Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout7. Approval of Minutes: February 8, February 15, (6 p.m.), February 15, (7 p.m.), February 22, March 1, 2005 (6 p.m.) OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL ADJ. REGULAR SESSION SHAKOPEE,MINNESOTA FEBRUARY 8, 2005 JOINT MEETING WITH THE TELECOMMUNICATIONS ADVISORY COMMISSION Acting Mayor Lehman called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. with Council members Menden, Helkamp and Joos present Mayor Schmitt arrived at 7:20 p,m. Also Present: Mark McNeill, City Administrator; Michael Leek, Community Development Director; Kim Henke, MIS Coordinator and Tracy Schaefer, Consultant with Bradley and Guzzetta, LLC. Also present from the Telecommunications Advisory CommisSion were: Michael Guncheon, Mark . Hillegas, Benjamin Adams and Bill Anderson. Commissioner Guncheon went over the focus of the Telecommunications Commission. Commissioner Guncheon noted there was much information regarding the goals of the Telecommunications Commission in the Councilor's packets. Cnc1.Joos noted the Council looked at the goals of the Telecommunications Commission from the budget side. He stated the Commission and staff needed to be the experts regarding telecommunications issues. He stated he wanted to identify what a new person was going to do and it needed to be a viable long-term position. He noted he wanted to be competitive in the marketplace. He wanted the Commission to tell him what was needed and how it was going to be utilized and then, if possible, the revenue sources. Commissioner Adams noted many ofthe achievements of the Telecommunications Commission went across administrative and'technology lines. Commissioner Adams noted there had been discussion between the members of the Telecommunications Commission regarding how telecommunication dollars should be used for the City and what the Commission chose to fund or do. He stated the Commission felt like they had been successful with achievements like the INET and VOIP. They felt they were ahead of the curve and had saved the City a great deal of money because the Commission made seed investments upfront. Commissioner Adams noted there was a lot of administrative legwork that went into these types of projects. He noted overseeing the Telecommunications franchise agreement could probably be outsourced if that was all the Telecommunications Commission needed to do. He noted the Telecommunications Commission had chosen to invest money in outreaching technology projects to benefit the residents of the City. He noted this is why the Telecommunications Commission needed administrative support for the technology investment portion of what the Telecommunications Commission did not for the maintenance end. Cncl. Lehman noted whenever the Telecommunications Commission started to process a Telecommunications issue it required City staff time other than Telecommunications funded staff. Cncl. Lehman noted the Telecommunications Commission had many goals started and more goals to begin later on. He was wondering when any of these projects got completed and Official Proceedings of February 8, 2005 Shakopee City Council Page -2- taken off the list. He did state technology was changing constantly. Commission Andersonnoted the Councilor's did have in their packet the 2004 Telecommunications Commission's goals that did get done. He noted one of the big goals that did get finished was the Time Warner Cable Franchise. Commissioner Anderson noted how the Telecommunications Commission was formed. Commissioner Anderson stated the Franchise Agreement was a IS-year agreement. He noted what the City/Telecommunications Commission did get from the Franchise. He noted the money coming in from the Franchise Agreement was increasing. Commissioner Anderson noted Time Warner Cable needed to be held accountable to their. terms of the Franchise Agreement and that was an administrative piece. He noted right now the Telecommunications Commission had gained some momentum but this momentum may not last forever, He stated the Telecommunications Commission has spent considerable dollars on infrastructure, INET, VOIP because of this unique pot of money received from the franchise fees. Yes, the goals of the Telecommunications Commission were many but the Commission was not certain how long this unique pot of money would be available. He noted the Commission had been working with all City departments to see how the money would benefit them. He did state some of the Telecommunications projects last Fall did fall off the list towards the end ofthe year. Council Menden stated knowing very little about telecommunications and the Commission he had a hard time judging if the number of goals were adequate or inadequate. Cnc1. Menden noted there was one line item that could perhaps use some discussion and that was the line item where the Telecommunications Commission gave some laptops to the Police Department. Cnc1. Menden was not sure this should be a Telecommunications Commission activity. He did state from the City's perspective, the City was gaining a lot from the Telecommunications Commission because of the Franchise Agreement with Time Warner Cable. He was glad those Telecommunication funds were shared. Cnc1. Menden noted he thought the Telecommunications Commission was requesting additional assistance to meet their goals and tasks, He asked the Commission if they were willing to fund this position and the Telecommunications Commission stated yes. Commissioner Adams stated the Telecommunications Commission was asking the Council for an understanding of what the Council wanted from the Telecommunications Commission and a discussion of the allocation of resources to help the Telecommunications Commission to accomplish those goals, Commissioner Adams noted when their administrative person left last September, the situation arose where the Telecommunications Commission goals became radically unskewed. He noted things were not happening. Commissioner Adams noted there were not enough hours in the day left for City staff now on board to help them with administrative work. The Telecommunications Commission needed balance and guidance. Cnc1. Joos did not think some of the Telecommunications Commission goals were goals, According to him, they were action items and needed an action plan. He thought the Telecommunications Commission was really more of a policy board. Cnc1. Joos felt the goals needed to be measurable. He thought the goals needed to be revisited. Official Proceedings of February 8, 2005 Shakopee City Council Page -3- Mayor Schmitt entered the meeting and took his seat. Cnc1. Lehman brought up the laptops forthe police squad cars. He did not think this was a goal, according to him, it was just direction to staff. Commissioner Anderson stated the Commission discussed this goal and the Commission decided they would fund one laptop as a research and development project to see how the special (heavy duty) laptops worked in the squad cars. After this initial research the Commission no longer had any ongoing responsibility for the laptop, He noted the Police Department came to the Telecommunications Commission through staff and requested the Commission purchase these laptops. Commissioner Anderson noted the Telecommunications Commission used the same method with the Police Departments laptops that would be.used in the police squads, as the Telecommunications Commission used for justification for VOIP. Going to the VOIP was a drastic switch - it was going from a copper base phone system to a digital system. He noted there also was not enough money in the department's budget to fund the phone system. He noted there was not a long-term commitment to fund the phone system; the Telecommunications Commission was not about that. Commissioner Adams addressed the Telecommunications Commission buying the first heavy-duty lap top for the Police Department. He stated it was hoped that the Police Department could then try this out and see if it was really something they needed. The Telecommunications Commission was giving the Police Department an opportunity to see if this was a good investment for them before they committed funds from their budget. He noted the VOIP was really technology and infrastructure provided by the Telecommunications Commission. Commissioner Guncheon addressed the full-time staff person. He noted the Telecommunications Commission wanted to keep the momentum going that they had realized over the last two to three years. He noted the' same kind of support to accomplish the goals for the last two to three years is now needed to complete the goals for 2004 and begin the goals later on for 2005. He noted the majority of the work was administrative, part was technical and part was expertise. He did not think a person having all of these skills was possible to find and if the City could find such a person, they could not afford them. Commission Guncheon suggested hiring an administrative person and then the expertise and technical work could be contracted out. He was not sure of the amount of time - needed for an administrative person. Commissioner Anderson explained the personnel that the Telecommunications Commission had and what needs this person took care of. He stated the Telecommunications Commission did not lmow the solution for the support they needed; but something needed to be done for the administrative work. Cnc1. Lehman stated if the goal list kept getting longer then eventually the Telecommunications Commission would be asking for another full-time person. Cncl. Lehman now turned the gavel over to Mayor Schmitt. Mayor Schmitt pointed out the support now given the Telecommunications Commission was a contractor who has a contract for four months or when the full-time person came on board. Mayor Official Proceedings of February 8, 2005 Shakopee City Council Page -4- Schmitt asked if there was synergy between MIS, telecommunications and communications. In his mind he felt telecommunications was broader. He was wondering if there could be an overall management merger between MIS, telecoml11unications and communications. Commissioner Adams noted he looked at the communications aspects as a message (the content on the websitelthe content of a newspaper). The telecommunications aspect was focusing on a device that would deliver the message (servers, software to put the message on - not the message itself). The MIS side was a very highly trained support for the hardware and the software that carried the message. The Telecommunications Commission was focusing on how to get the message out. There was very little interest by the Telecommunications Commission in the message content the City wanted to get out. They wanted to make sure the message looked good and got out. They wanted to make sure the message was searchable by the