HomeMy WebLinkAboutFebruary 19, 2002 77a
As a property owner within the 350' radius of the proposed variance request
by Patrick Link I have objection to the variances for the Jefferson St. lots.
Name
9��
, O `-�
ee ry $Ch eSS
13 re V�da Loden
c
Address
2 -A Qr,
�Z�ScS md„�6Q St'
5
1�i
a
liqq u, AJ
AJ Sr,
\moo
n
F.m
S ha lc of
S / I�p �2
ako p 2
�5
S�A�a
As a property owner within the 350' radius of the proposod variance request
by Patrick Link I have no objection to the variances for the Jefferson St. lots.
Name
z
4 z
City
Address
1 �
�?o� S. �1/I��,s
TENTATIVE AGENDA
February 19, 2002.
Page —2-
15] General Business
A] Police and Fire
*1. 911 Address Sign Affirmation
B] Parks and Recreation
1. Tahpah Park Parking Lot Project
C] Community Development
1. Pat Link Construction Appeal of Rear Yard Setback Variance Denial by the
Board of Adjustment and Appeals
D] Public Works and Engineering
1. Blue Lake Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) — Res. No. 5656
2. Approving Plans and Restricting Parking for Improvements to CSAH 83 /CSAH 16,
Project No.- 2001 -4 — Resolutions 5657, 5658, 5659, 5660, and 5661
*3. Declaring Adequacy of Petitions for Improvements to 17 Avenue from CR 79 to
Colonial Street, Project No. 2002 -1 —Res. 5662
*4. Purchase of Loader
*5. Street Light Agreements with Scott County for CR 18 at CR 16
6. Agreement for Right of Way for the Valley View Road Project No. 2001 -5
E] Personnel
* 1. Completion of Probationary Period for Three Police Officers
F] General Administration
* 1. Temporary Liquor Licenses — Church of St. Mary
2. Establishing a Telecommunications Committee —Res. No. 5655
3. Establishing Presumptive Penalties for Alcohol Violaions
*4. Amending the City Code Pertaining to Collection of Fees — Ord. No. 618
16] Council Concerns
17] Other Business
18] Adjourn to Tuesday, February 26, 2002, at 4:30 p.m.
TENTATIVE AGENDA
February 19, 2002
Page —2-
151 General Business
A] Police and Fire
*1. 911 Address Sign Affirmation
B] Parks and Recreation
1. Tahpah Park Parking Lot Project
C] Community Development
1. Pat Link Construction Appeal of Rear Yard Setback Variance Denial by the
Board of Adjustment and Appeals
D] Public Works and Engineering
1. Blue Lake Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) — Res. No. 5656
2. Approving Plans and Restricting Parking for Improvements to CSAH 83 /CSAH 16,
Project No. 2001 -4 — Resolutions 5657, 5658, 5659, 5660, and 5661
*3. Declaring Adequacy of Petitions for Improvements to 17 Avenue from CR 79 to
Colonial Street, Project No. 2002 -1— Res. 5662
*4. Purchase of Loader
*5. Street Light Agreements with Scott County for CR 18 at CR 16
6. Agreement for Right of Way for the Valley View Road Project No. 2001 -5
E] Personnel
* 1. Completion of Probationary Period for Three Police Officers
F] General Administration
* 1. Temporary Liquor Licenses — Church of St. Mary
2. Establishing a Telecommunications Committee —Res. No. 5655
3. Establishing Presumptive Penalties for Alcohol Violaions
*4. Amending the City Code Pertaining to Collection of Fees — Ord. No. 618
161 Council Concerns
17] Other Business
18] Adjourn to Tuesday, February 26, 2002, at 4:30 p.m.
OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL
REGULAR SESSION SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA JANUARY 2, 2002
Mayor Mars called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. with Council members Link, Lehman, Sweeney
and Joos present. Also present: Mark McNeill, City Administrator; R. Michael Leek, Community
Development Director; Bruce Loney (7:17), Public Works Director; Tun Thomson, City Attorney;
Gregg Voxland (8:20), Finance Director; Judith S. Cox, City Clerk, Paul Snook, Economic
Development Coordinator; Mark McQuillan, Natural Resource Director; Dan Hughes, Chief of Police;
Tracy Coenen, Management Assistant and former Mayor Jon Brekke; former Council members Gary
Morke and Deb Amundson.
The new Mayor for the City of Shakopee, William P. Mars, along with new Council members, Matt
Lehman and Terry Joos took the oath of office administered by City Clerk, Judith Cox, before the
Council meeting for January 2, 2002 began_
The pledge of allegiance was recited
The following items were added to the Agenda. 15 B.3 Agreement with Canterbury Holding Corp_
regarding Right -of -Way in connection with a Minor Subdivision and 15.1 Designation of Marquette
Bank as a Depository for City Funds.
Joos/Link moved to approve the Agenda as amended. Motion carried unanimously.
Mayor Mars deferred to Mr. McNeill, City Administrator, for the recognition of the outgoing officials
from the City Council: former Mayor Jon Brekke, and former Council members Gary Morke and Deb
Amundson. Mayor Mars presented each outgoing official with a plaque in appreciation for their fine
services given to the City of Shakopee.
Former Mayor Brekke approached the podium to say a few words. He stated that he felt the City had
good people working for them and he has high respect for all the people in the City he worked with_
Former Mayor Jon Brekke stated that he felt the future was bright for the City of Shakopee and he felt
good about the past and he felt even better about the future for the City of Shakopee.
The following items were added to the Consent Agenda. 15.132 Final Plat of Providence Pointe 2 °d
Addition and, 15 B_3 Agreement with Canterbury Holding Corp. regarding Right -of -Way in connection
with a Minor Subdivision, 151.7 Designation of Marquette Bank as a Depository for City Funds.
Cncl. Link stated that he would be abstaining from item no. 15.1 Attorney Hire on Cletus J. Link
assessment appeal to the City of Shakopee regarding his assessments for the 2000 Street
Reconstruction project.
Link/Sweeney moved to approve the Consent Agenda as modified. Motion carried unanimously.
official Proceedings of the
Shakopee City Council
January 2, 2002
Page —2-
Mayor Mars asked if there were any citizens present in the audience who wished to address any item
not on the agenda. There was no response.
Link/Sweeney moved to approve the bills in the amount of $911,493.08 plus $32,920.11 for refunds,
returns and pass through for a total of $944,413.19. (Motion carried under the Consent Agenda). [The
Est of bills is posted on the bulletin board at City Hall for one month following approval].
Mayor Mars opened the public hearing on the proposed vacation of an easement at 724 Shumway
Street.
Mr. Leek, Community Development Director, gave the staff report for the proposed vacation of a
portion of an easement. Mr. Leek stated this was a request for a current blanket drainage and utility
easement for 724 Shumway Street. Mr. Leek oriented the property via overhead and stated this
application had been reviewed by the appropriate agencies, as well as, internal City Departments. Mr.
Leek noted a comment was received from Shakopee Public Utilities (SPUC) requesting that a five (5)
foot drainage and utility easement along side the north property line adjacent to the alley be retained.
The Planning Commission recommended to the City Council that this blanket easement be vacated but
that the five -foot utility easement is retained as recommended by SPUC.
Mayor Mars asked for audience participation. There was no response.
Lehman/Link moved to close the public hearing. Motion carried unanimously.
Link/Sweeney offered Resolution No. 5634, A Resolution of the City of Shakopee Vacating An
Easement within Lot 1, Block 1, Doyle's and Pieper's Addition, City of Shakopee, Scott County,
Minnesota and moved its adoption and also to retain a five foot easement along the north property line
as requested by Shakopee Public Utilities. Motion carried unanimously.
A recess was taken at 7:12 p.m. for the purposes of conducting the Economic Development Authority
Meeting.
Mayor Mars re- convened the City Council meeting at 7:38 p.m.
Mr. McQuillan, Natural Resource Director, reported on the Parks, Trails, and Natural Resources Grant
Applications. Mr. McQuillan stated that before the City Council tonight were three resolutions
supporting the City's participation in the State administered grant program. Mr. McQuillan gave some
background on the variety of the grant program and the programs themselves. Mr. McQuillan stated
that this year there is $1.2 million of federal funding available for all of the grants. Last year the City
received some funds from the Metro Greenways Funding Grant for the natural resources inventory and
$4,000 for the oak wilt suppression program. Mr. McQuillan stated there is great need for support and
funding for recreational facilities. The resolutions in front of the Council tonight covered three different
projects. Mr. McQuillan went over each project and had illustrations for the home viewers.
Official Proceedings of the January 2, 2002
Shakopee City Council Page —3-
Cncl. Sweeney asked that each resolution be discussed one at a time. Mr. McQuillan stated the
resolution is the first step in the grant application. This resolution would show that the community is
supportive of the project and program. The next step would be to conduct public hearings, and the
third step is making the application itself. Mr. McQuillan felt the projects selected had the best
opportunity to receive grant money.
Cncl. Sweeney had a concern that each of these projects also required some City money and none of
these projects are on the CIP. Cncl. Sweeney was concerned about bringing in non - essential projects
that were not in the capital improvement plan, when it looked like there was a very good chance that
the City budgets would be facing reductions rather than expansions. Cncl. Sweeney felt the grant
application projects should reflect that if the grant is received then other capital improvement plans
would be delayed or cancelled. Given the current status of the City's funding, Cncl. Sweeney is
concerned about any project that is not currently in the budget. Cncl. Sweeney wanted to bring up this
issue of the funding so that it could be thought about and discussed at a future date if any grants were
received.
Mr. McNeill stated that if the City did receive the grant money the City needed to identify and prioritize
what projects in the CIP could be put lower on the list of projects that needed to be done, before the
grant money was accepted. The Council did feel the grants should be applied for and the City funding
for the grant projects discussed at a later date if necessary.
Mr. McQuillan commented that there was some money in the CIP for some of the grants and he gave
some other possibilities.
There was discussion on the boat launch being constructed on the other side of the river. It was noted
that the existing boat launch is not in a good location because of the river current now and is a high
maintenance item due to the river current. The City would be working with the DNR if this grant were
received.
Mr. McQuillan pointed out that the grant application for the trail in the Dean Lake area would be
graded very high because it was a collaborative project with the developer. Mr. McQuillan felt this
project had the highest chance of a possibly receiving grant monies.
Sweeney/Link offered Resolution No 5642, A Resolution In Support Of The City of Shakopee's
Participation In The Minnesota Water Recreation Cooperative Acquisition And Development Grant
Program For The Design And Construction Of The Huber Park-Minnesota River Boat Launch, and
moved its adoption. Motion carried unanimously.
Link/Lehman offered Resolution No. 5643, A Resolution In Support Of The City Of Shakopee's
Participation In The Minnesota Local Trail Connections Grant Program For the Design And
Construction Of The Dean Lake Trail Connection Project, and moved its adoption. Motion carried
unanimously.
Official Proceedings of the
Shakopee City Council
January 2, 2002
Page —4-
Joos/Link offered Resolution No. 5644, A Resolution In Support Of The City of Shakopee's
Participation In The Minnesota Outdoor Recreation Grant Program For The Development Of The
Huber Park Performance Area, and moved its adoption.
Cncl. Sweeney felt if this grant were received then the City would be forced into big time expenditures
to continue on the construction of Huber Park. It was noted that there is some money committed to the
Huber Park construction and Shakopee Public Utilities has committed to undergrounding some utilities
in the area. The construction of Huber Park would be a partnership that would involve many entities.
Motion carried 4 -1 with Cncl. Sweeney voting in the negative.
Link/Sweeney offered Resolution No. 5641, A Resolution Of The City Of Shakopee, Minnesota,
Approving The Final Plat of Juergen's Construction Addition, and moved its adoption. (Motion carried
under the Consent Agenda).
Link/Sweeney offered Resolution No. 5645, A Resolution Of The City Of Shakopee, Minnesota,
Approving The Final Plat of Providence Pointe 2nd Addition, and moved its adoption. (Motion carried
under the Consent Agenda).
Link/Sweeney moved to authorize the appropriate City officials to enter into an agreement between the
City of Shakopee and Canterbury Park Holding Corporation regarding the future dedication of right -of-
way in connection with a minor Subdivision for James J. Hauer. (Motion carried under the Consent
Agenda).
Link/Sweeney moved to accept the two automatic external defibrillators donated to the City by the St.
Francis Health Care Foundation in partnership with the Minneapolis Heart Institute. (Motion carried
under the Consent Agenda)_
Link/Sweeney moved to declare that Peter Vickerman, Planner I -GIS has successfully completed the
six -month probationary period, and appointed him to regular, full-time employment with the City of
Shakopee. (Motion carried under the Consent Agenda).
Link/Sweeney moved to adopt the modified revised pay schedule as reflected in Appendix A for the
Public Works Maintenance Workers, Mechanic, and Leadworkers for the year 2002 for inclusion into
the contact between the City and Teamsters Local 320 (Public Works), reflecting 3.5% as a market
adjustment for the Public Works union employees. (Motion carried under the Consent Agenda).
Link/Sweeney moved to designate the Shakopee Valley News as the official newspaper for the City of
Shakopee for the year 2002. (Motion carried under the Consent Agenda).
Link/Sweeney offered Resolution No. 5629, A Resolution Of The City Of Shakopee, Minnesota,
Approving Premises Permit for American Legion Post No. 2, and moved its adoption. (Motion carried
under the Consent Agenda).
Official Proceedings of the
Shakopee City Council
January 2, 2002
Page —5-
Link/Sweeney moved to authorize staff to retain the firm of Hoff, Barry, and Kuderer to handle the
assessment appeal of Cletus J. Link. (Motion carried under the Consent Agenda with Cncl. Link
abstaining.)
Mr. McNeill summarized the liaison appointments for the year 2002 of the City Council members as
recommended by Mayor Mars. The recommendation were: Cncl. Link to be the acting Mayor and a
liaison to the Murphy's Landing Board of Directors; Cncl. Sweeney to be a liaison to the Shakopee
Public Utilities Commission and a liaison to the Scott County Board of Commissioners; Cncl. Joos to
be a liaison to the I.S.D. 720 School Board, liaison to the Shakopee Convention and Visitors Bureau
and liaison to the Shakopee Chamber of Commerce Board of Directors; Cncl. Lehman to be liaison to
Vision Shakopee and liaison to the Shakopee Parks and Recreation Advisory Board; and Mayor Mars
was to be a delegate for the Association of Metropolitan Municipalities. City Administrator, Mark
McNeill, to be the alternate to the Association of Metropolitan Municipalities and primary delegate to
the Suburban Rate Authority. The alternate to the Suburban Rate Authority was to be Economic
Development Coordinator, Paul Snook. At this time, no Council member was being recommended to
be appointed as liaison to the Shakopee Cable Access Corporation. Cncl. Link was recommended to be
the acting Mayor and a liaison to the Murphy's Landing Board of Directors.
Sweeney/Lehman moved to endorse Mayor Mar's appointments for liaison positions as follows for the
year 2002. Cncl. Sweeney was appointed to be a liaison to the Shakopee Public Utilities Commission
and a liaison to the Scott County Board of Commissioners; Cncl. Joos was appointed to be a liaison to
the I_S.D. 720 School Board, liaison to the Shakopee Convention and Visitors Bureau and liaison to the
Shakopee Chamber of Commerce Board of Directors; Cncl. Lehman was appointed to be liaison to
Vision Shakopee and liaison to the Shakopee Parks and Recreation Advisory Board; and Mayor Mars
was appointed to be a delegate for the Association of Metropolitan Municipalities_ City Administrator,
Mark McNeill, was appointed to be the alternate to the Association of Metropolitan Municipalities and
primary delegate to the Suburban Rate Authority. The alternate to the Suburban Rate Authority was to
be Economic Development Coordinator, Paul Snook. Motion carried unanimously.
Mr. McNeill reported on the City Council meeting procedures that were used by previous Councils. He
outlined the procedures as to what would be included in the agenda and how the Council meeting
would be conducted.
Sweeney/Link moved to endorse the policies and procedures as set forth by Mayor Mars for the
operation of City Council meetings. (CC Document No. 314) Motion carried unanimously.
Mr. Mc Neill felt it would benefit the Council to have some special meetings for 1) tour of the City
Facilities, 2) Library/Police design discussion with the architects, 3) Department/Division presentations,
4) Council goal setting discussion and 5) Township meetings.
Council concurred that a meeting date for a tour of City buildings would be helpful and it was decided
to hold this meeting on Saturday, January 12th.
Official Proceedings of the January 2, 2002
Shakopee City Council Page —6-
Mr. McNeill stated that the architects for the Library/Police Station would like to meet with the City
Council and get some response from the Council. Mr. McNeill also noted that the consultants hired to
help with the long-range planning for the downtown and the west side the City requested about one-
half hour with the City Council. It was recommended that a workshop, for the Library/Police Station
and meeting with the consultants for the long range planning, be held Tuesday, January 8, 2002. It was
decided to have this work session Tuesday, January 8, 2002 at 4:30 p.m.
There was discussion on the desire to have meetings regarding the annexation of the townships.
It was decided to have the department/ division presentations and a limited Township meeting with
Jackson and Louisville Township on January 29, 2002 at 4:30 p.m. The issues to be discussed with the
Townships would be: Fire Protection budget items and the Park and Recreation possibilities.
Mayor Mars stated he would revisit the goal setting issue at a future date.
Cncl. Sweeney reported that the Shakopee Public Utilities Commission would like to have a meeting
with the City Council as soon as possible. The City Council decided it had been a long time since there
was a joint meeting with the Shakopee Public Utilities Commission and the City of Shakopee. Cncl.
Sweeney will ask the Shakopee Utilities Commission if February was soon enough to have this joint
meeting.
Link/Sweeney offered Resolution No. 5646, A Resolution Designating Marquette Bank as a Depository
for City Funds, and moved its adoption. (Motion carried under the Consent Agenda).
Sweeney/Lehman moved to adjourn to Tuesday, January 8, 2002 at 4:30 p.m. Motion carried
unanimously. The meeting adjourned at 8:38 p.m.
Judith S. Cox
City Clerk
Carole Hedlund
Recording Secretary
OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS OF THE MY COUNCIL
J. REGULAR SESSION SHAKOPEE, ME'qNESOTA JANUARY 8,2002
Mr. Brixius approached the podium and stated that Northwest Associated Consultants had many
meetings with the City Council, Boards and Commissions and they still intend to conduct more
meetings. Their firm worked with City personnel and with public input to devise the best possible
Comprehensive Plan update. The firm wanted all the issues discussed; then they could formalize a
plan of action that was reasonable, taking the scope of the focus and issues into great consideration.
Northwest Associated Consultants intended to hold a community wide workshop. There were four
areas that Northwest Associated Consultants were looking at in their study. These areas were: 1) the
west end of town and the C.R. 69/Hwy 169 area, 2) the downtown area, 3) the first avenue corridor,
and 4) the Marschall/Hwy 169 area. Mr. Brixius stated on the west end of town, from 3 Avenue to
the old shopping mall, the mix of retailers had shifted. He felt now a neighborhood approach was
being taken with the mix of business uses that were in the old shopping mall. Mr. Brixius stated that
the future of C.R. 69 and State Hwy 169 was of critical importance in the success of the west end of
the City of Shakopee. This area did hold some strengths. Such as: the close proximity to the County
Courthouse and the good mix of support businesses. It was also very important that MnDOT make a
decision on what they were going to do with C.R. 69 and access to State Hwy. 169 so businesses
could make their decisions. This decision from MnDOT was critical to the land use development for
this area. As far as the downtown area study was concerned, Mr. Brixius stated downtown Shakopee
was a focal point of the community and he was very excited about the possible development of Huber
Park. Mr. Brixius liked the intermixing land use of residential and business along with the business
mix in the downtown area. The First Avenue Corridor area in the study also had an intermixing of
business and residential, He felt this area had some good possible redevelopment options. The final
area of the study, Marschall Road and State Hwy 169 appeared to have developed later than the three
previous discussed areas. This fourth area did have identifiable street and pedestrian connections.
There was great opportunity for redevelopment in this area.
Official Proceedings of the January 8, 2002
Shakopee City Council Page 2-
Mr. McNeill introduced the BKV Group that was hired by the City to design the new Library and
Police Station/City Hall buildings. Actually the design of the new Library was about one phase ahead
of the Police Station/City Hall building. Initially, just the Police Station will be constructed but there
will be a new City Hall, several years down the road, that will/can be added to the new Police Station
building.
Mr. Jeff Kelley, and John Sponsel, from the BKV Group, gave a presentation on the new Library
project. Mr. Kelley stated that this project for a new Library is viable and he now needs final
approval so the project can go out for bids. Now is the time of the year to get the most favorable
bids. The design of the new library along with cost estimates was presented tonight. Mr. Kelley
stated that the concept of what the new library would house was determined early on in the design
process. It was noted that there were many meetings with City staff and the Library committee on the
features needed/required and the design of the new Library. The new Library was to be a two -story
building with stairs and elevator. It was at the recommendation of the Library Committee that the
portico that Council Link wanted for customer convenience was deleted. The Library Committee
recommended this portico be deleted because of safety reasons. The first floor would be used mainly
for quick access, young children and also young adults. The second floor would have bridges across
the lobby area and there would also be an information desk on the second floor along with work areas
and of course the books. The portico was done away with but a nice canopy, in the drop -off areas,
was left in the design to protect customers as much as possible from the elements.
Cncl. Sweeney noted that the previous Council had asked Mr. Link to oversee the library project.
Cncl. Link was able to save the City thousands of dollars on a previous project and it was hoped that
there will be a cost savings realized on this project also. The BKV Group had a list of eight
alternative deductions to lower the cost of the library right now. Right now, what revenues that the
City will have to use on the library project are uncertain. The cost of the library is $92,000 over the
budgeted amount. The eight alternative deductions have a price tag of $217,000 if all of the eight
deducts were made. There is room with the deducts presented to bring the cost of the new Library
within budget. Another possible deduct suggested by the City Council was to look at a different
facade for the Library building. It was also suggested that Scott County could possibly get the
demolition of the current library done cheaper than proposed by demolition firms. This demolition
cost was not included in the cost of the Library.
David R. Kross, Principal with the BKV Group, in charge of the Police Station/City Hall design passed
out schematic design material for the Council to look over. Mr. Kross stated that there had been
several meetings for the design of the new Library and Police Station/City Hall. Mr. Kross stated that
when he was informed that a new City Hall would be added to the Polices Station site, he had to take a
step back and rethink the design. The City Hall being attached to the Police Station added a far
greater impact on the building image, site plan and floor plan. The configuration of the two buildings
would be an ell shaped building. There would be some secured parking for the Police facility along
with a secured garage and some general parking. The site works well now with the additional acre
that the City purchased. The City Hall section of the building would be two levels with the Council
Chambers anchoring the two building. The Police Station was designed with functionality in mind.
Official Proceedings of the January 8, 2002
Shakopee City Council Page —3-
Because the county jail is going to be so close, the Police Department was talked with to see if they
really still wanted two jail cells. It was felt by the Council that perhaps these jail cells were a
duplication that could be avoided. The Police department stated they did in fact want the two cells;
the County charges for the use of their cells. Dan Hughes, Chief of Police, was asked if he was
content with the size of the new Police Station. Chief Hughes stated he was happy with the plan as it
is now. This plan allowed for some expansion area for the future. The Council thought the fagade of
this building did not need to be fancy. They wanted to see some figures on stressed concrete panel
possibilities used for the construction along with pre -cast and brick alternatives. Cncl. Link stated the
Council needed to be careful on the exterior of the Police Station because City Hall would be
attached to it.
Chief Hughes stated that he wanted the Police Department to be user friendly. He wanted the Police
Department and the community to interact with each other. The Police Department did state earlier
that they would forego a nice exterior for a better inside.
Gary Morke, 1042 Merrifield, approached the podium and stated that he liked the idea of saving on
the exterior of the building. Mr. Morke did feel the number one duty of the City is to provide public
safety to the community.
Mr. McNeill noted that there was a memo on the table stating what monies were available from
different funds within the City and also what these funds could be used for.
The Council needed to focus on finding $1 million dollars for the Police Station. Cncl. Sweeney
stated he was not comfortable putting the Police Station out for referendum.
David Kross stated that he thought it was possible to have deduct options available to the Council for
the Police Station and also figures on the exterior being in different materials by the next City Council
meeting, January 15, 2002.
It was decided to table the issue of the Police Station and new Library until a list of the deducts was
available from BKV, so the Council could see how /where some money could be saved on this project.
Gregg Voxland, Finance Director, approached the podium and stated that he was not sure what the
State of Minnesota was going to do regarding public financing.
Cncl. Sweeney gave a short liaison report regarding the sites preferred for wells and pump houses.
Sweeney/Lehman moved to adjourn the meeting to Tuesday, January 15, 2002 at 7:00 p.m. Motion
carried unanimously. The meeting adjourned at 7:11 p.m.
'&
d th S. Cox, City Jerk
ole Hedlund, Recording Secretary
OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS OF THE MY COUNCIL
J. REGULAR SESSION SHAKOPEE, M1NNESOTA JANUARY 29, 2002
Mayor Mars called the meeting to order at 4:30 p.m. with Council Members Link, Lehman, Sweeney,
Joos present. Also present: Mark McNeill, City Administrator; Gregg Voxland, Finance Director;
Judith S. Cox, City Clerk; Bruce Loney, Public Works Director /City Engineer; R. Michael Leek,
Community Development Director;Tracy Coenen, Management Assistant; Dan Hughes, Chief of
Police; Mark Themig, Facilities and Recreation Director, Mark McQuillan, Natural Resources
Director and Terry Stang, Fire Chief.
Link/Sweeney moved to approve the Agenda as written. Motion carried unanimously.
Mark McNeill, City Administrator, asked for clarification on the hiring freeze that the Council
approved at the January 15, 2002 Council meeting. The Council asked for a hiring freeze until it was
better known what the State of Minnesota was going to do about state aids at the state level. A
meeting was held with some department heads and there were questions regarding the hiring freeze.
Mr. McNeill stated that even if the additional positions planned for in the 2002 Budget were not
filled, there would be a cost savings of approximately $430,000, this figure is lower than the now
projected shortfall from state aids. Some of the questions that were raised regarding the hiring freeze
are: 1) Does this hiring freeze pertain to part-time seasonal employees, 2) Should eligibility lists be
created for the Police Department and Fire Department as they have vacancies now, 3) Should the
vacated positions for Community Service Officers be filled.
Mark McNeill stated if part-time employees of the Community Center were impacted by the hiring
freeze, this would impact the revenues received from the Community Center and some of their
programs would not be able to proceed because of a lack of staff. Cncl. Sweeney felt these positions
were revenue neutral programs because of the fees that were charged and the hiring freeze should not
pertain to seasonal part-time employees for the Park and Recreation Department but it should pertain
to the Public Works Department part-time employees because those are not revenue neutral positions.
There was consensus on the Council that vacancies in the Fire Department and the Police
Department, including the vacant CSO positions, should be filled. An eligibility list for hire should be
created for each department. The goal of creating this new eligibility list was to prepare for the
future. Cncl. Sweeney felt the City of Shakopee was best served by hiring bodies to fill the vacancies.
The vacancies would be replaced but there would be a hold on new hires.
Cncl. Sweeney stated that if Police positions were filled the City of Shakopee would not have to buy
back as much time from the Police Department (for unused holidays). Chief Hughes noted there are
discussions at this time going on between the Police Department, Valley Fair and Canterbury Park
regarding pay for Police Department contract time with these entities.
Joos /Sweeney moved to accept the resignation of Police Officer Luis Diaz -Calle from the Shakopee
Police Department.
Official Proceedings of the January 29, 2002
Shakopee City Council Page 2-
Sweeney/ moved to amend the motion to include the words "with regret ". Motion carried
unanimously.
Motion carried unanimously on main motion as amended.
Joos/Link moved to authorize the hiring of Asher Wiedemann as a probationary police officer at a
monthly rate of $3,135.33, subject to the satisfactory completion of pre-employment medical and
psychological examinations from the three listed candidates.
Chief Hughes explained the hiring process for the Police Department
Motion carried unanimously.
Bruce Loney, Public Works Director /City Engineer, approached the podium and gave the Council an
update on the projects that are under design, in the feasibility report preparation stage and potential
City projects for the upcoming 2002 construction season. Bruce Loney had an organizational chart
that listed the jobs of each department. Mr. Loney discussed the structure of the departments along
with the project orientations for 2002. There were various activities for: the street & alley group, the
shop area, the mechanical shop, the park maintenance, miscellaneous activities and special projects.
The Engineering Department was broken down into three categories. These were; 1) public projects,
2) private projects and 3) miscellaneous projects (including transportation, storm drainage
management, right -of- -way permit management and coordination between inter- governmental
agencies). Mr. Loney reviewed some of the public and private projects for the 2002 construction
season that are being planned by the Engineering Department. Mr_ Loney stated that after looking at
the projects he feels there are really two kinds of projects. There are reconstruction projects and new
projects. The City of Shakopee does received money from the state through the gas tax; the City of
Shakopee receives approximately $600,000 per year. This money goes into the CIP Fund and 25% of
the money is to be used on maintenance. Mr. Loney stated that the C.R. 83 /C.R. 16 project, Sarazin
Street and Valley View Road improvements, the pedestrian bridges and Vierling Drive projects are all
state aid candidates. Mr. Loney felt this was a year to do projects that are not assessment heavy. Mr.
Loney explained what a 429 project was. He stated that existing developments and those
developments coming on line need to be supported.
Cncl. Sweeney discussed a referendum versus a reverse referendum. Cncl. Sweeny is of the opinion
that there is a structural imbalance in the state budget. He felt it was prudent to find projects that
would not affect the tax levy. Cncl. Sweeney stated the cost of money is cheap today and because the
City is growing the City has needs.
Mr. Loney wanted direction on the projects the Council wanted done in 2002. He was sensing that
the Vierling Drive extension was a high priority, as well as Sarazin Street/Valley View Road project.
Mr. Loney will bring back to the Council at a future date a list of projects that he would propose the
Engineering Department do in 2002.
Official Proceedings of the January 29, 2002
Shakopee City Council Page —3-
The presentation of the Police Department Orientation/issues was deferred until later in the meeting
so the discussions with Jackson and Louisville Townships could take place.
A recess was taken at 5:37 p.m.
Mayor Mars reconvened the meeting at 5:39 p.m.
There was discussion with the Louisville Township Supervisors and the Jackson Township
Supervisors.
Present for the discussions from the Townships were: from Jackson Township: Rose Menke, Clerk,
and Gerald Mareck, Supervisor; from Louisville Township: Tim Theis, Clerk, John Weckman, Chair;
Marion Schmidt, Supervisor and Susan Morevec, Supervisor.
Mr. McNeill explained that the purpose of the discussion with Jackson and Louisville Townships was
to discuss fire department and recreation issues along with giving a Natural Resources inventory
update and discussion on long range planning for joint facilities. Louisville Township had some
questions that they would like answered and a joint meeting between the Townships and the City had
not taken place for quite sometime.
Gregg Voxland, Finance Director, went through financial considerations pertaining to the firefighters
pension. Mr. Voxland stated there was an increase in the Fire Pension fund and he explained this
fund. The increase was due to an increase in the benefit level. The City Council agreed to this
increase. Cncl. Sweeney said it was a wise idea to have a good benefit plan for the firefighters
because a good benefit plan would entice additional volunteer firefighters; a volunteer fire department
saves the City of Shakopee a huge amount of money. The Fire Department budget was increased by
about $250,000 and about 1/3 of this amount was due to the increase in the firefighters pension.
The status of the new fire station was discussed. There will be two fire station satellites and they
should go to referendum in 2004. There is to be one located in Lions Park that will replace the old
fire station that is located downtown and that the township's would participate in its depreciation. It
was thought that this satellite would serve the townships well. The other satellite does not have a
proposed location at this time but it would be located out by the Southbridge development.
The length of the billing process was discussed as well as the City of Shakopee fire call fee. The
townships of Jackson and Louisville pay their service call fees in different ways. The City of
Shakopee pays it's service call fee in one lump sum like Jackson Township does. Louisville pays per
service call.
Louisville Township discussed purchasing land now for a future fire station. It was noted that the
specifics of this discussion needed to be held with the Fire Chiet; Terry Stang. This additional fire
station would be constructed way out in the future.
Official Proceedings of the January 29, 2002
Shakopee City Council Page —4-
Mark Themig, Facilities and Recreation Director, approached the podium and addressed the
recreation services that the townships receive from the City. The recreation finances were a
complicated issue. Mr. Themig stated there had been a long - standing agreement between the
Townships and the City regarding the recreation services. This agreement had expired in 1999. Mr.
Themig pulled the records on the use of the Community Center and recreation programs by the
townships. He provided a quick analysis of the fees charged. He stated that the non - resident fee was
looked at this year and some changes had been made in the use of the Community Center facilities.
Mr. Mareck, Supervisor for Jackson Township stated that the Community Center policy worked well
for Jackson Township and he would support streamlining the administrative costs. He agreed the fees
charged for programs needed to be updated. Mr. Mareck will bring the idea of streamlining the
administrative costs back to the Jackson Town Board and see if a process could be figured out.
Mark McQuillan approached the podium to update the Townships on the Natural Resources
Inventory. The Natural Resources inventory started out being a tree inventory to help the City with a
tree ordinance and since the inception the Natural Resources inventory has been expanded. Grants
have been received to help with this inventory. As of now the Natural Resources inventory is about
at the half waypoint. It is anticipated that this inventory will be completed in late June or early July.
This Natural Resources inventory is expected to help the City in planning for the land use within the
City, help develop policies in terms of land use and for long range planning within Scott County.
Trails within the City of Shakopee and Jackson Township were discussed.
A recess was taken at 6:30 p.m.
Mayor Mars re- convened the meeting at 6:40 p.m.
Dan Hughes, Chief of Police approached the podium and discussed the orientation of the
Police Department along with some issues. Dan Hughes explained Community Policing. This is a
philosophy of full service, personalized, proactive policing by having police officers have the same
beat and work in partnership with the citizens of that beat. All the police beats (4) at this time are
aligned in geographic areas. The Police Department has two divisions. There is an operational
division and a support services divisions.
Police Chief, Dan Hughes went over the calls for service showing the growth within the City. He
noted that City of Shakopee is a very busy place compared to the City of Savage. The City of
Shakopee uses the Scott County jail more than any other City within Scott County. The success of
the Shakopee Police Department is relatively high. Pretty consistently the Police Department has
been above the metropolitan average in clearing crimes.
Chief Hughes stated that the goals of the Police Department are to protect the rights in the
constitution which are the rights of everyone, help support citizens and provide the service that is
needed by the citizens.
Official Proceedings of the
Shakopee City Council
January 29, 2002
Page —5-
Chief Hughes stated the Police Department deals with life and death situations. Safety, honor and
integrity are very important to the Police Department.
Experience is very important in police work. Right now most of the police officers have less than
three years of experience. However, these officers are very talented. The linguistics of a new police
officer is now being looked at because of the diversity within the City. Police Chief Hughes stated
there are some good partnerships going on within the City right now.
Sweeney/Link moved to adjourn the meeting to Tuesday, February 5, 2002 at 7:00 p.m. Motion
carried unanimously. The meeting adjourned at 7:15 p.m.
Judith S. Cox
City Clerk
Carole Hedlund
Recording Secretary
UMPI •r���
TO: Mayor and Council
Mark McNeill, City Administrator
FROM: Gregg Voxland, Finance director
RE: City Bill List
DATE: February 14, 2002
'- cc NSA iJ
Introduction and Background
Attached is a print out showing the division budget status for
2001 based on data entered as of 02/14/2002. Also attached is a
print out showing the division budget status for 2002 based on
data entered as of 02/14/2002.
Attached is a regular council bill list for invoices processed
to date for council approval.
Also included in the checklist are various refunds, returns,
pass through, etc. totaling $118,149.37. The actual net expense
amount is $392,879.45.
Action Requested
Move to approve the bills in the amount of $511,028.82.
N r
M
n
O
N
O m
V m
0
N L1
c
L
R
c
Q
c
N
CD
O a
U) o
0 U
O D
n
O
p
LL =
CD m
o x
of W
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 o O o O o 0 0 0 o O O o
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
n o m m O n M W W n n W o
M W cc LD W C' Ln N N N O O
M n
m N N co ccoo v) R R co M CJ C7 m
Lo N (o M Ln N V' n m n m co
N
I n �
M C
Q
M I M cn
ti W co
x
O co
co W
M M
N m m
U
C N N
(0
t9
m
I
Ci Ci
CO M
n n
N
p c m co
1
} m�
m�
I
I m m
� n
L n N
C _ LO tn
� O ' I
C U'
O Q
U
o
m
m
r-.
m
m
W
m
cD
c
co
co
W
m
m Lo
c
n
N
co
m!
N n
Co
m
4
n
N
r
N
7
co
co
n
N
> o
Q
M
7
M
7
W
N
W
cD
m
r
r
Ln
W
M
C
N
M
R
V'
to
N
O
n
w
[f
m
m
M
N
n
m
W
m
o
n
m
o
m
m
n
m
m
m
m
ci c
r
r
W
W
Q
O
M
m
O
W
O
m
N
V
m
m
cD
n
cq
W
u!
(�:
O
O
N
R
m
7
N
M
N
N
W
N
LD
n
M
O
M
(C
W
V'
O
m
Lo
O
r
d
Lf)
m
cci
M
W
n
r�i
O
C
m
7
M
O
r
n
N
d'
Ln
m
<f
m
Lq
•R
M
M
V
C
N
O
O
o
m
N
to
O
m
M
O
Lo
N
O
m
m
CO
W
O
M
M
W
V
M
O
m
co
W
O
C
n
Co
n
n
M
n
Co
La
Co
N
M
m
W
M
M
Ln
m
O
V
>`
ca
co
W
Ln
to
(D
n
M
C
O
n
N
co
O
M
N
n
m
n
O
n
W
m
M
N
n
(D
U9
V
Ln
W
cc
CD
m
caLU
C)
cp
to
m
I--
m
N
Lo
r
n
lA
V
tl]
M
n
EO
(o
W
W!L
U
}
Q
r
l0
M
M
N
N
n
W
W
W
r
c0
r
O
1 m
@
m
Q o
2 r r
(r) ° M
n
�
0
O
} m
N
co
N
n
M
M
m
Lo
M
N
V
N
L
W
M
<Y
!
W
M
(O
W
W
W
t
r
O
n
N
O
U a
M
M
V
O
n
m
I-
M
n
m
a'
W
C
m
to
'cl'
M
=
W
m
cD
to
CA
W
N
to
R
<Y
W
N
to
M
c
O
n
n
W
W
m
m
m
N
a)
d
C
M
V
LO
O
m
O
m
co
W
Cl)
N
N
M
7
N
m
x
O
m
N
n
r
W
M
V
N
to
co
O
N
n
O
W
2 E
M
c
L
R
c
Q
c
N
CD
O a
U) o
0 U
O D
n
O
p
LL =
CD m
o x
of W
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 o O o O o 0 0 0 o O O o
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
n o m m O n M W W n n W o
M W cc LD W C' Ln N N N O O
M n
m N N co ccoo v) R R co M CJ C7 m
Lo N (o M Ln N V' n m n m co
N
I n �
M C
Q
M I M cn
ti W co
x
O co
co W
M M
N m m
U
C N N
(0
t9
m
I
Ci Ci
CO M
n n
N
p c m co
1
} m�
m�
I
I m m
� n
L n N
C _ LO tn
� O ' I
C U'
O Q
U
o
i
0
S
co
co
co
co
W
M
M
r
Fa
N
W
N
co
m!
