Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout7. Approval of Minutes: March 1, 2005 (Regular Session) and March 10, 2005 OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL ADJ. REGULAR SESSION SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA MARCH 10, 2005 The March 1,2005, City Council meeting was adjourned to Thursday, March 10,2005 at 6:00 p.m. to the community center. The purpose of the March 10th meeting was to address any additional matters that may arise that would need Council consideration prior to the acquisition of the Shutrop property scheduled for March 11,2005. Since there were no additional matters that needed to be addressed by the City Council at this time, there was no need for the City Council to meet on March 10,2005. Councilor Menden and Councilor Joos and City Clerk, Judith S. Cox, met at 6:00 p.m. in the Rotary Room at the community center. Councilor Joos announced that there was no business to come before the City Council and adjourned the meeting to 5:00 p.m. on Tuesday, March 15,2005. ~~J.fr( ~ ith s. Cox ity Clerk OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL REGULAR SESSION SfUU(OPEE,NUNNESOTA MARCH 1, 2005 Mayor Schmitt called the March 1, 2005 Regular City Council meeting to order at 7:09 p.m. with Council members Lehman, Menden, Helkamp and Joos present. Also Present: Mark McNeill, City Administrator; Judith S. Cox, City Clerk; R. Michael Leek, Community Development Director; Bruce Loney, Public Works Director/City Engineer; Gregg Voxland, Finance Director; Jim Thomson, City Attorney; Mark Themig, Parks, Recreation and Facilities Director. The pledge of allegiance was recited. The following items were removed from the Agenda. Item No. 14.B. Comprehensive Plan Amendment to Re-guide, extend MUSA and Rezoning Request from RADS for property located east of CSAH 83 and north of Valley View Road extended (this item was deleted from the agenda at the request of the applicant); and item 15.F.!. Scott County HAZMAT Joint Powers Agreement. The following item was added to the Agenda. Item No. 15.FA. Adjourn to a special meeting at 6:00 p.m. March to, 2005 to allow for fmal discussion on the Shutrop property. Menden/Joos moved to approve the Agenda as amended. Motion carried 5-0. Mayor Schmitt stated the loan payment had been delivered to Challenge Printing. He noted Challenge Printing was up and running. He noted that roughly 80 new employees had been hired since their move here. He stated it appeared the projects out in Dean Lakes were getting busy. The followings items were added to the Consent Agenda. 10. a) Update on Community Strategic Visioning Process; to.b) City Goals and Action Plan and 15.D.3. Army Corps of Engineers Request for a Riverbank Stabilization FeasibilityStudy. The following item was deleted from the Consent Agenda. 15. F. 1. Scott County HAZMAT Joint Powers Agreement (deleted from the agenda). Lehman/Helkamp moved to approve the Consent Agenda as modified. Motion carried 5-0 Mayor Schmitt asked if there were any citizens present in the audience who wished to address any item not on the agenda. There was no response. Lehman/Helkamp moved to approve the meeting minutes for January 18 (Adj. Reg.), and February 1,2005. (Motion carried under the Consent Agenda). Lehman/Helkamp moved to approve the bills in the amount of$798,688.35 plus $63,925.68 for refunds, returns and pass through for a total of$862,614.03. (Motion carried under the Consent Official Proceedings of March 1,2005 Shakopee City Council Page -2- Agenda). [The list of bills is posted on the bulletin board at City Hall for one month following approval]. Helkamp/Menden moved to remove from the table and continue the public hearing on the proposed vacation of a portion of an easement on property located at 2460 Emerald Lane. Motion carried 5-0. Mr. Leek, Community Development Director, reported on the public hearing for a partial vacation of a drainage and utility easement requested by Leo and Cynthia Katzner and the appeal of the denial by the Board of Adjustment and Appeals of a variance to allow the addition that the applicant is proposing for the site. He noted the property was located on Emerald Lane. He noted the applicant supplied several graphics so the Council and the audience could understand the request. He stated the applicant was proposing the addition to the rear of their house to be 71fz feet in width and 13 feet in length. Mr. Leek stated this particular addition as it was planned now would extend I1fz feet into the utility easement and 11fz feet into the side yard setback of the house. Mr. Leek noted the easement line where the utility easement was requested to be partially vacated and also the area of the variance request. Mr. Leek noted the public hearing had been continued because there was an expectation that the applicant would appeal the side yard variance decision of the Board of Adjustment and Appeals. Mr. Leek stated the Planning Commission did recommend denial of the requested easement vacation to the City Council. Mr. Leek noted the side yard setback was ten feet and the drainage and utility easement was ten feet as well. Mr. Leek noted now the side yard utility easements for a residential area was usually five feet. Mr. Leek stated he was not aware of any utilities in this