Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout03-30-09-R ~ ~HILLS Approved: May 11, 2009 CITY OF ARDEN HILLS, MINNESOTA REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING MARCH 30, 2009 7:00 P.M. - ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS CALL TO ORDER/ROLL CALL Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, Mayor Stan Harpstead called to order the regular City Council meeting at 7 :04 p.m. Present: Mayor Stan Harpstead; Council Members David Grant, Brenda Holden, and Dave McClung and Fran Holmes. Absent: None. Also present: City Administrator Ronald Moorse; Public Works Director Gregory Hoag; City Engineer Kristine Giga; Finance Director Susan Iverson; Parks and Recreation Manager Michelle Olson; Community Development Director James Lehnhoff; City Engineer Deb Bloom; City Attorney Jerry Filla; Sarah Michaels, TTM Operating Corporation, Inc.; and Recording Secretary, Tina Borg. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE 1. APPROVAL OF AGENDA Councilmember Grant requested item 4A be pulled from the consent calendar. Councilmember McClung requested item 4C be pulled from the consent calendar. MOTION: Councilmember Grant moved and Councilmember McClung seconded a motion to approve the agenda as amended. The motion carried unanimously (5-0) ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL - March 30, 2009 2 2. PUBLIC INQUIRIES/INFORMATIONAL A. TCAAP Update City Administrator Ronald Moorse stated that the City's special legislation regarding tax increment financing has been introduced in both the House and Senate. A hearing in the House will be held on Friday, April!3. The National Guard recently held a three and a half day sustainability charrette regarding the AHATS. This charrette included a number of experts on LEED, sustainable design, and engineering. Some of the sustainable ideas included creating a LEED platinum development, generating electricity onsite with wind and/or solar, creating a district heating system, and possibly using this site as a model for other similar installations around the country. Public Mayor Harpstead opened the public inquiries/informational at 7:07 p.m. Mayor Harpstead closed the public inquiries/information at 7:08 p.m. 3. APPROVAL OF MINUTES None. 4. CONSENT CALENDAR A. 2009 Fee Schedule Amendment: Building Permit Special Investigation Fee - Ordinance 2009-006 and Approve publishing a summary of Ordinance 2009-006 MOTION: Councilmember Holden moved and Councilmember McClung seconded a motion to approve the Consent Calendar as amended and to authorize execution of all necessary documents contained therein. The motion carried unanimously (5-0). 5. PULLED CONSENT ITEMS A. Claims and Pavroll Councilmember Grant stated that the Council does review the items within claims and payroll and wanted to point out that the amount of $124.00 per name plate that ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL - March 30, 2009 " 3 was paid was excessive and these types of items should be better researched to get better pricing. MOTION: Councilmember Grant moved and Mayor Harpstead seconded a motion to approve Claims and Payroll as presented. The motion carried unanimously (5-0). B. Amendment #3 to the Preliminarv Development Al!reemeot (PDA) with RRLDtt extendinl! the PDA throu2h Mav 15tt 2009 Councilmember McClung requested clarification for the public record regarding the extension of the PDA with RRLD. City Administrator Moorse stated that the Preliminary Development Agreement or PDA between the City and RRLD, the developer for the TCAAP property, is currently set to expire on March 31, 2009. The extension of the PDA would align the expiration date with the Offer to Purchase that the City has with the Army. Mayor Harpstead stated that it is important to point out that the Preliminary Development Agreement affords the City access to funds that would allow the City to appropriately negotiate and do the necessary evaluations as the City moves forward with the completion of this agreement. This also allows the City to move toward a master development agreement in the future. MOTION: Councilmember McClung moved and Councilmember Holden seconded a motion to approve Amendment #3 to the Preliminary Development Agreement (PDA), extending the PDA through May 15, 2009. The motion carried unanimously (5-0). 