CO
t7
Z
� U
J �
2
LZLL m
0 Lu F U
O Z p Z W
p -L O W Z W ( b Z Z 0
Z U J > c O W Z
L a p> m U` Z w p LL
J O Z} O a Z Z Q F J
Q U?� p r (7 W O K Z Q LU
LU z ¢} Y U U Q g W W Z LLI W O Z
U O I- F Z C7 2 Z :3 w (LLn C7 0, O Q 0
O U U L.L. J OU 0 d LL? w 0 w d n Oo
C) _ o
O { .M-- cT in-• W N co N V O
r0 r M co M V N -IT C d m r0
c a
c �
Q m
z
Z
W
EL
O
J
W
u
p
H � H
Z
O
CD U Cv
r
O O
C7 A
M M
> o
Q
M M
M M
0 0
x p
W
0 0
V V
cD n
cD co
U O O
C C
cc
m
N
p C
m
CD
7
0)
CD
V
N
C
co
co
V
N
r a
M W
O O
L LD I Lo
C W co
O M M
3
C U
d Q
7
U
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 C
V IT
M M
N N N
7 m
C a
c
Q o
m
p qLL o
LL O LL
O d It O
z
O
= ¢ �
� U Of ui
z
o LU O
L O D
O n O
LO r
0
N
O �
U m
W
N a
a 0
F m
CO
m
aq
M
O
r
N
O
M
r V
O
m
O
M
r
o 3
LL
Ci
Ln
n
o
r-
m
m
m Lri
c
r.-
to
0
v
Z
A
m
m
m
w
m
m
m
m
m m
m
w
m
p-
m
� o
U n CO
J
F
¢
LL CD
F
j
S
O N
N
N
N
r
O
M
Co
'cf
r
M (o
N
r
N
r-:
m
LO
f`
M
�-
O
V
N
M
r
M
N
O
r
c0 V
LO
N
r
C'
M
N
Lo
LO 7 r
X c
Ir
O
co
0-
OJ
Z
d
Q
c
L
a-
cl
Ln
o
w
m
V
N
o
M
0
V
m
O
LO m
LO o C
C
CL
C
C1
M
N
LD
r
CJ
V
(D
M Cl)
M
L1J
O
o
tb
r
0
M
M
CO m
N
N
M
N
N
(o
cq
w
t0
N
N
M
r ti
O
m
F
N
L[)
o
z
¢
7
C)
m
m
Lm
m
o
�
U
O
m
R
O
n
co
O
�{
",
N
LD
N
N
O
O
cc
Lb
O
M
C
N
�
M
Cl m
M V
L
LI)
m
Cl
Cl
M
m
O
CO
r
O
m
O
M
r
f�
m
V
V
o
m
m cO
M
Lo
N
r-
0
0 0
U
C
n
N
LO
M
m
to
w
co
M
r.-
m
M
m
O
O
[(' N
Ln O
m
CD
c0
CD
t�
N
M
O
T
O
f0
O
LO
�
O
N
O
r
to
V'
M
N f N `
oc N
O Ni
N
r
O
co
m LO
V
co
O
m
LO co
M co
@ N
m
m
LO
N r-
M CD
N
'•')'
LO
co
tp
m
N"c0
o
LO
LO to
Uo M
CD
r
P-
LO
O
O
N
M
m
r--
n
N
M
m
m
CO
r-
h
r
7
N
m
M
"
N:
CO
(Ii N
M
O
LD
l
O
N
O
to
CO
LO
c0
a'
M
O Lo
c
m
'ZI
N
T
C
LO
m
co
Cl
M
LO
T
m
N
O
m
Co
M
Co
LO
r
lO M
cci N
LO
N
t0
CD
LO
M
C0
C
ti
N
O
L1
a)
M
r
tO
C
O
m
N
to O
O
N
m
O
LLI
LLj E
C
r
M
r
r
LO
N
r
CO
�-
M M
LO
N
N
co
co
a 0
F m
.N
O
>
d
U
_
C,
N
N
o CL
O
Lb
O U
Y m
O
O c
o 3
LL
LO o
LO x
K W
y
m
Z
¢ N
U n CO
J
F
LL CD
F
j
S
O N
F
Z
p]
N
m
m
LO M
N
LO
f`
M
V
O
M m r
Z
CD
r-: 7
m
N
CD
N
O
O
LO 7 r
Ir
O
co
0-
OJ
Z
d
Q
c
L
a-
cl
Ln
o
N
m
V
N
o
M
0
V
m
O
LO m
LO o C
C
CL
C
C1
M
N
LD
r
CJ
V
(D
M Cl)
7 n r
W
O
F
0
U
N
L S
to
U
CO
(7
z
w
U
w
It
n
¢ O
C
m
D
F
U
W
z
¢
7
~
O
U
<~
Z x
O
J U
O
D
n
o
O
o O
O
o
0
0
0
o O
0 O
O
o
O
o 0
o
O
o
0
0
0 0
0 0
0
0
0 0
0
0
0
0
0
o 0
0 0
cc
(D
T
O r
O V
O
LO
�
O
N
O
r
to
V'
M
N f N `
oc N
O Ni
w
Cn
O
co
m LO
V
co
LO
Co
LO co
M co
@ N
m
m
LO
N r-
M CD
N
'•')'
LO
co
tp
m
N"c0
o
LO
LO to
Uo M
CD
r
M
M
7
C
d'
m
N
0 0
C �
¢ 0o
c
.N
O
>
d
U
_
C,
N
N
o CL
O
Lb
(� U
O
O c
o 3
LL
LO o
LO x
K W
O
M
O
r
0
0
0
v
CD
O
W W
mm
c o
N N
Lo O
x ,
w
I
cD c
LoI L"
M M
U
O LO LO
N
R
UI1 I
N
U
r co
m
J
J
J
M M
N N
M co
O � O
CD
O � O
cD Im
L LO M
E _ N N
C UI
U
0 o
O o
0 0
cc O
c 6 cli O
N N O I O
7 O)
C 'O
C 3
¢ 0]
N N
Lri Lri
m m
cb W
R V
X
W
co cq
m m
m to
d
U
C � �
t0
R
m
to to
d O O
U r• r
r m
L
O _
� N
C Q
m
7
U
M
co
0 0
`
co
co
0
r
o ° o
(0 t
to o
O CD
00 co
N C 7 V
7 m
C 'O
c 7
¢ m
c
O
.
D
U
2
Z O LL
LL O Z O
O
a a
LLI a �
Ir U w
w
Ln
o r o
to
Z
J
F
F
j
S
F
Z
p]
Z
Z
W
o
Ir
O
0-
OJ
Z
d
Q
CL �
v
a-
0 J
F
W
U`
Z
U
Z
Z
JO
W
;g?
W ,
F
Z
U
W
L S
to
U
CO
(7
z
w
U
w
It
n
¢ O
Z
D
F
U
W
z
¢
~
O
<~
Z x
O
J U
O
D
n
G
w
w
-1
Z
I z Z
O O
z
O
w
p�
z
w¢
z
o
p
W
CD
U
CU LL
J
U
c9
a
LL
?
w
Cn
to d
0
C) U o�
0
O
IR
O
N
cc,)
r
N
"43'" CO
0
� r
{ `
r
M
M
7
C
d'
m
N
0 0
N N
Lri Lri
m m
cb W
R V
X
W
co cq
m m
m to
d
U
C � �
t0
R
m
to to
d O O
U r• r
r m
L
O _
� N
C Q
m
7
U
M
co
0 0
`
co
co
0
r
o ° o
(0 t
to o
O CD
00 co
N C 7 V
7 m
C 'O
c 7
¢ m
c
O
.
D
U
2
Z O LL
LL O Z O
O
a a
LLI a �
Ir U w
w
Ln
o r o
U'j N
R
O
O
V
N d
T
C
(U
w '3.
W E
EL
O U
Y
= 0 o
d CO
0 N
O
U v
c
N
X
W
C
O
A
O
� a
� a
0
N
(� U
O
J
d
O �
LL
LL
m C
CL
x W
R e I OI O
Q
X e I OI O
W
W c6
<f `7
co O
cc co
cli O)
(D LD
C
l9
co
m
co oc)
O
Ct co
m Ci
U Ln Lo
O �
} aca
CR
O O
rn m
L � m
C LO U)
O _
ca
C V
C Q
7
U
m m
� m
c �
c �
Q m
H
2
W
2
H
� Q �
~ W ~
L o -
W
O U O
LL J LL
N IL N
N M O
O
Ln
f,
a
N ,
O m
C m
m
(v LL
W O
W m
LL m
m
Y of
= U
U) d
LL U
O -
U
r �
N
v
N
O
N
O
U= U LLJ U U U U z
O>- O O O O O (
r r
Y Y Y `.L Y Y Z
W
Z F = 2
F 1 !¢- Z I 1 p p p p p
LL 7 w p 7 p>> LL >> O D p p 0� p D p O p p O O p O p LL p p a O p Z) 0 p p p 0 0
U_� z= Z=_ w_= z Z z Z Z Z z z Z Z z Z z Z z z Z z Z Z= z Z Z Z
O W O p p p p Z n m m z D z n>> 7 n D n D 7 z D M D D 7 f.0 D LL D>> D
z O m O O O z O O LL O LL LL LL O LL 0 LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL O LL LL LL LL LL _ LL LL LL LL LL
N w¢ w w w w w m w m m w w m m w Q d m a m¢ m
m d F w w LL w = W W w = W = W W w W w W W W W = W W W W W p W H W W W W
p Z Z Z p Z U Z Z z U Z U Z Z z Z z z z z z U, Z Z z z Z J Z LL z Z z z
m w m m 0 to 0 m m W m fn C7 C7 C7 C7 C7 C7 C7 C7 C7 C7 C7 C7 C ) C7 C� C7 C� C7 C7 m C7 U C7 C� C7 C7
w
W
w w w W w w w w w W w w w w w w w w w w w w w w W w w w w w w r w w w w w w w w W
r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r m r r r r r r r r r
rn m w m cn m m m� m m m m m m m m m m m w m rn m rn m m m m fn m m m m m m m m m m
c r r c r r
U) m m m flat m m y m Cl) m m m m m U m m m m m m m m m m Cn Cl1 fn m m J m m f? fA fA m m m f?
J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J
m m m m m m m m m m m m m W Q m¢ Q m Q m a G Q Q m a
O Q Q Q a Q a Q Q a Q a a Q a a Q a Q Q Q a a¢ Q Q Q¢ a¢ a Q
r r r r r} Y r r> r r r r r r r r r r} r r r r U r r r r r r r r r
a s Q Q¢ a Q a a a a a Q Q a a Q a Q a Q a a Q a a a a a a Q W a Q a a Q a a a a
LL m a a a a LL a a m m m m a m a LL a m LL 0- a m m a a a LL LL m a a= m m m m m m LL m n.
fn fn m m m m rn m fn m m m w m m m rn m m m m m rn m m m m m m m w m m m m m m fn m m fn
p r r z r r r r z r r r r r z z z r r r r r r z z z z r r r r r z r r r r r z z r r
z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
v U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U
Qi a Q Q a a a Q Q� Q Q C'Q ¢ a Q Q Q Q a� Q Q Q a a Q a Q Q Q a Q� a Q Q Q a Q Q a
U)
w CO
O J Z
a of a Q
U
D U 0 p Z D 0
Q Q
O= ¢ Ij, U 2 p W
w J F- O 0 Y r
w o a LL n
a Q ) z r
CO a W Z O W U O U
> O LL 2 2:E z m m
U
Q
U
w
W
O w
F} LL
U co
W
a
a a
co m
W
U
?
Z
W
J
w
a
z
00
j
}
g
U H
? m
U) m
W d
O
O
ZO
W
r
W
F
Z
F-
U m
n
N O
Om
O
W d
O
R
CmtJ p
W
z w
W
p
Q
=
0-
m Z
Jo
Lli
w
Q >
> N
2
Q Q
Q
a a
U
Z Z z W
C/3 U J z
Z z Z W U Z r Q Z
O O= z m os 9 ;-
_ > fl) p w
Y
O U f" a K O w
Z Of EL
W `af a m 0 z
= ? Z J W Z Z W
Of
0 0 o Q w == Z m¢ g g -W
w
Q 2¢ U L m O w w w
= OO O o o w U ¢ U - J -J w
- Z = = w w U W W W W w
¢¢ a¢ Q¢ m m m m m m
U a
Z
U OU Z
Om W Y U
Q Q Z Z
Q Q Q n
U zz m
Y Q f J F
to m m m U
U
Z
Q
z
Z
w
U
r
O
z
U,
z
U
c0
N
O
n
n (A
O N
w
O
O
O
O
to
O
O
n
N O
O
O
O
O
R
m
N
c0 w
C
O CD
O 0)
O
O
N
`7
1f7
N
O M
O O
m O
n O
[h
O
N
(o
'.
O
O
{ O
O 0)
O
V:
O
f11%
r
ci
O
O
N
T C7
O
O
(t7
r
c7
V
CO
(0
n (7
O N
6 O
D)
N
O
D)
to
V
N
u') (0
(o
D1
u7
O
N
O
Lo
N
V 01
O
O o
to c0
M
(0
D]
n
(�
O
V
O
m "I
(o (0
'T
n
O
O
n
m
w c0
V O
O
w
n
(`7
n
c0
N
P')
(o
r
to
N
('7
r
W —
N
-
—
T"
n
n
n
Ln
N
(0 aJ �
N
cc
(")
CJ
co
n
v-
O
n
V
( J
O N
�-
O Q
6)
c7
V
7
N
N
O
O
N
N
O
O
J
W
of
m
O
Y
(�
co O
O
o
N
C7
M
V 129
C'J C7
c0 n
m M
CO
O')
m
(7
O
C
�"
C
N
V
M
V
V to
V' <
(0 n
V C
W
V
to
(o
to
tf)
LLJ
(o
to
(o to
tf)
(D
(D
t0
(0
(O
(O
(D (D (D
Lo
N N
C7
(+)
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N N N
= L
U
N N
n n
N
n
N
n
N
n
N
n
N N
n n
N N
n n
N
n
N
n
N
n
N
n
N
n
N
n
N N
n n
N
n n
n
n
n
n
n
n
>`
n
n
n n
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
n n n
O N
m
<D
C
O
N �
O m
C m
a a
`m
w 5
IL
O m
= U
Cn N
O U
U
G
7
U 0
0
O
01
0
n
N
z
m-
n "
`r
7
m
o 0
m
7
LL
O
O
tD
CO u1
0
n
o
7-
N
N
0
a
07
V
O
R
F-
O
�--
O
t
O
O (0
o
m
<
0
t
O
O
ti
0
O
W
IO
C u 0 7
0 V
0
0
v
m
W m
m
0
01
r
0
O
m
V
LU
0 0
o
O m
U-
LL
0
Z
V
m
n
O
V
Z
v
O O O
O LL O
O O O O O O O
O
>
O
_
O LL
?
LL
w
m
tf1
v? Z
LL Z
Z
Z
Z
D
O O
z z
O O LL O O O O z
z z z z z z z z z z
z >>>
Z
a
Z
nj
c
Z
Z
Z
d
- 7
z >
>
>>
O
N
z
•.• 7
7 7
7 7 Z Z
LL LL LL LL
z
LL O IL
p> 7
LL LL LL LL LL LL LL
LL
LL O
J
LL
LL
LL
C-4
F LL
Z
O LL
LL
LL
LL
7 J
J J
LL LL 1
J LL
OQQ J
1
J
LL 1
J J J J J J
J H J
J J J J J
QQ aa ¢¢ aa J J
Q J
J F
(�
J
J
J
LLI -
iQQ- J
JQQ
J
a J a
rn
2'
QJQ
LL ¢ W of
�.
LL w
LL W
K
w w w w w
w
w cG
o
w
w
w
z
w
w
w
w
w
LL'
w
w w
w w x� w
w
w w w w w w
z z z z
w� w
z U z
w w
z z z z z z z
z
a
z U
�
z
z
w
z
w�
a z
D
O w
0
U z
w w
z
w
z
w
z
w
G z
Z z
z z U O z
w w w 0 w
z
w
z z
w w w w w W
w w w
W
w w w w w w w
w
W
¢
U
w w
W
7
m
w
W
W
W
F
w W
m W
W
W
W
a w
W
W w
W W
W W w 0 W
W
W W W W W W
W W
W W W W W W W
v m
N
N
N
W '
w
r G
F F
F F F F F F I
F
F
F F
F
F
FW'
F
F F
F M
1w "
!-- F-
F Fw'
F
F F F- F F Fw
"
w w f/J fn fn to (n
(p
CA
m m
m
m
fq
Cn
fn
Cn (n
(n
}
}
}
F
ca CO
fA [A
m
m 0 m 0 f0
} }
fn !A
} }
j- } } } } } }
}
}
} }
}
}
(n
}
m
}
C/3
}
CA
} }
(!7 (n
!A
m
U)
} }
}
m
} } }
m m m Lo m
C!) m
CO U) rn C/) m (!1 U)
(A
Cl)
U) m
V1
m
NO m
m m
m �
w w w w w
w w
w w w w w w w
w
w
w w
w
w
w
w
w
W w
J
W¢
J
N J
J J
w w
J J
w
J
J J J J J
J J
J J J J J J J
J
J
J J
J
J
J
J
J
J
Q
>
a
W
m
m
Q¢
Q
a Q
¢¢
m a m a
¢ a
r
¢¢ Q Q Q a Q
r r r r r r r
a¢
r
r
a a¢¢
r r
r
r
Q¢
r
r
a¢
r }
a¢
r
a¢
r O
Q
C
¢¢
r r
r
¢
r r r r r
a a a Q a
r
a¢
a¢ Q a a a a
a
Q
LL
a Q
LL LL
Q¢
LL
LL
Q¢
LL
LL
LL
LL LL
LL tY
LL
LL
ala
Q a
LL LL
LL
LL LL LL LL LL
�- LL
LL LL LL LL LL LL LL
LL
m
co
n
m
F
z LL
LL LL
m
e
u1
F H
n
o m
F co
~
F
H
N
H
H h
F F
rn
F
y
F F
Fes- F
F
F H H F F
H F
F F F I F
F
FU-
W >>
0
0
j>>>>>>
01
O
O
N
F-
N
N
FN-
0 Z
Z Z
X X �(
D
�(
D 7 7 D 7 Q
R
X
Z) 7 Q
7 W 7 7 7
n
W
7
O
O
O
O
O
O O
O O
t0
0
0
6 Q 7 7 Q
F"
0
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 F
O O O O O O O
O
O
U
O O
U U
U
U
U
U
U
U U
U U
W
U
U
0
0 0
0 0
W
0
U U U U U W
U U W
U U U U U U U
U
U
U
U U
U
U
U
U
U
U U
U U
U
U
U
U
U U
W w U U
U U W
U
U U U U U U
U U U
U U U U U U U
Q
a
Q Q
Q
a
a
a¢
n
Q¢
a a
7
¢
Q
0 0
0 U
Q
m m
Co 7 Q a
Q
Q Q¢ Q Q
Q Q 7
0 0 0 Q¢¢¢
n
n
n
n n
n
n
n
Q Q
Q
z
U. n
U m
z
Q
Z
j
O
z
U
Z
W
U
U
Z
U
C O
K
W
W
j
>
?
F- W>
m
U O
0
U
U
Z
0
W
Z
.-
z 2
LL
w
LL
W U
CL
z F.
W
Z
>
N
m
z
U)
In
Z U O W?
0 W
O J U? J
O
F-
0
Z U`
z
N
W Z
F-
O
F
0 O
J Z Q
W
0 w w
p 7
Z m
w Z p
Q 0
O
W
W
1-
z
Q
w LL
Cn
U
Er,
¢ 7
w
n
O LL W LL
z F
0 p Z J U w
F
Z
F_
r
W
W
'
a w
7
Fa_-- O
W m Z
W Z= p Z O
X O O Z
O O 0 F V U=
x
OC F-
r
0
O J
Q Z
W ° J K a
Q Z U W Q y>
g
Z LL G.S.) ui 4 Q LL
F
W
F z
W
Y
Y?
W
z�
'�
¢
W
W
uj
o_
o W
GA
LL K W
z `U
o
U 2 W 7 j LL
w Z Q w Q
w
z z w 7: m a z
w¢
p w
z�
O
Q Z
U
-j p J
Z
�
a
J
v
c
Y w
U_ w
J LL
7 0 W Z Z
Z
0
o W J W o 9
0 7
W W W
Q W
W S 2
W 0 7 7 p F- �
S S S
Z,,
¢
y
Y Y Y Y
-J
> p
0 0
0 W LL u. !L
LL
LL LL LL
O
01
0
n
N
o
m-
n "
`r
7
m
o 0
m
O
O
tD
CO u1
0
n
o
7-
N
N
0
a
07
V
O
R
O
�--
O
t
O
O (0
o
m
<
0
t
O
O
ti
0
O
0
IO
C u 0 7
0 V
0
v
m
W m
m
-
01
r
CV
O
m
V
7
o
O m
O
01
V
m
n
O
V
N v
v
CD
N
W
O
troll
w
m
tf1
A
--
m
i�
c
O
m
n
L
1 O
O
n
nj
c
N
t0
N
-
d
m
N
O
O
N
V
n
A m
0
N
0
m
n
O
N
C-4
N
C-4
N
m
0
E ti
M
n r
r
N
>O ¢
.-
N
Q
N
O
O
N
N
O
J
W
w
m
co
n
m
rn
m
e
u1
to
n
o m
Y
p
o
rn
o
N
m
t 0
O
m
�
o
m o m
m
N
m
W
0
0
01
01
O
O
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N N
U Y O
Ln
O
n
N
m
n
a 0 0
n n n
n
n
n
m
C9
m
t0
m to
aim
n
n
N
N
N
N
N N
N
N
N
n n
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
n n
m
n
n
n
n
n n n
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
n n
n
n
n
U. n
q M
M
0
N �
O N
c m
R
N 11
W
W N
CL 'm
¢ U
O U
v
F 0
U 0
0
O
O
N
N
0
J
w
LO
Y
U
x
❑ ❑ ❑ O O
O ❑ ❑ O ❑ p ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ O ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑
Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z LL LL LL LL Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z
C ❑ LL LL LL L w LL LL LL LL LL LL z LL U- LL W Z LL LL U- LL= z LL LL Z z LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL
LL LL LL LL LL
Z LL LL LL LL Q' LL LL LL LL LL LL O LL LL LL Q: O LL LL LL LL LL O LL LL O O LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL
D J J J J J J J J J J J J J J F- J J Q J �- J J Q J Q J J L-- Q J Q J �— }- J JJ Q J QQ JQQ J J J J
w a K m 2 O W lr W w m Z 0Y Of Of w M Z a W w a a a a a W a s W a K K K a
w w w w w m m w w W LL w w w w W w Z W W W LL W W W W W W W W W R' W W W W W w w W w
y Z Z Z z z O U z z z = z z z z z z U z z z x U z z z z z U z z U U z z z z z z z z
W W w w w F to w w w O w w w w w w w w w w O w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w
m U' 0 0 0 0 0 w CD 0 0 LL 0 0 0 U` 0 0= 0 0 0 LL K 0 0 U` 0 U m 0 0 K K 0 0 0 0 0 U` 0 0
N
_V
N
0
N
w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w
F F- F- F r- r- F- F- F F F- F r- F- F- r- F- F- F- F- F F- F- F F- F- F- F- F F- r F
to m m cn m to v> rn m m � rn rn m cn � cn rn m cn m rn cn to cn rn cn rn � � rn cn � to m cn
r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r w r
� rn U) U) m to to U) co m rn to to V) to m to U) U) to 0 to to m 0 to 0 to to to 0 0 to to cn to
W w w W W w W w W W w W w w w w w W w w w w w W W w w W W W w W w w w w
J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J
m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m
o Q Q Q Q Q Q¢ Q Q Q Q Q Q Q¢¢ Q Q Q Q Q Q Q¢ Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q
r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r
CL a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a m a a a M a a a a M m a m a
U
F- I —
Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z X X Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z X Z Z Z Z
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 E F O o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
U U U U U U U U U U U fA U U U U U U U w w U U U U U U U U U U U U U w U U U U
v U U U U U U U U U U U w U U U U U U U cn rn U U U U U U U U U U U U to U U U U
� w to O
CD F, U) r a ¢ w U J N
W Q W Of z 0 O p to Z L r n
U O p J Q ❑ U p U R' q J LL �_
LL' J W K z J U J= Of z q U m LL w O
W¢ U m n3 U Q W g Z w U m❑ J
U) Z Q m Z Z J F " W CD to LL' z m to m O
W v U z O Z m U U } Q ai °> as m c r 7 o? O Q Z U z
ti LL w F- U W Cl- Z Z Q cc w W LL m w W W m U
Q J z Z CO LL. — W Of W w o O� °— 0¢ Z Z z Z� Z F- O a to
�_ w ¢ "' g 0 Q m 0 j Q Q W 2_ w co � w g w w o Q O Z = O� w w
d vi ai o a z a a -i_ CL > Q a m w o F = w F F J W m' o U Z LL a
Ir a Z W w U W O O W W 0 Q U p a j Q Z O CO J z m w y ~ = 0 K Q Q
Z Z U ❑ ❑ d > aa
Q U W W , Z z Z z Z z 0 LL' F O 2 O W W� W
> 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2� 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 z o m d a O a of w w w� W W m w w w w w
2
w
W
r
U)
W
J
m
}
a
U)
z
z
O
U
Q
U
Z
W
c�
w
w
CL
O
co
x
O m O w 0 O V O O q O O O R O D) O O q q O O n M O O O q O O) O O (n O n q O M
C O V O V (D n O O O n O O O n O O O O n C O O N M q q L i z O q q O O q O O D) O q
L6 m O O Lo O q O m co O q c7 t0 O co O q O u r N V CD < q N N n LD V q q 0 M n q O) q
U n CD M CO O CU q q q 7 r r N CO q O r n q q 7 M M t0 q N M n M m 'V M w m r r q
E N r q 0 n q r to O R r N q N M r q r N R C N q N
Q u) LU r r t0 q N
N M V q CO n q m O N M V q t0 O N M
U r N N N N N N N N N N M M M M M M M M M M 7 V V' N q
0 N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N
N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N
L N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N
U n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n
7t
0
N
co
O �
O1
N a
w
w N
CL rn
m
Y �
¢ U
= tU
r
LL U
O - U
U U
O
O
0
N
N
O
O
J
U
W
LO
Y
U
x
Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z
0 0 0 o 0 O o 0 0 o 0 Z 0 0 � o o o 0 0 0 0 o 0 � 0 0 0 0 0 m m Q Q�Q QQw a Q Q= �QQ
Z z Z z Z Z Z Z z Z Z Z Z Z Z z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z z Z Z W w W W W W W
+- Z) Z) D =3 :3 :) =) D 7 D :) Z m D Z D D D = m m 7 = D Z m m n D 0 J 0 Z) J J J J J J J
C LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL O LL LL O LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL O LL LL LL LL LL U LL LL U U U U U U U
J Q J J J J J J J Q J ¢ J J F- J J F < - J J J J J J ¢ J ¢ J J F- J ¢ J ¢ ¢ J Q J J J Q J J J J J J J J J
y R m K w W a 2 K W K K K p a 0 0 0 O O 0 O
c w w w w w w w w w w w m w w m w w w w w w w w w w w m W w w W m
N - Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z U Z Z U Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z U Z z z Z Z } Q w Of Z } } } } } }
w w w w w w w w w w w w w w W W w W w w w w w w w w w w w w Q o w w Q¢¢¢
o Q ¢
m C7 C7 C7 C7 (7 (7 C7 C7 C7 (7 t7 K U C7 C7 C7 0 C7 w a a C7 C7 C7 C7 C7 � C7 C7 Cl C7 C7 a C7 0 n� a m a
m
N }
w Q
w w W w w W w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w a
m m m m m m m m m m m m m m rn y m m m rn m m m m m m rn m m m m m p w
N } } } } } } } } } } } } } } } } } } } } } } } } } } } } } } } } J
o m m m m m m m m m m w m m m m m m rn rn m m rn m m m m m m rn m m m m
W w w w w W W w W w w W W w W w W w W W w w W w W w W w w w W w m J �' In J
N J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J Z m ¢ z m
m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m CO m m CO m m m w Q a p¢
o Q¢ Q Q¢ Q Q Q ¢¢ Q¢ Q Q¢ Q¢ Q Q Q Q Q¢ Q Q¢ Q Q Q >- W
Q Q¢ }
} } } } } } } } } >- } } } } } } } } } } } } } } } } } } } W } >- >- 0 Q U Q
a a a a a a a Q a a a d a d d a a d a a d a a a d a a a a a Q a a a z
m W m to m m m m m m m V) m m y rn rn m m m m y m m m m m m m} m m m 0 W 9 o w m m
o F- F- F- F- F- F- F- F- F F- F- F- F F- F- F- F- F- F- F F- F- F- F- F- r F F- Q a F- F- F- W > > w Q ¢
z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z Z Z Z Z a o m m o¢ Q
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > a z Z m z m a
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 W 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 g O 0 o w o w 0 w w
v U U U U U U U U U U U m U U U U U U U U U U U 0 0 U U U LL U U U w Z m F - Z LL LL
Q a Q¢¢ Q Q¢ Q¢ Q ¢ Q Q Q Q¢ Q Q¢ a Q Q Q¢ Q Q Q¢ Q Q o D m Z)
w w F m
W U Z p U w
Q < W w > Z U
4 o Z W U` ? O Q~ N~ FQ-- D U z p M LL }- ( w m
a # OZ ? w 0 0 0 0m F z z U LL z j m 4 m z
< U) O U 2 U K Z Z CD p Z Z Z z m z Y U p Z Z F- m F- N Z LL
Z 0 2 pp o - m p - CC U O u)���� w W m 0 > " Q a W W g a
m I_- Q 0 m Z O O W Z F 0 (n J LL LL LL LL U) F- LL> F ¢ J Z �' a. U
i s p J O F- F -i w} z Q w Z 0 0 0 0 Z 0 o LL = LL U p F¢- w W z
w w w w Z Z o J w U pa ¢ D Z¢¢ 2 LL W 0 z tr o U w C/) OLL 2 Q m
a n- a s 3: z J F- K 0 ¢ w U m ¢ o z z IL 0 x Of 9w x Q¢¢¢ w ¢} z LL a W w p o t > > >> � of -j w 0 R U a g w Q Q V d
`o
m= 2 2 m 2 Z z 0 0 F- F- F I- 7> Z Z Z Z Z Z Q W W O¢ Q W W LL Q W O 0 ¢¢ m Z Z Q U
NN Q U O 0 U J Z Z
m r O m O m M C O to O O O N o O m o
C N O O O N N m �. C? O O C7 r O Ln N O O O O O O. N O r Cn m m tin O C`7 O O O O tin O Cn O
V N Ln O O m m Cn O O m N - d - '7 7 N m m m m O m m O V M O C' co m O m O m N O N m N CV
0 m m m O m m C) Ln m Cl) O CO to m V m m V C C33 IT m m m r C m r U) N O m m O C m m m m m m
E N — -I N N CA r Cn r r N r m t_ m N m n � m C7 m r -T m O N
Q co M — o) — { Cl) N
4t
s to m r m m O N Cl) V m m r CO m O N m V m m r m m O N w= m m r m m O N m m
o` m ,n m Ln m m m co m m m m m m m m r n r r r r r r r r m co m m m m m m m m m m m m m
N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N
m W
In
to
0
o
a m
m
N �-
W m
W y
CL
O
Y �
U
= N
O U
�U
c
U O
U
Q
O
O
N
C)
O
J
0
LLI
K
Y
U
v
N
0
n
❑ ❑ ❑ ❑
Z Z Z Z
D D M D
c LL LL LL LL
J J J J
N <
m W W W W
c Z Z Z Z
M! U' 0 0 0
W W w W
m m m m
W W W W
J J J J
m m m m
C } } }
Q Q Q Q
U LL
m W W m
❑ z z z z
C D m D D
0 0 0 0 0
U U U U
a a Q ¢ a
LLL
U) LLJ
Z J
O w
� m
U m
Z CL LU
0 J
of of
O Z Z
W t O O
'a F F W Z N
a) X LLI
>I2 O 0 > o
H
a
c
m
U
O O N
C M U9 U7 O W
0
O co 1- cl) W
Q I
W
�I
N i N N N N
ti
0
N
O @
C 07
@
N d
T
W @ O
W
a E v
O N
= U
U) m
LL r-
0 CJ
c o
U U N
C
q
t0
m O
q M
W
ui
V'
O
N
O
O
O
to
O
q
V
m
a)
V'
O)
q
V'
o
O
N
q
O
O
q
uJ
O c7
O
N
V
c0
N
O)
W
V'
(`J
I�
q
�`'J
uJ
N
c'I
O
co
N
1-
m
O
m
q
N
E
q
6) 1�
o
-
-
N
O
O
V
O
q
O
O
O
Q
u) N
O
In
O`
m
O
R
r
W
<..
N
cN-
t0
r
N
t0
fA
O
~
W
Z
[L
n
LL
0
ID
F-
W
co
z
N
W
0
Z
LL
W
Z
Z
(�
o Z
j
O0
O
LL
ci
LL
C� w
w
2
d
O
u:
0 O
Z
LL
O
W
o
>>
LL
L
Q
Z
W
c7
C
Q
o
F_
Rl
W
d
= U
0
w Z
O 9
o¢¢
o
w
w
D
y c 0
u- F
W
4.
U
N
u)
Cn
Of
W
O]
0
W
L) lo l O
Lo
o o
N V'
o
O
O
O
r']
O
O
O
O
o
b
O
LD
O
O
O
E p
O
N N
N
O
K
ct
O
V
I�
c
r
h
co
r
q
q
U i 0
O O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
M" 11 " ,
CITY OF SHAKOPEE
Memorandum
Mel
SUBJECT:
Mayor and City Council
Mark McNeill, City Administrator
Julie Klima, Planner II
Amendment to the Zoning Map — Rezone property from Agricultural
Preservation (AG) Zone to Urban Residential (R -1B) Zone
MEETING DATE: February 19, 2002
CASELOG NO.: 021 -010
INTRODUCTION:
Peninsula Point, LLC has requested that the City amend its zoning map to rezone property currently
zoned Agricultural Preservation (AG) Zone to Urban Residential (R -1B) Zone. The property is
located south of 17 Avenue East, north of Valley View Road and east of Sunpath Elementary. Both
the adopted Comprehensive Plan and draft Comprehensive Plan guide this area for Single Family
Residential purposes.
PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION:
At its February 7, 2002, meeting, the Planning Commission took public testimony and reviewed this
request. After review and discussion, a motion to recommend approval of the rezoning request was
approved unanimously. Provided for your reference is a copy of the February 7, 2002 memorandum to
the Planning Commission.
ALTERNATIVES:
1. Approve the request to rezone property from Agricultural Preservation (AG) Zone to Urban
Residential (R -1B) Zone.
2. Deny the request to rezone property from Agricultural Preservation (AG) Zone to Urban
Residential (R -1B) Zone.
3. Table the decision and request additional information from the applicant and/or staff.
ACTION REQUESTED:
Offer and approve a motion to approve Ordinance No. 619, approving the request to rezone
property from Agricultural Preservation (AG) Zone to Urban Residential (R -1B) Zone.
f
Julte ima
Planner II
g: \cc\2002 \02- 19\rezgonyea.doc
WHEREAS, Peninsula Point, LLC, applicant, and Harold and Roberta Schneider,
property owners, have requested the rezoning of land from Agricultural Preservation (AG) Zone
to Urban Residential (R -1B) Zone;
WHEREAS, the subject property is legally described as follows:
All that part of the Southeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter, Section 17, lying westerly
of the centerline of the tract of the Chicago, Milwaukee, St. Paul and Pacific Railroad Company
as shown in Scott County Recorder Document No. 178638 and also all that part of the
abandoned right -of -way of said railroad in said Southeast Quarter of Northeast Quarter of
Section 17, lying easterly of said centerline; in Township 11 S, Range 22, Scott County,
Minnesota.
WHEREAS, notices were duly sent and posted, and a public hearing was held before the
Planning Commission on February 7, 20021, at which time all persons present were given an
opportunity to be heard; and
WHEREAS, the City Council heard the matter at its meeting of February 19, 2002, and
found that the proposed rezoning is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan for the area of the
City within which it is located.
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA, ORDAINS:
Section 1 - That the zoning map adopted in City Code Sec. 11.03 is hereby amended by
rezoning the property referenced herein, from Agricultural Preservation (AG) Zone to Urban
Residential (R -1B) Zone.
Section 2 - Effective Date. This ordinance becomes effective from and after its passage
and publication.
Passed in
Minnesota, held this day of
Attest:
Judith S. Cox, City Clerk
session of the City Council of the City of Shakopee,
-2002.
Mayor of the City of Shakopee
Published in the Shakopee Valley News on the day of - 2002.
W-
i'
Mem
TO: Shakopee Planning Commission
FRONT: Julie Klima, Planner II
SUBJECT: Amendment to the Zoning Map rezoning property from Agricultural
Preserve (AG) to Urban Residential (R 1B)
MEETING DATE: February 7, 2002
REVIEW PERIOD: December 20, 2001 - February 18, 2001
CASELOG N.: 02 -010
Site Information:
Applicant: Peninsula Point, LLC (Gonyea Land Co.)
Property Owner: Harold & Roberta Schneider
Location: South of 17` Avenue East, north of Valley View Road and east of Sunpath
Elementary School
Adjacent Zoning. North: Agricultural Preservation (AG)
South: Urban Residential (R 1B)
East: Agricultural Preservation (AG)/Mining Overlay Zone
West: Agricultural Preservation (AG)
MUSA: The site is within the current MUSA boundary.
ODUCTION:
Peninsula Point, LLC has requested that the City amend its zoning map to rezone property currently
zoned Agricultural Preservation (AG) to Urban Residential (R 1B). The property is located south of
17' Avenue East, north of Valley View Road and east of Sunpath Elementary School. Both the
approved 1995 Comprehensive Plan and the draft Comprehensive Plan guides the property for single
family residential development.
The City's Comprehensive Plan sets basic policies to guide the development of the City. The purpose
of designating different areas for residential, commercial, and industrial land uses is to promote the
location of compatible land uses, as well as to prevent incompatible land uses from being located in
close proximity to one another. The Zoning Ordinance is one of the legal means by which the City
implements the Comprehensive Plan. Under Minnesota statute, zoning is to conform with a city's
comprehensive plan.
The proposed rezoning is consistent with the adopted land use plan. Exhibits B and C provide a
listing of the uses, both permitted and conditional, that are allowed in the Agricultural
Preservation (AG) and Urban Residential (R -1B) zones. Copies of the land use plans are
available for viewing at City Hall and will be made available at the February 7, 2002 meeting.
FIND INGS:
The criteria required for the granting of a Zoning Ordinance Amendment are listed below with
proposed findings for the Commission's consideration.
Criteria #1 That the original Zoning Ordinance is in error;
Finding #1 Tie original zoning ordinance is not in error.
Criteria 42 That significant changes in community goals and policies have taken place;
Finding #2 Significant changes in community goals and policies have not taken place relative to
the vibject property.
Criteria #3 That significant changes in City -wide or neighborhood development patterns
have occurred; or
Finding #3 Development of the subject property for residential use will be consistent with desired
development patterns for this area of the City.
Criteria 94 That the comprehensive plan requires a different provision.
Finding #4 The requested zoning is consistent with the adopted and proposed Comprehensive
Plan land use map.
ALTERNATIVES:
1. Recommend to the City Council the approval of the request to rezone the subject property,
from Agricultural Preservation (AG) to Urban Residential (R -1B).
2. Do not recommend to the City Council the approval of the request to rezone the subject
property from Agricultural Preservation (AG) to Urban Residential (R -1B).
3. Continue the public hearing and request additional information from the applicant or staff.
4. Close the public hearing, but table the matter and request additional information.
STAFF RECD NDATION:
Staff recommends Alternative No. 1, recommend to the City Council the approval of the request to
rezone the subject property from Agricultural Preservation (AG) to Urban Residential (R - 1B).
ACTION REQUESTED:
Offer and approve a motion to recommend to the City Council the approval of the request to rezone
the subject property from Agricultural Preservation (AG) to Urban Residential (R -1B).
+uUe Klima
Planner H
g:\ boaa- pc�2002 \02 -07�rzgonyea- schneider.doc
-7 LILM
§11.22
Subd 1. purnose. The purpose of the agricultural preservation zone is to preserve and promote
agriculture in the unsewered areas of the City which are suitable for such use, to prevent scattered
and leap -frog non -farm growth, and to prevent premature expenditures for such public services as
roads, sewer, water, and police and fire protection.
