Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout7. Approval of Minutes: March 16, 2004 OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL ADJ. REGULAR SESSION SHAKOPEE,NITNNESOTA MARCH 16,2004 Mayor Schmitt called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. with Council members Lehman, Menden Joos and Helkarnp (8:15) present. Also present: Mark McNeill, City Administrator; Judith S. Cox, City Clerk; R. Michael Leek, Cornmunity.Development Director; Bruce Loney, Public Works Director/City Engineer; Gregg Vmdand, Finance Director; Paul Snook, Economic Development Coordinator; Jim Thomson, City Attorney; Mark Themig, Facilities and Recreation Director; Dan Hughes, Police Chief; Mike Hu1lander, Public Works Supervisor; and Tracy Schaefer, Assistant to the City Administrator. The pledge of allegiance was recited. LehmanlJoos moved to approve the Agenda as written. Motion carried 4-0. Mayor Schmitt noted this had been a busy two weeks. He noted there was a meeting with SPUC on March 11, 2004 and the Excel peaking station expansion was.discussed. He noted there was a Scott County Alliance for Leadership and Efficiency (SCALE) meeting held, as well as a retirement party for three retiring volunteer firefighters since the March 1, 2004 Council meeting, He noted that he also talked with a group of second graders from Red Oak about govenunent in action. The following item was removed from the Consent Agenda. 15.C.3. Acceptance of Play Structure Donation from Valleyfair. The following item was added to the Consent Agenda. 15.FA. Expanding the Automobile Insurance Coverage For Private Vehicles while on City Business. LehmanlMenden moved to approve the Consent Agenda as modified. Motion carried 4-0. Mayor Schmitt asked if there were any citizens present in the audience who wished to address any item not on the agenda. There was no response. LehmanlMenden moved to approve the meeting minutes for February 17, February 23, and March 1, 2004. (Motion carried under the Consent Agenda). LehmanlMendenmoved to approve the bills in the amount of $393,245.72 plus 201,012.99 for refunds, returns and pass through for a total of$594,258.71. (Motion carried under the Consent Agenda). [The list of bills is posted on the bulletin board at City Hall for one month following approval]. Lehman/Joos moved to open the public hearing regarding the $4,500,000 revenue bonds for the construction of an assisted living facility to be attached to St. Gertrude's Health Center. Motion carried 4-0. Official Proceedings of the March 16, 2004 Shakopee City Council Page -2- Mr. McNeill, City Administrator, noted that at the City Council meeting of February 17,2004 the public hearing was set regarding the assisted living facility attached to St. Gertrude's long- term care residence. Mr. McNeill noted that the City of Osseowould be issuing these bonds but technically the financing would be a joint venture through a joint powers agreement with the City of Osseo and the City of Shakopee. Lee Larson, CEO from St. Gertrude's, made a brief presentation, Mr. Larson showed via an overhead what the assisted living section adjacent to St. Gertrude's would look like. He noted this site was located on the St. Francis Campus and would be right next to the hospital for all medical needs of the residents. He noted this senior care assisted living would meet an unrnet need in the City of Shakopee. He noted the main entrance for the facility would come off Sarazin Street in front of the facility. This would be the main entrance for St. Gertrude's as well as the assisted living facility. They were attempting to provide a full continuum of services on the St. Francis Campus. He noted St. Francis was a member of the Benedictine Health facilities and spiritual care was also very important. There were interdenominational services frequently. He noted there would be no obligation or risk to the City of Shakopee in issuing these bonds. The City of Osseo bared the risk. Mayor Schmitt asked if anyone from the audience would like to be heard on this project. No one was present who asked to speak. Joos/Lehman moved to close the public hearing. Motion carried 4-0. Lehman/Mendenoffered Resolution No. 6021, A Resolution Giving Approval To The Issuance of Tax Exempt Loan Revenue Obligations And Authorizing Execution Of A Joint Powers Agreement Relating To Such Revenue Obligations (St. Gertrude's Health Center Project), and moved its adoption. Motion carried 4-0. Lehman/Menden moved to enter into a Joint Powers Agreement with the City of Osseo to Provide For the Issuance Of Tax Exempt Bonds To Refinance A Senior Housing And Nursing Facilities eSt. Gertrude's/Health Care Center Project). Motion carried4~0. Mr. Snook, Economic Development Coordinator, opened the presentation of the Vision Shakopee Annual Report. He noted that Bill Willkening, from Vision Shakopee, would present the annual report itself. Bill Willkening, Treasurer of Vision Shakopee, reported on the financial status of Vision Shakopee. This was probably the first annual report of the Vision Shakopee Partnership. He noted that the Board had been restructured and that Vision Shakopee Partnership had done a couple of things to improve communications. He noted that they now had a website and also a quarterly newsletter with a broad mailing base. He noted that Vision Shakopee Partnership held a planning retreat with many members of the community being invited. The purpose of this Official Proceedings of the March 16, 2004 Shakopee City Council Page -3- planning retreat was to talk about what Vision Shakopee should be doing this year. He stated some very good ideas and good discussion carne from the retreat. Vision Shakopee now had a plan of action of what they were going to do, as well as a budget to go along with the plan of action. He noted their banquet with the silent auction was their main source of income, at this time. A raffle was being added to Vision Shakopee'sbanquet this year. Other avenues to produce income needed to be explored, He