Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout7. Approval of Minutes: November 3, 2005, November 16, 2004, November 23, 2004 and December 6, 2004 OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL REGULAR SESSION SHAKOPEE,M~SOTA NOVEMBER 3,2004 Mayor Schmitt called the meeting to order at 7:03 p.m. with Council members Menden, Helkamp, and Joos present. Absent: Council member Lehman. Also Present: Mark McNeill, City Administrator; JudithS. Cox, City Clerk; R. Michael Leek, Community Development Director; Bruce Loney, Public Works Director/City Engineer;. Jim Thomson, City Attorney; Gregg V oxland, Finance Director and Paul Snook, Economic Development Coordinator. The pledge of allegiance was recited. The following item was deferred on the agenda. 14.A. Text Amendment to City Code Regarding Building Materials in the Single-Family Residential Zones. Helkanlp/Joos moved to approve the Agenda as modified. Motion carried 4-0. Mayor Schmitt stated the Great Scott Conference took place in Prior Lake and noted it was very well attended and successful. He noted that there was a meeting on the playground project for Huber Park that was also very well attended by the public. He. stated there was a SCALE meeting on October 29,2004 and SCALE was pursuing the lobbying technique with the County's legislators. The following item was added to the Consent Agenda. 7. Minutes for the sleptember 20, September 21, and September 27,2004 meetings. The following item was removed from the Consent Agenda. 15.B.3 Centex; Homes Request for Suspension of Noise Restrictions on Construction Activities. I I Helkamp/Menden moved to approve the Consent Agenda as amended. Motion carried 4-0 with Cncl. Joos abstaining from voting on the minutes because he was absent frdm a meeting. Hell(amp/Menden moved to approve the Minutes for the September 20, seJember 21, and September 27,2004 meetings. Motion carried 3-0 with CncI. Joos abstaini~g because he was absent for a meeting. (Motion carried under the Consent Agenda). Helkamp/Menden moved to approve the bills in the amount of $370,799.42 plus $173,266.13 for refunds, returns and pass through for a total of $544,065.55. (Motion carri$d under the Consent Agenda). [The list of bills is posted on the bulletin board at City Hall for ore month following approval]. I - I Mayor Schmitt asked if there were any citizens present in the audience whQ wished to address any item not on the agenda. I I I I I . Official Proceedings of the November 3, 2004 Shakopee City Council Page -2- John O'Loughlin, 2988 Valley View Road, asked to be heard after the assessment hearing had taken place for Valley View Road. Helkamp/Menden moved to open the public hearing on proposed assessments for the 2003 (4th Avenue) Street Reconstruction Project, No. 2003-3. Motion carried 4-0. Mr. Loney, Public Works Director/City Engineer, noted the 4th Avenue Street Reconstruction Project, No. 2003-3 was essentially completed; there was the finallayer of bituminous that would be applied, stripping and punch list items in 2005 for this project. Mr. Loney noted the project had been in five segments and he noted the project area. Mr. Loney gave some history on the project. Mr. Loney noted what improvements were done for each segment ofthe project. He . did state the second segment 4th A venue from CSAH 17 to Shenandoah Drive was the major portion ofthe project. Mr. Loney noted the projected final cost for the five segments was $3,424,149. He noted the funding sources for the city. The funding sources for this project were: 1) Sanitary Sewer Enterprises Funds, 2) Storm Sewer Fund, 3) Tax Levy, 4) State Aid, 5) Assessments, and 6) Shakopee Public Utilities. Mr. Loney noted the breakdown of the costs. He noted there were right-of-way charges and ponding agreements that had affected assessment costs to a few property owners in the project area. Mr. Loney noted that JLD (Northland Forest Products) wanted to pay their ponding fee as an assessment over time. Mr. Loney stated segment one was assessed for the street work as per City policy at 25% to the benefiting property. The mill and overlay was assessed at 25% to the benefiting property owners. Any new water lines or new sanitary sewer lines were 100% assessed to the benefiting properties. Segment two had the street, storm sewer and street lighting assessed at 25% to the benefiting property owners and any new sanitary sewer or water lines were 100% assessed to the benefiting properties and any reconstruction of water lines was 100% paid for by Shakopee Public Utilities. Mr. Loney noted a private sewer line was reconstructed in the right-of-way along 4th Avenue and 50% ofthat cost was assessed to the Knights of Columbus and the City's Sanitary Sewer Fund picked up the other 50%. He noted there was a ponding assessment per agreement with JLD Investments (Northland Forest Products). In segment three (Sarazin Street) right-of-way, sanitary sewer, watermain and storm sewer were 100% assessed to the benefiting propertyowner. Mr. Loney noted the railroad crossing and signal improvement was 100% City cost. The storm sewer oversizing and pond construction was 100% out of the City's Trunk Storm Fund. He noted some ofthe project costs were higher than most project costs because this was a very difficult area where much blasting had been required. He noted segment four (Cavanaugh Drive) served Rubber Industries and Northland Forest Products. He noted the new pavement and streetlighting were assessed at 25% to the benefiting property owner. He noted the new watermain on Spruce Street was 100% assessed to the benefiting property owners. Mr. Loney noted he received some objection to the assessments and these objections were on the Council table. These objections were from: 1) the Shakopee Ballroom [objecting to assessment on the watermain along 4th Avenue {they are currently served by the water main on Shenandoah . Official Proceedings of the November 3,2004 Shakopee City Council Page -3- Drive but they do have a comer lot and possibly an agreement exists that they would contribute to the watermain on 4th Avenue}] and a possible objection to the watermain assessments on the Outlots in Pinewood Estates [currently have access to a watermain on Spruce Street]. He noted the Shakopee Knights of Columbus also objected to the increase in assessments on. their parcel because their assessments cost increased 81 % from the costs projected in the feasibility study [watermain increased $3,000 and the replacement of the sanitary sewer line was tlle balance of the increased cost]. Mr. Loney did state there was a revised assessment roll on the table. He noted some errors were found in tlle original assessment roll. It was the revised assessment roll that staff would like to see Council adopt tonight. He noted the term for the assessments was a ten-year term with an interest rate of 5% from the date of adoption of the resolution containing the assessments. He reported there were deferments that were included in the assessment roll as per the agreements with Kelley Fuel and JLD Investments. He noted there was an issue with the watermain along 4th Avenue. He noted some of these parcels already had water from another source. He noted the City Attorney had reviewed his memo to Shakopee Public Utilities and the memos to Joe Adams and Lou VanHout at Shakopee Public Utilities. Mr. Loney recommended . that a public hearing on the assessment issue be held tonight with public testimony taken to see how many actual objections there really were to the assessments but to table any action until November 16,2004. This would allow staff time to see what could be done with the assessments and then to come back to Council with a recommendation. Harry Weinandt, Maxine Circle, representing the Knights of Columbus Home Association, stated the Knights of Columbus Home Association objected to the assessments, feasibility study and the increase in the assessments. He noted the sanitary sewer for the Knights of Columbus Home Association was televised by the City and the City recommended it be replaced during . construction of 4th A venue and the Knights of Columbus Home Association would pay 50% and the City would pay 50%. He noted this sanitary sewer assessment was increased about 81 % from the feasibility study. He would like to see this assessment reduced. Ken Rantham, representing the Pinewood Homeowners Association, noted the Pinewood Homeowners Association objected to the watermain assessment on 4th Avenue up to Spruce Street for Outlot A and Outlot B. This objection to the watermain assessment was also in writing. He noted the Pinewood Homeowners Association was okay with the assessment for the street and curb and gutter. They agreed to pay this; it was the watermain assessment in question. . He stated from the Pinewood Homeowners Association understanding there was not a looping agreement and they questioned why they would be assessed for an additional watermain that they felt was not a benefit to them. They already had water from another source. Joe Adams, Shakopee Public Utilities Planning and Engineering Director, commented about the project. He noted it had been a very complicated project. He was asking Council to defer action on the watermain assessments until the Shakopee Public Utilities Commission (SPUC) could revisit this issue. He noted when SPUC first discussed this issue they did not have enough information before them and their legal council advised them that they should have more Official