Subd. 2 permitted Uses. Within the agricultural preservation zone, no structure or land shall be
used except for one or more of the following uses:
A.
agricultural uses;
B.
single family detached dwellings;
C.
forestry and nursery uses;
D.
seasonal produce stands;
E.
riding academies;
F.
utility services;
G.
public recreation;
H.
public buildings;
1. day care facilities serving twelve (12) or fewer persons;
J. adult day care centers as permitted uses, subject to the following conditions: The
adult day care center shall:
1, serve twelve (12) or fewer persons;
2. provide proof of an adequate water and sewer system if not served by
municipal utilities;
3, have outdoor leisure/recreation areas located and designated to minimize
visual and noise impacts on adjacent areas;
4, the total indoor space available for use by participants must equal at least
forty (40) square feet for each day care participant and each day care staff
member present at the center. When a center is located in a
multifunctional organization I the required space available for use by
participants is maintained while the center is operating. In determining the
square footage of usable indoor space available, a center must not count:
a. hallways, stairways, closets, offices, restrooms, and utility and
storage areas;
b. more than 25% of the space occupied by the furniture or
equipment used by participants or staff; or
page revised In 1996
1111
§11.22
C. in a multifunctional organization, any space occupied by persons
associated with the multifunctional organization while participants
are using common space; and
5. comply with all other state licensing requirements. (Ord. 482, May 15,
1997)
J. group family day care facilities serving fourteen (14) or fewer children; or
K, residential facilities serving six (6) or fewer persons.
Subd. 3. Conditional Uses. Within the agricultural preservation zone, no structure or land shall be
used for the following uses except by conditional use permit:
A. commercial feedlots, which include yards, lots, pens, buildings, or other areas or
structures used for the confined feeding of livestock or other animals for food, fur,
pleasure, or resale purposes;
B. (Deleted, Ord. 501, September 18, 1997)
C. retail sales of nursery and garden supplies;
D. cemeteries;
E. churches and other places of worship;
F. agricultural research facilities, which are facilities specifically operated for the
purpose of conducting research in the production of agricultural crops, including
research aimed at developing plant varieties. This term specifically excludes
research regarding the development or research of soil conditioners, fertilizers, or
other chemical additives placed in or on the soil or for the experimental raising of
animals;
G. animal hospitals and veterinary clinics;
H. kennels. A kennel is any premise in which more than two (2) domestic animals,
over six (6) months of age, are boarded, bred or offered for sale;
I, public or private schools having a course of instruction approved by the Minnesota
Department of Education for students enrolled in K through grade 12, or any portion
thereof;
J. commercial recreation, minor,
K. utility service structures;
L. day care facilities serving thirteen (13) through sixteen (16) persons;
M. adult day care centers as conditional use, subject to the following conditions: The
adult day care centers shall:
1, serve thirteen (13) or more persons;
page revised in 1997
1112
2. provide proof of an adequate water and sewer system 9 not served by
municipal utilities;
3. have outdoor leisurelrecreation areas located and designed to minimize
visual and noise impacts on adjacent areas;
4. the total indoor space available for use by participants must equal at least
fourty (40) square feet for each day care participant and each day care staff
member present at the center. When a center is located in a
multifunctional organization, the center may share a common space with
the multifunctional organization if the required space available for use by
participants is maintained while the center is operating. In determining the
square footage of usable indoor space available, a center must not count:
a. hallways, stairways, closets, offices, restrooms and utility and
storage areas;
b, more than 25% of the space occupied by the furniture or
equipment used by participants or staff; or
C. in a muftifunctional organization, any space occupied by persons
associated with the multifunctional organization while participants
are using common space;
provide proof of state, federal and other govemmental licensing agency
approval; and
6, comply with all other state licensing requirements; (Ord. 482, May 15, 1997)
N. residential facilities serving from seven (7) through sixteen (16) persons;
O, wind energy conversion systems or windmills;
P. relocated structures;
0. structures over two and one -half (2 -1/2) stories or thirty -five (35) feet in height;
R. developments containing more tharrone (1) principal structure per lot; or
S. other uses similar to those permitted by the subdivision, upon a determination by
the Board of Adjustment and Appeals, may be allowed upon the issuance of a
Cond'dional Use Permit. (Ord. 528, October 29, 1998)
S_ubd 4 Permitted'Accessory Uses. Within the agricultural preservation zone the following uses
shall be permitted accessory uses:
A. machinery and structures necessary to the conduct of agricultural operations;
B. garages;
page revised in 1998
1113
1 §11.22
C. fences;
D. recreational equipment;
E. stables;
F. swimming pools;
G. solar equipment;
H. tennis courts;
1. receive only satellite dish antennas and other antenna devices;
J. home occupations contingent upon approval of a home occupation permit; or (Ord.
S01, September 18, 1997)
K. other accessory uses, as determined by the Zoning Administrator.
Subd 5 Design Standa Within the agricultural preservation zone, no land shall be used, and
no structure shall be constructed or used, except in conformance with the following requirements:
A. Maximum density: one dwelling per forty (40) acres.
B. Lot specifications:
Minimum lot width: 1000 feet.
Minimum lot depth: 1000 feet_
Minimum front yard setback: 100 feet.
Minimum side yard setbacks 20 feet.
Minimum rear yard setback: 40 feet.
C. Maximum height: Thirty-five (35) feet. Grain elevators, barns, silos, and elevator
lags may exceed this limitation without a conditional use permit.
Subd S. Additional Require
A.
All dwellings shall have shall have a of
width of at lea (20) feet for least 50 °�
width. All dwellings of
their depth.
g, All dwellings shall have a permanent foundation in conformance with the Minnesota
State Building Code. (Ord. 31, October 25, 1979; Ord. 264, May 26, 1989; Ord.
279, December 1,1989; Ord. 304, November 7,1991; Ord. 377, July 7, 1994; Ord.
435, November 30, 1995)
SEC. 1123. Reserved.
page revised in 1997
1114
§11.28
A. All dwellings shall have a depth of at least twenty (20) feet for at least 50% of their
width. All dwellings shall have a width of at least twenty (20) feet for at least 50% of
their depth.
B. All dwellings shall have a permanent foundation in conformance with the Minnesota
State Building Code. (Ord. 377, July 7,1994; Ord. 435, November 30, 1995)
SEC. 11.27. Reserved.
SEC, 11.28. URBAN RESIDENTIAL ZONE (R -113).
Subd. 1. puraose.. The purpose of the urban residential zone is to provide an area for residential
development where public sanitary sewer and water are available.
Subd. 2. permitted Uses. Within the urban residential zone, no structure or land shall be used
except for one (1) or more of the following uses:
A, single family detached dwellings;
B. existing single family attached dwellings;
C. existing two (2) family dwellings;
D. public recreation;
E. utility services;
F. public buildings;
G. day care facilities serving twelve (12) or fewer persons;
H. adult day care centers as permitted uses, subject to the following conditions: the
adult day care center shall:
1. serve twelve (12) or fewer persons;
2. provide proof of an adequate water and sewer system if not served by
municipal utilities;
3. have outdoor leisuretrecreation areas located and designated to minimize
Visual and noise impacts on adjacent areas;
4. the total indoor space available for use by participants must equal at least
forty (40) square feet for each day care participant and each day care staff
member present at the center. When a center is located in a
multifunctional organization if the required space available for use by
participants is maintained while the center is operating. In determining the
square footage of usable indoor space available, a center must not count:
a. hallways, stairways, closets, offices, restrooms, and utility and
storage areas;
page revised in 1997
1129
§11.28
b. more than 25% of the space occupied by the furniture or
equipment used by participants or staff; or
C. in a multifunctional organization, any space occupied by persons
associated with the multifiunctional organization while participants
are using common space; and
5. comply with all other state licensing requirements. (Ord. 482, May 15,
1997) -
I, group family day care facilities serving fourteen (14) or fewer children;
J. residential facilities serving six (6) or fewer persons; or
K. single family detached residences previously constructed as accessory uses to a
church, where the resulting lot meets the design standards found in Subdivision 5 of
this Section. (Ord. 496, August 21, 1997)
Subd. 3. Conditional Uses. Within the urban residential zone, no structure or land shall be used
for the following uses except by conditional use permit:
A. churches and other places of worship;
B. (Deleted, Ord. 501, September 18,1997)
D. cemeteries;
D. public or private schools having a course of instruction approved by the Minnesota
Board of Education for students enrolled in K through grade 12, or any portion
thereof;
E. bed and breakfast inns;
F. utility service structures;
G. day care facilities serving thirteen (13) through sixteen (16) persons;
H. adult day care centers as permitted uses, subject to the following conditions: the
adult day centers shall:
1, serve thirteen (13) or more persons;
2, provide proof of an adequate water and sewer system if not served by
municipal utilities;
3, have outdoor leisure(recreation areas located and designed to minimize
visual and noise impacts on adjacent areas;
page revised in 1997
1130
§11.28
- 4. the total indoor space available for use by participants must equal at least
forty (40) square feet for each day care participant and each day care staff
member present at the center. When a center is located in a
multifunctional organization, the center may share a common space with
the multifunctional organization if the required space available for use by
participants is maintained while the center is operating. In determining the
square footage of usable indoor space available, a center must not count:
a, hallways, stairways, closets, offices, restrooms and utility and
storage areas;
b. more than 25% of the space occupied by the furniture or
equipment used by participants or staff; or
C. in a multifunctional organization, any space occupied by persons
associated with the multifunctional organization while participants
are using common space;
5. provide proof of state, federal and other governmental licensing agency
approval; and
6. comply with all other state licensing requirements. (Ord. 482, May 15,
1997)
I, residential facilities servicing from seven (7) through sixteen (16) persons;
J. relocated structures;
K. structures over two and one -half (2 -1/2) stories or thirty -five (35) feet in height;
L. developments containing more than one (1) principal structure per lot; or
M. other uses similar to those permitted by the subdivision, upon a determination by
the Board of Adjustment and Appeals, may be allowed upon the issuance of a
Conditional Use Permit. (Ord. 501, September 18, 1997; Ord. 528, October 29,
1998)
Subd 4 Permitted Accessory Uses. Within the urban residential zone, the following uses shall
be permitted accessory uses:
A, garages;
B. fences;
C. recreation equipment;
D. gardening and other horticultural uses not involving retail sales;
E. communication service apparatus/device(s) as permitted accessory uses, subject to
the following conditions:
1, shall be co- located on an existing tower or an existing structure;
page revised in 1998
1131
§11.28
2. must not exceed 175 feet in total height (including the extension of any
communication service device(s) apparatus);
3, lights and/or flashing equipment shall not be permitted unless required by
state or federal agencies;
4, signage shall not be allowed on the communication service
device(s) /apparatus other than danger or warning type signs;
5, must provide proof from a professional engineer that the equipment will not
interfere with existing communications for public safety purposes;
6. shall be located and have an exterior finish that minimizes visibility off -site
to the maximum extent possible;
7, applicable provisions of the City Code, including the provisions of the State
Building Code therein adopted, shall be complied with;
g, all obsolete or unused towers and accompanying accessory facilities shall
be removed within twelve (12) months of the cessation of operations at the
site unless a time extension is approved by the City. After the facilities are
removed, the site shall be restored to its original or an approved state. The
user of the tower and/or accompanying accessory facilities shall be
responsible for the removal of facilities and restoration of the site;
9. the applicant shall submit a plan illustrating all anticipated future location
sites for communication towers and/or communication
devices (s) /apparatus;
10. wireless telecommunication towers and antennas will only be considered
for City parks when the following conditions exist and if those areas are
recommended by the Parks and Recreation Advisory Board and approved
by the City Council:
• City parks of sufficient size and character that are adjacent to an
existing commercial or industrial use;
commercial recreation areas and major playfields used primarily by
adults;
11. all revenue generated through the lease of a City park for wireless
telecommunication towers and antennas should be transferred to the Park
Reserve Fund; (Ord. 479, March 13,1997)
F. swimming pools;
G. tennis courts;
home occupations contingent upon approval of a home occupation permit; (Ord.
501, September 18, 1997)
1. solar equipment, or
page revised in 1997
1132
§11.29
J. other accessory uses, as determined by the Zoning Administrator.
Subd 5 Design Standards. Within the urban residential zone, no land shall be used, and no
structure shall be constructed or used, except in conformance with the following requirements:
A. Maximum density: five (5) dwellings per acre. Streets shall be excluded in
calculating acreage.
B. Maximum impervious surface percentage: 50%
C. Lot specifications:
Minimum lot width (single - family detached): 60 feet;
(existing two-family dwelling): 70 feet
Minimum lot depth: 100 feet
Minimum front yard setback: 30 feet
Minimum side yard setback: 10 feet
Minimum rear yard setback: 30 feet
D. Maximum height: No structure shall exceed thirty -five (35) feet in height without a
conditional use permit.
Subd 6 Additional Requireme
A. All dwellings shall have a depth of at least twenty (20) feet for at least 50% of their
width. All dwellings shall have a width of at least twenty (20) feet for at least 50% of
their depth.
B. All dwellings shall have a permanent foundation in conformance with the Minnesota
State Building Code. (Ord. 31, October 25,1979; Ord. 60, May 14,1981; Ord. 159,
February 28, 1985; Ord. 264, May 26, 1989; Ord. 377, July 7, 1994; Ord. 435,
November 30, 1995)
SEC. 1129. Reserved.
page revised in 1997
1133
. 8 e
CITY OF SHAKOPEE
Memorandum 7
Lai
CASE LOG NO.: 02 -016
TO: Mayor and City Council
Mark McNeill, City Administrator
FROM: Julie Klima, Planner II
SUBJECT: Text Amendment to Section 11.70
MEETING DATE: February 19, 2002
INTRODUCTION:
Staff has prepared a draft text amendment revising a portion of the signage regulations. The draft
language provides for setback requirements of area identification signage.
ALTERNATIVES:
1. Approve Ordinance No. 620, approving the text amendment as presented.
2. Approve Ordinance No. 620, approving the text amendment with revisions.
3. Do not approve the proposed amendment.
4. Table the matter for additional information.
PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION:
The Planning Commission reviewed the proposed amendment at its February 7, 2002, meeting. The
Commission has unanimously recommended approval of the proposed amendment as presented.
ACTION REQUESTED:
Offer and pass a motion to approve Ordinance Number 620, amending City Code Sec. 11.70, as
presented.
7 2 PeK�a
Planner II
0: \cc\ 2002 \02- 19 \tasips- areaident.doc
1
1 1 / FMU tj 0 19LINSM
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE,
AMENDING ;. P 0 SIGNS
Section 1 - That City Code Chapter 11, Zoning, Section 11.70, is hereby amended by adding
the language which is underlined
Section 11.70, Subd. 7.
Residential Zone Regulations.
b) Area identification
signs shall be permitted subject to the following:
i)
One monument style sign;
ii)
Shall not exceed 24 square feet copy and graphic area;
iii)
6 foot maximum height;
iv)
Shall be located at a primary entrance to the project area;
v)
City shall not be responsible for maintenance of sign;
vi)
Shall be setback at least 10 feet from any t -of- -way line.
Section 11.70, Subd. 8.
Commercial Sign Regulations.
e) Area identification signs shall be permitted, subject to the following:
i)
One monument style sign;
ii)
Shall not exceed 50 square feet copy and graphic area;
iii)
10 foot maximum height;
iv)
Shall be located at primary entrance to the project area;
v)
City shall not be responsible for maintenance of sign;
vi)
Shall be setback at least 10 feet from anv right-of-way line.
Section 11.70, Subd. 8.
Commercial Sign Regulations. (Highway Business and Major Recreation Zones).
d) Area identification signs shall be permitted, subject to the following:
i)
One monument style sign;
ii)
Shall not exceed 50 square feet copy and graphic area;
iii)
Shall be located at a primary entrance to the project area;
iv)
10 foot maximum height;
v)
City shall not be responsible for maintenance of sign;
vi)
Shall be setback at least 10 feet from any ri t -of -way line
Section 11.70, Subd. 9.
Office and Industrial Sign Regulations.
d) Area identification
signs shall be permitted subject to the following:
i)
One monument style sign;
ii)
Shall not exceed 50 square feet copy and graphic area;
iii)
10 foot maximum height;
iv)
Shall be located at a primary entrance to the project area;
v)
City shall not be responsible for maintenance of sign;
vi)
Shall be setback at least 10 feet from any right -of -way line.
Section 2 - - Effective Date. This ordinance becomes effective from and after its passage and
publication.
2
Adopted in session of the City Council of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota, held
the day of 1 2002.
Mayor of the City of Shakopee
ATTEST:
City Clerk
Published in the Shakopee Valley News on the day of 1 2002.
i SIFY-C41P
Mem
TO Shakopee Planning Commission
FROM: Julie Klima, Planner H
SUBJECT: Amendment to City Code Section 11.70
MEETING ATE: February 7, 2002
INTRODUCTION:
The City Council in December 2001 adopted new sign regulations for the City. As implementation of the
new regulations has begun, staff has become aware of an omission relative to area identification signs.
The sections of the sign regulations which address area identification signs do not specify setback
requirements for these types of signs. Therefore, staff is recommending the proposed language changes
below. Language which is underlined is proposed and language which is st is proposed for
deletion.
Section 11.70, Subd. 7. Residential Zone Regulations.
b) Area identification signs shall be permitted subject to the following:
i) One monument style sign;
ii) Shall not exceed 24 square feet copy and graphic area;
iii) 6 foot maximum height;
iv) Shall be located at a primary entrance to the project area,
v) City shall not be responsible for maintenance of sign;
vi) Shall be setback at least 10 feet from any right -of -way line.
Section 11.70, Subd. 8. Commercial Sign Regulations.
e) Area identification signs shall be permitted, subject to the following:
i) One monument style sign;
ii) Shall not exceed 50 square feet copy and graphic area;
iii) 10 foot maximum height;
iv) Shall be located at primary entrance to the project area,
v) City shall not be responsible for maintenance of sign;
vi) Shall be setback at least 10 feet from any ri hg t -of —way line.
Section 11.70, Subd. 8. Commercial Sign Regulations. (Highway Business and Major Recreation Zones).
d) Area identification signs shall be permitted, subject to the following:
i) One monument style sign;
ii) Shall not exceed 50 square feet copy and graphic area;
iii) Shall be located at a primary entrance to the project area,
iv) 10 foot maximum height;
v) City shall not be responsible for maintenance of sign;
vi) Shall be setback at least 10 feet from M right-of -way line
Section 11.70, Subd. 9. Office and Industrial Sign Regulations.
d) Area identification signs shall be permitted subject to the following:
i) One monument style sign;
ii) Shall not exceed 50 square feet copy and graphic area;
iii) 10 foot maximum height;
iv) Shall be located at a primary entrance to the project area;
v) City shall not be responsible for maintenance of sign;
vi) Shall be setback at least 10 feet from any right -of -way line.
City Code states that the City Council may grant a zoning ordinance amendment when it finds that one or
more of the following criteria exists. Staff has prepared draft findings for the Board's reference:
C #1 That the original zoning ordinance is in error;
Finding #I The original zoning ordinance is in error for the reason that it does not include setback
requirements for area identification signs .
Criteria #2 That significant changes in community goals and policies have taken place;
Finding #2 Significant changes in community goals and policies have not taken place.
Criteria #3 That significant changes in City -wide or neighborhood development patterns have
occurred; or
Finding #3 Significant changes in development patterns have not occurred
Criteria #4 That the Comprehensive PIan requires a different provision.
Finding #4 The Comprehensive Plan does not require a different provision.
ALTERNATIVES:
1. Recommend to the City Council approval of the proposed text as presented.
2. Recommend to the City Council approval of the proposed text amendment with revisions.
3. Do not recommend to the City Council the approval of the proposed amendment.
4. Continue the public hearing and request additional information from staff.
5. Close the public hearing, but table the matter and request additional information.
STAFF RECOMAlENDATION:
Recommend to the City Council approval of the proposed text amendment as presented or with revisions.
ACTION QUESTED:
Offer and pass a motion to recommend to the City Council approval of the proposed text amendment as
presented or with revisions.
7u e Klima
Planner H
9: \boaa -pc \2002 \02- 07\tasignrevisions. doc
2
CITY OF SHAKOPEE
Memorandum
TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: Mark McNeill, City Administrator
SUBJECT: 911 Address Sign Affirmation
DATE: February 15, 2002
The Council is asked to reaffirm the City's desire to participate in a 911 address signage program
being coordinated by Scott County.
BACKGROUND:
Attached is a memorandum (Attachment A) describing action which was considered by the City
Council last September. At that time, the County asked about Shakopee's desire to participate in
a program which would provide uniform addressing for rural residences, by means of a 6" x 18"
double -faced sign, mounted on a post in front of the property. The cost for the individual signs
are estimated to be $35.00. The contract for this is about to be bid by the County; they anticipate
7200 signs to be placed throughout the County; that would include approximately 100 in rural
Shakopee. The location for these would be on the streets identified by the Fire Inspector, and
shown on Attachment B.
An assessment for this would have to be done by the City; it could not be done by Scott County.
It is recommended that, following the lead of the County, a 15% administration fee would be
added to the actual cost of the sign (cost to be determined by bid results). Initially, a bill would
be sent to the benefited property. If that is not paid, a public hearing would be held, and those
properties would be billed, similar to the process done for unpaid storm drainage fees.
The previous Council indicated a desire to participate in this, and it is recommended by the
Police and Fire Chiefs to participate. However, if the new Council is not supportive of this, it is
not too late to withdraw at this time. However, Scott County should be notified immediately.
I recommend that the Council reaffirn its desire to participate in the emergency signage program
for rural residential addresses.
I ' 1 1' 1
If Council concurs, it should, by motion, direct staff to reaffirm the City's intent to participate in
the 911 signa�e program for rural residential addresses, as coordinated by Scott County.
Mark McNeill
City Administrator
MWj s
L•Jeanette /911 address
" 'j
V Pte,
CITY OF SHAKOPEE
Memorandum
TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: Mark McNeill, City Administrator
SUBJECT: 911 Address Signs
DATE: September 13, 2001
The Council is asked to consider participation in the 911 Address Signage Program that
was recently approved by Scott County. The County has asked that each city respond.
0
Attached is information that was presented to the Scott County Board at its meeting on
September 4 It describes how the County is entering into a program which will identify
more than 7200 rural addresses with uniform reflective address signs, to ease property
identification for emergency vehicles. The cost of each sign (anticipated to be
approximately $35) will either be borne by townships, or assessed back against the
benefiting properties, for the actual cost, plus 15 %.
The County has offered to each City in the County an opportunity to participate in the
program. The intent would be to help identify rural addresses. While there is no
definition of what would qualify as a "rural" address, it is anticipated to be in unsewered
areas where mailboxes might not easily identify properties. For example, some rural
areas have clusters of mailboxes, which make it difficult for ambulance or fire crews to
specifically identify the property location which requested assistance. They have asked
that each City consider the pro €Taan, and respond by the first week of October. -
I've talked with both the Police Chief and Fire Chief. It is of more importance to the Fire
Department. Chief Mary Athmann said that Fire Chiefs in the County were very
supportive; Chief Athmann notes that it will be especially beneficial for the Shakopee
Fire Department when it responses to calls in Louisville or Jackson Townships.
However, Chief Athmann also said that there are some properties in Shakopee that could
benefit from participation in such a program — he noted examples like properties along
Eagle Creek Boulevard, on the bluff above Valley View Road, and rural farmsteads along
County Road 83. There might be 100 or so properties that could be better identified
through this program, even though the City code requires all properties to be easily
identifiable by a street number visible from the curb line.
If the City wants to participate in this, the decision that would have to be made would be
funding. The County is following a 429 process for Townships that choose not to fund
their participation through taxes. In this case, it would make the most sense for the
benefiting property owners to be billed, and, should they choose not to make payment,
assess the property following the 429 procedure.
The Council should first indicate whether it is interested in participating in such a
program.
We recommend that the City indicate its interest in participating in the program.
• •
The Council should indicate whether or not it wants to have participation in the 911
Address Sign Program with Scott County.
U4cd&QV4
Mark McNeill
City Administrator
MM:th
DATE: August 30, 2001
TO: Scott County Township Officials
FROM: Michael Sobota, Community Development Director
SUBJECT: 911 Address Signs
For your information, the Scott County Board will be considering action on the 911 address sign
proposal at the Tuesday, September 4 meeting. Enclosed is the staff recommendation to the
County Board. We invite and encourage your participation in the meeting.
Please review the staff.. recommendation and if you have any questions or comments, contact
Dave Umnacht at (952) 496 -8100, or me at (952) 496 -8366. Assuming positive action by the
County Board, we will be sending you additional information in the near future (possibly at a
Quarterly Township Meeting under consideration). We look forward to your township's
decision on this much needed and beneficial project.
C: Renee Christianson, 911 Project Coordinator
Dave Unmacht, Scott County Administrator
jf- h: \pzfuehj \correspondence \townships \911 rba.doc
An Equal Opportunity/Safety Aware Employer
-r - •- 11'
CONSENT AGENDA: No AGENDA #
ORIGINATING Community Development
SIGNATURE:
DEPARTMENT: Public Works
ACTION REQUESTED:
Update and Authorization to Proceed with 9 -1 -1 Residential Address Marker Project
BACKGROUND /JUSTIFICATION:
The purpose of this agenda item is to provide background information on the 9 -1 -1 Residential Address Markers project
and request authorization to proceed from the County Board. Attached for your information is an updated copy of the
proposed work plan, with background information on the purpose of the project, funding and timeframe. In addition,
included with the RBA is a copy of a memo prepared for the Township Officers Spring 2001 Meeting on the assessment
process as well as the estimated project costs for each Township.
In summary, as the number of residences in rural Scott County continues to grow, Scott County's responsibility to provide
emergency services also grows. The Scott County Sheriffs Office has the responsibility to provide police protection, and
also dispatch police, fire and medical personnel to this rapidly growing county, including the unincorporated areas. Often
times address numerals installed by homeowners, used to identify properties in the rural areas, are difficult for emergency
personnel to read, are only visible from one direction, not reflective, and inconsistent from house to house.
During the course of this project and early on in the analysis of whether or not it had support in the emergency community,
staff met with representatives from Sheriffs Patrol and Communications, Scott County fire chiefs from Shakopee, Prior
Lake, Savage, Jordan, Belle Plaine, New Market, and ambulance services that serve Scott County. All were very
supportive of the project.
Continued:
ATTACHMENTS:
® County Attorney Review
® Yes
❑ Risk Management Review
❑ No
FISCAL IMPACT:
COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR SIGNATURE /DATE
❑ None
s
❑ Amount included in current budget
--
❑ Budget amendment requested
\ /
® Other
v
Approved:
Distri ution /Filing Instructions
Denied:
Tabled:
Other:
Rec. Sec.:
Date: r/ 9 —/ -6 j
RBA # 2001-
_ t .
RBA- SIGNBACKGROUND
TO: Michael Sobota
David Unmacht
County Board of Commissioners
FROM: Renee Christianson
DATE: August 1, 2001
RE: 911 Residential Address Markers
As the number of residences in rural Scott County continues to grow, Scott County's
responsibility to provide emergency services also grows. The Scott County Sheriff's Office has
the responsibility to provide police protection, and also dispatch police, fire and medical
personnel to this rapidly growing county, including the unincorporated areas.
Oftentimes address numerals installed by homeowners, used to identify properties in the rural
areas, are difficult for emergency personnel to read, are only visible from one direction, not
reflective, and inconsistent from house to house. This causes a potential delay for emergency
responders.
Early in 2000, a Scott County District Court jury ruled that Allina Health Systems ambulance's
inability to locate the home of a couple in rural Scott County during a 911 emergency call
amounted to negligence on the company's part and that Allina should pay damages totaling
$11.1 million. Scott County was also named in the original suit, but was dismissed.
Solution
More can be done by Scott County to identify, rural addresses. One solution to better- identify z
rural addresses is to install Residential Address Markers at the entrance to each property. The
signs have been installed in numerous counties throughout the State. These signs are becoming
commonplace when driving through rural areas. Staff has been talking with Sibley, LeSueur and
Ottertail Counties, which went through the installation of residential address markers during
1999 -2000. The signs of choice have house numbers that are visible from both directions, are 6"
x 18" in size, installed on a 7' or 8' post, highly reflective blue background with white lettering.
A photograph of the actual signs will be available at the meeting.
The Townships understand that the County is considering this project. On several occasions in
2000 and most recently during the 2001 Spring Townships Officers Meeting in March of this
year, the project and its related details were discussed with the Township Officials. Extensive
discussion has, occurred with township comments ranging from a very high level of support to
The project has been presented to the Townships in at least three distinct settings: 1) August 2000 Quarterly Township
meeting; 2) November 2000 Leadership Forum; and 3) March 2001 Spring Township Officers Meeting. Although generally
well received and supported by the majority of Townships, after much discussion, no consensus on one funding plan could
be achieved. Our original goal was that all Townships would agree to pay the cost of installing the signs within their
Township, thus avoiding a more costly and time - consuming assessment process. At this time, an overall consensus by
the Townships on how to pay for the sign installation has not been reached.
Staff is now requesting that the County Board provide direction to proceed with the project, giving each Township the
choice between two funding options: 1) enter into a Joint Powers Agreement between the County. and Township, which
authorizes the Township to pay for the original sign installation; or 2) have the County administer the Chapter 429
assessment process to pay for the signs. Each option has its advantages and disadvantages from a Township
perspective, and all Townships have, at one time or another, indicated a policy preference. However, since the last
discussion on this was almost six months ago, staff wants to ask each Township for their preference of funding options
which would then be formalized and accepted as the project alternative.
Pursuant to the direction of the County Board in an earlier discussion, staff has discussed the project with the City
Administrators and included the option to have the signs installed for rural residences within their jurisdictions. No formal
commitments have been received to date. If the County Board proceeds with the project, staff will again contact the cities
and seek their formal decision on whether or not to participate.
Page 2 of 4, 911 Residential Address Markers
08/30/01
general reluctance. However, the consensus from the Townships is that the signs are a good idea
and could reduce emergency response time which would be of great benefit to our emergency
personnel.
Staff recommends that should a program be established installation of signs for existing
addresses (approximately 7,314) be contracted out to a .,private company. Staff would
recommend that sign installation costs for new platted developments be charged to developers up
front. These fees would be implemented as part of Community Development's fee schedule.
Staff has met with Brad Larson and Joe Kane from the Scott County Highway Department and
they have agreed to make and install the signs for new addresses being issued (approximately
200 each year). They would be notified when the Community Development Division issues an
address, and would then sign the property. Any money received from developers for E911 sign
purposes would be forwarded to the Highway Department for their work.
Replacement signs would be the responsibility of the individual homeowner. Neither the
Township nor the County will be responsible for replacing or repairing an existing sign. This
policy will be clearly spelled out in the hearing process and during the acquisition of the original
signs. Signs will be available from the County for an established fee. Staff is developing the
replacement policy and is considering it as part of an update to our Addressing Ordinance.
Financial Impact
After speaking with various sign companies, and being given figures ranging from $31 to $35
per sign, staff is using $35 per sign for discussion purposes. As of August 22, 2001, there were
7,314 addresses in the rural area of Scott County. Staff has escalated the fee by 10% to allow for
costs of inspection observation and contract administration. Fees for signs within new
developments would be charged to the developer during final plat approval. This is consistent
with the philosophy of 'new growth paying for itself. The fees for the existing addresses could be
collected through one of two options outlined below.
Two primary funding options are as follows:
I. Each Township could pay the cost of the signs within their jurisdiction. Scott
County would estimate the number of homes and a cost estimate for each
Township. The Township and County would enter into a Joint Powers
Agreement indicating the County would implement the project, and the Township
would agree to reimburse the County for the cost. The Township would submit a
payment to the County from the sources it has allocated to pay for this cost.
II. The County could assess the cost of the signs. The procedures for assessing the
fees to affected property owners would fall under Minnesota Statute 1998,
Chapter 429. In this event, the cost of the signs would be increased to cover the
administrative cost of overseeing the 429 assessment process. Costs would be
escalated by approximately 15 %. This amounts to a total increase of
approximately $38,000 if the assessment method were used for all Townships.
Page 3 of 4, 911 Residential Address Markers
08/30/01
Another possible option that was dismissed early in consideration was to pay for the signs with a
County ad valorem levy, then reimburse the County through a property tax on all parcels in the
Township area only. This does not provide equitable cost recovery and staff does not
recommend that the costs of the signs be placed on the County's annual property tax levy.
Scott County's goal was that all Townships would agree to Option #1. Over the past nine
months the Townships were unable to come to a consensus regarding a funding mechanism.
Attached is a table that outlines the current cost estimate for each Township, giving both funding
options I and II. Detail on each funding option will be presented at the during the County Board
discussion.
If directed to proceed by the County Board, staff would seek to obtain a policy preference from
each Township. Decisions by each Township will need to be made in the very near future. Staff
is planning a Quarterly Township Officers Meeting in September and will use that opportunity to
secure an option from each jurisdiction.
Work Plan /Timing
If the Board decides to pursue the installation of E911 Residential Address Markers, a time
frame is outlined below:
June /July /August 2000
Meet with police, fire, and ambulance responders, and
city officials to obtain support from these agencies.
X
July 2000 — April 2001
Work with townships to obtain support for project and
discuss funding mechanism
August 2001
Present to County Board for official action to proceed
September 2001
Finalize funding mechanism
October 2001
BEGIN 429 PROCESS
October 2001
Hold public hearing on proposed project, following two
publications in the newspapers and notices must be sent
to every affected property owner at least 10 days prior to
the hearing.
October_ 2001
County Board must vote to proceed- with, a .four -fifths
vote, by order of resolution, within 6 months of the
p ublic hearing on the project.
November —
Write RFP, advertise for bids, construction bulletin and
December 2001
local newspaper
December 2001
Award contract
Spring 2002
Installation of E911 Residential Address Markers on
existing properties
Upon completion, hold final assessment hearing.
Certify parcel numbers and names to the County Auditor
to be collected with taxes. Must be certified to the
County Auditor on or before November 30 for payment
with the following years taxes.
This was originally presented to the Spring Townships Officer Meeting in March of 2001.
March 23, 2001
TO: Township Officials
From: David Unmacht, Scott County Administrator
RE: 911 Signs
In response to your request for information on the County being responsible for assessing the costs of
signs in some of the unincorporated areas, the statutes that we will need to follow to complete the project
are outlined in summary below. Here are the essential steps that we must follow:
• Prior to the work being done, we must hold a public hearing and publish for
two weeks in the newspaper (each publication must be a week apart from each other), a notice stating
the time and location of the public hearing, what the project is meant to accomplish, the cost, and the
locations of the areas to be assessed.
• The hearing must be at least 3 days from the last publication date
• Not less than 10 days prior to the meeting, a notice must also be mailed to
every property owner who will be assessed that states the project_ improvement and the cost
associated with it
• Prior to the adoption of the resolution, the County Board must receive a report by either an engineer or
"some other competent person" as to the projects necessity, feasibility, and cost effectiveness; as
well as the total cost, an estimate of the cost to be assessed /parcel owner and the methodology used
to determine the individual assessment. The County can, if they choose, include in the assessment,
the cost for preparing this report as long an itemization of labor is kept and the person preparing the
report has the experience and knowledge to prepare such a report.
• After adoption of the resolution, the work for the project must be done within one year, unless the time
constraints make that an impossibility due to the size of the project; in this case that time frame must
be specified in the resolution
• If the County is receiving bids on this project, we must advertise for bids if the project exceeds
$25,000 The number of weeks the publication must run depends upon the cost of the project.
• We must keep a detailed report of the labor in regard to the: a) complete cost; b) units of work done;
c) materials used & cost; d) cost of labor, equipment and supervisory costs
• After the completion of the project, the County Board will determine by resolution the total cost of the
project; the amount that we will pay; and the amount to be assessed
Page 4 of 4, 911 Residential Address Markers
08/30/01
Miscellaneous
Scott County Ordinance #13 regulates addressing procedures within Scott County. Staff would
also propose that this ordinance be amended to include details on E911 Residential Address
Markers. Staff has rewritten the sections that it feels are appropriate and will bring forward for
your consideration in the near future.
Karen911 Paper
• We must publish a notice of a final hearing on the adoption of the assessment roll no longer than 2
weeks prior to the public hearing
• A mailed notice to all property owners must be made no longer than 2 weeks prior to the hearing. The
notice will state the appeal rights of the owner; the final amount to be assessed; the right of the owner
to prepay the assessment; the time when interest will be added to the assessment if applicable; the
rate of the interest; and to inform the owner that the board may adopt this proposed assessment at
this hearing
• Following adoption of the resolution, the County Board sends a signed copy of the resolution, along
with a list of properties to be assessed and the amounts of the assessment, to me to be placed on the
tax rolls. Homeowners must be made aware of any changes to the assessment, decided at the public
hearing, by mail.
These are the statutory guidelines for placing a special assessment. Let me know how your meeting goes
with the townships. As soon as we can determine which areas we will be responsible for, I can get a list &
labels ready to start this process.
f0
O (W17 co
W
N O O
CD
O co Q
0 3 S
m c
w m m
Q-
A O
� Q
49 4fl
co
N O cn
O o c
0 0 3
{q O O
O Q Z7
A
O O —
O O_
cn cn cn Z r C- = n C7 0o a7
O iv m ° O cD cD p� cD
r- Q N- 77 (D CL w ; m
�w n� S o =3 r m �
r (D w < w
m N T ,-. O 7 (D CD
o — O O D W � o o 7 0
c t a _0 ai - a W
co zT =T = zy
o 2: - a o
a
V
co
W
c0 j j W N j W O
J
co C
c0 W V O m V co
OD
N
4fl
Efl 49 49 1 0 1 3 4H FA 40 fH
tf3 4G3
00
(T
N
V 1 .p N N i j
c0 CJ 0) 0 0
V 1
_
1
co
N s 0
-r' O
4 W
(NO
( M --+ C
W
N
m N 8 N N N W
'W
c0
- N co OD W W co cn
� W
N
V - 41 N 03 O N (O W
CO O
co
coo
0) � (D m 1 0
al
W coo
W
69
4f3 ffl 419 4i) 49 49 &3 49
fo 4fl
00
V
N (n N N N V -P
1
- Cl
W
C.
O 07 10 N V V O N
Q1
CD
m
CD
co
WA W N co N N
W Ln
x x
Z Z
C C
m N
7 7
A A
C C
cl Q
N (D
Cl) (D
W N
co 00
3 co
0 3
0 O
m 6
S (D
O 7
O
m 3
O O
w
O
3
O
t:
O D
2 -0
O 'Ro
3 0
m x•
N V7
N = rt
O -{ N
v 0 C
m a .
CD
'a
O
n-0
() ( O
C * 7
-w -
O c D
co
(D r o
w C "O
O
(D
O
Q.
C _0
N. z
7 O O
> O
w O
CL
CL N n W
O =
Ul
N rt
7 -w
W
(D 0
* L O
CD (A
ID O rt
7 O v
O_ O
_ =w
'a
O tG
3 O
n
D N
m
(m
M
m
T .
CD
a?
D
a
Q
CD
v
m
n
O
m
a
3
w
CD
uJ
D
c
(o
C
rt
N
N
O
O
Mark McNeill
From:
Tom Pitschneider
Sent:
Thursday, November 08, 2001 3:54 PM
To:
Peter Vickerman
Cc:
Dan Hughes; Mark McNeill
Subject:
911 Signs
Peter,
Here are the areas where the reflective signs would be best utilized.
Addresses on Co. Rd. 101 east of the Mill Pond area
Addresses on County Rd. 16 east of County Rd. 83
Addresses accessible via Tuckaway Trail (these would be Eagle Creek Blvd. addresses)
Addresses on Valley View Road (specifically the south side)
Addresses on Co. Rd. 78
Addresses on Co. Rd. 42
Addresses on Co. Rd. 14
Addresses on Co. Rd. 72 (north side only)
Addresses on Co. Rd. 79 south of Hwy. 169 (east side only)
Addresses on Co. Rd. 17 south of Hwy. 169 (west side from 169 to Valley View, east & west side south of Valley View)
Addresses on Co. Rd. 83 south of Cr. Rd. 16
Addresses on McKenna Road
Addresses on Pike Lake Trail
Addresses on Stagecoach Rd. from Co. Rd. 101 to Preserve Trail
I will be working on a public education campaign to focus on the need for visible addresses in the rural residential and
commercial areas outside of the current MUSA line. This should be ready for release in early January.