noted other things that Vision Shakopee Partnership would be doing this year. These are: lighting a holiday tree, a walking touring of historic sights in Shakopee and a farmers market. He stated there would be an art fair in 2005 in downtown Shakopee. Vision Shakopee wanted to focus on bringing people to the downtown area. Mr. Willkening noted Vision Shakopee had assets of$16,100 at the end of2003. The net income for the year was a negative $12,800. He noted a good chunk of the cash that Vision Shakopee started the year with had been spent in 2003. He stated Vision Shakopee now had a balance of about $17,000. He noted a profit and loss sheet was enclosed forthe Council to see where the income and expenses were derived for Vision Shakopee. A new item has been added to the budget for additional income for 2004 and that was a $2,500.00 membership investment fee (this $2,500 was the total of all memberships expected this year). Memberships had never been sold before, all the income had been received through donations. Vision Shakopee was fairly certain that they would meet this goal. Mr. Willkening stated that some businesses not before associated with Vision Shakopee were now buying memberships. He stated the budget again for 2004 would be a deficient budget of about $7,200. The [mancial side of Vision Shakopee was a continuing challenge. Cnc1..Lehman suggested changing the meeting time for Vision Shakopee so more people could attend the meetings. This was thought to be a. good idea. Mr. Willkening thanked the Council members for their support. Cncl. Joos noted that Shakopee Public Utilities (SPUC) and Time Warner finished the pole attaclunent agreement with each other. He stated a few other issues were discussed. He noted SPUC was working on their new building, which was on schedule. Cncl. Joos stated that SPUC would like some information on the NSP Plan and the foregoing of taxes proposed by the legislature for the utility. Cncl. Joos noted there was discussion on the Northridge project regarding the water issue. It was noted that Mr. McNeill would set up a meeting with SPUC and see if a resolution could be figured out for the water problem with the Northridge project. Cnd. Mendennoted he attended the Vision Shakopee meeting. He stated the Vision Shakopee Banquet would be Wednesday, April 7, 2004 at 8:00 p.m. He stated that he also attended the School Board meeting and the discussion there was centered on establishing committees for the new school (steering & design).CncI. Menden noted the School Board would like to sit down with Michael Leek, Community Development Director, and the County Planner, as well, to look Official Proceedings of the March 16,2004 Shakopee City Council Page -4- at areas of potential growth where the next.school district land purchase should possibly be geared to. Mr. Themig noted that in April of2003 the City authorized a task force to help organize a citywide survey. This survey was administered in October/November of 2003 where much good information was received by the City regarding what the residents wanted their recreation to consist of. Mr. Themig acknowledged who the volunteers were for the Citizens Survey Task Force that helped develop the survey. Mr. Thernig noted there was a resolution tonight to thank all the members of the Citizens Survey Task Force for all of their work. Joos/Lehman offered Resolution No. 6024, A Resolution Of Appreciation To The Citizen Task Force For A Survey On Parks and Recreation Services, and moved its adoption, Motion carried 4~O. Mr. Themig reported on the Parks and Recreation planning process. He was reporting on the second phase of the process after the survey results had been reviewed. He noted the first recommendation from the Parks and Recreation Advisory Board was that the trails needed to be updated to reflect the growth that had occurred in the City since 1998. The trails plan had not been updated since 1998. The City needed to take a look atthe trail plan and finish the trails that had breaks in them where development had occurred. It was noted that the City needed to continue requiring developers to make trail connections and install trails when development occurred but that portion of the trail had not been put in. It was noted by Mr. Themig that trails were the number one amenity used by the residents and trails were rated the highest in terms of future improvements that the City needed to do. Mr. Themigstated land acquisition was also addressed in the survey for natural space, open space and active park areas. The Parks and Recreation Advisory Boards (PRAB) recommendation was that the Park Master Plan needed to be updated to reflect the growth and the parkland acquisition that had occurred since the plan was last updated in 1998. Search areas needed to be identified for future potential purchases for parkland. Mr. Themig noted there still were funds in the Park Reserve budget for a future land purchase~ The future of the community center was rated third, according to Mr, Themig, in level of importance. Mr. Themig stated as part of the failed referendum in 1999 some plans had been put together for potential enhancements in the community center. The PRAB determined that these plans needed to be re-Iooked at to see what options are available to enhance services at the community center. The PRAB needed to bring forward an updated plan for enhancements to the community center for the City Council to consider. Enhancements were imperative if the community center was to retain and gain memberships. Mr. Themig stated the survey also looked at neighborhood parks and community parks development. These parks nyed to q~ 88ntigued to be planned for as well as redevelopment of Official Proceedings of the March 16,2004 Shakopee City Council Page-5- current neighborhood parks and community parks put in the annual capital improvement program (CIP). There might have been some parks that have been overlooked and needed to be moved up in prioritization in the CIP process this year. Mr. Themig