1. Call to Order. The regular meeting of the Council of the City of Rogers was called to order by Mayor Grimm on Tuesday, May 26, 2009 at 7:08 p.m. at Rogers Community Center, 21201 Memorial Drive, Rogers, MN, 55374.
Council present: Mayor Grimm, Rob Bell, Jay Bunting, Jamie Davis and Steve Rauenhorst.
Staff present: Chuck Burnham, City Planner; Jeff Carson, City Attorney; Stacy Doboszenski, Assistant City Administrator; Brad Feist, Fire Chief; Jason Greninger, Web IT/Communications Specialist; Scott Lange, City Engineer; John Seifert, Public Works Director; Steve Stahmer, City Administrator; and Lisa Wieland, Finance Director.
2. Open Forum. None.
3. Presentations. 3.01 Senior Advisory Report – Patricia JohnsonPatricia Johnson read from a prepared statement updating the Council on the activities of the Senior Advisory Report. Also handed to Council was a proposed Senior Advisory Board budget for 2010.
Mayor Grimm asked if there will be separate individuals who serve on the board versus those who serve on the 501C3.
Attorney Carson stated he doesn’t feel there are restrictions to that activity.
Council thanked Mrs. Johnson for her presentation. No action taken.
4. Approve agenda. The following items were added to the Agenda: 8.01 Park Board Appointment – Councilmember Davis
5. Consent Agenda. 5.01 Approval of Minutes from May 12, 2009 City Council Meeting - Pulled by Davis 5.02 Approval of Bills and Claims 5.03 Calling a Work Session of the City Council for Saturday, June 6, 2009 at 8:00 a.m. to be Held at XXXXX Location 5.04 Appointment of Jennifer Tomaszewski to the Rogers Park Board 5.05 Grant for Eighteen Type III BarricadesMayor Grimm asked if the location of the work session for the City Council and staff needs to be disclosed.
Administrator Stahmer stated the location will be posted prior to the work session.Motion by Davis seconded by Bunting to approve the consent agenda 5.02 to 5.05. Motion carried 5-0.
5.01 Approval of Minutes from May 12, 2009 City Council Meeting Motion by Bunting seconded by Rauenhorst to approve the May 12, 2009 City Council Meeting minutes. Motion carried 4-0-1 with Davis abstaining due to absence from meeting.
6. Public Hearing. None.
7. General Business. 7.01 Youth Action Committee AppointmentsAdministrator Stahmer provided the background on the application and selection process. Stahmer suggested scheduling monthly meetings taking the Mayor’s and students’ schedules into account. A staff liaison is also needed and Stahmer suggested the school resource officer.
Bunting asked for the students present to introduce themselves.
Davis asked the students to work with the Seniors to keep them apprised of activities.
Motion by Bunting, seconded by Bell to appoint Colton Buege, Tatum Miller, Molly Reger, Tom Sitzman and Kelly Shrack to the Youth Action Committee with a term ending April 30, 2010. Motion carried 5-0.
Mayor Grimm discussed possible meeting times.
7.02 Review and Approval of Comprehensive Sanitary Sewer Plan Engineer Lange handed out a powerpoint presentation packet that he reviewed with Council regarding the comprehensive sanitary sewer plan. The presentation focused on wastewater flows; primarily five locations the need monitoring, and the wastewater treatment plant.Engineer Lange reviewed the following recommendations included in the plan: 1. Enter into discussions to request MCES to Operate Rogers WWTF 2. Monitor Flows 3. Annual Lift Station Flow Testing 4. Develop Flow ModelBunting asked the potential costs and savings or income from the Met Council taking over the treatment plant.
Engineer Lange stated those are all items that need to be discussed. When cities put their wastewater into the system, the City pays for that flow. It was clarified that the City still maintains the collection system.
Seifert explained the costs that are included in the wastewater charge per thousand gallons. Seifert also explained that a check isn’t cut to the City, but a credit to offset the payment of $1.70 per thousand gallons of flow.
Lange reported that as of November 2008 there is a total of $417,000 on one bond and $1.7M on another bond owing on the plant.