Tom
CITY OF SHAKOPEE
MEMORANDUM
To: Parks and Recreation Advisory Board
From: Mark McQuillan, Parks and Recreation Director
Subject: Tahpah Park Parking Lot Project
Date: February 13, 2002
INTRODUCTION
Staff is asking the City Council if it wants to move forward with newly revised plans for
the Tahpah Park parking lot.
BACKGROUND
At its August 7, 2001 meeting, the City Council rejected bids for the Tahpah Park
Parking Lot Project citing that it exceeded Council's "lid" amount of $408,000.000. The
low bid came in at $435,718.45.
Subsequent to that action, staff asked Bolten & Menk, Inc. to create two new concept
plans for consideration. One plan (Option A) involves the construction of a 200 -car
parking lot on the undeveloped 10 acres west of the existing ball fields. A second plan
(Option B) involves the elimination of field #5 and placing parking on that field with a
roadway slithering between fields #6 & #7 to Vierling Drive. The third plan (Option C)
reduces the number of parking spaces (253 to 200) in the original plan, which eliminates
field #8 for parking and has access to Vierling Drive.
At the January 28, 2002 Parks and Recreation Advisory Board Meeting, representatives
from various user groups were invited to review and discuss the three options. After a
lengthily dialogue, the user groups and the Parks and Recreation Advisory Board,
recommended (Option A) which is to construct a separate 200 -car parking lot on the
undeveloped 10 acres and rough grade two future ball fields. The ball players and the
PRAB were emphatic in not eliminating any fields.
According to Bolten & Menk, Inc., the estimated cost for Option A is $360,240.38. The
Alternate Bid Estimate for rough grading two youth fields is $21,390.00. New plans and
specs will cost about $10,000. Total estimated cost is $391,630.38. According to
those in the construction business, the current economic slow -down has resulted in very
favorable bids for the customer right now.
Even though Council has not made a decision on the land purchase by Lake O'Dowd,
you could still proceed with plans and specifications, bid it and decide later if you want to
do the project or table it for next year. The tentative timeline for the project would be as
follows:
■ Feb. 19 — Authorize a contract extension with Bolten & Menk, Inc. to proceed
with plans and specifications for the parking lot.
■ March 19 Approve plans, specifications, and direct staff to advertise for bids.
■ April 25 — Bid Opening.
■ May 7 — Accept or reject bids or table project to next year.
ALTERNATIVES
1. Authorize a contract extension with Bolten & Menk, Inc. to develop plans and
specifications for the Tahpah Park Parking Lot Project.
2. Do nothing until Council makes a decision on the land purchase.
ACTION REQUESTED
Provide staff direction.
�; 7/x- //"� /2- 131
Mark Mc uillan
Director of Natural Resources
N'akhw
PA
a
COUNTY ROAD 15
I
®r,
02/15/2002 11:47 FAX 9528908065 BOLTON & MENK Z002/002
ENGINEER'S ESTIMATE
TAHPAH PARK - 2001 (OPTION A MODIFIED)
BMI PROJECT NO. T12.20435
H.XSHAMT1220436\ENGESTMOD.
JANUARY 18, 2002
BASE
BID
ESTIMATE
77r�
ggggg
�
mm ������..
j Jt k
1: 1;';• e ,� •!`^� h ".. 1
it ti J. 1 a ,.
kt alo " � °�
I {"�r'. +��:rA
,(. I
., )i' r7r1� , .( ;� ;
I
LS
$11,000.00
$11,000.00
1
2
MOBILIZATION
COMMON EXC AVATION
9,650
CY
$3.50
$5.0
$33,775.00
$1,925.00
-
3
SUBGRADE EXCAVATION EV)
(
385
CY
LF
$3.00
$1,140,00
4
SAWCUT BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT
380
SY
$350
$2,695.00
_
5
REMOVE BITUMINOUS
770
10
LF
$1000
$100.00
6
REMOVE CONCRETE CURB & GUTTER
2
EACH
$100.00
$200.00
7
REMOVE EXISTING STORM SEWER CASTING
- BITUMINOUS
--
840
TONS
$31-00
$26,040.00
8
WEAR COURSE, T YPE 41
1,125
-
TONS
$27.00
$30,375.00
9
BITUMINOUS BASE COURSE, TYPE 31
420
GAL
$1.50
$630.00
10
BITUMINOUS MATERIAL FOR T ACK COA
3,065
TONS
$11.25
$34,481
11
AGGREGATE BASE, CLASS 5
9,650
TONS
$6.00
$57,900.00
12
GRANULAR BACKFILL
BACKFILL FOR E EXCAVATION
640
TONS
$6.00
$3,840.00
13
GRANULAR ,'iu
B612 CONCRETE CURff -GUTTER
1,830
LF
$8.00
$3
$14,640.00
$7,068.75
14
15
4" CONCRETE SIDEWALK (WI 4' GRANULAR BASE)
2,175
I
SF
EACH
00 00
$1,5 00
$1,500.00
16
SALVAGE & RELOCATE HYDRANT
--
1 7
LF
$30.00
$510,00
17
6" DIP WATERMAIN (IqCL.FITTINGS)
ADJUST VALVE BOX
8" PVC SANITARY SEWER SUR 35
8 PVC SANITARY SEW ER ULEANOUT
12" PIPE SEWER RCP CLASS V
15" PIPE SEWER RCP CLASS V
]:ffjP:E SEW RC
R CP !! IV
CLASS IIA
I -
40
1
40
690
80
125
-
EACH
LF
EACH
LF
LF
LF
$150.00
$1
$30.00
-- $3 - 00.00
$23-00
$25,00
$28.00
$3 00-00
$150.00
$1,200.00
$300.
$920.00
$17,250.00
$2,240.00
$37,500-00
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
102" SPAN PIPE SEWER ARCH
1
EACH
$800.00
$800,00
25
SALVAGE & RELOCATE 84" RCP ARCH APRON & TRASHGUARD
T2 RCP FLARED END WITH TRASHGUARIJ
2
EACH
EACH
$550.00
$670-00
$1,100.00
$670.00
26
-- 27 -
18" RCP FLARED END WITH I RASHGUARD
1
LF
$170-00
$2,380.00
28
CONSTRUCT DRAINAGE STRUCTURE RUCTURE DES 2'x3'
14
LF
$200.00
$1,800,00
29
CONSTRUCT DRAINAGE ST DES 48
9
7
EACH
$350.00
$2,450.00
30
CASTING ASSEMBLY
- C 35 CABLE CONCRETE -C
-- T
�PARKING
553
9,905
-
SF
LF
$10.00
$0.50
$5,530,00
$4,952.50
31
32
�WHITE LOT STRIPE - PAINT
15
EACH
$80.00
$1,200.00
33
PAVEMENT MESSAGE HANDICAP SYMBOL
LF
$2.00
$3,640
34
- SILT FENCE, PREASSEMBLED
SEED, FERTILIZER & MULCH
1820
1.50
ACRES
$900.001
$1,35000
35
SUBTOTAL COSTS
313,252,50
$46,987.88
CONTINGENCIES (15%)
Fn ®NS RUC TIONCOSTS
City of Shakopee T12.20435 Tahpah Park
C
x
a1 �j v
ENGINEER'S ESTIMATE
TAHPAH PARK - 2001 (OPTION B)
BIVII PROJECT No. T12.20435
WSHAKW
JANUARY 18, 2002
ALThKNA
It-' V 1 rZ I IMAM
t
Ir I! lot
1.14%
• It
VIg
1. N
R
i
li'V
®R
46
N
V "
liil 5: fN
1
COMMON EXCAVATION (P) (EV)
6,600
CY
$2.00
$13,200
2
SEED, FERTILIZER & MULCH
9
ACRES
$600.00
$5,400
ISUBTOTAL COSTS
$18
$2 ,600.00
,790.00
1 CONTINGENCIES (15%)
T
F; ri "o
T OT AL ESTIMATE W1,390.00
k :: i � 1 .111 (��: I' I(]
r-1- -4 Cl—L-- T19 on4qr, Tahnah Park
x
VWUAIZ IWAL 15
k
I 1�1
�`
4
� d
N
ENGINEER'S ESTIMATE
TAHPAH PARK - 2001 (OPTION C)
HMI PROJECT NO. T12.20435
HASHAK\T1220435\ENGEST.123
JANUARY 18, 2002
MAer- 01M =LlM9lrAr=
AL, I r m rdK i r 0 1 u r- 0 g I IVIP% i G
ITT N" V W l
I T P! ll 1 019 W"ll I ' , ,
t0l"111-1-1.
.
MOBILIZATION
I
Ls
$11,000.00
$11,000.00
2
1 COMMON EXCAVATION (P) (EV)
8,500
CY
$3.50
$29,750.00
3
SUBGRADE EXCAVATION (EV)
300
CY
$5.00
$1,500.00
4
SAWCUT BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT
330
LF
$3.00
$990.00
5
REMOVE BITUMINOUS
765
SY
$3.50
$2,677.50
6
REMOVE CONCRETE CURB & GUTTER
10
LF
$10.00
$100.00
7
REMOVE EXISTING STORM SEWER CASTING
2
EACH
$100.00
$200.00
8
BITUMINOUS WEAR COURSE, TYPE 41
780
TONS
$31.00
$24,180.001
9
BITUMINOUS BASE COURSE, TYPE 31
1,040
TONS
$27.00
$28,080.00
10
BITUMINOUS MATERIAL FOR TACK COAT
430
GAL
$ 1.50
$ 645.00
11
AGGREGATE BASE, CLASS 5
2,830
TONS
$11.25
$31,837.50
12
GRANULAR BACKFILL
9,000
TONS
$6.00
$54,000.00
13
GRANULAR BACKFILL FOR SUBGRADE EXCAVATION
550
TONS
$6.00
$3,300.00
14
6612 CONCRETE CURB & GUTTER
2,230
LF
.$8.00
$17,840.50
15
4' CONCRETE SIDEWALK (W/ 4 GRANULAR BASE)
200
SF
$3.25
$650,001
16
11 SALVAGE & RELOCATE HYDRANT
i
EACH
$1,500.00
$1,500.00
17•
6' DIP WATERMAIN (INCL FITTINGS)
17
LF
$30.00
$510.00
18
ADJUST VALVE BOX
1
EACH
$150.00
$150.00
19
8' PVC SANITARY SEWER SDR 5
40
LF
$30.00
$1,200.00
20
8' PVC SANITARY SEWER CLFANOUT
1
EACH
$300.00
$300=
21
12' PIPE SEWER RCP CLASS V
32
LF
$23.00
$736.00 7
22
15" PIPE SEWER RCP CLASS V
308
LF
$25-00
$7,700.00
23
18' PIPE SEWER RCP CLASS IV
357
LF
$28.00
$9,996.00
24
102' SPAN PIPE SEWER RCP ARCH CLASS IIA
125
LF
$300.00
$37,500.00
25
SALVAGE & RELOCATE W RCP ARCH APRON & TRASHGUARD
1
EACH
$800.00
$800.00
26
12' RCP FLARED END WITH TRASHGUARD
2
EACH
$550.00
$1,100-00
27
1 8' RCP FLARED END WITH TRASHGUARD
1
EACH
$670-00
$670.00
28
CONSTRUCT DRAINAGE STRUCTURE DES 2'x3'
10
LF
$170.00
$1,700.001
29
CONSTRUCT DRAINAGE STRUCTURE DES 48'
28
LF
$200=
$5,600.001
30
CASTING ASSEMBLY
11
EACH
$350.00
$3,850.001
31
CC 35 CABLE CONCRETE
553
SF
$10.00
$5,530.00
32
4' WHITE PARKING LOT STRIPE - PAINT
8,800
LF
$0.50
$4,400.00
33
PAVEMENT MESSAGE HANDICAP SYMBOL
10
EACH
$80.00
$800.00
34
SILT FENCE, PREASSEMBLED
1800
LF
$2.00
$3,600.00
35
SEED, FERTILIZER & MULCH
2.90
ACRES
$900,00
$2,610.00
: T
SUBT OTAL
$297,002.00]
C ONTINGENCIES (10%)
$2
TOTAL ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION COSTS 26 7�0220
AL, I r m rdK i r 0 1 u r- 0 g I IVIP% i G
WN,
I T P! ll 1 019 W"ll I ' , ,
t0l"111-1-1.
.
I
-
p-le--p - , g
, to Nih .
ht
- "
. -
"I
0
-p�
gi
91 7
5,
I.R t0tiP,flu
' 8o
N
I;Ml' i
NOR
• l i v
N,
i
1
] COMMON EXCAVATION (P) (EV)
6,600
CY
$2.00
$13,200.00
2
ISEED, FERTILIZER & MULCH
9
ACRES
$600.00
$5,400.00
$18,600.00
SU BTO TAL CO STS
CONTI NGENCIES -65%)
$2,790.00
TOTAL ESTIMATED CON STRUC - -------- $21 390.00
110N
Mtvaf c-'i;jknnpe T12.20435 Tshnah Park
i � ? t.
�. v k
Del � ��,,w( DP���, -,
CITY OF SHAKOPEE
Memorandum
CASE LOG NO.: 02026
TO: Mayor and City Council
Mark McNeill, City Administrator
FROM: R. Michael Leek, Community Development Director
SUBJECT: Patrick Link Construction Appeal of Rear Yard Setback Variance
Denial by the Board of Adjustment and Appeals
MEETING DATE: February 19, 2002
WN W 1 1 , �1
Patrick Link Construction has submitted an appeal of the Board of Adjustment and
Appeals February 7 denial of a variance to allow a rear yard setback of 21 feet instead
of the required 30 feet for lots in the plat of South Parkview 4 Addition.
The Board of Adjustment and Appeals held a public hearing on the variance request at its
February 7, 2002 meeting, and denied the request, having concluded that it did not meet
all of the criteria for granting a variance. The Board's action was consistent with staff s
recommendation. A copy of the report to the Board is attached for the Council's
information. The applicant has appealed the Board's determination.
1. Uphold the determination of the Board of Adjustment and Appeals, and direct staff to
prepare a resolution for the Council's consent agenda that is consistent with that
decision.
2. Uphold the appeal of the applicant, thereby granting the requested (or some other)
variance, and direct staff to prepare a resolution for the Council's consent agenda that
is consistent with that decision.
3. Table the appeal for additional information.
Offer and pass a motion consistent with the Council's determination.
R. Michael Leek
Community Development Director
APPlink
The Planning commission upheld the city planners recommendation
to deny the request for rear yard set backs, even though MN -Dot
took 10 feet of the rear yards. The city planner feels the land
could still be put to a reasonable use without variances, even
though variances were granted to all the lots East of this parcel.
It is my belief that the city planner and the planning commission
have not gone one step further in their study of this problem.
They have no expertise in designing and marketing homes and the
importance of maintaining the same level of quality, size and
style of home that already exists in the area surrounding this
property. Maintaining property values and building homes
comparable to the neighborhood is an important equation in
planning a city.
I could understand their denial if there had been any opposition
from the surrounding property owners but if you refer to the
signed petition that was presented and the testimony of some
of the neighbors they also would like to see homes of the same
size , quality and style.as the existing homes.
I respectfully ask you reconsideration of this request.
�SAI-YZI
Mem
CASE NO.: 02013
TO: Board of Adjustment and Appeals
FROM: R. Michael Leek, Community Development Director
SUBJECT: Request of Patrick Link Construction for a Variance from the Rear Yard
Setback in the Urban Residential (R -1B) Zone
ME ETING DATE: February 5, 2002
REVIEW PERIOD: 12/21/2001— 2/19/2002
Patrick Link Construction, Inc. has made application for variances up to nine (9) feet to allow a
twenty -one (21) feet rear yard setback instead of the required thirty (30) feet. The requested
setback would apply to the lots created in the plat of South Parkview e Addition, previously
identified as Outlot A in the plat of South Parkview 3 Addition.
Applicant: Patrick Link Construction, Inc.
Location: South of 12� Avenue West; east of Jefferson Street; west of Quincy Circle
Current Zoning: Urban Residential (Rl B) Zone
Adjacent Zoning: North: Urban Residential (R 1B)
South: Urban Residential (R 1B)
East: Medium Density Residential (R-2)
West: Urban Residential (R 1B)
Comp. Plan: Single - family Residential
Attachments: Exhibit A: Location Map
Exhibit B: Application
Exhibit C: Plat of SOUTH PARKVIEW 4TH ADDITION
Patrick Link Construction Inc. has made application to allow a reduced rear yard setback for
single - family lots located in SOUTH PARKVIEW 4 ADDITION, and adjacent to the twin
homes in SOUTH PARKVIEW 3 ADDITION. The applicant states that the taking by
1
MND ®T of 30 feet for right -of -way along CSAH 15 in connection with STH 169 resulted
essentially in undersized lots, and that the setback variance is required to construct homes on said
lots.
The required front and rear yard setbacks would leave a building area (front to rear) of 61 feet.
While this may limit the size of house that can be constructed on the subject lots, it did not appear
to staff that it would preclude the construction of reasonably sized structures on the lots. For that
reason, staff has prepared a resolution of denial for the Board's consideration. That resolution
contains draft findings responsive to the following criteria for the Board to consider as well.
Section 11.89, Subd. 2, of the City Code contains provisions for the granting of variances only if all of
the following circumstances are found to exist. Staff has provided draft findings on each criterion. The
Board of Adjustment and Appeals may use or modify these draft findings as it sees fit:
Criterion 2
It has been demonstrated that a variance as requested will be in keeping with the spirit and
intent of this Chapter.
Criterion 3
The request is not for a use variance.
Criterion 4
Conditions to be imposed by the Board of Adjustment and Appeals will insure compliance to
protect the adjacent properties.
Criterion 5
Variances in the flood plain overlay zone also shall meet the following criteria:......
2
r
1. Approve Resolution No. PCO2 -013, as presented.
2. Approve Resolution No. PCO2 -013, with revisions.
3. Deny Resolution No. PCO2 -013, and direct staff to prepare a resolution approving the
requested variances.
4. Table the action on this item and request additional information from staff and/or the applicant.
C A N:
Staff recommends that the Board approve Resolution No. PCO2 -013, as presented.
ACTION REQUESTED:
Move to approve Resolution No. PCO2 -013 as presented and move its adoption, or provide staffwith
other direction.
a
l R. Michael Leek
Community Development Director
g: \boaa- pc\2002 \0207\varlink. doc
L1
• RESOLUTION OF :1 OF : •'
DENYING • FOR • THE REAR YARD SETBACK FOR
LOTS LOCATED IN THE URBAN RESIDENTIAL (R ZONE-
AS, Patrick Link Construction Inc., applicant and property owner, has filed an
application for a variance under the provisions of Chapter 11, Land Use Regulation (Zoning), of
the City of Shakopee City Code, Section 11.28, Subd. 5 to allow rear yard setback variances up to
nine (9) feet to allow a rear yard setback of twenty -one (21) feet instead of the required thirty (3) feet
for lots in South Parkview 4' Addition; and
WHEREAS, the subject parcel of land is presently zoned Urban Residential (R -1B); and
WIIEREAS, the legal description for the subject parcel of land for which the request is
being made is:
Outlot A, SOUTHPARKVIEW 3 ADD177ON, City of Shakopee, Scott County,
Minnesota; and
WHEREAS, notice was provided and on February 7, 2002, the Board of Adjustment and
Appeals conducted a public hearing regarding this application, at which it heard from the
Community Development Director or his designee and invited members of the public to comment;
and
WHEREAS, the Board of Adjustment and Appeals reached the following findings with
respect to the requested variance and applicable ordinance criteria:
Finding I.A.;
The property as platted can be put to a reasonable use for the development of single family
residences if used under conditions allowed by the official controls
The plight of the landowner is not due to circumstances unique to the property. the lots in
this subdivision are similar in size to lot in other single-family residential plats in the City of
Shakopee Area exists elsewhere on the lot which could be utilized for construction of a garage
addition.
Finding 1. G;
The applicant contends that the lots are undersized as a result of a taking of property by the
Minnesota Department of Transportation (M11 DO7�. While that may have affected the size of
the lots, as noted above they are similar to other lots in other plats in the City.
0
The variance would not alter the essential character of the locality.
Finding I.E.;
The problems relate specifically to economic considerations, i.e. the apparent market move to
construct larger houses on smaller, existing lots..
Finding 2.;
The proposed variance would not be in keeping with the spirit and intent of Chapter 11
(Zoning) in that there is no hardship or need to vary from the ordinance.
Finding 3.;
The request is not a use variance.
Finding 4.;
Not applicable if the application does not meet all the criteria for granting a variance.
Finding 5.;
Not applicable since the front of the property is not within the flood plain overlay zone.
NOW CI !" BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF 1 1
1 APPEALS OF DI OF :'• •' EE, MENNESOTA, ! !
That the request for variance to allow a reduced rear yard setback for lots in the plat of SOUTH
pARKVIEW 4' ADDITION is hereby denied.
Adopted by the Shakopee Board of Adjustment and Appeals on the 7 h day of February, 2002.
Community Development Director
5
SHAKOPEE
Proposed Variance •
Rear 1 Setbacks
Zoning Boundary
• - d a
•
APPLICATIONFOR
(please check j�IJ the appropriate box and answer the corresponding questions)
$] Variance - Questions 1-4, 6, 15 -19
Single Family Residential $ 85
All Others $150
❑ Conditional Use Permit (CUP) -Questions 1-4, 6, 14, 18,19
Over Height Fence $100
All other Conditional Use Permits $ 200
Renewal or Amendment of Existing CUP $ 200
Mineral Extraction and Land Rehabilitation $ 200
plus $2500 cash deposit (Mineral Extraction/Land Rehabilitation)
❑ Determination by the Board of Adjustment and Appeals - Questions 1-4, 6, 18
Application Fee:
❑ preliminary Plat - Questions 1-4, 6 -8, 18, 19
Fee Calculation: $200 + ( acres x $4) _
$330+( lots x SO
Amount Due is the GREATER of the two calculations.
❑ Final Plat -Questions 1-4, 6-8, 18,19 $150
Application Fee:
Title Review Fee $100
❑ PUD Concept Review - Questions 1-4, 6 -8, 18 $100
Application:
❑ planned Unit Development (PUD) - Questions 1-4, 6- 8,18,19
Application Fee: $ acres x $35) _
Cash Deposit $1000
❑ Amendment to Planned Unit Development (PUD) - Questions 1-4$ 6-8 18, 19
Application Fee:
Cash Deposit $1000
❑ Rezoning - Questions 1 -6, 18,19
Rezoning less than 2-5 acres $250
Rezoning greater than 2.5 acres $500
❑ Zoning Text Amendment - Questions 13, 18, 19 $500
Application Fee:
❑ Vacation of Easements or Right -of -Way - Questions 1-4, 6, 9 -12, 18, 19
Application Fee (Right -of -Way): $200
(Easements): $100
This form must be used and handed in, in it's entirety with all required attachments to be considered
complete. Only the first eight (8) completed applications will be accepted for each deadline (see list
attached for deadline date)
Applicants Name: ?. i c �. //✓�C' �ioi ✓sTic ` 1'� G .
Address:
City S�-6 /�oz1 `/= State IYiJY Zip (.ode s s3 75
Phone Number: �'� — A d-- g FAX Number:
Property Owner. %�� , , ✓ �J� G a / v sTR /s
Address:
Phone Number: FAX Number:
1. Current legal descriptions of all parcels (attach separate sheets, if necessary):
1v 'a ti bl�
2. pID Numbers:27- a o Sy
27-
27-
27-
3. Property Acreage: o
4. Present Zoning:
5. Requested Zoning:
6. Existing Use of Property:
7. Proposed name of development:
8. If development is to be phased, proposed number of phases: /
9. Right -of -way or easement location proposed for vacation:
10. Size and dimension of proposed vacation:
11. Right -of -way names (if applicable):
12. Any existing utilities or improvements: A LL - /A�
13. If proposing an amendment to the text of the Zoning Ordinance, which
provision?
14. Type of Conditional Use Permit requested:
or
15. Variance requested to: /P�.4 'A �.4.Q
16. Variance dimension requested:
17. Please describe the undue hardship that exists that is unique to the site which necessitates the
request for a variance: ,A /fID Ta e Ar 3 o fr
/ pI3� J y ►E ls, �/ z TZ/A Tu �A /rC
A A /v ,t? h1 A S
w
Submitted this i g' day of e Q r C, , , 20 U A
City staff has ten days from the date of application to determine
if an application is complete. Incomplete applications will not be processed.
GAcomdev\forms \application
I""- ���� 1JJ 11 � � _....... ® ...... ... �• � .. ... �. -� a... w ..... .. -.-+. .... .. _. .,.
u rl
Lai
M D M
OO O N M
4
I.
y
4 •
•
O
.p
o
ti m
V v
• O
6
N V
N •
M
p
6 m
a
t.
1 � �' F „�, . \ ,
A '�~ . ° � ` V
�..�:..`,~ •! e i. �i
ei
: Qf
w
F
-
w
cx
p
• IG
V <
-
I
� a�g
m
8
Y O
�
M
. •
G ® O
�
•
u
� -
•
, O a
A
w
7
�N,
V
v
p
w
a
H x
mN
M
p
•
h
O
�.
.
ae
•p�
®
p1
e
m
p
� U 8 4
M •�
H
°•
st
y
• V
4 ■
N N
[ 8w
m <
�
•
N C
N ✓
� ® M
M
'
•
F
M
ti
A a
E h M y p
A g
e •
G
0yyyp�� •
E
,y
•
®
w
V S A Y 67
N•
N 6 •
•
<' •
":
•
a
I
u
! A
B y r MN
V
ti w M
m
Y
Y N
V
ti N
°•
A .j
V °
9
�
•
•
v e
�
u
� • Q � a �
a'
A
IVA
O N
..i7 z yQ
Z <
O � „
D »
I~ y
y X
m m _
m ! O
1"
rj {
2T
m
o 1
'
O
o
v
o
ti m
V v
6
N V
N •
M
p
6 m
a
•
1 � �' F „�, . \ ,
A '�~ . ° � ` V
�..�:..`,~ •! e i. �i
ei
: Qf
w
F
-
w
cx
p
• IG
V <
-
I
� a�g
m
Y M X
c
•
e�.
w
7
�N,
V
v
p
w
a
H x
mN
M
p
•
h
O
�OO
•p�
®
p1
F
09 •.•
m
p
� U 8 4
H
�
•
N C
N ✓
1
'
•
F
O N
..i7 z yQ
Z <
O � „
D »
I~ y
y X
m m _
m ! O
1"
rj {
2T
m
o 1
o
v
o
�1 MI�:
p
6 m
•
1 � �' F „�, . \ ,
A '�~ . ° � ` V
�..�:..`,~ •! e i. �i
ei
: Qf
w
F
-
cx
p
• IG
V <
-
I
� a�g
m
O N
..i7 z yQ
Z <
O � „
D »
I~ y
y X
m m _
m ! O
1"
rj {
2T
m
o 1
' _ F•
- - - --
9V L9
3' 0z N
oo = oe
oo - o- r — 1
0 '.
f a • r
0
�Q
e
VIN
ro
z
. J
W
cn W
a.
�... 0
z x
Z �
bs
J
V
N
t o
U M •�
� ® X
00
® � M
® � a
b
M• .
o8m,
0
.---+ c I
,.•' ® •!i y��I N ZI I_ u ® rip Io Z l I— �I� -• N <
L 1J ®�' I Si� I ml - � I 0 % N I Z I I /i = = /��
�. c� N I ZI I Z I zl I ml I
co
:*
� o oo'oe 000e — J L_000e_ Z
L 0 oe l
It
-+L Z o P9
LL _1 -3T - r ' s
r .
i lu
® � '. I
. L% : S ti :_ %. •: —L..I :__I °._B \ f ° � J - �1 t. V /• ._/ ! if e . / e ( YYY��•�• _ .... _ ... m y a ....
o
�1 MI�:
�.��r\`Ir� o
1 � �' F „�, . \ ,
A '�~ . ° � ` V
�..�:..`,~ •! e i. �i
' �° ir e"�
•,
w
F
-
' _ F•
- - - --
9V L9
3' 0z N
oo = oe
oo - o- r — 1
0 '.
f a • r
0
�Q
e
VIN
ro
z
. J
W
cn W
a.
�... 0
z x
Z �
bs
J
V
N
t o
U M •�
� ® X
00
® � M
® � a
b
M• .
o8m,
0
.---+ c I
,.•' ® •!i y��I N ZI I_ u ® rip Io Z l I— �I� -• N <
L 1J ®�' I Si� I ml - � I 0 % N I Z I I /i = = /��
�. c� N I ZI I Z I zl I ml I
co
:*
� o oo'oe 000e — J L_000e_ Z
L 0 oe l
It
-+L Z o P9
LL _1 -3T - r ' s
r .
i lu
® � '. I
. L% : S ti :_ %. •: —L..I :__I °._B \ f ° � J - �1 t. V /• ._/ ! if e . / e ( YYY��•�• _ .... _ ... m y a ....
o
15�Cal,
Memorandum
T: R. Michael Leek, Community Development Director
FR OM: 1
South Parkview 3r Addition Variances
DA February 15, 2002
Mayor Mars requested that staff provide a historical background of the variances that
have been granted to date in South Parkview 3` Addition.
The Final Plat of South Parkview 3' Addition was approved the City Council on August
19, 1997. As a part of the Final Plat approval, the following variances were granted:
o A 100 foot extension to the 500 foot cul -de -sac length;
o An 8 foot variance to the 3 5 foot front yard setback for Lots 1, 3, 5, 7, 9, and 15,
Block 1;
o An 18 foot variance to the 70 foot lot width requirement for all lots;
o A variance to allow a 26.5 foot front yard setback for Lots 1, 3, 5, 7, and 9, Block
1 (standard setback is 35 feet);
A variance to allow a 32.5 foot front yard setback for Lots 2, 4, 6, 8, 16, 18, 20,
22, and 24, Block 1 (standard setback is 35 feet); and
o A variance to allow a 30 foot front yard setback for Lots 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, and
15, Block 1 (standard setback is 35 feet).
Variances to Lots 15 and 16, Block 1, were requested in October 2000. The BOAA
reviewed the request and denied the variances. The applicant appealed the denial to City
Council. Prior to Council taking final action on the appeal, the applicant requested that
the matter be tabled. City Council did table the matter and has not taken any final action
to date.
CITY OF SHAKOPEE
Memorandum
TO: Mayor & City Council
Mark McNeill, City Administrator
FROM: Bruce Loney, Public Works Director
SUBJECT: Blue Lake Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW)
DATE: February 19, 2002
INTRODUCTION:
The City Council is asked to direct staff to either prepare a Resolution adopting findings
and making a negative declaration on the need for an Environmental Impact Statement
(EIS) for the above named project or to prepare an EIS. Attached for Council's
consideration are proposed findings of fact for making a negative declaration. Also
attached are copies of the comments received and the draft response to those comments.
BACKGROUND:
A notice of the availability of the EAW for the project was published in the EQB Monitor
and the local paper. The review and comment period officially closed on January 9,
2002. Copies of the comment letters that were received, as well as the responses from the
City, have been attached as Exhibit A. Staff extended the comment period until February
12, 2002 in order to receive comments from the Shakopee Mdewakanton Sioux
Community (SMSC).
Comment letters were received from the following agencies, associations or individuals:
Shakopee Mdewakanton Sioux Community (SMSC)
Kathy Gerlach
Technical & Regulatory Evaluations Group, Inc.
Prior Lake -Spring Lake Watershed District (PLSLWD)
Lower Minnesota River Watershed District (LMRWD)
Scott County's Community Development
Metropolitan Council
Minnesota Department of Transportation (MNDOT)
U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service
Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (MDNR)
Minnesota Historical Society — State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO)
City of Shakopee Environmental Advisory Board
From the letters received, drainage alternative No. 3 was preferred as this proposal
promoted water infiltration the best and mimics the current watershed drainage pattern.
Negative comments were received from the SMSC on this proposal as this drainage
currently does and would flow through their land that is currently in fee status and is
being reviewed for trust by the BIA. The letters from Technical & Regulatory
Evaluations Group, Inc. and the Prior Lake - Spring Lake Watershed District issue concern
on the EAW in as far as completeness but do not specifically call for an EIS.
The Minnesota Environmental Quality Board (EQB) guidelines for EAW's state that an
EIS shall be ordered for a project that has the potential for significant environmental
effects. In deciding whether a project has the potential for significant effects, the RGU
compares the effects that are reasonably expected from the project with the following
criteria:
1. Type, extent and reversibility of environmental effects.
2. Cumulative potential effects of related or anticipated future projects.
3. The extent to which environmental effects are subject to mitigation by ongoing
public regulatory authority.
4. The extent to which environmental effects can be anticipated and controlled as a
result of other environmental studies undertaken by public agencies or the public
proposer or of EIS's previously prepared.
The Responsible Governmental Unit ( "RGU") must apply the criteria to the factual
information contained in the EAW, the comments received on the EAW and the
responses to the comments. In this particular case, the City is the proposer of the EAW
and the RGU. After reviewing the four criteria, staff proposes that a resolution be
prepared adopting findings and declaring that there is no need for an EIS. Council should
discuss the findings, comment letters and responses before giving staff direction with
respect to the preparation of a Resolution.
ALTERNATIVES:
1. Direct staff to prepare a Resolution making a negative declaration on the need for
an EIS for the Blue Lake Watershed Drainage Improvement as presented.
2. Direct staff to prepare a Resolution making a positive declaration on the need for
an EIS.
3. Table the decision on the need for an EIS.
Staff recommends Alternative No. 1.
ACTION REQUESTED:
Direct staff to prepare a Resolution making a negative declaration on the need for an EIS
for the Blue Lake Watershed Drainage Improvement.
Bruce Loney
Public Works Director
BLpmp
MEM5656
15. D.I
To: pl aim i ng Commission
Michael Leek, Community Development Director
F Environmental Advisory Board
Mark J. McQuillan, Natural Resources Director
Subject: EAC Plan Review
Date: January 10, 2002
, 1 1
The Environmental Advisory Committee has reviewed the Environmental Awareness
Worksheet for the Blue Lake Watershed Channel Alternatives and based on study saw no
need to require additional studies. The EAC also commented that alternative #3 is the
most environmentally friendly approach for handling storm water run off.
There was some concern about the infiltration of contaminants into the ground water
supply. See comments by Steve Meriden.
I have attached their individual comments to this memorandum.
A
I concur with Mary about alternative 3.
I concur with Mary and Steve that an EIS does not appear to be
warranted.
Also, I believe Steve raises an excellent concern, but I confess I am
not familiar with Shakopee's groundwater situation or affiliated
environmental issues related to groundwater. I would value us discussing
the topic at an upcoming EAC meeting, but I wonder if someone could
provide to us either a written report (ahead of a meeting if one
already exists)or a presentation to provide a foundation for our
discussion regarding the state of Shakopee Community's groundwater
resource and our current known impacts to it.
charley
-- Original Message- -
From: Steven Menden [mailto: 11 :25 AM-
Sent: Thursday, January 03, 2002 11:25
To: 'Mark McQuillan'; 'Charlie Kubler'; 'Jeff Reinhard'; Steven Menden;
'Russell Kennedy'
Subject: RE: EAW Blue lake Channel
Mark, I can't really see where an EIS would be warranted. The EAW
appears to be adequate in presenting the issues regarding the Blue Lake
outlet and along with Mary I feel Alternative 3 is the preferred choice.
Looking at the bigger picture thou I do have one concern regarding storm
water infiltration. As you know, Shakopee gets its water through
groundwater wells placed in underlying fractured bedrock (dolomite). If
I recall correctly one of the more recently installed groundwater wells
had fairly high nitrate concentrations. In the Shakopee area (as you
move towards the MN River) bedrock is fairly close to the surface and as
the EAW indicates rock will be encountered during excavation of the
channel. Apparently the nitrate concentrations found in the well are
believed to be attributed to fertilizer application or manure
(application) management by the regional farming community.
What I'm wandering is if groundwater can be impacted by farming
practices in this region are we going to also be impacting groundwater
by moving towards a storm water control practice of infiltration? If I
recall correctly, the EAW states that two feet of soil will be required
in the channel over bedrock. If farming practices have impacted our
groundwater, and I'm assuming that in most cases two feet of soil was
present over the bedrock, then what type of long term impact could
infiltration have? Maybe this is a topic we can discuss further in our
next EAC meeting. Take care.
--r - -- Original Message - - - -- NCX?
1
From: Mark McQuillan [ mailto :MMcquillan @ci.shakopee.mn.us]
Sent: Thursday, January 03, 2002 9:11 AM
To: 'Charlie Kubler'; 'Jeff Reinhard'; 'Steve Menden'; 'Russell Kennedy'
Subject: EAW Blue lake Channel
Today is the last day for comments on the Blue Lake Watershed Channel. I
assume most of you feel that no further study is required or to require
an EIS. Mary Pennington -Hoyt passed along the following comments:
Mark,
After reviewing WSBs EAR it is quite evident that
Alternative 3 is the most environmentally sound choice
to make given it will have the least impact to water
quality, water quantity and the surrounding
environment. It also allows historical drainage
patterns to remain unchanged and also provides a
greenway and wildlife travel corridor. Something
this area currently does not offer.
The only obstacle I can foresee is obtaining the
cooperation from the Mdewakanton Sioux Community.
Considering their Native American heritage, I would
hope they would prefer to preserve and protect the
natural resources of the area, however I am only
second guessing their motives.
I am in total agreement with Mr. Loney's summary that
Alternative -No.3 is the best alternative.
Mary
Mark McQuillan
2
FENDViGS
ENVIRONMENTAL
BLUE • _ (A D DRA O I PROJ
I. PROJECT DESCRIPTION
A. Project
Blue Lake Watershed Drainage Improvement Project provides for the
construction of drainage improvements within the Blue Lake Watershed as
outlined within the City's Comprehensive Stormwater Management Plan.
Three alternatives were evaluated as part of the EAW with potential
project acreage ranging from 11.7 acres to 68 acres.
B. Project Site
Three alternatives were evaluated to provide watershed improvements
from the depression located immediately north of Valley View Road along
County Road (CR) 83 as outlined below:
Alternative 1: Construct storm sewer north along CR 83 to K -Mart Linear
Pond
Alternative 2: Construction storm sewer north along CR 83 to CR 16 to
Dean's Lake
Alternative 3: Construct greenway corridor east to existing Prior Lake -
Spring Lake Outlet Channel
11. PROJECT HISTORY
A. The project was anticipated to be subject to the mandatory preparation of a
EAW under Minnesota R. 4410.4300, subp. 27.
B. An EAW was prepared on the proposed project and distributed to the
Environmental Quality Board (EQB) mailing list and other interested
parties.
C. A press release containing the notice of availability of the EAW for public
review was provided to media serving the project area.
F.IWPWIM1281- 191011702ResolMemo_doc 3
D. The EAW was noticed in the December 10, 2001 EQB Monitor. The
public comment period ended on January 9, 2002 and was extended to
February 12, 2002 to accommodate the Shakopee Mdewakanton Sioux
Community's (SMSC) schedule. Comment letters were received from the
Minnesota Department of Transportation, State Historic Preservation
Office, Metropolitan Council, Scott County Community Development,
Lower Minnesota River Watershed District, US Fish and Wildlife Service,
Prior Lake -Spring Lake Watershed District, Technical and Regulatory
Evaluations Group, and the SMSC. Copies of the letters are hereby
incorporated by reference. Responses to the comments are also
incorporated by reference and are attached.
III. CRITERIA FOR DETERMINING THE POTENTIAL FOR SIGNIFICANT
ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS
Minnesota 8.4410.1700, subp. 1 states that "an EIS shall be ordered for projects
that have the potential for significant environmental effects." In deciding whether
a project has the potential for significant environmental effects, the City of
Shakopee must consider the four factors set out in Minnesota 8.4410.1700, subp.
7. With respect to each of these factors, the City finds as follows:
A. TYPE, EXTENT, AND REVERSIBILITY OF ENVIRONMENTAL
EFFECTS
The first factor that the City of Shakopee must consider is "type, extent
and reversibility of environmental effects," Minnesota 8.4410.1700, subp.
7.A. The City of Shakopee findings with respect to each of these issues
are set forth below.