particular easement right now. He noted staffs concern and Planning Commission's concern was the potential use of this easement in the future. Mr. Leek noted potential uses of the utility easement for future use. Leo Katzner, 2460 Emerald Lane, noted he was the original owner of the property. He explained the addition would be a walk in closet and making it smaller was not practicable. He stated he had tried to maintain the character of the neighborhood with this addition. He noted all the utilities ran along the street in the front of the house except for cable that came for the back. He stated the utility easement was only used for drainage. He noted he was at the high point and the water drained away from him. He saw no future need for drainage work in the area. He stated if he could not build a walk in closet by 71fz feet by 13 feet a hardship would be created for him and his wife. Cncl. Lehman suggested some alterations to the plan. Mayor Schmitt asked staff the reason for the Planning Commission's recommendation for denial. Mr. Katzner responded that the Planning Commission stated they did not have the authority to grant this vacation because the criteria had not met been but the City Council was not tied to the criteria. Cncl. Joos took exception to this comment. Cncl. Joos thought perhaps the ordinance Official Proceedings of March 1,2005 Shakopee City Council Page -3- needed to be revisited. Cncl. Joos stated he was very protective of the easements because they may be needed for future use. Cncl. Lehman asked for more information on the cantilever that had been discussed. Mr. Katzner responded to the cantilever as City staff explained it to him. He noted he was not excited about doing a cantilever and he did not see where either party (he or the City) benefited from a cantilever design. Mr. Thomson noted there were two agenda items tonight. These were: 1) the vacation of easement and 2) the variance. Mr. Thomson noted that a hardship did not have to shown to grant a vacation of easement. Helkamp/Menden moved to close the public hearing. Motion carried 5-0. Helkamp/Joos offered Resolution No. 6190, A Resolution Of The City Of Shako pee Denying The Request To Vacate A Portion Of An Easement At 2460 Emerald Lane, and moved its adoption. Cncl. Menden noted he did not think it was an undue request for these reasons: 1) because of the width of the easement and 2) the probability of a substantial future use of the easement. Cncl. Lehman noted he was opposed to a variance for this use but he did agree with Cncl. Menden and he did support a portion of the easement to be vacated to allow this addition to happen. He did not think this vacation would have a negative impact on the neighboring homes, he had not heard any negative comments from the neighbors and he did not see this partial vacation harming the City. He felt the government was suppose to work for and with the people. Mr. Leek stated if the applicant wished to construct the addition as proposed he would need the variance along with the vacation of easement. It was noted an addition with a cantilever could be constructed with the vacation of the easement only. The applicant would not be able to build what he really wanted unless a variance was granted. Cncl. Joos was concerned about houses being constructed so close to the lot line. He did not think it was the City's problem to correct this type problem. Motion carried 3-2 with Cncl. Lehman and Cncl. Menden dissenting. Mr. Leek addressed the denial by the Board of Adjustment and Appeals of the 1.5 foot setback variance at 2460 Emerald Lane. Mr. Leek stated the Council had just voted to deny vacating the easement; therefore, the variance was mute. Official Proceedings of March 1,2005 Shakopee City Council Page -4- Lehman/Joos moved to direct staff to prepare a resolution upholding the denial by the Board of Adjustment and Appeals of the 1.5 foot setback variance at 2460 Emerald Lane and to bring that resolution back for action at the next meeting. Motion carried 4-1 with Cncl. Menden dissenting. Cncl. Lehman noted he attended the Park And Recreation Advisory Board (pRAB) meeting with the largest share of that meeting being a joint meeting with the PRAB and the citizen task force looking at a possible expansion of the community center. Cnc1. Joos noted he attended a Shakopee Public Utilities Commission (SPUC) meeting. He noted at the SPUC meeting SPUG discussed their goals and objectives for the year. He noted he attended a Visioning meeting and a Shakopee Visioning initiative session was set up for residents to come to an open house on March 10. 