stated that he also thought park maintenance was an important piece of the survey results. There were comments in the survey that were both positive and negative regarding the maintenance of the parks. It was important that public works had the opportunity to look at standards for park maintenance so a program could be put together to help identify costs for the future. This recommendation carne from talking to staff from the public works division and the parks and recreation staff. Cncl. Joos asked if some of this information could come from the Natural Resource Director. Mr. Themig noted the considerations in moving these plans forward. He stated the City was currently updating their Comprehensive Plan and therefore, it would be difficult to update the Trail Plan and the Park Master Plan until this Comprehensive Plan Update was complete. The transportation corridors and where future growth was seen as happening would be identified in the Comprehensive Plan Update. Mr. Themig thought perhaps these plans (Trails and Park Master) could be done together with the Comprehensive Plan Update in an attempt to ward off duplicating work. The recommendation from the PRAB was to . begin work on planning options for enhancements to the community center. The PRAB also recommended that a Citizen Task Force be formed to assist them in this planning process for enhancements to the community center. Cncl. Joos noted that there were breaks in many of the sidewalks in town and he would like to see the sidewalks in the older sections of town incorporated into the trail plan and linked also. Mr. Leek noted there really was no sidewalk plan right now. Mayor Schmitt thought the sidewalk issue deserved some attention especially because of the change in school uses (vehicle traffic now would become pedestrian traffic). Mr. Themig noted that he would be coming back before the Council looking for their oyerall direction ona Master Plan for the community center and the enhancements would be part ofthat plan. Mr. Themignoted there was money budgeted this year to do an Update for the Park Comprehensive Plan. Mr. Themig noted that in time he would be asking for authorization to update the Trail Plan and the Park Master Plan. Mr. Themig stated that he thought the community center could stand alone but that the Trail Plan and the Park Master Plan could be combined with the Comprehensive Plan Update for efficiency. He felt the park maintenance was separate from these two components. Mayor Schmitt was concerned about being to aggressive and setting up an advisory group simultaneous with the long-term strategic planning process. Cncl. Joos stated he would like to see the preliminary leg work done at least on the community center. Mayor Schmitt stated he was worried about staff resources. /' Official Proceedings of the March 16, 2004 Shakopee City Council Page -6- Lehman/Menden moved to accept the Parks and Recreation Advisory Board's recommendation to begin work on a process that would analyze and develop options for enhancing the community center, and establish a citizen task force to assist them in this process. Motion carried 4-0. LehmanlMenden moved to remove the Heritage Preservation Ordinance and Heritage Preservation Commission issue from the table. Motion carried 4-0. Mr. Snook noted that Council was asked to direct staff to develop a Heritage Preservation Ordinance and Heritage Preservation Commission. This issue had been tabled at the last meeting for the purpose of having the Heritage Preservation Professionals attend the Council meeting so more information could be presented. Mr. Snook recapped the information that was presented at the March 1,2004, City Council meeting regarding this Heritage Preservation issue.. Mr. Snook also stated that there were many individuals in the City who were interested in the Historic Preservation. He did note that staffing had not been provided for any Historic Preservation. Staffing is typically done through the Planning Department. There needed to be discussion on the best way to staff this item. Some funding for local preservation programs was.available through matching funds through the Minnesota Historical Society. Michael Koop, Minnesota Historical Society, State Historic Preservation Office, showed some slides and explained the program he dealt with. The program was established in 1981 as a way of linking the local community's interest in preservation to the state preservation office and the national preservation office and to help develop a formal preservation process. Part of the mission ofthe State Historical Preservation Office was to preserve, protect and identify historical structures in Minnesota and then to get these historical pieces listed on the national register. Shakopee had four or five pieces of property on this national register. Mr. Koop mentioned some of the properties listed on the national register. Mr. Koop noted that just because a property was listed on the national register did not mean that it would be protected forever. If a private owner of a building listed on the national register wanted to demolish or alter the property he could do that. The purpose of tonight was to talk about a local presence to oversee historical sites through a preservation ordinance. The real purposeof a heritage commission waS to safeguard the local resources. Currently, there were 54 cities in the state that had Historical Preservation ordinances. This was actually quite a small number. Mr. Koop noted who could serve on a Heritage Preservation Commission. It was noted by Mr. Koop, that state enabling legislation did require that one member from the county historical society serve on the Historical Preservation Commission. The Historical Preservation Commission's charge was to identify historical resources and to designate them thru the City's ordinance and make recommendations to the City Council. The Historical Preservation Commission would review proposed changes to the exteriors of historic structures and try to educate people what