1. The type of environmental impacts anticipated as part of this project
include:
a. Impact to wetlands: Wetlands have not been preliminarily
identified within each alignment alternative. A wetland
delineation will be completed to positively determine wetland
impacts associated with this project. Any unavoidable wetland
impacts such as filling, draining, or excavation of a Type 3, 4, 5
wetland will be mitigated in accordance with the Wetland
Conservation Act. Wetland impacts, if any, are anticipated to
be minimal. No impact to Blue Lake and its associated wetland
complex is anticipated as part of this project.
b. Impact to water quantity and quality: Alternative 1 has the
potential to lower surface water elevations of Dean's Lake.
Alternatives 2 and 3 slightly reduce discharge rates to Dean's
Lake as compared to existing conditions. This is a result of
F :• WPWIN11 2 8 1- 1 9101 1 702ResolMemo.doc 4
anticipated future rate control, ponding and infiltration
provided by upstream developments and is not anticipated to be
a significant negative impact to the Lake.
The P8 water quality analysis anticipates that under all three
alternatives the total suspended solids loads to Blue Lake and
Dean's Lake may be reduced. This is a result of converting
agricultural property to residential and the addition of
stormwater infiltration and detention ponds. Alternative 1
increases the area tributary to the K -Mart Linear Pond. This
results in higher loading rates to the K -Mart Pond. Alternative
3 reduces the pollutant loadings to Dean's lake in comparison
to Alternative 2. This reduction occurs as a result of
infiltration within the proposed greenway corridor.
Erosion and sedimentation: Best management practices to
control erosion and reduce sedimentation during and after
construction are anticipated to be used for any of the three
alternatives. Further, Alternative 3 proposes to stabilize the
existing drainage channel in the area.
2. The extent and reversibility of environmental impacts are consistent
with infrastructure projects. These impacts will be minimized and
mitigated through the permitting and plan approval processes.
B.- CUMULATIVE POTENTIAL EFFECTS OF RELATED OR
ANTICIPATED FUTURE PROJECTS
The second factor that the City of Shakopee must consider is "the
cumulative potential effects of related or anticipated future projects ",
Minnesota R.4410.1700. supb. 7.B. The City's findings with respect to
this factor are set forth below.
1. The EAW evaluated the impacts associated with construction of
drainage improvements within the Blue Lake watershed. The
EAW anticipates the implementation of City and State Regulation
as related to drainage issues for future development in the
watershed.
C. THE EXTENT TO WHICH ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS ARE
SUBJECT TO MITIGATION BY ONGOING PUBLIC REGULATORY
AUTHORITY
The following permits or approvals will be required for the project:
F. IWPWIM1281- 19I011702ResolMemo.doc 5
Unit of Government Permit or Approval Required
Federal:
US Corps of Engineers
US Fish and Wildlife Service
State:
MP CA
DNR
DNR
DNR
MnDOT
City/Local:
GP/LOP
Plan review
NPDES Permit
Dean's Lake Outlet (permit
obtained)
Water appropriations
Work in public waters permit
(for Alternative 2 and 3)
Drainage permit
LMRWD
PLSLWD
Scott SWCD
Scott County
City of Shakopee
City of Shakopee
Shakopee Mdewakanton
Sioux Community
Plan review
Plan review
Plan review
Work in right -of -way
Plan approval
WCA approval
Easements
2. The City of Shakopee finds that the potential environmental affects
of the project are subject to mitigation by ongoing regulatory
authorities such that an EIS need not be prepared.
D. THE EXTENT TO WHICH ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS CAN BE
ANTICIPATED AND CONTROLLED AS A RESULT OF OTHER
ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES UNDERTAKEN BY PUBLIC
AGENCIES OR THE PROJECT PROPOSER, OR OF EISs
PREVIOUSLY PREPARED ON SIMILAR PROJECTS.
The fourth factor that the City -of Shakopee must consider is "the extent to
which environmental effects can be anticipated and controlled as a result
of other environmental studies undertaken by public agencies or the
project proposer, or of EISs previously prepared on similar projects,"
Minnesota R.4700.1700, subp. 7.D. The City's findings with respect to
this factor are set forth below:
F. IWPW 191011702ResolMemo.doc 6
The environmental impacts of the proposed project have been addressed in
the following plans prepared by the City:
The City finds that the environmental effects of the project can be
anticipated and controlled as a result of the environmental review,
planning, and permitting processes.
The preparation of the EAW and comments received on the EAW have generated
information adequate to determine whether the drainage improvements have the proposed
development has the potential for significant environmental effects.
The EAW has identified areas where the potential for significant environmental effects
exist, but appropriate mitigative measures have or will be incorporated into the project
design and permits to reasonably mitigate these impacts.
The Blue Lake Drainage Improvement Project is expected to comply with all the City of
Shakopee standards and review agency standards.
Based on the criteria established in Minnesota 8.4410.1700, the project does not have the
potential for significant environmental effects.
Based on the Findings of Fact and Conclusions, the project does not have the potential for
significant environmental impacts. Therefore, an Environmental Impact Statement is not
required.
P. I WPWIM1281- 191011702ResolMemo.doc 7
FINDINGS OF FACT
ENVIRONAHNTAII, ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET
BLUE LAKE WATERSHED DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
I. PROJECT DESCRIPTION
A. Project
Blue Lake Watershed Drainage Improvement Project provides for the
construction of drainage improvements within the Blue Lake Watershed as
outlined within the City's Comprehensive Stormwater Management Plan.
Three alternatives were evaluated as part of the EAW with potential
project acreage ranging from 11.7 acres to 68 acres.
B. Project Site
Three alternatives were evaluated to provide watershed improvements
from the depression located immediately north of Valley View Road along
County Road (CR) 83 as outlined below:
Alternative 1: Construct storm sewer north along CR 83 to K -Mart Linear
Pond
Alternative 2: Construction storm sewer north along CR 83 to CR 16 to
Dean's Lake
Alternative 3: Construct greenway corridor east to existing Prior Lake -
Spring Lake Outlet Channel
II. PROJECT HISTORY
A. The project was anticipated to be subject to the mandatory preparation of a
EAW under Minnesota R. 4410.4300, subp. 27.
B. An EAW was prepared on the proposed project and distributed to the
Environmental Quality Board (EQB) mailing list and other interested
parties.
C. A press release containing the of availability of the EAW for public
review was provided to media serving the project area.
F: IWPWIM1281- 191011702ResoZMemo.doc 3
D. The EAW was noticed in the December 10, 2001 EQB Monitor. The
public comment period ,ended on January 9, 2002 and was extended to
February 12, 2002 to accommodate the Shakopee Mdewakanton Sioux
Community's (SMSC) schedule. Comment letters were received from the
Minnesota Department of Transportation, State Historic Preservation
Office, Metropolitan Council, Scott County Community Development,
Lower Minnesota River Watershed District, US Fish and Wildlife Service,
Prior Lake -Spring Lake Watershed District, Technical and Regulatory
Evaluations Group, and the SMSC. Copies of the letters are hereby
incorporated by reference. Responses to the comments are also
incorporated by reference and are attached.
III. CRITERIA FOR DETERMINING THE POTENTIAL FOR SIGNIFICANT
ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS
Minnesota 8.4410.1700, subp. 1 states that "an EIS shall be ordered for projects
that have the potential for significant environmental effects." In deciding whether
a project has the potential for significant environmental effects, the City of
Shakopee must consider the four factors set out in Minnesota R.4410.1700, subp.
7. With respect to each of these factors, the City finds as follows:
A. TYPE, EXTENT, AND REVERSIBILITY OF ENVIRONMENTAL
EFFECTS
The first factor that the City of Shakopee must consider is "type, extent
and reversibility of environmental effects," Minnesota 8.4410.1700, subp.
7.A. The City of Shakopee findings with respect to each of these issues
are set forth below.
1. The type of environmental impacts anticipated as part of this project
include:
a. Impact to wetlands: Wetlands have not been preliminarily
identified within each alignment alternative. A wetland
delineation will be completed to positively determine wetland
impacts associated with this project. Any unavoidable wetland
impacts such as filling, draining, or excavation of a Type 3, 4, 5
wetland will be mitigated in accordance with the Wetland
Conservation Act. Wetland impacts, if any, are anticipated to
be minimal. No impact to Blue Lake and its associated wetland
complex is anticipated as part of this project.
b. Impact to water quantity and quality: Alternative 1 has the
potential to lower surface water elevations of Dean's Lake.
Alternatives 2 and 3 slightly reduce discharge rates to Dean's
Lake as compared to existing conditions. This is a result of
F.IWPWIM ]281- 191011702Reso[Memo.doc 4
anticipated future rate control, ponding and infiltration
provided by upstream developments and is not anticipated to be
a significant negative impact to the Lake.
The PS water quality analysis anticipates that under all three
alternatives the total suspended solids loads to Blue Lake and
Dean's Lake may be reduced. This is a result of converting
agricultural property to residential and the addition of
stormwater infiltration and detention ponds. Alternative 1
increases the area tributary to the K -Mart Linear Pond. This
results in higher loading rates to the K -Mart Pond. Alternative
3 reduces the pollutant loadings to Dean's lake in comparison
to Alternative 2. This reduction occurs as a result of
infiltration within the proposed greenway corridor.
Erosion and sedimentation: Best management practices to
control erosion and reduce sedimentation during and after
construction are anticipated to be used for any of the three
alternatives. Further, Alternative 3 proposes to stabilize the
existing drainage channel in the area.
2. The extent and reversibility of environmental impacts are consistent
with infrastructure projects. These impacts will be minimi and
mitigated through the permitting and plan approval processes.
B. CUMULATIVE POTENTIAL EFFECTS OF RELATED OR
ANTICIPATED FUTURE PROJECTS
The second factor that the City of Shakopee must consider is "the
cumulative potential effects of related or anticipated future projects ",
Minnesota 8.4410.1700. supb. 7.B. The City's findings with respect to
this factor are set forth below.
The EAW evaluated the impacts associated with construction of
drainage improvements within the Blue Lake watershed. The
EAW anticipates the implementation of City and State Regulation
as related to drainage issues for future development in the
watershed.
C. THE EXTENT TO WHICH ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS ARE
SUBJECT TO MITIGATION BY ONGOING PUBLIC REGULATORY
AUTHORITY
The following permits or approvals will be required for the project:
F. IWPWIM1281- 191011702ResolMemo.doc 5
Unit of Government Permit or Approval Require
Federal:
US Corps of Engineers
US Fish and Wildlife Service
State:
MPCA
DNR
DNR
DNR
MnDOT
City/Local:
GP/LOP
Plan review
NPDES Permit
Dean's Lake Outlet (permit
obtained)
Water appropriations
Work in public waters permit
(for Alternative 2 and 3)
Drainage permit
LMRWD
PLSLWD
Scott SWCD
Scott County
City of Shakopee
City of Shakopee
Shakopee Mdewakanton
Sioux Community
Plan review
Plan review
Plan review
Work in right -of -way
Plan approval
WCA approval
Easements
2. The City of Shakopee finds that the potential environmental affects
of the project are subject to mitigation by ongoing regulatory
authorities such that an EIS need not be prepared.
D. THE EXTENT TO WHICH ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS CAN BE
ANTICIPATED AND CONTROLLED AS A RESULT OF OTHER
ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES UNDERTAKEN BY PUBLIC
AGENCIES OR THE PROJECT PROPOSER, OR OF EISs
PREVIOUSLY PREPARED ON SIMILAR PROJECTS.
The fourth factor that the City of Shakopee must consider is "the extent to
which environmental effects can be anticipated and controlled as a result
of other environmental studies undertaken by public agencies or the
project proposer, or of EISs previously prepared on similar projects,"
Minnesota R.4700.1700, subp. 7.D. The City's findings with respect to
this factor are set forth below:
P- - IWPWINI 1281- 191011702ResoZMemo.doc 6
The environmental impacts of the proposed project have been addressed in
the following plans prepared by the City:
The City finds that the environmental effects of the project can be
anticipated and controlled as a result of the environmental review,
planning, and permitting processes.
The preparation of the EAW and comments received on the EAW have generated
information adequate to determine whether the drainage improvements have the proposed
development has the potential for significant environmental effects.
The EAW has identified areas where the potential for significant environmental effects
exist, but appropriate mitigative measures have or will be incorporated into the project
design and permits to reasonably mitigate these impacts.
The Blue Lake Drainage Improvement Project is expected to comply with all the City of
Shakopee standards and review agency standards.
Based on the criteria established in Minnesota 8.4410.1700, the project does not have the
potential for significant environmental effects.
Based on the Findings of Fact and Conclusions, the project does not have the potential for
significant environmental impacts. Therefore, an Environmental Impact Statement is not
required.
P.• IWPWIM1281- 191011702ResoZMemo.doc 7
From: Peter R. Willenbring, P.E.
Todd E. Hubmer, P.E.
WSB & Associates
Memorandum
Date: February 15, 2002
Re: Blue Lake Watershed Drainage Improvement Project
Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW)
City of Shakopee
WSB Project No. 1281 -19
The public comment period for the Blue Lake Watershed Outlet Environmental Assessment
Worksheet (EAW) ended January 9, 2002, but was extended to February 12, 2002 to
accommodate the Mdewakanton Sioux Community's schedule. Comments were received
from the Minnesota Department of Transportation (Mn/DOT), State Historic Preservation
Office (SHPO), Scott County Community Development, Lower Minnesota River Watershed
District (LMRWD), the Metropolitan Council, the Department of Natural Resources (DNR),
US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), Prior Lake -Spring Lake Watershed District
(PLWSD), the Mdewakanton Sioux Community, Technical & Regulatory Evaluations
Group, Inc. (TREG), Metropolitan Council, and Shakopee Environmental Advisory
Commission.
The purpose of an EAW is to determine the need for an Environmental Impact Statement
(EIS). EAW's are to identify the environmental issues associated with a proposed project,
identify the adequacy of process and policy to address these issues, and to evaluate the
potential for environmental impacts to be reversed. The EAW process includes a public
comment period in which local, regional, state, federal and the general public comment on
4150 Olson the contents, issues and need for the preparation of an EIS. Comments are received and
Memorial Highway taken into consideration to determine whether or not the project has the potential for
Site 300 significant environmental effects. To address comments received as part of the Blue Lake
Minneapolis EAW, responses have been developed as outlined below. Section I summarizes comments
that were similar in nature and provides responses to these comments. Section II contains
Minnesota responses to each comment individually. Attached as Exhibit A are the comment letters
55422 received.
763 - 541.1700 FAX Minneapolis - St. Cloud - Equal Opportunity Employer
WSB
&Associates, Inc.
To:
Sharon Anderson, Mn/DOT
Britta Bloomberg, SHPO
Dawn Tracey, Scott County Community Development
Kevin Blgalke, LRWD
Eli Cooper, Metropolitan Council
Bill Johnson, DNR
Terry Schreiner, USSF
Paul Nelson, PLSLWD
Stanley Crooks, Mdewakanton Sioux Community
Linda Lehman, TREG
Metropolitan Council
From: Peter R. Willenbring, P.E.
Todd E. Hubmer, P.E.
WSB & Associates
Memorandum
Date: February 15, 2002
Re: Blue Lake Watershed Drainage Improvement Project
Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW)
City of Shakopee
WSB Project No. 1281 -19
The public comment period for the Blue Lake Watershed Outlet Environmental Assessment
Worksheet (EAW) ended January 9, 2002, but was extended to February 12, 2002 to
accommodate the Mdewakanton Sioux Community's schedule. Comments were received
from the Minnesota Department of Transportation (Mn/DOT), State Historic Preservation
Office (SHPO), Scott County Community Development, Lower Minnesota River Watershed
District (LMRWD), the Metropolitan Council, the Department of Natural Resources (DNR),
US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), Prior Lake -Spring Lake Watershed District
(PLWSD), the Mdewakanton Sioux Community, Technical & Regulatory Evaluations
Group, Inc. (TREG), Metropolitan Council, and Shakopee Environmental Advisory
Commission.
The purpose of an EAW is to determine the need for an Environmental Impact Statement
(EIS). EAW's are to identify the environmental issues associated with a proposed project,
identify the adequacy of process and policy to address these issues, and to evaluate the
potential for environmental impacts to be reversed. The EAW process includes a public
comment period in which local, regional, state, federal and the general public comment on
4150 Olson the contents, issues and need for the preparation of an EIS. Comments are received and
Memorial Highway taken into consideration to determine whether or not the project has the potential for
Site 300 significant environmental effects. To address comments received as part of the Blue Lake
Minneapolis EAW, responses have been developed as outlined below. Section I summarizes comments
that were similar in nature and provides responses to these comments. Section II contains
Minnesota responses to each comment individually. Attached as Exhibit A are the comment letters
55422 received.
763 - 541.1700 FAX Minneapolis - St. Cloud - Equal Opportunity Employer
February 15, 2002
Page 2 of 45
Section I • Response to Common Comme
A. What is the purpose of the Blue Lake Watershed Drainage Improvement
Project?
Some comments received indicated that some additional clarification of the
purpose of constructing drainage improvements within the Blue Lake
subwatershed was needed.
1. Is the project's purpose to solve a drainage problem or to facilitate future
development (USFWS, PLSLWD)?
2. What is the need for the project since only intermittent flows from the
area have been observed (TREG)?
Response: Currently, during large storm events and snow melt
conditions, water flows overland through fields and backyards from the
depression along CR 83 near Valley View Road to the east into the Prior
Lake - Spring Lake (PLSL) outlet channel. The PLSL outlet channel flows
north into Dean's Lake, Blue Lake, and the Minnesota River. As areas
upstream in Shakopee and Prior Lake develop, the depression is
anticipated to be more frequently inundated and water will more
frequently flow overland through private property. Therefore, the
purpose of the project is to address the impacts of current development as
well as anticipated future development in a sound and reasonable manner.
The purpose of the EAW is to determine whether the proposed drainage
alternatives have the potential for significant environmental effects.
B. What is the impact of surrounding development on Dean's Lake, Blue
Lake, and the PLSL outlet channel?
Some of the comments received questioned what the specific impacts to
Dean's Lake, Blue Lake, and the PLSL outlet channel would be from
surrounding development.
1. Concern was expressed regarding potential development around Dean's
Lake (TREG, LMRWD).
2. Concern was expressed about water quality degradation on Blue Lake and
erosion within the channel under TH 101 from further development
within the watershed (USFWS, Scott County, LMRWD).
Response: General assumptions about the impact of surrounding
development on local resources have been made in this EAW. These
assumptions are based on the City of Shakopee's future land use plan as
contained in the Comprehensive Plan, and the City's storm water
management policies as contained in the City's Comprehensive Storm
Water Management Plan. To review, the following are some of the
requirements which must be met by all future development in the area:
F:\WPWIN\1281-19\021102SectionI.doc
February 15, 2002
Page 3 of 45
Rate control must be provided to reduce runoff rates to 1 /10 cfs per acre
for the 100 -year storm event. Rate control addresses how fast water can
leave a site. This policy is intended to protect downstream areas from
receiving water too quickly, causing erosion, and flooding downstream
areas.
• The City requires infiltration practices to be implemented wherever
practical and reasonable.
Water must be treated prior to discharge from a site. The City's standards
state that storm water must be pretreated to at least National Urban
Runoff Program (NURP) recommendations. These design requirements
remove approximately 90% of the total suspended solids (TSS) and 40 %-
60% of the total phosphorous from storm water runoff.
• Dean's Lake and Blue Lake are also within the Shoreland Overlay
District. These regulations require a 200 -foot setback from the Ordinary
High Water of the lakes. Any future development will be required to
conform to these regulations.
The City requires parkland/open space to be incorporated into future
development plans. For residential development, 1 acre of land for every
75 people anticipated within the development is required to be reserved
for public open space, parks, etc. For non - residential development, 10%
of the undeveloped land proposed for subdivision is required to be
reserved for public open space, parks, etc.
Development within the Blue Lake Watershed is required to conform to these
policies. Furthermore, it is likely that future development projects maybe
required to undertake separate environmental reviews.
3. Concern was expressed regarding physical impacts to the PLSL outlet
channel (PLSWD).
Response: Concerns associated with erosion of the PLSL outlet channel
are being addressed through a separate study and construction project
being undertaken by the Cities of Prior Lake, Shakopee and the PLSWD.
C. Water quality modeling questions /comments
Some comments indicated concern over the water quality within Dean's Lake
and Blue Lake from future development and proposed drainage
improvements. There were also questions regarding the water quality model
used in the analysis of the proposed drainage alternatives.
F: \WPWIN\1281- 19 \021102Sectionl.doc
February 15, 2002
Page 4 of 45
1. Why was a P8 model and the associated parameters used for this analysis
(PLSLWD, TREG)
Response: The Program for Predicting Pollutant Particle Passage
through Pits, Puddles, and Ponds (P8 model) is commonly used to
evaluate water quality impacts associated with changes in land use
and evaluate the performance of various storm water treatment
techniques on treating storm water runoff. The P8 water quality
model was developed in coordination with the National Urban Runoff
Program.
The pollutant parameters contained within the environmental
documents for each of the three alternatives under the proposed
condition, utilize the Minneapolis particle classification of the P8
model. Minneapolis particle classification was developed in the early
90's in association with the City of Minneapolis' National Pollutant
Discharge Elimination System Phase 1 permit to the MPCA and EPA.
Nearly $250,000 of water quality monitoring was conducted in this
NPDES permit application and the P8 model was specifically
calibrated for use within the Twin Cities area based on this
monitoring.
The bare soil particle classification, as described in the attached
environmental documents, is intended to give consideration to the
bare soil conditions associated with construction sites. The bare soil
for the existing condition model in the attached environmental
documents was used to anticipate the total suspended solids, which
may be observed from agricultural processes where bare soil and
tilling resemble, within reason, the bare soil characteristics of a
construction site.
2. What is the potential impact on the K -Mart linear pond regarding
overloading, compromised retention times, and treatment (PLSL)VD).
Response: The K -Mart linear pond was designed to handle a specific
drainage area tributary to the PLSL outlet channel. A portion of this
area extends from TH 169 south to the intersection of County Road
(CR) 83 and CR 16, and is located west of Dean's Lake. The
environmental assessment of water quantity /quality impacts
associated with drainage improvements in the Blue Lake watershed
indicates that Alternatives 1 and 2 increase the drainage area tributary
to the K -Mart linear pond by approximately 3,400 acres. Increasing
the drainage area will increase the storm water volume directed to this
basin, thereby reducing its efficiency at removing pollutants from the
direct tributary areas for which it was originally designed.
Furthermore, directing this volume of water into the pond may require
an increase in the discharge rate from the K -Mart linear pond. An
F:\WPWTN\1281-19\021102SectionI.doc
February 15, 2002
Page S of 45
increase in the discharge rate would reduce the detention time of the
pond and reduce its efficiency of removing pollutants.
D. Water Quantity Modeling and Interpretation of Impacts
Some comments indicated concern over the modeling assumptions, methods,
and interpretation of results.
1. Questions were raised regarding the assumptions used to develop the
water quantity model for the proposed alternatives and questioned
interpretations of these results (TREG, PLSLWD).
2. Questions were raised regarding the Dean's Lake surface water elevations
used in the model and what the specific impacts of additional volume on
the PLSL outlet channel would be under Alternative 3 (PLSLWD).
Response: The purpose of water quantity analysis is two fold:
1) Evaluate each alternative's performance under flood
conditions, the 100 -year design storm events;
2) Evaluate the changes in storm water runoff rates and volumes
between the existing and proposed conditions for each of the
alternatives.
To effectively evaluate the impact of storm water runoff on the
downstream systems, including Dean's Lake, K -Mart linear pond, and
the Prior Lake outlet channel, normal water levels have to be assumed
to anticipate worst -case scenarios. During dry conditions, as
mentioned in several of the comments, there will be additional
volume available within several of the basins when the storm begins.
Therefore, under a dry conditions model there will be less impact to
the downstream systems. However, for the consideration of design
and evaluating impacts of worst -case scenario, the water level in each
pond or lake is assumed to be at the normal water elevation. This
provides the most direct way of evaluating the design storm events.
The impact of volume changes and rate changes to the PLSL outlet
channel have been evaluated in a study completed by the City of Prior
Lake, City of Shakopee, and the Prior Lake - Spring Lake Watershed
District. Alternative No. 3 presented in this environmental
assessment does not exceed the rates or volumes as outlined in the
previous studies conducted on the PLSL outlet channel. Therefore,
the findings of the previous reports are consistent with the rates and
volumes of the environmental assessment.
F : \W P W IN \1281- 19 \021102SectionI. doe
Page 6 of 45
February 15, 2002
Section II • Responses to Individual Comments
Comments from Mn/DOT
Comment 1: A Mn/DOT drainage permit will be required regardless of which
alternative is chosen (1, 2, or 3). Mn/DOT Water Resource Engineering
definitely prefers either alternative 2 or 3, although we may have concerns with
these alternatives considering the Dean's Lake outlet channel crossing at
approximately sta. 520 +00 eb. We would also be opposed to adding 3400
additional acres of drainage area into the K -Mart Linear Pond. This is a very
difficult and complex area to analyze because things are changing so fast.
The drainage permit application must include before /after hydraulic computations
for both 10 and 100 -year rainfall events verifying that all existing drainage
patterns and systems affecting Mn/DOT right of way will be perpetuated. Please
direct questions regarding permit applications to Keith VanWagner (651 -582-
1443) of Mn/DOT'S Permits section.
The City of Shakopee should submit a revised stormwater management plan
along with calculations showing what the conditions are now. If you have any
questions regarding these drainage concerns please contact Don Berre in our
Water Resource Engineering section at (651) 634 -2406.
Response: The City will acquire the necessary drainage permits from
MnDOT when this project moves to the permitting phase. This
information has been included in the Findings of Fact.
The City of Shakopee notes that MnDOT is opposed to routing an
additional 3,400 acres of drainage area to the K -Mart Linear Pond and
understands that MnDOT believes that this alternative may not be feasible
for this reason.
Comment 2: The plans submitted with the EAW do not adequately identify TH
169 right of way. The final plans should identify the right of way by reference to
the appropriate plat(s) and in place monuments. The distances from the centerline
and offset dimensions from the centerline to the edge of the plat should also be
identified. Please direct questions concerning these issues to Mike Schadegg
(651 - 582 -1279) in Mi /DOT's Right of Way section.
Please address all future correspondence for development activity such as plats,
site plans, environmental reviews, and comprehensive plan amendments to:
Paul Czech
Mn/DOT — Metro Division
1500 West County Road B -2
Roseville, Minnesota 55113
Page 6 F.IY pWfl \M1281- 191011602Section11doc
Page 7 of 45
February 15, 2002
Mn/DOT document submittal guidelines require three (3) complete copies of plats
and two (2) copies of other review documents including site plans. Failure to
provide three (3) copies of a plat and/or two (2) copies of other review documents
will make a submittal incomplete and delay Mn/DOT's review and response to
development proposals. We appreciate your anticipated cooperation in providing
the necessary number of copies, as this will prevent us from having to delay
and/or return incomplete submittals.
Response: Once final plans are prepared for whichever Alternative is
chosen, the right -of -way will be identified within the project areas and all
necessary approvals will be secured.
Comments from SHPO
Comment 1: Thank you for providing this office with a copy of the EAW for the
above - referenced project. It has been reviewed pursuant to responsibilities given
to the Minnesota Historical Society by the Minnesota Historic Sites Act and the
Minnesota Field Archaeology Act and through the process outlined in Minnesota
rules 4410.1600.
There are no properties listed on the National or State Registers of Historic
Places, and no known or suspected archaeological properties in the area that will
be affected by this project. As you know, we had previously expressed concern
with the area north of highway 101, as this area has good potential of including
archaeological sites.
However, the response to question 25a and other sections of the EAW indicate
that no construction is planned for this area. In such a case, "no" response to
question 25a is appropriate.
Should any changes to the project occur which would result in terrain disturbance
north of 101, we would ask that you consult further with our office regarding the
need for a survey.
Please note that this comment letter does not address the requirements of Section
106 of the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 and 36CFR800, Procedures
of the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation for the protection of historic
properties. If this project is considered for federal assistance, or requires a federal
permit or license, it should be submitted to our office with reference to the
assisting federal agency.
Response: As indicated in the EAW from the information obtained from
SHPO, there are no properties listed on the National or State Registers of
Historic Places, and no known or suspected archaeological properties in
Page 7 F.• WMIM1281- 191011602Section H-doc
Page 8 of 45
February 15, 2002
the area that will be affected by this project since no construction or
disturbance north of TH 101 is proposed. The City appreciates the
information provided by SHPO in the preparation of this EAW.
Comments from Scott County Community Development
Comment 1: Question 6: Alternative 1 refers to the installation of a deep storm
sewer system and goes on to indicate that 8,000 CY of rock will be excavated for
this alternative. How deep is the proposed trench? What type of rock is being
excavated and how? Are there any impacts to groundwater due to this
alternative? Alternative 2 raises the same questions.
Staff would favor Alternative 3, which is more consistent with the County's Draft
Water Resource Management Plan to infiltrate water as opposed to piping storm
water downstream. This alternative could be modified to provide additional
infiltration upstream of Deans Lake by not only providing a channel, but a series
of wetland areas with constructed overflow outlets. This would enhance
infiltration of additional water volume, slow the rate of flow through the system
and decrease the bounce on Deans Lake.
Response: For Alternatives 1 and 2, the storm sewer system would be
approximately 25 -30 feet deep for areas south of County Road 16. The
trench_ for the sewer would be approximately 25 -30 feet deep for areas
south of County Road (CR) 16. Information from the Geologic Atlas
indicates that the average depth to groundwater in the area south of CR 16
is 50 feet below the surface. Information from a study conducted in 1981
states that sand and gravel deposits at least 65 feet thick extend 1 -1.5
miles south of Dean's Lake where it meets moraine deposits of glacial till
(Beissel and Ford, DNR, 1981). A few soil borings located north of CR
16 near wetlands indicated that water was encountered 2 to 6.5 feet below
the surface. However, in some areas south of CR 16, water was not
encountered down to 35 -65 feet.
Therefore, storm sewer associated with Alternative 2 is not anticipated to
be constructed within the groundwater layer, as construction will primarily
be south of CR 16. Alternative 1 is also not anticipated to be constructed
within the groundwater layer south of CR 16 as it would be constructed
similarly to Alternative 2. Once the proposed pipe for Alternative 1
travels north of CR 16, the depth in the trench is not anticipated to be as
deep and, therefore, anticipated to have minimal groundwater interaction.
Based on the Geologic Atlas for Scott County, the bedrock that would be
excavated is anticipated to be within the Prairie du Chien group. Dolomite
is known to occur near the quarry site. However, soil borings would need
Page 8 F- WPWIM1281- 191011602&ction ll doc
Page 9 of 45
February 15, 2002
to be conducted to obtain more accurate information about the depth and
type of bedrock that could be excavated for these alternatives.
It is noted that Scott County Community Development would prefer
Alternative 3. The suggestion to provide additional infiltration and/or
created wetland areas as a part of Alternative 3 will be taken under
advisement if Alternative 3 is chosen.
Comment 2: Question 8: Regarding permits; the placement of storm sewer or
culverts under or within county road rights -of -way will require a permit from the
County Highway Department.
Response: The need for right -of -way permits has been noted within the
Findings of Fact.
Comment 3: Question 10: Alternative 3 shows no wetland, brush or grassland
habitat after the proposed project. This does not appear to be consistent with the
text or figures that show a proposed vegetative /wildlife buffer.
Response: The acreage for the entire channel and greenway together was
indicated as "other' ' in Item 10 for Alternative 3. This response was not
intended to be confusing or inconsistent, but rather provide for an
estimation of the acreage to be disturbed as part of these alternatives. It is
estimated that between 30 -50% of the area identified in Item 10 will be for
the channel and the remaining 50 -70% of the area will be the greenway
and is anticipated to consist of grasses, forbs, shrubs, and trees. Until final
plans are developed, it is difficult to provide more than this estimation.
Continent 4: Question 11: The EAW recognizes that the Wilkie Unit of the
USFWS Minnesota Valley National Wildlife Refuge is located north of TH 101.
Blue Lake, located in the Wilkie Unit, is currently receiving storm water from the
project area, which staff assumes refers to the Blue Lake watershed. The text
further states that negative impacts will be minimi using pretreatment of storm
water and rate control devices. However, the EAW does not address what the
increase in volume of water or the nutrient loads that might be expected with
development would be and whether or not these unmitigated increases would
significantly impact the ecological resources of the wildlife refuge.
Response: The supplemental document, Environmental assessment of
water quantity/ quality impacts associated with drainage improvements in
the Blue Lake Watershed, provides an analysis of the volume and nutrient
impacts on Dean's Lake, the K -Mart Linear Pond, and Blue Lake. The
models used to analyze these impacts were based only on general
development scenarios rather than detailed development plans for the
watershed.
Page 9 F. IWPWIM1281- 19W11602Section Il doc
Page 10 of 45
February 15, 2002
Comment 5: The EAW indicates that a visual wetland inventory was conducted
within the project area by WSB and refers to areas shown on the National
Wetland Inventory (NWI). The NWI map included with the EAW does not
provide the information found on the NWI. It would be helpful to show the
classifications and where these wetlands are with respect to the project
alternatives. Staff would also note that the NWI is not a substitute for field
delineation of wetland areas. Further, the visual wetland inventory was conducted
at the driest time of the year within a dry year. Therefore, the methodology used
for this type of wetland inventory would be flawed. Wetland characteristics
depend on soils, hydrology and plants. In dry periods soils should be studied as
well as historical aerial photos to determine where wetland basins exist and what
their characteristics are during normal periods.
Response: The City agrees that neither the visual inventory nor the NWI
is a substitute for a wetland delineation. This information within the EAW
was not intended to substitute for this information. A wetland delineation
in accordance with the 1987 US Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation
Manual will be completed as part of the preliminary plan development
process for the alternative that is chosen. Additional information about the
presence, absence, or type of wetland beyond that which was indicated in
the EAW cannot be provided until delineation is complete.
Comment 6: The anticipated impacts on Deans Lake are outlined within this
section [Question 11]. Alternative 2 would appear to be problematic in that it
would lead to "short- circuiting" (a decrease in residence time) of water through
the lake and possible degradation of water quality downstream. Staff does not
necessarily agree that there would be "no negative effect" due to Alternative 2.
Staff would again note that Alternative 3 provides an option more consistent with
current conditions, but could be enhanced using wetland areas to break up the
linear character of this alternative. The EAW states that Alternative 3 would also
be used to create a greenway corridor. While this is encouraged, the type of
greenway (i.e., trail, wildlife corridor, etc.) is not noted.
Response: To clarify, the EAW states that "no negative impacts
associated with a change in hydrology" on Dean's Lake would be
anticipated as part of Alternative 2 as compared to Alternative 1 where
water is being routed away from Dean's Lake. There is a concern that
Alternative 1 could cause a loss in wetland by redirecting water away from
the Dean's Lake wetland complex.
At the conclusion of Item 10, it is noted that a trail may be incorporated
into a greenway corridor through Alternative 3. However, no other
specific details about the design of the greenway have been determined
yet. This corridor may or may not include a trail. These details will be
finalized through the preliminary and final design phases if this alternative
is chosen.
Page 10 F• IWPWIM1281- 191011602Section11doc
Page 11 of 45
February 15, 2002
Comment 7: A listing of resources identified by the Minnesota Natural Heritage
Database is provided in the EAW. The text states that most of the species were
documented outside the immediate project area, however, there is no statement as
to which species were documented inside the project area. Species located within
the proposed project area should be clarified. The EAW also states that impacts
to these resources are not anticipated as part of the proposed alternatives and any
impacts would be temporary. A listing of anticipated temporary impacts would
help strengthen this point. In addition, this project acknowledges that the reason
for the project is, in part, the need for drainage improvements due to development
in the watershed. A discussion regarding impacts from increased/decreased flow
to downstream areas should be included with this section, specifically as it relates
to the resources listed by the Minnesota Natural Heritage Database.
Response: Information from the DNR Natural Heritage Database
indicates that all the rare species that have been recorded with the
Database are located outside of the project disturbance area. A dry prairie
feature, evening primrose, plains pocket mouse, and gopher snake had all
be recorded within Section 11 (TI 15N, R22W) which is located northeast
of Dean's Lake outside of the project area.
Temporary impacts to any wildlife species would include disturbance
while construction is occurring. Under any alternative construction
activities would be temporary in nature and the area would either be
restored to its original condition or contain a channel that has been
vegetated and stabilized. The supplemental report that was included with
the EAW discusses the environmental impacts to downstream areas
anticipated by the three alternatives. Conclusions from this report indicate
that Alternative 1 has the potential to effectively drain a portion of Dean's
Lake and has limited opportunities for habitat improvement and
infiltration. Alternative 2 provides limited opportunities for habitat
improvement and infiltration. Alternative 3 provides greater opportunities
for infiltration and habitat improvement through the greenway corridor.
Comment 8: Question 12: The EAW states that Alternative 1 will divert water
around Deans Lake, which could significantly lower the surface water elevation
of the lake over time. Staff concurs with this conclusion and would prefer that
this alternative not be considered. Alternative 2, as stated earlier in these
comments, has the potential to short- circuit water through Deans Lake due to
water entering the lake on the west side rather than on the east as it currently does.
Alternative 3 would be preferred due to the potential for infiltration of water using
overland flow versus pipe.
Response: The City notes that Scott County Community Development
prefers Alternative 3 to the other alternatives presented.
Page 11 F.•iWPWIM1281- 19W11602Section ILdoc
Page 12 of 45
February 15, 2002
Comment 9: Question 25: Archaeological, historical or architectural resources —
the letter from the SHPO asks for a survey in the area north of TH 101. It is
understood that the City-has determined that since no project work will be
completed in the area north of TH 101, no survey is needed at this time. It should
be noted, however, that if federal funds or a federal permit are required for this
project (i.e., Corps of Engineers), a Section 106 consultation will be needed as
stated in the SHPO's letter.
Response: See comment and response to SHPO Comment #1.
Comments from LMRWD
Comment 1: Question 6, page 2: This section describes the three alternatives
being considered. Alternative 1 describes a deep storm sewer system and
indicates that 8,000 cubic yards of rock will be excavated for this alternative.
How deep is the proposed storm sewer trench? What type of rock is being
excavated? Is this bedrock? What are the impacts to groundwater due to this
alternative?
Alternative 2 raises the same questions. The LMRWD does not consider
Alternative 2 to be an acceptable alternative as it "short circuits" the natural
drainage system.
The LMRWD would favor Alternative 3. This alternative is consistent with the
LMRWD watershed management plan promoting infiltration of water. While this
is the preferred alternative, the LMRWD staff feels that this alternative could be
modified to provide additional infiltration, and enhance the greenway corridor,
through a series of wetland complexes and infiltration basins, rather than a linear
channel. This would enhance the infiltration capabilities of this alternative,
reduce the rate of storm water flow through the system, and minimis the bounce
in Dean's Lake.
Response: See response to Scott County Comment #l.
Comment 2: Question 10, page 7: Alternative 3 does not show any wetland;
wooded, or grassland habitat after the completion of the project. This does not
seem to be consistent with the proposed project, which is to incorporate prairie
restoration and a wooded greenway corridor.
Response: See response to Scott County Comment #3.
Comment 3: Question 11, page 7: All of the proposed alternatives discharge
into Blue Lake in the Wilkie Unit of the USFWS Minnesota Valley National
Wildlife Refuge. The EAW states that negative impacts will be minimized using
pretreatment of storm water and rate control devices. The EAW does not discuss
Page 12 F. WPWIM1281- 191011602SectionHdoc
Page 13 of 45
February 15, 2002
what the increase in volume of water or nutrient loads that would occur with
development would be. It also does not address the impacts these unmitigated
increases could have on the ecological resources of the wildlife refuge.
Response: See response to Scott County Comment #4.
Comment 4: The EAW discusses _a visual wetland inventory conducted within
the project area. A simple visual inventory using the National Wetland Inventory
(NWI) maps might not be adequate to identify wetlands found in this watershed.
It would be beneficial to show the wetland classifications and where these
wetlands occur in relation to the proposed alternatives. Also, the visual wetland
inventory was conducted during an extremely dry period of a dry year (July —
September, 2000). The visual wetland inventory would not identify all wetlands
during a dry period unless all wetland characteristics were used (soils, hydrology,
plant types).