2005 and talk about the visioning process. Cnc1. Helkamp stated he attended a Chamber Board meeting and noted the Chamber was disappointed that money for the entrance monument/s did not make it through the budget process again. Joos/Helkamp moved to recess at 7:45 p.m. for the purpose of conducting the Economic Development Authority meeting. Motion carried 5-0. Mayor Schmitt re-convened the City Council meeting at 7:58 p.m. Mr. Leek, Community Development Director, reported on the request from Associated Capital Corporation (ACC) for a Comprehensive Plan amendment to re-guide, extend MUSA, and rezone property located west of Marschall Road and south of County Road 78. Mr. Leek noted this item had been on the agenda the month before and based on that conversation he had been directed to come back with a resolution denying the rezoning for 55 acres of the subject site but he had been directed to bring back an ordinance to approve the request to re-zone approximately 25 acres of the site. Mr. Leek noted a portion of the property had been granted MUSA several years ago. Mr. Leek stated since that meeting this request was discussed at, there has been additional information regarding the booster station. Mr. Leek noted about 26 lots in the Valley Creek Crossings plat, already approved, across County Road 78 from the subject property; need to be served by this booster station because of the elevation they are in (pressure purposes). Mr. Leek noted this booster station was designed to handle about 400 lots. He stated the applicant had discussion with SPUC about the booster station and stated they would move forward on the land across County Road 78 in an effort to help with the costs of the booster station. Cnc1. Joos also addressed some other reasons for SPUC that it would be desirable to have this project move forward. Mr. Leek noted it was in the 1999 Comprehensive Plan that was adopted in 2002 that MUSA was extended to the 25 acres on the south side of County Road 78. Mayor Schmitt asked why these 25 acres was singled out for MUSA back in 1999. Mr. Leek noted MUSA for this specific area had been requested at one of Official Proceedings of March 1,2005 Shakopee City Council Page -5- the public hearings for this 1999 Comprehensive Plan and that comment was on record so the MUSA was extended. Joe Adams, Shakopee Public Utilities, noted the expectations for the first water tower area on Wood Duck Trail was that a water tower would be needed by 2009 based on growth and demand projections. Mr. Adams clarified payment ofthe infrastructure. He noted the water connection charge was the method used to pay for a booster station and how this charge was arrived at. Jim Cook, Secretary/Treasurer of ACC and former utilities Commissioner for the City of Shakopee, addressed the booster station. He noted he was on the Commission when long range planning was looked at for the water system going down Marschall Road and getting into the two pressure zones located near the intersection of Marschall Road and County Road 78. He noted SPUC had learned from experience that the booster station is not an interim solution; it is an integral part of the water system. He stated the booster station had to go in; it was the means to move water from the wells in this area through the two pressure zones into the water tank and to service the territory. That booster station has to go in soon whether the tank goes in or not. The booster station is paid for through restrictive reserve funds (water connection charge). It was not paid through the general fund. This booster station has been in SPUC's plans for a long time. Mr. Cook noted if the 25 acres south of County Road 78 were developed along with the 26 lots on the north side of County Road, ACC would be developing about 75 lots to be served by the booster station. He stated if the 80 acres were developed on the south side of County Road 78 and the 26 lots on the north side of County Road 78 that was about 175 lots to be served by the booster station that was designed to serve 400 lots. If the booster station were used by alll75 lots it would be a benefit for the City, SPUC and ACC. There really was a benefit to the whole water system when this booster station was used. It was noted the booster station would be built to serve the homes in the second high water elevation zone. The booster station moved water from the lower elevations to the higher elevations. Mr. Adams noted how this would supply pressure to the first high elevation service district. Helkamp/Menden offered Ordinance No. 723, An Ordinance Of The City Of Shako pee, Minnesota, Amending The Zoning Map Adopted In City Code Sec. 11.03 By Rezoning Land Generally Located South Of County Road 78 And West Of County Road 17 From Rural Residential (RR) To Urban Residential (R-IB) Zone, and moved its adoption. Motion carried 5- O. Helkamp/Menden offered Resolution No. 6193, A Resolution Of The City Shakopee Denying A Request To Rezone Property From Agricultural Preservation (AG) To Urban Residential (R-IB), and moved its adoption. Cncl. Menden noted he struggled with the request to reconsider this motion because he almost felt obligated to work with SPUC to make this booster station work. Official Proceedings of March 1,2005 Shakopee City Council Page -6- Motion carried 4-1 with Cncl. Lehman dissenting. Mr. Leek noted there were a few issues to discuss regarding the final plat of Riverside Fields 4th Addition. Mr. Leek noted in the entire Riverside Fields Development there was a portion for a neighborhood commercial type development but this was a single family fmal plat that was being request tonight. He noted the portion proposing to be platted was the residential portion of the project area north of Crossings Boulevard. Mr. Leek noted to the west of this property were some other properties that Ryland and Mr. Liesener have been working on (Riverside Bluffs). To the west of this property is the former Eagle Creek stables property (80 acres). Mr. Leek noted