedings of the June 06, 2006 Shakopee City Council Page - 10 - Mark Themig, Parks, Recreation, and Facilities Director presented Council with archery range operations plan. Mr. Themig presented the two concepts that are being proposed. The first being the traditional ranges in a row. Access would come from the boat launch and an access road that would be constructed and brought to the archery range site. The access road would cross under the 101 bridge and the old 169 bridge. The second concept plan shows an enhanced range concept. The enhanced range concept is much more family oriented activity to bring opportunities for youth as well as adults into the sport of archery. It contains a mix of different ranges and different shooting opportunities. There are static ranges where people would shoot at a round circle. Then there are different opportunities for beginner as well as intermediate and advanced interactive ranges. They are three-dimensional targets. Under the second concept plan the roadway area has been changed slightly. It doesn't extend as far over, more centrally located and the range makes a better use of the entire site. Mr. Themig said that with both of these plans the creation of the range is contingent on the construction of the boat launch. In order to utilize the access road and the existing easement for the boat launch the City would have to construct the boat launch or the U.S. Fish and Wildlife said that we have to re-negotiate the easement that the City has. The cost ofthe boat launch is unknown until new bids are presented, which will happen at the first meeting in July. Mr. Themig highlighted a few components of the operations plan and discussed some of the costs that are incurred. First, this is a partnership between several organizations; the City of Shal(Qpee, The River Valley Chapter of the Minnesota Deer Hunter's Association (MVCMDHA), local residences, Shakopee Downtown Partnership, as well as a number of civic organizations that indicated they would donate to this project. Other components highlighted were: . Lease with DNR for use of the land would be the responsibility of the City of Shakopee. . Hours of operation would be sunrise to sunset. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife strongly opposes lighting. . Under the Enhanced Range concept the programs become more open to youth, groups and activities. . Fees for Use would be the responsibility of the City and would be worked out in the future. Mr. Themig then discussed the maintenance of the facility. . Target replacement would be the responsibility of the RVCMDHA. The cost would be approximately $5,000 for the standard range and $10,000 for the enhanced range. . Garbage collection would be shared. The volunteers would do general clean up of the site and they City would do the collection. No restrooms are allowed on the site. Proposed would be portable toilets under the Cities cost. . Field/lawn maintenance would be taken care of by volunteers ofRVCMDHA. . No proposal for utilities. Official Proceedings ofthe June 06, 2006 Shakopee City Council Page - 11 - . Accessibility of trails would be maintained by volunteers. . A small picnic shelter has been discussed with building maintenance taken care of by volunteers. No other structures would be permitted due to the site being in a flood plain. . Sign replacement would be the responsibility of the City since the City has a sign shop. . Flood preparation and restoration would be handled by the volunteers however may require some help of the City for target storage, etc. Mr. Themig discussed the commitment of the volunteer group, RVCMDHA. Staff suggested that the City proceed with a pilot program. Basically start up a small range of 6 to 10 targets, see how it goes. At that point the City could make a decision if they would like to proceed with the full-enhanced range. At that point the City would know what the status of the access roads would be. Mr. Themig stated that the Park Board was firm that the archery range should only happen ifthe boat launch comes in. The other recommendation the Park Board had was regarding fees. They believe that if the enhanced range concept is developed the City should have a permitting program where users pay for this facility as they do with some of the Cities other fee-based facilities. Mr. Themig advised the City Council that he is looking for some direction on where to go with this project. Mr. Themig stated that he could then work on a lease with the DNR for the creation of an archery range which would come back before the City Council in July. Cncl. Lehman asked Mr. Themig ifhe knew what the membership fee would haveto be in order to cover the issues outlined. Mr. Themig stated he didn't know the answer because there aren't any use projections at this point. He said that there approximately 250 members in the MVCMDHA and believes that there are many archers that are not associated with MVCMDHA that would also use the facility. Cnc1. Lehman asked ifthe members ofMVCMDHA are willing to pay a membership fee, depending on cost, to use the facility. Mr. Themig stated before a commitment would