Response: See response to Scott County Comment #5.
Comment 5: The LMRWD has similar concerns regarding the monitoring that
was done as part of the environmental assessment of water quantity /quality
impacts associated with the drainage improvements in the Blue Lake Watershed.
The monitoring again was conducted during an extremely dry period of the year.
One could expect to see a positive response to surface water inflows on any lake
during a dry period. Monitoring should continue on Dean's Lake. The LMRWD
interested in working with the City of Shakopee to continue these monitoring
efforts.
Response: The City will continue to work with the LMRWD to continue
monitoring efforts on Dean's Lake.
Comment 6: The potential impacts on Dean's Lake are also discussed in this
section. Alternative 1 could have the potential to lower the surface water
elevation of Dean's Lake. This would be a combined result from loss of recharge
area (groundwater flow) due to the increase of impervious surface and some
surface water flow loss from storm water runoff. Alternative 2 appears to "short-
circuit" the natural hydrology of the watershed. It directly discharges storm water
into Dean's Lake and could in water quality degradation of the lake and
downstream water bodies. The LMRWD staff does not agree that there would be
"no negative effect" due to Alternative 2. The LMRWD feels that Alternative 3 is
most consistent with current conditions. The LMRWD staff does have some
concerns regarding the linear design of this alternative. This design could be
enhanced using wetland areas and infiltration basins within the proposed corridor.
By improving the Alternative 3 design with a series of wetlands and infiltration
basins, the aesthetics of the greenway corridor would also be enhanced.
Response: See response to Scott County Comment #6.
Page 13 F.1WPWIM1281- 191011602SeCd0n 11d0c
Page 14 of 45
February 15, 2002
Comment 7: Of the three alternatives presented in the EAW, the Lower
Minnesota River Watershed District would prefer to see Alternative 3 as the
alternative to improve the drainage of the Blue Lake Watershed. The LMRWD
would also emphasize that improvements to Alternative 3 should be considered to
improve the water quality treatment and infiltration capabilities, and aesthetic
values of the greenway corridor. The LMRWD staff is interested in working with
the City of Shakopee and their consultants on the potential design enhancements.
Response: The City notes that the LMRWD would prefer that Alternative
3 be implemented as part of a drainage improvement project within the
watershed. The City will continue to keep the LMRWD informed about
the design of the project for whichever alternative is chosen.
Comments from DNR
Comment 1: The Department of Natural Resources has reviewed the EAW for
Blue Lake Watershed Drainage Improvement Project. We take the opportunity to
note with appreciation that DNR has been consulted during the project's
development, which has facilitated our review of the EAW. The EAW describes
the project's purpose in Item 6c as providing "drainage improvements within the
Blue Lake Watershed" to address water pooling that occurs in a depression that is
located in the vicinity of CR 83 and Valley View Road. The EAW details three
(3) alternatives that can meet this objective. We do not recommend preparation of
an environmental impact statement (EIS) for any of the proposed alternatives.
Response: The City notes that the DNR does not recommend an EIS be
completed for this project. The City will continue to keep the DNR
informed about the design of any drainage improvement project within the
watershed.
Comment 2: Alternative 3 is preferred from a natural resources perspective
when considering the three approaches evaluated in the EAW. It offers the
opportunity for both runoff infiltration and habitat creation along an open water
channel. Alternatives 1 and 2, because they involve piping the flow prior to -
discharging to artificial or natural basins, do not present similar opportunities for
infiltration, habitat creation, and aeration of runoff. Implementation of
Alternative 3 should also closely maintain the present hydrology of the Dean's
Lake basin that has evolved over the past 15 years. The constructed greenway
corridor should be designed to reflect the typical cross section depicted in Figure
5, Proposed Typical Section 3B, which incorporates a shallow floodplain with an
approximately 50 -foot wide upland vegetated buffer on either side of the channel.
Response: The City will take this information into account when
preparing the final design of a drainage improvement project.
Page 14 F• IWPWIM1281- 191011602Secti0nH -d0c
Page 15 of 45
February 15, 2002
Comment 3: Alternative 3 is also preferred by DNR because it could provide
future trail possibilities and it could be eligible for consideration of a grant from
DNR's Metro Greenway_s Program. Bill Penning, Greenways Outreach
Coordinator, can be reached at (651) 793 -3981 for further information on DNR's
grant program and eligibility criteria.
Response: The City may consider requesting grant money for the
implementation of Alternative 3 if this alternative is chosen for
implementation.
Comment 4: Item 8, Permits and Approvals, should indicate that DNR public
waters permits are needed for two of the alternatives. Specifically, Alternative 2
would require a DNR permit if the outlet pipe or any other associated work occurs
below the ordinary high water (OHW) elevation of Dean's Lake; the OHW on
this water body is 747.0 feet. Alternative 3 will require a DNR permit to make
the physical connection between a constructed channel and the existing Prior
Lake Outlet Channel. No DNR public waters permit is required to implement
Alternative 1 as offered in the EAW. Please continue working with Pay Lynch,
Area Hydrologist, on issues relating to the need for a DNR public waters permit;
he can be reached at (651) 772 -7917.
Response: These permits have been included in the Findings of Fact.
Comment 5: The EAW correctly identifies in Item 11 that Blue Lake and Dean's
Lake provide habitat resources that could be affected by the project. Specifically:
Blue Lake is a valuable resource that is part of the flood plain of the
Minnesota River. The area serves as fish spawning habitat and a wildlife
feeding area. Alternative 3 appears to provide the most protection to this
flood plain lake while Alternative 1 provides the least protection.
Dean's Lake provides wildlife habitat but is not a flood plain lake. Its
contributing watershed was substantially increased when an outlet from
Prior Lake was installed, thus directing flow through this wetland.
Although Alternative 1 would divert part of the watershed away from
Dean's Lake, this is likely balanced by the additional flows from the
Prior /Spring Lake(s) watershed through Dean's Lake. As such Alternative
1 would provide the most protection of the Dean's Lake resource.
Response: No response is necessary.
Comment 6: If sediment input were minimal from the project site, Alternative 3
would provide the most protection when considering the habitat resources of both
Blue and Dean's Lakes.
Page 15 F.IWPWIM ]281- 191011602Sectionll.doc
Page 16 of 45
February 15, 2002
Response: Best management practices for erosion and sediment control
will be used during construction to prevent sediment from entering the
local water bodies within the watershed.
Comment 7: Consideration of habitat impacts in Item 11 also involves the
potential for the project to affect the Minnesota River. The Minnesota River's
ecological functioning is highly dependent upon its backwater, flood plain lakes.
Blue Lake is the more sensitive resource to the Minnesota River in comparison to
Dean's Lake. Thus impacts to the river would be most affected by alterations to
Blue Lake. From a Minnesota River protection perspective, Alternative 3 is the
preferred approach while Alternative 1 is the least protective.
Response: The City notes that the DNR prefers the implementation of
Alternative 3.
Comment 8: Item 12, in its discussion of Physical Impacts on Water Resources,
should note that the existing Prior Lake Outlet Channel is a protected DNR
watercourse. The EAW should indicate that the increased discharge volume it has
received from the construction of the Prior Lake Outlet has likely impaired this
watercourse. The EAW does not address the capability of the Prior Lake Outlet
Channel to assimilate any additional project- related flows. Such an assessment
will be necessary if Alternative 3 indeed moves forward and will be required in
the DNR permit process. Any information now available on the assimilative
capacity of the Prior Lake Outlet Channel to receive the proposed flows should be
provided in the responses to comments on this EAW.
Response: The Findings of Fact have taken into account that a portion of
the PLSL Outlet Channel is a DNR watercourse. Additional
hydrauhc/hydrologic assessment will be provided as part of the permitting
process for any alternative.
Comment 9: Figure 6, City of Shakopee — Areas Prone to Erosion, should
indicate that the lower terraces, particularly those west of Dean's Lake and north
of CR 16, are susceptible to severe wind erosion. Wind erosion has indeed
occurred at these sites over the past few years.
Response: While the figure does not show the lower terraces as prone to
erosion, Item #16 indicates that the soils in the area are listed as highly
erodible. Erosion control measures will be used for the chosen alternative
and any alternative will require the City to obtain an NPDES permit.
Comments from US Fish & Wildlife Service
Comment 1: Minnesota Valley National Wildlife Refuge was established in
1976 through Public Act 94 -466. The mission of the Refuge is to restore, manage
Page 16 F. I WPWIM1281-191011602Section H.doc
Page 17 of 45
February 15, 2002
and to protect the ecological communities of the Lower Minnesota River Valley
and its watershed while providing environmental education and wildlife
dependent recreation. The Refuge encompasses nearly 14,000 acres within eight
units, which lies between the bluffs of the Minnesota River Valley from
Bloomington to Jordan, Minnesota. It is a green belt of large flood plain wetland
complexes and bluff oak savanna and forest.
Blue Lake is one of four separate flood plain marshes found within the
Wilkie/Rice Lake Unit of the Refuge and are considered to be among the highest
quality and diversified of all the wetland complexes on the Refuge. The source of
the majority of water entering these wetlands is from ground water. Blue Lake
receives the vast majority of surface water entering the wetland system from its
watershed that lies in Shakopee and Prior Lake. The wetland basins are
interconnected and water control structures allow the management of water levels
on Blue, Fisher and Rice Lakes. Although, as mentioned earlier, the major source
of water is ground water, the surface runoff from the Blue Lake watershed can
and does affect the overall water quality of all three lakes. Therefore, we would
be concerned if the quality of the water entering Blue Lake were to become more
degraded due to impacts from further development.
Response: The City is willing to work with the US Fish and Wildlife
Service to reduce impacts to Blue Lake. It is the City's understanding that
by implementing Alternative 3, impact to Blue Lake will be minimized.
Comment 2: The purpose and need of the proposed project is unclear to us. We
are not sure if the purpose of the proposal is to solve a drainage problem in BLD 7
and BLD 8 or to facilitate future development of both. A discussion of why
"improved" drainage is needed would be helpful. If future development is the
purpose, a discussion of the type of developments being proposed would also be
helpful. If the depression in subwatersheds BLD 7 and BLD 8 is the main reason
for the drainage proposal, maybe the problem could be remedied through other
alternatives other than residential or commercial development. Maybe a
lake /wetland complex with associated open space and recreation area would be
this area.
Response: For information about the purpose of the project, see response
to Section I - General Comment A.
Comment 3: Most cities in the metropolitan area have as the major goal in their
Surface Water Management Plan to maintain the pre - development runoff
conditions from each development and the watershed as a whole. If the City of
Shakopee has also adopted this goal, why is "improved" drainage needed? If each
development is required to not exceed the existing rate and total volume of runoff
or loading, why is added storage and treatment needed downstream? A drainage
easement along the natural drainage alignment to a certain storm event with no
additional disturbance may be the best alternative. In any event, the alternatives
Page 17 F.IWPW1M1281- 191011602Section H-doc
Page 18 of 45
February 15, 2002
appear to be incomplete. What other alternatives were considered? Why were
they not considered feasible? Was a bypass of Blue Lake to the Minnesota River
considered?
Response: For information about the purpose of the project, see response
to Section I - General Comment A.
Comment 4: If this project were to proceed as proposed, it would in essence
allow numerous additional actions, i.e. development, that would also have
environmental consequences. Therefore, we believe using the Alternative Urban
Area Review (AUAR) may be the most appropriate review process to best assess
the long -term environmental impacts.
Response: The City may consider the preparation of an AUAR for
development activities associated with the Blue Lake watershed. For
information about the EAW in relation to future development, see
response to Section I - General Comment A and B.
Comment 5: We agree with the conclusion that of the alternatives offered,
Alternative 3B provides the least impact to the Blue Lake Watershed and provides
a 200 to 250 -foot corridor of native wildlife habitat. If Alternative 3A or 3B is
approved and implemented, we believe strongly that the design should not only
include plantings of native vegetation but a series of treatment pools be included
with variable weir control and shut -off valves to treat storm water more
effectively and contain toxic spills.
Response: The City will take into consideration variable weir controls
and shut -off valves to allow for containment of spills prior to discharge to
Blue Lake for whichever alternative is chosen. The City also has an in-
place spill response and prevention program.
Comment 6: Currently, Blue Lake has no storm water conveyances that outlet to
the lake. The source of water for the lake is groundwater entering directly from
the aquifer and via the stream under Highway 101. We have noticed higher flows
during the spring during recent years, which has caused severe bank erosion and
washed out a vehicular crossing and culvert. The quality of the water, although
not analyzed, appears to carry a little sediment and is cold,.which leads us to
believe the majority of the flow is from groundwater. The modeling indicates
that alternative 3B would result in a reduction in TSS and peak flow from current
conditions with a corresponding decrease in all nutrients, metals and
hydrocarbons except phosphorus and lead. What is the explanation for this? We
are very concerned with large increases of lead and phosphorus. Can this be
remedied? We remain concerned that the water quality of Blue Lake will be
impacted. We believe more intense investigation needs to be completed to assess
the potential impact.
Page 18 F.- WPWIM1281- 19W11602SecdOnlldoc
Page 19 of 45
February 15, 2002
Response: Please see response in Section I, Comment C. Also, when the
Minneapolis particle classification is run on the existing conditions model,
the TSS value decreases to 0.7 tons /year and the TP and Pb increase to
212 and 72 lbs /year respectively, which is similar to the other alternatives
presented in the report. There are differences in the atmospheric
deposition values from the bare soil to Minneapolis particle classifications
that account for these differences. It is anticipated that the City's policies
for rate control, infiltration and ponding would mitigate the effects of
development. The City shares your concern for protecting the resources of
Blue Lake.
Comment 7: On several occasions toxic spills have reached Refuge waters via
storm water conveyance systems. Therefore, we strongly encourage all cities in
the Lower Minnesota Watershed to ensure that facilities are in place to contain
toxic spills from reaching Refuge waters or any natural wetland systems.
Containment on the property where the spill originates would be preferred. If
spill containment is to be accomplished within the storm water system, shut -off
valves need to be in place to allow spill responders a way to contain the toxic
materials.
Response: See response to USFW Comment #5.
Comment S: We encourage planners to allow, where the opportunity exists, for
as much infiltration as possible to maintain recharge in the ground water system.
Numerous development projects nationwide are incorporating Low Impact
Development Techniques in both residential and industrial projects with very
successful results in meeting, and in most cases exceeding, Nationwide Urban
Runoff Practices (NURP) Standards. At the core of this method is the use of
numerous on -site practices over the entire area developed to eliminate the runoff
through infiltration, detention and evaporation. The soil types in the Blue Lake
watershed are ideal for infiltration.
Response: The City generally agrees with these comments and is
requiring implementation of infiltration practices where soils and ground
water conditions allow.
Comment 9: In recent years there has been extensive bank erosion in the stream
feeding Blue Lake below Highway 101. Even though the models indicate
reduced rate and volumes under Alternative 3, we remain concerned and believe
more in -depth analysis be conducted to assess potential impacts.
Page 19 F. WPWIM1281- 19W11602Section 11 doc
Page 20 of 45
February 15, 2002
Response: Currently, the PLSLWD and the City are evaluating a joint
project to reduce erosion and stabilize the entire PLSL outlet channel from
Prior Lake to the Minnesota River. This project is nearing
implementation. However, this stabilization project is outside the scope of
the project for the drainage improvements outlined in the EAW.
Comment 10: Numerous small impacts of unrelated projects within the same
watershed can and often do result in major environmental impacts in the long
term. Therefore, we believe the cumulative effects of this project when coupled
with the impacts of other projects in the watershed, such as the Dean's Lake
bypass, general development, water level manipulations of Prior Lake, and others
may result in major impacts to Blue Lake. In fact, most studies on watershed
functioning result in the finding that the main problem is the accumulation of
many small impacts over a large area. Therefore, a thorough discussion of the
cumulative impacts should be included.
Response: The City recognizes the cumulative impacts that can occur due
to changes within the watershed. It is the purpose of the Water Quality
Report and EAW to define these issues before development occurs. To
date, the City has revised its management policies for the Blue Lake
Watershed to address these concerns. These changes include reducing the
100 -year peak discharge rates from 1/3 cfs /acre to 1 /10 cfs /acre, and
requiring enhanced infiltration to be incorporated into pond designs.
Comment 11: Given the location and type of activity proposed, we have
determined that the project is not likely to adversely affect any federally listed or
proposed threatened or endangered species, or adversely modify their critical
habitat. This precludes the need for further action on this project as required
under section 7 of the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended. However, if
the project is modified or new information becomes available which indicates that
listed species may occur in the affected area, consultation with this office should
be reinitiated.
Response: No response is necessary.
Comment 12: Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the Environmental
Assessment Worksheet for the Blue Lake Watershed Drainage Improvement. We
look forward to working with you to meet the mutual goals of providing cost -
effective, environmentally compatible development and healthy wild lands for the
public we serve. Enclosed you will find a copy of the document specifying the
minimum standards of quality for water entering Minnesota Valley National
Wildlife Refuge. Please call me at 952- 858 -0701.
Response: No response is necessary.
Page 20 F. I WPWIM1 2 81- 1 9101 1 602S --ion ILdoc
Page 21 of 45
February 15, 2002
Comments from PLSLWD
Comment 1: Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the EAW. We offer
the following comments on accuracy and completeness of information presented,
and potential impacts we think warrant further investigation. We do not offer an
opinion on whether or not an EIS is necessary because we feel the information
presented in the EAW is not accurate or complete enough for us to make a
determination of this need. It may still be possible to address potential impacts in
a more complete and accurate revised EAW.
Response: No response is necessary.
Comment 2: Page 4: 6.c: Project Purpose states the need is to provide drainage
improvement particularly to the depressional area located in the vicinity of CR 83
and Valley View Road. However, the supplemental report "Environmental
assessment of water quantity /quality impacts associated with drainage
improvements in the Blue Lake Watershed" by WSB states that storage in this
area is about 16 acre -feet. This is not a large amount of water and it would be
helpful in dete the need for the project versus its cost and impact to know
how much land this floods.
Additionally, since the hydrologic analyses presented show peak discharge rates
and volumes equal to or lower than existing conditions for the alternatives, why is
a project for drainage improvements needed?
Response: For information on the purpose of the project and EAW, see
response to Section I - General Comment A.
Comment 3: Page 8. l La paragraph 5 starting with Alternative 1 states that this
option alters the existing historic hydrologic regime of Dean's Lake. We think
that the `historic hydrologic regime' (from both surface and groundwater
perspectives) of Dean's Lake probably requires some description in the EAW.
Prior to 1983 -84 surface drainage of this area through Dean's Lake was not the
natural/historic hydrology. In addition, Dean's Lake surface inflows since 1983 -
84 have been periodically augmented by Prior Lake outflows because of the
City's request to route the outlet channel through Dean's Lake rather than the
original proposal, which would have directed the channel toward northeast. Also,
we do not see any analysis in the EAW and supplemental report that supports the
claim of detrimental affects on Dean's Lake hydrology with Alternative 1 for the
reasons listed below. However, while the analysis does not prove a low Dean's
Lake low level hydrologic impact with Alternative 1, we do concur that
alternative 3 offers the greatest potential for infiltration and maintenance of the
historic "groundwater" flow regime, and that mimicking this regime to the extent
practical would be valuable.
Page 21 F. WPWIM1281- 191011602Section H-dOC
Page 22 of 45
February 15, 2002
First, it's not clear that under dry conditions, when Dean's Lake levels would
most likely be negatively affected, that the existing conditions storm water
flows from these areas actually make it to the lake. With the poorly defined
drainage patterns at the Valley View and CR 83 intersection and area east to
the Prior Lake Outlet channel it seems likely that under dry year conditions
that what little runoff occurs would largely replenish depressions and soils.
Further, it seems that much of these low flows go to the recently constructed
bypass channel, thereby doing very little to maintain the lake level.
Modifying the low flow bypass channel to be a high flow bypass, or to allow
some low flow into Dean's Lake, may do just as much or more than
Alternative 3 for maintaining lake levels.
• Second, the analyses presented in the supplemental report using the TR20
model are all rainfall event based analyses more typically associated with wet
conditions.
Finally, all the TR20 runs shown on page 28 of the supplemental report (i.e.,
the 1 -year, 24 -hour through the 100 -year, 10 -day event) show the lake under
all alternatives is at least one foot above the outlet weir elevation. Under
these events, the lake appears to be full and discharging. This may be partly
due to the starting elevation of the lake assumed in the modeling runs. It
might be more appropriate to calculate the volume difference between existing
conditions and the alternatives and what depth that represents given the lake
area, but only for the 1 -year event, since the others are clearly wet conditions.
The fact that flow volumes into the lake or that peak lake elevation are lower
during these wet events with Alternative 1 does not prove detrimental lake
lowering impacts critical during dry periods.
Response: For information regarding the hydrologic/hydraulic modeling,
see response to Section I — General Comment D.
Comment 4: Analyses to validate the EAW conclusion should be based on an
analysis of a "dry" period/condition. The P8 model already constructed for the
project could probably be modified for this analysis. For example, for the
"average year" P8 analysis, already included in the supplemental report and
presented in the appendix, predicts total annual inflows to the lake of 470 acre-
feet for existing conditions, and 362 acre -feet for Alternative 1. At first glance,
this shows a reduction of 108 acre -feet under this in an "average year ". However,
with the current P8 configuration it's unclear whether upstream storm water flows
from areas tributary to the Prior Lake Outlet Channel are included. Therefore, we
can't determine whether 108 acre -feet is a significant amount of the total flow
anticipated to reach Dean's Lake, and what lake level affect this might have, nor
does this represent a dry year. Model runs should be completed for a dry year that
includes the upstream flows directly tributary to the Prior Lake Outlet Channel
(but not including the Prior Lake Outlet flow since these are unlikely in a dry
Page 22 P.• IWPWIM1281- 19W11602Sectionlldoc
Page 23 of 45
February 15, 2002
year. For example, during 2000, a relatively dry year, we only released about 80
acre -feet of water).
Response: The P8 model and EAW clearly state that the flow rates in the
PLSL outlet was not incorporated into the analysis. The purpose of the
EAW is to evalute the three alternatives presented to provide a permanent
drainage route for the Blue Lake Watershed west of the PLSL Watershed.
Comment 5: Pages 9 -10. 12: Physical Impacts on Water Resources
4.a Page 10 first paragraph. We do not see where the analyses presented show
"the potential to significantly lower the surface water elevation of Dean's Lake
over time ". Analyses presented do not assess lake levels over any extended
period of time and are event based and do not represent critical dry periods under
which significant low elevation impacts might occur. See comments and
questions under comment #2 above for additional detail.
4.b No discussion has been presented in this section or the EAW in general
regarding the physical impacts of the drainage improvements on the Prior Lake
Outlet Channel under the alternatives. Additional analysis is needed to address
the following:
• What impacts if any on the Prior Lake outlet channel are anticipated?
® What improvements if any to the outlet channel are anticipated to
accommodate the drainage improvements from this project?
Will the discharge of runoff from Shakopee into the channel
impact/compromise the rights the Prior Lake - Spring Lake Watershed District
has to channel capacity?
Response: It is the City's understanding that the flows and design within
the PLSL outlet channel shown in the analysis in the EAW have
previously been agreed to by the PLSLWD.
Comment 6: Page 11. 16. Erosion and Sedimentation. More analysis and
discussion is needed with respect to the potential for the project to contribute to
erosion and sedimentation problems along the Prior Lake Outlet Channel. See
comment 4 above for detailed comment.
Response: The stabilization of the PLSL outlet channel has been
addressed in a previous study. The City and the PLSL Watershed District
have agreed to the flow rates that are outlined in the EAW analysis and the
stabilization project takes these rates into account. Best Management
Practices will be used for the alternative that is chosen thus reducing
Page 23 F: tWPWIM1281- 191011602Section H.doc
Page 24 of 45
February 15, 2002
erosion and sedimentation to the greatest extent practical during and after
construction.
Selection of Alternate No. 1 or No. 2 would reduce the City of Shakopee's
participation in improvements to the PLSL outlet channel.
Comment 7: Page 12. 17. Water Quality. We question the accuracy and
completeness of using the P8 for portions of this analysis. P8 is probably a valid
planning level tool for assessing the pollutant loads delivered to Dean's Lake and
the K -Mart linear pond. It is also probably a valid tool for assessing the pollutant
removal efficiency of the K -Mart linear pond. However, it is inappropriate for
assessing TSS and TP sedimentation in Dean's Lake as done in the EAW
supplemental report. This means that the pollutant loads and water quality
assessments presented in the supplemental report for Blue Lake contain a large
amount of uncertainty.
Dean's Lake is a very complex shallow lake /wetland system. The monitoring
data presented on Figure 8 of the supplemental report suggests that net
sedimentation occurring in Dean's Lake is not nearly as high as the 98% and 74%
for TSS and TP, respectively, predicted by the existing conditions P8 model. This
may be due to bioturbation by rough fish (Carp) in combination with high algae
productivity. High algae productivity is demonstrated by the high chlorophyll -a
concentrations observed in the lake, and further, this algae is likely the source of
the high TSS concentrations also observed in the lake.
Averaging and comparing the inflow and outflow concentrations collected on
concurrent dates as presented on Figure 8 suggests retention rates of 70% and 8 %,
respectively, for TSS and TP in Dean's Lake. This assessment is limited by the
small data set, the fact that we do not know the flow rates when these samples
were collected, the average concentrations are not flow weighted, and by the fact
that most of the data was collected during the dry year of 2000. However, it is
clear that these retention rates are nowhere near the rates predicted by the P8
model. P8 does not include functions for algae or bioturbation, and only reflects
particle settling. WE are not sure that any modeling approach could reasonably
represent pollutant retention in Dean's Lake given the complex shallow lake
cycling functions and limited lake data and diagnoses. However, empirical lake
models such as Reckow /Simpson, Dillon Ringler; or Canfield models at least
empirically consider algae and in -lake processes when dealing with phosphorus
sedimentation. The EPA supported model Aquatox may also be a consideration
since it does include some algae functions.
The bottom line of this comment is that we question the accuracy of the results
presented for the loads to Blue Lake presented on pages 34 to 36 of the
supplemental report. However, we are not certain whether more detailed
modeling of sedimentation/retention in Dean's Lake is necessary to assess
impacts. Instead a case might be made that water quality loads from the project
Page 24 F. IWPWIM1281-191011602SectionU.doc
Page 25 of 45
February 15, 2002
and from new development would be mitigated to the extent practical because of
City ponding, infiltration, and storm water treatment requirements in combination
with the conversion away from Agricultural Land use. These practices in
combination with the project result in load changes that could be less than
existing conditions, increase negligibly compared to the total load from all
sources, or could be mitigated with some other practice. For example, the P8
modeling presented shows a decrease in TSS load to Dean's Lake from existing
conditions to Alternative 3, and a slight increase in TP. This increase in TP
(approximately 200 lbs.) could be mitigated or might be negligible part of the
overall TP budget of Dean's Lake. If that is true then presumably, the use of the
same practices mitigates TP impacts to Blue Lake, or if under worst case and
there is no net sedimentation in Dean's Lake, then Blue Lake loads are affected
similarly.
Response: The City agrees with the general complexity involved in
evaluating the Dean's Lake water quality. The City also agrees that the
use of mitigation measures such as ponding and infiltration can be
effective in addressing the water quality issues. Please also see response
in Section I, Comment C.
Comment 8: Page 12. 17. Water Quality. Paragraph beginning with Alternative
1 states that this alternative results in higher loading rates to the K -Mart pond.
We agree, but the question is whether or not the pond can adequately handle these
additional pollutant and hydraulic loads. The supplemental report states that the
additional flow to this pond results in higher loading rates to the pond, overloads
the pond, and does not allow adequate detention times to treat direct areas
tributary to the pond as originally designed. However, while analyses regarding
increased loading rates and pond levels are presented, no information is presented
regarding the other claims of overloading, and compromising detention times and
treatment performance. No physical description of the pond or its outlet is
presented so the reader can judge the capacity of the facility or whether it could
be reasonably modified to accommodate the increased loads. It appears that the
facility only overflows by infiltration since that is the way it is modeled in the
existing conditions P8 model. It is also modeled as an infiltration device under
Alternative 1 with all 1250 ac -ft of water flowing through the system discharging
to ground water. This seems very unlikely, as it would require several acre -feet of
infiltration per day during the ice -free runoff season and may cause localized
ground water mounding impacts (potentially supporting the claims of hydraulic
overloading). However, the analysis does not address whether reasonable
modifications in terms of adding a surface outlet could be made to alleviate the
increase in hydraulic loads, and how much pollutant treatment would be
compromised. A planning level estimate of the pollutant treatment impacts would
be helpful for comparing the alternatives, particularly since pollutant
sedimentation in the pond is essentially being compared to the sedimentation that
could occur in Dean's Lake with the other alternatives. Since phosphorus
sedimentationlretention in Dean's Lake may be low due to bioturbation, shallow
Page 25 F- WPWIM1281- 19W11602Section Il doc
Page 26 of 45
February 15, 2002
lake recycling and algae production; even a small amount of retention in the K-
Mart linear ponds may be comparable to the other alternatives.
Analysis of this question could be done with P8 by establishing a maximum
infiltration rate for the pond and inserting an outlet device for the remaining flow.
The P8 model now presented in the supplemental report shows the K -Mart linear
pond as removing 100% TS and 97% TP under alternative 1: essentially the
same as existing conditions.
Response: Please also see response in Section I, Comment C.
Comment 9: Summary of issues. We do not believe the analysis completed
substantiates the conclusions made in this summary as summarized below.
The claim that Alternative 1 significantly reduces surface water elevations of
Dean's Lake is not supported. See comments 2 and 4 above.
The P8 modeling completed is sufficient to make conclusions regarding
pollutant loads delivered to Dean's Lake, but is not sufficient to assess
subsequent loads delivered to Blue Lake because of uncertainties regarding
modeling sedimentation/retention in Dean's Lake as well as the limited water
quality processes modeled in P8. See detailed comment 6 above.
The assessment shows higher loading rates to the K -Mart pond, but does not
completely assess impacts to the pond or to Blue Lake from these load
changes.
® Erosion and sedimentation section does not assess the adequacy of the Prior
Lake outlet channel to handle the Shakopee storm water discharges.
Response: See responses to previous PLSL comments # 1 -8.
Comment 10: Page 16.29 Cumulative Impacts. This section should probably
note that upstream development along the Prior Lake Outlet Channel in the City
of Prior Lake is also anticipated to contribute storm water flow. And that the
Prior Lake - Spring Lake Watershed in combination with the Cities of Shakopee
and Prior Lake are developing a project/repairs to improve the existing and future
stability of the outlet channel.
Response: These issues are outside of the study area and do not effect the
options being presented in this EAW. The City will continue to work with
the City of Prior Lake and the PLSLWD to address the PLSL outlet
channel concerns.
Page 26 F. I WPWIM1281 -19W 11602Section H doc
Page 27 of 45
February 15, 2002
Comment 11: We have one additional comment regarding just the supplemental
report. On pages 14 and 15 of this report conclusions are made that in -lake water
quality is positively impacted by surface water inputs. How was this
determination made? No correlations of flow to water quality are presented. We
agree that this may be true, particularly with respect to Prior Lake discharges to
Dean's Lake, but it is not necessarily true with respect to all types of surface
water inputs. Extending this conclusion regarding surface water inputs to
localized urban storm water is not a given. The historic surface flows likely
contributing to good water quality in the lake are those from Prior Lake since it is
a mesotrophic lake with good water quality. For example, two of the three lowest
observed in -lake TP concentrations in Dean's Lake, from the data set presented
on Figure 8, were during April of 2001 when the Prior Lake was discharging at a
significant rate. Prior Lake was not discharging a meaningful rate on any of the
other sampling dates. In addition, higher in -lake quality during flow periods may
also be partly due to just having higher lake levels at these times. It is well
documented that deeper lakes have lower phosphorus concentrations probably
because sediment associated phosphorus is less likely to be recycled or re-
suspended by rough fish and other mechanisms.
Response: The correlation between surface water and Dean's Lake water
quality was made based on the monitoring information obtained by the
City in 2000. When water was discharging into Dean's Lake from the
PLSL outlet channel, TSS was generally less in the lake than when water
was not entering the lake from the outlet channel. The TSS overall was
higher within Dean's Lake than in the water from the outlet channel.
Comment 12: In conclusion, we think the EAW is incomplete and not adequate
to make a determination regarding potential impacts. The technical analyses
completed do not adequately support some of the conclusions. Some of these are
major conclusions, such as significantly reducing the water levels on Dean's Lake
and warrant further study. The EAW is also incomplete with respect to an
assessment of the physical impacts to the Prior Lake Outlet Channel, and capacity
rights of the District.
Response: The level of detail contained in the EAW is adequate to
determine the potential for significant environmental impacts associated
with the proposed project in order to evaluate the need for an EIS. The
alternatives presented in this study are in conformance with the previous
work completed by the PLSLWD, City of Shakopee, and the City of Prior
Lake.
Comments from TREG to the Dean's Lake Homeowner's Association
Comment 1: As per your request, I have reviewed the above - mentioned
documents. The document entitled Environmental Assessment of Water
Page 27 F.- WPWIM1281- 19W11602Section Il.doc
Page 28 of 45
February 15, 2002
Quality /Quantity Impacts Associated with Drainage Improvements in Blue Lake
Watershed, dated November 28, 2001, was prepared by WSB & Associates, Inc.
for the City of Shakopee. The report is used to support the conclusions and
recommended options for the location of a storm sewer (and potentially a sanitary
sewer), which is required in order to develop parcels of land, which lay to the
south and west of Hwy 83 and 16. There are numerous inaccuracies in the report
and associated analyses, which tend to limit its validity and the validity of
conclusions based on this work. I strongly recommend that an independent and
impartial review be undertaken of this work. There are numerous interests
represented by WSB, which could affect the objectivity of this environmental
review work.
Response: This EAW was prepared by the City of Shakopee in
accordance with the requirements and rules for the preparation of an
EAW. WSB & Associates assisted the City of Shakopee in the
preparation of these documents. WSB & Associates has no standing
relationship with any landowners or parties located within the study area.
Comment 2: The Environmental Assessment report calculates inflow volumes to
Dean's Lake under existing and future fully developed conditions. WSB
concludes that current inflow into Dean's Lake is at the same volume, or higher
than those of a fully developed watershed. This is not reasonable. The problem
lies in the assumptions of Curve Number and by neglecting or limiting ponding
and infiltration that presently exist. It also assumes that the watershed when
developed will not have runoff in excess of 0.1 cfs per acre. It is common
knowledge that a developed watershed produces more runoff than an undeveloped
one. These assumptions are misleading at best. Current runoff into Dean's Lake
from these watersheds does not approach the values assumed.
Response: The City of Shakopee has in place policies that limit the 100 -
year peak discharge rate from developments within Blue Lake Watershed
to 0.1 cfs /acre. Therefore, ponding, infiltration, and storm sewer systems
in all new developments must be constructed to these standards. For more
information, please see response in Section I, Comment B.
Comment 3: The flow paths and channels described for existing conditions is
also misleading or incorrect. Especially in the Introduction and Purpose section
where water in a closed depression west of Hwy 83 is said to drain to Dean's
Lake. For it to do so, it would have to traverse across open fields and join with
the Pike Lake Outlet Channel to enter Dean's Lake, basically the route described
by Alternative 3. There may be occasional intermittent discharge into the Pike
Lake Channel, via this route, but it is insignificant. Most of the water that
transgresses under 83 to the east is infiltrated in the open fields. It does not cross
Pike Lake Road in any significant quantities. I live in this area and travel Pike
Lake Road on a daily basis and have not observed this to be the case.
Page 28 F.- WPWIM1281- 191011602Section 1Ld0c
Page 29 of 45
February 1 S, 2002
Response: Please see response in Section I - Comment A.
Comment 4: Several assumptions used in the modeling tend to be inaccurate and
lead to inaccurate conclusions. For example, infiltration is allowed only in
wetlands. This is totally invalid for the area of Alternative 3. Significant
infiltration is expected to occur in these fields at the base of the bluff. Had this
infiltration been allowed in the model, it would serve to greatly reduce the
calculated inflow volumes into Dean's Lake under existing conditions.
Response: Infiltration is allowed to occur in both the P8 water quality
analysis and in the hydrologic/hydraulic analysis presented in the EAW.
However, the hydrologic/hydraulic analysis also included a review of
snowmelt conditions. Under snowmelt conditions, the ground is frozen
and infiltration does not occur.
Comment 5: Another assumption which serves to make it look as though routing
highway runoff to Dean's Lake is a positive thing, is the assumption of bare and
highly erodible soils in the area of Alternative 3. These fields may be bare in the
winter, they are in crops in the summer. This bare soil assumption leads to higher
modeled runoff and suspended solids than would a field in crop.
Response: Information used to evaluate the impacts of each alternative
was developed by the Soil Conservation Service (SCS) and is consistent
with the land uses evaluated in the EAW.
Comment 6: The choice of chemical parameters upon which to base a
comparison is also interesting, as it is primarily a reflection of contaminants
which would originate in an agricultural setting. If one changes from an
agricultural setting to a developed setting, then other contaminants would be more
reflective of this condition. Agricultural contaminants would be reduced, but they
are replaced by other, perhaps more detrimental species, such as road salt,
petroleum products and heavy metals. None of these contaminants are modeled
or mentioned in this analysis of water quality.
Response: The choices of pollutant parameters presented in the study are
discussed in Section I, Comment C. Concentrations of road salts and
heavy metals in runoff from urban areas are not typically at levels of
concern. The main concerns regarding petroleum products are illicit
discharges and spills. These issues are managed through the City's spill
preventative process.
Comment 7: Sampling done in support of this environmental assessment is also
questionable and is not representative. The fall of 2000 was the culmination of a
very long -term episode of water level lowering, either from drought or more
probably by draining of Dean's Lake by developers along the shoreline. The fall
2000 measurements were taken at the very lowest levels since 1998. These
Page 29 F. IWPWIM1281- 191011602SectionHdoc
Page 30 of 45
February 15, 2002
readings would naturally show a more degraded level of water quality than would
those taken during a more normal cycle. Likewise, the water chemistry reading in
April 2001 would be reflective of the very large snowmelt event that occurred
during this time and would not be typical of runoff during other periods of time.
(In this regard, Figure 7 appears incorrect, it seems that readings taken during the
months of September through October 2000 as shown in Figure 8, are not
reflected on this chart. The last data point reading on Figure 7 must be the
reading taken in late April 2001.)
Response: Figure 7 shows the data obtained by the DNR for Dean's Lake
and does not reflect data obtained by the City of Shakopee. This data can
be obtained from the DNR's web -site. This data was included in the EAW
and supplemental documentation as background information. See
response to TREG, Comment #8.
Comment 8: This type of interpretation, i.e., routing storm water to Dean's Lake
is good for water quality, is extremely misleading and self serving. It is not the
opinion of the bulk of the scientific community that storm water runoff will
improve the water quality of a largely groundwater -fed lake, nor is it consistent
with planning documents written by the Metropolitan Council. The WSB
interpretations regarding the significance of the groundwater flow component to
the lake is also inconsistent with work done previously by the Lower Minnesota
Watershed District, Larry Samsted.
Response: The data collected by the City during monitoring that occurred
in 2000 and the beginning of 2001 shows a correlation between improved
water quality when the PLSL outlet channel is discharging into the Lake
versus when the outlet channel is not discharging. Since other water
quality monitoring studies are not available, there is not a bulk of
scientific data for this Lake. The City does agree that additional
monitoring is needed to further substantiate the finding that the surface
water from the PLSL outlet channel is having a positive impact of the
water quality of Blue Lake.
In regard to the groundwater issue, the City does not disagree that the
Lake is partially groundwater fed as evidenced by its location below the
terrace and the sandy soils present within the area. The groundwater that
partially feeds this Lake is estimated to be a shallow sand aquifer source
as evidenced by the 1981 study conducted by the DNR. The City agrees
that there is an interaction between Dean's Lake and the groundwater.
However, Dean's Lake hydrology is not solely driven by groundwater
discharge. If the Lake were solely driven by groundwater, the surface
water levels would be more constant and water would be consistently
discharging from the outlet, even during dry months.