residents on the website. Mayor Schmitt felt the communication, telecommunications and MIS were intertwined. Mayor Schmitt stated the Telecommunications Commission had a hard time finishing tasks (website and code manual). He stated giant leaps forward were taken with the VOIP. However, the goal list just kept getting bigger and nothing seemed to get completed. He stated that Wi-Fi needed to be discussed and it needed to be decided who was going to do that. The challenge needed to be defined and some of the goals needed to go into 2006. He stated one of the Telecommunications Commission's biggest problems right now was getting the web page in and fully operational in its final form. The community wanted it. Then after getting the web page done it needed to be determined how Wi-Fi fit into this picture. Mr. McNeill stated the Telecommunications Commission did get things done. Mayor Schmitt stated he was not saying that. Mr. McNeill noted the City was more aware now of what the capabilities were of the Telecommunications Commission. Mr. McNeill noted the Telecommunications Commission could bring up issues that could be done with the appropriate staffmg level. . Mayor Schmitt noted the priorities needed to be determined first. Then the performance factors needed to be looked at to determine the amount of goals that would/could be achieved. Cnc1. Joos was of the opinion that many things under the guise of telecommunications did not belong with the Telecommunications Commission. Many of the items were intermixed. He stated there needed to be someone to coordinate all the efforts and keep things all together and functioning. He stated he had been told the Telecommunications. Commission was not functioning properly. He noted staff members were already overworked and had been for a long time and yet the City was getting further and further behind. Cnc1. loos wondered if some of the administrative needs of the Telecommunications Commission could be rolled into helping the City's MIS Department. He stated the Council needed to understand the Telecommunications Commission. It seemed not everyone was focused together within the City. Cnc1. Lehman stated it appeared that administrative support was the need the Telecommunications Commission felt they had. They did have a half-time administrative person and now they wanted a Official Proceedings of February 8, 2005 Shakopee City Council Page -5- full-time administrative person. He felt the issues that needed expertise should be contracted out; the Telecommunications Commission agreed with that statement. Cnc1. Lehman felt they were back to the half-time administrative person overseeing all the functions underneath the Telecommunications Commission umbrella. He was not sure a full-time person was needed at this time but he did agree a half-time person was needed. He also noted every project the Telecommunications Commission tackled had City staff involvement and cost. He wanted to accomplish the staffing need of the Telecommunications Commission the way it had been done initially with the Assistant to the City Administrator. Commissioner Adams stated the goal list of the Telecommunications Commission would always get longer. Technology was always evolving and this Commission has chosen to operate to advance new technologies that directly impacted the City. Cnc1. Helkamp agreed with the Commission completely that they needed an administrative support person and technical and expertise issues could be consulted out. He felt this made a lot of sense. He stated he would like to see who the City hires for an Assistant to the City Administrator. Then based on the skills of the new Assistant to the City Administrator see how much of their time could be designated for Telecommunications Commission support for administrative needs. He thought maybe the 2006 budget might support some more time for support for the Telecommunications Commission. This was the solution that he saw right now. Commissioner Anderson noted last month it was decided by the Telecommunications Commission that giving the new Assistant to the City Administrator halftime for Economic Development, special projects and Telecommunications Commission support would just not allow enough time for the needs of the Telecommunications Commission. The Telecommunications Commission would just not get enough administrative support with that scenario. Commissioner Anderson proposed that the Telecommunications Commission still consider the contract with Bradley and Guzzetta. Commissioner Anderson noted Bradley and Guzzetta does a lot of administrative work plus they have technical people on board. Commissioner Anderson noted that the Telecommunications Commission has lost about four months since the Assistant to the City Administrator left the City. He noted to be fair because of this departure the Commission lost support to do four months of web site implementation. He did agree it would be hard to hire a half-time administrator. This was a real conundrum. Mayor Schmitt asked what was in the Telecommunications Commission budget. Mr. McNeill explained the Telecommunications budget and noted there was money in there for an administrative person if the Council chose to do that. Mayor Schmitt did not think the money the Telecommunications Commission was willing to provide for their support was adequate. Mayor Schmitt noted perhaps the answer was fully funding a position out of the Telecommunications Commission budget for two years for an administrative person with some technical skills. The problem was in how and where the position would be funded. Mayor Schmitt stated he did not like Official Proceedings of February 8, 2005 Shakopee City Council Page .6. paying outside consultants to do his daily planning for administrative work. He preferred to have this work done in house. He did not want to spend the City's money that way. Cncl. Lehman stated there would be two separate entities working on the same project with a consultant because staff time was involved also. There would be a doubling of efforts if a consultant were used. He stated the City needed to combine the resources (which was a cost savings according to Cncl. Lehman) and this would make everyone's life much easier. This would allow one person to spearhead both sides of the issue. He wanted to get back to the way this administrative support was initially provided for the Telecommunications Commission with the Assistant to the City Administrator. The Telecommunications Commission agreed it was an administrative person they needed, not a technical person. However, this administrative person needed a background including technology. Commissioner Adams noted the Commission was not confident they could find a person with the skill set needed, at a City pay scale, who is pre-trained and ready to start working at the level the Commission needed on day one for this person. Commissioner Adams stated the Commission did not have a strong opinion on how this support was accomplished, it just needed to get done so the things the Council wanted done could get done. He stated iff ewer hours were available for support then fewer goals would get done if that was what the Council wanted. This was reality. Everything needed to be kept in balance. Mayor Schmitt stated maybe the Commission and City needed to start with someone who had limited experience and build from there. Commissioner Anderson noted the administrative position was different now from when this Commission started. The Telecommunications Commission noted if an inexperienced person were hired, this meant that they lost more time to achieve the City's goals if they had support from an inexperienced person that needed training. Mayor Schmitt noted this was the lesser of two evils. He noted the general consensus was that this was not a full-time job. Commissioner Anderson noted there were a few spots the Commission was worried about high-level responsibilities (franchise oversight and INET oversight). Cncl. Joos stated it was not the task of the Telecommunications Commission to train anyone. He noted the Commission was made up of volunteers. Mayor Schmitt stated if you do not train them then you have to be willing to pay significantly for them. Cncl. Joos noted again it was not the Telecommunications Commission job to train this person. Mayor Schmitt noted who ever came on staff would need some training because they would have to get to know Shakopee. Mr. Leek, Community Development Director, noted the skill set needed by the Telecommunications Commission was relatively easy to come by. The problem could be if that person had the understanding ofthe teclmology that was being dealt with. He stated he thought some Council Members saw a growing need for some more IT support. Mr. Leek suggested a full-time position with administrative skills and technical skills. This person could then give administrative support to the Telecommunications Commission and technical support to the IT Department for some percentage of the time. Mr. Leek stated this required the Council look at funding some portion of Official Proceedings of February 8, 2005 Shakopee City Council Page -7- this position. He thought this IT area might help to get the skills needed by the Commission. He understood the concern the Telecommunications Commission had with the Assistant to the City Administrator position having the Economic Development Authority function included in that position now and therefore, not having adequate time to devote to the needs of the Telecommunications. Commission. Cncl. Lehman stated initially he wanted to get the Assistant to the City Administrator on board and allocate 50% of his /her time to administrative functions for the Telecommunications Commission. Cncl. Lehman explained the future make up of the support for the Telecommunications Commission. Cncl. Lehman stated this was a fix for the time being. Cncl. Joos asked about the Economic Development portion. Was the Economic Development aspect going to stop for a year? The Assistant to the City Administrator had that on their plate too for 50% of the time. Commissioner Adams stated if the Assistant to the City Administrator was asked to give 50% of their time to the Telecommunications Conimission the Council just pointed out that did not leave enough time for the Assistant to the City Administrator to do all the things asked/expected of them. Commissioner Adams stated the Telecommunications Commission needs more hours in the day to do the work they requested and since that can't be done the City needed more bodies to do the work (we are trying to do the web site and there are not enough hours in the day with the staff the City has now). Cncl. Menden stated there were more tasks than bodies to do thework. He stated if the Telecommunications Commission was willing to fund 50% of a