a historical landmark was. /" Official Proceedings of the March 16, 2004 Shakopee City Council Page -7- Mr. Koop stated to become a member of the certified local government program you needed to pass an ordinance that meets certain requirements and the ordinance needed to identify certain things. These were: 1) spell out a process to survey and locally designate landmarks, 2) a process for reviewing proposed changes to the landmarked properties, 3) public involvement in the process where there were public hearings. Mr. Koop explained the funding that was available through the certified local government program (the money was federal money so the State could not touch it). Some money was set aside each year that went to all the cities that were certified local governments. This money did have the caveat that 20% of the match had to corne from local government funding. The balance of the match could be in-kind. There were only certain projects that could be funded with this federal money. Mr. Koop stated that he did not think the costs would be as high now as they would be a couple of years down the road. Right now many of the things that a Historical Preservation Commission needed to do would qualify for a matching grant. Mr. Koop noted not all communities were set up to have a Heritage Preservation Commission or Heritage Preservation Ordinance. He noted economic development and preservation worked hand in hand. It took time for the Heritage Preservation Ordinance and Heritage Preservation Commission ideato germinate and move forward. Mr..Koop stated there was no model Heritage Preservation ordinance available but he could send several examples of other cities Heritage Preservation ordinances. The City Attorney could then step in and make changes as he saw fit. When a Heritage Preservation Ordinance and Heritage Preservation Commission were set up it was normally driven by some . local group pressing for an ordinance. It was noted that there could be certain historic districts (with tax advantages) as well as individual historic places. There were different criteria for national level designation as a historic feature as opposed to local government designation in recognizing certain properties. Mr. Koop stated the local ordinance provided the teeth behind the protection for a historic designation. This extra protection was the additional level of review. Cncl. Helkamp arrived at the meeting at 8:15 p.m. and took his seat. John Gutterer, Executive Director of the Scott County Historical Society, stated that there has not been a systematic historic review of historical properties in Scott County. With the establishment of a Heritage Preservation Ordinance and Heritage Preservation Commission it may be found that there are some properties eligible for national register nomination if the owners of the properties chose to pursue this avenue and become eligible for the tax credits. The Scott County Historical Society was interested in bringing recognition to historical properties in Shakopee. Once the historical properties were gone, they were gone. He noted that the convention bureau for Shakopee was working on cultural tourism and they recognized the possibilities of th~ economic impact that historical pieces of property could bring to the City. I~ Official Proceedings of the March 16, 2004 Shakopee City Council Page -8- Mayor Schmitt felt the community needed to be asked if they were interested in tIlls idea ofa Heritage Preservation Ordinance and Heritage Preservation Commission. Mr. Snook stated there was interest in the community and through the Shakopee Heritage Society fora Heritage Preservation Ordinance and Heritage Preservation Commission. Don McNeill, 1101 Naurnkeag Street, noted he moved to Shakopee because ofthe historical flavor of the town, He noted the Shakopee Heritage Society was very much interested in this issue. He noted many out of town people drove around Shakopee to look at things in Shakopee that were not in their City and the City of Shakopee needed to recognize this fact. He was in favor of the Heritage Preservation Ordinance and establishment of a Heritage Preservation Commission. Jay Whiting, 520 3rd Avenue, member of the Shakopee Heritage Society, thanked the Mayor and the Council for at least looking at this idea and considering it. . He noted Shakopee had a rich history to preserve. He thought many people would be interested in serving on a Heritage Preservation Commission. Cncl. Menden noted moving directly into a development of an ordinance maybe was not the way to go right now. He suggested that Mr. Snook survey the community to see what they felt about a committee possibly putting together an ordinance and to get some feedback. Cncl. Joos noted many new Boards and Commissions had already been committed too and staff was really getting overloaded. He proposed that all the boards and commissions be looked at because of all the staff time they required. Cncl. Lehman thought having a Heritage Preservation Advisory Citizen Group get together and start putting together some ideas for some heritage preservation would be a good thing. He would like to be in front of the curve and he would like this issue looked at by some of the citizens. Cncl. Helkarnp noted this was important to the citizens and to the economic vitality of the City. He was not ready to jump right into an ordinance without this issue being looked at first. He would like this citizen group to work with the Economic Development Advisory Committee (EDAC) and with Mr. Snook. Cncl. Joos was concerned about staff time and the money. Mayor Schmitt felt the folks (Shakopee Heritage Society)interested in this process should move forward and form a Shakopee Heritage Preservation group working with the Minnesota Historical Society, Mr. Koop's Historic Preservation program and the Scott County Historical Society with Mr.Snookcoordinating all these groups; this group could then corne back to the City Council with a recommendation. The City needed to see how much interest