HomeMy WebLinkAbout7. Approval of Minutes: August 14, and 19, 2003
OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL
ADJ. REGULAR SESSION SHAKOPEE,MINNESOTA AUGUST 14, 2003
Mayor Mars called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. with Council members Lehman, Joos, Link
and Helkarnp present. Also present were: Mark McNeill, City Administrator; Judith S. Cox, City
Clerk, Bruce Loney, Public Works Director/City Engineer; Gregg Voxland, Finance Director;
Mark Themig, Facilities and Recreation Director; Terry Stang, Fire Chief and Dan Hughes, Chief
of Police.
Mr. McNeill, City Administrator, reported on the reconstruction of the alley north of the new
Library Building. Mr. McNeill noted that this alley needed to be reconstructed and the contract
need to be awarded because if the alley were not worked on there would be some drainage
problems and the alley was not in good shape to begin with for the increase in traffic that was
anticipated. The contract did not call for this work to be done but it did call for a transition three
(3) foot bituminous curb to go along the south side. Mr. McNeill noted three quotes were taken
to see what the reconstruction would cost. The low bid carne in at $8,945 with the top bid being
$12,850; the funding for this reconstruction would be a combination ofthe Street Department's
maintenance budget and some funds from the Library contingeney fund. Mr. McNeill
recommended that a contract be awarded to Bituminous Roadways, Inc. for $8,945. It was noted
that this reconstruction would be for the whole alley.
Joos/Link moved to authorize award of a contract in the amount of $8,945 to Bitunlinous
Roadways, Inc., for the reconstruction of the east/west alley adjacent to the library site for the
entire length of the block. Motion carried 5-0.
Mr. Themig, Facilities and Recreation Director, reported on a change order for Pheasant Run
Park. There were two items that needed to be brought to the Council's attention. The first item
related to a sidewalk issue with this park because of the reduction in a retaining wall. Several
options were explored to remedy this sidewalk situation. The best option was determined to be
that the sidewalk needed to be lowered (approximately two feet) to the original design in order
for water to flow properly to prevent homes located to the south from flooding in the event of a
large water event.
The second issue was that the Pheasant Run Park needed to be completed. It appeared that
several items were left to be completed. Several options were discussed to get this project
completed. A quote of $8,000 was provided by the original contractor to complete this work
(this work had not been included in the original contract). Because the other options were not
available until some future time, Mr. Themig recommended that Mom's Landscaping do the
work so the park could get done and be used by the residents.
Mr. Themig noted that if a culvert were used the culvert would be a small culvert and this small
culvert then had the chance of freezing. Mr. Themig noted that using a larger culvert would end
up costing more than reinstalling the sidewalk (50 feet to 80 feet). It was not necessary to have
Official Proceedings of the August 14, 2003
Shakopee City Council Page -2-
the sidewalk ADA compliant because there was access from two street sides. The access on the
other side was ADA compliant and one side was sufficient to meet ADA requirements.
There was discussion on the amount of the slope (grade) for this sidewalk. It was also noted that
this type facility was not used much in the wintertime and if the grade were too much then
perhaps the park should not be plowed in the wintertime.
LinklLehman moved to authorize a change order in the amount of $8,489.50 in favor Mom's
Landscaping and Design to reinstall drain tile that was damaged during installation of the
equipment, final grade and cleanup of the play area, install fabric and place wood chips in each
of the play areas, install the benches, remove and replace the sidewalk to address possible water
issues and water the sod and seed.
Cncl. Lehman felt that this project needed to get done. Cncl. Lehman would like City staff to
take a look at the engineering plans done by Mom's Landscaping and Design before any work
was done so the work would be done correctly this time. Cncl. Link noted that the project
needed to move forward.
Ann O'Laughlin, 1962 Cardinal Drive, approached the podium and noted she was on the Board
to do this project. She addressed the reason the Park was over budget. She noted originally this
park was just to be a sitting park with no playground. She noted the residents wanted a park with
play equipment. Mr. Loney noted that the Engineering Department was not asked to do
inspections. Ms. O'Laughlin figured there was a lot ofmiscornrnunication regarding this project.
Motion carried 4-1 with Cncl. Joos dissenting.
Mr. Gregg V oxland, Finance Director, opened the FY04 budget discussion. There were two
areas for discussion on vehicles/equipment. These were: 1) the actual vehicle/equipment list and
2) what was the actual criteria to be used to determine if the equipment needed to purchased this
year. Mr. Voxland noted that there was a list ofvehic1es proposed to be replaced as well as
completed evaluation forms on each vehicle.
Mr. V oxland noted that when a squad car was replaced it was normally kept by the City for some
other City use or if not needed by the City it was then sold at auction. There was discussion on
the amount of money received for these police cars that were sold at auction. Mr. V oxland noted
that it was his opinion that these police cars were to tired to be sold to a small town as a police
vehicle. Mr. V oxland noted that if a vehicle were received in 2004 it would impact the 2005
budget.
Police Chief Hughes was asking for three (3) squad cars to be replaced and for one additional
squad car for new police officers. The Police Chief stated that he thought when a first line Police
car had 85,000/1 00,000 miles it was time for it to be replaced or a risk was then taken for first
Official Proceedings of the August 14, 2003
Shakopee City Council Page -3-
response time. The Police Chief did state that the 4-wheel drive to replace the Suburban could be
deferred for a year or two. It was noted that if a police car broke down responding to a call that
was a public safety issue.
Mr. V oxland discussed the equipment asked for by the Fire Department. Fire Chief Stang
approached the podium and explained how the 1986 Henrickson truck was used. Chief Stang
stated that he would like to keep the new Telesquirt truck in the 2004 budget. When the Fire
Station was up and running in the Southbridge area, he figured that would be the perfect unit for
out there. He would like to do more research on this unit. As far as keeping the 1986 truck, that
truck would serve well for a third unit out, but for what the truck was needed for now it was not
working out.
As far as replacing the boat, that boat had tubes that were leaking. There was more equipment
being loaded on the boat than actually there was room for. However, he would consider keeping
the motor for the boat; that was the expensive part of buying a boat in the first place.
Chief Stang noted that when the equipment now used by the Fire Department was purchased, it
was state of the art. The turn around time for the major equipment for the Fire Department was
about 15 to 18 years. Chief Stang stated the inflation cost each year was about 10% to replace a
vehicle. It was noted that if a piece of Fire Equipment broke down responding to a call that too
was a public safety issue.
Mr. Voxland noted that there was a rescue truck in the Fire Department's budget that had been in
the budget since 2002 for replacement; it looked like that would not happen in 2004 either.
Chief Stang noted this was a rescue truck.
Mr. V oxland noted it needed to be decided what criteria was going to be used to determine when
a piece of equipment needed to be replaced. What was the determining factor going to be,
condition of the vehicle or the number of miles the vehicle had. Cncl. Link was concerned about
the reliability of the equipment
Mr. V oxland noted that the Engineering Department was not requesting any new equipment this
year.
The Street Department was requesting a sign truck. Mr. Loney, Public Works Director/City
Engineer, stated this would be a nice truck to have so equipment could be stored on it and
equipment would not be forgotten. As the City grew it would be come even more necessary to
have this type truck. The council discussed this truck and wondered if it would be possible to
share this type truck with the county or other cities.
Mr. V oxland addressed the I ~ ton truck with a utility box and noted this truck would be an
addition to the fleet and would be used for sign maintenance. If need be a used truck could be
Official Proceedings of the August 14,2003
Shakopee City Council Page -4-
looked for or it could be postponed. Staff was going to see if Shakopee Public Utilities had this
type truck that need to be replaced and the City could buy it. Cncl. Joos suggested using SCALE
for this type truck. It made sense to do this, as the City grew larger. Mr. Loney suggested that
this be left in the budget but that staff should look for other options.
Mr. Voxland addressed the Park Maintenance request for a small traetor, tow behind mower and
I-ton pick up. It was requested that the I-ton pick up be four-wheel drive because this vehicle
was used to haul much equipment. This pick up could be a multi-purpose vehicle. Mr. Loney
noted the existing tractor was in pretty good shape and there should be good salvage value for the
tractor. He wanted to upgrade the tractor and get a 16-foot attachment mower because of the
amount and size of parks.
Mr. Voxland noted that the next item to discuss was the storm drainage fund equipment. Here a
Tanker ($100,000) was being requested and a Screener/pulverizer ($40,000). Mr. Loney noted
this tanker was a heavily used vehicle. The City had this piece of equipment for 17 years; if the
tank were fixed, it was thought then some other major parts might go. This piece had been kept
beyond normal replacement guidelines because it had been performing well. It is time for it to
go now. The screener/pulverizer was a new piece of equipment that was being requested. This
was used for screening materials and would be used to make better soil for the parks. Mr. Loney
noted this piece of equipment could be shared with other cities. This could also be rented. He
would check into these options.
Mr. V oxland pointed out the Council may wish to review the vehicle acquisition, use and
replacement policy and discuss a current list of items that rent was being collected on for the
Capital Equipment Internal Service Fund. The Council may want to discuss the charges and the
way the rent was determined on the equipment that was funded into this account. Mr. V oxland
discussed the replacement percentage rate.
Mr. McNeill noted that a third mechanic had been added this year to take care of the Fire
Department Equipment. This position has been working out well. Chief Stang noted the Public
Works mechanics were doing a bang up job.
Mr. Voxland explained the schedule for the 2004 General Fund Revenue estimates. Mr. Voxland
noted there were two areas to focus on. These were: I) development fees and engineering and
engineering grade fees and 2) taxes.