Proceedings of the November 3,2004 Shakopee City Council Page -4- information before any determination was made on the assessments for the watennain. He noted SPUC was willing to discuss this issue when they had more information from the City's public hearing on the watermain assessments and the background had been reviewed. Mr. Adams noted Mr. VanHout, Shakopee Public Utilities Manager, did not want to see a blanket change in the City's policy regarding water main assessments because of the unique circumstances in this case. Demus Vyscosil, 568 Woodside Court, approached the podium with some questions. He had . questions on the water assessment along 4th Avenue for United Land and the watermain assessment for the Pinewood Twin homes. Mr. Loney noted what these assessments were. Mr. Vyscosil wanted to know ifthere was any agreement that United Land would shift any of their watermain cost into the 4th Avenue project. Mr. Loney responded no. Mr. Loney did state that the SPUC looping agreements [with the developer of Pinewood Estates andthe Shakopee Ballroom, or lack of,] needed to be investigated further. Mr. Loney noted the majority of the watennain costs went to United Land. Mr. Vyscosil stated he objected to being assessed for something he already paid for. It was noted it was the looping agreement again that was the problem. Mr. Loney explained the looping agreement with the developments along 4th Avenue. He noted there may be an agreement that the developer would help pay for watermain along 4th Avenue if that watermain ever went in. It was not a vehicle to object to assessments. Mr. Loney explained the watermainlooping system requirement. Mr. Loney noted Pinewood Estates had two sources of water [one from Prairie Bend and one from Shenandoah Drive]. Mr. Adams noted the process should be followed and then he would answer the questions. Jim Thomson, City Attorney, noted appeals had been filed. The questions could now be answered. Mr. Adams stated the Pinewood Estates development was connected to two sources of water. These are Prairie Bend between some lots on the west side and from Shenandoah Drive. Mr. . Adams noted there were some elements ofSPUC's design criteria that were not met by the system in place prior to the project being done. Mr. Loney noted these assessments had to be certified to the County by November 30, 2004 if the City did not want to accrue more interest. Mr. Thomson noted every one had the opportunity to object to the assessments so he recommended that the hearing be closed and the action be continued. Mayor Schmitt asked if there were any more comments from the public. There were none. Helkamp/Joos moved to close the public hearing. Mr. Delmis Vyscosil asked Mr.'Adams if there was any agreement between SPUC and United Properties regarding the watermain along 4th Avenue. Mr. Adams answered no, there was no agreement written or otherwise to put the watermain assessments for 4th Avenue on the project costs. . Official Proceedings of the November 3, 2004 Shakopee City Council Page -5- Motion carried 4-0. Helkamp/Joos moved to table action on the proposed assessments for the 2003 Street Reconstruction Project, 2003-3 until November 16, 2004. Motion carried 4-0. Helkamp/Menden moved to open the public hearing for the proposed assessments for Valley View Road Improvements, 2003-4. Motion carried 4-0. Mr. Loney reported on the assessment for the Valley View Road Improvements, 2003-4. Mr. Loney noted the project area and the improvements. Mr. Loney noted the totalproject cost was . $590,842.96 and the feasibility study projected the cost to be $674,990. He noted the streets were assessed the local street equivalent. He noted the street oversizing was picked up by the City with state aid funds, the lighting costs were assessed 50% to the benefiting residents and 50% was picked up by the City. The sanitary sewer service, water main service and storm sewer service were assessed costs. He noted the actual assessments were $495,000 and the City costs were $94,000 and there were some SPUC costs. Mr. Loney noted this project was mostly assessed. He noted that SPUC did underground the power lines in the project area. Mr. Loney noted there were only three parcels in this project. Mr. Loney noted the City had an agreement with Tollefson Development where Tollefson agreed to pay their assessments in full. The other two parcels were the Gene Hauer Farms parcel [pID #279200050} and the John O'Loughlin parcel [pID #279200090]. Mr. Loney stated the assessment term was ten-years with a 5% interest rate unless the Gene Hauer Farms parcel and the John O'Loughlin parcel were put in green acres. Mr. V oxland, Finance Director explained what "green acres" was. Mr. V oxland and Mr. O'loughlin would look into the green acres option. John O'Loughlin asked if this assessment could be deferred. Mr. Loney suggested green acres if Mr. Q'Loughlin qualified. Mr. O'Loughlin noted he would not appeal the assessments. The SAC and WAC charges were discussed on the building permit. Mr. Loney explained what the $3,500 charge was about on Mr. O'Loughlin's property. Mr. O'Loughlin now discussed a different issue with the Council. Mr. O'Loughlin stated Time Warner would not bring cable services to his area and he questioned the Franchise Agreement between the City and Time Warner Cable. Mr. McNeill, City Administrator, explained the agreement regarding this situation. Mr. McNeill noted he would follow-up where the cable box was closest to Mr. O'Loughlin's property. Mayor Schmitt asked if there were any more comments from the public. There were none. Helkamp/Joos moved to close the public hearing. Motion carried 4-0. Official Proceedings of the November 3,2004 Shakopee City Council Page -6- Helkamp/Menden offered Resolution No. 6140, A Resolution Adopting Assessments For Valley View Road, From The East Plat Line Of Pheasant Run 6th Addition To The East Plat Line Of Greenfield, Project No. 2003-4, and moved its adoption. Motion carried 4-0. Helkamp/Menden moved to open the public hearing for the proposed assessments for Vierling Drive from CSAH 15 to Orchard Park West PUD, 2002-4. Motion carried 4-0. Mr. Loney reported on the assessments forVierling Drive from CSAH 15 to Orchard Park West PUD, 2002-4. Mr. Loney oriented the project area and noted roadway alignments had been looked at for this project to allow for a fire station site. Mr. Loney noted the improvements to Vierling Drive for this project. Mr. Loney noted how the project had been assessed. Mr. Loney noted the properties that benefited from this project were properties than could obtain access from Vierling Drive. The properties were assessed on a front foot basis. Mr. Loney noted the project costs came in on this project lower than the feasibility study. The total project costs were $835,550.15. Mr. Loney noted Vierling Drive was assessed at the local street equivalent with the City picking up the oversizing of the street. . The street lighting was assessed 50% to the benefiting properties and 50% to the City. Mr. Loney noted SPUC paid for some items. He noted there was a sanitary sewer assessment on the east end to bring sanitary sewer to the property owned by Link Construction. Mr. Loney stated there were watermain assessments and storm sewer assessments for the project also. He noted the cost of the box culvert was picked up 100% by the City (Storm Water Trunk Fund). Mr. Loney noted the City was picking up the assessments for Lions Park. He noted the assessments were based on the front footage. Mr. Loney noted the assessment term was 10 years with the interest rate at 5.25%. Mr. Loney noted the City did have a written letter for an assessment appeal from the Haasken property owners [PID #279120500] objecting to the assessments. The Haaskens wanted to talk to the City and to keep their options open for an assessment appeal. Mr. Loney stated with the realignment of Vierling Drive in this project area the assessments to Mr. Haasken had been reduced. Mr. Loney noted the fee per front foot was equal with the Link Construction property and the Haasken property. Mr. Loney noted how the assessment was calculated. Mayor Schmitt asked if there were any comments from the public. There were none. Joos/Helkamp moved to close the public hearing. Motion carried 4-0. Helkamp/Joos offered Resolution No. 6141, a Resolution Adopting Assessments For 2003 Vierling Drive Improvements, Vierling Drive, From County Road 15 To Orchard Park West Plat Line, Project No. 2002-4, and moved its adoption. Official Proceedings of the November 3,2004 Shakopee City Council Page -7- . Mr. Thomson, City Attorney noted what action could be taken on the assessment appeal by the Haaskens. Motion carried 4-0. Helkamp/Menden moved to open the public hearing on the proposed vacation of easements located north of CR 78, east of Barrington Drive and west of CSAH 17 in Beckrich Park Estates. Motion carried 4-0. Mr. Leek, Community Development Director, reported on the vacation of the drainage and utility easements located north of CR 78, east of Barrington Drive and west of CSAH 17 in Beckrich Park Estates. Mr. Leek noted there was a condition imposed in the Valley Creek Crossings plat that required this vacation of the drainage and utility easement. Mr. Leek noted with the approval of the Valley Creek Crossings plat any necessary drainage and utility easements that were required were obtained with that plat by the City. He noted the Planning Commission did recommend approval of