6. PUBLIC HEARINGS None. 7. NEW BUSINESS A. Eureka Recvclinl! Community Development Director James Lehnhoff stated the City signed a new contract with Eureka Recycling to provide residential curbside recycling services from March 1, 2008 to March 1, 2011. As part of this switch for 2009 there is a $3.06 per household per month fee and another part of the contract is a revenue share for paper and aluminum. Due to the declining recycling market, there is ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL - March 30, 2009 4 unlikely to be any revenue share in 2009. What is before the Council tonight is a concern from Staff and the City Attorney about a disagreement with the contract language that relates to the payment terms with Eureka Recycling. This came to light in mid-February when Eureka Recycling contacted Staff about an error in the December 2008 invoice. Through that conversation it was determined that there were some discrepancies in the interpretation of the contract language. The payment terms are divided into two parts. The first part is the general compensation or monthly fee per household and the second part is the material sales and revenue share, which is section 6.2 of the contract. The second part states that the City and Eureka would split 50/50 any revenue received after the processing fee for paper and aluminum. It is the understanding of the City that the City would only retain revenue when the prices were above the processing fees and would not pay any more than the base monthly service fee if there was no revenue share. Eureka states that the City is responsible if there is a gap in the market price and the processing fee for paper and aluminum. Staff has not authorized payment of the processing fees at this time. It is also important to note that the City has not budgeted for these processing fees. We met with the City Attorney and Eureka Recycling to discuss the contract language and to come to some reasonable solution. He reviewed the three possible solutions that Staff had at this time including the possible downsides of each. He pointed out that at the March 13 meeting; Eureka did indicate that they may pursue Section 25 of the contract that allows them to declare a material economically unfeasible to collect. If they pursue this portion of the contract, residents would no longer be able to recycle paper and it would be left behind in the bins. Mayor Harpstead asked how the processing fees are determined. Community Development Director Lehnhoff stated that this was not explained in the contract. He had a brief discussion with Mr. Goodwin of Eureka Recycling about the processing fees. He had received a general answer. Staff had reviewed contracts that Eureka has with other cities and the processing fees vary considerably among the cities. Councilmember Holden asked how many tons of paper Eureka handles for the City each year. Community Development Director Lehnhoff stated that based on the current levels the yearly total would be about 450 tons per year. Councilmember Holden stated that the City does not want to loose paper recycling. ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL - March 30, 2009 5 Community Development Director Lehnhoff stated that paper is a significant portion of the total tons of recycling collected each year. Councilmember McClung asked what percentage of the total recycling collect would be considered paper. Community Development Director Lehnhoff stated that paper would be about 40 tons per month and all other recycling would be about 15 tons per month. Councilmember McClung stated that the City would want to maintain paper recycling because of the environmental impacts and the service to the residents. No matter what the City decides to do there is still the potential that Eureka would enforce Section 25 of the contract and discontinue paper recycling. Councilmember Grant stated that when Eureka first approached the City they brought the concept of profit sharing and no where in their documents was there reference to short fall sharing. Councilmember Holmes clarified that the third option that Community Dev~Iopment Director Lehnhoff had presented was from Eureka Recycling. This option proposed a contract amendment to change the revenue share formula and the revised formula would eliminate the processing fee and the City's ability to collect revenue share in the future. She stated the letter from Eureka did not raise any questions about them either continuing to collect paper or discontinuing it. Community Development Director Lehnhoff stated that this was a question that Staff had come up with and this would need to be addressed before any resolution was made. Councilmember Holmes stated that this would need to be clarified but their letter does not state that they are discontinuing paper pickup. If Eureka would commit in writing to continuing paper recycling then the third option would be a feasible option for the City. Councilmember Grant stated that if there is an option for Eureka to discontinue paper but still maintain the remainder of the recycling then the City needs to be looking for a new vendor. He stated that there was nothing in the documents presented to the City that the City would make up any short falls if there was no profit. He stated that Eureka is a small company and he would like to be able to support them. ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL - March 30, 2009 6 Mayor Harpstead stated that Eureka is a non-profit organization. He asked what recourse the City would have if the City is not able to recycle the components that they want. City Attorney Jerry Filla stated that if the City interprets the contract the way it has been, it would require Eureka to continue operating the way it has been and the City would share in profits not losses and if they did not pick up the paper then they are in default of the contract and the City could pursue that option. Section 25 supports the interpretation that the City would only pay so much per household and share in profits and allows Eureka an escape clause so that they would not have to loose money indefinitely. Eureka has stated in one of their letters that in the RFP they have the statement that the City would not pay any cost above the processing costs and this is what they are using to support their cause that the City has to pay for the gap. Even though this language is in the RFP it did not make its way into the contract. If Eureka refuses to collect paper and they don't go through the Section 25 process then the City would determine they are in default of the terms of the agreement. Mayor Harpstead clarified that if Eureka did go through the Section 25 process the City would not have any recourse to find another vendor. City Attorney Filla stated that the City could find another vendor for just the paper if this was possible. Mayor Harpstead clarified that changing vendors would not be an option if Eureka did not pick up the items that the City wanted. City Attorney Filla stated that if Eureka did not pursue the process of Section 25 they would have to continue to pick up the paper. Councilmember Holden clarified that there was no way to cancel the contract until 2011. City Attorney Filla stated that this was correct unless they are in default of the contract. Councilmember Grant stated that there should be some course of action that the City can take with Eureka in order to keep them as a vendor. Mayor Harpstead clarified that there was a direction for Staff from the Council to go back and negotiate with Eureka Recycling that paper is continued to be collected and bring the appropriate amendment back to the Council. ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL - March 30, 2009 7 Councilmember Holmes stated that it goes further than this and includes the third option where the City does not pay the processing fee. Mayor Harpstead restated the sense of the Council as: Giving Staff some leeway to negotiate the third option with paper collection being a requirement. Councilmember McClung stated that the only real option at this time is something along the lines of option 3. He stated that he would not be able to support any option unless it is explicitly written into the contract that Eureka can not use Section 25 and get rid of paper recycling throughout the course of the contract. Mayor Harpstead stated that paper recycling in important to the City and has to be figured out. He stated that the City should try to encourage Eureka to keep the profit sharing in the contract because this does align their interests with the City's interests in trying to recycle as much product as possible. Councilmember Grant stated that profit sharing should still be in the contract. Mayor Harpstead stated that Staff should also look at other recycled products not being discontinued by Eureka. He would like to see Eureka continue with their philosophy and align their interests with the City's. Development Director Lehnhoff stated that this could be achieved through option 3. Councilmember Holden stated that with the current market it is unlikely that there would be any profit share between now and the end of the contract. Mayor Harpstead stated that it may be possible to move from a 50/50 split to something that would be more in Eureka's favor. Councilmember McClung clarified that under option 3, the City would eliminate the processing fee and profit sharing and the fee for 2009 would be $3.06 and the following year would be $3.06 plus CPI and the final year would be the 2010 price plus CPl. Community Development Director Lehnhoff stated that this was correct. It was the consensus of the Council to direct Staff to continue negotiations with Eureka along the lines of option 3 and ensure that paper recycling does not get removed. ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL - March 30, 2009 8 B. Motion to direct Staff to applv for American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) Transportation Enhancement Fundin2 City Engineer Kristine Giga reviewed the policies of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) Transportation Enhancement Funding including eligible . components for funding and non-eligible components. The eligible components include project construction and materials and right-of-way/land acquisition. The non- eligible components are the study completion and engineering costs. There is a maximum award of$1,300,000. Councilmember Holden clarifie4 that this is stimulus money. City Engineer Giga stated that this was correct but the new name for the stimulus money was the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) and the Transportation Enhancement Funding was one of the areas that this had been divided into. Mayor Harpstead asked if the $7.5 million was available to predominately Ramsey County. City