Mr. Voxland stated it was not in the City's best interest to be dependent on these development
fees for operating expenses and operations. Mr. V oxland stated that the City had been depending
less and less on this fee; the percentage was dropping. The schedule tonight shows a dependence
of 16% on development fees. If the City wanted to use the same percentage as last year (18%)
then $270,000 could be added back into the budget.
Official Proceedings of the August 14, 2003
Shakopee City Council Page -5-
Mr. V oxland showed a graphic representing the taxes and showing a loss of the state aids. He
noted which Debt Service Levy's had been cancelled every year. Mr. Voxland noted a potential
change that the Council may want to consider. It was noted that the Council could special levy
for the Metropolitan Council Environments services debt service. There was a limit as to how
much could be levied from the general levy. Mr. Voxland noted that even though taxpayers saw a
reduction in their tax bill for market value credit the State would not be giving that money to the
City. The budget figure of tax revenue was almost $7,000,000. There was a way to shift some
of this money around. This would be for one year only and would possibly be needed to be
looked at again next year.
Mr. Voxland noted that for a house whose value went up 12% and the tax capacity went up 16%
the taxes would go up 10.5% (this is for a year). Council needed to decide how they wanted to
manage taxing the houses. If this Council, like past Councils, wanted to keep the dollar tax
burden the same, as each house had this year, that would be more challenging this year. Mr.
V oxland noted the average house price in the City of Shakopee including townhomes was
$175,000. If the townhomes were removed the average price would be about $190,000.
Mr. V oxland noted that right now it was estimated the utility contributions would be about
$1,175,00,00. Total income would be approximately $12,236,950. Mr. Voxland stated that there
was still some fine tuning to do to the budget but right now the budget was roughly balanced.
Currently, the City was collecting more for development fees than had been budgeted for in
2003. Mr. V oxland noted that by September 15th the City had to certify a maximum tax levy to
the County. Mr. Voxland noted that when the actual tax levy was set in December, the tax levy
could come down from the maximum amount of levy now projected but it could not be
increased. This was the number that was used to generate the truth and taxation notices sent out
to property owners.
Mayor Mars noted to Mr. V oxland that it was early in the process but the numbers did look
encouraging compared to other cities. Cncl. Joos noted he was much more comfortable with the
budget after seeing these figures than before he saw the figures. Cncl. Lehman stated that the
Council had been proactive at the beginning and between the Couneil and Mr. V oxland the City
was in relatively good shape compared to other cities. Mr. McNeill noted there were still some
tough choices ahead.
Chief Hughes noted that the Police Department was a service industry. About 10% of the police
calls were crime related and about 90% was service business related to helping people. They
were trying to enhance the quality of life in the City of Shakopee. The Police Department had
excellent partnerships within the City. Chief Hughes presented several graphs via the document
camera. He noted the Shakopee Police Department had many, many more calls for service than
other Police Departments in neighboring cities. Shakopee generated many customers for the
Scott County jail; Shakopee contributed l,300 customers last year and the next largest amount
was 700 from the City of Savage. The calls for service continued to climb 5% to 6% each
Official Proceedings of the August 14, 2003
Shakopee City Council Page -6-
month. Chief Hughes noted the opening of the by-pass was a big reason for the increase of calls
for service.
Chief Hughes noted many of the arrests did not involve people who lived in Shakopee. Chief
Hughes stated that the reported crimes went up in 1.6% in 2002 over 2001; the reported crimes
were up substantially in 2003. All in all the City of Shakopee was a very safe place to live and
do business. It was noted that many times Shakopee was the first responder for calls for service
out on the by-pass. Chief Hughes noted many, many people came to the Police Department for
advice and to file reports. The Police Officers wrote over 3000 citations alone last year,
excluding DWI's. It was noted that there were about 60% as many juvenile arrests as there were
adult arrests.
Chief Hughes stated that citations were down about 10% this year and DWI's were down
slightly. Juvenile arrests were up 22% (thru June) and adult arrests were up 77%.
Chief Hughes stated he was requesting three (3) police officers positions be added. He noted that
he hoped to bring the Council in early September consideration to accept the award from the
COPS office, the universal hiring program grant. If Council decided to accept this grant it would
bring in $225,000 over a three year period. This would help offset the cost ofthree additional
police officers. The expectation was that these officers would still have a full-time job with the
Shakopee Police Department after the three years was up and then it would be the City's
responsibility to fund these positions. Angela Trutnau, Shakopee police officer, wrote this grant
application. Only 181 City's in the nation received this grant; only three in the State of
Minnesota received this grant and the City of Shakopee received the largest award. Mr. McNeill
noted that the three police officers requested through the grant program had not been figured into
the budget at this time. Mayor Mars noted that when the City held the joint meeting with the
schools it was a very important item to the schools that these officers be hired.
Chief Hughes noted that the Police Department did a workload analysis for what took place in
2002 and that analysis showed that the Shakopee Police Department should have at least 36
police officers. At this time, the Shakopee Police Department has 33 positions filled.
The increase in the Police Budget for supplies and services was directly related to the new police
building. It was noted by Chief Hughes the capital request this year was for an outdoor warning
siren. Chief Hughes noted that he would follow-up and see if the sirens the City now had had
battery backup capability.
Mr. Loney reported on the a Resolution restricting parking on Vierling Drive, from CSAH 15 to
Fuller Street. Mr. Loney noted that Vierling Drive was a State Aid Highway that was designed
for four lanes and was not adequate for parking. A resolution restricting this parting needed to be
passed by the Council so State Aid Funds could be utilized.
Official Proceedings of the August 14, 2003
Shakopee City Council Page -7-
Joos/Lehman offered Resolution No. 5919, A Resolution Restricting Parking On Vierling Drive,
From County State Aid Highway 15 To Fuller Street, Project No. 2002-4, and moved its
adoption. Motion carried 5-0.
Mr. McNeill reported on the budget request for the Mayor and the Council. In the Budget for the
Mayor and Council the major expenditures were primarily salaries for the Mayor, four (4)
Council members, the recording secretary and printing and publishing. The printing and
publishing contained expenses for printing the Hometown Messenger in the Parks and Recreation
booklet rather than having the Hometown Messenger printed as a stand alone magazine as had
been done in the past. Mr. McNeill felt this was a cost effective way to get information out to the
residents. Mr. McNeill suggested that the City not participate in the coalition of Utilities Cities.
This would save about $3,000. Mr. McNeill noted that this budget was almost identical to last
year's budget.
Cncl. Joos addressed the wages for the Mayor and Council members. Cncl. Joos noted that the
City of Shakopee was significantly behind the average in the Metropolitan area regarding wages
for their Mayor and their Council members. Cncl. Joos felt it was time to address this issue. The
proposed increase would not affect his salary; this was for future Mayors and Councils. This
issue was talked about last year and never got any place; the City was just falling more behind
according to the study (study was from the League of Minnesota Cities). He felt the Mayors and
Councilor's salaries should be at least the average in the Metropolitan area. Mayor Mars would
like to see some figures on this impact. Cncl. Lehman noted he would like to see a per diem per
meeting studied in addition to the budget impact of an increase of the salaries. Mr. McNeill
would follow-up on these two ideas.
Some of the Councilors felt there should be no increase to salaries because services were being
cut.
Joos/Link moved to adjourn to Tuesday August 19,2003 at 7:00 p.m. Motion carried 5-0. The
meeting adjourned at 9:20 p.m.
U~~x J c+
City Clerk
Carole Hedlund
Recording Secretary
OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL
ADJ. REG. SESSION SHAKOPEE,MINNESOTA AUGUST 19,2003
Mayor Mars called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. with Council members Link, Joos, Lelunan
and Helkamp present. Alsopresent: Mark McNeill, City Administrator; Judith S. Cox, City
Clerk; R. Michael Leek, Community Development Director; Bruce Loney, Public Works
Director/City Engineer; Gregg V oxland, Finance Director; Jim Thomson, City Attorney; Dan
Hughes, Police Chief and Terry Stang, Fire Chief.
The pledge of allegiance was recited.
The following items were added to the agenda. 15.C.10 Authorize staffto apply for Pedestrian
Bridge and Railroad Crossing Grant Funding, 15.F. 6 Cancel City Council Workshop for August
20, 2003, and Change the Start Time of the August 26, 2003, City Council meeting to 6:20 p.m.
and 15.F.? Notification of Two Shakopee Public Utilities Commission Resignations.
Helkamp/Lehman moved to approve the Agenda as amended. Motion carried 5-0.
Mayor Mars reported that Wednesday, August 20,2003, he would be cutting the ribbon and the
Pedestrian Bridges would be dedicated. The public was invited as well as the Councilors.
Mayor Mars noted these bridges were a great addition to the community. Mayor Mars gave the
publication on Balancing Growth in the City of Ramsey to Council members and the Planning
Commission and staff. This publication highlighted blending businesses and lifestyles with
urban and natural open spaces appeal within a community. Mayor Mars also noted the
Association of Metropolitan Municipalities was working on a recommendation and policy for the
State Legislature next year regarding the market value credit.
The following items were added to the Consent Agenda. The Minutes for June 30t\ 2003, City
Council meeting were taken off the Consent Agenda because Cncl. Link did not attend that
meeting. IS.C.IO Authorize staff to apply for Pedestrian Bridge and Railroad Crossing Grant
Funding, 15.F.6 Cancel City Council Workshop for August 20, 2003, and Change the Start Time
of the August 26,2003, City Council meeting to 6:20 p.m.