Seifert continued to address the need for future plant expansion and the future of Rogers staying in the wastewater treatment plant business.
Bunting asked how many full-time employees (FTE) are associated with wastewater treatment at this point.Seifert stated that the Met Council’s calculations state we should have 2.5 FTE’s and we currently handle operations with one FTE.
Bell questioned if there is a reliable way to locate the inflow problems in the identified area to reduce the daily flow amounts.
Engineer Lange stated there would need to be modeling and flow testing records to accomplish that.
Motion by Davis seconded by Bell to approve the Plan and authorize the Engineer to forward the document to the Metropolitan Council. Motion carried 5-0.
7.03 Transportation Task Force Update Engineer Lange referred to a prioritization spreadsheet included in the Council packet and asked for Council to review the spreadsheet and forward any comments.
No action taken.
7.04 Approval of CSAH 81/Industrial Boulevard Project Memorandum Engineer Lange stated the project memorandum was prepared by SRF. Lange stated SEH has reviewed the document and recommends execution and forwarding to MNDOT for review and comment. The project memorandum provides the project details, environmental documentation and other information required by Mn/DOT and the Federal Highway Administration when a project is uses Federal or State Funding.
Motion by Bunting, seconded by Bell to authorize City Staff to sign the Project Memorandum and for SRF to forward the document to Mn/DOT. Motion carried 5-0.
7.05 City Network Connectivity Project (VPN)Jason Greninger addressed the Council regarding the City Network Connectivity Project. Greninger provided the following background on the project:The Rogers computer network is a critical infrastructure which is the underlying framework for City business to occur. It is essential that this framework be secure, reliable and flexible. The current network infrastructure is unreliable at remote buildings which cause the loss in ability to conduct city business at remote buildings (FD, PD, RAC).
Greninger handed out a diagram illustrating the current network layout.Objective: Create a faster, more reliable and improve security for the network infrastructure between city buildings and also add the police department to the City network.
Solution: Purchase and deploy updated network hardware that will fix current issues and give flexibility for growth of future technical needs. The cost of purchasing and installation of this hardware will be offset by the cost of not purchasing the replacement police server. This server would no longer be necessary since all applications would be moved to existing resources at City Hall.
This project will provide the following benefits:1. Improve connectivity issues and performance for remote buildings.2. Police and City Hall network would be connected to the same network. A. Allows the Police Department access to resources hosted on the City Hall network B. Ability to integrate future technology and software. -Provides a future costs savings C. Provide network redundancy D. Improve performance E. Ability to remove the Police Server to reduce costs3. Improve Security4. Improve flexibility
Greninger stated he would need to have backup IT consultant, Curt Zachman assist in the installation and configuration of the hardware. Greninger explained that Zachman has implemented similar projects at many sites including the City of St. Michael and soon the City of Becker. Greninger stated the project will be accomplished over a weekend.
Greninger then provided the following costs and cost savings to the council:Estimated Cost of Project
Model Cost Location Hardware $1725.27 City Hall Setup of City Hall $330.00 City Hall Hardware $480.00 Police Setup of Police $330.00 Police Hardware $480.00 Fire Setup of Fire $220.00 Fire Hardware $480.00 RAC Setup of RAC $220.00 RAC Misc. equipment / licenses $500.00 Police Estimated Total (including tax) $4,765.27
2009 cost savings: This project would eliminate the need of a server and its associated costs at the Police Department. The projected minimum cost savings of implementing this project would be $1,694.73. The following lists the 2009 budgeted items compared with the cost of this project:
2009 Budgeted Items Proposed ProjectItem Cost Item CostCity Hall Firewall $1,000 Proposed VPN project $4,765.27VPN at Fire $460 Police server/ licenses $5,000 Total: $6,460.00 Total: $4,765.27
Future Cost Savings: There is potential long term cost savings associated with this project:
Item Estimated savingsNo longer need to replace Police Server and $4,500 every 4 yearsmaintain associated licenses No longer need to purchase a separate laserfiche licenses $2,500 server software and $450 aand support costs annual maintenanceFuture applications and support for one network Difficult to estimate dollar savingsReduce IT time in support and maintenance Soft dollar savings
Bunting clarified this is a cost savings now and in the future.