Page 30 F.• IWPWIM1281- 191011602SectionH -doc
Page 31 of 45
February 15, 2002
Comment 9: The EAW is also misleading and incorrect regarding other
development planned in the area. For instance, it makes no mention of the
rerouting of County Road 16, the proposed Highway 21 across the same area as
Alternative 3 and the heavy commercial development planned on both the east
and west side of Dean's Lake. The rerouting and widening of Hwy 16 and the
future Hwy 21 traffic loads and runoff into the open ditch must be considered due
to the proximity of these features to Alternative 3. The Dean's Lake
environmental impacts should not be considered in a piecemeal fashion. All of
these cumulative effects must be considered when deciding on an alternative
storm water routing.
Response: The purpose of the EAW was to evaluate the impacts of the
proposed drainage improvement and not the impacts of the reconstruction
of CR 16 and 83. Nor was it the purpose of the EAW to evaluate impacts
associated with future development. The EAW does not mislead or
misinform regarding other development. Item #29 makes clear that
development is anticipated in the area, but that specifics about the majority
of the development are not available and estimations were used based on
the City's Land Use plan. The EAW was prepared to evaluate the
alternatives available to provide drainage improvements within the
watershed. Developments may be required to undertake individual
EAW's to address these concerns.
Comment 10: The reports do not mention that the consent of the Sioux Tribe
would probably be needed for Alternative 3, since it would be on their property.
Response: This comment is incorrect. The supplemental report states on
Page 6 that Alternative 3 would require the participation and cooperation
of the Mdewakanton Sioux Community. Additionally, the Sioux
Community was initially contacted in the preparation of this EAW and the
EAW and supplemental report were submitted to the Community for their
review.
Comment 11: The area under consideration is listed as highly susceptible to
groundwater contamination by Scott County and State Groundwater susceptibility
Maps. Scott County has recently amended their septic system ordinances to bring
septic systems in areas of moderate to high susceptibility into compliance quickly.
It seems that routing storm water runoff and infiltrating contaminated water into
the groundwater system in these areas is not consistent with county plans. See
Scott County Groundwater susceptibility map in Scott County Scene, December
2001 /January 2002.
Response: The EAW acknowledges in Item #19 that the soils in the area
have the potential to transmit contaminants to the groundwater. Providing
for additional opportunities for infiltration is actually an integral part of
the Scott County Plan and infiltration is supported by Scott County as
Page 31 F .XPWIM1281- 19W11602SectionH.doc
Page 32 of 45
February 15, 2002
evidenced in their comments related to the EAW (see Scott County
Comment #1). It is acknowledged that infiltrating contaminated water is
inconsistent with any local or state agency.
Comment 12: In summary, these reports contain many technical assumptions,
which serve to sway the conclusions and recommendations. Many of these
assumptions are highly questionable or just plain incorrect. The public would be
better served by getting an unbiased environmental review on matters concerning
runoff into and draining of Dean's Lake.
Response: Please see responses to TREG Comments 1 -11.
Comments from Metropolitan Council
Comment 1: Council staff finds that the EAW is adequate and accurate in
addressing regional concerns and that an EIS is not necessary for regional
concerns.
Response: The City notes that the Met Council does not believe that an
EIS is needed for this project.
Comment 2: Council staff concurs that Alternative 3 will have the least
environmental impact of the three alternatives evaluated.
Response: No response is needed.
Comment 3: Blue Lake is located within the Wilkie Unit if the Minnesota Valley
national Wildlife Refuge and Recreation Area, which is a significant part of the
region's open space system. Preserving water quality and wildlife habitat is very
important.
Alternative 3B appears to do the best job of preserving water quality, providing
habitat, and does not remove wood/forest land cover. The natural
drainageway /greenway approach increases filtration and infiltration of storm
water runoff and provides the potential for wildlife habitat preservation and
enhancement. Page 6 states that this alternative would improve the quality of the
water discharged from this watershed. It also provides the opportunity for a
greenway corridor.
Response: No response is necessary.
Comment 4: The consequences of letting a portion of the storm water continue to
collect in the existing depression is not entirely clear in the report. If more water
was retained and infiltrated in the depression area, the storm water runoff
infrastructure and its impacts.could seem to be reduced.
Page 32 F. I WPWIM1281-191011602Section II doc
Page 33 of 45
February 15, 2002
Response: Allowing the water to continue to collect in the depression as
development upstream within Shakopee and Prior Lake continues would
not provide for sound storm water management within the City. For
additional information, please see response to Section I, Comment A.
Comment 5: The description of the Dean's Lake wetland complex describes it as
not having much diversity. As a part of this project, some ecological restoration
should be done in and around the wetlands. This includes removal of some exotic
species and re- vegetation with native plant material to increase the diversity of
plants and wildlife. The plan greenway area should be vegetated in native plant
materials only and have the appropriate soil composition to support this native
vegetation.
Response: As the City does not have rights to the land around Dean's
Lake, including a restoration plan is not feasible at this time. However,
the City will take this information into advisement and may include as part
of the City's public education plan for residents around Dean's Lake. The
implementation of a greenway corridor as part of Alternative 3 would
include the use of native grasses, forbs, shrubs, and trees.
Comment 6: Item 11— Based on the aerial photo in appendix C, it appears that
all of the alternatives direct the storm water to a pipe labeled "all alternatives"
between Highway 169 and Blue Lake. A natural drainage / greenway system like
the one in alternative 3B should be considered for this section, too. The natural
alternative should also include provisions for wildlife crossings at both Hwy. 169
and Hwy. 101.
Response: The line labeled "all alternative' in the aerial photo in
Appendix C of the supplemental report is not intended to represent a pipe,
but show that water under all alternatives flows this direction through an
existing open channel. Water flows under TH 101 via twin box culverts.
This channel is part of the Prior Lake - Spring Lake outlet channel and is a
DNR stream. No physical disturbance is proposed as part of any
alternative to this channel.
Comment 7: Item 14 — Maintaining a drainage system as close to the natural
system as possible is generally the best for protecting natural resources.
Response: No response is necessary.
Comment 8: Item 25 — The EAW should describe the public access that is
proposed as part of the greenway alternative. There is a brief mention of a
potential trail as part of the greenway. As part of the public investment, there
should be public access for fishing and wildlife observation.
Page 33 F. IWPWIM1281- 191011602Section 11doc
Page 34 of 4S
February 15, 2002
Response: Item #10 stated that a trail within the proposed greenway as
part of Alternative 3 may be included. The inclusion of this trail may or
may not occur as part of Alternative 3, if this alternative is chosen. If it is,
access to the trail will be considered.
Comments from the Mdewakanton Sioux Communi
Comment 1: The EAW is contradictory and insufficient in content and analysis
and should be rejected. As drafted, the EAW is unclear as to the intent and
purpose of the project and may greatly overstate benefits while understating
impacts. The information provided cannot form a rational basis for a decision on
the need for an Environmental Impact Study (EIS). The document simply does
not meet the minimum stated purpose for an EAW.
Basis The EAW is internally inconsistent. Alternatives shown on Appendix B,
figures 1, 2 and 3 of the EAW differ from alternatives shown on Appendix A,
figures 2 and 3. The difference is in the point of origin for the project. This is not
a mere matter of poor drafting or presentation. The change from the information
in Appendix B to Appendix A significantly alters the area benefited by the study
and indicates two different purposes for the proposed activity.
Paragraph 6.a. of the EAW describes a need for a regional trunk storm sewer
rather than a need to drain storm water from a specific development that is in the
planning stages. The figures in Appendix B are from the original feasibility study
for this project. As drawn in Appendix B, the alternatives will provide some level
of management for storm water originating over a broad area, much of which is
underlain by clay rich soils.
The project description in paragraph 6.c. of the EAW cites a need to provide
drainage from a low point located near County 83 and Valley View Road. The
stated need for this is development planned on land lying immediately to the west
of this low point. Figures in Appendix A support this project description. The
figures in Appendix A, when superimposed on the sub - watershed map, indicate
that the project will only serve a small area just to the west of Scott County
Highway 83 and north of Valley View Road. If this is the case, storm water from
that development should be manageable within the development area itself. The
Shakopee Comprehensive Stormwater Management Plan identifies significant
areas of hydrologic group A soil in the area being developed. These soils are very
amenable to treatment and infiltration within the limits of the development itself.
The project may be unnecessary or of greater impact than required. If the project
benefits the smaller area, the environmental impacts related to construction alone
are far greater than the benefit provided. Long -term environmental impacts
would only exacerbate this situation. The project simply shifts the cost of
providing onsite treatment, storage and infiltration from the developer and future
Page 34 F: IWPWIM1281- 191011602Section H.dOc
Page 35 of 45
February 15, 2002
residents to the public. Ultimately, residents of Scott County, the Shakopee
Mdewakanton Sioux Community, the State of Minnesota and, through the
Minnesota Valley Wildlife Refuge, the taxpayers of the United States will share
in the cost of providing this benefit to a very small group of people.
Until the EAW is amended to more clearly state the project purpose and to
adequately define the scope of the project, it cannot be used as a basis for an
Environmental Impact Study (EIS) decision. The RGU should reject the EAW as
drafted and rewrite it to provide sufficient information to allow a clear decision
path.
Response: Please see responses in Section I, Comments A and B.
Comment 2: The EAW fails to raise, let alone consider, alternatives that lower
environmental impacts and reduce the need for the project.
Basis There is no mention of requiring low- impact development (LID)
techniques in this area of Shakopee. Low - impact development uses undisturbed
areas and on -lot and distributed retention storage to reduce runoff rate and
volume. The central tenet behind LID is the reduction of the curve number while
maintaining or increasing the time of concentration.
Curve numbers are manipulated through:
Narrower driveways and roads
Maximizing tree preservation or forestation
Site fingerprinting (minimal disturbance)
Open drainage swales
Preservation of soils with high infiltration rates
Location of integrated management techniques on high - infiltration soils
The time of concentration is increased or maintained by:
Maintaining pre - development flow path length
Increasing surface roughness
Detaining flows
Minimizing disturbance
Flattening grades in impacted areas
Disconnecting impervious areas
Connecting pervious and vegetated areas
Low - impact development would be ideal on the highly permeable soils found in
BL D8, BL D 18 and BL D9. If these techniques are required where suitable in
the drainage area, there would be a marked decrease in storm water runoff. The
decreased amount of storm water could be infiltrated using a smaller system. Pipe
Page 35 F. tWPWLV11281- 191011602Secrion H-doc
Page 36 of 45
February 15, 2002
diameter and pond size requirements would be reduced if LID techniques were
implemented.
Response: The City of Shakopee is requiring that enhanced infiltration
techniques be used for developments currently proposed west of CR 83 in
the vicinity of Valley View Road. The Alternative No. 3 presented in the
EAW is an open drainage swale system, which is a low impact
development alternative that increases the contact time that water has with
soil, allowing for infiltration. However, low impact development has
drawbacks associated when evaluating runoff that occurs during the spring
snowmelt event. The volume of runoff that is generated from frozen soil
conditions limits the infiltration taking place and increases the volume of
water that runs off. Therefore, it is the City's goal to provide 100 -year
flood protection to residents within the Blue Lake Watershed District and
to formally define the drainage pattern in which water would leave the site
in a flood event. Furthermore, the City of Shakopee has refined its storm
water discharge requirements for the Blue Lake Watershed District to
reduce the allowable discharge rate within this watershed to 0.1 cfs per
acre. Development occurring within the watershed will have to provide
ponding, infiltration, and storm water conveyance systems that limit the
discharge rates to 0.1 cfs per acre prior to leaving the development.
Comment 3: The project is, as shown in Appendix A of the EAW and the
November Assessment, will not drain the entire contemplated area thus all
calculations are incorrect and the entire EAW is suspect.
Basis It appears that Alternative 1 and Alternative 2 will only be capable of
draining BL D8, BL D 18, BL D9, part of BLE 2B, and the northern quarter of
BL D 7. The southern portion of the watershed (BL D9 — BLD 16, November
Assessment, Figure 1) drains to an existing channel that flows through BL D10 to
BL D7, BL D2 and then to BL D1 before it reaches the Prior Lake outlet channel.
Currently, the southern half of BL D7 drains east and not north as is depicted in
Figure 1. The channel is clearly visible in Figure 1. The EAW does not explain
how Alternative 1 or Alternative 2 will assist in the drainage of any area below
Valley View Road (excluding BL D9).
Response: Alternatives No. 1 and 2 are at an elevation sufficient to
provide service to the areas highlighted in the EAW. Therefore, the
alternatives presented in the EAW are valid.
Comment 4: The project design avoids using land located west of County 83 for
ponding and infiltration event though the land is suitable and such use would
significantly decrease overall environmental impacts.
Basis The November Assessment and the EAW understate the ability of the sand
layers in BL D8, BL D18, BL D9, BL D10, BL D7, BL D2 and BL D1 to
Page 36 F:IWPWIM ]2 81- 1 91011 602Section U.doc
Page 37 of 45
February 15, 2002
infiltrate water. The Scott County Soil Survey lists the dominant soils on the
lower elevations along with their infiltration/permeability rates. The following
data is from the Scott Co_ unty Soil Survey. As noted below, more current data is
available elsewhere.
With minor surface alterations, typically required of pond construction, these
dominant soils would have the infiltration rates of hydrologic group A soils. The
area west of County 83 is well suited for the type of open channel ponding and
infiltration space shown in Alternative 3. Coupling this type of management with
the LID techniques mentioned above could significantly reduce the overall storm
water runoff amounts. This would decrease the scope of any additional project,
lower costs and limit environmental impacts.
Response: Please see response to Comment No. 2. To reiterate, the City
of Shakopee is requiring significant ponding infiltration and storm water
discharge restrictions for all areas in the vicinity of CR 83 and Valley
View Road to take advantage of the high infiltration capacity of the soil.
Please also see responses in Section I, Comment B.
Comment 5: There are inconsistencies, assumptions and generalities in the
modeling that preclude definitive results thus the RGU should expand the EAW
or order an EIS.
Basis The modeling erroneously assumes consistent geologic conditions. Soils
on the bluff area (BL D9 — BLD 16) contain more clay and loam than the sands
on the lower elevation. These clay rich soils are less permeable and should be
represented as such in the hydrologic and water quality modeling process. This
Page 37 F WPWIM1281- 191011602Section Il doc
1 1'
0 -12
1.0
12 -38
5 -10
Hubbard fine sand
38+
5 -10
A
0 -11
0.45
Waukegan silt
11 -31
2.5 -5.0
loam
31+
10+
B
0 -24
0.6
Dakota sandy
24 -120
5.0 -10
loam
120
10+
B
0 -12
0.25
12 -36
0.8 -2.5
Hayden (minor)
36+
0.8 -2.5
B
0 -20
1.0
Hubbard loamy
20 -38
5 -10
fine sand
38+
5 -10
A
With minor surface alterations, typically required of pond construction, these
dominant soils would have the infiltration rates of hydrologic group A soils. The
area west of County 83 is well suited for the type of open channel ponding and
infiltration space shown in Alternative 3. Coupling this type of management with
the LID techniques mentioned above could significantly reduce the overall storm
water runoff amounts. This would decrease the scope of any additional project,
lower costs and limit environmental impacts.
Response: Please see response to Comment No. 2. To reiterate, the City
of Shakopee is requiring significant ponding infiltration and storm water
discharge restrictions for all areas in the vicinity of CR 83 and Valley
View Road to take advantage of the high infiltration capacity of the soil.
Please also see responses in Section I, Comment B.
Comment 5: There are inconsistencies, assumptions and generalities in the
modeling that preclude definitive results thus the RGU should expand the EAW
or order an EIS.
Basis The modeling erroneously assumes consistent geologic conditions. Soils
on the bluff area (BL D9 — BLD 16) contain more clay and loam than the sands
on the lower elevation. These clay rich soils are less permeable and should be
represented as such in the hydrologic and water quality modeling process. This
Page 37 F WPWIM1281- 191011602Section Il doc
Page 38 of 45
February 15, 2002
area should also be considered for development patterns that minimi storm
water runoff.
It appears that the hydrologic modeling and the water quality monitoring
incorporate different curve numbers for both the existing and proposed
conditions. This discrepancy should be rectified or better explained.
It appears that an average curve number was used for existing and proposed
conditions for most sub - watersheds. Further explanation should be made
regarding the use of a standard curve number across the entire watershed.
Because the land use and soil type differs markedly across the watershed, variable
curve numbers are almost certain. Modeling using a standard curve number is not
likely to represent actual conditions.
The water quality model (P8) uses a curve number of 61 for the proposed
alternatives. Assuming hydrologic group B with 1 /4 acre lots and 38% impervious
area the Hydrology Guide for Minnesota suggests this number should be closer to
75.
The project may lead to increased pollution in waters of the State of Minnesota
and the United States. Under all three alternatives total phosphorus (a leading
indicator of eutrophication), total kj eldahl, and lead concentrations increase.
Using Carlson's Trophic State Index and the 2000 sampling data gathered by
WSB & Associates, Inc., the lake would already be classified as euthrophic to
hypereutrophic. Implementing alternatives 2 and 3 could lead to further
degradation of Dean's Lake and downstream receiving waters.
Response: The hydrologic/hydraulic modeling incorporated a change of
curve numbers to reflect the existing conditions to the anticipated
developed conditions as contained in the City's Comprehensive Plan.
The P8 water quality model does not operate off of the same curve number
uses as contained in the SCS TR20 hydrology. The P8 model requests a
pervious curve number for the portion of the property that is not
impervious and requires an input of a percentage of impervious surface
area. Therefore, using the Hydrology Guide from Minnesota, 38% of the
watershed is impervious with a curve number of 98 and that the turfed
areas would have a curve number of 61, therefore, allowing for infiltration
in the pervious areas of the watershed.
Please also see the response in Section I, Comment C.
Comment 6: The EAW makes general, declaratory and unsubstantiated
statements regarding water quality. These statements must be substantiated.
Page 38 F.- 1WPW1M1281- 19W11602Section 11 doc
Page 39 of 45
February 15, 2002
Basis The EAW presumes that water quality in Alternatives 1 and 2 will be
sufficient to meet standards. This is based on pre - treatment in a system that is not
shown and which would, presumably, exist upstream from the system inlet. This
pre - treatment system must be described and evaluated for efficacy.
Response: Please see response in Section I, Comment B.
Comment 7: The EAW makes general, declaratory and unsubstantiated
statements regarding water quantity. These statements must be substantiated.
Basis The EAW states that the rate and volume of flow to Dean's Lake will be
decreased over the existing level using ponds. These statements must be
substantiated by providing, at a minim the basic parameters for the ponding
system. A plan for this system does not exist in the Shakopee Stormwater
Management Plan. If a system of ponding and infiltration is planned to mitigate
environmental impacts these plans must be included as part of the overall project
consideration.
Response: Please see response in Section I, Comment B.
Comment S: The EAW uses outdated soil mapping information.
Basis WSB derived soil types from the Scott County Soil Survey. This soil
survey is outdated and contains material that is ambiguous or inaccurate. Its use
could affect the modeling results. The University of Minnesota has updated the
soil survey in their online version, which replaced several ambiguous soil types
such as Alluvial land with more accurate soil types. This data should be used at a
Response: Soils information contained within the EAW is consistent with
the University of Minnesota Soil information.
Comment 9: At least one wetland area is not identified.
Basis WSB survey of wetlands failed to identify an area west of McKenna Road
as wetland. This area occurs within the proposed footprint of Alternative I This
area is a constructed wetland with a classification of Palustrine, persistent
emergent, and intermittently flooded (PEMl J). It currently provides volume and
rate control for treated storm water originating on other portions of the SMSC
Reservation.
Response: The City will take this into consideration during any future
design phase.
Comment 10: The EAW does not provide sufficient information to evaluate the
potential impacts of Alternative 1 on a navigable water of the United States.
Page 39 P.-IWPWJM1281- 191011602Section Hdoc
Page 40 of 45
February 15, 2002
Basis Negative water quality impacts on Blue Lake and its associated water
bodies are almost certain under Alternative 1. This alternative shortcuts miles of
existing surface water flow. It relies on undescribed and unqualified "treatment
ponds" to address water quality concerns. There is no clear statement of the
planned development patterns in the area drained other than a reference to one
EAW completed for one development. There is no analysis of potential
contaminates. The EAW does not address potential releases of chemicals or other
materials at or near the inlet to the system. The EAW does not address the
original design capacity of the "K -Mart Pond" nor its current performance levels.
This issue is handled by declaring that there will be higher loading rates to this
pond without further clarification.
Response: Please see response in Section I, Comment C.
Comment 11: Alternative 2 could do irreparable harm to waters of the State of
Minnesota.
Basis Alternative 2 does far more than perpetuate the existing drainage to
Dean's Lake (see EAW, page 10, paragraph 12, Alternative 2). It directs
significant amounts of storm water through a pipe directly into the lake and short
cuts miles of surface flow. The original drainage system provided opportunity for
evaporation, infiltration and cleaning as well as rate control. All of these
functions will be eliminated. This option is a death sentence for any remaining
natural ecosystem elements in Dean's Lake.
Response: Please see response in Section I, Comment B.
Comment 12: Alternative 3 increases regional environmental impacts, shifts
impacts from the City of Shakopee to other jurisdictions and disproportionately
impacts the environment on downstream lands to the benefit of the RGU.
Basis As shown, Alternative 3 places all rate and volume control and all of the
infiltration sites on land owned by the SMSC, a federally recognized Indian Tribe
and several downstream landowners. Additionally, this alternative uses the
existing Prior Lake Drainage Channel to direct water into Dean's Lake. The
impacts on these downstream parties could be significantly reduced by using low
impact development techniques, ponding and infiltration methods on land west of
Scott County 83 and requiring all development to manage storm water onsite as
far as possible.
The net affect is to shift impacts from one jurisdiction into others leaving the
SMSC, the Prior Lake /Spring Lake Watershed district and the State of Minnesota
with the cost and problem of mitigating any problems that develop. The benefit is
to the City of Shakopee and, more directly, to persons developing land in that
City.
Page 40 F.IWPWWM1281- 191011602Secrion11doc
Page 41 of 45
February 15, 2002
Response: The implications contained in this comment are incorrect. The
City of Shakopee has very restrictive storm water rate control and
treatment mechanisms in place to provide rate control and treatment of
storm water runoff from each development as it occurs. Please see
Section I, Comment B.
Comment 13: All three alternatives presented in the EAW represent a shifting of
costs and negative environmental impacts from the City of Shakopee to other
jurisdictions rather than actual limiting or mitigation of those cost and impacts.
Basis Alternative 1 shifts impacts and costs to the State of Minnesota and the
United States Department of Interior. If the Minnesota Department of
Transportation allows use of the K -Mart pond it will be receiving a greatly
increased amount of water. This will increase maintenance costs and may require
redesign of the pond in the future. The Department of Interior, Fish and Wildlife
Service is the ultimate recipient of this storm water. Blue Lake and its associated
water bodies will be impacted by contaminates, increased fluctuation in water
levels and potential spill and release impacts.
Alternative 2 shifts impacts and costs to the State of Minnesota and, to a lesser
extent, the Department of the Interior. Dean's Lake is a water of the state. It will
be heavily impacted by alternative 2. Any contaminates in storm water will be
piped directly into the lake. It will be subject to rapid fluctuations in water input
and level. Many of the remaining native plants in the area are sensitive to such
level fluctuations. The lake will become, over time, less and less a natural water
body and more of a treatment pond.
Alternative 3 shifts the cost and impacts to the Shakopee Mdewakanton Sioux
Community, the Prior Lake /Spring Lake Watershed District and possibly to Scott
County. Nearly all of the treatment, rate and volume control and infiltration sites
are planned for SMSC land. This uses a large amount of land, a very scarce
resource for the SMSC. Any water that flows downstream must reach Dean's
Lake via the Prior Lake Channel. This will require the Watershed District to act
to improve this channel. While it is true that Shakopee will contribute to this
effort, it will not pay 100 %. It is possible that Scott County will become involved
as additional county roads are constructed in the area. These roads will have to be
designed to deal with storm water originating miles upstream within the City of
Shakopee.
Response: Please see response to SMSC Comments 10 -12. The City of
Shakopee, the City of Prior Lake, and the PLSLWD are working together
to address the concerns associated with the PLSL outlet channel through
additional studies and the implementation of erosion control measures.
Page 41 F: IWPWIM12 81- 1 9101 1 602Section 11 doc
Page 42 of 45
February 15, 2002
The Shakopee Mdewakanton Sioux Community Cultural (Community)
Preservation Office submits the following comments regarding the cultural
resources related issues in the Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) for the
Blue Lake Watershed Drainage Improvement Project from the City of Shakopee
(City).
Comment 1: The EAW is insufficient because it completely fails to address the
requirements of Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act of 196 and
related requirements contained in 36 C.F.R. § 800.
Discussion Because the proposed project areas will require federal permits and
would impact the lands of a federally recognized tribe, the City must address all
requirements of Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 and
36 C.F.R. § 800, procedures of the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation for
the protection of historic properties. Each of the alternatives is addressed more
specifically below.
Alternative 1: In the City's EAW, Section 25 (archaeological, historical or
architectural resources), the City, contrary to recommendations from the State
Historic Preservation Office (SHPO), maintains that it has determined it is not
necessary to survey the area north of TH 101 because there is no "proposed
construction". However, the proposed project could have, in fact, an impact on
the area around Blue Lake and could alter potential sites. There are numerous
previously identified earthworks, burial mounds, artifact scatters, lithic scatters,
village sites, etc. along the first terrace of the Minnesota River in proximity to
Alternative 1. Therefore, the potential of encountering such cultural materials for
Alternative 1 is very high. The survey of this area completed by the Minnesota
Department of Natural Resources (MN DNR) for the State Trail in 2001 further
supports the extensive and intensive use of this area during the precontact and
contact period (this report was not yet available during this comment period).
Many of the previously identified sites in the area north of TH 101 along the first
terrace of the Minnesota River near the project area are directly related to the
Mdewakanton and the entire area is of extreme cultural importance to the
Community.
Alternative 2: As with the southern portion of the Alternative 1 project area,
much of the Alternative 2 project area appears to be located along previously
disturbed areas. In these areas, there is no longer a great potential for
encountering intact cultural materials. However, as the project area nears Dean's
Lake, the likelihood for encountering cultural material increases.
Previous archaeological surveys were completed in areas adjacent to Alternative
2. In 2000, The 106 Group completed a Phase I archaeological survey for the
proposed Valley Green Corporate Center, located just north and adjacent to
Alternative 2. No cultural materials were identified during this survey.
Page 42 F.- WPWINI1281- 19W11602Sectfon 11.doc
Page 43 of 45
February 15, 2002
The timing of this survey was highly unfortunate. The City allowed the developer
to fill and grade the property before requiring the archeological survey.
Regardless of the skill and expertise of the survey party, it is impossible to
identify cultural artifacts beneath compacted fill. The northern portion of
Alternative 2, in the northeast portion of Section 16 and the northwest portion of
Section 15, is located along the ridge of a secondary terrace of the Minnesota
River. In this area, a small portion of the proposed alternative may extend into
undisturbed land. While this secondary terrace is located two miles south of the
current Minnesota River channel, a review of survey reports indicates that the
archaeology of this terrace is relatively unexplored and there is a potential to
uncover cultural materials along the ridge of this terrace, especially near Dean's
Lake.
The Community recommends a survey of the project area, including the entire
area surrounding Dean's Lake, an area that could see significant impact to
potential sites because of the proposed project. The area of potential impact must
include all areas of proposed soil disturbance, all areas impacted by construction
traffic, all land that may be subject to any increased erosion from the project and
all locations that may be impacted by either increased or decreased water levels in
wetland, lakes or streams.
In addition, the project area for Alternative 2 area lies just north and east of a
precontact/contact period trail used by native people f6r traveling from the
SAKPE village area east toward the TEWAPA village / MAKAYUSOTA
(Boiling Springs) area, with a branch of the trail heading south to MDEMAYATO
(now Prior Lake). In a previous survey completed on tribal lands, cultural
materials were found just off of the trail area. The project area for all three
alternatives will cross the path of the former trail at some point.
Alternative 3: The Alternative 3 proposed project area would have the greatest
impact on Community lands. The City has not consulted with the Community
regarding cultural resource information for Community lands. Much of this area
has been previously surveyed, and the City is required to consult with the
Community regarding the potential impact to cultural resources for this project
area. In addition, land adjacent to the stream runnin rin through Sections 14 and 23
exhibits a moderate potential for encountering cultural materials, especially where
the stream meets the edge of a secondary terrace to the Minnesota River in the
southeast portion of Section 14. Just one mile east, a number of sites are located
along a similar tributary (Eagle Creek) and its confluence with the Minnesota
River. Similarities can be drawn between the landforms, water resources and
potential for cultural resources to be associated with such an area. The
archaeology of this terrace is relatively unexplored and there is potential to
uncover cultural materials along this terrace ridge. The City must consider the
impact to cultural resources in undisturbed areas along this stream and terrace
Page 43 F. WPWIM1281- 19W11602Section Hdoc
Page 44 of 45
February 15, 2002
edge in Sections 14 and 23 (especially considering that this alternative proposes
the most ground disturbance).
Response: The Minnesota Historical Society State Historic Preservation
Office indicated that there is nothing of an historic nature located south of
TH 169 of concern within the project area. However, the City of
Shakopee recognizes the historic significance of this area to the SMSC
and will consider the need for additional National Historic Preservation
Research prior to initiating implementation of a chosen alternative.
Comment 2: The EAW is insufficient and incomplete because the City failed to
consult with the Shakopee Mdewakanton Sioux Community on potential impacts
related to cultural properties and archeological sites.
Discussion The City must consult with the Community regarding cultural and
archeological matters for several reasons: 1) the Community is the nearest
federally recognized Indian Tribe; 2) the Community has a direct and immediate
interest due to its history occupation of the land; and 3) the Community holds title
to the land being used under the proposal. The City failed to consult with the
Community regarding any aspects of the cultural resources issues involved in
their proposed project. The EAW submitted for comment by the City of
Shakopee is highly deficient in its assessment of the impact to cultural resources
in the proposed project areas and must be considered incomplete and inadequate.
Response: The City contacted the Community in a letter dated September
24, 2001 requesting information regarding any significant resources
present that maybe affected by the proposed project. A letter from the
Community to the City dated November 29, 2001 is included in Exhibit A.
This letter indicated that information regarding cultural resources would
be forthcoming, but no information regarding cultural or archaeological
resources was provided to the City. However, the City of Shakopee
recognizes the historic significance of this area to the SMSC and will
consider the need for additional National Historic Preservation Research
prior to initiating implementation of a chosen alternative.
Comment 3: The EAW fails to recognize, let alone address, the larger scope of
impacts on cultural and archeological resources related to completion of this
proj ect.
Discussion The proposed project will enable large amounts of development
upstream from the inlet. It will also create extensive impacts downstream related
to water level fluctuations and potential erosion. All of these impacts are within a
broad area of very high cultural significance. The EAW should include, at a
minimum, a Section 106 survey of the entire sub - drainage basin impacted by the
project. The proper response would be to require an Environmental Impact
Page 44 F. WPWIM1281- 19W11602Section Il doc
Page 45 of 45
February 15, 2002
Statement (EIS). The EIS would provide the proper forum for an extensive
survey such as that required.
Response: Please see response to Comment No. 2.
This concludes the City's responses to comments generated as part of the EAW process.
If you have any questions, please contact Bruce Loney at (952) 233 -3800 or Pete
Willenbring at (763) 287 -7188.
Page 45 F.IWPWI1V11281- 191011602Se&ionH.doc
Immoll •.
To: Planning Commission
Michael Leek, Community Development Director
From: Environmental Advisory Board
Mark J. McQuillan, Natural Resources Director
Subject: EAC Plan Review
Date: January 10, 2002
Re: EAW for the Blue Lake Watershed Channel
The Environmental Advisory Committee has reviewed the Environmental Awareness
Worksheet for the Blue Lake Watershed Channel Alternatives and based on study saw no
need to require additional studies. The EAC also commented that alternative #3 is the
most environmentally friendly approach for handling storm water run -off.
There was some concern about the infiltration of contaminants into the ground water
supply. See comments by Steve Menden.
I have attached their individual comments to this memorandum
�, •
January 7, 2002
City of Shakopee
Attn.: Bruce Loney, P.E.
120 Holmes Street South
Shakopee, Minnesota 55379
Dear Mr. Loney:
SUBJECT: Blue Lake Watershed Drainage Environmental Assessment Worksheet
Minnesota Department of Transportation Review #EAW01 -032
S of TH169 / E of CSAH 83
Shakopee, Scott County
C.S. 7005
The Minnesota Department of Transportation (Mn/DOT) has reviewed the above referenced
Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW). Please address the following issues before any
further development:
A Mn/DOT drainage permit will be required regardless of which alternative is chosen (1, 2,
or 3). Mn/DOT Water Resource Engineering definitely prefers either alternative 2 or 3,
although we may have concerns with these alternatives considering the Dean's Lake outlet
channel crossing at approximately sta 520 +00 eb. We would also be opposed to adding 3400
additional acres of drainage area into the K -Mart Linear Pond. This is a very difficult and
complex area to analyze because things are changing so fast.
The drainage permit application must include before /after hydraulic computations for both 10
and 100 -year rainfall events verifying that all existing drainage patterns and systems
affecting Mn/DOT right of way will be perpetuated. Please direct questions regarding permit
applications to Keith VanWagner (651 - 582 -1443) of Mn/DOT's Permits section.
The City of Shakopee should submit a revised stormwater management plan along with
calculations showing what the conditions are now. If you have any questions regarding these
drainage concerns please contact Don Berre in our Water Resource Engineering section at
(651) 634 -2406.
An equal opportunity employer
JAN -09 -2002 14 :32 - STATE AID
City of Shakopee
January 7, 2002
Page 2
651 582 1368 P.03iO3
The plans submitted with the EAW do not adequately identify TH 169 right of way. The final
plans should identify the right of way by reference to the appropriate plat(s) and in place
monuments. The distances from the centerline and offset dimensions from the centerline to
the edge of the plat should also be identified. Please direct questions concerning these issues
to Mike Schadegg (651- 582 -1279) in Nln/DOT's Right of Way section.
Please address all future correspondence for development activity such as plats, site plans,
environmental reviews, and comprehensive plan amendments to:
Paul Czech
Mn/DOT - Metro Division
Waters Edge
1500 West County Road B -2
Roseville, Minnesota 55113
Mn/DOT document submittal guidelines require three (3) complete copies of plats and two (2)
copies of other review documents including site plans. Failure to provide three (3) copies of a
plat and/or two (2) copies of other review documents will make a submittal incomplete and delay
Mn/DOT's review and response to development proposals. We appreciate your anticipated
cooperation in providing the necessary number of copies, as this will prevent us from having to
delay and/or return incomplete submittals.
This letter represents only the transportation concerns of Mn/DOT Metro Division. Other
environmental issues raised by a wider Mn/DOT review may be forwarded to you in a separate
letter. If you have "any additional questions regarding this review please call me at
(651) 582 -1468.
Cc: Gerald Larson — Mn/DOT Environmental Services Section
Andrea Moffatt - WSB & Associates, Inc.
James Hentges, Scott County
Brad Larson, Scott County
Mn/DOT Division File — C.S. 7005
Mn/DOT LGL File — Shakopee
TOTAL P.03
STATE HISTORIC PRESERVATION OFFICE
December 26, 2001
Mr. Bruce Loney
City of Shakopee
Public Works Director
129 Holmes Street S.
Shakopee, MN 55379
RE: EAW — Blue Lake Watershed Outlet
Shakopee, Scott County
SHPO Number: 2001 -4390
Dear Mr. Loney:
Thank you for providing this office with a copy of the EAW for the above - referenced project. It has
been reviewed pursuant to responsibilities given to the Minnesota Historical Society by the Minnesota
Historic Sites Act and the Minnesota Field Archaeology Act and through the process outlined in
Minnesota Rules 4410.1600.
There are no properties listed on the National or State Registers of Historic Places, and no known or
suspected archaeological properties in the area that will be affected by this project. As you know, we
had previously expressed concern with the area north of highway 101, as this area has good potential
of including archaeological sites.
However, the response to question 25a and other sections of the EAW indicate that no construction is
planned for this area. In such a case, "no" response to question 25a is appropriate.
Should any changes to the project occur which would result in terrain disturbance north of 101, we
would ask that you consult further with our office regarding the need for a survey.
Please note that this comment letter does not address the r equ;rements of Section 106 of the National
Historic Preservation Act of 1966 and 36CFR800, Procedures of the Advisory Council on Historic
Preservation for the protection of historic properties. If this project is considered for federal assistance,
or requires a federal permit or license, it should be submitted to our office with reference to the
assisting federal agency.
Please contact Dennis Gimmestad at (651)296 -5462 if you have any questions regarding our review of
this project. Please refer to the SHPO Number above in any correspondence.
Sincerely,
Britta L. Bloomberg
Deputy State Historic Preservation Officer -
cc: Andrea Moffatt, WSB (WSB No. 1281 -19)
J i 1 _.,r1? 02 i.(tri, _ '=
PE 7 W
Thank you for providing this office with a copy of the EAW for the above - referenced project. It has
been reviewed pursuant to responsibilities given to the Minnesota Historical Society by the Minnesota
Historic Sites Act and the Minnesota Field Archaeology Act and through the process outlined in
Minnesota Rules 4410.1600.
There are no properties listed on the National or State Registers of Historic Places, and no known or
suspected archaeological properties in the area that will be affected by this project. As you know, we
had previously expressed concern with the area north of highway 101, as this area has good potential
of including archaeological sites.
However, the response to question 25a and other sections of the EAW indicate that no construction is
planned for this area. In such a case, "no" response to question 25a is appropriate.
Should any changes to the project occur which would result in terrain disturbance north of 101, we
would ask that you consult further with our office regarding the need for a survey.
Please note that this comment letter does not address the r equ;rements of Section 106 of the National
Historic Preservation Act of 1966 and 36CFR800, Procedures of the Advisory Council on Historic
Preservation for the protection of historic properties. If this project is considered for federal assistance,
or requires a federal permit or license, it should be submitted to our office with reference to the
assisting federal agency.
Please contact Dennis Gimmestad at (651)296 -5462 if you have any questions regarding our review of
this project. Please refer to the SHPO Number above in any correspondence.
Sincerely,
Britta L. Bloomberg
Deputy State Historic Preservation Officer -
cc: Andrea Moffatt, WSB (WSB No. 1281 -19)
J i 1 _.,r1? 02 i.(tri, _ '=
Date: January 8, 2002
To: Bruce Loney, P.E., City of Shakopee
From: Dawn Tracy, Natural Resources Program Manager
i
Subject: EAW for the Blue Lake Watershed Drainage Improvement Project
Scott County staff has reviewed the above -referenced document and respectfully submits the following
comments regarding the proposed project.
• Question 6: Alternative 1 refers to the installation of a deep storm sewer system and goes on to
indicate that 8,000 CY of rock will be excavated for this alternative. How deep is the proposed
trench? What type of rock is being excavated and how? Are there any impacts to groundwater due to
this alternative? Alternative 2 raises the same questions.
Staff would favor Alternative 3, which is more consistent with the County's Draft Water Resource
Management Plan to infiltrate water as opposed to piping stormwater downstream. This alternative
could be modified to provide additional infiltration upstream of Deans Lake by not only providing a
channel, but a series of wetland areas with constructed overflow outlets. This would enhance
infiltration of additional water volume, slow the rate of flow through the system and decrease the
bounce on Deans Lake.
• Question 8: Regarding permits; the placement of storm sewer or culverts under or within county road
rights -of -way will require a permit from the County Highway Department.
• Question 10: Alternative 3 shows no wetland, brush or grassland habitat after the proposed project.
This does not appear to be consistent with the text or figures that show a proposed vegetative /wildlife
buffer.
Page 1 of 3
118102 Memo
2
Question 11: The EAW recognizes that the Wilkie Unit of the USFWS Minnesota Valley National
Wildlife Refuge is located north of TH 101. Blue Lake, located in the Wilkie Unit, is currently
receiving stormwater from the project area, which staff assumes refers to the Blue Lake watershed.