person, and it sounded like the Council had enough needs to fill the. other 50%, he suggested hiring someone who could provide administrative services with a technical background and can also be shared with IT, with the idea in 2006 the Telecommunications Commission would still fund their 50% of this person. This person would be in addition to the Assistant to the City Administrator. The Telecommunications Commission felt this was a good solution. Commission Anderson still wanted the Telecommunications Commission to be told they retained the ability to contract out cable franchise administration and INET administration. Mayor Schmitt noted the Commission still retained the option to contract out for professional services. Council Joos stated since it had been decided that the new Assistant to the City Administrator would not administer to the Commission did the contract language with Bradley and Guzzetta need to be revised to reflect this change? Commissioner Anderson noted he preferred that the Commission retain the services of Bradley and Guzzetta until the new person to administer for the Telecommunications Commission was on board. Mayor Schmitt stated based on these conditions he would recommend the contract be extended/amended. Mr. McNeill noted the vacant positions that the City has now would help fund the new Y:z time position that needed to be paid for from the General Fund. In 2006 the fmancial impact of this new position would be seen. Cncl. Joos stated the City could not stop doing business. If this is what is needed then the City needed to find the funds. Official Proceedings of February 8, 2005 Shakopee City Council Page -8- There was consensus from the Council and the Telecommunications Commission on the hiring a new person with 50% of this person's time being allocated to administrative work for the Telecommunications Commission and 50% of the time being allocated to work on IT functions for the IT department with the funding to be 50% from the Telecommunications Fund and 50% from the General Fund. Cncl. Lehman stated he was comfortable with what he was hearing but he wanted to see the budget impacts. Mayor Schmitt noted everyone was concerned about the budget impact, this was important. Mr. McNeill noted he would bring back this information. Kim Henke, MIS Coordinator, gave an update of the website. She noted she met with the web site developer on getting through the website, the general administration parts of it, getting the content into it and linking it to the public site, etc. She noted as she was working with the website, it became very evident that this website was still in the developmental stage. She noted bugs were found but she felt these bugs were to be expected in a developmental stage. She stated she decided a face-to- face meeting was needed again with the web site developer. That was done and she is confident now in saying the City has passed that developmental stage. She noted she was now trying to get content into the website site. There were two portions to the website. These are: 1) the public site and 2) the administration side (content manager). She explained the process to getting the content into the site. She wanted to make sure the information for the old web site was in there, correct and up to date. She felt at this time she had about 50% of the content into the new site. She stated she was creating documentation as she went and this took some time. She stated she made some alterations to the website with the website developer. Ms. Henke gave a demonstration of what was on the website. There was discussion as to when and how the website should open to the public. Mr. Leek noted there were reasons to roll out the web site as soon as possible in some form. A plan needed to be put together to include more content as time went along. Commissioner Anderson wanted people to think about who was the driver of the site? Who really owned it? There needed to be someone to go to when problems arose. Commissioner Anderson stated tIns was a content and brand issue and it appeared to him that it belonged to Communication (not telecommunications). HelkamplLebman moved to adjourn to February 15,2005 at 6:00 p.m. The meeting adjourned at 8:55p.m. Motion carried 5-0. ~^~ cd-q<: Ji th S. Cox 'ty Clerk Carole Hedlund Recording Secretary OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL ADJ. REGULAR SESSION SHAKOPEE,MINNESOTA FEBRUARY 15, 2005 Mayor Schmitt called the meeting to order at 7 :00 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 DirectorlCity Engineer; Gregg Voxland, Finance Director; Jim Thomson, City Attorney (arrived . 7:50); Mark Themig, Parks, Recreation and Facilities Director and Dan Hughes, Police Chief. The pledge of allegiance was recited. The following item was added to the Agenda. Item 15.D.l. Declare Certain Property as Surplus Property in the Police Department. The following items were deferred at the request ofthe applicants until a future meeting. 14. A. Reguiding, MUSA Extension and Rezoning Request from Associated Capital Corporation for property located west of Marschall Road and south ofCR 78. and 15. B. 2. Final Plat for Riverside Field's 4th Addition, located west of CSAH 18 and north of Crossings Boulevard. Staff deferred the following item until a future meeting. Item 18. Recess for executive session to discuss labor negotiations. Helkamp/Joos moved to approve the agenda as modified. Motion carried 5-0. Mayor Schmitt noted he attended a SCALE meeting and a meeting with Congressman Kline. Bruce Loney introduced Rodney Beck, employee in the Public Works Department. Mayor Schmitt presented Rodney Beck a Resolution of Appreciation, Resolution No. 6191 on his return to employment in the Public Works Department after serving a two-year military tour of duty, including time in Iraq. Lehman/Joos offered Resolution No. 6191, A Resolution Of Appreciation And Welcome Back To City Employee Rodney Beck From Military Service, and moved its adoption. Motion carried 5-0. The following items were added to the Consent Agenda. 14. F. Purchase of Phase II Expansion Equipment for the Skate Park; IS.A.S. Renewal ofSchleper Stadium Concession Stand Agreements as modified by the memo on the table; 15.D.l. Declare Certain Property as surplus property in the Police Department; 15.C.3. Acceptance of Feasibility Report for 2005 Street Reconstruction Project No. 2005-1; 1S.C.5. Approval of Plans and Specifications for the New Public Works Building Project No. 2005-5 and 15.F.l. Appointment to Boards and Commissions. The following item was removed from the Consent Agenda. Item no. 7. Approval of Minutes for January 18, (Adj. Reg.), January 18 (Special) and January 25,2005. Official Proceedings of February 15, 2005 Shakopee City Council Page -2- Mr. McNeill noted there was a memo on the table regarding item no. 15.A.5. Thisitem was on the Consent Agenda but he pointed out the corrections (basically typographical) to the agreement regarding the Shakopee Indians Baseball Team Concessions Agreement for 2005 before it was approved on the Consent Agenda. LehmanfJoos moved to approve the Consent Agenda as modified. Motion carried 5-0 Mayor Schmitt asked ifthere were any citizens present in the audience who wished to address any item not on the agenda. There was no response. The January 18, 2005 minutes were deleted from the agenda because staff was asked to make a correction and to add background information to the minutes regarding the bids on the fire trucks and on the discussion on Huber Park improvements as it related to an upcoming meeting with legislators. Helkamp/Menden moved to approve the minutes for the January 18, 2005 special meeting and the January 25,2005 regular meeting. Motion carried 5-0. LehmanfJoos moved to approve the bills in the amount of$368,011.65 plus $50,656.00 for refunds, returns and pass through for a total of$418,667.65. (Motion carried under the Consent Agenda). [The list of bills is posted on the bulletin board at City Hall for one month following approval]. Helkamp/Joos moved to open the public hearing on the proposed vacation of a portion of an easement on property located at 2460 Emerald Lane. Motion carried 5-0. Helkamp/Menden moved to continue the public hearing on the proposed vacation of a portion of an easement on property located at 2460 Emerald Lane to the meeting on March 1, 2005. Motion carried 5-0. LehmanfJoos offered Resolution No. 6188, A Resolution Of The City Of Shako pee Approving A Request To Extend MUSA, and moved its adoption. (Motion carried under the Consent Agenda). Mr. Leek, Community Development Director, reported on the Preliminary Plat for Park Meadows East located west ofCSAH 83 and north of Valley View Road extended. Mr. Leek oriented the site. Mr. Leek noted the proposed preliminary plat proposed the creation of 92 lots on 38 acres with a net density of3.0210ts per acre. Mr. Leek noted the Planning Commission reviewed this application at their February 3,2005 meeting and recommended approval of the preliminary plat with conditions. Mr. Leek noted this plat could be partially serviced by existing sanitary sewer to the west but the other portion of the plat needed a sewer extension coming from the north and going south along Official Proceedings of February 15,2005 Shakopee City Council Page -3- County Road 83. Mr. Leek noted approximately one-third of the lots could be served by existing sanitary sewer. Mr. Leek stated one ofthe conditions in Resolution No. 6184 talked about the plat not being able to be recorded until there was an agreement in place regarding the extension of the sanitary sewer. It was staffs position and the position of the Planning Commission that it was desirable not to have a lift station in place for this development. Mr. Leek noted staff did not have an idea of the level of their commitment for this sanitary sewer extension at this point. Mr. Leek highlighted condition Roman Numeral lA. in Resolution No. 6184 regarding the improvements to Valley View Road. He stated he had confirmed with Scott County that Scott County was willing to pay 50% of the cost of the right and left turn lanes at the intersection of Valley View Road and County Road 83 that would be required if this plat moved forward. Mr. Leek noted an agreement would be required between the City and County regarding the reimbursement of this 50%. Mr. Leek noted the plat drawing in front of the Council this evening did not reflect a connection point to the property to the north. He stated there was a condition in Resolution No. 6184 requiring a revision to the proposed plat showIng a connection to the property to the north before the plat could be recorded. Mr. Leek noted the rationale for this connection. He did not want this northerly property to be landlocked in the future. Mr. Leek stated at the Planning Commis.sion on February 