on the' preliminary plat was the drawing of a looped street but this looped roadway no longer existed in the final plat, shown in the final plat was an over length cul-de-sac. Mr. Leek stated the fmal plat also had a request for a variance for this over length cul-de-sac. Mr. Leek noted the Planning Commission reviewed a concept plan for the commercial area and it was at this time that the Planning Commission recommended that the loop street be removed and this over length cul-de-sac replace it. The Commission did not want to see commercial traffic going through a residential district. There was a memo included in the Councilors packet from the Fire Marschall stating he had no problem with the over length cul-de-sac as long as there was provision made for emergency access with the applicant having responsibility to maintain that emergency access. Mr. Leek noted the Planning Commission did not see final plats. There was a request for a variance in this fmal plat, but since this final plat did not go before the Planning Commission, there was a clause in the resolution to deny the variance. Mr. Leek noted the second issue dealt with the sanitary sewer and the memo on the table regarding this issue from Chris Enger, Development Manager for Ryland Homes. Mr. Leek noted there was a preliminary plat before staff on the Liesener's and Ryland property west of Riverside Fields. Mr. Leek stated the sanitary sewer plan provides for service to this property through the Noecker property (Eagle Creek Stables property) from the west and that parcel has not been developed yet. Mr. Leek noted there was discussion on whether the sewer from the east had the capacity to serve Riverside Bluffs. Mr. Enger was asking that the Council direct the connection for that sanitary sewer be left in the plans for Riverside Fields 4th Addition so that sanitary sewer can at least be used for an interim solution for Riverside Bluffs to the west. Mr. Leek stated staffs recommendation was for approval of the Final Plat of Riverside Fields 4th Addition with conditions and there were two issues to address. These were: 1) the over length cul-de-sac and 2) Mr. Enger's memo regarding a sanitary sewer connection to the west for Riverside Bluff s. Mr. Loney, Public Works Director/City Engineer, addressed the sewer connection proposed by Mr. Enger. Mr. Loney stated engineering wise he thought the connections could be made for the sanitary sewer but he had many questions regarding who pays the costs. He stated he thought Mr. Enger was really asking to keep his options open by extending a temporary line through Official Proceedings of March 1, 2005 Shakopee City Council Page -7- Riverside Fields and to abandon that line once the sewer is through the Eagle Creek Stables property from the west. Mr. Loney stated he thought there should be an orderly process in extending the sewer. Ian Peterson, Centex Homes, noted Centex Homes had discussed at length with Mr. PitscOOeider, Fire Inspector, the emergency access for the over length cul-de-sac. He did not think the over length cul-de-sac was much of an issue; he was requesting the variance so that the over length cul-de-sac could be approved. Mayor Schmitt addressed the easements and no fencing on the residential lots adjacent to the commercial property. Mr. Loney addressed this concern by Mayor Schmitt. Mayor Schmitt addressed the deed restrictions (constructing fences) listed in the conditions for the Final Plat of Riverside Fields 4th Addition to Mr. Peterson. It was because of the drainage and utility easement that certain lots on Fescue Circle and Rye Court that abut commercial property were restricted from building a fence. Mr. Loney responded the City no longer required normal fence permits, so the Engineering Department was responsible for that condition. Mr. Loney explained why the Engineering Department wanted that condition. Mayor Schmitt also inquired about storm drainage. Mr. Peterson noted there was a rear yard storm system for the lots adjacent to the commercial property. Mr. Peterson stated the deed restrictions that the Mayor was referring to actually followed the rear yard storm sewer and in the Riverside Fields 3rd and 4th Additions, the rear yard storm sewer was put on the commercial side so the residents could build a fence if they choose to. Mr. Leek stated he thought there was sufficient room for decks to be put on these homes adjacent to the commercial. Chris Enger, Land Resources Manager for Ryland Homes, addressed the sanitary sewer issue. Mr. Enger stated Mark Liesener, the property owner to the west of Riverside Fields 4th Addition, was present at the meeting also. Mr. Enger explained the different additions around Crossings Boulevard. Mr. Enger pointed out as part of the entire Riversides Fields Preliminary Plat and again at the Final Plat approval for the entire Riverside Fields it was required in the Resolutions that Ryland Homes connect and extend the sewer utility to the west to the Liesener property in Crossings Boulevard. Mr. Enger also stated that the City required Centex Homes in the 3rd Addition Final Plat Resolution to extend the sanitary sewer connection that last 150 feet in Crossings Boulevard to the western property line. He stated it was always Ryland's expectation that there would be sewer (maybe