Engineer Giga stated that this amount was the total available to the seven county metro area. She reviewed the qualifying criteria including the twelve qualifying activities. Other qualifying criteria are the project must be ADA compliant, projects must relate to surface transportation, projects must be in an approved Comprehensive Plan, or Capital Improvement Plan, the applicant must agree to operate and maintain the facility, proposed designs for bikeways and combined bike/pedestrian facilities must meet Mn/DOT standards, and projects must be coordinated with all affected communities and other levels and units of government. The application is due on Friday April 3 and projects may be bundled together. State Aid approval is required by November 13, 2009 and this includes environmental documentation, right-of-way certificates, plans, specifications, and estimates. Construction would be no later than next season. Councilmember Grant asked if failure of approval would result in a loss of the funding. City Engineer Giga stated that if all of the five items for State Aid are not approved by November 13, 2009 then the City will lose their funding eligibility. City Engineer Deb Bloom stated that since it can take up to eight weeks to get approvals from Mn/DOT, the City would have to have everything for the project ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL - March 30, 2009 9 completed by August in order to)meet the November deadline. She clarified that if the City did not have their approvals by November 13, 2009 the funds would be returned to the State and redistributed or returned to the Federal Government. Councilmember Grant clarified that if the City had everything in by August this would not guarantee funding. City Engineer Bloom stated that at this time this is a solicitation and there is nothing that has been funded. The decision will be made sometime in mid April by the Met Council Transportation Advisory Board and the deadline for a submittal is April 3. Once a submission has been approved the City has that funding unless they are unable to meet the November 13, 2009 deadline. City Engineer Giga stated that each applicant is only allowed one proposal. CounciJmember Holmes asked for clarification regarding the statement "projects currently programmed for 2009 are not eligible for ARRA Transportation Enhancements funding." City Engineer Bloom stated that if the City has funding within the 2009 State Transportation Improvement Plan (STIP) or Federal Budget cycle (July 1, 2008 - June 30, 2009) then the project is not eligible for the funding. Councilmember Holmes asked if this would impact some of the next projects that the City is talking about. City Engineer Bloom stated that this would not impact these projects because the Safe Routes to School project is in the 2010 STIP (July 1,2009 - June 30, 2010). Councilmember Holmes clarified that all the projects listed for review do not have a conflict. City Engineer Bloom stated that this was correct. The three projects being presented for discussion are the three projects that were in the Comprehensive Plan and have been discussed by the Council as being priorities. The three projects are County Road E Bridge Improvements, County Road E-2 pathway (Safe Routes to School project) possibly bundled with the Perry Park pathway and the CP Rail Bridge Improvements. Councilmember Holmes asked about the Perry Park pathway possibly being bundled with the County Road E-2 pathway project and if the Perry Park pathway being budgeted for in 2009 would be a problem. ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL - March 30, 2009 10 City Engineer Bloom stated that this would not be a problem because the City has a DNR Grant for this project. Councilmember Holmes asked if the project was programmed for 2009. City Engineer Bloom stated that it was not programmed at the state level STIP because the Perry Project is funded through the DNR. City Engineer Bloom explained to the Council that because of the tight deadlines with this solicitation there have been several meetings since the agenda memo was prepared and the details of these meetings have not been included in the Council packet. She reviewed the requirements for eligibility, fundability, and feasibility for the solicitation. Councilmember Holden asked how the CP Rail Bridge project could be included in this list when Mr. Thomas explained to the Council that it could be eight to twelve months before the City would even hear back from the railroad. City Engineer Giga stated that the timing of this funding with the CP Rail Bridge project in relation to tbe required timelines related to the ARRA funds could be a problem. Even though the feasibility report has been completed and Bolton and Menk, Inc. is starting the design process, the problem would be how quick CP Rail would be in responding to the City's requests. The County Road E Bridge Improvements is currently in the RFQ process for a consultant firm to complete the final design. The reason that Staff has not brought back a recommendation