3,2005, there was a request from the property owner to the north that the City Council not taken action on this preliminary plat at this time. Mr. Leek noted Council was in the position to take this information into account. Mr. Leek noted to Cncl. Menden the connection to the propertyto the north would in all likelihood necessitate the removal of at least one home from the plat. Cncl. Menden questioned the affect this northerly connection point would have on the cul-de-sac in the southern portion of this plat. Mr. Leek noted that affect had not been looked at. Cncl. Menden noted ifthe Planning Commission was recommending approval of this plat with conditions, he was comfortable with their recommendation. Mr. Leek noted the property owner to the north was present and testified at the Planning Commission meeting regarding her concerns with this preliminary plat and she had been present at each of the public hearings for the project as well as the public hearing for the project to the west, Park Meadows. Cncl. Lehman asked ifthe agreement with the County and the City regarding the County Road 83 improvements should come before this development. Mr. Loney, Public Works Director/City Engineer, addressed this question. He noted the agreement was really regarding the Valley View Road Improvement project. Mr. Loney stated plans would be brought back before Council for bids for the Valley View Road improvements if this plat was approved. Cncl. Lehman pointed out that the condition lA. in Resolution No. 6184 noted this plat was one ofthe drivers for the right and left turn lanes. Cncl. Lehman also wondered if the right and left turn lanes would affect the sewer line coming from the north going south on County Road 83. Mr. Loney responded to this question. He noted this would have to be taken into consideration but he did not think the Official Proceedings of February 15, 2005 Shakopee City Council Page -4- right and left turn lanes would affect the sewer extension. The City wanted to extend the sewer on the east side of the roadway and that is where the right-of-way was being acquired. Cncl. Lehman asked if the agreements were in place for the lift station maintenance from this applicant if a lift station was used until the sewer is extended. Mr. Leek responded no, there was no maintenance agreement with the applicant because the conditions did not contemplate that this plat could be recorded, or that the lots that required that sewer extension could be developed, until there was an agreement for that sewer extension. Cncl. Joos asked if the City was comfortable with the drainage plan for this development. Mr. Leek stated yes, in addition to the City Engineering Department reviewing the drainage the City also had a consultant review the drainage and the City was very comfortable with the drainage plan. Cncl. Joos noted he was comfortable with staffs review of the drainage in that area. Mayor Schmitt noted there were more possible acreages that could be served by this sewer line and the interconnection point for the parcels north of the Park Meadows East plat. Access to this area was discussed. Mayor Schmitt asked for questions from the audience on this request. There was no response. Ian Peterson, Centex Homes, noted he was present at the meeting to answer questions. Mr. Peterson noted it was the intent of Centex Homes to get the sewer extension down to the intersection of County Road 83 and Valley View Road. He clarified condition Roman Numeral No. I.B. had a portion of a sentence that stated "or until plans and a maintenance agreement for a sanitary lift station have been approved by the City". Centex Homes planned on the sewer extension but with all the entities involved (the property owner to the east, the City, the County and the Shakopee Mdewakanton Sioux) unforeseen problems could arise. Centex Homes wanted the ability in the future to serve the balance of the plat via a temporary lift station for sanitary sewer purposes until the sewer extension was made. Mr. Peterson stated there would be a maintenance agreement for the operation, the maintenance and the removal of the lift station, at the expense of Centex Homes, with the homeowners association of this plat. Cncl. Lehman, stated pe wanted in the maintenance agreement that the City had the right to enter the property if maintenance was needed on the lift station. Mr. Peterson agreed to this statement. Helkamp/Menden offered Resolution No. 6184, a Resolution Of The City Of Shako pee, Minnesota Approving The Preliminary Plat Of Park Meadows East, and moved its adoption. Motion carried 5-0. Mr. Leek reported on the Preliminary Plat for Countryside located south ofHwy 169 between County Road 15 and County Road 79. Mr. Leek stated this project had been in the works for several years. He noted the preliminary plat being presented today was far different from the original concept plan. He noted this preliminary plat showed approximately 437 single-family homes on,approximately 172 acres and had a density of2.78 units per acre. He noted there had Official Proceedings of February 15, 2005 Shakopee City Council Page -5- been a significant amount of collaboration on this project with the neighboring project of the School District as well as the County on 17th Avenue. Mr. Leek stated if this project was approved and moved forward the developer of this project would be constructing the extension of 17th Avenue from County Road 79 to Marystown Road (County Road 15) as well as improvements to County Road 79 and County Road 77. Mr. Leek noted the school district would begin grading and construction ofthe new high school on their new site this spring. Mr. Leek noted this property was annexed into the City in three stages from Jackson Township. He oriented the site. Mr. Leek noted adjacent to this site was the Marystown LLC site and this developer had been in discussion with the owner of the LLC site regarding development of that site with a shared access point at a certain location. That development would consist of medium density town homes and some commercial development consistent with the guiding. Mr. Leek noted the developer asked for variances for about 80 lots. He stated the Planning Commission recommended denial of those variances. Mr. Leek highlighted a few items pertaining to the preliminary plat. These are: 1) park dedication language [conditions 9, 10 and 11]; 2) lots along the Xcel gas line easement [staffs concerns ofthe limited amount of yard space for additions, therefore conditions]; 3) park area and open space [wetland area- condition requiring a buffer area]; 4) over length cul-de-sac [connection to the south for future {Planning Commission recommended a temporary access be provided for a second access location to 1 in A venue for public safety purposes} ]. The access spacing was pointed out. Mr. Thomson, City Attorney, arrived and took his seat. Cncl. Menden asked about the sound wall. Mr. Weiland responded to this question. Mr. Weiland noted why the sound wall was proposed and where it was proposed. -. Cncl. Lehman wondered how the sound wall would affect the signs noting the gas line easement. Mr. Weiland pointed out the Xcel gas line easement the signs would refer to was in front of the wall adjacent to the property. Cncl. Lehman wanted to know if the Environment Advisory Committee (EAC) noted which department of the City would acquire the wetland area and how it would be funded. Mr. Leek noted the desire of the EAC was to have this wetland dedicated to the City. Mr. Themig stated the EAC's recommendation was to have the area incorporated in the park and open space system. Mr. Themig noted because this was wetlands, this area, it did not count towards the park dedication. Mr. Themig noted when the Park and Recreation Advisory Board reviewed this application and they concurred with the EAC's recommendation. Mr. Leek noted one of the rationales for the wetlands to be counted as open space. Cncl. Joos asked if the City was comfortable that the sound wall would do what it was suppose to do. Mr. Leek ,stated the City was comfortable with the sound wall. He noted the applicant Official Proceedings of February 15, 2005 Shakopee City Council Page -6- addressed the one concern that the City did have with the sound wall and the sound wall was extended to include certain lots. Mr. Weiland noted in addition to the sound wall some vegetation was planned for privacy in that area. Mr. Leek noted the landscape planting was planted on the lot side of the fence to soften the look of the fence. Mr. Leek noted a sound wall was being put in this area because of experience, topography and a sound study noted this should be done. encl. Lehman questioned the maintenance of the wetlands if the City took ownership. Mr. Leek addressed this question. He thought here might be times when the City would need to do maintenance. Mr. Loney stated this was nothing new, the City needed to maintain storm water ponds in plats all the time. Mayor Schmitt noted the sound wall would be going on the easement line between the Xcel energy power line easement and the Xcel Energy gas line. The Excel Energy gas line easement was south of the berm. Mr. Leek noted Xcel Energy would govern anything planted in the Xcel easements; they did have limitations on the materials that could be used. Mayor Schmitt noted the easement area would not provide much vegetation for noise mitigation itself. Matt Weiland, Tollefson Developmentt noted this project had been a very cooperative and beneficial process for all. He stated he wanted to address a few concerns. These were: 1) the wetland buffer ([condition III.B.8.] - Tollefson Development asked for a condition that the watershed district would ultimately recommend the size of the buffer zone and that the buffer zone should not be required to be in public ownership. This was a no disturb zone and 2) the oversize cul-de-sac length condition [IV.O]. Tollefson Development noted this cul-de-sac was oversized because they were limited on the number of access points. Mr. Weiland stated when the rest is developed this cul-de-sac will not be a problem. It was Tollefson Development's understanding that the Planning Commission approved the over length cul-de-sac with the stipulation that lots 14 and 15 could not be developed now because this area was. to provide for an emergency vehicle access point. . Mr. Weiland stated Tollefson Development would like to develop lots 14 and 15 now. Mr. Weiland noted Tollefson Development had been working with Xcel energy on the easement regarding the sound wall, the berm and landscaping and so for Tollefson Development has received favorable comments. He was confident that they would be able to do the proposed landscaping in that location. Mr. Weiland noted there was no homeowners association to take care of the wetland area that was in the