temporary at first) to the property to the west. Mr. Enger noted Mr. Liesener approached Ryland Homes to see if they would be interested in developing his 46 acres as a single-family development. Mr. Enger indicated Mr. Liesener had conversations with the City regarding a temporary sewer connection from the sewer to the east. Mr. Enger stated Ryland Homes was interested in developing this property. Mr. Enger noted developing this acreage of Mr. Liesener's would result in many benefits for the City and for Ryland Homes. Mr. Enger stated.staffhad determined there was enough sewer capacity from the east to allow the sewer to come from the east temporarily for the Liesener property. He stated that Ryland Homes propos~s to pay 1111 the costs of the temporary sewer hook-up and Official Proceedings of March 1,2005 Shakopee City Council Page -8- abandonment. Mr. Enger was asking simply to retain the sewer connection in the Riverside Fields developments plats that was in the resolutions of the overall Riverside Fields Preliminary Plat and Final Plat. He stated Ryland Homes would work with the City Engineering staff to come up with good elevations for the sewer. Mark Liesener, 8679 Sunset Court, stated staff had told him the hook up to sewer from the east needed to be studied to see if the capacity was there. Mr. Liesener stated he was assured that the capacity was there. He stated it was only recently that they have heard that this particular 150 feet of extension is not being included into the final plat for Riverside Fields 4th Addition. Mr. Leek noted Mr. Enger was asking that a language change be made to the Resolution so the door was left open for the sewer connection to Riverside Bluffs. Mr. Thomson noted this 150 feet was on Centex's property, the property to the west did not have access to the property because the 150 feet was not on their property. The condition that this 150 feet should be extended needed to be in the Resolution tonight. The two developers could come to their own cost sharing arrangement. Cncl. Lehman noted it was Chris Enger from Ryland Homes who stated Ryland Homes was willing to bear the entire cost of the hook up and abandonment of the temporary sewer. Helkamp/Menden offered Resolution 6187, A Resolution Of The City Of Shako pee, Minnesota Denying The Variance For Over length Cul-de-Sac And Approving the Final Plat of Riverside Fields Fourth Addition, and moved its adoption. Note this did not include the 150 feet. Mr. Leek noted what material the Council had before them. Mayor Schmitt stated staffs recommendation was that the variance be denied and that the over length cul-de-sac be shortened up to comply with the City's design criteria for a cul-de-sac. Mayor Schmitt noted if the cul-de- sac was shortened it would then be 100 feet further east. Mr. Leek stated Tom Pitschneider, Fire Inspector, noted it would be preferable to have a shorter emergency access between the cuI-de- sac and the private roadway in the commercial area or the shared access, rather than shortening the cul-de-sac and having a much longer connection. Cncl. Helkamp noted he thought the residential neighborhood would be better served (security, privacy and more disconnected from the commercial area) by shortening the cul-de-sac so the commercial area was further from the residents. Mr. Leek clarified the emergency access connection point would be an asphalt trail wide enough to accommodate emergency vehicles. Mr. Leek noted there was a second emergency access proposed from Southbridge Parkway that was addressed by Mr. Pitschneider. Mr. Peterson noted there was an interim condition to provide a secondary access from Southbridge Parkway for the whole Riverside Fields development via a temporary access road when more than 100 building permits had been issued for the Riverside Fields development. Mr. Peterson noted currently all the construction traffic comes in through a gravel access off Southbridge Parkway. Mr. Peterson noted Mr. PitscOOeider wanted a temporary Official Proceedings of March 1,2005 Shakopee City Council Page -9- access road feeding the cul-de-sac to provide a secondary access to the overall Riverside Fields development. Currently, the only way out was through Crossings Boulevard. Mr. Peterson noted in the fmal plat they were proposing a cul-de-sac with a temporary connection. He stated emergency access could still be gained from Southbridge Parkway via the temporary road that will be constructed and via the cul-de-sac. According to Cncl. Lehman right now the motion was to make the access point longer than what the Fire Inspector would like to see. If the cul-de-sac was shortened up then the emergency access became longer in length. Mr. Leek noted even if the cul-de-sac was shortened the Fire Inspector would still require a permanent emergency access from the east side of the cul-de-sac. Cncl. Menden wondered if the timing was such that this issue could be tabled to allow time to get clarification ofthe cost figures for the sewer and clarification from the Fire Inspector on the emergency access points. Mr. Leek noted there was time to table the issue if that was the desire. Mr. Leek noted perhaps the language in the conditions needed to be tweaked to D;1ake sure Ryland Homes was responsible for bearing the costs for the hookup