for the Council is because Staff has had additional meetings with MnJDOT regarding what the City can and can not do on County Road E with the existing bridge or what the plans are for the future. Staff met with MnJDOT Bridge on Friday as a follow up to the memo from Kimley-Horn, the City's consultant engineer. Kimley Horn had indicated that they could do additional leg work for the City prior to the final design to evaluate the bridge again and see what the conditions of the bridge are today and how that might affect a future project. MnJDOT Bridge indicated that the structural modifications that would happen would trigger the need for improvements on the bridge so that it is not functionally obsolete as it currently is today. The lane widths are narrower than the approach lanes on either side of it. This means that it would result in a bridge widening project and the City would need to meet a minimum standard bf 32 feet aside from any trail or sidewalk. Once this is evaluated then the condition of the existing bridge is considered and if it is worth widening the bridge or constructing a new bridge. City Engineer Bloom asked what the current width of the bridge is. ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL - March 30, 2009 11 City Engineer Giga stated that the current width is 35 feet including the sidewalks. City Engineer Bloom stated that the widening would go from the 35 feet that exist today to a total of 42 feet. There is additional structural analysis that would need to occur for this. The result of the meeting was the widening of the bridge may trigger a variety of other things that are outside of the scope of the City. The City would not be able to get a letter of support from MnJDOT for the County Road E-2 Bridge Improvements project by the deadline date. Councilmember Grant asked for clarification on what was meant by widening. City Engineer Bloom stated that at this time they have only talked to MnlDOT Bridge and they are the group that the City would need to get a letter of approval from for this project. At this time what they have told the City is that they would not be able to provide such approval. Councilmember Holden stated in the B2 Plan the City wanted to pursue this bridge and this was one of the priorities and now this project is going to be more than was estimated with the B2 Plan. City Engineer Giga stated that there was another option suggestion at the meeting and that was to pursue a stand alone pedestrian bridge on the north side. The proposal that was submitted in 2006 for the Cooperative Agreement was a 7.5 foot sidewalk attached to the bridge, which is currently substandard to MnJDOT regulations that recommend a minimum of 8 feet. If a stand alone bridge was built it could be built to the width that the City wants. The preliminary costs that MnJDOT Bridge provided was about $750,000 to $1,000,000 depending on the amount of right-of-way that would need to be taken. There are other factors that also need to be looked at including utilities and water mains. Councilmember Grant asked if City Engineer Giga was referring to a separate stand alone pedestrian bridge. Mayor Harpstead asked if this would be a steel construction. City Engineer Giga stated that she was referring to a separate stand alone pedestrian bridge possibly constructed with steel. Councilmember Holden asked if there would be enough time to complete this option for the ARRA funding. ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL - March 30, 2009 12 City Engineer Bloom stated that this would be the question with this option. Mayor Harpstead clarified that the assumptions that the City had been operating on with the B2 Zone and the cantilever pathway on the existing bridge triggered a series of things with Mn/DOT that basically lead to the point that this is no longer a realistic or feasible project. City Engineer Bloom stated that it may' be realistic or feasible. It is just not possible to answer all the questions for it to be a viable option for the ARRA funding request. Mayor Harpstead stated that it sounded like if there was any work done to the bridge there would also have to be work to extend the usable life of the bridge and the width of the lanes would have to be adjusted. City Engineer Bloom stated that this is correct. The City could do a structural analysis of the bridge, which may change some of Mn/DOT's caveats. Mayor Harpstead clarified that this would not address the fact that Mn/DOT wants the lanes widened if the City did anything to the bridge. City Engineer Bloom stated that a structural analysis could show that there would not have to be a lot of additional work to get the needed width, then there would be a different discussion with Mn/DOT. Councilmember McClung asked if option 3 could be presented. City Engineer Bloom stated that the third option was the Safe Route to School project. All the project documentation has been done and the specifications are currently being worked on. This project has all the support letters. Staff has been working on value