be made to doing the enhanced range and doing anything permanent at the site, we would get a feel for what kind of use the facility would have by starting with the standard range. Clay/Joos moved to direct staff to pursue with developing a lease agreement with the Minnesota DNR for the creation ofthe archery range. Motion.carried 5-0. Joos/Menden moved to recess for 10 minutes (9:00 p.m.). Motioned carried 5-0. At 9:10 p.m. Mayor Schmitt re-convened the meeting. Mr. Leek presented the Council with a preliminary plat for Ridge Creek. Mr. Leek gave an overview of the location of Ridge Creek plat. It's an 80-acre site in eastern Shakopee which is bordered on the south by Country Road 16, on the west it's bounded by the Shutrop North property, which the City acquired in 2005. On the east it is bounded by the preliminary plat of Riverside Bluffs. The north property line is the existing right-of-way that the County owns for future County Road 21. Official Proceedings of the June 06, 2006 Shakopee City Council Page - 12 - Mr. Leek stated that the proposed plat is for a single-family development consisting of about 153 lots. On the map Mr. Leek pointed out the existing Prior Lake/Spring Lake Watershed District outlet channel. The plat contains only single family lots ranging in size from 74 feet in width and 140 feet in depth to other lots which range up to 15,000 to 21,000 square feet. Mr. Leek stated the application for the preliminary plat was initially received in November, 2005. There have been a number of review extensions and the current extension ends on July 1, 2006. Mr. Leek stated that the plat application comes with the recommendation from staff and from the Planning Commission to deny the application. The Planning Commission has identified several unresolved issues associated with the request: 1. The Environmental Advisory Committee (EAC) recommended that the applicant provide wetland mitigation either offsite but within the Lower Minnesota Watershed District (LMWSD) or if this option was not available, the applicant would be required to complete wetland mitigation completely on-site 2. Prior Lake/Spring Lake Outlet channel construction issues, Le. the developer has been asked to pay the basic cost of grading the new channel, but does not wish to pay for that cost. 3. Site grading issues; Specifically, the developer wishes to grade the site in phases. City staff does not support this alternative and would require the developer to grade the entire site, as well as provide access directly from CSAH 16 across the site for trucks hauling fill, rather than using other adjacent City streets. At the Planning Commission meeting on May 18, 2006 the applicant stated he was in negotiations with a property owner within the LMWD to acquire land for the off-site wetland mitigation. At this time staff has not received any confirmation of whether or not the applicant will be able to accommodate the wetland mitigation off-site. The applicant has not provided any revised drawings to indicate how the mitigation could occur on-site. The City has not received a response from the applicant on how he intends to proceed regarding wetland mitigation, and because he has not complied with the EAC recommendations, the plat is not approvable in its present form. Mr. Leek also stated that these items are not resolved and because of the July 1st deadline for action by the City Council, and because it is consistent with the Planning Commission recommendation, city staff has asked for direction to propose a resolution of denial. Mayor Schmitt asked the applicant ifhe had anything to add. Randy Noecker, the developer of Ridge Creek addressed the Council. Mr. Noecker stated he has worked on this project for many months with regard to changes and redrafts. Changes included in the plan are a park trail along the creek, the physical construction of the creek as shown on the plan, and mitigation off-site. Mr. Noecker stated that at aPark Board meeting he suggested a creek park trail subject to the approval of the existing plan. Mr. Noecker suggested this because in November, 2005 he submitted a plan with mitigation on-site. Mr. Noecker then said that in December, 2005 he was told to attend a technical evaluation panel meeting. At that meeting, Mr. Noecker stated that he was instructed to mitigate off-site. Mr. Noecker stated that he submitted a plan with mitigation Official Proceedings of the June 06, 2006 Shakopee City Council Page - 13 - off-site on February 22,2006 at a cost of approximately $14,000 re-doing that plan. Mr. Noecker said that he called for comments but didn't receive any until April 12, 2006 at a DRC meeting. At that meeting he was told that he should now mitigate on-site. Mr. Noecker stated he was frustrated. At the April 24, 2006 Park Board meeting and the EAC meeting Mr. Noecker offered to install the park trail along the creek and do the physical construction of the creek with the condition that he could use the plan with the mitigation off-site. Mr. Noecker stated that 21.2 percent of the entire property is dedicated to pond, park and channel on the property. Mr. Noecker stated