the residents really had in this issue. Mayor Schmitt did not think the City was ready for an ordinance yet either, LehmanlMenden moved to direct Mr. Snook to work with the Shakopee Heritage Society so that he would be able to give updates to the City Council on how this issue was progressing (how it Official Proceedings of the March 16, 2004 Shakopee City Council Page -9- was coming and where it was going and what they were talking about) on a regular basis probably in the form of activity reports. Mr. Snook's job description would be looked at to see ifhis time and effort were appropriate. Motion carried 5-0. Lehrnan/Menden offered Resolution No. 6028, A Resolution Adopting Standard Specifications And Standard Detail Plates For Street And Utility Construction, and moved its adoption. (Motion carried under the Consent Agenda). HelkamplMenden moved to recess at 8:45 p.m. Mayor Schmitt reconvened the City Council meeting at 8:58 p.m. Judy Cox, City Clerk, reported on Mr. Schwaesdall's request for prorating the liquor license fee for outdoor seating. Mr. Schwaesdall submitted a letter to the City asking that the liquor license fees be prorated for outdoor seating because outdoor seating areas were limited to the number of days they could be used by the weather. Ms. Cox noted that.in August of 2000 the City Council granted Mr. Schwaesdall a liquor license to serve alcohol in his proposed outdoor seating area. At that time, the inside area was remodeled creating more indoor seating as well as the outdoor seating area being constructed. Mr. Schwaesdall's liquor license fees went up in 2002 because of the increased seating to the indoor seating and because the liquor license included fees for the outdoor seating area. Ms. Cox explained the City liquor license fees were based on the customer use floor area excluding certain areas. Ms. Cox noted that the City Council had approved four other outdoor seating liquor licenses in the City. Ms. Cox stated that staff looked at the Association of Metropolitan Municipalities Municipal License and Permit ~ee Survey of2003. It was noted according to this survey, two other cities in the metropolitan area based their liquor license fee on the customer use of the floor area, one city charged a flat fee for outdoor seating and another City did not charge for outdoor seating at all. Staff recommended prorating the license fee for approximately four months of the year when the outdoor seating would most likely be used. This fee would be one-third the amount based on customer used floor area for the outdoor seating area. This was being recommended for all outdoor seating areas in the City. Ms. Cox recommended that staff come back with a revised fee schedule for liquor licenses. It was not staff s intent to identify a time period just a time frame of one-third year. This was strictly for outside dining. Helkamp/J oos moved to direct staff to prepare an amendment to the fee schedule and to set the on sale intoxicating license fee for outdoor seating at one-third of whatever the fee would be for the additional square footage for the outdoor seating and for this amended fee schedule to become effective"for renewals occurrip.g July 1,2004. Official Proceedings of the March 16, 2004 Shakopee City Council Page -10- Motion carried 5-0. Mr. Themig reported on the City's acceptance of play structures to be donated by Valleyfair. Mr. Themig noted that he received a call from Dave V osepka saying Valleyfair had two play structures that needed to be moved and he asked if the City would be interested in them. Mr. Themig noted he and the park maintenance staff in the Public Works Department went and took a look at the play structures and agreed to take them offValleyfair's hands. Mr. Themig noted one of the play structures was installed in 2000, therefore it was a relatively new play structure and in really good condition. The play equipment was appropriate for ages 2 to 5 and the play equipment met all current safety and accessibility standards. Mr. Themig noted this play equipment had a value of about $20,000. Mr. Themig stated the second play structure was slightly older. It was installed around 1993 or 1994. This equipment was more appropriate for ages 3 and up. About $2,000 in modifications was needed for this play equipment to meet current safety standards. This play equipment was in good condition but was faded slightly. This structure was valued between $25,000 to $30;000. Mr. Themig noted several places where this play equipment couldbe used~ He was concerned about placing this play equipment in existing parks with light colored play equipment because these donated pieces were lively colored. Mr. Themig noted he had been contacted by the Central Family Center asking if the City would be willing to participate with a play structure that would serve residents in the area as well as some school type activities. Mr. Themig noted that the newer of the two play structures being donated by Valleyfair was appropriate for this site. Mr. Themig noted that he worked with the City Attorney,Jim Thomson, to see that ValIeyfair was relieved of any legal obligations (liability) should the City accept this play equipment. Mr. Themig noted there was a hold harmless clause in the resolution to provide this protection for Valleyfair. Mr. Themig stated that Valleyfair needed to have this equipment removed as soon as possible. The Public Works Department was worked with and they felt that they could remove this equipment in a timely fashion. Lehrnan/Helkarnp offered Resolution No. 6029. A Resolution Accepting A Donation Of Two Play Structures From Cedar Fair L.P., DBA Valleyfair Family Amusement Park, and moved its adoption. Mayor Schmitt asked about updating some of the colors on the older of the two play structures being donated to the Qity by Valleyfajr. Mr. Themig noted he had obtained some figures on Official Proceedings of the March 16, 2004 Shakopee City Council Page -11- updating the color and it would cost about $10,000 to replace the plastic