LehmanlHelkamp moved to approve the Consent Agenda as amended. Motion carried 5-0.
Mayor Mars asked if there were any citizens present in the audience who wished to address any
item not on the agenda. There was no response.
Lehman/Helkamp moved to approve the meeting minutes for July I, 2003. (Motion carried
under the Consent Agenda).
Joos/Lehman moved to approve the June 30, 2003, meeting minutes. Motion carried 4-0 with
Cncl. Link abstaining.
Official Proceedings of the August 19,2003
Shakopee City Council Page -2-
LehmanlHelkamp moved to approve the bills in the amount of$I,239,054.53 plus $303,136.73
for refunds, returns and pass through for a total of $1,542,191.26. (Motion carried under the
Consent Agenda). [The list of bills is posted on the bulletin board at City Hall for one month
following approval].
Cncl. Lehman noted he attended the ground breaking for the new Apple Ford location on Weston
Court. The building in its concept form looked very nice.
Cncl. Joos noted he attended the School Board meeting where reports from various school
principals were given along with some other school reports.
Cncl. Link noted he attended the Shakopee Public Utilities Commission (SPUC) meeting August
18,2003, and SPUC was still discussing water connection charges. Mr. Link noted builder's felt
they were being penalized because the City could not process their building permits by the date
the new rate took effect and they then needed to pay the higher rate. Cncl. Link noted the wells
for the soccer complex located in the land now owned by SunPath School was discussed.
Mr. McNeill noted that staff would be meeting with some the residents in the area to let them
know what was being done as far as the wells were concerned. Mr. McNeill noted that at this
time the City was doing what it could to accommodate SPUC's need for a well on the soccer
complex and school property in this area. The Joint Powers agreement that was passed at the
Council meeting two weeks ago was contingent on all four parties having their agreements in
order. Obviously this did not happen. Cncl. Link noted SPUC had a site out on County Road 17
and this also may be considered for a well site now.
Cncl. Helkamp noted he attended the Transit Review Board meeting at Scott County where a
presentation was given on the Transit needs for Scott County.
Helkamp/Joos moved to recess at 7:22 p.m. for the purpose of conducting the Economic
Development Authority meeting. Motion carried 5-0.
Mayor Mars re-convened the City Council meeting at 7:25 p.m.
Mr. Leek, Community Development Director, reported on Ryan Companies revised request to
amend the Comprehensive Plan to re-guide 42 acres from Business Park to Residential Planned
Unit Development. The original request was for 69 acres to be re-guided from Business Park to
Medium Density Residential development. Mr. Leek noted on August 6th the City Council
directed that this revised request go to the Planning Commission. Mr. Leek noted public
testimony was taken from individuals, and the Planning Commission did recommend to the City
Council approval of the requested revised Comprehensive Plan Amendment to re-guide 42 acres
from Business Park to Residential Planned Unit Development on a 6-0 vote, one member of the
Planning Commission being absent.
Official Proceedings of the August 19,2003
Shakopee City Council Page -3-
Cncl. Link wanted it noted that two weeks before this application came to the City there was a 7-
o vote for denial for the original proposed amendment to the Comprehensive Plan. Cncl. Link
noted the City Council did not get to vote on the amended request because the Chair of the
Planning Commission had submitted a letter requesting if any major changes were made to the
requested amendment the Planning Commission would like a chance to review those changes.
Mr. Leek noted that on the request to re-guide the 69 acres the Planning Commission's vote had
been 7-0 for denial. Mr. Leek reported what happened with the applicant, Ryan Companies. He
noted Ryan Companies submitted a letter asking that they be allowed to revise the re-guiding
amendment application to reduce the amount of re-guiding. That request came to the City
Council on August 6th and also on that date the letter written by the Chair of the Plmming
Commission was submitted for the table. Mr. Leek noted both of these letters came to staff with
direction that they be submitted to the City Council and they were submitted on August 6th to the
City Council. On that evening City Council directed that the revised request go before the
Planning Commission.
Cncl. Link stated that he felt he had been mislead. He stated he thought the City Council should
have acted on the original request and if Ryan Companies wanted further action, they should
have made a new application and waited six weeks for a hearing like everyone else. He did not
feel this gave the residents of Shakopee an opportunity to voice their opinions. There was no
public input on this issue because it happened so fast. He thought it was unethical to do this.
Mr. Leek commented that the public notice on the original request was clear in its intent to re-
guide property from business park to residential, and there was much testimony that evening,
most of it not to re-guide any of the area to residential. Mr. Leek stated because this was a lesser
request to re-guide business park to residential he did not think it had to be re-noticed. Mr. Leek
noted if the request had been for a larger request, on staffs own initiative, staff would have held
another public hearing. That would have increased the potential impacts of that change.
Jim Thomson, City Attorney, noted that the City met the legal requirements. The initial public
notice was issued for a greater area than what was going to be acted on tonight. Mr.
Thomson noted it was a policy issue for the Council to decide if they wanted to go beyond the
legal requirements and have additional public hearings. Cncl. Link wanted to know if by law
there should have been a public hearing to re-hear the amendment because the meeting where the
Planning commission had voted 7-0 had in actuality ended. Mr. Thomson answered that question
stating the answer was "sometimes". As long as the change was less in scope City Councilor the
Planning Commission, without another public hearing, could act on the amendment. Mr.
Thomson noted to Mayor Mars that he thought the Planning Commission had authority to do
what they did. Mr. Leek stated the public hearing, which was held on July 3rd, had been closed.
This revised request, which appeared before the City Council before the Planning Commission
saw it, was directed to go before the Planning Commission so they could make a
recommendation and then the City Council would hear the request. So actually, all appropriate
procedures were being followed.
Official Proceedings of the August 19, 2003
Shakopee City Council Page -4-
Cncl. Helkamp asked if there were an approved preliminary plat for the subject site in question.
Mr. Leek noted there was, but this new re-guiding practically speaking probably would not work
for a residential development. The preliminary plat was specifically designed for a business
park. To accommodate this type development the applicant would have to make application for a
revised preliminary plat.
Cncl. Lelunan noted the Brauer study that had been done for the City of Shakopee, was done in
2001/02 and the stated recommendations from the Brauer study were pretty close to what the
revised amendment was. Mr. Leek noted this st~tement was basically correct. The report from
Brauer and Associates indicted that the first conceptual plan had public values related to Dean
Lake. Mr. Leek noted it was related to the Council in the report for the August 6th meeting, there
was, in fact, a Comprehensive Plan amendment submitted at that time (back in 2001102),
reviewed by the Planning Commission recommended to the City Council for approval, and in
fact the Council's packet later in 2002 had that report with that recommendation in it and before
the Council acted on it, and the applicant's request for that particular Comprehensive Plan
amendment was withdrawn. There was a recommendation approximately April 2002 from the
Planning Commission to amend the Comprehensive Plan at that time to Medium Density
Residential.
Cncl. Lehman noted that the residential component was 42 acres now compared to 69 acres in
the original proposed Comprehensive Plan amendment.
With the many discussions that had been held, Mr. Leek noted that the density on the revised
PUD would be similar to the medium density range. He thought the developer was looking at a
slightly higher density than single-family units would allow. Single-family units would be up to
5 units per acre.
Mayor Mars felt this matter had been very open and very public dating back to 1999 to date. It
had been discussed with various City Councils, the Planning Commissions and in the public's
eye. The public openness of this project started with the grading that took place and had gone
through the process of the Comprehensive Plan amendment that is before the Council tonight.
Mr. Leek also stated that if the Council took action on this proposal tonight, and it moved
forward, there would be future opportunity for public hearings and public input. Mr. Leek noted
the proposed land use was not currently on the land use map, it was the intent of the applicant to
signal that this would indeed be a planned unit development (PUD). This land use required
approval by the City Council, and there would be a public hearing at the Planning Commission
on this land use. In addition the property would have to be replatted for what the developer was
proposing and that too would require a public hearing. Mr. Leek stated if there were needs for
conditional use permits, those would require a public hearing as well. Based on previous
direction from the City Council those applications could all be submitted at the same time, the
Official Proceedings of the August 19,2003
Shakopee City Council Page -5-
public hearings could all take place at one time but that did not mean that all requests would
move forward at the same time.
Mr. Leek was of the opinion that, should the Council approve this request, this change would be
incorporated in the Comprehensive Plan Update as it moved forward. At the same time the
amendment would be submitted to the Metropolitan Council for their review. Mr. Leek
explained what would need to be done if the Council acted affirmatively tonight regarding this
request.
Mr. Leek noted that the consultant for the Comprehensive Plan Update, did think because of the
unique characteristics iil this area, the land use for this area should be Business Park.
Mayor Mars noted that he thought there had been significant changes in this property, and the
Comprehensive Plan was in error in guiding this only for Business Park. Because there was a lot
of discussion about the use of this land the Brauer report was done. In that report, Brauer and
Associates noted that public values are a very important element. Other benefits were
incorporated within their plan for the area, as well. Mayor Mars felt this revised plan amendment
was more like what was initially proposed, recommended, and passed by the Planning
Commission, and then withdrawn by the applicant. The developer had now gone back to what
did have support in Shakopee. CncL Link felt if this was approved then no zoning changes
should be denied. Mayor Mars was referring to Hwy 169 and the update of County Road 83 and
the growth of the City of Shakopee, as to what changes had taken place in the City. Cncl. Link
felt this land should remain prime comlnercial property for the financial benefit of Shakopee.