that he has located two possible sites for wetland mitigation within the LMWSD. The first property owner wants to sell and the second property owner is unsure of a price. Mr. Noecker then stated that he signed a contract for an off-site wetland mitigation site but the City refused to accept it. Mr. Noecker is assuming that the City Council could make the 3.5 acres of off site mitigation a condition of approval. Mr. Noecker stated that he hesitates signing another contract to purchase a site at this time that might be denied by the City. Mr. Noecker requested that he has the ability to mitigate in the LMWSD like the City has done for their lower Minnesota mitigation, which is the Prior Lake/Spring Lake District. Mr. Noecker also stated that the creek construction is an expensive endeavor because it's large. Mr. Noecker said that he estimated the cost to be approximately $150,000 which he is not in favor of. Mr. Noecker stated the he is willing to do this plan with the creek correction and the creek park trail with off-site mitigation. He asked for the opportunity to mitigate in Prior Lake/Spring Lake Watershed District if the Council is willing. Mr. Noecker said that he has no desire to build the creek park trail unless the plan is accepted with off-site mitigation. Cncl. Lehman asked Mr. Noecker why he didn't plan the site with on-site mitigation. Mr. Noecker stated that he did but was asked to change it to off-site mitigation in a December meeting, as requested by the Park & Recreation Advisory Board, saving 100 trees. Mr. Leek stated that, when the first plan was reviewed by Engineering Staff, staff concluded that it didn't make a lot of sense to have several ponding locations. At that time Staff asked the Applicant to combine them into one or two major ponding areas. The Applicant unilaterally decided that the wetland mitigation would not work. Mr. Leek said there was a Technical Evaluation Panel convened and the Technical Panel was okay with mitigation occurring off-site within the watershed district, onsite, and on/off-site in some combination. The fmal decision under the Wetland Conservation Act rests with the City as the local governmental unit (LGU). Mr. Leek said that the Applicant was not specifically told to mitigate off-site. Mr. Leek said that the first site that he brought to the panel that was off-site wasn't even in Scott County. To date staff has no specifics regarding locations Mr. Noecker's looking at for mitigation. Mayor Schmitt asked Mr. Leek what determines where the mitigation should occur. Mr. Leek stated that the Wetland Conservation Act was put in place to preserve wetlands as an important natural resource. In terms of replacement there is a preference within the Act and the regulations for mitigation which has the likelihood of replacing the value that the wetland had in the natural Official Proceedings of the June 06, 2006 Shakopee City Council Page - 14 - system. By proposing a replacement that was outside of these watershed districts Mr. Noecker is talking about today didn't address the basic policy intent. Again Mr. Leek stated that Mr. Noecker has not provided the specifics about the off-site mitigation sites he is talking about. Cnc1. Lehman stated to Mr. Noecker that ifhe were unable to find an off-site mitigation area that's acceptable then the alternative would be to have it on-site. Mr. Noecker stated that he has an off-site area in the LMWSD. Cnc1. Lehman then asked where the off-site location is. Mr. Noecker offered to give the information regarding the off-site area but not in the public forum. Cnc1. Joos is concerned about the grading issue since it hasn't been discussed. Mr. Noecker stated that he doesn't have a problem with doing the entire site grading at once. Mr. Noecker stated that he does not want to phase the property and that all of the grading would be done over a period of time with houses being built on the south side of the property first. Mr. Loney stated that there needs to be a lot offill in the lower part of the property and does not desire any houses being build until all ofthe grading is done on the entire property. Mr. Loney also stated that the process Mr. Noecker stated has never been brought to Staffs attention. Mayor Schmitt stated that with Mr. Noecker's plan of grading not being documented, he is recommending that Mr. Noecker needs have all the details of his plans documented and reviewed by Staff in a satisfactorily manner before July 18, 2006. Cncl. Lehman asked Mr. Noecker ifhe would be willing to, in writing, allow an extension to July 18,2006. Mr. Noecker stated he would do that. Cncl. Menden asked whether, based on the issues before the Council, there would be an adequate amount of time to try to address any issues that may arise. Mr. Leek stated that it all depends on what information is presented by Mr. Noecker. Cncl. Joos said that this entire issue is getting irritating in that every time Mr. Noecker comes before the City Council the same issues keep arising. Cnc1. Joos told Mr. Noecker that this is the last time the Council will be negotiating a plat. encl. Menden concurred. Lehman/Joos moved