pieces. Mr. Themig noted the play equipment was faded but it was not unpleasing to the eye. Mayor Schmitt thought the money to update the older piece of play equipment could be included in the 2005 budget. This piece of equipment did not need to be installed immediately. Cncl. Lehman asked Mr. Vosejka to tell Valleyfair officials of the appreciation from the Shakopee City Council in donating this play equipment. Cncl. Menden noted there appeared to some interest from the School District in participating in some of the costs of moving and reinstalling this equipment at the Central Family Center. This appeared to be a win/win situation for all involved. Mr. V osejpka noted that Valleyfair was glad for the opportunity to provide this play equipment to the City. He also thanked Mr. Themig for his quick response to this request. Motion carried 5-0. Mr. Loney, Public Works Director/City Engineer, reported on the request to accept the feasibility report and set the hearing date for Valley View Road improvements. He stated that the last half- . mile of Valley View Road was still gravel. The feasibility report for the Valley ViewRoad Improvements from the east plat line of Greenfield to CSAH 83, project 2004-3 had been completed. The goal of the City and the Council has been to get another paved collector road out to County Road 83 to help relieve some of the traffic that was building up on County Road 17. Mr. Loney stated to get this road built this year staffwas proposing that the road be built to the 44 foot wide specifications of an urban section of road and there was a 66 foot right-of-way in most places. Mr. Loney was of the belief that Valley View Road could be built with the existing right-of-way. The trail and sidewalk would be left off in areas where the right-of-way was not sufficient. Mr. Loney noted there was right-of-way on the Park Meadows Plat and the other segments of the trail could be left for future plats to do; thereby, requiring the developer to dedicate the right-of-way and to put in the trail and the sidewalk. This approach would save the City many dollars and it was legal for this to be required. Mr. Loney stated the Park Meadows Plat would be required to put in the trail and would be assessed for that; the undergrounding of the overhead power lines would probably also be required. Mr. Loney noted the acreages left were large and in Green Acres so the assessments would be recouped in time. Mr. Loney explained how assessments on Green Acres worked. Mr. Loney noted if this approach was okay the report should be accepted; if the Council wanted all the right-of way purchased so all the sidewalks could be put in now, then the report would need to be amended. He noted the Tahpah Park parking lot had been included in this feasibility report but staff was recommending that Tahpah Park parking lot improvements not be done at this time because an overall master plan for this park needed to be looked at. The Tahpah Park Official Proceedings of the March 16, 2004 Shakopee City Council Page -12- improvement project needed to corne back in the CIP and be attached to another project for bonding at a future date. Cncl. Lehman addressed the ponding issue west of County Road 83 and north of Valley View Road. Mr. Loney addressed this ponding issue and noted what would be done if no drainage agreements could be worked out with the Mdewakanton Sioux Community. Mayor Schmitt asked Michael Leek, Community Development Director, if a way could be figured out to defer the landscaping on the southern and eastern boundaries because the City did not own the right-of-way and it would be futile anyway; future development would most likely harm the trees that were put in today. When this land was developed, then the developers would become responsible for the landscaping. Mr. Leek was to check and see what needed to be for this to occur. Mr. Leek thought the mechanism for thisto occur was through the plat approval process that the City had now. Mr. Loney pointed out at the intersection of County Road 83 and Valley View Road the City had included a bypass lane and a right turn lane. The City was working with Scott County to qualify for safety improvement funding to reduce the City's cost for the Valley View Road Improvements from the east plat line of Greenfield to CSAH83, Project 2004-3, Mr. Loney noted that the undergrounding of the overhead power lines would be done through the right-of-way ordinance. Mr. Loney stated if the project was ordered this undergrounding.ofthe overhead power lines in the Park Meadows Plat could be brought back before the Council in the design process. The undergrounding would only occur in the Park Meadows plat because of the location of the trail; the rest of the powerlines would remain overhead for now. It was because the. City was requiring a trail that the power lines would need to be undergrounded. Helkamp/Joos offered Resolution No. 6025, A Resolution Receiving A Report And Calling A Hearing For Improvements To Valley View Road, From The East Plat Line Of Greenfield Addition To County Road 83, Project No. 2004-3, and moved its adoption. Motion carried 5-0. LehmanlMenden moved to authorize the purchase of a 1 ton 4x4 pickup from Superior Ford in the amount of$17,685 in accordance with the Minnesota State light truck contract #432185. (Motion carried under the Consent Agenda). LehmanlMenden moved to approve the purchase of 11 sets of firefighting turnout gear from Fire Equipment Specialties for the amount of$13,489.96. (Motion carried under the Consent Agenda). Lehman/Menden moved to declare the 1994 Oldsmobile Bravada, VIN IGHDT13WXR0703787 and the 1994 Plymouth Voyager Van, VIN 2P4GH2537RR531684 as surplus Property. (Motion carried under the Consent Agenda). Official Proceedings of the March 16, 2004 Shakopee City Council Page -13- Lehman/Menden moved to approve the purchase. of cleaning equipment from Hillyard, Dalco and Sanco in the total amount of $39,168.62. (Motion carried under the Consent Agenda). Lehman/Menden moved to