no disturb zone. Cncl. Lehman was looking for someone to maintain the wetland area. Mr. Weiland noted that the parks/would be constructed at the same time the development was constructed, Official Proceedings of February 15, 2005 Shakopee City Council Page -7- Gary Wollschlager, Tollefson Development, stated he had a couple of concerns. These were: 1) the overlength cul-de-sac and2) the variance for the 60 foot wide lots. Mr. Wollschlager stated in his conversations with Tom Pitschneider, Fire Inspector, Mr. Pitschneider stated he had no problem with the long cul-de-sac. Mr. Pitschneider stated his only concern would be if there was a way to back out or turn around emergency equipment and with the stub street in this area he thought he would be fine. He noted he would work with Mr. Pitschneider and bring back final plans regarding this over-length- cul-de-sac at the time of final plat. Mr. Wollschlager addressed the variances (80) for the 60-foot wide lots, Mr. Wollschlager stated he was asking for this variance so a three-car garage could be put on the homes rather than a two-car garage. He wanted five feet on the garage side and five feet on the house side. He would like the three-car garage accommodated. Mr. Wollschlager suggested a condition that only building plans showing a three-car garage on the 60-foot wide lots could get the variance. Mr. Wollschlager stated it was the builder asking for this variance. Cncl. Menden addressed the wetland buffer zone. Mr. Loney addressed this question. He noted at times an average had been used for the buffer zone. Cncl. Menden noted this wetland buffer zone could be revisited at the time of final plat and then it should be known the watershed's thought on using an average for the wetland buffer zone. Cncl. Ioos addressed affordable housing with a two-car garage and a three-car garage. Mr. Weiland noted it was the density that was needed for affordable housing (reality). Mr. Wollschlager noted there would be covenants on all three developments regarding outside storage but the homeowners association didn't enforce those covenants because they were the violators. Cncl. Helkamp addressed the side yard setback variance. He noted he was interested in seeing three car garages. He thought a three-car garage helped to clean up the neighborhood. Mr. Leek addressed crafting a condition that would only allow this variance for a dwelling with a three-car garage. Mr. Leek felt this could be done. Cncl. Lehman stated he liked the fact this plan was down from 1100 units to 437 single-family homes, the parks were centralized and that 17th A venue would go all the way to Marystown Road. He stated he did not have a good answer to the variances. He would like to see the ongoing maintenance addressed on the wetland buffer zone. Mr. Leek stated ifthe Council wanted to address the variances in the resolution he asked that staffbe directed to come back with specific findings to approve the setbacks variances in the . limited areas that were discussed so the findings could be crafted and the City Attorney would have a chance to review them. Official Proceedings of February 15, 2005 Shakopee City Council Page -8- Mr. Themig addressed the wetland questions. He noted it was the goal ofthe EAC to make sure the developer provides a buffer for the wetlands. If the developer wanted the watershed management organization to determine the buffer zone size, he felt that would be fine with the EAC. Mr. Themig stated he felt there was some flexibility to work with the wetland buffer conditions. Mr, Themig stated the City would have maintenance responsibilities with the wetland area, so the EAC felt the City should own the land and include it in the parks and open space system. This would benefit the wetlands long-term. He did not think there would be a long-term wetland maintenance cost to speak of. Mr. Thomson, City Attorney, noted the Council could change the wetland condition and the over length cul-sac- sac condition with this current resolution or with the final, but regarding the variances to the side yard setback the Council has to approve the final consistent with the preliminary plat. Mayor Schmitt addressed the over length cul-de-sac. He noted he would feel much more comfortable ifhe had a memorandum from Mr. Pitschneider stating he agreed with over length cul-de-sac. Mayor Schmitt also addressed the side-yard setback variance. He stated with this size variance there would be no access to the rear yard. Five and ten could possibly work but not five feet and five feet. A fire also needed to be considered. He stated he could not support five and five but he could support five and fifteen (15 feet between structures). Cncl. Helkamp stated he would go with the Attorney's suggestion. The Council should approve' the preliminary plat as written and then they could work on the variances. The variances requested in this application could go through other channels. Cncl. Lehman stated if done correctly a 5 foot and 5 foot side-yard setback did work; a 3 foot and 7 foot side yard setback also worked. JooslMenden offered Resolution No. 6183, A Resolution Of The City Of Shako pee, Minnesota Approving The Preliminary Plat Of Countryside, and moved its adoption noting the wetland buffer size could be determined by the watershed management organization of that area, and the over length cul-de-sac variance request shall be approved subject to the Fire Inspector recommending building permits for lots 14 and 15 and also to amend conditions 10, 11 and 12 as Mr. Leek requested. Cncl. Helkamp noted Mr. Leek wanted to make changes to conditions 10, 11 and 12 regarding some additional language regarding park dedication fees being at the rate in place at the time of final plat if the developer where to phase the final plats and Mr. Leek wanted some additional language regarding the review by park staff and the Park and Recreation Advisory Board of plans for the specific park areas. Cncl. Menden noted he would still like to see a memo from the Mr. Pit schneider regarding his thoughts on the over length cul-de-sac. Official Proceedings of February 15, 2005 Shakopee City Council Page -9- The City Attorney recommended Condition W.O. be stated as "the over length cul-de-sac variance request shall be approved subject to the Fire Inspector recommending building permits for lots 14 and 15. Motion carried 5-0. Mr. Themig, Park, Recreation and Facilities Director, reported on the text amendment regarding landscaping requirements. Mr. Themig stated the Environmental Advisory Committee (EAC) was proposing this text amendment. Mr. Themig noted the EAC was proposing a change in the text to require 6" of topsoil 'rather than the 4" that was required now. He stated the EAC had been working on this text amendment for over 1 Y2 years. He noted since that time, the Engineering Department has updated their design standards and implemented them. These design standards require 6" of topsoil to the subdivision level. Mr. Themignoted these engineering design standards do not necessarily carry over to the building permit level. This proposed text would hold the builders responsible to have 6" oftopsoil brought back to the site after grading. encl. Lehman asked how the proposed new text amendment pertained to current buildings getting building permits. Mr. Themig noted this text amendment pertained to undeveloped lots not existing buildings. Mr. Leek concurred with this statement. Mr. Leek noted there are two issues that related to lot development. These were: 1) topsoil and 2) final grades matching the plat grading plan. Mr. Leek noted he would be addressing these issues soon. Helkamp/Joos offered Ordinance No. 725, Fourth Series, An Ordinance Of The City Of Shakopee, Minnesota, Amending Chapter 11, Sec. 11.60, Subd. 8 Landscaping Requirements, and moved its adoption. Motion carried 5-0. Lehman/Joos moved to purchase the revised Skate Park Phase IT Expansion Equipment from True Ride in the total amount of$27, 115.17. (Motion carried under the Consent Agenda). Lehman/Joos moved to establish a workshop date to discuss the Park eIP on Tuesday, February 22, at 6:00 p.m. (Motion carried under the Consent Agenda). LehmanlJoos offered Resolution No. 6194, A Resolution Of The City Of Shako pee, Minnesota Determining The Necessity For And Authorizing The Acquisition Of Certain Property By Proceedings In Eminent Domain And Rescinding Resolution No. 6172, and moved its adoption. (Shutrop property) (Motion carried under the Consent Agenda). LehmanlJoos moved to approve the concept ofreconfiguring the current fitness center including the donation ofthe cable crossover to the Shakopee Police Department. (Motion carried under the Consent Agenda). Official Proceedings of February 15, 2005 Shakopee City Council Page -10- Lehman/Joos moved to approve the purchase of new cardio and strength equipment for the fitness center at the Community Center from Push Pedal Pull and Free Motion Fitness in the amount of $23,606. (Motion carried under the Consent Agenda). Lehman/Joos moved to authorize the renewal of the amended agreements with the Shakopee Coyotes Baseball Team and the Shakopee Indians Baseball Team to operate the Joe Schleper Stadium concession stand through August 31, 2005, (Motion carried under the Consent Agenda). Lehman/Joos offered Resolution No. 6186, A Resolution Of The City Of Shako pee, Minnesota Approving The Final Plat Of Park Meadows Second Addition and move its adoption. (Motion carried under the Consent Agenda). Lehman/Joos moved to authorize the appropriate City officials to execute the Joint Powers Agreement for 2005 Traffic Markings, Street Sweeping, Crack Sealing and Seal Coating between the Cities ofBurnsville, Apple Valley Eagan, Lakeville, Rosemount, Savage, Prior.Lake and Shakopee. (Motion carried under the Consent Agenda). Lehman/Joos moved to authorize staff to contract with Duke's Sewer Root Control Specialists for the price of$39,750 for sanitary sewer root control, with payment to be expended from the Sanitary Sewer Fund. (Motion carried under the Consent Agenda). Lehman/Joos moved to approve the motion accepting the revised preliminary assessment roll to be included in the feasibility report for Project No. 2005-1, prior to accepting the feasibility report and calling for a public hearing. (Motion carried under the Consent Agenda). Lehman/Joos offered Resolution No. 6181, A Resolution Receiving A Report and Calling A Hearing for the 2005 Street Reconstruction Project, Project No. 2005-1, and moved its adoption. (Motion carried under the Consent Agenda). Lehman/Joos offered Resolution No. 6182, A Resolution Receiving A Report And Calling A Hearing For The 2005 Bituminous Overlay, Project No. 2005-4, and moved its adoption. (Motion carried under the Consent Agenda). Lehman/Joos offered Resolution No. 6185, A Resolution approving