to continue the plat application for Ridge Creek to July 18, 2006 pending receipt of an extension letter from the Applicant by June 20, 2006. Motion carried 5-0. Mr. Leek presented the Council with a Petition by Ryan Contracting/DR Horton for the Annexation of Land in Jackson Township. The 350-acre parcel is located south of Highway 169 and west of Marystown Road (CSAH 15). Mr. Leek stated that atthe last Council meeting this item was tabled to allow for discussion with a full council. Tim Keane of Ryan Contracting/DR Horton addressed the Council with information regarding the 320-acre master plan of their master plan community. Mr. Keane estimate a five to seven year build out for the project to be completed. Joos/Lehman offered Ordinance No. 761, Fourth Series, An Ordinance relating to the Annexation of Certain Property, and moved its adoption. Official Proceedings of the June 06, 2006 Shakopee City Council Page - 15 - Discussion followed the motion. Cncl. Menden's concern is that he feels that the City's housing stock is high enough that the city doesn't need to annex the property at this time. Cncl. Joos stated he likes the concept of a master development as well as the school property being included in the plan. Cnc1. Clay asked if anyone has talked to the school district to see what their current student projection is for the need of an elementary school. Mayor Schmitt advised that he spoke to the Superintendent of Shakopee Schools who stated that are seriously interested in the property offered by Ryan Contracting. Mayor Schmitt also is concerned that the City needs to have their five percentpart of sewer capacity allocation. Motion carried 4-0 with Councilor Menden dissenting. Mr. Leek presented the Council with an Appeal of the Board of Adjustment and Appeals Determination on Allowable Building Materials for Valleyfair, located at One Valleyfair. Valleyfair has filed an appeal of the Board of Adjustment and Appeals (BOAA) decision concerning a variance to allow for the construction of (2) 40' by32' steel sided buildings at their property. The application noted that the proposed buildings would remain consistent with existing steel structures and by doing this it would not draw attention to the proposed buildings. They also noted that this view of the park along Highway 101 is a service area, and that they are presently looking into additional landscaping in this area in an effort to enhance the appearance of the park from Highway 101. The BOAA denied the variance with a 4-3 vote. Valleyfair is now making their appeal to the Council. Larry McKenzie, General Manager ofValleyfair, stated to the Council that Valleyfair fully supports the spirit of the ordinance but they felt that in this particular case the support buildings would not be either a dominant feature on the property nor materially attract or stand out in a current look in a material way. Valleyfair's intent is to maintain consistency to be somewhat subtle and blend these buildings in with other existing buildings. Mr. McKenzie stated that if the appeal is granted, the Park would line the visibility site area from the highway with Pine or shade trees. Cnc1. Menden asked Mr. McKenzie if there would be adequate room to install Pine trees or shade trees. Mr. McKenzie stated that there would be enough room. Cncl. Lehman asked if the building has a color to it other than being a primer color. Mr. McKenzie stated that the building would be a tan color. Cncl. Joos had a concern regarding the material standards that the City upholds. Mr. Leek stated that there is a provision that allowed for a cement material on the street facing side. When the last change was instituted it applied to all sides of commercially related buildings. Joos/Lehman moved to direct staffto prepare a resolution supporting a variance to allow for the construction of two (2) 40' by 32' steel sided buildings at One VaUeyfair Drive, with the highway side to be in conformance with City Code building materials and with landscaping and trees to mitigate the appearance from the south. Motion carried 4-1. Official Proceedings of the June 06, 2006 Shakopee City Council Page-16- Bruce Kimball ofSpringsted presented the Council with the results of2006A G.O. Improvement Bond bids. Mr. Kimball stated that the winning bid went to Stifel, Nicolaus & Co., Inc. with an interest rate of 3.9437 percent. Mr. Kimball stated that a month ago their recommendations projected a rate of 4.23 percent, and this is 29 basis points better than they had projected. Menden/Joos offered a Resolution No. 6426, A Resolution Awarding The Sale of $3,440,000 General Obligation Improvement Bonds, Series 2006A, Fixing Their Form and Specifications, Directing Their Execution And Delivery; and Providing For Their Payment, and moved its adoption. Motion carried 5-0. Bruce Loney, Public Works Director asked the City Council to consider an ordinance pertaining to the installation of grease interceptors and amending Section 3.10 of the City Code. Mr. Loney stated that the City created a sanitary sewer policy in April 2005, which established guidelines for maintenance and inspection