authorize the appropriate City officials to enter into an agreement with Metro Sales for lease and service of a Ricoh Aficio 2238C Color Digital Imaging System. (Motion carried under the Consent Agenda). Lehman/Menden moved to authorize the renewal of the agreements with Shakopee Coyotes Baseball Team and Shakopee Indians Baseball Team to operate Joe Schleper Baseball Stadium concessions stand through August 31, 2004. (Motion carried under the Consent Agenda). Mr. Loney reported on the Mechanics Assistant position in the Public Works Department. Lehman/Helkamp moved to remove the Mechanics Assistant position in the Public Works Department from the table. Motion carried 5-0. Mr. Loney stated he was bringing more information forward regarding the Mechanic's Assistant position in Public Works. He noted the 2004 budget did include a third mechanic. He stated the Public Works Department has had a full-time temporary mechanics helper in the shop all of2003 and all of 2004 in an attempt for the shop to catch up on the vehicle maintenance tasks and because of the additional maintenance work associated with the Fire Department equipment and the Police Department vehicles. Mr. Loney noted the position was looked at to see if a mechanic was needed but it was felt that a mechanic's assistant would meet the needs now. Mr. Loney noted he has found since the approval of the mechanic's helper position that the City of Coon Rapids uses a mechanics helper position to start all their mechanics at, they were expected to reach certain service levels and to pass a promotional (ASE certification tests) examination before reaching a Public Works Shop maintenance mechanic position. Mr. Loney liked this program at the City of Coon Rapids and was considering using this program for future mechanics for the City of Shakopee. Mr. Loney stated the salary proposed to be paid for. a mechanics helper was very consistent to the pay of a mechanics assistant for the City of Coon Rapids. He noted the City of Shakopee had a higher standard of pay in their pay plan. After a mechanics helper in the Coon Rapids pay plan reached the first step of being a mechanic then the pay was equal to what the City of Shakopee was now starting their mechanics at. Mr. Loney thought a better option at this point in time for the City was to take the mechanics helper position and reword the job description. Mr. Loney stated that the City's consultant for the City's pay plans looked at the position; this position was rated at grade three by the consultant. He would like to make the temporary full-time position that is now on a temporary basis a full-time position. This position would need to be advertised. Because this full-time temporary position in the union shop has been on-going for some time the union was telling the City that a timeline needed to be made stating when a decision regarding Official Proceedings of the March 16, 2004 Shakopee City Council Page -14- this position would be made. As of now that date was March 31, 2004. Mr. Loney acknowledged that. something needed to be done. He did not think a full-time mechanic was needed yet but there was need for a full-time mechanics helper or a full-time mechanic's assistant. Mr. Loney stated he liked the mechanic's helper being called an "assistant" as opposed to "helper" but the assistant position was a little higher ranking (pay wise and requirement wise) than the helper position. Mr. Loney's preference was a helper but with the terminology of assistant. Lehman/Helkamp directed staff to begin the hiring process for a Mechanic's Helper position as presented using the Mechanic's Helper job description but changing the title to a Mechanic's Assistant. Motion carried 5-0. Lehman/Menden moved to authorize the hiring of Scott Weiers as a probationary police officer, at Step 1 of the current labor contract, at a monthly rate of $3,358.58, subject to the satisfactory completion of pre-employment medical and psychological examinations. (Motion carried under the Consent Agenda). Lehman/Menden moved to authorize the hiring of Derek Nordvedt as a probationary police officer, at Step 1 of the currentlabor contract, at a monthly rate of $3,358.58, subject to the satisfactory completion of pre-employment medical and psychological examinations. (Motion carried under the Consent Agenda), Mr. Leek, Community Development Director, reported on the hiring of an additional full-time building inspector. Mr. Leek stated this position was included in the 2004 budget. He noted currently the City was operating with one building official and three building inspectors. Mr. Leek stated that he anticipated that the growth in the City would continue at an accelerated pace for some years to corne. Mr. Leek noted there were other areas of inspections that needed to be addressed; therefore the City would retain the ability to keep this additional building inspector busy. Mr. Leek asked that the past list of candidates be re-certified if this position was approved. This list contained many worthwhile candidates. Helkamp/Lehman moved to authorize the hiring of an additional full-time building inspector and to re-certify the previous candidate list from the County. Motion carried 5-0. Lehman/Menden moved to authorize the appropriate City officials to extend the Cleaning Contract, under the same terms and conditions, with Coverall Cleaning Concepts until December 2004 to clean the park buildings at Tahpah Park, Lions Park, Memorial Park and Hiawatha Park. (Motion carried under the Consent Agenda). , Official Proceedings of the March 16, 2004 Shakopee City Council Page -15- LehrnanlMenden moved to approve distribution of the state-processing rebate to Shakopee residents serviced through the City refuse contract with Dick's Sanitation with a one-time rebate on each customer's bill. (Motion carried under the Consent Agenda). Lehrnan/Menden moved to extend the City's automobile liability coverage as primary for privately owned vehicles when used for City business. (Motion carried under the Consent