the vacation of easements. There was no one present from the public who had any comments. . Menden/Helkamp moved to close the public hearing. Motion carded 3-0, with Councilor Joos abstaining because he owns property in the Beckrich Park Estates. Helkamp/Menden offered Resolution No. 6139, A Resolution Of The City Of Shako pee Vacating Easement Within Valley Creek Crossing, and moved its adoption. Motion carried 3-0 with Cncl. Joos abstaining because residents in Beckrich Park Estates had received money compensation for this vacation of easement and he lives in Beckrich Park Estates. Helkamp/Menden moved to continue the public hearing on the Minnesota Investment Fund Loan for Challenge Printing, Inc. for property located at 1000 Valley Park Drive to November 16, 2004. (Motion carried under the Consent Agenda). Cncl. Menden noted he held a visioning session with the Lions Club and he stated he had the opportunity to speak to some junior high classes about the importance of voting. He noted he also helped out with the kids voting project. Mayor Schmitt asked for feedback on the results of the kids voting. He felt this would be valuable information for the City to have. . Cncl. Joos noted he attended the open house for the (Huber Park) community built park project. He noted he also attended a SPUC meeting and the SPUC Commission unanimously passed their assistance on the building per the City's memo. He noted nothing was decided at this SPUC . Official Proceedings of the November 3, 2004 Shakopee City Council Page -8- meeting regarding the looping issue question on assessments (for the 2003-3 reconstruction project). Helkamp/Menden moved to recess at 8:22 p.m. for the purpose of conducting the Economic Development Authority meeting. Motion carried 4-0. Mayor Schmitt reconvened the City Council meeting at 8 :25 p.m. Mr. Leek, reported on Randy Noecker's request for a grading pelmit to allow stockpiling of clean fill. Mr. Leek noted Mr. Noecker was infonned that this item would be on the Council's agenda this evening; however, Mr. Noecker was not present at the meeting. There was consensus by the . Council to take action on this item tonight. Helkamp/Menden moved to deny the requested grading permit from Randy Noecker consistent with the reasons that the Planning Commission had for denial. These reasons are: 1) there was not an approved or approvable plat for the project area, and 2) the applicant had submitted insufficient information for the City to be assured that the wetlands, woodlands,. and Prior Lake/Spring Lake Outlet Chmmel on the site will be adequately protected. Jim Thomson, City Attorney noted that this grading permit was denied for the reasons outlined by the Planning Commission. Mr. Thomson noted these reasons were sufficient for a denial. Motion carried 4-0. Mr. Leek reported on the waiver of subdivision criteria requested by Mark and Michelle Minea, 8380 Eagle Creek Boulevard. The request was to waive the lot requirements under the zoning ordinance so the Minea's could move the lot line on their two properties. Mr. Leek explained the location of the two parcels. He noted the Minea's desire was to eventually sell off a portion of this property and to relocate the property line so they would have a larger lot to preserve some wooded area and to ensure themselves access from their driveway to Tuckaway Court. Mr. Leek was ofthe opinion that these properties would stay rural residential for some time and the request would not negatively impact City Code if the request for a waiver were granted. It was pointed out by Cncl. Joos that, at this time, neither of the lots would be permitted under City Code because of the lotsize. Cncl. Joos noted he did not want to landlock someone. Mr. Leek noted currently the applicant did not have direct access to his lot but after the minor subdivision there still will not be direct access but the applicant would have access off the private roadway (Tuckaway Court). Mark Minea, 8380 Eagle Creek Boulevard, noted the landlock issue was the main reason he requested a waiver to the subdivision criteria. Mr. Minea explained the driveway as it is now. He noted something needed to be done to make his property where his house is accessible if the Official Proceedings of the November 3, 2004 Shakopee City Council Page -9- front portion of the property were sold. Mr. Minea gave some history of the parcel. Mr. Leek stated why this request was not treated as a simple minor subdivision process. Helkamp/Joos moved to approve therequest of Mark Minea for the waiver of minor subdivision . criteria and allow the relocation of the lot lines on PID # 279130490 to create the +/- 1.97 acre and the +/- 2.93 acre parcels. Cncl. Joos stated to Mr. Minea that he, Mr. Minea, really needed to assure himself access to his property (easement). Cncl. Joos did not want to create any more problems. Motion carried 4-0. Helkamp/Menden offered Resolution No. 6143 and Resolution No. 6144, authorizing the appropriate City officials to execute Agreement No. 86066 and Agreement No. 86067 with the Union Pacific Railroad Company and the Commissioner of Transportation for the State ofMN for the installation and maintenance of railroad crossing flashers with circuitry at the intersections of Sommerville Street and Spencer Street respectively. (Motion carried lUlder the Consent Agenda). Helkamp/Menden offered Resolution No. 6142, A Resolution Accepting Work On Valley View Road, From The East Plat Line Of Pheasant Run 6th Addition To The East Plat Line of Greenfield; And Vierling Drive, From County Road 15 To Orchard Park West, Project No's . 2003-4 and 2002-4, and moved its adoption. (Motion carried under the Consent Agenda). Cncl. Helkamp addressed the construction activities at Riverside Fields 3rd Addition. He thought there was enough activity and noise at that location now. The residents near the construction site did not need to bear more construction activities. He was not inclined to deviate from the City's noise ordinance. Helkmup/Menden moved to deny the suspension of City Code Sec. 10.60, Noise Elimination and Noise Prevention, Subd. 3, Hourly Restrictions on Certain Operations, D, as requested by Centex Homes, for work in Riverside Fields 3rd Addition. Mr. Loneynoted staff had not received any complaints regarding the noise from this construction but encl. Helkamp may have intercepted the concerns. He noted Centex Homes was up against the weather. Motion carried 4-0. Helkamp/Menden moved to accept Ken Pass's resignation for the Shakopee Fire Department with regrets. (Motion carried under the Consent Agenda). Official Proceedings of the November 3, 2004 Shakopee City Council Page -10- Mr. McNeill noted Mr. Themig requested a workshop to discuss Park and Recreation issues. He stated Mr. Themig felt a couple of hours would be needed. Tuesday, November 23,2004 was suggested as a possible workshop date. Helkamp/Menden moved to establish a Council work session Tuesday, November 23,2004 at 7 :00 p.m. Motion carried 4-0. Helkamp/Menden moved to direct staff to prepare the Truth In Taxation hearing incorporating a $420,000 reduction from the proposed maximum taxlevy. (Motion carried under the Consent Agenda). Joos/Helkamp moved to adjourn the meeting to Tuesday, November 16,2004 at 7:00 p.m. Motion carried 4-0. The meeting adjourned at 8:47 p.m. ~.J,rt J - Ctf~ udith S. Cox City Clerk Carole Hedlund Recording Secretary . OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL ADJ. REGULAR SESSION SHAKOPEE,NUNNESOTA NOVEMBER 16, 2004 Mayor Schmitt called the meeting to order at 7:03 p.m. with Council members Menden, Lehman, and Joos present. Absent: Council memberHelkamp. Also Present: Mark McNeill, City Administrator; Judith S. Cox, City Clerk; R. Michael Leek, Community Development Director; Bruce Loney, Public Works Director/City Engineer; Jim Thomson, City Attorney; Gregg V oxland, Finance Director; Paul Snook, Economic Development Coordinator; Mark Themig, Park, Recreation and Facilities Director; Terry Stang, Fire Chief and Captain Marty Glenn, Fire Fighter and Rick Holman, Fire Fighter. Mayor Schmitt noted present in the audience was Boy Scout Troop #218 to see government in action. Boy Scout Troop #218 presented the colors. The pledge of allegiance was recited; The following item was added to the agenda. 15.E.6. Accept the Resignation of Paul Snook, Economic Development Coordinator. Joos/Menden moved to approve the Agenda as modified. Motion carried 4-0. Mayor Schmitt stated there as a SCALE meeting on November 121, 2004 over in Prior Lake and on Wednesday November 10, 2004 there was an open house for the new Ashley Furniture store in Shakopee. . Mr. McNeill, City Administrator, reported there was a Reliant Enyrgy/Minnegasco $2,500 donation to the City that was applied for by the Shakopee Fire Department for air-monitoring equipment. Mr. McNeill noted the donation needed to be accepte~ by resolution per City policy. I I Mark Spanton, Senior Sales Associate with Reliant Energy, presented a check for $2,500 from Centerpoint/Reliant Energy to Marty Glenn, Shakopee Fire Depa~ment, for the purpose of purchasing air-monitoring equipment for the Fire Fighters. Mr. G,lenn wrote the grant for the Center PointlReliant Energy grant. ! I Joos/Menden offered Resolution No. 6151, A Resolution Of The ~ity Of Shako pee, Minnesota Accepting A $2,500 Donation From Reliant/Minnegasco To The Shakopee Fire Department, and moved its adoption. Motion carried 4-0. The following item was added to the Consent Agenda. 