Plans and Specifications And Ordering Advertisement For Bids For the New Public Works Building Project No. 2005-5, and moved its adoption. (Motion carried under the Consent Agenda). Lehman/J oos moved to declare the following item a 1997 Chevrolet S 1 0 pickup, VIN # 1 GCCS 19X3V8196313 as surplus property and moved to authorize staff to auction the vehicle. (Motion carried under the Consent Agenda). Official Proceedings of February 15,2005 Shakopee City Council Page -11- Lehman/Joos moved to approve the job description attached to the staff report from Bruce Loney to Mark McNeill, dated February 1, 2005 and to authorize the hiring of a full-time Public Works Office Worker in the Maintenance Divisions in the Public Works Department. (CC Document No.375) (Motion carried under the Consent Agenda). Lehman/Joos moved to approve the job description for the full-time Record's Clerk attached to the staffreport from Judith S. Cox, City Clerk, to Mark McNeill, dated February 9,2005, and to authorize staffto take appropriate steps to fill the position. (CC Document No.376) (Motion carried under the Consent Agenda). LehmanlJoos moved to authorize the hiring of probationary police officer Jerinifer Scheel at Step 1 of the current labor contract, at a monthly rate of$3,529.21, subject to the satisfactory completion of pre-employment medical and psychological examinations. (Motion carried under the Consent Agenda). Lehman/Joos offered Resolution No. 6189, A Resolution Appointing Individuals To Various Boards And Commissions and moved its adoption. This was the revised resolution on the table. (Motion carried under the Consent Agenda). Mr. McNeill, City Administrator, followed up on establishing a Heritage Preservation Advisory Commission (HP AC). He noted on February 1, 2005 Jay Whiting made a report from the ad hoc committee. Mr. McNeill noted he had put information together but he did have a concern regarding staffing for this. Mr. McNeill stated ifth~s Commission was going to be basically volunteer with no new standards coming from the City but only encouraging local efforts, he thought the existing staff, work load wise, might be able to handle this. Cncl. J oos felt there were very limited items for historical preservation designation in the City of Shakopee. He would like to see an inventory of historical properties in the City be put together that would qualify for this status. He felt certification wasn't needed, but that some incentive was needed for a homeowner to keep up his property. At this point, Cne!. J oos felt perhaps the Council could do something. Cncl. Menden stated if the Council was going to move ahead with something for historical preservation, staff needed to be designated for this purpose.. If there was not enough staff t4en more staff needed to be hired. Cncl. Lehman stated he did not think this would require a lot of staff time for the first six to nine months because this committee had a lot of knowledge by itself. He stated it would take this HPAC time to even come up with the criteria regarding what should be of historical importance. Cnc1. Lehman thought at least the Council could acknowledge there was some interest in this City about this subj eet. He noted everything would come back in front of the Council for a final decision. He felt this could be done in-house. Official Proceedings of February 15, 2005 Shakopee City Council Page -12- Cncl. Helkamp thought the subject was such that the City should have a Historical Preservation Advisory Commission. He stated he would like to see this project move forward. Helkamp/Joos offered Resolution No. 6192, A Resolution Establishing An Historic Preservation Advisory Commission For The City Of Shakopee, and moved its adoption. Mayor Schmitt thought the City owed the residents and the people who preceded this committee at least an inventory. Cncl. J oos felt at least one staff person needed to be on the HP AC so the Council knew what was going on and to bring back reports. Mr. Leek noted the planning staff had staff experience in historical preservation. Mr. Leek felt thiswould be an investment in staff time. Mr. McNeill noted an inventory would be very labor intensive. Mayor Schmitt stated perhaps the ad hoc committee probably already had some knowledge of historical placelitems that were important to the City. Cncl. Helkamp felt the inventory would be an activity for the HP AC members to pursue not the staff. Cncl. Menden was still concerned about how much time this would take staff. Cnc1. Joos wanted to know where the money would come from to support this Historical Preservation Advisory Commission because this is not free. Mr. McNeill thought the money right now would come from the General Fund.. Cncl. Lehman volunteered to attend the meetings and take minutes for the Advisory Commission. Motion carried 5-0. Helkamp/Menden moved to appoint Cncl. Lehman to be the Council's liaison to the Heritage Preservation Advisory Commission. Motion carried 5-0. Cncl. Joos stated he attended a Shakopee Public Utilities (SPUC) meeting where the Valley Creek Crossings project was discussed. He noted a couple of the SPUC Commissioners went to a seminar regarding being an Internet provider. SPUC was looking at this issue very seriously. He also stated SPUC was meeting with their attorney regarding the old SPUC building. Mr. Leek noted, Kim Henke, the City IT person was also at that Internet provider seminar. Mr. Leek stated there needed to be a very significant conversation between the Council and SPUC regarding being an Internet provider. Official Proceedings of February 15, 2005 Shakopee City Council Page -13- Mr. McNeill addressed the old SPUC building closing by the City. He noted the attorney for SPUC had raised a couple of issues. He noted the City was looking at closing on or before March 24, 2005. Mayor Schmitt addressed the Wi-Fi option. This needed to be addressed sooner not later. He noted the City would have to come to grips with SPUC. Cncl. Helkamp noted he attended a SCALE meeting. He noted a presentation was given on the joint Scott County training facility. Mr. McNeill noted something would be circulated in the activity report regarding this SCALE meting. Cncl. Lehman noted he met with Congressman Kline, Senator Robling, Representative Beard, Mayor Schmitt, Jeff Weyandt, Assistant City Engineer; Mark Themig, Park, Recreation and Facilities Director and it was a pretty productive meeting. Cncl. Lehman stated the riverbank stabilization was discussed at great length and some City options were presented. Cncl. Lehman also noted transportation was discussed. He noted he felt the meeting was fairly positive. He noted a couple of funding sources were identified. Cncl. Lehman noted the first step towards the possibility of the City receiving federal funding for the riverbank stabilization would be a resolution by Council seeking funding for this purpose. This was specifically asked for. Cncl. Lehman noted congressman Kline was looking at the Army Corp of Engineers and the other alternative was 10% of the City's transportation appropriations was suppose to go towards transportation enhancements. Because the trail along the river was a regional trail it would be an enhancement and would fall underneath the 10%. Cncl. Lehman also noted that Congressman Kline was looking at LMR from the State and Senator Robling was going to delve into that further and work on those details. Representative Beard was going to be working on appropriations from the DNR that are allocated yearly for trail improvements for maintenance and coordinating all these dollars. LehmanlHelkamp moved to direct staff to prepare. a resolution to come back to this Council seeking riverbank stabilization funds, section 14 and/or any other funding sources applicable for this project. Cncl. Helkamp clarified that the request was being made to the Federal Government. Mayor Schmitt noted there were contacts on Congressman Kline's staff in Washington and Minnesota to work with. Motion carried 5-0. Cncl. Lehman noted transportation issues for Shakopee were also discussed. The 69/169 access, the river crossing and some of the County improvements i.e. County Road 21. Cncl. Lehman noted the federal appropriations bill has not been passed yet and several things hinge on that bill. encl. Lehman was somewhat reassured that something would get done this session. Cncl. Lehman noted they talked to Mr. Beard and Senator Robling regarding the tier 1 EIS for the Official Proceedings of February 15, 2005 Shakopee City Council Page -14- River Crossing no longer being on the States foreseeable CIP. Mr. Beard and Senator Robling were unaware of this. Cncl. Lehman noted that Mr. Beard and Senator Robling were going to find out what happened to this project. Cncl. Lehman noted it was really hard to set goals and do something on west end of Shakopee when the City had no information for that end of town regarding transportation. Cncl. Lehman and Mayor Schmitt wanted to direct staff to send letters to the participants of this meeting thanking them for their time and efforts and to follow-up with the various parties, Mr.K1me and his office, Mr. Beard and Ms. Robling so every one was on the page. Cncl. Lehman noted he was working very hard to get something accomplished. Mayor Schmitt also noted some other contact people and some other activity regarding the transportation on the west oftown. . Cncl. Menden noted he attended the School Board meeting and there was consensus by them to look further at a new elementary school being constructed on the parcel of property between the old high school and the community center.' That was one of the options. Cnc1. Joos thanked Mr. Loney for the informative CD given to each encl. Member and it was noted that this CD was shown on cable channel 16 periodically. Don McNeill approached the podium to address a telecommunications matter. He noted there was positive reaction to the programming now being shown on the cable channels and the hiring of Mike Johnson and Pat Nevin. Helkamp/Joos moved to adjourn the meeting to Tuesday, February 22, 2005 at 6:00 p.m. The meeting adjourned at 9:25 p.m. Motion carried 5-0. ~d.C0;0 . udith S. Cox City Clerk Carole Hedlund Recording Secretary OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL ADJ. REGULAR SESSION SHAKOPEE,MINNESOTA FEBRUARY 15,2005 Mayor Schmitt called the meeting to order at 6:08 p.m. with Council members Lehman, Menden, Helkamp and Joos present. Also Present: Mark McNeill, City Administrator; Judith S. Cox, City Clerk; Bruce Loney, Public Works Director and Jeff Weyandt, Assistant City Engineer. Joos/Menden mov~d to approve the agenda as written. Motion carried 5-0. Jeff Weyandt, Assistant City Engineer, gave a presentation of the feasibility report of the 2005 Street Reconstruction projects proposed. He noted this project