of the system, an emergency response, reductions to inflow/infiltration, training, work schedules, weather conditions, and documentation. This was created on the recommendation from the League of MN Cities. The League is also recommending that cities require grease interceptors for places that prepare food for the public. These include schools, restaurants, cafes, dining rooms, hotels, motels, bars, taverns and other related businesses. Generally the grease is washed down the drain as a liquid when it is hot. After it enters our sewer system, it cools and hardens which reduces or even blocks sewage flow resulting in a sewer back up. Mike Hullander, Public Works Supervisor, presented the Council with a PowerPoint presentation regarding the implementation of grease interceptors. The presentation included video of a sewer line partially blocked three months after being cleaned. Discussion followed. Clay/Menden directed staff to include in the ordinance requiring grease interceptors: 1) criteria for restaurants that would be exempt and exempt those that meet the criteria, and 2) requiring the installation of grease interceptors within 18 months rather than three years, to be brought back to the Council at a later date. Motion carried 5-0. Joos/Menden moved to extend the meeting five minutes. Motion carried 5-0. Mr. Loney presented the Council with information on the C.R. 101 Reconstruction Project regarding undergrounding of power and street lights. He described the area as C.R. 101 from CSAH 17 to the Mill Pond Bridge. He said that he has met with Shakopee Public Utilities. Mr. Loney is recommending temporary street lighting on three overhead power poles, putting 1 % inch street light conduit behind both sides of the curbs for future street lights, and putting in three 3-inch conduits under C.R. 101 in three locations for future undergrounding of the power lines. Mr. Loney estimated the cost to be about $22,000 and stated that this will set the City up for street lights and the future undergrounding of power; and, maybe there could be some cost sharing of the underground conduits for future undergrounding from Shalwpee Public Utilities. Official Proceedings of the June 06, 2006 Shakopee City Council Page - 17 - Joos/Lehman moved to approve staff's proposal to put in conduit underneath C.R. 101 from CSAH 17 to the Mill Pond Bridge for future street lights and for future undergrounding of the power lines and doing the temporary lights on the poles and to determine the lights at a later time and directed staff to consider the cost sharing with Shakopee Public Utilities. Motion carried 5- O. Joos/Lehman moved to adjourn the meeting to Wednesday, June 7, 2006 at 7:00 p.m. Motioned carried 5-0. The meeting wa~ adjourned at 11 :25 p.m. t;jJ4d.O{ (;I ith S. Cox, lty Clerk Kim Weckman, Recording Secretary OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL ADJ. REGULAR SESSION SHAKOPEE,NITNNESOTA JUNE 7, 2006 Mayor John J. Schmitt called the meeting to order at 7:08 p.m. with Council members Steve Clay, Terry Joos, Matt Lehman, and Steve Menden present. Also present: Mark McNeill, City Administrator; Jim Thomson, City Attorney; Judith S. Cox, City Clerk;R. Michael Leek, Community Development Director; Bruce Loney, City Engineer/Public Works Director; and Gregg V oxland, Finance Director. JooslMenden moved to recess for an executive session to discuss pending litigation. Motion carried 5-0. Mayor Schmitt re-convened the meeting at 8:30 p.m. Lehman/Menden moved for a five minute recess. Motion carried 5-0. Mayor Schmitt re-convened the meeting at 8:27p.m. Jessie Hart, Springsted Inc., presented copies of her DRAFT Cost of Services Study for 2005 relating to building permits.and development. She explained the methodology used and how a bench mark cost was derived at for the various building permits. Ms. Hart provided copies of the summary of Actua12005 Building and Construction Fees Revenues and Expenses. She identified certain permits and compared the frequency of the issuance of the permits, costs for the permits, bench mark fee for the permits and the excess revenue collected. Ms. Hart provided copies of a Reconciliation from Model to Almual Report ( Actual 12/31/05) which identified the indirect cost allocations. She explained that the indirect allocations are those costs that are incurred for a common or joint purpose benefiting more than one service or activity and not readily assignable to the service or activity benefited, such as maintenance of government buildings, information tec1mology, etc. She said that this reconciliation from model to annual report is part of the model that will generate information for each year. Ms. Hart then responded to questions raised by the Council members. Mr. Joe Springer, Attorney for the Builders Association of the Twin Cities (BATC), asked Ms. Hart what work remained to put the draft Cost of Services Study in final form. Ms. Hart responded and advised that it would be presented to the City Council on June 20, 2006. Lehman/Joos moved to adjourn to June 20, 2006, at 7:00 p.m. Motion carried 5-0. . J ~ ~~~~ox: Ci~ lerk R cording Secretary