and abandonment of the temporary sewer and not the City. Mayor Schmitt wanted to look at a concept plan for the entire area on the east side of town (County Road 16, County Road 18, and County Road 83) along with the City's sewer plan. Ian Peterson, Centex Homes, noted he was willing to continue this issue to March 15,2005 to take care of any issues. He stated the 150 feet of sewer extension was not a monetary issue to either Ryland Homes or Centex Homes. Cncl. Helkamp withdrew his motion. Lehman/Helkamp moved to table the Final Plat for Riverside Fields 4th Addition and to direct staff to work out the issues that were raised and to bring back this information at the March 15, 2005 meeting. Ian Peterson asked for some direction on the cul-de-sac-as to what might be beneficial to the Council taking Mr. Pitschneider's memo into consideration. Cncl. Lehman stated to Mr. Peterson that everyone had until March 15 to get on the same page regarding Mr. Pitschneider's letter. Mr. Leek and Mr. Loney offered to put together a larger map so the Council could get a big picture view of what was going on in the area. Motion carried 5-0. Official Proceedings of March 1, 2005 Shakopee City Council Page -10- Lehman/Helkamp offered Resolution No. 6195, A Resolution Of The City Of Shakopee, Minnesota, Approving The Registered Land Survey For Air Products And Chemicals, and moved its adoption. (Motion carried under the Consent Agenda). Lehman/Helkamp moved to authorize the appropriate City Officials to execute the extension agreement with WSB & Associates, Inc. for the ~/DOT Annual Materials Certification Compliance Project Review on County Road 79 and CSAH 17 Pedestrian Bridges over T.H. 169. (Motion carried under the Consent Agenda). Lehman/Helkamp moved to ratify the election of Lino Baden and Bob Gieske to fill the positions of the 5th and 6th Fire Captains for the Shakopee Fire Department for the year 2005. (Motion carried under the Consent Agenda). Helkamp/Menden moved for a recess at 9: 16 p.m. Motion carried 5-0. Mayor Schmitt reconvened the City Council meeting at 9:31 p.m. Mr. Themig, Parks, Recreation and Facilities Director, reported on the Shutrop property purchase agreement. Mr. Themig gave an overview of the proposed purchase. Mr. Themig noted the 'funding of CR 21 was the most critical piece and the major issue regarding this purchase. Mr. Themig noted the funding mechanism. Mr. Themig noted a piece of the Shutrop property had been identified for development and the developer had been selected by the Shutrop's. Mr. Themig noted the County had now identified a funding source (Federal Government) for the right-of-way for future CR 21; the County was now exploring that source. Mr. Themig noted he received a call from Leslie Vermillion, Scott County's Public Works Director, notifying him that the City could purchase the land and the County would still be able to use the funds for CR. 21 right-of-way with the following two conditions. These conditions are: 1) the City would have to offer the Shutrops the fair market value based on the appraised value. The Shutrops were asking less than the appraised value. The City had to offer the fair market price but the Shutrops could counter with the terms proposed in the agreement; 2) the agreement had to be structured as a bargain sale where the appraised value is clearly indicated, the selling (purchase) price is clearly indicated and the difference is indicated as a donation to the City. Mr. Themig noted he and the City Attorney would see that the letter and purchase agreement is drafted according to these conditions. Mr. Themig noted at the time of the closing the City would convey a portion of the property to Tollefson Development for development. Mr. Themig stated the City would also be committing funds from the Park Reserve Fund in the amount of $2,354,250 to complete the funding package for this proposed purchase. Mr. Themig stated the funding was in place and the purchase agreement was drafted for the most part (they still needed to check out the offer letter). official Proceedings of March 1, 2005 Shakopee City Council Page -11- Mr. Themig went over a few terms of the purchase agreement that needed to take place for this purchase to occur. These were: 1) the City needed to enter into a purchase agreement with Tollefson Development for the sale of approximately 37 acres for $2,500,000, and 2)portions of the property (filter strips) that are in the conservation reserve program (13.2 acres) the City would need to assume the existing contract which expires September 20,2007, or buyout the of the program. The recommendation was to assume the contract. Mr. Themig noted there were some questions unresolved in the purchase agreement and he had some updates to those issues now. He stated the City did have the property description - that was in place, the Shutrops will enter into an occupancy closing with Tollefson Development before closing, and the existing site conditions and warranties piece have been resolved so the City has no liabilities for the site conditions in the future. Mr. Themig noted the appraisal was done by the Shutrops so a third party appraisal firm is reviewing the appraisal to verify its accuracy. . Mr. Themig stated staff was recommending approval of the resolution with a condition