had been included in the City's 2005 CIP. Mr. Weyandt noted what streets were included in this study and what streets were recommended to do. He noted a part of the report also recommended reducing some street widths and the rational for this width reduction and the benefits the City would see from reducing these widths. He noted the proposed streets for reconstruction had been constructed in the 50's and the 60's and he noted reasons why the streets needed to be reconstructed. He noted this project had been broken into five sections for assessment purposes. He notedthe five sections. These were: 1) Apgar, Scott and Atwood Streets, 2) Fuller and Sommerville Streets, 3) Main Street, 4) Dakota Street between 3rd and 4th Avenues and 5) Dakota Street south of 4th Avenue. Mr. Weyandt stated after assessing the existing infrastructure and looking at projects costs it was recommended that the scope of the project be reduced. It was recommended that Main Street and Dakota Street be eliminated from this years project. He noted Main Street had never been reconstructed from 6th to 10th A venue. He recommended adding the one block of Main Street into a future project that included Main Street down to 6th Avenue. He noted Dalcota Street could be added to any future project. The reduction in the project scope was an effort to bring costs inline with the current budget. Mr. Weyandt noted what the proposed street improvements consisted of (width reduction. storm sewer, water main, sanitary sewer i.e.). Mr. Weyandt noted 25% ofthe street improvements will be assessed on a front footage basis, 100% of the sanitary sewer services will be assessed to the benefiting property owner, the remaining 75% ofthe remaining streets costs will be paid by the General Tax Levy, 100 % of the storm sewer improvements will be funded by the Storm Sewer Fund, 100% of the water main improvements will be funded by Shakopee Public Utilities, 100% of the mainline sanitary sewer replacement will be funded by the Sanitary Sewer Fund. The estimated assessment rates for section one (Apgar, Scott and Atwood Streets) for streets is $39.90 per linear foot, for sanitary sewer $1870.00 per service. The estimated assessments rates for section two (Fuller and Sommerville Streets) for street reconstruction is $44.41 per linear foot and $1965 per sanitary sewer service. Official Proceedings of February 15,2005 Shakopee City Council Page -2- Mr. Weyandt stated the total cost ofthe project is approximately $1.6 million. He noted included in this cost was approximately $639,000 that would come from the general tax levy. He noted the estimate in the 2005 CIP for the general tax levy amount for this project was $655,000. Mr. Weyandt noted he was now asking Council to accept the feasibility study and order a public hearing for March 15,2005. He noted in the future he would like to bring the street reconstruction feasibility report to the Council most likely in January of each year. He noted there were still a lot of streets in the downtown area that had not been reconstructed. He stated the City was looking at putting together a five-year plan for street reconstruction projects and street overlay projects. encl. J oos noted that he thought this would be. an appropriate time to upgrade sidewalks in the area of the street reconstruction project. Mr. Weyandt noted rightnow the City did not have a sidewalk plan, Mr. Loney noted Council had not really authorized a plan. This did need to be looked at. Mr. Weyandt stated Fuller Street was working as a local street (a traffic count was taken) not as an arterial street as it was classified; it was recommended that the arterial designation be taken off Fuller Street. He noted if a sidewalk were put in that area there were a number of mature trees that would need to be removed. The sidewalk had been looked at. Cncl. Lelunan asked if the street width reduction had an impact on the property owner's assessments? Mr. Weyandt replied yes, it reduced the assessments approximately 9%. Cucl. Lehman was not happy that Dakota Street was no longer included in this project. He thought Dakota Street was pretty rough. Mr. Weyandt stated there were a number of streets in town in the reconstruction category. He noted once they were in that category it really was not important in what order they were reconstructed unless the infrastructure was poor. The street reconstructions needed to be done one step at a time. . Mr. Loney noted Shakopee Public Utilities reviewed the projects and they noted they did not have the money to replace the watermain under Dakota and Main Street at this time. They did approve replacing the watermain under the streets the City was recommending in section one and two. Mr. Loney also pointed out there was a memo on the table because there was an error in the preliminary assessment roll. He noted this memo had the corrected assessment figures in it. This memo should be placed in the feasibility study by the Council. Mr. Weyandt noted how the street reconstruction projects were selected this year and how they would be selected in the future. Mr. Weyandt noted the City could mill and overlay Dakota Street and Main Street but it was the infrastructure that really was the City's concern. Mr. Weyandt noted what would be done so the width reduction would not create a problem at any of the intersections connected to the streets involved. Official Proceedings of February 15,2005 Shakopee City Council Page -3- Mr. Loney stated street reconstructions projects are really geared to what the City could afford. He stated the City wanted to get a pavement management program up and operating. Mr. Weyandt stated the streets were geared to last 50 to 60 years. Mr. Weyandt noted the utilities the City was putting in now should last 100 years. He stated many utilities that are in use now will not last that long. Mayor Schmitt noted the budget each year would need to be looked at to make sure there. was sufficient street reconstruction dollars for reconstruction each year. He preferred projects get done that need to get done. Cncl. Lehman wanted to know why some properties had sanitary sewer assessments and others did not. Mr. Weyandt noted the assessment roll was based offthe PID number. He noted some parcels were large but there was only one house and one service or possibly there was a corner lot with the sanitary sewer coming off a different street. Cncl. Lehman asked if the sanitary sewer fund recouped its.funds from the sanitary assessment cost to the property. Mr. Weyandt replied no and then explained how the Sanitary Sewer Fund received its money. Cncl. Lehman wanted to know what portion the sanitary sewer assessments were for if it was not for the mainline. Mr. Weyandt noted the assessments were for the Y all the way to the right of way line. Mr. Loney reported on the Plans and Specifications for Public Works Building Project No. 2005- 5. He noted Oertel Architects had completed the plans. He noted on February 3, 2005 a committee consisting of Cncl. Helkamp, Cncl. Lehman, Mr. Oertel and himself met to fmalize the design and alternates that would be included in the project. He noted a bid opening for March 21, 2005 was being proposed and the committee would meet to look over the bids and alternates and make a recommendation at the April 5, 2005 City Council meeting. Mr. Loney went over the alternates that had been included in the proposed bid package. These alternates are: 1) to paint the entire vehicle storage ceiling, joists, deck and mechanical, electrical work with a white paint, 2) provide special epoxy urethane coating on the entire maintenance and wash bay floor in the vehicle maintenance area (to allow better clean-up) not including welding or mezzanine areas, 3) provide new masonry and veneer window units and related items to the existing Public Works Building [new building face], 4) provide a five-ton crane in the vehicle maintenance area [the building would be built to handle a five-ton crane {Cncl. Lehman noted there were two different type cranes in the bid 1: a mono-rail that was a lighter weight one-ton and 2: the five-ton}], 5) A gas island canopy as a fuel island, 6) providing skylights in all locations of the vehicle storage and maintenance area [16], 7) alternate storm sewer and water system [Mr. Loney explained - expansion], 8) to provide a two truck wash bay in the existing building, 9) vehicle lift options. Mr. Loney noted the grading work would also be a unit price bid. Official Proceedings of February 15,2005 Shakopee City Council Page ~4- Lehman/Helkamp moved to adjourn the meeting to Tuesday, February 15,2005 at 7:00 p,m. The meeting adjourned at 6:48 p.m. Motion carried 5-0. B~d. ~ City Clerk Carole Hedlund Recording Secretary OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL ADJ. REGULAR SESSION SHAKOPEE,MINNESOTA .FEBRUARY 22, 2005 Mayor Schmitt called the meeting to order at 6:00 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; (arrived 6:37) Bruce Loney, Public Works DirectorlCity Engineer; Gregg Voxland, Finance Director; Mark Themig, Parks, Recreation and Facilities Director. Mr. McNeill noted the City was expecting a check in the amount of $440,000 from the State that would be forwarded to Challenge Printing, Mr. McNeill noted this check was for the equipment purchased through the authorization of the Minnesota Small Business loan. Mr. McNeill stated when the City did receive this check, the Council would need to authorize that this check be forwarded to Challenge Printing. Joos/Helkamp moved to authorize payment for the amount of the check received from the State (approximately $444,000) to Challenge Printing as proceeds from the Minnesota Investment Fund Loan. Motion carried 5-0. Mr. Themig reported on the Park and Recreation CIP. Mr. Themig noted the current Park Reserve balance was about $3.4 million. Mr. Themig noted what money was already committed from this Fund. He stated he met with Cncl. Lehman and Mayor Schmitt and went over a list of some of the park projects. Mr. Themig noted from this meeting a list of park projects that were committed to by the City, and needed to move forward, was put together. Mr. Themig noted what these park projects were. Mr. Themig noted the park projects committed to already totaled about $1.2 million. Mr. Themig discussed the possible acquisition of the Shutrop property. He noted things were changing constantly regarding the Shutrop property. Mr. Themig noted the status of the acquisition of the Shutrop property per the Shutrop's attorney. He noted the issue now regarding the purchase of the Shutrop property was the County's acquisition of the right-of-way needed for County Road 21 in the area. It was noted the County may have the opportunity to use federal funds to purchase the right-of-way on the Shutrop property. However, there were specific