Cncl. Joos felt the residential made a better fit with Dean Lake, and this is what Brauer and
Associates determined when the public values came forth. Using the land next to the lake for
residential purposes had less impact on the lake than the commercial/industrial properties did. It
was the impact on Dean Lake that was the driving force for residential around the lake. This land
use allowed less run-off and less impact on the lake than a straight commercial/industrial land
use would. This is why Cncl. Joos was supportive of the Brauer study. He noted as a
representative of the City he was closely involved with this project and what the plan was now
was fairly close to what Brauer and Associates recommended for the site. Cncl. Joos noted the
aesthetics of this plan should satisfy the residents on the other side of the Lake.
Mr. Leek noted that the attached housing percentage over the last decade in the City of Shakopee
was 43% and the single-family percentage in the City was 57%. The goal for attached housing in
the City of Shakopee was 35% or 36%. Mr. Leek shared his opinion from the comments he had
heard over the last three years and this was that there was no consensus as to what made a better
neighbor to the lake or to the south Dean Lake neighborhood.
Mr. Leek noted that he thought the Planned Unit Development probably gave the City the most
flexibility and control of all zoning choices. Mr. Leek's understanding of what occurred was that
there was interest in selling the entire property to someone who was willing to develop it as a
Official Proceedings of the August 19,2003
Shakopee City Council Page -6-
whole. If the opportunity to do this came about the developer, at that time, was going to take that
offer and forget about his approved preliminary plat. Mr. Leek noted that the Brauer study began
as a comprehensive look at parks and trails for the Dean Lake area and the Southbridge
development on the east side. The scope of the study was expanded out to include the West
Dean Lake area as well.
Kent Carlson, Ryan Land Companies, approached the podium to discuss the plan amendment
request. Mr. Carlson noted the residential development would be a mixture of the small lot
single-family and townhomes. Mr. Carlson stated that he thought the Planning Commission
went from a 7-0 denial to a 6-0 recommendation for approval because this was a different plan
than what the 7-0 vote was on. This plat was much like the original with homes around the Lake,
and the Planning Commission also recognized the public values that had been brought out in the
Brauer report. The feed back from the Planning Commission in July was to reduce the number
of residential units and to go back to something like what Ryan Companies had originally. Mr.
Carlson noted that without the development of this park an important travel link (trail) was not
an option for the residents in the Southbridge developments.
Mayor Mars called for public testimony even though this was not a public hearing.
Kathy Gerlach, 4855 Eagle Creek Boulevard, approached the podium and noted there really have
been a lot of changes and wanted to make a couple of corrections to what was said. Ms. Gerlach
stated the whole time there were open houses for the Dean Lake area there really was not any talk
about a residential area. Ms. Gerlach stated that Ryan Companies wanted residential and they
went to Jeff Schoenbauer, consultant with Brauer and Associates, and together Mr. Schoenbauer
and Ryan Companies came up with a residential component. Ms. Gerlach stated after residents
met on this residential component in the plan, in the end, there was about 50% for and 50%
against the idea of a residential component.
Joos/Mars offered Resolution No. 5908, A Resolution Of The City Of Shakopee Amending The
1999 Comprehensive Plan Update By Amending The Land Use Plan To Re-guide Land
Generally South of STH l69, East Of CSAH 83, North of CSAH 16, And West Of Dean Lake
From Business Park to Residential PUD (42.0 acres), and moved its adoption.
Cncl. Link asked if it made sense to take some prime commercial property and re-guide it to
residential PUD when there was little commercial land left in the City of Shakopee but several
thousand acres of residential left? Mayor Mars noted that there are areas in Jackson Township
being identified moving west on STH 169 for commercial and in time these areas would be
annexed into the City. Mayor Mars stated in his opinion there were other Commercial/Industrial
areas in the City that were not being used for the best and highest tax capacity value right now.
Cncl. Link did not think these two areas could be compared to each other for commercial
property. Mayor Mars felt the access to highway 69 and the new River Crossing placement
Official Proceedings of the August 19, 2003
Shakopee City Council Page -7-
would playa huge part in possibly bringing more traffic to the west end of Shakopee and make
that end of town viable economically again.
Motion carried 4-1 with Cncl. Link dissenting.
LehmanlHelkamp offered Resolution No. 5918, a Resolution Of The City Of Shakopee,
Minnesota Approving The Preliminary Plat Of Southern Meadows, and moved its adoption.
(Motion carried under the Consent Agenda).
Mr. Leek reported on the berms in the Greenfield Plat. Mr. Leek noted there were a couple of
letters on the table for the Councilors tonight from residents in the Greenfield Plat about the
berms in that development. Mr. Leek oriented the site via the document camera and focused on
the lots that were affected by the berms. The berms in questioI1 were by Valley View Road and
Independence Drive. Mr. Leek noted that this was a single-family plat that has been approved
and is under construction. Mr. Leek stated back when the plat was approved the City had an
ordinance that required berming adjacent to arterial and collector roadways. Mr. Leek noted
under the City's Transportation Plan, Valley View Road and Independence Drive were classified
collector roadways. Mr. Leek noted the authors of the letters on the table wish was to have the
requirements for those berms eliminated because the berms were located on their property, not
within the City right-of-way and the berm took up a substantial portion of their lot. Mr. Leek
noted that he has a concern about the removal of the berm because there had been a reason for
that requirement and that reason related to noise mitigation. Mr. Leek stated if any changes were
made, it would be noted that, it would be the responsibility of those property owners if any noise
mitigation in the future were desired or required.
Mr. Leek noted originally there was a requirement that there be a continuous berm along Valley
View Road to Independence Drive, subsequently there was a request to amend the plan so all the
grading to occur was according to the plan that was subsequently submitted which showed
intermittent berming on the properties. Mr. Leek noted that this did not meet the intent of the
Code at that time which was to provide continuous berming to mitigate noise. Cncl. LeIunan
liked the use of the trees on top of the berm much better than having the trees first and then the
berm. Cncl. Joos wanted to know the best way to fix this situation to retain some noise
mitigation and still take the berms out of the resident's yards. Mr. Leek noted that it has been
found out that berms are not really a good noise mitigation measure. If in the future noise
mitigation were needed there would need to be a sound fence across the property.
There was discussion on moving the berms closer to the City right-of-way. Mayor Mars wanted
to protect the property owners from the noise impact that was going to corne in the future. It was
Mr. Leeks opinion that what happened was what the residents were presented when they bought
there land and houses did not have City approval and was not the end result because what the
City did approve was not what was shown to the people. The developer marketed the property
before he had City approvals.
Official Proceedings of the August 19,2003
Shakopee City Council Page -8-
Gary Wollschlager, with Tollefson Development, approached the podium and stated he would
like to hear comments from the residents and then he would address their concerns.
Nick Maxwell, homeowner, along the property line being discussed approached the podium and
stated his main concern was that he get full use of his property. He felt this was valuable
property on a small lot that he did not have use of. He was concerned about an amendment that
would require homeowners to do something in the future and this needed to be a decision made
by all the homeowners affected and not just an assessment done by the City. Mr. Maxwell stated
it would be nice to have a berm when the trail was put in. He was not sure how much good a
berm would do for noise mitigation with a two-story house.
Mohammed Mullah, 3072 Molina Street, approached the podium and asked if the berm were
removed now, in the future if the traffic got worse would the City require the residents to put in a
noise barrier. Mayor Mars stated no.
Mr. Loney noted there is a storm sewer easement as well as utilities easements in the City's
right-of-way.
Jenny Huber, 2960 Molina, approached the podium and wanted to know why not all residents in
the area had a consistent berm (some had none). Mr. Leek stated that some residents had
contacted him and some people noted they were going to remove the berm regardless and that
was perhaps why some residents did not have berms. Ms. Huber stated she was never told about
any kind of berm. Ms. Huber stressed there was 45 feet from the end of the slope of the berm to
the road and basically that left them with no backyard. The back yards were not functional at all.
loos/Lehman moved to direct staff to bring forward a revised resolution of preliminary and/or
final plat approval for Greenfield eliminating the berming requirement but clarifying that any
future required noise mitigation or buffering will be at the expense of the property owners.
Gary Wollschlager approached the podium and clarified that the berms were put in last Fall
before the houses went up. Mr. Wollschlager noted that an "as built" grading plan was done and
provided to the City with berms on the plan. Mr. Wollschlager noted that they did follow
procedure. He agreed with the residents, he felt it was best that these berms be removed. Mr.
Wollschlager noted he spoke with the builder and if the residents went back to the builder he felt
the builder would cooperate with the residents in removing the berms.
Mr. Link was concerned about disclosing to future property owners that may have to pay for any
noise mitigation. Mr. Leek stated that if the resolution were amended that would have to be
recorded, that was public record and that would cause disclosure.
Cncl. Lelunan would like to see what the cost would be to continue the berm along Valley View
Road for new plats.
Official Proceedings of the August 19,2003
Shakopee City Council Page -9-
Cncl. Helkamp pointed out the homes in this area sit much higher than the road; the berm would
not have any affeet on the headlight wash or noise mitigation.
Motion carried 5-0.
A recess was taken at 8:53 p.m.
Mayor Mars re-convened the City Council meeting at 9:01 p.m.
Mr. Leek reported on the request for a preliminary plat approval of Riverside Fields. Mr. Leek
noted this was a single-family detached residential plat. The original request included requests
for variances in lot width north of the proposed Crossing Boulevard extended as well as, rear
yard setbacks and side yard setbacks for 5 feet and 10 feet for a fifteen~foot building separation.