Bell questioned the annual support costs for network hardware versus the old server. Greninger stated the support cost is his time.
Administrator Stahmer the project may seem like something that could have been approved administratively, but thought it was best to bring the project forward for a change in budget and explanation by Greninger.
Motion by Bunting, seconded by Rauenhorst to authorize staff to go forward with the proposed project of updating the network infrastructure.
Mayor Grimm asked what happens if the server dies. Greninger stated we would have backups that are done nightly and eventually we would have a back-up server.Motion carried 5-0.
7.06 Certificate of Occupancy Escrow Fund Release Policy Attorney Carson presented the proposed policy to Council explaining the revisions that were forwarded by Council at the last meeting.
Motion by Davis, seconded by Bunting to approve the policy. Motion carried 5-0.
7.07 Items Relating to the Sale of 12522 Main Street: 7.07.01 Approval of Escrow AgreementAttorney Carson explained this is the City’s side of the EDA agreement.
Motion by Davis, seconded by Bunting to approve the Escrow Agreement. Motion carried 5-0.
7.07.02 Approval of Resolution No. 2009-19, A Resolution Authorizing the Termination of the Lease With Option to Purchase Between the Economic Development Authority of the City of Rogers, Minnesota and the City of Rogers, Minnesota and the Authorization to Execute the Necessary DocumentationMotion by Davis, seconded by Bunting to approve Resolution No. 2009 – 19, A Resolution Authorizing the Termination of the Lease With Option to Purchase Between the Economic Development Authority of the City of Rogers, Minnesota and the City of Rogers, Minnesota and the Authorization to Execute the Necessary Documentation. Motion carried 5-0.
Motion by Rauenhorst, seconded by Bunting to approve the debt defeasance finance package. Motion carried 5-0.
7.08 Approval of Villas of Fletcher Hills Design Standards RevisionsPlanner Burnham provided an explanation on the background of the request by the developer for revisions to design standards to the size of the homes in Villas of Fletcher Hills:On Tuesday, May 19, 2009 the Planning Commission recommended unanimous approval for architectural changes to the Villas of Fletcher Hills. The applicant, Innovative II, LLC is requesting approval to amend the layouts of the homes originally presented to the City Council in November of 2006 to create smaller homes than originally anticipated. Architectural features and elevations of the homes will remain consistent with the previous approval. The previous approval included upgraded garage doors and stone work on the front façade of the structures. The applicant has committed to keeping upgraded garage doors and stone work on the homes.
The applicant is not proposing to amend any of the previously approved landscaping, trails, parcel lines or land area of the development. The applicant is seeking approval to reduce the home sizes previously approved by the Council. The new home sizes, not including garage areas range from approximately 1,077 square feet to 1,136 square feet of floor area. The proposed homes will have the ability to contain finished basements which would add to the finished floor area. The original approvals were for homes ranging in size from 1,472 up to 1,911 square feet of finished floor area.
Burnham stated the City Council is not required to accept the proposed changes being requested. Burnham then read the following proposed conditions should the Council decide to permit the reduction in the originally approved home sizes: 1. That the landscaping behind Lots 6 & 7, Block 2, be treated similar to that designed behind Lot 5, Block 2 which is a mixture of the following: 2 Black Hill spruce, 1 Norway Pine, 1 Amur Maple and 1 American Linden. 2. That two identical house styles are not allowed to be next to each other. 3. Approval of grading, drainage, stormwater management, and erosion control plans by the City Engineer and Elm Creek Watershed Commission Compliance with the Wetland Conservation Act for the off-site mitigation of an 8,458 square foot delineated wetland area. 4. Approval of utility plans by the City Engineer 5. Submittal of all fees as determined by the adopted Master Fee Schedule to include park dedication for eleven of the lots, lot fees, storm sewer trunk, water trunk, sanitary sewer trunk, trails fees, off-site wetland, and transportation fees totaling $308,623. 6. Submittal of Letter of Credit totaling $189,000 to offset payment of mailboxes, wear course, grading, trails, turf establishment and engineering. 7. The applicant shall meet all conditions and requirements as established by the City Engineer in his memorandum of March 25, 2008 and May 12, 2009. 8. The applicant shall dedicate Lot 8, Block 3 of the Fletcher Hills Addition to the City of Rogers for park dedication purposes to offset a portion of the park dedication fees required.
