05-22-2017 Council Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Search

CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL WORK SESSION May 1, 2017 DRAFT 2 and staff intends that there will be more information and discussion in the future with 46 resident involvement included. 47 48 The council expressed their support for strong neighborhood involvement. The residents 49 would be directly affected by additional traffic control (or no additional traffic control) 50 and should have their voices heard. City Engineer Hankee explained that staff is still 51 looking at the validity of the stop sign request from an engineering perspective. Staff 52 could provide notice to the area residents at any time with council direction. Council 53 Member Kusterman pondered the council’s authority if it comes to overruling a staff 54 recommendation. Ms. Hankee explained that safety is the number one priority and so a 55 recommendation would be based first on that consideration. If the addition of a stop sign 56 isn’t the right action, there could be other traffic calming recommendations. 57 58 Council Member Rafferty asked if a traffic study and the work occurring on this situation 59 is a standard response to a resident’s request and staff confirmed that they review several 60 requests each year as part of their normal work load. 61 62 3. Public Works Site Analysis and Space Needs Study – Public Services Director 63 DeGardner introduced Quinn Hutson (Principal Architect) and Jessica Johnson 64 (Architectural Designer) representing CNH Architects, to present their report. 65 66 Mayor Reinert noted that he believes the council requested an option of fixing the current 67 facility but that doesn’t seem to be included in the analysis. Mr. Hutson said that Option 68 One includes renovating the current facility with a building expansion. 69 70 Jessica Johnson and Quinn Hutson, reviewed a PowerPoint presentation that included 71 information on: 72 - Overview of analysis they have completed; 73 - Public Works site options map (site options are the existing site as Option A, or 74 site adjacent to fire station #2 as Option B); 75 - Space needs for the city’s public works program: office, vehicle storage, vehicle 76 maintenance, and departmental shops; 77 - Growth consideration for the next 20 years; 78 - A comparison with other public works facilities in cities in the area and with 79 similar population; 80 - Layout options (two at site one and one at site two); 81 - Sanitary and water service addition would be required at current site; there would 82 be some disruption of services at current facilities (Council Members expressed 83 concern about losing the baseball field and suggested that should not be 84 necessary); 85 - Site Option B advantages were noted (sewer and water hookup;, etc); the site is 86 sufficient to meet the needs of both Phase 1 and 2; 87 - An architectural review of the current facilities; accessibility and code review 88 (several issues noted); mechanical systems review; 89