engineering the bridge and the engineers estimate came in at $442,000. There is also Perry Park pathway, which is connected to this. The City has set aside $30,000 for funding along with the DNR grant. The City would be looking at requesting an estimated $250,000 from the ARRA fund for completing these two projects. Final figures need to be worked out when completing the grant. Councilmember McClung asked City Engineer Bloom and City Engineer Giga which of the three projects has the best chance of competing with other projects and getting funding. City Engineer Bloom stated that the Safe Routes to School project bundled with the Perry Park pathway would have the best chance. The stand alone pedestrian ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL - March 30, 2009 13 bridge could potentially work but one of the things that the proposal will be scored on is how this project will fill a gap. It would provide a much needed safety improvement but there is not a trail system to the west currently. Councilmember Holden asked if there would be any points against the project if there was already a grant such as the Safe Routes to School Project. City Engineer Bloom stated that this would be a point in favor of the project. Councilmember Holden asked how City Engineer Bloom knew this would be a plus and not a minus. City Engineer Bloom stated that when the applications are reviewed the sources of other funding are reviewed and if there is other funding there is more certainty that the project will be completed. Councilmember McClung stated that if the City was going to pursue the County Road E Bridge the amount that they would be requesting would be $750,000 to $1,000,000. He asked what the amount would be for the Safe Routes to School project. City Engineer Bloom stated that it would be somewhere around $250,000 and this would include the water main work and the bridge. Councilmember McClung asked if City Engineer Bloom thought that the Met Council might try to look to provide for some larger projects but also leave some set aside for smaller projects and the smaller project might be more apt to get funding. City Engineer Bloom stated that she could not say for sure. Councilmember Holden asked if the Met Council was looking to fund the whole amount of the request or just a portion of the request. City Engineer Bloom stated that it would depend on how the grant was written and what was asked for. Councilmember Holden asked for additional information regarding the Perry Park attachment in the Safe Routes to School project. City Engineer Bloom stated that Perry Park is the connection from the Tony Schmidt Park pathway, which connects from Lake Johanna. Right now there is a ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL - March 30, 2009 14 dirt road connection that connects to the City's lift station. Staffhas laid out a path that goes up along the ball fields at Perry Park. Councilmember Holden asked if this would meet the ADA requirements with the steep hill. City Engineer Bloom stated that the ADA requirements would be met. She also stated that this is a pathway that the PTRC has been looking at doing. There is a gate that is located at the south side of County Road E2 that could also be replaced with something that is more attractive and functional. Councilmember Holden asked if this grant would be written to include the services of consultants. City Engineer Bloom stated that this would be correct. MOTION: Councilmember Holden moved and Councilmember McClung seconded a motion to direct Staff to apply for American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) Transportation Enhancement Funding utilizing the Safe Routes to School project bundled with the Perry Park pathway. Mayor Harpstead stated he was concerned that the County Road E Bridge is not being addressed. The City will need to find a way to have a lead project for this. If this particular project were in a better position it would be the better project to apply for the ARRA funding. Councilmember Grant stated that the City does need to find a way to address the safety issues on this bridge and it does need to be a priority. The motion was called to a vote. The motion carried unanimously (5-0). City Engineer Giga stated that Staff will continue to work with MnJDOT on getting more information on the County Road E Bridge and what the County plans on doing. Councilmember Grant stated that there were tests that could be done that would determine structural condition of the bridge. City Engineer Giga stated their Staff will ask Mn/DOT if they would consider doing these tests out of their maintenance funds. If they are not willing to do this then StaffwiII bring a recommendation to the Council for approval. ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL - March 30, 2009 15 Mayor Harpstead asked that City Engineer Giga work with City Administrator Moorse to get this item into a work session for the Council. Councilmember Holden asked how much the City would be requesting in the grant request. City Engineer Bloom stated that the amount would be about $250,000 including the Perry Park pathway. Mayor Harpstead clarified that Council had authorized Staff to apply for the grant. C. Approve the lease 3ereement between TTM Operatine Corporation.. Inc. and the City of Arden Hills with a vearlv lease rate of $2..700 and a vearlv increase on 30/0 based on the terms in the Communications Site Lease A2reement in Planninl! Case 09- 004 vendin!! the receipt of the final exhibits Community Development Director Lehnhoff stated that TTM Operating Corporation, Inc. is requesting to install communication equipment at the 1230 Red Fox Road water tower. TTM provides high speed fiber optic services to cellular towers and is a competitor of Qwest. What TTM is proposing to do is install a fiber optic line and related utilities to an existing T-Mobile building at the Red Fox water tower. As part of the proposal they would lease 16 square feet of ground space for their equipment. Included in the proposal is a nonexclusive easement for fiber optic lines. He reviewed the lease proposal for the Council. He also pointed out that approval is pending the receipt of the final exhibits. Exhibits A and C have been finalized so Staff is waiting for exhibit B. Councilmember Holden wanted to verify that if the City ever wanted to put a fence around the area the equipment and the easements are well within the area. Community Development Director Lehnhoff stated that there would be no problems if the City decided to put up a fence. Councilmember Grant stated that the yearly lease rate would be a benefit to the City. He asked what the public benefit would be with the addition of the equipment. He asked if more users of this particular tower could be accommodated or if the fiber optic is used to carry some of the increased graphics etc. that are being processed by cell phones. ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL - March 30, 2009 16 Community Development Director Lehnhoff stated that the increased capacity on a fiber optic would make it easier for T -Mobile to handle more customer traffic and more applications. Ms. Sarah Michaels, 1 0498 169th Street West, Lakeville, TTM Operating Corporation, Inc., stated that the fiber optics being brought in is similar to Qwest Tl lines that are run through the ground. The fiber optic has greater capacity to carry applications such as graphics and pictures, data, texting, and internet. This type of data transfer takes more space and fiber optics can accommodate this need better than a T 1 line can. Councilmember Grant asked if the fiber optic line would make 3G possible or is that an added service that would have to be provided by the cellular company. Ms. Michaels stated that the fiber optics supports this. TTM is a utility company providing a utility to the site. Mayor Harpstead clarified that the fiber optics does not affect the speed of transmission other than having one line handling a greater volume to the source of the antenna. Ms. Michaels stated that the fiber optics do help the speed as well. Councilmember Grant asked that with the increased capacity does that mean that T -Mobile customers would be less likely to loose coverage or hop a tower in this area.. Ms. Michaels stated that the fiber optics does not change the coverage but rather increase the efficiency that is currently in place. MOTION: Councilmember Grant moved and Councilmember McClung seconded a motion to approve the lease agreement between TTM Operating Corporation, Inc. and the City of Arden Hills with a yearly lease rate of $2,700.00 and a yearly increase of3% based on the terms in the Communications Site Lease Agreement in Planning Case 09-004 pending the receipt of the final exhibits. The motion carried unanimously (5-0). 8. UNFINISHED BUSINESS None. ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL - March 30, 2009 17 9. COUNCIL COMMENTS AND REQUESTS Councilmember Grant asked when the sump pump program would be brought before the Council again. City Administrator Moorse stated that the sump pump ordinance would be at the next Council meeting and the sump pump work plan is being finished this week and will be brought to the Council before the next. work session. The sump pump work plan can be discussed at the next work session. Councilmember Holden stated that the first Thursday in May (May 7) is the Northwest Youth and Family Services Leadership lunch at Midland Hills. She asked that any Council members interested in attending let her know. Councilmember McClung stated that April 17 is the last day to take advantage of the Friends of the Park tree sale. There is information on the City's website along with a list of trees that could be donated to the City's parks. Councilmember Grant stated that the new Arby's restaurant had opened on March 19. They did a good job rehabbing the building and it is a nice improvement to the area. Mayor Harpstead stated that the fence helps. ADJOURN MOTION: Councilmember McClung moved and Councilmember Holden seconded a motion to adjourn. The motion carried unanimously (5-0). ~ ~