Bell asked if basements were included in the square footages. Burnham stated no.
Rauenhorst stated he is not in favor with the size reduction and doesn’t see it beneficial to the residents who own houses in the area.
Bill Christian, developer, addressed the Council regarding his request for a home size reduction.
Mr. Christian provided details on the size reductions proposed. Christian stated he also wanted to address the issue of the occupancy of the model, which was originally constructed as a model/parade home. Through the process, Christian stated he assumed he would get a recorded plat and the occupancy would not be an issue. He stated he is trying to be resourceful and avoid bank-owned property.
Mr. Christian stated the price range for reduced sized homes would be $199,000 to $230,000 price range.
Mayor Grimm proposed a hypothetical situation and the City’s obligation to hold a new developer to prior design standards. Grimm stated that with a different builder, we wouldn’t know if the interior quality of the product would be maintained as it would if Christian built the home.
Mayor Grimm entertained questions from the audience.
Ron Gleason on Irma Place: What protection do they have regarding the property from turning into apartments?
Council explained the process of rezoning and a comprehensive plan amendment.
Mr. Gleason questioned how Distinctive Builders built homes outside of the design standards of their development.
Planner Burnham explained there are not architectural standards in King Estates, however this PUD does have architectural standards.
Steve Ivey questioned what property is considered King Estates. Staff explained. Mr. Ivey discussed the King Estates project and called it a fiasco. Mr. Ivey stated he does not understand why these were approved for development. He thinks to change the architectural standards will make these problems worse.
Bell stated that market values are going down across the board.
There was a discussion on “what if” the Council does approve it or denies the request.
Bell explained these homes were to be built to different standards, they are townhomes.
Rauenhorst addressed the issue regarding moving into a home without a certificate of occupancy and stated he doesn’t like the idea of him living there. Rauenhorst called it wrong.
Bunting asked for history on the entire PUD process.
Planner Burnham provided additional history and stated it is a PUD overlay district. In this case, there were special landscaping, architectural, and lot size standards.
Bunting asked if they had square footage requirements.
Burnham stated the standards showed length and width of homes. Now being proposed are smaller widths and lengths with different floor plans; same lot size.
Davis questioned how many units. Burnham stated 33 homes total.
Clint Foster, resident in Fletcher Hills, spoke on difficulties he has encountered with selling a single family house next to a townhome development. The disparity in the price ranges is why he is here and is concerned. He stated he is also curious about the traffic. He addressed the road and asked if the traffic would be coming into South Pointe and asked if there is a plan to complete the road.
Engineer Lange provided an explanation on why the roads do not connect to the current gravel road of Fletcher Lane; the right-of-way and utilities go all the way through, but the road does not.
Don Judge on Foxtail Lane, mimicked the disparity comment. They were told they would be higher upper class homes that would draw the people that can afford them. Mr. Judge and Bell then discussed a previous comment by Bell. Mr. Judge stated he hopes the Council does not approve this.
Bell questioned Burnham what the Planning Commission said. Burnham stated the Planning Commission forwarded a unanimous recommendation to approve the revisions to the standards, and no one was in attendance at the meeting.
Administrator Stahmer stated there is not a firm recommendation in this report. The Council is tasked with weighing the possibility of the project going forward versus allowing the project to go under and a new developer would come along.
Mr. Ivey spoke again and stated the market isn’t going to stay this way forever.
Bunting asked why Mr. Christian lowered the size of the larger homes so much more than the size of the smaller homes.
Mr. Christian stated he doesn’t see two-story homes being built.
Burnham clarified these are single family detached homes with common maintenance areas.
Bunting asked if larger homes can be added to this mix; may not be built now but can be in the future.
Mr. Ivey spoke again and stated he doesn’t want the homes “cheapened up”.
Rauenhorst stated he wants to maintain the size it was before.