15.D.l. New High School Environmental Assessment Worksheet and 15.E.6. Accept the Resignation of Paul Snook, Economic Development Coordinator. Lehman/Joos moved to approve the Consent Agenda as modified. Motion carried 4-0. Official Proceedings of the November 16, 2004 Shakopee City Council Page -2- 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/Joos moved to approve the bills in the amount of$466,150.76 plus $309,818.60 for refunds, returns and pass through for a total of $775,969.36. (Motion carried under the Consent Agenda). [The list of bills is posted on the bulletin board at City Hall for one month following approval]. Joos/Lehman moved to open the public hearing on proposed assessments for Delinquent Refuse Bills. Motion carried 4-0. Mr. Loney, Public Works Director/City Engineer, reported on the assessment hearing for delinquent refuse bills. He noted the City did the collecting of delinquent refuse bills for Dick's Sanitation. Dick's Sanitation was the City's refuse collector under the City's organized refuse collection, Ordinance No. 583. Mr. Loney noted in 2000, the City passed Ordinance No. 583 that obligated property owners to pay the charges and costs for collection of refuse and recycling. Mr. Loney noted this process had been followed in past years. He noted the City had a certified list of taxpayers in the City who had delinquent bills with Dick's Sanitation. Mr. Loney noted the assessment amounts did include a $45.00 setvicefee charge for City stafftime. Mr. Loney stated if the payment was made tonight there would not be a $45.00 service fee. Mayor Schmitt called for comments from the audience. There were no comments. Lehman/Joos moved to close the public hearing. Motion carried 4-0. Lehman/Menden offered Resolution No. 6148, A Resolution Adopting Assessments for Delinquent Garbage Bills, and moved its adoption. Motion carried 4-0. MendenlLehman removed the Minnesota Investment Fund Loan for Challenge Printing, Inc. for property at 1000 Valley Park Drive from the table and opened the public hearing. Motion carried 4-0. Mr. Snook reported on the Minnesota Investment Fund Loan for Challenge Printing, Inc., located at 1100 Valley Park Drive. Mr. Snook stated this Minnesota Investment Fund Loan for Challenge Printing, Inc. would be a grant agreement between the City of Shakopee and the Minnesota Department of Employment and Economic Development relating to grant of funds under the Minnesota Investment Fund program, and approving Minnesota Investment Fund Loan Agreement between the City and for Challenge Printing, Inc. Mayor Schmitt asked for comments from the audience regarding this public hearing. There were no public comments. Official Proceedings of the November 16, 2004 Shakopee City Council Page -3- Joos/Menden moved to close the public hearing. Motion carried 4-0. Joos/Menden offered Resolution No. 6149, A Resolution Approving Grant Agreement Between The City And Department Of Employment And Economic Development Relating To A Grant Of Funds Under The Minnesota Investment Fund Program And Approving Minnesota Investment Fund Loan Agreement Between The City And Challenge Printing, Inc., and moved its adoption. Mr. Snook clarified what the $100,000 to be retained by the city after repayment of the loan could be used for. Mr. Snook stated the funds could be used for a revolving Loan Fund for Economic Development activity geared towards manufacturing. Cncl. Lehman questioned the conditions on the grant agreement. Mr. Snook noted there were conditions put on the agreement with Challenge Printing. Motion carried 4-0. LehmanlMenden moved to open the public hearing for 2005 Currency Exchange License Renewals. Motion carried 4-0. Ms. Judith Cox, City Clerk, reported that two of the three license applications are in order for the three businesses applying for Currency Exchange License Renewals for 2005. She stated the license is ultimately issued by the Department of Commerce but the local municipality needed to approve or deny the issuance ofthis license. She stated the Shakopee Police Department advised the City they are unaware of any reason the City would object to the renewal ofthe current licenses for the three applicants. She noted it was recommended that the two licenses that are in order be granted and the third license renewal application be tabled until the December 7, 2004 meeting. Mayor Schmitt asked if there was anyone in the audience who had comments. There were no public comments. JooslMenden moved to close the public hearing. Motion carried 4-0. Joos/Lehman offered Resolution No. 6150, A Resolution Of The City Of Shako pee, Minnesota, Approving The Application of Madison Financial Companies and DRM LLC Of Shakopee For A Currency Exchange License,.and moved its adoption. Motion carried 4-0. LelunanlMenden moved to table the application from Game Cash Inc., 1100 Canterbury Road, to December 7, 2004 Council meeting. Motion carried 4-0. Cncl. Lehman noted he attended the Park and Recreation Advisory Board meeting in October and park project priorities and the Shutrop property acquisition were discussed as well as naming Official Proceedings of the November 16,2004 Shakopee City Council Page -4- City parks. He noted he attended the Heritage Preservation/CLG meeting alongwith Paul Snook, Economic Development Coordinator. Cncl. Lehman noted he did participate in the kid's vote at the high school. Cncl. Menden noted Vision Shakopee held their planning meeting and most of the discussion centered on the activities they hoped to do in 2005 and the establishment of their budget. He noted the use of the Public Works Department gater to water the flowers downtown was discussed. Cncl. Joos noted he attended a Shakopee Public Utilities meeting (SPUC) and there would be more information coming forward on the 2003 Street Reconstruction 4th Avenue Project, 2003-3. Cncl. Joos noted there were issues with the high pressure gas pipeline from Xcel Energy going through the City of Shakopee and SPUC took some action on these issues. Mr. Leek, Community Development Director, reported on the text amendment to City Code regarding building materials in the Single-Family Residential Zones. He noted this text amendment was being brought forward in response to some concerns regarding the building materials in the Single-Family Residential Zones. He noted the language in the proposed text amendment would bring the building materials for single-family housing into conformance with the recent language for attached housing building materials requirements. Mr. Leek noted what the revision would be in the language. The new language referred to the exterior walls of principal and accessory stmctures greater than 120 square feet. Mr. Leek noted the text amendment clarified that accessory structures would be subject to requirements. The building materials for accessory structures should be matching or complimentary to the principal structure. Mr. Leek noted the Plal111ing Commission did recommend adopting the language in front ofthe Council on September 23 but since that time a few additional concerns were raised by the Council. This revised text amendment did include the concerns raised by CotUlcil members since September 23,2004. Cncl. Lehman addressed the gauge of the metal. Mr. Leek addressed the specificity of the gauge of the metal. Mr. Leek noted he would work with the City Attorney on wording the text amendment regarding the language pertaining to the use of metal.Mr. Leek noted this wording of metal siding would not affect the use of metal siding on mobile homes. Cncl. Joos noted he was not comfortable with the materials being specified for use on accessory structures today; he thought the text amendment would be unenforceable. He thought many structures would be out of compliance if this text amendment was adopted. Mayor Schmitt stated he thought matching accessory structures to a reasonable degree to the principle structure was key in the residential area. Official Proceedings of the November 16,2004 Shakopee City Council Page -5- Lehman/Menden offered Ordinance No. 714, Fourth Series, An Ordinance Of The City Of Shakopee, Minnesota, Amending City Code Sec. 11.60, Subd. 4, and moved its adoption with the revision that the exterior metal siding meet current (now on the house) industry standards. Cncl. Joos stated he was not comfortable with the wording at this point. There was discussion on the meaning of the language. Jim.Thomson, City Attorney,. suggested the language be the "exterior finished metal siding meeting industry standards in effect at the time of initial construction". Lehman/Menden moved to amend the motion to read "the exterior finished metal siding should meet industry standards in effect at the time of initial construction". The amendment carried 4-0. ( Lehman/Menden modified the motion to offer Ordinance No. 714, Fourth Series, An Ordinance Of The City Of Shakopee, Minnesota, Amending City Code Sec. 11.60, Subd. 4, and moved its adoption with the revision that the exterior finished metal siding meet industry standards in effect . at the time of initial construction. Amended motion carried 4-0. Mr. Loney reported on the special assessments for the 2003 Street Reconstruction Project, 4th Avenue Street Reconstruction Project, No. 2003-3. Mr. Loney noted a public hearing had been held on this project and owners ofthree parcels filed objections to their assessments. The Shakopee Ballroom, the.Shakopee Knights of Columbus and the Pinewood Estates