that stated the review of the November 2004 appraisal being done on behalf of the City supports the appraised value. Mr. Themig noted this was important for the County to get som'e federal funding. Mr. Themig stated the Shutrops have agreed to farm the land for a period oftime if the City would like that. Mr. Themig thought this would be beneficial to the City (maintenance). He noted a farming agreement was not it place at this time; this would be worked on with the City Attorney, Jim Thomson. Mr. Themig stated there would be some tweaking of the language in the purchase agreement to protect the City to make sure all items were covered. Cncl. Helkamp noted the proposed County Road 21 went right thru the conservation property and he wondered if this would be an issue for the County with the contract. Mr. Themig responded that he did think this would be an issue. Helkamp/Lehman offered Resolution No. 6196, A Resolution Authorizing Purchase Of Real Property From Idella Shutrop Revocable Trust, and moved its adoption with the condition added that the review of the November 2004 appraisal being done on behalf of the City supports the appraised value. Motion carried 5-0. Helkamp/Lehman moved to appoint Cncl. Lehman and Cncl. Helkamp to oversee any last- minute issues that arise prior to closing. Motion carried 5-0. Mr. Themig reported on the Tollefson Purchase agreement for a portion of the Shutrop property. This purchase agreement would convey 37.8 acres acquired by the City from the Shutrops to Official Proceedings of March 1,2005 Shakopee City Council Page -12- Tollefson Development. Mr. Themig noted this 37.8 acres would be developed as a residential development with a purchase price of $2,500,000 and Tollefson Development would pay the construction costs of Pike Lake Trail as it moved through the area. Because the existing access ran along the eastern property line, Mr. Themig negotiated with Tollefson Development that the City would be able to access their property through this access point if need be with the understanding that there would be a public trail platted as part of the residential development that would provide that access in the future. Mr. Themig noted how the costs for Pike Lake Trail were being structured in the purchase agreement. The costs for Pike Lake Trail would be the responsibility of Tollefson Development, Tollefson Development would negotiate the needed right-of-way on the Liesener property, the City would provide needed right of way for CR 21 on its property and the City would pay for wetland mitigation costs. Mr. Themig noted the City proposed to work with the County on the wetland mitigation. Mr. Themig noted the only issue left was for the City to work with the property owner (Mark Hanson who is under contract with Randy Noecker) for the little amount of right-of-way needed for Pike Lake T~ail in the "old Eagle Creek Stables" area. He noted the City would work to see that this right-of-way would be dedicated at the proper time. Mr. Thomson noted the language worked out for the right-of-way on the Noecker piece of property was "the City would be responsible to purchase the right-of-way needed" but it was contemplated that this land would be dedicated as part of the plat. There was the possibility that Tollefson Development and the City may need to work together on this piece of Pike Lake Trail (this was a timing issue). Cncl. Lehman was concerned about the right-of-way for Pike Lake Trail on the Noecker property. Mr. Thomson addressed this issue with Cncl. Lehman. Cncl. Helkamp addressed condition 11 B in the Shutrop property purchase agreement regarding disclosure of a well and waste water pipe going into a ravine, no septic on the property and that it should also be in the purchase agreement with Tollefson. Mr. Themig stated he did think that omission in the Tollefson purchase agreement had been caught and had been sent to the City Attorney. Mr. Themig noted he would double check. Cncl. Helkamp noted graphics were included that showed the residential development by Tollefson. Mr. Thomson noted the drawings were there for schematic purposes; there was no implied approval of the particular development. It was clearly articulated that this type approval could not be included in any sale. Helkamp/Lehman offered Resolution No. 6197, A Resolution Authorizing The Sale Of Certain Property To Tollefson Development, Inc., and moved its adoption. Motion carried 5-0. Helkamp/Menden moved to appoint Cncl. Lehman and Cncl. Helkamp to oversee any last- minute issues that arise prior to closing. Motion carried 5-0. Official Proceedings of March 1,2005 Shakopee City Council Page -13- Jan Shutrop, representing the Shutrop family, approached the podium to thank certain people for putting this whole issue together. She said that her mother-in-law hopes that the beauty of the land will be preserved. Lehman/Helkamp offered Resolution No. 6198, A Resolution Of The City Of Shako pee, Minnesota, Requesting The Army Corps of Engineers To Conduct A Feasibility Study For Riverbank Stabilization, and moved its adoption. (Motion carried under the Consent Agenda). Mr. McNeill, City Administrator, reported on the SCALE joint training facility. Mr. McNeill noted most of the fire calls now were for commercial or apartment fires and a training