requirements forthe use of those funds. Mr. Themig noted those requirements. Mr. Themig noted a meeting had been held with the Shutrops, their attorney, the County, Tollefson Development and City to discuss a potential delay in the closing. Mr. Themig received notification from the Shutrop's attorney today of the ramifications (significant sale price increase) of delaying the close on the Shutrop property. Mr. Themig noted that the County had been informed of the ramifications of a delay to see if they could expedite the County's process. Mr. Themig noted the County was working with the federal government now and he noted how the federal dollars could affect the right-of-way dollars and the closing on this property. Official Proceedings of February 22, 2005 Shakopee City Council Page -2- Mr. Themig responded to Cncl. Helkamp's question regarding Tollefson Development buying the right of way and then selling it to the City (the City could not be in ownership of the right-of- way and still have the County be eligible for federal dollars). Mr. Themig stated there were problems involved with that scenario also. He stated what the problems were, but it was a possibility that would involve several closings. Cncl. Helkamp stated this would put the City back in control of the first closing, rather than waiting for the County and federal government; it also kept the door open for federal funding for the County. It was noted after all the park pieces were put together tonight it would be determined if the City had the financial ability to complete this transaction for the Shutrop property. Cncl. Joos wanted assurances that the City would not be vulnerable if they completed the transaction as Cncl. Helkamp proposed. Cncl. Lehman noted this protection could be written into the agreement. Cncl. Joos stated it made sense to get this done but he wanted the assurances in place to protect the City. It was noted if the City acquired this land, everything would stop for the Park Reserve Fund for this year until the County came back to the City and picked up their right of way costs. The City needed a guaranteed time line from the County (when they could fund the right-of-way for CR 21) with an alternate financing proposal if something fell through, Cncl. Lehman disagreed with this. He noted why. He disagreed with the Park Reserve Fund carrying the County's right-of- way costs. Cncl. Lehman feltthe carrying cost should come from another fund. Mr. Themig stated the County needed to get some answers from the federal govenmlent regarding just what land the City could own in order for the County to remain eligible forthe federal funding. Mr. Themig really thought for the closing to get done when stipulated (March 11, 2005) the City would have to cash flow the roadway right-of-way. Mr. Themig noted he had spoken with Gregg V mcland, Finance Director, and Mr. V oxland thought an interfund loan could be done with existing funds as long as there was a mechanism to pay this loan back. Cncl. Menden asked Mr. Themig to go over the projects that the City would not get done if the acquisition of the Shutrop did take place. Mr. Themig noted what these projects were. Mr. Themig noted how Huber Park could move forward by reducing, eliminating or delaying other projects. Mr. Themig presented a list ofprojects that could be presented for reduction, elimination or delay with reasons they were selected. Mayor Schmitt addressed the cash flow portion of the Park Reserve Fund in calendar year 2005. He did not think some developers would complete projects in 2005 as anticipated. He thought the development projects would move into 2006. Mr. Themig noted the justifications of the money listed in the park Reserve Fund and stated there could be some other money coming in. Official Proceedings of February 22, 2005 Shakopee City Council Page -3- Cncl. Lehman questioned some figures in the 2003, 2004 and 2005 budget for the Parks. Mr. ....- --llremig-nute-d--these'-figures'changed-quite-often~;-Themig-explainecl-a-few-line-items----.... .-.-.-- regarding grants and donations in the 2005 CIP. The construction of Huber Park was discussed. Cncl. Lehman suggested staging the construction of Huber Park over three years. Mr. Themig was concerned about that suggestion and the possible impact this would/could have on the Park. Mr. Themig suggested another alternative for Huber Park. Cncl. Helkamp stated he too preferred to get Huber Park done. He wanted to start Huber Park as soon as possible. The costs just went up yearly. Cncl. Menden stated he heard the Council saying at the last few meetings that they wanted to do the Shutrop property acquisition and Huber Park; ifthat was case, then some of the other proj ects would just have to wait. Cncl. Joos stated he would like to see the money budgeted for a certain project to remain earmarked for the certain project even if that project was moved into another year. Mr. Voxland stated if the Council wanted to do that, they could. The Council needed to make that decision. Cncl. Lehman wanted the County to understand if the City was going to carry their costs, for their right of way for County Road 21, there would be carrying charges involved. Mayor Schmitt felt there should be some risk dollars included in the carrying costs. Cncl. Helkamp felt some residents had to wait for their parks to be developed so they too deserved to make some money because of the City carrying the County. Cncl. Helkamp stated now it looked like perhaps the City could pull off the acquisition of the Shutrop property and the construction and development of Huber Park looking at this revised CIP for the Parks. He stated he was willing to move forward with the Shutrop acquisition. . He noted in Plan A the County could get the federal funding by March 23, 2005 and if the Shutrops would agree to that closing date or plan B if the County did not get that answer from the federal government tomorrow regarding the federal funds then the City should move forward and close on the Shutrop property on March 11, 2005 and the City would fund an amount not to exceed $750,00 (for right-of-way) from the CIF and the County could come back later, whenever they were ready to fund the right-of-way and the City would then have a new appraisal done and the County could pay the going rate at that time for that right-of-way. Helkamp/Joos moved to go forward with the acquisition of the Shutrop property with the interfund loan, to fund the County's right-of-way, coming from the Capital Improvement Fund (CIF) either by plan A or plan B and the $300,000 for the roadway improvements for Pike Lake Trail would also be funded from the CIF and not repaid and the additional money available from the CIP project that was coming to a close (98 improvement projects) would be transferred into the Park Reserve Fund. Official Proceedings of February 22, 2005 Shakopee City Council Page -4- Cnc1. Lehman noted he was basically comfortable with the motion but he did have a problem if . . ... '..--meColifity Qictnofpay-forth~light~of;;way-in-a--reasonable-time:-l'-his-right-t>f~way'e0st-may---"------_._'. then need to be revisited. Cncl. Menden stated he was comfortable with the motion. Mayor Schmitt asked if the interfund loan needed to be identified. Mr. V oxland noted he could see rationale for an interfund loan coming from the CIF (streets and utilities). Mr. Voxland noted the Sanitary Sewer Fund had sufficient money also, that too could be used for an interfund transfer as well as there was a CIP project coming to a close and about $300,000 could be transferred from it. He thought using the CIF made the most sense. Cncl. Lehman stated he would like to see the funds for road right-of-way carrying costs come from the CIF. Cnc1. Helkamp agreed that money should not come out of the Park Reserve Funds for the right-of-way. Mr. Voxland also noted if this $300,000 was from a road project and if this project was going to be assessed then those assessments would be paid over time from the General Fund. The construction of Pike Lake Road/trail was discussed. It was decided to reimburse the CIF with the sale proceeds of the right-of-way when the County decided to take care of that cost. Mayor Schmitt wanted a list of the basic City Funds and what the City was proposing to do' out of them so the Council knew what was left at the end of December 31, 2005. Cnc1. Lehman also wanted a list of the expected revenues by the December 31, 2005 date. These balances would affect what happened in 2006 and 2007. Motion carried 5-0. Mr. Themig stated it was shown that Huber Park could be funded with it being developed in 2006. He was talking $1.2 million in 2006. Mr. Themig noted at some time Huber Park may require an interfund loan that would be paid back in 2007/08. Cncl. Helkamp stated he had no problem with an interfund loan. Lehman/Helkamp moved to approve the CIP as amended ($300,000 from '98 improvement projects transferred to the Park Reserve Fund) and directed staff to go back and tweak it and make sure everything was accurate. Motion carried 5-0. Cnc1. Menden stated, shortly, there would be a referendum for the community center. Cnc1. Menden asked if the Council would be willing to ask the public, at that time, if they would be willing to help fund some of the park projects that are needed in the community but are always deferred. He stated he would like to keep these park questions separate from the community center itself. Cnc1. Helkamp noted his first reaction in doing that was the public may vote no on everything rather than picking and choosing but he needed more information, Official Proceedings of February 22, 2005 Shakopee City Council Page -5- Cncl. Lehman noted he was looking forward to an updated Park Master Plan. He thought these master plans had much value for the City. LehmanlMenden moved to adjourn the meeting to Tuesday, March 1,2005 at 7:00 p.m. The meeting adjourned at 7:47 p.m. Motion carried 5-0. ~~ktkJ. ~ ith S. Cox City Clerk Carole Hedlund Recording Secretary OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL SESSION SHAKOPEE,MINNESOTA MARCH 1, 2005 Mayor John Schmitt called the meeting to order at 6:04 p.m. with Council members Joe Helkamp, Terry Joos,Matt Lehman, and Steve Menden present. Also present: Mark McNeill, City Administrator; Judith S. Cox, City Clerk; Gregg V oxland, Finance Director; R. Michael Leek, Community Development Director; and Bruce Loney, Public Works Director/City Engineer. HelkamplJoos moved to recess to an executive session to discuss pending litigation and labor negotiations. Motion carried 5-0. Mayor Schmitt re-convened the meeting at 7:08 p.m. No 'action was taken during the executive session. LehmanlMenden moved to close the special session with no action being taken. Motion carried 5-0. The meeting was adjourned at 7:08 p.m. ~J8? 'E~s. Cox . ty Clerk