Homeowners Association filed the objections. Mr. Loney noted the Council did close the public hearing but action had been tabled on the resolution until further information could be provided on the assessments. Mr. Loney noted the City did receive a memo from Shakopee Public Utilities (SPUC) giving more background information on the watermain agreements and assessments that were on or should have been on the parcels for Pinewood Estates, Outlots A & B and on the Shakopee Ballroom. Mr. Loney noted the City Attorney has had a chance to review the information provided by Shakopee Public Utilities and he reviewed the information provide by the City on the properties regarding which documents were recorded on the Shakopee Ballroom property (Lot 1, Block 1) and Pinewood Estates Outlots A & B. Mr. Loney noted the Shakopee Ballroom was platted in 1984 and recorded. This plat created two lots. Lot 1, Block1 (the lot the Shakopee Ballroom sits on now) and Outlot A. Mr. Loney noted Outlot A was then sold to Pinewood Estates. Mr. Loney noted there was indication of a watermain agreement noting that if a watermain were provide along 4th A venue and connected to Shenandoah Drive the developer would waive any objections. This watermain agreement was in the developer's agreement. Mr. Loney noted this developer's agreement had been recorded and has not been released. Mr. Loney noted there was a SPUC's resolution authorizing water service with the understanding that future watermains across Lot 1, Block 1 would be treated as if no water existed on the property and this watermain would be assessed. Official Proceedings of the November 16,2004 Shakopee City Council Page -6- Mr. Loney addressed the Pinewood Estates parcels. Mr. Loney noted a Developer's (Barrington Corporation) Agreement was included; however, the developer installed the waternlain to his site but not on Spruce Street and not on 4th Avenue. It was SPUC's intention to have a looping agreement for future extension of the watennain. Mr. Loney noted the Developer's Agreement did not obligate Barrington Corporation to construct or pay for any future watermain. The agreement SPUC had prepared and had signed was not recorded and Barrington Corporation no longer exists. There was no agreement with SPUC on Outlots A & B after they were conveyed to Pinewood Estates. Mr. Loney noted the Developer's Agreement on Outlots A & B when the Outlots were sold to Pinewood Estates was released when sold. Mr. Loney noted both parcels are served with water cUITently and the issue was the additional watermain along 4th Avenue and Spruce Street. It was the opinion of the City Attorney the watermain on Pinewoods Estates baITing any agreement gave very little benefit and very little value to residents. It was City staffs opinion that this watermain assessment should be removed from Pinewood Estates assessments. Mr. Loney noted there was enough documentation of the Shakopee Ballroom property that those assessments should remain on the property. Mr. Loney noted City staffdid meet with the Shakopee Knights of Columbus. The Shakopee Knights of Columbus objected mainly to the increase of the cost of their sanitary sewer main. Mr. Loney noted they had an existing private sanitary sewer main that had been allowed in previous years. Mr. Loney noted the increase of the construction cost (over the feasibility study) was $6,915. Staffwas recommending after consulting with the City Attorney that this amount was reasonable and staff was recommending that there be a reduction adjustment of$6,915 to the assessments for the Shakopee Knights of Columbus. If the adjustment was made to the assessment then the Shakopee Knights of Columbus would withdraw their objection. Mr. Loney noted there would be difficulty in proving benefit if the City had to go to court. Mr. Loney noted staff was making two changes to the assessment roll regarding the special assessments for the 2003 4th Avenue Street Reconstruction project, No. 2003-3. He noted the Pinewood Estates assessment was changed to reflect the reduction in the waternlain assessment ($51,500) and the Shakopee Knights of Columbus assessment was changed to reflect the reduction in the sanitary sewer main assessment of $6,915. Cncl. Joos noted SPUC agreed to participate in the Pinewood Estates assessment for the watermain. They would pay $51,500 with that amount coming out ofthe Trunk Water Fund. Quang Luu and Donna Tseng, owners of the Shakopee Ballroom, had a concern about paying for something they would not use because they had existing sewer and water service. They did not know about the agreement when they closed on the Shakopee Ballroom. It was not disclosed to them. This huge assessment created a major hardship for them to stay in business. The City Attorney noted there should havl:( g~ltn two documents picked up on the title search. Official Proceedings of the November 16,2004 Shakopee City Council Page -7- It was noted Mr. Luu and Ms. Tseng still had the right to appeal the assessment even though the document was recorded. It was also noted that the assessment could be paid over a lO-year period. Mr. Loney stated right now there was basis to keep the assessment but a judge may think otherwise. Mayor Schmitt asked it there were any more comments from the audience. There were none. LehmanlMenden offered Resolution 6138, A Resolution Adopting Assessments For The 2003 Street Reconstruction 4th A venue, Between Naumkeag Street and Shenandoall Drive; Sarazin Street, From 4th Avenue to County Road 101; And Cavanaugh Drive, From Sarazin Street To The Union Pacific Railroad Crossing Project No. 2003-3, and moved its adoption. Motion carried 4-0. LehmanlJoos offered Resolution No. 6146, A Resolution Ordering The Preparation Of A Report On 17th Avenue Improvements, From Southern Meadows to County Road 83, and moved its adoption. (Motion carried under the Consent Agenda). LehmanlJoos offered Resolution No. 6147, A Resolution Ordering The Preparation Of A Report On An Improvement To The 2005 Street Reconstruction Project, and moved its adoption. (Motion carried under the Consent Agenda). LehmanlJoos moved the appropriate City officials to execute a consultant extension agreement with Bonestroo, Rosene, Anderlik & Associates Inc., for surveying services for the proposed 2005 Street Reconstruction Project in an amount not-to-exceed $7,850. (Motion carried under the Consent Agenda). Lehman/Joos moved the appropriate City Staff to solicit quotes for soil investigation work for the 2005 Street Reconstruction Project. (Motion carried under the Consent Agenda). Mr. McNeill noted Mr. Voxland would talk about the financing of the three fire trucks and Terry Stang, Fire Chief and Rick Holman, fire fighter would talk about specifics. Mr. Voxland noted these trucks were included in the proposed budget for 2005; the Council had reviewed those projections for the fire equipment in the Capital Equipment Fund. Mr. V oxland stated the Fire Department was requesting a Pumper for $400,000, a Rescue Truck for $210,000 and a Quint Fire Truck for $700,000. Mr. V oxland stated the Capital Equipment Fund has sufficient funds to make these purchases now. The Pumper and the Quint were replacement, vehicles. Chief Terry Stang stated the Fire Department was asking to go out for bids. They would like to include all three vehicles in one bid for one vendor because they felt they would get a significant amount of savings doing it this way. Chief Stang noted when the bids came in from one bidder Official Proceedings of the November 16, 2004 Shakopee City Council Page -8:- the Council still had the option to only purchase two out of the three vehicles if that is what they would chose to do. Chief Stang noted there was a need to keep the Rescue Truck because of all the specialty equipment. MendenlLehman moved to authorize Shakopee Fire Department to advertise forbids. for one medium rescue truck, one pumper and one Quint pumper. Motion carried 4-0. Lehman/Joos moved to authorize staff to submit a Greenway Grant application for funding potential park land and greenway acquisition. (Motion carried WIder the Consent Agenda). Lehman/Joos moved to approve the purchase agreement and offer Resolution No. 6152, A Resolution Of The City Of Shakopee Authorizing The Conveyance of Fee Title And Easements To The Shakopee Public Utilities Commission, and moved its adoption. (Motion carried under the Consent Agenda). (For the installation and operation of water wells on the 17th Avenue Sports Complex property.) Lehman/Joos offered Resolution No. 6153, A Resolution issuing a Negative Declaration of Need, and moved its adoption for the EA W for the new Shakopee High School property. (Motion carried under the Consent Agenda). (Property located south of Highway 169 and west of County Road 79.) Lehman/Joos moved to approve the job description for the position of Plat mer I, and moved to direct staff to take the appropriate steps to fill the Platmer I Position. (CC Document No. 366) (Motion carried under the Consent Agenda). Lehman/Joos offered Resolution No. 6145, A Resolution Adopting The City Of Shakopee's Level Of Contribution For Employee Benefits For The Year 2005, and moved its adoption. (Motion carried WIder the Consent Agenda). Lehman/Joos moved to accept the resignation of Terry Meiller, Natural Resource Specialist, and authorize filling the vacancy. (Motion carried under the Consent Agenda). Lelllnan/Joos moved to accept the resignation of Jason Asper with regrets from the Shakopee