Setback variances for side yard and rear yard were also requested for the southern portion of the
site located south of the Crossings Boulevard extended. Mr. Leek noted the Planning
Commission had reviewed the request and recommended approval of the plat but they were
recommending only one variance, and that was a fifty-five foot lot width north of Crossings
Boulevard extended.
Mayor Mars noted that the applicant had withdrawn their request for a rear yard setback. (And
observed that the issue would reappear in the future). Mr. Leek concurred with Mayor Mars.
Steve Soltau, Shakopee Crossings, approached the podium to give a history of the area. Mr.
Soltau noted that originally this land was guided for medium density but last year he requested a
PRD zoning on this property recognizing the fact that the City was not especially excited to see
more homes with a high density. This preliminary plat actually had a density that was
considerably less than eight (that was allowed with medium density), and had single-family
ownership homes.
Chris Enger, Ryland Homes, approached the podium, and stated that Ryland Homes thought this
property was good for single-family homes as well as townhomes. When Mr. Enger first went to
staff, Ryland Homes had ordinance size lots with no variances. As the area was worked with and
the Engineering Department came into the picture, it was discovered that there was a problem
with the entire site as it related to the Comprehensive Stormwater Management Plan regarding
the outlet and drainage from the site. This problem with the Comprehensive Stormwater
Management Plan required that the entire site be filled somewhere between four and eight feet.
Responding to the Park and Recreation Advisory Board's request Ryland Homes put a 4.2-acre
park in the southwest comer of the property along with a trail bringing the total park acreage up
to 5.7 acres. The Park Board also recommended development of that park for approximately
$l72,000 along with a cash park fee for the 10-acre mixed-use neighborhood commercial. Mr.
Enger stated all of these recommendations exceed the park requirement by about $543,000. Mr.
Enger noted that a noise study had been done; it indicated that no further noise mitigation was
necessary.
Official Proceedings of the August 19, 2003
Shakopee City Council Page -10-
Mr. Enger noted Centex Homes would be building homes on the north half of the east-west road
because these lots required a smaller house (97 lots).
Mr. Enger stated that even though this was a straight plat Ryland Homes was asking the City for
some flexibility to allow for more variety in the single-family homes. Mr. Enger suggested some
of the benefits to the City were: 1) a dramatic decrease in the number of housing units [a
potential of 640 down to 211 single-family homes], 2) a dramatic decrease in the amount of City
services that would be required, 3) an increased value per single-family home over a town home
[$100,000], 4) the staging would take longer thereby extending when City services would be
needed,S) working with the Environmental Advisory Committee [EAC] Ryland homes exceeded
the tree replacement requirements, 6) Ryland Homes was also using larger trees than the City
required, 7) the trail requirement was exeeeded, 8) the street requirement was exceeded
[sidewalks on both sides and width of street], 9) the requests from the County were complied
with, 10) 6 inches of top-soil was requested by the EAC and agreed to by Ryland Homes [not a
requirement of City Ordinances]. Mr. Enger noted that because of all the fill required, wanting
to cooperate with the Park Boards and the Environmental Advisory Boards recommendations,
other benefits to the City and the loss in the number of housing units because of the rezoning and
park, Ryland Homes felt they now needed the variances.
Mr. Enger noted that originally there was a variance requested on the rear yard setback for all of
the lots [the code was 30 feet and Ryland homes was requesting that the setback be 20 feet]. The
Plmming Commission noted they needed to find a hardship to grant this variance, and that they
could not do in this case. Mr. Enger stated that Ryland Homes believed a hardship had been
shown. Mr. Enger stated after speaking with Centex Homes, Ryland Homes withdrew their
request for a setback variance for the rear yards on the northern half where Centex was
developing. Mr. Enger noted that the rear yard setback request for the lots Ryland Homes had on
the southern part was not withdrawn.
Mr. Enger noted a lot width variance from 60 feet to fifty feet for the 97 lots that Centex was
going to build on [on the north side of the east-west street] was requested. Mr. Enger sited some
of the lot widths in the Southbridge area.
Mayor Mars suggested breaking up the requests to this preliminary plat to the north half and the
south half.
Mayor Mars noted on the north half the Planning Commission approved 55-foot wide lots;
however, Mr. Enger wanted 50-foot wide lots. The Planning Commission denied the side yard
setbacks for 5 feet and 10 feet for a total of fifteen feet for building separations. Mr. Enger noted
the reason the Planning Commission did not act affirmatively on the side yard setbacks was
because if a 55-foot lot width were used then the variance would not be needed. Ryland Homes
continued to request a 50-foot lot width and therefore, the variance to the side yard setbacks
would be needed.
Official Proceedings of the August 19,2003
Shakopee City Council Page -11-
Mayor Mars now asked what was needed on the southern side. It was noted that the Planning
Commission did not recommend any variances for this half. Mr. Enger would like to see a side
yard variance to allow 5 feet and 10 (15 feet building separation) on the south side and a rear
yard setback variance for all lots except those lots all along the stormwater pond.
Cncl. Link asked Mr. Enger where the hardship was for these variances. Mr. Enger noted that
Ryland homes would have great difficulty proceeding with this as a single-family plat if there
had to be a large reduction in the number of the lots. Mr. Enger stated because of the many areas
where Ryland Homes exceeded the requirements of City Code, Ryland Homes was asking that
they be allowed to have the number oflots that these variances would allow.
Mr. Enger noted the rear yard setback on the southern half would allow Ryland Homes more
flexibility in the floor plans that could be used. The rear yard setback of the southern half has
variety driven. However, the side yard setback was more important to Ryland Homes. Mr.
Enger noted that if the rear yard was varied it will allow for more monotony control. Mr. Enger
noted the gross density was just over 3.0 units per acre and the net density was just over 5.1 units
per acre.
Mr. Enger saw this plat as a win/win situation. The City got the extra parkland and many more
benefits and Ryland Homes was still able to retain all the units they originally had on the plan
before the Park and Recreation Advisory Board and Environment Advisory Committee made
their recommendations. Mr. Enger felt Ryland Homes illustrated a hardship in the information
that he provided. Mr. Enger stated there was precedent for the IS-foot sideyard building
separation setback and the 50-foot lot width within Shakopee today.
Mr. Soltau approached the podium to speak to the three conditions added by the Scott County
letter. He stated in reading the letter, in his opinion, there were requests and requirements. Mr.
Soltau noted some of these request actually provided obstacles to his development and he felt it
was unreasonable of the County to ask the City to impose these requests and requirements. One
of the lots affected by the County's request was the commercial area. Mr. Soltau noted this was
a very difficult condition for him to comply with because he planned on bringing a CUP for a
portion ofthis affected commercial lot before the Council soon. Mr. Soltau asked if conditions
19, 20 and 21 were absolutely necessary for this plat [these conditions referred to future CSAH
21- there was no plan available at this time].
Mr. Enger noted they would like to have the variances as suggested, if they had all of the
variances they would have the most flexibility and they felt they would have a better
neighborhood. Mr. Enger stated if the Council decided this was too much they could live
without the rear yard setback south of the east-west road.
The next request was if there was still too many variances for the Council; 2/3 of the variances
on the southern half of the east-west road would be the next choice. This would affect 75 lots.
Official Proceedings of the August 19, 2003
Shakopee City Council Page -12-
Mr. Enger stated if the Council could not grant any of the variances then Ryland Homes would
like the Council to consider the park requirement and somehow credit the overage of the
requirement to the property in some manner.
Cncl. Lehman did not like the County telling the City where the landscaping should go. It was
also noted that the County was trying to secure more right-of-way than what STH 169 had.
Lehman/Helkamp offered Resolution No. 5916, A Resolution Of The City Of Shakopee,
Minnesota Approving The Preliminary Plat Of Riverside Fields, and moved its adoption.
The Council discussed conditions 19, 20,and 21 that were contained in Resolution No. 5916.
Joos/Lehman moved to remove conditions 20 and 21 from Resolution No. 5916.
Mr. Soltau noted that Condition No. 19 interfered with the plans that he had for that area.
Mr. Loney stated that this section of future CSAH 21 according to the County could possibly be
larger than 35 W but it would again narrow down to two lanes in Prior Lake.
Motion carried 5-0.
Mr. Soltau felt strongly that the County should not be expecting the City to impose the County
requests and requirements as part of the plat but that the County should be coming to him. This
extra drainage and utility easement was creating additional restrictions on his property.
Joos/Mars moved to remove condition no. 19 from Resolution No. 5916.
Jim Thomson, City Attorney, stated he thought the City had the authority do this if they wanted.
Cncl. Joos noted that the County had given him no good reason why this extra 50 feet should be
needed. He saw no justification.
Motion carried 5-0.
Mayor Mars noted on the north side of the east-west road Ryland Homes was requesting 50-foot
lot width. The Planning Commission recommended a lot with of 55 feet. Ryland Homes was
also asking for side yard variances so there would be a total of 15 feet between structures. They
were asking for 5 feet on one side and 10 feet on the other side. The Planning Commission
recommended denial for this request, the side yard setbacks were to remain at City Code.
requirements.
Official Proceedings of the August 19, 2003
Shakopee City Council Page -13-
Mayor Mars noted that this setup was out in Southbridge in an area; that is a 55-foot lot width
and 5 feet on one side and 10 feet on the other side. It seemed to be working well. The residents
liked the set up. Mayor Mars liked the feel and the idea of 5 feet on one side and 10 feet on the
other side. Mr. Enger noted the house that was in Southbridge has been redesigned and was now
5 feet narrower.