Agenda). Lehrnan/Menden moved to direct staff to prepare an amendment to the City Code to increase the purchasing limit from $5,000 to $10,000 for items not requiring prior Council approval. (Motion carried under the Consent Agenda). Lehrnan/Menden moved to direct staff to prepare an ordinance amending the Fee Schedule to charge properties using the Savage sewer interconnects the flow rate of $2.90/1,000 gallons of water used. (Motion carried under the Consent Agenda). Lehrnan/Menden moved to approve the transfer of $256,899 from the 1998A Debt Service Fund to the Capital Improvement Fund. (Motion carried under the Consent Agenda). Mr. Leek reported on the Appeal of permit fees for the re-roofing of two eight-unit buildings submitted to the City by Mr. G. Leonard West. Mr. West was of the opinion that each eight unit building was governed by a homeowners association and a re-roofing fee should not be based on the number of units. Mr. Leek asked this issue be tabled until the next meeting because the applicant was no longer present to address the Council. Cncl. Helkarnp asked the opinion of the City Attorney, Jim Thomson, regarding this issue. Cucl. Helkamp noted the appellant had an opinion from his attorney. Mr. Leek noted that Mr. West contacted an attorney who was familiar with common interest communities (CIC) properties, as well as contacting Ray Joachim, Minnesota State building official. Mr. Leek stated that Jim Grarnpre, the City's building official, talked with staff at the state and came away with the understanding that the state staff appeared to generally agree with Mr. West's position but that it ultimately was the local City's interpretation and application of what fees should be charged for re-roofing. Mr. Leek stated City staff had contacted several cities to see how they determined the fee for their re-roofing permits. Mr. Leek noted the re-roofing fee was determined several different ways by other cities. The City Attorney stated the City could go either way on this issue. Mr. Thomson stated the outside of an eight unit CIC could be maintained by a homeowners association but the air space between the walls was owned by individuals. He stated whatever way the City thought was the fair way, was the way to act. The City Attorney did ask how the City determined fees on non CIC properties. Mr. Leek stated if it was an apartment building or a rental duplex then the re-roof fee was based on one contract amount. Mr. Leek stated whatever way the City wanted the re-roofing fee calculated City staff was fine with. Official Proceedings of the March 16, 2004 Shakopee City Council Page -16- Mayor Schmitt was concerned about the size of the building in determining the re-roofing fee. Cncl. Helkamp asked Mr. Leek if the fee was charged as one roof - did that cover the City's cost of doing the inspections for that roof? Mr. Leek answered generally speaking yes. Cncl. Lehman felt with seeing what other Cities were chargingJor fees for re-roofing the City of Shakopee appeared to be competitive. Mr. Leek stated how the City figured their cost of a re- roofing permit. Cncl. Joos felt there should be only one permit. Cncl. Helkamp stated he was leaning towards upholding Mr. West's appeal and directing staff to go ahead and make the necessary changes to treat this as a single roof. Cncl. Lehman would like to hear from Mr, West. Helkamp/Joos moved to direct staff to prepare a resolution upholding the appeal ofMagnUffi Contractors to be acted upon by the City Council at their April 6, 2004 meeting and to prepare an amendment to the fee schedule and to return any portion of the fee that may have been charged in excess to Magnum Contractors. Mayor Schmitt stated he would like to remain in the middle of the road for re-roofing permit fees; he thought treating this building as one roof was a little low. Cncl. Joos suggested that staff take a look at the issue and corne back with a percentage amount that would accomplish what the Council wanted to do with this re-roofing permit fee issue (equate the values). Motion carried 5-0. Lehman/Menden offered Resolution No. 6026, A Resolution Setting The Public Hearing Date To Consider The Vacation Of Easement, North of 4th A venue East, East Of Shenandoah Drive And South Of Highway 101, and moved its adoption. (Motion carried under the Consent Agenda). Lehman/Menden offered Resolution No. 6027, A Resolution Of The City Of Shako pee, Minnesota Approving The Final Plat Of Riverside Fields Second Addition, and moved its adoption. (Motion carried under the Consent Agenda). Lehman/Menden moved to accept the successful completion of Duane Toenyan's probationary period and grant him regular full-time status. (Motion carried under the Consent Agenda). Cncl. Helkamp gave his liaison report at this time. He noted Scott County Association for Leadership and Efficiency (SCALE) did send out a request for proposal (RFP) for the joint training facility for the County, Cities and Townships for their Police and Fire Departments. Cncl. Helkarnp noted Mark McNeill, City Administrator, did an enormous amount of work in preparing the RFP. Mr. Helkarnp noted the Scott County Board was working on the County's '" -- Official Proceedings of the March 16, 2004 Shakopee City Council Page -17- Comprehensive Plan Update. He noted the County would like to get from the City issues and concemsthat were important to the City that the County should know about. Cncl. Helkamp noted the Chamber ofCornmerce selected Canterbury Park as the Business of the Year for 2003. Helkamp/Lehman moved to recess at 10:00 p.m. for the purpose of conducting an executive session to discuss labor negotiations. Motion carried 5-0. Mayor Schmitt re-convened the meeting at 10:35 p.m. ( Mayor Schmitt reported that the council was returning from an executive session and that 110 action was taken during the executive session. Lehman/Joos moved to adjourn. Motion carried 5-1. The meeting adjourned at 10:35 p.m. JJJ:L J. ep ~~ s. Cox City Clerk Carole Hedlund Recording Secretary