Mr. Christian again addressed the Council on his proposal.
Rauenhorst, can’t change the rules of the game in the middle of the game.
There was discussion regarding foundation size and whether or not the four-season porch is included in the square footage of the current structure, 1472 square feet, and if it is included, is minimum foundation size of 1300 square feet reasonable.
Bunting stated if a home there is 1472 including the porch, if that is the minimum size that nobody is complaining about.
Rauenhorst, no reason to change the sizes if there was a 1472 minimum already approved.Bunting requested staff to make a clarification on what constitutes square footage.
Davis suggested tabling the item until staff gets a concrete answer on the foundation size.
Burnham stated each style model has a square footage associated with it and interior design.
Mr. Christian stated he doesn’t believe that taking that model plan and building it is the problem. He is concerned about going over the 1472 square footage.
Bunting what Council has been told tonight is that the model is really a 1310 square foot home and that is the minimum size that he should go with.
Mr. Christian stated he believes he can make it work, but needs to talk with two other partners.
Bunting asked if Council needs to make a clarification on what constitutes square footage.
Attorney Carson stated that is subject to a developer’s agreement.
Rauenhorst stated 1472 sq.ft. should be the minimum.
Mr. Christian wanted clarification.
Rauenhorst stated 1472 sq.ft. as a minimum with the four-season porch as part of the 1472 sq.ft.. If it doesn’t have the porch, it is still 1472 sq.ft..
Planner Burnham questioned the two styles similar and next to each other condition. Burnham stated he will need the flexibility of two styles adjacent to each other.
Rauenhorst again stated he doesn’t see any reason to change, the market will improve.
Rauenhorst made a motion to not change the previous PUD with a minimum house size of 1472 sq.ft.Bunting is not willing to artificially restrict him to a size that wasn’t made clear.
Davis seconded the motion.
Attorney Carson stated he is not sure it is the best move to make a hard and fast decision tonight until Mr. Christian is able to determine what he is able to do. If you table it, you can reconsider.Rauenhorst then withdrew his motion.
Motion by Rauenhorst, seconded by Bunting to table consideration and asked Planner Burnham to look at minimum size. Motion carried 5-0.
Mr. Christian stated he will speak to his investors.
7.09 Brockton Meadows Neighborhood Park Public Works Supt. Seifert addressed the Council on approval to proceed with the Brockton Meadows Neighborhood Park.
Mayor Grimm asked if park dedication fees were collected will cover the cost of the park as described. Seifert stated the park dedication fund will cover the cost.
Seifert spoke on park dedication fees not being a sole source of funding for the park improvements on the priority list. The difference here is the property is available to build the park on. Seifert stated the project would be a 2 to 5 year old play structure with the second phase being a 5 to 12 year old play structure.
Seifert stated the cost estimate envisioned would be for pavement, curb, sidewalk, and contracting for an installer.
Motion by Rauenhorst seconded by Bell to authorize staff to solicit for construction quotes for sidewalk, curb and bituminous trail and schedule a playground installation date with Earl F. Anderson installation coordinator. Motion carried 5-0.
7.10 Approval of Joint Resolution with Hassan Township for Trail Grant ApplicationPublic Works Supt. Seifert provided background information on the joint resolution with Hassan Township for the County Road 144 trail grant application.
Motion by Bunting, seconded by Rauenhorst Approve Joint Resolution for application for trail grant through the 2009 Transportation Enhancement Program. Motion carried 5-0.
8. Other Business. 8.01 Park Board Appointment – DavisDavis explained it is difficult for him to attend the Park Board meetings and asked if someone else would be interested in attending in his place. Bell stated he is the back-up councilor appointed to the Park Board and will work with Davis to attend the meetings.
9. Correspondence and Reports 9.01 April 2009 Financial Reports 9.02 Park Board Minutes of Feb. 17, 2009 and April 21, 2009No action taken.
10. Adjourn Motion by Bunting, seconded by Rauenhorst to adjourn at 9:27 p.m. Motion carried 5-0.
Respectfully submitted,Stacy DoboszenskiAssistant City Administrator/Clerk