Cncl. Helkamp noted that the City was getting a lot for this variance (by allowing them to be
efficient with their land use). He liked the proposal.
He1kamp/Joos moved to change the language in condition no. 29 for Resolution No. 5916 to
allow the lot width to be 50 feet rather than 55 feet as the Planning Commission recommended to
the north of the east-west road. Motion carried 4-1 with Cncl. Link dissenting.
He1kamp/Lehman moved to add a condition allowing the side yard setback of 5 feet on one side
and 10 feet on the other side for a total of 15 feet between structures on the northern portion of
the project on the north side of the east -west road. Motion carried 4-1 with Cncl. Link
dissenting.
Mayor Mars noted that now the south side was going to be discussed. Mr. Enger said he would
withdraw the rear yard setback if it was the Councils preference. Ryland homes wanted 5 feet on
one side and 10 feet on the other side of the buildings. Mr. Enger noted previously that he would
modify this request to be 5 feet on one side and 10 feet on the other for 2/3 or 75 lots on the
south side of the east-west road.
Cncl. He1kamp stated he really saw now no reason to limit the property owners flexibility on the
size of their decks or season porches or even if they could even have one. He would also like to
see a wider choice of floor plans in the development.
Helkamp/Lehman moved to allow the 15 feet between structures on the southern portion of the
east-west road for 75 lots.
Motion carried 3-2 with Mayor Mars and Cncl. Link dissenting.
Helkamp/Joos moved to allow the variance for the rear-yard setbacks (from 30 feet to 20 feet) for
all lots on the southern half from the east-west road.
Motion failed 2-3. The three nays were Mayor Mars, Cncls. Lehman and Linle
Mayor Mars noted on the preliminary plat before the Council the Park and Recreation Advisory
Board had asked that five specific lots be removed. Cncl. Lehman noted that earlier Mr. Enger
stated that it was the removal of these five lots that drove the hardship for the variances. Mr.
Enger concurred with this statement.
Official Proceedings of the August 19,2003
Shakopee City Council Page -14-
Mr. Leek noted that the removal of these 5 lots was ineorporated in the resolution in condition
no. 6. If the Council elected to keep these lots for housing units then condition no.6 would need
to be modified to reflect this lesser park dedication. Mr. Enger noted the delineation of the
wetland affected the amount of park dedication by.6 of an acre more.
LehmanlJoos moved to offer Resolution No. 5916 as modified.
Motion carried 4-1 with Cncl. Link dissenting.
Mr. Enger asked the Council for permission to begin the installation of utilities for the first phase
of Riverside Fields at their own risk subject to review of the Plans for Riverside Fields by the
City Engineer prior to the final plat approval.
Mr. Loney, Public Works Director/City Engineer, noted this would be difficult because he was
short on staff. Mr. Loney stated the grading could start upon approval of the preliminary plat.
Mr. Enger stated he understood Mr. Loney's concern but if they could not start with utilities now
they would lose this construction season and that would make it very risky to use the plat for
single-family homes. Mr. Enger stated he was prepared to cooperate in all ways with the City's
engineering staff. Ryland Homes would not be able to come back before the City Council until
at least November with the final Plat and that would undoubtedly be after the end of the
construction season. Mr. Enger noted that Ryland Homes would be willing to help defray the
costs of additional consultant services.
LinklLehman moved that Ryland Homes go through the regular platting process for Riverside
Fields.
Motion failed 2-3 with Cncls. Joos, Helkamp and Mayor Mars dissenting.
There was discussion that Ryland Homes pay all the fees for the consultant. This would not give
Ryland Homes special consideration because the buildings permits all had to go through normal
channels. Mr. Loney noted that this type of request, to put in utilities before the final plat was
approved, did happen last year towards the end of the construction season because this did cause
hardships to developers. Mr. Loney noted the developer was the one taking a risk here.
Mars/Lehman moved to reconsider the previous motion.
Mayor Mars felt the developer was pushing the envelope.
Motion carried 3-2 with Cnc1s. Joos and Helkamp dissenting. (This was to reconsider the motion
- not the motion itself). Now the main motion was back on the table.
Official Proceedings of the August 19, 2003
Shakopee City Council Page -15-
Cncl. Lehman withdrew his second to the original motion.
Joos/Helkamp moved the recommendation that the developer pay the entire cost of the consultant
fees to review the plans for Riverside Fields and upon their approval by the City's consultant and
the City engineering staff the developer could then go ahead and install the utilities prior to final
plat for the first phase of Riverside Fields, at the developer's risk and expense. Motion carried 5-
O.
Cncl. Joos left the meeting at 10:36 p.m.
Mr. Loney, Public Works Director/City Engineer, reported on the existing power lines on the
Valley View Road Improvement, Project No. 2003-4. Mr. Loney stated there was an overhead
power line that existed, for about 3/8 of a mile on the north side of the unimproved Valley View
Road in this area and the electric power lines would need to be relocated when the new Valley
View Road was constructed. Mr. Loney noted from the information received from Shakopee
Public Utilities Commission (SPUC) it would cost approximately $12,000 to relocate the power
line overhead and approximately $55,000 to place the power line underground. Mr. Loney noted
there were three options that SPUC was considering for funding. Mr. Loney showed pictures of
the area via the document camera. Mr. Loney also noted that this power line had been upgraded
in 1997. It was in 1999 or thereabouts that the City Right-Of-Way Ordinance came into
existence. With this ordinance the City could require that these lines are now put underground.
Mr. Loney noted when the decision on the previous Valley View Road project was decided, that
decision was to relocate those existing overhead lines but to let the lines remain overhead lines.
Joe Adams, Shakopee Public Utilities Planning and Engineering Director, approached the
podium to explain some of the alternatives SPUC's consultants determined to recover some of
the costs for undergrounding power lines. Jim Thomson, City Attorney, addressed the recovery
of the costs for undergrounding power lines. Mr. Adams stated that SPUC was only trying to
recover costs like Excel Energy did. (For this project, there would be a line item of$.15 added to
each ratepayer's monthly bill.)
Link/Lehman moved to allow Shakopee Public Utilities the right to relocate the overhead power
lines and to allow these overhead lines to remain overhead for the Valley View Road
Improvement, Project No. 2003-4.
Mayor Mars noted the opportunity for this undergrounding of these electric power lines was
now. Mayor Mars felt there was a benefit when these electric power lines were underground for
the ratepayers and the City of Shakopee also.
Mayor Mars asked for audience participation even though this was not a public hearing.
Official Proceedings of the August 19, 2003
Shakopee City Council Page -16-
Nick Maxwell, 3024 Molina Street, approached the podium with a few questions. He. noted his
house was along Valley View Road in the construction area for the new Valley View Road. He
noted that the pictures showed substantial vegetation that hides the existing power lines now. He
felt this was an aesthetic issue; these power lines would eventually be running through a highly
visible and developed area and he felt it would be inconsistent if the Council allowed these lines
to be relocated yet remain overhead. He, as well as the other homeowners involved, would be
more than happy to pay a separate line item on hislher utility bill for the undergrounding of this
power line. Where these overhead lines were proposed to be relocated was right in his backyard
where his children play.
Mr. Loney noted this issue would come up again on other colleCtor streets and 4 III A venue to
name a couple areas where there are existing overhead electric lines that would need relocation
when those streets were fixed.
Mr. Adams clarified and addressed some of the points raised regarding the overhead electric
lines. Mr. Adams noted the utilities staff and the Utilities Commission was not against
undergrounding the line; they were struggling with how to pay for the undergrounding. They felt
adding a special rate to the ratepayers was a good method to recover the difference in the cost of
overhead and underground. Mr. Adams explained why some of the overhead electric power line
in the previous section of Valley View Road were so close to the road.
Cncl. Helkamp felt the electric power lines henceforth should be underground.
Motion failed 2-2 with Mayor Mars and Cncl. Helkamp dissenting.
Helkamp/Lehman moved to table the issue regarding the relocation of the existing overhead
electric lines along Valley View Road for Project No. 2003-4 until there was a full complement
of Councilors present. Motion carried 4-0.
Mr. Loney reported on the request for a second driveway off of Shumway Street for Mrs. Jean
Marschall of 600 Hennes A venue. Mr. Loney noted the City had an application for a detached
garage from Mrs. Jean Marschall and she was requesting another curb cut on Shumway Street.
Mrs. Marschall already had a curb cut off Shumway Street. This was a corner lot on the corner
of Hennes A venue and Shumway Street. Mr. Loney noted the house was large enough that there
really could not be a driveway off Hennes A venue to obtain access to the backyard. This item
was on the agenda tonight as an appeal because staff denied the request per the policy on curb
cuts. Mr. Loney noted Shumway Street was 350 feet long (a regular City block).
Link/Lehman moved to allow two curb cuts on Shumway Street for the property located at 600
Hennes Avenue.
Mayor Mars noted that Shumway Street was a very low volume street.
Official Proceedings of the August 19,2003
Shakopee City Council Page -17-
Motion carried 4-0.
Cncl. Link left the meeting at approximately 11: 15 p.m.
Mr. Loney reported on possible parking control signage changes along 11th Avenue, from C.R.