Fire Department effective August 1,2004. (Motion carried under the Consent Agenda). Lehman/Joos moved to accept the resignation of Bob Snell with regrets from the Shakopee Fire Department. (Motion carried under the Consent Agenda). Lehman/Joos moved to accept with regrets the resignation of Paul Snook, Economic Development Coordinator. (Motion carried under the Consent Agenda). Official Proceedings of the November 16, 2004 Shakopee City Council Page -9- Lehman/Joos moved to direct staffto advise those individuals whose terms are expiring on boards and commissions that they are eligible for reappointment. (Motion carried under the Consent Agenda). Lehman/Joos moved to announce that the City will be advertising and accepting applications from Shakopee citizens for boards and commissions beginning in January. Applications may be obtained at the City offices during regular hours or if requested they can be mailed. (Motion carried under the Consent Agenda). Mr. McNeill stated that staffwas asking Council to appoint members to a steering committee for the strategic visioning process. Mr. McNeill noted this steering committee would act as a group to review the input that is gained from the community conversations groups in the strategic visioning process. This committee would then work with other groups to come up with some suggestions for goals and strategies from these groups that would come back before the Council. Mr. McNeill noted there were 15 responses (volunteers) received and expected more who might be interested and he would like to fin gaps in representation. He noted the larger the.committee the better. He noted the visioning facilitator recommended this committee. . Mayor Schmitt noted it was the Council that should be doing the recruiting of the steering committee members not leaving it to City staff. Cncl. LelunaIl volunteered to be on the steering committee as a citizen of Shakopee. Cncl. Lehman noted perhaps some developers in the community could be on the steering committee and Mr. Snook suggested there be businesses represented on the committee also. Menden/Joos moved to appoint the initial members of the Shakopee Visioning Initiative Steering Committee: Carol Schultz, Kathy Gerlach, Wayne Herstad, Duane Marschall. Charley Kubler, Marge Henderson, Bill Nevin, Jane DuBois, Paulette Rislund, Arv Sornberger, Bob Mitchell, Don Wagner, Joan Lynch, Tom Steininger, Phil Burke. Motion carried 4-0. Mayor Schmitt noted there was a letter on the table that needed some discussion. This discussion pertained to $20,000 being budgeted or not budgeted (for downtown beautification, as requested by Vision Shakopee) and which budget this money was in or which budget the money was deleted from. Cncl. Lehman was unaware that this money had been deleted from the budget. He noted he would look at the tape of the meeting to see if there was direction to budget $20,000 in the EDA budget for that purpose. Mr. Snook noted there was discussion on this item but no final action had been taken in the EDA budget. Mr. Snook gave some background on the issue from the EDA meeting and the Economic Development Advisory Committee (EDAC). Mayor Schmitt asked what was the City's obligation was in maintaining the landscaping downtown and the cobblestone sidewalks? Mr. McNeill noted City staff was following up on the cobblestone sidewalk issue. . Official Proceedings of the November 16,2004 Shakopee City Council Page -10- Cncl. Joos suggested that staff take a look at the issue including weeds in the downtown area and come back to Council with some recommendations. Mayor Schmitt was comfortable with this idea. Cncl. LelU11an noted he held a neighborhood visioning conversation process and he submitted the written comments that came from the meeting. Menden/Joos moved to adjourn the meeting to Tuesday, November 23, 2004 at 7:00 p.m. Motion carried 4-0. The meeting adjourned at 8:41 p.m. OuJJ-LJ. ~ Juaith S. Cox City Clerk Carole Hedlund Recording Secretary OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL ADJ. REGULAR SESSION SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA NOVEMBER 23, 2004 Mayor Schmitt called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. with Council members Lehman, Menden and Joos present. Absent: Council member Helkamp. Also present: Mark McNeill, City. Administrator; Judith S. Cox, City Clerk; R. Michael Leek, Community Development Director; Bruce Loney, Public Works Director/City Engineer;.Jim Thomson, City Attorney; Mark Themig, Park, Recreation and Facilities Director and Josh Barrick, Ice Arena Supervisor. Mr. Themig, Park, Recreation and Facilities Director, noted the reason for the meeting was to discuss several park and recreation issues. Mr. Themig noted the first issue to be discussed was the community center feasibility study. Mr. Themig gave a quick overview of the project. He noted the major outcomes of the survey that had been given to the residents of Shakopee by the Park and Recreation Department earlier this year were: 1) trails were the most important amenity, 2) park and open space was very important and 3) the community center was an important amenity and the community would like to see enhancements made to the community center facility. Mr. Themig noted what options the citizen task force had explored for the current community center. The consensus of tins task force was an expansion to the community center that was financed with public money was the best option. Mr. Themig noted that a Request for Proposals (RFP's) for professional services was authorized by the City for expansion of the community center that included program identification, feasibility study and market analysis, cost estimates and concept drawings. Nine proposals were received back. Mr. Themig noted the make-up of the firms that submitted proposals. Mr. Themig noted Michael Leek, Community Development Director; himself and three members of a citizen's task force, Mike Thelen, Kitty Hauer and Eric Nutter were on a committee to evaluate all nine proposals and five firms were selected to be interviewed. The interview committee was comprised ofthe five members of the evaluation committee along with Mark McNeill, City Administrator. Mr. Themig reported it was unanimously recommended to the City Council, by this interview committee, that an agreement be entered into between the City and Barker Rinker Seacat of Denver Colorado to do the feasibility study. Mr. Themig noted the team of Barker Rinker Seacat included a local firm that already does some work for the City of Shakopee along with other firms. Steve Blackburn, Barker Rinker Seacat, gave a presentation to the Council on how they planned to organize the project feasibility study. He showed slides of some of the projects they had done and completed. He focused on the experiences of Barker Rinker Seacat. He noted some of the projects they did included partnerships and they used much architecture that was homegrown to the specific community. He stated Barker Rinker Seacat would go through the feasibility process, determine the demand in the community, create a program with a realistic budget and help the community pass a referendum for the project to be done successfully. Mr. Blackburn noted there were a few key elements in getting a referendum done successfully. Official Proceedings of the November 23, 2004 Shakopee City Council Page -2- Mr. Blackburn noted Barker Rinker Seacat (BRS) had begun an analysis ofthe Shakopee Community Center and was looking at the existing structure to see if structure enhancements were needed. He noted an aggressive study project was proposed. They would be acting quickly and efficiently to present information to the community and the Council. He noted there would be a public campaign period with public workshops to take public information either verbally or in written form. He stated that they did realize there needed to be a balance between the wants and resources of the community. He noted the feasibility study from Barker Rinker Seacat would be fiscally responsible and conservative. He noted there was a cost recovery philosophy along with the feasibility study. He noted what some of the cost recovery entailed. Mr. Blackburn went through some slides to show what some possibilities for enhancements could be for the community center. He noted a specific type swimming pool could possibly be a focus for a partnership with the School District. He noted what some ofthe current trends for programs were for community centers and what programs helped with marketing (tot and babysitting, programs, family locker rooms). Mr. Blackburn stated that BRS would be looking at a second sheet of ice in some form as an enhancement to the community center. He noted some other enhancements that could lead to the Shakopee Community Center being more successful. BRS would be working hand in hand with the City regarding operating expenses and revenues because ofBRS experience across the.country. Mr. Blackburn noted he would bring case studies as well as other materials to the City showing how other cities successfully passed referendums. He noted he would also bring information on how other cities formed various partnerships and how they got those partnerships done plus legalese on shared use agreements. Mr. Blackburn noted BRS was much more sophisticated in thinking about operating costs than they where initially and they had learned many new ideas throughout the years. They were strategic in their offerings. Joos/Lehman