facility that would allow training for those type calls was needed along with a training facility for training with police long guns. Mr. McNeill reported many of the SCALE cities and the Mdewakanton Sioux were facing the same needs. Mr. McNeill noted the recommendations for this facility that an architect came up with. He noted a 29,000 square foot indoor training facility was being explored as part of the training facility. This indoor training facility was needed because of the weather restrictions for certain training opportunities. Mr. McNeill also noted some of the other training uses this indoor facility could be used for. Mr. McNeill noted that safety concerns had been addressed for the gun range. This training facility would be on 40 acres and a couple oflocations were being looked at. Mr. McNeill noted what properties were being looked at. Mr. McNeill stated the cost was a big factor. He stated everything the consultant had suggested and all the things the departments looked at would cost $17,000,000. Mr. McNeill noted this price tag certainly was not feasible. He stated the committee came up with a plan that cost $9,000,000. A formula was proposed that would be based partially on the need and the ability to pay (tax base). Mr. McNeill noted Shakopee had the largest tax base. With this scenario, Shakopee would be looking at paying $193,000 annually for 20 years. At this point, staff had no recommendation for the overall concept but they did recommend on purchasing the land. Mr. McNeill noted the City's cost for a $1.4 million land purchase using this scenario would be about $31,000 annually over 20 years. Cncl. Lehman asked about the funding for the land purchase. He stated he was in favor of locking up the land and he did agree that the County should be the bonding agent for all the cities in SCALE but he thought this payment should be recalculated yearly. Cncl. Menden also agreed that the land should be locked up. Cncl. Joos stated the numbers were atrocious. The City had many positive features for safety purposes and yet this was being held against the City now. Cncl. Joos stated he thought locking up the land was okay but he would not support funding like this. He also agreed with Cncl Lehman about the recalculating of the Cities cost each year. Official Proceedings of March 1,2005 Shakopee City Council Page -14- Cncl. Helkamp noted the funding issue was just being looking at; this funding issue would be revisited. He stated he thought the land should be locked up and that the firing range should start to be developed, so everyone around knew there was a firing range here in this location. Mayor Schmitt noted the County did not determine this particular financing; the team did. He thought it was imperative that the cities dealt with their legislators, the Secretary of State, and the state legislature to fund 50% of this facility and then use this facility as an example of what a County could do. Mayor Schmitt wanted to use this facility as a demonstration project. Mr. McNeill stated this actually was in the SCALE legislative proposal for this year. Mr. McNeill noted there would be ongoing operational costs for this facility also. Cncl. Lehman again addressed the funding formula. . He suggested using the certified tax capacities and numbers of each City involved. Cncl. Helkamp noted the financial agent looked at three funding opportunities and the certified tax capacity was never used. Cncl. Joos noted the type funding he was interested in. Cncl. Menden noted money was earmarked in the CIP for this project. Mr. McNeill responded yes money was earmarked for this project in the CIP but it was not earmarked for this year. Cncl. Helkamp noted the users' fees for the facility were for other communities that would use the facility. The facility was proposed to be built with appeal for potential renters. Mr. McNeill stated a business plan would be the next realistic step if there were enough interest in this type facility. Mr. McNeill noted it was found out if there was any possibility of state funding a more regional concept was needed. Mayor Schmitt thought the next step should be more discussion and a business plan. He thought the land acquisition needed to follow the business plan. Mr. McNeill noted there was consensus to move ahead with the land purchase for SCALE joint training facility with the understanding the City's cost would be about $31,000. Right now the Councilors were not satisfied with the funding, they would like to see something that reflected future growth and that Shakopee pays its fair share and not just a block of what the upfront costs are. Lehman/Helkamp moved to approve the transfer of the balance in the CR 16/83 project fund into the CIF fund and $300,000 from the 1998 Improvement Fund be transferred into the Park Reserve Fund. (Motion carried under the Consent Agenda). Helkamp/Joos moved to set Thursday March 10,2005 at 6:00 p.m. at the community center for a special meeting regarding the purchase of the Shutrop property. Motion carried 5-0. Official Proceedings of March 1,2005 Shakopee City Council Page -15- Helkamp/Lehman moved to adjourn to Thursday, March 10,2005, at the community center. The meeting adjourned at 10:30 p.m. Motion carried 5-0. (f~J ~ City Clerk Carole Hedlund Recording Secretary