79 to Market Street. Mr. Loney noted that the City had received a petition from residents along
this area of 11 th Avenue. Mr. Loney showed pictures of some of the residents complaints on the
document camera. The issue really was high school students parking on the street. The residents
issues were debris on the road and in yards, parking in front of mailboxes, parking on lawns and
boulevard, and other behavioral problems. Mr. Loney noted the street was wide enough to allow
parking on both sides of the street. Mr. Loney noted that right now City Code did allow parking
in front of mailboxes and perhaps garbage cans. He thought that perhaps the City Code should be
adjusted regarding parking in front of mailboxes. Mr. Loney noted from an engineering
standpoint the road was wide enough to allow parking on both sides but the ordinance could be
adjusted to reflect no parking in front of mailboxes and maybe garbage cans.
Mr. McNeill noted the high school principal was aware of the situation; noting that the high
school had just outgrown itself. Mr. McNeill was not sure there was a good solution right now.
Jim Kuhout, 1070 South Main, approached the podium and stated this problem just keeps getting
worse. He stated if the police were not there policing, this behavior would continue. His
solution was not to allow the students to park there. It was the speeding up and down the street
after school hours that was the real problem. Mr. Kuhout was concerned about the safety of the
neighborhood children. Mr. Kohout noted that the school parking lot was not full and there was
still parking on the street.
Jeff Zarr, 600 East 11 th A venue approached the podium with a concern. He noted on the corner
of Main and 11 th after school there was drag racing. The mail would not be delivered if cars were
parked in the way; there have been times when Mr. Zarr had not gotten mail for several days in a
row.
Mr. McNeilI noted that the Police Department would follow-up on the speeding issue and there
was an issue as far as mail being able to be delivered that needed to be addressed. He suggested
bringing back a modification to the ordinance to remedy that situation.
Cncl. Lehman directed staff to look at the Ordinances that could be a help in controlling this
situation (for mailboxes and driveways). Cncl. Lehman also wanted staff to talk to the Police
Department to see what else could be done and to start using the Police Officers in the schools to
enforce some of these issues. The School District needed to be talked with and they needed to be
told that this problem needed to be fixed. A solution needed to be found because the problem
was just getting passed around.
Official Proceedings of the August 19,2003
Shakopee City Council Page -18-
Mayor Mars would like more input from the Police Department and the School Board before a
decision was made. Mayor Mars would like the residents named on the petition notified when
this item was on the agenda again.
Cncl. Helkamp noted the problem needed to be fixed; it was more than just a problem of parking
on 11 tit street.
Staff will meet with School District Officials and then bring the matter back to City Council.
Mr. Leek reported on the planed unit development for the Philipp Addition. Mr. Leek stated this
was a request of a Planned Unit Development (PUD) for the Thomas A. Philipp Addition. He
noted that the preliminary plat had already been filed and was under review by the Planning
Commission. Mr. Leek gave some background on this issue. Mr. Leek noted the density
allowed in this area was 5.0 dwelling units per acre, because it was a single-family detached type
with an underlying zoning district of R-IB (single-family). The applicant was proposing 5.26
dwelling units per acre. Originally this proposed PUD had 5.67 dwelling units per acre. Mr.
Leek noted the Planning Commission did review this PUD and did recommend approval to the
City Council for this PUD but they did insert a condition limiting the density to 5 units per acre.
Mr. Leek noted in proposed Resolution No. 5923 the condition regarding financial security to
ensure that the development ofthe open space and recreational areas, even though private areas,
were developed early on as approved. Mr. Leek also noted there was a condition that related to
the open space being accessible to all residents of the development and to residents in the
adjacent development. Mr. Leek noted condition no. 7 talked about who was responsible for the
maintenance of the share driveways and condition no. 8 talked about enforcing the monotony
controls for the design of the units. Mr. Leek also noted that the applicant was still requesting
the 5.26 units per acre.
Mayor Mars noted that the applicant had worked to satisfy several substantial issues for staff
and/or the Planning Commission.
Gary Wollschlager, Tollefson Development, approached the podium and stated there were two
remaining issues on the PUD. These issues were: 1) the density on the site and 2) 1 tit Avenue
sightlines. Mr. Wollschlager stated when he initially went before the Planning Commission the
land was for medium density; the Planning Commission did not want to see more townhomes so
now there were single family units to the west and south of the current townhomes. He had
negotiated this development in good faith. As far as the sightlines were concerned for 17tlt
A venue there was the issue of a berm. Mr. Wollschlager noted if the berm were put in that
would leave a very small usable backyard on the units that abutted l7th Avenue. Mr.
Wollschlager noted his recommendation for along the sightline on 17th A venue was to landscape
heavily with shrubbery or a new type retaining wall system.
Official Proceedings of the August 19,2003
Shakopee City Council Page -19-
Mr. Wollschlager noted the reason why he needed the 5.26 units per acre and he explained the
landscaping that he thought he would put in if he used landscaping. He noted if the Couneil
wanted a retaining wall that could be done also.
Lehman/Mars offered Resolution No. 5923, A Resolution Of The City Of Shakopee, MiImesota
Approving The Planned Unit Development for the Thomas A. Phillip Addition (PUD No. 22),
subject to the conditions contained within the resolution, and moved its adoption.
Mayor Mars wanted to discuss the density of the PUD for the Philipp Addition. He noted that
the land had been zoned for medium density and the PUD made it more of a R-IB zone. Five to
eight units per acre was the density for a medium density development and three to five units was
the density for a single-family development. Mayor Mars noted this was a unique product that
was coming to the City of Shakopee. Because of where this PUD was located Mayor Mars did
not feel that .26 acres was out of line. Cncl. Helkamp agreed with Mayor Mars and Cncl.
Helkamp stated that he thought the developer did a great job to have an innovative product and
address the needs of the City. Mayor Mars thought the landscaping of this PUD should go back
to the Planning Commission and the landscaping could be worked on at the time of the
preliminary plat.
Mars/Helkamp made a friendly amendment to Cncl. Lehman's motion that the density should be
allowed to remain at 5.26 units per acre with the landscaping being worked on at the preliminary
plat with the Planning Commission. Motion carried 3-0.
LehmanlHelkamp offered Ordinance No 678, Fourth Series, An Ordinance Of The City Of
Shakopee, Minnesota, Amending Chapter 11.84 Board of Adjustment and Appeals, and moved
its adoption. (Motion carried under the Consent Agenda).
Lehman/Helkamp offered Ordinance No. 677, Fourth Series, An Ordinance Of The City Of
Shakopee, Minnesota, Amending Chapter 11.60 Performance Standards, and moved its adoption.
(Motion carried under the Consent Agenda).
Lehman/Helkamp offered Ordinance No. 679, Fourth Series, An Ordinance Relating To The
Annexation of Certain Property, and moved its adoption. (Motion carried under the Consent
Agenda).
A recess was taken at 11 :50 p.m.
Mayor Mars re-convened the meeting at 11 :56 p.m.
Official Proceedings of the August 19,2003
Shakopee City Council Page -20-
Mr. Loney reported on the contract to be awarded for the Valley View Road Improvements, from
the east plat line of Pheasant Run 6th Addition to the east plat line of Greenfield, Project No.
2003.4 and Vierling Drive Improvements, from CSAH 15 to Orchard park West, Project No.
2002.4. The two projects were combined because Mr. Loney was of the opinion there was some
cost saving involved when two or more projects were combined. Mr. Loney stated both of these
roads were collector streets. Mr. Loney stated five bids were received but one bidder asked the
Council that his bid be withdrawn. Mr. Loney noted from the opened bids it appeared that S.M.
Hentges & Sons, Inc. was the low bidder. The bid that was withdrawn was from Advanced
Concrete Innovations, Inc.; it had some items in the bid that were not acceptable to staff and after
several conversations with the bidder, the bidder asked that his bid be withdrawn. S.M. Hentges,
Inc. apparent low bid was $1,062,301.95. Mr. Loney noted that the two projects were very close
in cost to what had been estimated in the feasibility report.
Mr. Loney noted that Scott County would be doing some improvements on County State Aid
Highway 15 at Vierling Drive (County requested these improvements) and there was a
cooperative agreement between the City of Shakopee and Scott County for these improvements.
The City would be reimbursed by Scott County for these improvements. The work amounted to
around $17,000, plus design and engineering for the improvements to County State Aid Highway
15.
LehmanlHelkamp offered Resolution No. 5931, A Resolution Accepting Bids On Vierling Drive,
From County State Aid Highway 15 To Orchard Park West, Project No. 2002-4; And Valley
View Road, From The East Plat Line Of Pheasant Run 6th Addition To The East Plat Line Of
Greenfield, Project No. 2003-4, and moved its adoption.
Mayor Mars thought with these improvements some of the transportation patterns in the City
would be changed.
Motion carried 3-0.
LehmanlHelkamp moved to authorize the appropriate City officials to execute an extension
agreement withWSB & Associates, Inc. to provide consultant services for Projects 2002-4 and
2003-4 and moved to authorize a 5% contingency amount for the use by the City Engineer in
authorizing change orders or quantity adjustments on this project and moved to authorize the
appropriate City officials to execute the Scott County Cooperative Agreement for CSAH 15
improvements at Vierling Drive. Motion carried 3-0.
Lehman/Helkamp moved to approve a request from Classic Protective Coatings, Inc. for
suspension of City Code Sec. 10.60, Noise Elimination and Noise Prevention, Subd.3, Hourly
Restrictions from 7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. to be 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. Monday thru Friday and
from 9:00 a.m. to 9:00 p.m. to be 8:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. on Saturday and Sunday upon
minimizing noise exposure near residential areas and if residential complaints were received by
Official Proceedings of the August 19, 2003
Shakopee City Council Page -21-
the City, the suspension could be revoked at the discretion of the City Engineer and to direct staff
to publish notice of the suspension terms for restoration activities for the Water Tank located on
10th Avenue. (Motion carried under the Consent Agenda).