moved to authorize staff to enter into agreement with Barker Rinker Seacat for program identification, feasibility study and market analysis, cost estimates and concept drawing for a Community Center expansion, and provide direction on funding. . Council Leman wanted to do this but he was concerned about the funding. Mr. Themig noted funding for this agreement was being worked on and he thought the money was there to continue on. Motion carried 4-0. Official Proceedings of the November 23, 2004 Shakopee City Council Page -3- Mr. Themig reported on the 120-acre quarry reuse project. He noted this project had been in the planning stages since the Fall of 2003 and some deadlines were getting close (purchase agreement with Aggregate Industries and a use.agreement with the Prior Lake Water Ski Association). Mr. Themig explained the area of the 120-acre quarry reuse project and stated it was a natural resource gem that is in the industrial commercial area. It was a pretty unique site with some challenges. He noted the purchase agreement with Aggregate Industries needed to be completed by December 31, 2004 along with a use agreement for the Prior Lake Water Ski Association to retain an exclusive use of a portion of the water surface. The Water Ski Association was the entity that brought this possible land acquisition to the City's attention. The appraised value of the land was about $1.6 million dollars but Aggregate Industries was willing to sell the land to the City with terms and conditions for $250,000. Mr. Themig noted the terms and conditiQrls suggested by Aggregate Industries for a purchase agreement. He also noted many potential partners were interested in using the site along with the City. Mr. Themig outlined some terms of the agreement as well as points still in the negotiation stage. Mr. Themig noted that Jim Thomson, City Attorney, recommended that a phase I environmental study should be done on the property as well as some licenses be provided rather than some easements. Mr. Themig noted the seller would provide a limited access easement (not access for the public) to the property until access from the west is acquired. The site right now was landlocked with a private railroad crossing going over private land. There was a concept plan that showed a public access on the northwest corner of the property. The access easement now being proposed by Aggregate Industries would provide limited access to the site for the City until a future public access could be provided by the City. There was much discussion on the access point and the private street in the area. It was noted by Mayor Schmitt that the cost to develop the access point was not included in the cost of the land purchase. The access easement was still being worked on. Arail spur easement was also discussed. Amajor condition was that the City and Aggregate Industries close on the land by December 31, 2004 and there was.work still to do but the City was working on it. Mr. Themig noted there were state statute requirements that protected the City against liabilities from a discharge of hazardous materials (major spill) from the parcel of the property that Aggregate Industries would retain and use. Mr. Themig noted the use agreement that would be between the City and the Water Ski Association set forth how the Water Ski Association would use the site long-term and what rights and obligations the Water Ski Association had as well as the rights and obligations the City had. The term of the agreement was discussed and a term of 25 years was agreed to for the agreement. The City Attorney noted public benefit needed to be shown ifthere was an exclusive agreement with the Water Ski Association for some portion of the surface water. Mr. Themig did note the exclusive surface water portion that had been agreed to with the Water Ski Association; Mr. Official Proceedings of the November 23, 2004 Shakopee City Council Page -4- Themig noted several factors had been identified as public benefit as well. Mr. Themig noted what these factors were. . Mr. Themig noted funding for improvements was also included in the use agreement for the Water Ski Association. Mr. Themig also stated that he thought the other users should be responsible for funding their share of the needed improvements for the use. Mr. Themig noted the language proposed for funding these improvements. Mr. Themig noted the funding for the access and infrastructure improvements was pointed out in the use agreement with the Water Ski Association. John Davis from the Water Ski Association stated he thought a solution could be found so a new public access to the site could be created. He talked with a property owner adjacent to the site and this property owner saw the site to be created as an amenity to his property. . Mayor Schmitt addressed the access point with a third player. Mayor Schmitt stated the access point needed to be put to bed in some form. Cncl. Joos was concerned about the public road and public access. Mr. Thomson,.City Attorney, noted the City would be solely in charge of when the public access would be put in. There were ways that this could take place and language to this affect would be included in the use . agreement for the Water Ski Association. Mayor Schmitt stated for the project to be successful a . public access needed to be in place from the west. Mayor Schmitt was of the opinion that it would cost about $1,000,000 to make the site a value. Mr. Themig stated there were no.flinds in the CIP for any work for this site through 2009. Cncl. Lehman noted the City was not obligated in this use agreement to put in the public access if the funding was not there. Jim Thomson noted the City was not acquiring this land as parkland; there were no deed restrictions. He also stated there was language in the agreement that there was no money in the City's CIP for making improvements to this property for at least five years. The Water Ski Association was very concerned about defaulting on the agreement as it related to. funding, .. improvements but language to their satisfaction had finally been agreed to. Mr. Themig noted the City had the right to use an portions of the property for public purpose as long as it did not interfere with the rights being granted to the Water Ski Association. However, Mr. Thomson stated these water rights to the Water Ski Association could be interrupted in the short term (like a week) for public improvements that the City made. Mr. Themig noted the City's insurer and underwriter did a preliminary review of the site and they informed the City that the purchase of the site would not result in increased premiums to the City. However, the League of Minnesota Cities (Insurer) is concerned about the agreements that . the City has with other users of the location; they want to review the agreements to make sure the City is transferring any liability to the organization with the agreement. Mr. Thomson was addressing this concern with any of the agreements. - Official Proceedings of the November 23, 2004 Shakopee City Council Page -5- Mr. Themig noted the Park And Recreation Advisory Board (PRAB) reviewed this agreement. It was noted that there were several things that still needed to be finalized. Mr. Themig did note the City did.do a survey of the property so that would be done when changes needed to be made on the survey to show certain easements as well as other items that needed to be addressed. Mr. Thomson noted language was included in the use agreement for the Water Ski Association pertaining to permits and rights. Lehman/Menden moved to direct staff to continue working on the purchase agreement with Aggregate Industries and the use agreement with the Water Ski Association and to incorporate all of tonight's comments into the agreements. Motion carried 4-0. . A recess was taken at 9:10 p.m. Mayor Schmitt re-convened the City Council meeting at 9:23 p.m. Mr. Themig reported on the possible parkland acquisition. He noted the PRAB toured four sites and the property owned by the Shutrop'swas the no. 1 priority site. He noted the Shutrop 103 - acre parcel would be bisected just about in half with the proposed alignment of County Road 21. This alignment would have some impacts on the property which is located north of CR16 and west of Pike Lake Trail extended. I He stated work had been done on creating options tofund the property. The possible funding options identified were: 1) Park Reserve Funds [$2,000,000 in Park Capital Improvement Program], 2) sale ofland for future development, 3) Country Road 21 right-of-way, 4) land for a possible Fire Station, 5) Greenway Grant Funding and 6) Park Dedication fees. One of the possibilities of funding part of the property would be for a developer to do some residential homes on a portion of the Shutrop property. Mr. Themig noted there were wetlands that had to be protected and uplands on this properly could be purchased for parklands. This site could also possibly house a future fire station out in this area and Pike Lake Trail could be . extended through the property. Matt Weiland, Tollefson Development, approached the podium and gave some ideas on developing some of the property as single-family housing. He noted this would be a unique opportunity. Mr. Weiland did note for the residential development some variations would be needed. The site was roughly 104 acres and he was proposing Tollefson Development develop about 40 of the acres with single-family homes. Mr. Weiland did note that all the