Lehman/Helkamp offered Resolution No. 5934, A Resolution Declaring The Costs To Be
Assessed And Ordering The Preparation Of Proposed Assessments For Sarazin Street, From
Mooers Avenue To Valley View Road; And Valley View Road To The East Plat Line Of
Pheasant Run 6th Addition, Project No. 2001-5, and moved its adoption. (Motion carried under
the Consent Agenda).
Lehman!Helkamp offered Resolution No. 5935. A Resolution Declaring The Costs To Be
Assessed And Ordering The Preparation of Proposed Assessments For 17th A venue, From
County Road 79 To Colonial Street, Project No. 2002-1, and moved its adoption. (Motion
carried under the Consent Agenda).
Mr. Loney gave an update on the Huber Park grading. Mr. Loney went over the grading status of
Huber Park once more before fill started to come in. Mr. Loney noted that the Department of
Natural Resources (DNR) had been worked with and their approval had been received as well as
a CUP has been received from the Planning Commission for the fill required to be put in Huber
Park to raise the level of the park above the flood plain (50,000 cubic yards were needed). Mr.
Loney noted that there would be 10,000 yards coming from the new jail site and 15,000 yards
would be coming from the Valley View Road project. There was a possibility that there would
be more fill coming. He would have to keep his eye on the dust coating of Fillmore Street.
Mr. Loney reviewed some of the issues with the grading. These were: 1) fill would be coming in
on Fillmore Street with the fill starting in the west and working towards the east, 2) after the fill
was in Mr. Loney wanted to follow the plan and rough grade to get the site into shape so a final
design could be made and maybe there would need to be some slight adjustment to grade, 3) this
project was tied in with the River District Sewer project which was showing some very soft soils
in certain areas therefore, staff was recommending that the River District pipe be moved.
Mayor Mars suggested some grant money be looked to for help with the restoration of the
shoreline along the river. Mr. Loney noted that he was going to pursue a LCMR grant with the
DNR. Mr. Loney noted that Fillmore Street had been dust coated and there would be a silt fence
along the river. Mr. Loney stated the fill was free but there were some costs associated in getting
ready for the fill (removing top-soil) and with dust coating Fillmore Street. Mr. Loney noted the
fill would be monitored as to what type fill was being used. There would be no contaminated fill
used.
Helkamp/Mars moved to accept the fill from various sources per the direction of the City for
Huber Park. Motion carried 3-0.
Official Proceedings of the August 19,2003
Shakopee City Council Page -22-
Lehman/Helkamp moved to direct staff to proceed in submitting the T.R. 169 pedestrian bridge
east of C.R. 83 and the rail crossing safety improvements at Sommerville Street and Spencer
Street for TEA-2l funding to the Metropolitan Council and Mn/DOT. (Motion carried under the
Consent Agenda).
Mr. Leek reported on the proposal for a transit facility at the Southbridge Crossings East
location. Mr. Leek noted that in the analysis done by LSA, they pointed out Southbridge
Crossings East was a prime location to explore possible facilities at. There were a number of
elements that were required so it probably was to soon to search out federal funding. Mr. Leek
noted several meetings had taken place but now he needed direction on whether or not more
discussions should take place regarding a potential transit hub of some sort at Southbridge
Crossings East (this could include developing some hard costs and taking a look at them). Mr.
Leek noted in discussions with the Metro Transit and Metropolitan Council staff, he tried to ear
mark some funding in 2007/08 from their funds for development of this type facility. Mr. Leek
noted at the Southbridge Crossings East site there was some willingness on the developer's part ,
to do some improvements to the site now if this particular site is desired.
There were some possible secondary sites but it was noted that they were not in Shakopee.
Lehman/Helkamp moved to direct staff to continue analysis and discussion with Shakopee
Crossing, LLC; Scott County HRA; and LSA Design about the location of a transit facility in the
Southbridge Crossings East area, including costs. Motion carried 3-0.
Lehman/Helkamp moved to authorize the appropriate City staff to purchase and implement the
T ASER X26 as a new department less lethal force option. (Motion carried under the Consent
Agenda).
Lehman/Helkamp moved to authorize the appropriate City officials to enter into the amended,
2003 Joint Powers Agreement between Southwest Metro Drug Task Force and the City of
Shakopee Police Department, and moved its adoption. (Motion carried under the Consent
Agenda).
Lehman/Helkamp moved to accept Brian Benz's resignation from the Shakopee Fire Department
with regrets. (Motion carried under the Consent Agenda).
Lehman/Helkamp moved to accept Mike Otteson's resignation from the Shakopee Fire
Department with regrets. (Motion carried under the Consent Agenda).
Lehman/Helkamp moved to accept the resignation of Scott Smith and authorize the
advertising for the Assistant City Engineer position in the Engineering Department. (Motion
carried under the Consent Agenda).
Official Proceedings of the August 19,2003
Shakopee City Council Page -23-
Lehman/Helkamp moved to authorize the use of engineering consultants for assistance during
this vacancy of the Assistant City Engineer position. (Motion carried under the Consent
Agenda).
LehmanJHelkanlp moved to authorize the hiring of Nicholas Delaney as a probationary part-time,
Community Service Officer at an hourly rate of$13.37, subject to the satisfactory completion of
pre-employment medical and psychological examinations. (Motion carried under the Consent
Agenda).
LehmanlHelkamp moved to set Tuesday, September 16,2003, at 7:00 p.m. to review the actions
of alcohol licensees: Knights of Columbus Home Association, Inc., 1760 East 4th Avenue, Babe's
Place, Inc., 124 South Holmes Street, Speedway SuperAmerica, 1298 Vierling Drive East, and
Derby, Inc., dba South Side Liquor, 1667 East 17th Avenue. (Motion carried under the Consent
Agenda).
LelunanlHelkamp offered Resolution No. 5917, A Resolution Changing The November 4,2003
City Council Meeting Date, and moved its adoption. (Motion carried under the Consent
Agenda).
Mr. McNeill reported on the Resolutions giving final approval for financing documents related to
the Northbridge Court Apartments project. He noted that this was a follow-up from the
Economic Development Authority (EDA) recommendation to enter into the Execution and
Delivery of an Indenture of Trust and Other Documents Related to the Northridge Apartments
Project.
He1kamp/Lehman offered Resolution No. 5933, A Resolution Approving The Execution And
Delivery Of An Indenture Of Trust And Other Documents Related To Northridge Apartments
Project, and moved its adoption. Motion carried 3-0.
Mr. McNeill reported on increasing the size of the City Council. Mr. McNeill noted that it was
authorized under State Law that the size of the Council could be changed from five members to
seven members. Mr. McNeill noted what needed to be done. Mr. McNeill noted that about 90%
of the communities in the Metropolitan area did have Councils consisting of the Mayor and four
Councilmembers. Mr. McNeill recommended to stay with what the City now had.
Mayor Mars stated that he had wanted to see these numbers and some of the pros and cons as to
whether the number of elected councilmembers should be changed. Mayor Mars noted he was
surprised with the numbers in the report. Cncl. Lehman stated the City did not have the funds to
increase the Council at this time. Cncl. Helkamp felt the City was doing fine as is.
LehmanlHelkamp offered Resolution No. 5932, A Resolution Giving Authority To The Issuance
Of Tax Exempt Revenue Obligations And Authorizing Execution Of A Joint Powers Agreement
Official Proceedings of the August 19, 2003
Shakopee City Council Page -24-
Relating To Such Revenue Obligations (St. Gertrudes/Steeple Pointe Project); and moved its
adoption. (Motion carried under the Consent Agenda).
LelunanlHelkamp moved to authorized the appropriate City officials to enter into ajoint powers
agreement providing for the issuance oftax exempt bonds to refinance a senior housing and
nursing facilities (St, Gertrudes/Steeple Pointe Project). (Motion carried under the Consent
Agenda).
Lehman/Helkamp moved to cancel the budget workshop originally scheduled for Wednesday,
August 20, at 7:00 p.m. and to reschedule the start time of the August 26th workshop to 6:20 p.m.
Mr. McNeill noted that today, August 19,2003, two Shakopee Public Utilities Commission
(SPUC) Commissioners resignations were received. One of these resignations was from Cole
Van Horn beeause he was moving out of the community. Mr. Van Horn noted in his letter of
resignation that he would like to finish his term out which would be approximately 6 months
from now. Mr. McNeill noted that Mr. Brian Young had also submitted his resignation effective
September 2, 2003 due to scheduling conflicts. Mr. McNeill noted how the resignation of then
SPUC Commission Dave Thompson's resignation was handled when he too moved from the
community .
LelunanlHelkamp moved to accept the resignation of Mr. Brian Young, with regrets, and to
reject the resignation of Cole Van Horn and to direct staff to advertise for two candidates for two
SPUC positions.
Cncl. Lehman noted this was consistent with the way Mr. David Thompson's term was handled.
Cncl. Helkamp added a friendly amendment to Mr. Brian Young's resignation stating Mr.
Young's resignation was effective September 2, 2003.
Motion carried 3-0.
Helkamp/Lehman moved to adjourn to Tuesday, August 26, 2003, at 6:20 p.m. at City Hall in
the Council Chambers. Motion carried 3-0. The meeting adjourned at 12:25 a.m.
[:::J.8;xc
City Clerk
Carole Hedlund
Recording Secretary