drawings presented tonight were draft drawings. Mr. Leek noted that the area could be served by sewer and water. Cncl. Menden and Cncl. Joos stated they were uncomfortable with the City buying land for residential and then selling it. Mr. Themig noted there could possibly be more land for park purposes as development occurred in that area. There would be many opportunities for parks and trails for the area. Official Proceedings of the November 23,2004 Shakopee City Council Page -6- Mr. Themig noted the Park And Recreation Advisory Board (PRAB) did recommend that the purchase of the Shutrop property be further discussed with some dollars now being explored. They still wanted to keep the other sites initially explored on the table also. There was discussion on using park dedication funds to purchase this land. It was thought there was a way to use the park dedication funds. MendenlLehman moved to direct staff to move forward and proceed with discussion for acquisition of the Shutrop parcel north ofCR16 for parkland and development and to explore funding options. There was discussion about the City getting into the development business. Mayor Schmitt noted there were times when it was appropriate for the City to get into the development business. Mr. Weiland noted Tollefson Development was not asking the City to buy this land and then resell it. This was all a function to lower the cost of the land to the City and give the Shutrops' some tax benefits. Motion carried 3-1 with Cncl. Joos dissenting. Josh Barrick~ Ice Arena Supervisor, reported on the concept for ice arena radiant heating. The purpose of the radiant heat in the ice arena was to meet the needs for warmth for the spectators in the ice arena and also for cost savings in the heating bill. Mr. Barrick noted there would be a five . Joten.year payoff for this type heating. There supposedly was cost savings of $3,000 to $5,000 . annually. Mr.Barrick explained the radiant heat installation. He noted it would .be vented out the north wall to the outside. He thought this would also meet the needs for possible expansion in the future. Mr. Barrick noted the five bids he received ranged from $14,000 to $35,000. It was noted the bid for $14,000 was for very minimal work. He recommended the bid fi-om Ron's Mechanical ($28,174) be accepted. Mr. Barrick noted when he researched this bid he had favorable comments. Mr. Barrick noted this was an unbudgeted expenditure for 2004. Mr. Themignoted spectators were pushing for more heat in the ice arena. Cncl. Lehman was concerned where the unbudgeted funds would come from. Cnd. Joos noted right now the Council was looking at expanding the community center and there were no concrete plans on the expansion now and it was not known if this money would be well spent or if the radiant heating would need to be tore out. It was thought that this had already been done. Mayor Schmitt wanted this item brought back after he had sufficient proof that the Community Center architects had looked at this and they noted this radiant heat system would not be impacted with the expansion and design of the building expansion they proposed. Cncl. Menden was in support of the ice arena radiant heating due to energy savings over the next two years. The use of the recreation fund was discussed. . . Official Proceedings of the November 23,2004 Shakopee City Council Page -7- Menden/ moved to approve the amount of$28,174 for Ron's Mechanical for the installation of the new radiant heat system at the Community Center. Josh Barrick stated this design for the radiant heat had taken into consideration the second sheet of ice. Mayor Schmitt stated he was concerned about more space being added on the front of the current building rather than on a second sheet of ice. He was okay with the radiant heat but now was the wrong time. Motion died for a lack of a second. Lehman/Menden moved to adjourn the meeting to Monday, December 6,2004 at 7:00 p.m. for the truth and taxation hearing. The meeting adjourned at 10:30 p.m. Motion carried 4-0. . u~.J. 0G ith S. Cox . City Clerk Carole Hedlund Recording Secretary . . OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL ADJ. REGULAR SESSION SHAKOPEE,NUNNESOTA DECEMBER 6, 2004 Mayor Schmitt called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. with Council members Lehman, Menden and Joos present. Absent: Council member Helkamp. 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; Mark Themig, Park, Recreation and Facilities Director and Dan Hughes, Police Chief. . Joos/Menden moved to approve the Agenda. Motion carried 4-0. LehmanlMenden moved to open the Truth and Taxation Hearing. Motion carried 4-0. Mr. V oxland opened the 2005 Truth and Taxation hearing. He stated because the City was proposing to raise taxes for collection next year the City was required by law to hold this special public hearing. He noted the items in the budget figures for governmental funds, not including items paid by special assessments, for 2004 totaled $19 million and this year that figure was $26 inillion; this was an increase of36%. The focus of tonight's meeting was on the Tax Levy and services provided by taxes (General Fund). The proposed tax levy was an 18% increase over last year. The tax rate payable in 2004 was 32.4% and the proposed tax rate payable in 2005 is 32.33%. The proposed tax rate declined slightly. Mr. Voxland noted the City's share for every tax dollar was 34 cents (about a 1/3). He noted the City of Shakopee was no. 5 out of six when the City of Shakopee's proposed tax rate was compared to the other cities (1 being the highest) in Scott County. Mr. Voxland noted the process used to determine resident's taxes. Mr. Voxland noted there had been a steady increase in the market value over several years. He noted the commercial industrial taxes were at a higher rate and determined with a tax capacity formula that was different than the tax capacity formula and rate used for residential properties. He noted the commercial/industrial parcels did not receive a market value credit. He noted the net tax capacity (the amount the taxes could be spread over) went from $24 million in 2004 to $28 million in 2005. He stated the percent of tax capacity had decreased for commercial/industrial and multiple family and increased for single-family. Mr. V oxland stated the City Council during subsequent budget discussions noted they wanted to go into this hearing reducing the tax levy impact by a reduction of about 1/3. The levy supporting the General Fund was almost $9 million dollars. The operational expenditures of the General Fund were almost $13 million dollars. The total tax levy to support the General Fund, EDA Fund and Debt Services Fund is $9.7 million. The revenues projected for 2005 were $12.7 million. It was thought that the budget would be under spent by atleast the difference between the revenues and the expenditures. Official Proceedings of the December 6, 2004 Shakopee City Council Page -2- Mr. Voxland noted the City did not receive the market value credit given to taxpayers for 2004 from the State. Mr. Voxland stated that currently it was in the State's plans to give the market value credit to the City in 2005; but the City would have to wait and see if this really materialized. It was noted the State's budget shortfall this year was not as bad as the shortfall in 2004. Mr. V oxland noted there really was no other place financially that the City was vulnerable to losing money from the State because the local government aid was already taken away. There were other state aids that could be taken away but that was not too likely. Mr. V oxland did note that when the State cut the market value credit last year they did allow cities to levy 60% of the market value credit back to the local taxpayers (the City raised the taxes and not the State). The General Levy for operations was up 9.9%, the EDA Levy stayed the same, Debt Service dollars was up 13.8% and the Fire referendum was decreased 4%. The total levy for 2005 was a 9.6% increase after the reduction. It was noted it cost the taxpayer average (household) about $50 a month for City services. Mr. V oxland noted what these services consisted of. Some things were noted that could be done to reduce the budget if the State did decide to take away the market value credit from the City again. Cncl. Lehman stated the State was talking about phasing out the market value credit in the next couple of years. Mayor Schmitt asked for public comment. There was none. . J oos/Menden moved to announce that the tax levy and budget will be adopted during the public hearing tobe held on Tuesday December 21,2004 at 7:00 p.m. Motion carried 4-0. Joos/Lehman moved to close the public hearing. Motion carried 4-0. LehmanlMenden moved to recess at 7:45 p.m. for the purpose of holding a closed session to discuss pending litigation. Motion carried 4-0. Mayor Schmitt re-convened the meeting at 8:05 p.m. and announced that the meeting will recess to go into an executive session. Joos/Lehman moved to recess the meeting. Motion carried 4-0. LehmanlMenden moved to re-convene the meeting at 9:19 p.m. Motion carried 4-0. Mayor Schmitt stated that no decisions were reached in the executive session. . . Official Proceedings of the December 6, 2004 Shakopee City Council Page -3- Joos/Lehman moved to adjourn to Tuesday, December 7, 2004 at7:00 p.m. Motion carried 4-0. The meeting was adjourned at 9:20 p.m. ~.j.~. Gr-- JU~h s. Cox . y Clerk Carole Hedlund Recording Secretary .