The text further states that negative impacts will be minimi using pretreatment of stormwater and
rate control devices. However, the EAW does not address what the increase in volume of water or
the nutrient loads that might be expected with development would be and whether or not these
unmitigated increases would significantly impact the ecological resources of the wildlife refuge.
The EAW indicates that a visual wetland inventory was conducted within the project area by WSB
and refers to areas shown on the National Wetland Inventory (NWI). The NWI map included with
the EAW does not provide the information found on the NWI. It would be helpful to show the
classifications and where these wetlands are with respect to the project alternatives. Staff would also
note that the NWI is not a substitute for field delineation of wetland areas. Further, the visual wetland
inventory was conducted at the driest time of the year within a dry year. Therefore the methodology
used for this type of wetland inventory would be flawed. Wetland characteristics depend on soils,
hydrology and plants. In dry periods soils should be studied as well as historical aerial photos to
determine where wetland basins exist and what their characteristics are during normal periods.
The anticipated impacts on Deans Lake are outlined within this section. Alternative 2 would appear
to be problematic in that it would lead to "short- circuiting" (a decrease in residence time) of water
through the lake and possible degradation of water quality downstream. Staff does not necessarily
agree that there would be "no negative effect" due to Alternative 2. Staff would again note d using
Alternative 3 provides an option more consistent with current conditions, but could be enhance g
wetland areas to break up the linear character of this alternative. The EAW states that Alternative 3
would also be used to create a greenway corridor. While this is encouraged, the type of greenway
(i.e., trail, wildlife corridor, etc.) is not noted.
A listing of resources identified by the Minnesota Natural Heritage Database is provided in the EAW.
The text states that most of the species were documented outside the immediate project area, however
there is no statement as to which species were documented inside the project area. Species located
within the proposed project area should be clarified. The EAW also states that impacts to these
resources are not anticipated as part of the proposed alternatives and a ny impacts would be
temporary. A listing of anticipated temporary impacts would help strengthen this point. In addition,
Blue Lake Watershed EAW Comments
Page 2
January 8, 2002
118102 Memo 3
this project acknowledges that the reason for the project is, in part, the need for drainage
improvements due to development in the watershed. A discussion regarding impacts from
increased/decreased flow to downstream areas should be included with this section, specifically as it
relates to the resources listed by the Minnesota Natural Heritage Database.
Question 12 - The EAW states that Alternative 1 will divert water around Deans Lake, which could
significantly lower the surface water elevation of the lake over time. Staff concurs with this
conclusion and would prefer that this alternative not be considered. Alternative 2, as stated earlier in
these comments, has the potential to short- circuit water through Deans Lake due to water entering the
lake on the west side rather than on the east as it currently does. Alternative 3 would be preferred due
to the potential for infiltration of water using overland flow versus pipe.
Question 25 - Archaeological, historical or architectural resources - the letter from the SHPO asks for
a survey in the area north of TH 101. It is understood that the City has determined that since no
project work will be completed in the area north of TH 101, no survey is needed at this time. It
should be noted, however, that if federal funds or a federal permit are required for this project (i.e.,
Corps of Engineers), a Section 106 consultation will be needed as stated in the SHPO's letter.
Blue Lake Watershed EAW Comments
Page 3
January 8, 2002
M
MINNESOTA RIVER
M WATERSHED DISTRICT
Scott County Government Center
200 4" Avenue West
Shakopee, MN 55379
Tel: (952) 496 -8842, Fax: (952) 496 -8844
January 9, 2002
Bruce Loney
City of Shakopee
129 Holmes Street
Shakopee, MN 55379
Dear Mr. Loney:
,r
.SAN
Terry L. Schwalbe, President
Office: (612) 404 -5312, Fax: (612) 404 -5318
Wallace E. Neal, Vice President
Office: (952) 884 -1632, Fax: (952) 884 -7726
Glenda Spiotta, Secretary
Office: (952) 471 -0590, ext. 285, Fax: (952) 471 -0682
Edward A. Schlampp, Treasurer
Office: (612) 9204398, Fax: (612) 920 -0086
Ron Kraemer, Asst. Treasurer
Cell: (651) 335 -8305, Fax: (952) 894 -3235
Kevin D. Bigalke, Administrator
Office: (952) 496 -8842, Fax: (952) 496 -8844
Thank you for providing the Lower Minnesota River Watershed District (LMRWD) an
opportunity to review the EAW for the Blue Lake Watershed Drainage Improvement
Project. LMRWD staff has review the above- references document and offer the
following comments regarding the proposed project for your consideration.
Question 6, page 2: This section describes the three alternatives being considered.
Alternative 1 describes a deep stone sewer system and indicates that 8,000 cubic
yards of rock will be excavated for this alternative. How deep is the proposed
storm sewer trench? What type of rock is being excavated? Is this bedrock?
What are the impacts to groundwater due to this alternative?
Alternative 2 raises the same questions. The LMRWD does not consider
Alternative 2 to be an acceptable alternative as it "short circuits" the natural
drainage system.
The LMRWD would favor Alternative 3. This alternative is consistent with the
LMRWD watershed management plan promoting infiltration of water. While this
is the preferred alternative, the LMRWD staff feels that this alternative could be
modified to provide additional infiltration, and enhance the greenway corridor,
through a series of wetland complexes and infiltration basins, rather than a linear
channel. This would enhance the infiltration capabilities of this alternative,
reduce the rate of storm water flow through the system, and minimize the bounce
in Dean's Lake.
Question 10, page 7: Alternative 3 does not show any wetland, wooded, or
grassland habitat after the completion of the project. This does not seem to be
consistent with the proposed project, which is to incorporate prairie restoration
and a wooded greenway corridor.
Question 11, page 7: All of the proposed alternatives discharge into Blue Lake in
the Wilkie Unit of the USFWS Minnesota Valley National Wildlife Refuge. The
EAW states that negative impacts will be minimi using pretreatment of
stormwater and rate control devices. The EAW does not discuss what the
increase in volume of water nutrient t add ess the impacts unmitigated increases could
would be. It also does no
have on the ecological resources of the wildlife refuge.
The EAW discusses a visual wetland inventory conducted within the project area.
A simple visual inventory using the National Wetland Inventory (NWI ) maps
might not be adequate to identify wetlands found in this watershed. It would be
beneficial to show the wetland classifications and where these wetlands occur in
relation to the proposed alternatives. Also, the visual wetland inventory was
conducted during an extremely dry period of a dry year (July — September, 2000).
The visual wetland inventory would not identify all wetlands during a dry period
unless all wetland characteristics were used (soils, hydrology, plant types).
The LMRWD has similar concerns' regarding the monitoring that was done as
part of the environmental assessment of water quantity /quality impacts associated
with the drainage improvements in the Blue Lake Watershed. The monitoring
again was conducted during an extremely dry period of the year. One could
expect to see a positive response to surface water inflows on any lake during a dry
_period. Monitoring should continue on Dean's Lake. The LMRWD interested in
working with the City of Shakopee to continue these monitoring efforts.
The potential impacts on Dean's Lake are also discussed in this section.
Alternative 1 could have the potential to lower the surface water elevation of
Dean's Lake. This would be a combined result from loss of recharge area
(groundwater flow) due to the increase of impervious surface and some surface
water flow loss from storm water runoff. Alternative 2 appears to "short- circuit"
the natural hydrology of the watershed. It directly discharges stormwater into
Dean's Lake and could result in water quality degradation of the Lake and
downstream water bodies. The LMRWD staff does not agree that there would be
"no negative effect" due to Alternative 2. The LMRWD feels that Alternative 3 is
most consistent with current conditions. The LMRWD staff does have some
concerns regarding the linear design of this alternative. This design could be
- enhanced using wetland areas and infiltration basins within the proposed corridor.
By improving the Alternative 3 design with a series of wetlands and infiltration
basins, the aesthetics of the greenway corridor would also be enhanced.
Of the-three alternative presented in the EAW, the Lower Minnesota River Watershed
District would prefer to see Alternative 3 as the alternative to improve the drainage of the
Blue Lake Watershed. The LMRWD would also emphasize that improvements to
Alternative 3 should be considered to improve the water quality treatment and infiltration
capabilities, and aesthetic values of the greenway corridor. The LMRWD staff is
interested with working with the City of Shakopee and their consultants on the potential
design enhancements.
On behalf of the Board of Managers of the Lower Minnesota River Watershed District, I
look forward to work with you and the City of Shakopee on this project. If you have any
questions -, please contact me at (952) 496 -8842.
Sincerely,
;?'�" Z �4�
Kevin D. Bigalke
District Administrator
Minnesota Department of Natural Resources
January 4, 2002
Bruce Loney, P.E.
Public Works Director
City of Shakopee
129 Holmes Street South
Shakopee, MN 55379
500 Lafayette Road
St. Paul. Minnesota 5.5155 -40_
RE: Blue Lake Watershed Drainage Improvement Project
Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW)
Dear Mr. Loney:
10
The Department of Natural Resources has reviewed the EAW for Blue Lake Watershed Drainage
Improvement Project. We take the opportunity to note with appreciation that DNR has been consulted
during the project's development, which has. facilitated our review of the EAW. We offer. the�following
comments for your consideration.
The EAW describes the project's purpose in Item 6c as providing "drainage improvements within the Blue
Lake Watershed" to address water pooling that occurs in a depression that is located in the vicinity of CR
re commend preparation and Valley View Road. n e environmental thr
act statement (EIS) th
or any of the roposed alternatives of
re o
Alternative 3 is preferred from a natural resources perspective when considering the three approaches
evaluated in the EAW. It offers the opportunity for both runoff infiltration and habitat creation along an
open water channel. Alternatives 1 and 2, because they involve piping the flow prior to discharging to
artificial or natural basins, do not present similar opportunities for infiltration,
habitat creation, and
aeration of runoff. Implementation of Alternative 3 should also closely maintain the present hydrology of
the Deans Lake basin that has evolved over the past 15 years. The constructed greenway corridor should
be designed to reflect the typical cross section depicted in Figure 5, Proposed Typical Section 3B, which
incorporates a shallow floodplain with an approximately 50 -foot wide upland vegetated buffer on either
side of the channel.
Alternative 3 is also preferred by DNR because it could provide future trail possibilities and it could be
eligible for consideration of a grant from DNR's Metro Greenways Program. Bill Penning, Greenways
Outreach Coordinator, can be reached at (651) 793 -3981_ for further information on DNR's grant program
and eligibility criteria_
Item 8, Permits and Approvals, should indicate that DNR public waters permits are needed for. two of the
alternatives. Specifically, Alternative 2 would require a DNR permit if the outlet pipe or any other
associated work occurs below the ordinary high water (OHW) elevation of Deans Lake; the OHW on this
waterbody is 747.0 feet. Alternative 3 will require a DNR permit to make the physical connection between
DNR Information: 651- 296 -6157 ° 1- 888 - 646 -6367 TTY: 651- 296 -5484 ° 1- 800 - 657 -3929
An Equal Opportunity Employer #* Printed on Recycled Paper Containing a
who Values Diversity 1 a4 Minimum of 10% Post - Consumer Waste
Bruce Loney, P.E.
January 4, 2002
a constructed channel and the existing Prior Lake Outlet Channel. No DNR public waters permit is
required to implement Alternative 1 as offered in the EAW. Please continue working with Pat Lynch,
Area Hydrologist, on issues relating to the need for a DNR public waters permit; he can be reached at
(651) 772 -7917.
The EAW correctly identifies in Item 11 that Blue Lake and Deans Lake provide habitat resources that
could be affected by the project. Specifically:
Blue Lake is a valuable resource that is part of the flood plain of the Minnesota River. The area
serves as fish spawning habitat and a wildlife feeding area.. Alternative 3 appears to provide the
most protection to this flood plain lake while Alternative 1 provides the least protection.
Deans Lake provides wildlife habitat but is not a flood plain lake. Its contributing watershed was
substantially increased when an outlet from Prior Lake was installed, thus directing flow through
this wetland. Although Alternative 1 would divert part of the watershed away from Deans Lake,
this is likely balanced by the additional flows from the Prior /Spring Lake(s) watershed through
Deans Lake. As such Alternative 1 would provide the most protection of the Deans Lake resource.
If sediment input were minima from the project site, Alternative 3 would provide the most protection
when considering the habitat resources of both Blue and Deans Lakes.
Consideration of habitat impacts in Item 11 also involves the potential for the project to affect the
Minnesota River. The Minnesota River's ecological functioning is highly dependent upon its backwater,
flood plain lakes. Blue Lake is the more sensitive resource to the Minnesota River in comparison to Deans
Lake. Thus impacts to the river would be most affected by alterations to Blue Lake. From a Minnesota
River protection perspective, Alternative 3 is the preferred approach while Alternative 1 is the least
protective.
Item 12, in its discussion of Physical Impacts on Water Resources, should note that the existing Prior Lake
Outlet Channel is a protected DNR watercourse. The EAW should indicate that the increased discharge
volume it has received from the construction of the Prior Lake Outlet has likely impaired this watercourse.
The EAW does not address the capability of the Prior Lake Outlet Channel to assimilate any additional
project - related flows. Such an assessment will be necessary if Alternative 3 indeed moves forward and
will be required in the DNR permit process. Any information now available on the assimilative capacity of
the Prior Lake Outlet Channel to receive the proposed flows should be provided in the responses to
comments on this EAW.
Figure 6, City of Shakopee — Areas Prone to Erosion, should indicate that the lower terraces, particularly
those west of Deans Lake and north of CR 16, are susceptible to severe wind erosion. Wind erosion has
indeed occurred at these sites over the past few years.
Thank you for the opportunity to review this project. We look forward to receiving your record of decision
and responses to comments at the conclusion of the environmental review. Minnesota Rules part
4410.1700, subparts 4 & 5, require you to send us your Record of Decision within five days of deciding
FA
Bruce Loney, P.E.
January 4, 2002
this action. Any questions that you may have about this letter can be directed to me at (651) 296 -9229.
Sincerely,
Bill Johnson, Environmental Planner
Environmental Policy & Review Section
Office of Management & Budget Services
c: Kathleen Wallace
Bruce Gerbig
Bill Penning, Greenways Outreach Coordinator
Pat Lynch, Area Hydrologist
Dan P. Stinnett, USFWS
Jon Larsen, EQB
#20020132 -0002
BLUELAKE.DOC
3
01/09/02 15:30 FAX 612 725 3279 MN VALLEY NVYR
F United States D epartmfmt Of the Interior
FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE
�frca s Minnesota Valley National Wildlife Refuge
3815 East 80th Street
Bloomington, Minnesota 55425 -1600
January 9, 2002
Mr. Bruce Loney
Public Works Department
City of Shakopee
Shakopee, Minnesota 55379
Dear Mr. Loney:
2002
L
This letter responds to the Environmental Assessment Worksheet for the Blue Lake Watershed
Drainage Improvement Project, WSB Project No. 1281 -19, which is designed to provide drainage
improvements within the Blue Lake watershed. The project site is located in Sections 3, 9, 10, 14, 16,
22, and 23. of TI 15N, R22W, City of Shakopee, Scott County, Minnesota. Our primary concern is
how the project will impact the Minnesota Valley National Wildlife Refuge (Refuge) which is located
downstream.
Bac - ground Information
Minnesota Valley National Wildlife Refuge was established in 1976 through Public Act 94 -466. The
mission of the Refuge is to restore, manage and the protect the ecological communities of the Lower
Minnesota River Valley and its watershed while providing environmental education and wildlife
dependent recreation. The Refuge encompasses nearly 14,000 acres within eight units which lies
between the bluffs of the Minnesota River Valley from Bloomington to Jordan, Minnesota. It is a green
belt of large flood plain wetland complexes and bluff oak savanna and forest.
Blue Lake is one of four separate flood plain marshes found within the Willie /Rice lake Unit of the
Refuge and are considered to be among the highest quality and diversity of all the wetland complexes
on the Refuge. The source of the majority of water entering these wetlands is from ground water.
Blue Lake receives the vast majority of surface water entering the wetland system from its watershed
that lies in Shakopee and Prior Lake. The wetland basins are interconnected and water control
structures allow the management of water levels on Blue, Fisher and Rice Lakes. Although as
mentioned earlier, the major source of water is ground water, the surface runoff from the Blue Lake
watershed can and does effect the overall water quality of all three lakes. Therefore, we would be
concerned if the quality of the water entering Blue Lake were to become more degraded due to
impacts from further development.
01/09/02 15:31 FAX 612 725 3279 MN VALLEY NWR
[003
Purpose for Improvement
The purpose and need of the proposed project is unclear to us. We are not sure if the purpose of the
proposal is to solve a drainage problem in BLD 7 and BLD 8 or to facilitate future development or both.
A discussion of why `improved" drainage is needed would be helpful. If future development is the
purpose, a discussion of the type of developments being proposed would also be helpful. If the
depression in subwatersheds BLD 7 and BLD 8 is the main reason for the drainage proposal, maybe
the problem could be remedied through other alternatives other than residential or commercial
development. Maybe a lake /wetland complex with associated open space and recreation area would
be this area.
Most cities in the metropolitan area have as the major goal in their Surface Water Management Plan to
maintain the pre - development runoff conditions from each development and the watershed as a whole.
If the City of Shakopee has also adopted this goal, why is "improved" drainage needed? If each
development is required to not exceed the existing rate and total volume of runoff or loading why is
added storage and treatment needed downstream? A drainage easement along the natural drainage
alignment to a certain storm event with no additional disturbance may be the best alternative. In any
event, the alternatives appear to be incomplete. What other alternatives were considered? Why were
they not considered feasible. Was a by-pass of Blue Lake to the Minnesota River considered?
If this project were to proceed as proposed it would in essence allow numerous additional actions, i.e.,
development, that would also have environmental consequences. Therefore, we believe using the
Alternative Ylrban Area Review (AUAR) may be the most appropriate review process to best assess
the long term environmental impacts.
We agree with the conclusion that of the alternatives offered, Alternative 3B provides the least impact to
the Blue Lake Watershed and provides a 200 -250 foot corridor of native wildlife habitat.. If
Alternative 3A or 3B is approved and implemented en'es of treatment s hv variable e weir�
include plantings of native ve but a p ools be included with
control and shut of valves to treat storm water more effectively and contain toxic spills.
Potential Ympacts to Blue Lake
Currently, Blue Lake has no storm water conveyances that outlet to the lake. The sources of water for
the Lake is groundwater entering directly from the aquifer and via the stream under Highway 101. We
have noticed higher flows during the spring during recent years which has caused severe bank erosion
and washed out a vehicular crossing and culvert- The quality of the water, although not analyzed,
appeals to carry little sediment and is cold which leads us to believe the majority of the flow is from
ground water. The modeling indicates that alternative 3B would result in a reduction in TSS and peals
flow from current conditions with a corresponding decrease in all nutrients, metals and hydrocarbons
except phosphorus and lead. What is the explanation for this? We are very concerned with large
increases of lead and phosphorus. Can this be remedied? We remain concerned that the water quality
01/09/02 15:31 FAX 612 725 3279 MN VALLEY NWR
CM 004
of Blue Lake will be impacted. We believe more intense investigation needs to be completed to assess
the potential impact.
On several occasions toxic spills have reached Refuge waters via storm water conveyance systems.
Therefore, we strongly encourage all cities in the Lower Minnesota Watershed to ensure that facilities
are in place to contain toxic spills from reaching Refuge waters or any natural wetland systems.
Containment on the property where the spill originates would be preferred. If spill containment is to be
accomplished within the storm water system, shut -off valves need to be in place to allow spill responders
a way to contain the toxic materials.
We encourage planners to allow, where the opportunity exists, for as mucb infiltration as possible to
maintain recharge in the ground water system. Numerous development projects nationwide are
incorporating Low Impact Development Techniques in both residential and industrial projects with very
successful results in meeting, and in most cases exceeding, Nationwide Urban Runoff Practices (NURP)
Standards. At the core of this method is the use of numerous on-site practices over the entire area
developed to eliminate the runoff through infiltration, detention and evaporation. The soil types in the..
Blue Lake watershed is ideal for infiltration.
In recent years there has been extensive bank erosion in thes tream feeding Blue Lake below Highway
101. Even though the models indicate reduced rate and volumes under Alternative 3, we remain
concerned and believe more in -depth analysis be conducted to assess potential impacts.
Cumulative Impacts
Numerous small impacts of unrelated projects within the same watershed can and often do result in
major environmental impacts in the long term. Therefore, we believe the cumulative effects of this
project when coupled with the impacts of other projects in the watershed, such as the Deans Lake By-
Pass, general development, water level manipulations of Prior Labe, and others may result in major
impacts to Blue Lake. In fact, most studies on watershed functioning result in the finding that the main
problem is the cumulation of many small impacts over a large area. Therefore, a thorough discussion of
the cumulative impacts should be included.
Thr ®r Endangered Species
Given the location and type of activity proposed, we have determined that the project is not likely to
adversely affect any federally listed or proposed threatened or endangered species or adversely modify
their critical habitat. This precludes the need for further action on this project as required under section
7 of the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended. However, if the project is modified or new
information becoines available which indicates that listed species may occur in the affected area,
consultation with this office should be reinitiated.
01/09/02 15:32 FAX 612 725 3279 NN VALLEY NWR
Z 005
Summary
Thank your for the opportunity to comment on the ]Environmental Assessment Worksheeet for the Blue
Lake Watershed Drainage Improvement. We look forward to working with you to meet the mutual
goals of providing cost effective environmentally compatible development and healthy wild lands for the
public we serve. Enclosed you will find a copy of the a document specifying the minimum standards of
quality for water entering Minnesota Valley National Wildlife Refuge. Please call me at 952- 858 -0701
if you need clarification or desire to discuss our comments.
Sincerely,
o-�
Richard D. Schultz
Refuge Manager
Enclosure
01/09/02 15:32 FAX 612 725 3279 MN VALLEY Nn Z006
Water Quality Standards .
Minnesota Valley National Wildlife Refuge
October 29, 1999
Purpose
The purpose of this document is to establish water quality standards for waters directly entering
Minnesota Valley National Wildlife Refiige_ It is acknowledged that the quality of waters entering
the Refuge is subject to the land management practices that occur upstream and off refuge. In
order to ensure the long-term health of Refuge wetlands, it is important for Refuge staff to work
with the parties responsible for managing upstream watersheds and with those agencies who
currently administer surface and sub - surface water resources and facilities.
Background
A significant portion ofMuuiesota Valley National, Wildlife R*ge- lies.iii the•
River Watershed downstream from several cities along a 34 mile stretch 'of the Minnesota
River.
• As determined by EPA criteria and adopted by the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency,
all Refuge wetlands are Class IIB waters. More specifically, these waters "...shall be such
as to permit the propagation and maintenance of a healthy, community of cool or warm
water sport or coriimercial fish and associated aquatic life, and'their Habitats. These
waters shalt be suitable for aquatic recreation of all'kinds, including bathing, for which the
waters may be usable."
• Over the years, a variety of surface and sub - surface storm water facilities have been
constructed which outlet directly into the Refuge or into the Mnn esota River.
• Today's primary concern is the quality of water released directly in Refuge wetlands and
ponds from storm v�ater sewer outlets and toxic spills that enter the storm water. sewer
systems.
® In many cases, Refuge waters are the first line of defense if and when a toxic spill occurs.
The potential for toxic spills significantly increase as cities encourage commercial and
industrial development near the Mumesota River.
• To date, no systematic or comprehensive water quality monitoring program has been
established to document the health of Refuge waters subject to storm water discharges.
• To date, the responsibility for routine cleanup of discharged materials into Refuge waters
is unclear_
01/09/02 15:32 FAX 612 725 3279 MN VALLEY NWR 14 007
Refuge Goals and Standards*
1. Refuge staff will work with cities, corporations, private conservation organizations and
other responsible parties:
A To maintain or restore historic surface and subsurface water flows into Refuge
wetlands.
B To improve and/or modify existing storm water discharge facilities to ensure at
least one level of treatment occurs before entering Refuge.
2. At a minimum, water entering Refuge lands must meet the following quality and purity
standards:
A Minnesota Rules, Chapter 7050.0140 for Class I B waters
B Minn esota standards and design for -wet sediment ponds under the guidelines of the
National Urban Runoff Program.
3. To construct or develop adequate emergency storage and treatment facilities so that the
Refuge is not the first line of defense for a toxic spill.
4. To establish a systematic and long -term monitoring program designed to assess the
impacts of incoming waters upon Refuge wetlands and ponds.
5. � To clearly establish, who is responsible for r6utine maintenance and cleanup of materials
entering the Refuge and who is responsible for cleanup of any toxic spill that enter Refuge
lands.
6.- To ensure that all new construction and development will incorporate water treatment
facilities designed to address the above- mentibned goals and standards.
* Listed goals and standards should not be considered absolute since it may be necessary to
amend as knowledge is gained from monitoring, experience and other sources.
PRIOR LAKE - S PRING LAKE W ' M . D137R, 10'
;952; A4117 -4166
-^ran L4 7 787
Mr. Bruce Loney
City of Shakopee
129 Holmes Street
Shakopee, MN 55379
January 8, 2002
RE: Comments on the Environmental Assessment Worksheet for the Blue Lake
Watershed Drainage Improvement Project: WSB Project No. 1281 -19
Dear Mr. Loney:
Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the EAW. We ofFer the following
comments on accuracy and completeness of information presented, a nd potential
impacts we think-- warrant further investigation. We do not offer an opinion on whether or
not an EIS is necessary- because we feel the information presented in the EAW is not
accurate or complete enough for us to make a determination of this -need It may still be
possible to address potential-impacts in a more complete and accurate revised EAW:
Specific comments. are as follows:
1. Page 4: 6.c: Project Purpose states the need is to provide drainage improvement
particularly to the depressional area located in the vicinity of CR83 and Valley View
Road. However, the supplemental report . "Environmental assessment of water
quantity /quality impacts associated with drainage improvements in the Blue Lake
Watershed" by WSB states that storage in this. area is about 16 acre -feet. This is
not a large amount of water and it would be helpful in determining the need for the
project versus its cost and impact to know how much land. this floods.
Additionally, since the hydrologic analyses presented show peak discharge rates
and volumes equal to or lower than existing conditions for the alternatives why is a
project for drainage improvements needed?
r
16670 FIRANKUHN T RAIL S.E. 10 PRIOR _JAKE, i> N 55 372 �� ��
toward northeast. Also we do not see any analysis in the EAW and supplemental
report that supports the claim of detrimental affects on Dean's Lake hydrology with
Alternative 1 for the reasons listed below. However, While the analysis does not
prove a low Dean's Lake low level. hydrologic impact with Alternative 1, we do
concur that Alternative 3 offers the greatest potential for infiltration and maintenance
of the historic "groundwwater" flow regime, and that mimicking this regime to the
extent practical would be valuable.
➢ First, its not clear that under dry conditions, when Dean's Lake levels would most
likely be negatively affected,. that the existing conditions stormwater flows from
these areas actually make it to the lake. With the poorly defined drainage
patterns at the Valley View and CR83 intersection and east to the Prior
Lake Outlet channel.it seems likely that under dry.year that what little
runoff occurs would largely replenish-depressions and soils. Further it.seems:
that much of these low flows go to the recently constructed by -pass channel`
thereby doing: very little.to maintain the lake level. Modifying the low flow by- pass
channel to be a high flow by- pass,: or to allow some low flow into: Dean's Lake,.
may do, just as.. much or more than Alternative- 3 for maintaining Jake levels:
: Second, the analyses presented in the supplemental report using, the TR20.
model are. all. rainfall event based analyses more - typically associated with we
conditions.
➢ Finally; all 'the TR20 runs shown; on page_ 28 of thesupplemental= report (i.e.,- the.
1' year 24 hr hour through the 100 - year' 10- day - event) show the. lake under :all
alternatives is, at least one foot..above -:the outlet weir elevation. Under-these
events the :lake appears to be- full : and. discharging This may'bepartly due to the
starting elevation of the lakeassumed in the model'mg runs: If might be more`
appropriate to calculate:the volume difference between existing. con ditions and..
the alternatives: and what depth that represents given the lake area, but only for
thee -1 -year event,.since the others are clearly. wet conditions: The' fact that flow
volumes into the. lake or that, peak lake elevation are lower during these wet°
events with Alternative 1 does not prove; detrimental lake lowering impacts: critical
: `during dry periods.
Analyses to validate the EAW conclusion should be based on an .analysis: of a "dry "
penod /condition: The P8 model already constructed for the- project could.. probably
be modified for this analysis. :.For example, for the "average year" P8: analysis,
already included M. thesupplemental report and presented in:the- appendix,. predicts
total annual inflows to the lake of 470 acre -feet for existing conditions,. and 362 acre-
feet for Alternative 1. At first glance this shows a reduction of 108` acre-feet under
this in an "average year." However, with the current P8 configuration its unclear
whether upstream stormwater flows from areas tributary to the Prior Lake Outlet
Channel. are included: Therefore, we can't determine whether 108 acre-feet is a
significant amount of the total flow anticipated tol reach Dean's.Lake, and what lake
level' effect this might have, nor does this. represent.a dry year. Model. runs should
be completed for a dry year that includes the upstream flows directly tributary the
Prior Lake- Outlet Channel (But not including the Prior Lake Outlet flow since these
- 2
are unlikely in a dry year. For example, during 2000, a relatively dry year, we only
released about 80 acre -feet of water).
4. Pages 9-10. 12: Physical_ Impacts on Water Resources
4.a Page 10 first paragraph. We do not see where the analyses presented show
"the potential to significantly lower the surface water elevation of Dean's Lake over
time. Analyses presented do not assess lake levels over any extended period of
time and are event based and do not represent critical dry periods under which
significant low elevation impacts might occur. See comments and questions under
comment #2 above for additional detail.
4.b No discussion has been presented in this section or the EAW- in general
regarding the physical. impacts of the drainage improvements on the Prior Lake
Outlet Channel under, the alternatives. Additional analysis is needed to address the
following:
9 What impacts if any on the Prior Lake outlet channel are anticipated?
➢ What improvements if any to the outlet channel are anticipated to accommodate
the drainage improvements from the project?
WiIF the discharge of runoff from Shakopee- into the channel impact/compromise
the rights the Prior Lake - Spring -Lake Watershed District has to channel
capacity?
5 Page 11. 16. Erosion-and Sedimentation. More analysis and discussion i.s needed
with respect to the potential for the project to contribute to erosion and sedimentation
problems along:the Prior Lake Outlet Channel. See comment above for detailed`
comment:
8, Page 12. 17. Water Quality. We question the accuracy and completeness of using
the P8 for portions of this analysis. PS is probably a. valid planning level tool for
assessing the pollutant loads. delivered to. Dean's Lake and the K -Mart linear. pond.
It is also probably a valid tool for assessing the pollutant. removal efficiency of the K-
art linear pond. However, it is inappropriate for assessing TSS.and TP
sedimentation in Dean's. Lake as done in the EAW supplemental report.. This means
that the pollutant loads and water quality assessments presented in the
supplemental report Blue Lake contain a large amount. of uncertainty.
Dean's Lake is a very complex shallow lake /wetland system- The monitoring data
presented on Figure 8 of the supplemental report suggests that net sedimentation
occurring in Dean's_ Lake is not. nearly as high as the 98% and 74% for TSS and TP,
respectively, predicted by the existing conditions P8 model. 'This may be due to
bioturbation by rough fish (Carp) in combination with high algae productivity. High
algae productivity is demonstrated by the high chlorophyll -a concentrations observed
in the lake, and further this algae is likely the source of the high TSS concentrations
also observed in the lake.
3
Averaging and comparing the inflow and outflow concentrations collected on
concurrent dates as presented on Figure 8 suggests retention rates of 70% and 8 %
respectively for TSS and TP in Dean's Lake. This assessment is limited by the small
data set, the fact that we do not know the flow rates when these samples were
collected,- the average concentrations are not flow weighted, and by the fact that
most of the data was collected during the dry year of 2000. However, it is clear that
these retention rates are nowhere near the rates predicted: by the P8 model. P8
does not include functions for algae or bioturbation, and .onlyreflects particle settling.
We are not sure that any modeling approach could be reasonably represent
pollutant retention -in Dean's Lake given. the complex shallow lake cycling functions
and limited lake data and diagnoses. However; empirical lake models such as
Reckow /Simpson; Dillon Ringler; or Canfield models at least empirically consider
algae and in -lake processes when dealing with phosphorus sedimentation. The
EPA supported model Aquatox,may also be a consideration since it does include
some algae functions.
The bottom line of this comment is that we question the accuracy of the results
presented for the loads to. Blue Lake presented on pages 34 to 36 of the.
supplemental report.. However, we -are not certain whether more detailed modeling
of, sedmentationlretention in Dean's Lake is: necessaryao assess. impacts: Instead a
case might be made that water quality loads: from the project and from new
development would be mitigated: to the extent practical, because of City ponding,
infiltration and stormwater treatment requirements irr combination with the
conversion away from Agricultural Land use. These practices in.combination with
the project result`in load changes that could, be less than existing. bonditions;
increase .negligibly: compared 16 the total load from alt sources, or could, be mitigated;
with some. other practice. For example the P8 modeling presented shows a
tlecrease in TSS Toad to, Dean's Lake from existing:conditions to Alternative 3 and a
slight increase in TP. This in' crease ,in TP. (approx. 200 ibs) could be mitigated. or
might be negligible part of -the overall TP budget of: Dean's. Lake.. If-that is true then
presumably, the use of- the same practices mitigates TP impacts to- Blue Lake, or if.
under worst case and there is no net. sedimentation in Dean's' Lake then Blue Lake -
- ..load are. affected similarly.
7.' Page. 12.17. Water Quality. Paragraph beginning with. Alternative 1 states that this
alternative results in. higher Joading rates to the K- Mart pond.. We- agree,. but the
question is whether or not the pond can adequately handle these additional. pollutant
and hydraulic loads. The supplemental report states -that the additional flow to this
pond results in higher loading rates to the pond, overloads the pond, and - does: not
allow adequate detention times to treat direct, areas tributary to the pond as originally
designed. However, while analyses regarding increased loading rates and pond:
levels are presented, no information is presented regarding the other claims of
overloading, and compromising detention times and treatment performance. No.
physical description of the pond or its outlet is presented so the reader can judge the
capacity of - the facility or whether it could` be reasonably modified to accommodate
the increased loads. It appears that the facility only overflows by infiltration since
4
� — ,' : ':' ' 1 f — e • • — +— • '. •'. — • • '... • _� a •, I• •
-r L61 - - a:, �, - - -r _ •
• 'rr;- ! • - a _ - • • • a a•_ • • ^ _ • I --
correlations of flow to water quality are presented. We agree that this may be true
particularly with.. respect to Prior Lake discharges to Dean's Lake, but it is not
necessarily true with respect to all types surface water inputs. Extending this
conclusion regarding surface water inputs to localized urban stormwater is not a
given. The historic surface flows likely contributing to good water quality in the lake
are those from Prior Lake since it is a mesotrophic lake with good water quality. For
example two of the three lowest observed in -lake TP concentrations in Dean's lake,
from the data set presented on Figure 8, were during April of 2001 when the Prior
Lake was discharging at: a significant rate. Prior Lake was not. discharging a
meaningful on any of the other sampling dates In. addition, higher in -lake
quality during flow periods- may also. be partly duee to just having. higher lake levels at
these times. It is well documented that deeper lakes have lower phosphorus
concentrations probably because sediment associated phosphorus is less-likely to
be recycled or re- suspended by rough -fish: and` other mechanisms:
la conclusion, we. think the EA is incomplete and 'not adequate�to Snake a
determination regarding potential .impacts._ The technical analyses completed A6. not
adequately support some of the conclusions:: Some of these are.major conclusions,
such as significantly reducing the water levels on Dean's Lake and warrant further
study. The EAW is also incomplete with .respect to_ assessment of the physical-
impacts to the Prior. Lake Outlet Channel,. and: capacity rights of the District:
Sincerely
The Prior Lake- Spring take - Watershed° District
Paul` Nelson, -Administrator'`.
Cc: Craig Gontarek, PLSLWD: President
Dave. Moran, PLSLWD Vice President
Q
Technical & Regulatory Evaluations Group, Inc.
13231 Henning Circle AE
Prior Lake, MN 55372
Voice (952) 496 -0594 Fax (952) 496 -2097
E -Mail - lllehman@aol.coin
January 3, 2002
Mrs. Kathy Gerlach
Dean's Lake Homeowner's Association
4855 Eagle Creek Blvd.
Shakopee, MN 55379
Review of 1) Blue Lake Watershed Drainage Improvement Project EAW and 2)
Environmental Assessment of Water Quantity and Quality Impacts Assoc with
Drainage Improvements in the Blue Lake Watershed.
Dear Mrs. Gerlach,
As per your request, I have reviewed the above mentioned documents. The document entitled
Environmental Assessment of Water Quality /Quantity Impacts Associated with Drainage
Improvements in Blue Lake Watershed, dated November 28, 2001, was prepared by WSB &
Associates, Inc. for the City of Shakopee. The report is used to support the conclusions and
recommended options for the location of a storm sewer (and potentially a sanitary sewer) which is
required in order to develop parcels of land which lay to the south and west of Hwy 83 and 16.
There are numerous inaccuracies in the report and associated analyses which tend to limit its
validity and the validity of conclusions based on this work. I strongly recommend that an
independent and impartial review be undertaken of this work. There are numerous interests
represented by WSB which could affect the objectivity of this environmental review work.
Some of the major technical problems that I see in this report follow.
1. The Environmental Assessment report calculates inflow volumes to Dean's Lake under
existing and future fully developed conditions. WSB concludes that current inflow into Dean's
Lake is at the same volume, or higher than those of a fully developed watershed. This is not
reasonable. The problem lies in the assumptions of Curve Number and by neglecting or limiting
ponding and infiltration that presently exist. It also assumes that the watersheds when developed
will not have runoff in excess of 0.1 cfs per acre. It is common knowledge that a developed
watershed produces more runoff than an undeveloped one. These assumptions are misleading at
best. Current runoff into Dean's Lake from these watersheds, does not approach the values
assumed.
� �O C/ (/
U'
✓ ��
/ ,,/�
ti: C� 'vy • "1.,� . -�-f�L � /��a • � /1./�7;CG r �,'�7 GG°'�� /7� - ^�.�`�
�///
12�� G�C�s� l ����G� C� _/ �Z�2��i°'1 ���
J
�2�� G�����'
�.� ��� �� � ��e �� ���� ����"
,, //�
���� �� l�
�.
�i� cc����� ��'n'
�.
�•
���z��J
,:
��,���-
�� ��
�`
2. The flow paths and channels described for existing conditions is also misleading or incorrect.
Especially in the Introduction and Purpose section where water in a closed depression west of
Hwy 83 is said to drain to Dean's Lake. For it to do so, it would have to traverses across open
fields and join with the Pike Lake Outlet Channel to enter Dean's Lake, basically the route
described by Alternative 3. There may be occasional intermittent discharge into the Pike Lake
Channel, via this route, but it is insignificant. Most of the water that transgresses under 83 to the
east is infiltrated in the open fields. It does not cross Pike Lake Road in any significant quantities.
I live in this area and travel Pike Lake Road on a daily basis and have not observed this to be the
case.
3. Several assumptions used in the modeling tend to be inaccurate and lead to inaccurate
conclusions. For example, infiltration is allowed only in wetlands. This is totally invalid for the
area of Alternative 3. Significant infiltration is expected to occur in these fields at the base of the
bluff. Had this infiltration been allowed in the model it would serve to greatly reduce the
calculated inflow volumes into Dean's Lake under existing conditions.
4. Another assumption which serves to make it look as though routing highway runoff to Dean's
Lake is a positive thing, is the assumption of bare and highly erodible soils in the area of
Alternative 3. These fields may be bare in the winter, they are in crops in the summer This bare
soil assumption leads to higher modeled runoff and suspended solids than would a field in crop.
5. The choice of chemical parameters upon which to base a comparison is also interesting, as it is
primarily a reflection of contaminants which would originate in an agricultural setting. If one
changes from an agricultural setting to a developed setting, then other contaminants would be
more reflective of this condition. Agricultural contaminants would be reduced, but they are
replaced by other, perhaps more detrimental species, such as road salt, petroleum products and
heavy metals. None of these contaminants are modeled or mentioned in this analysis of water
quality.
6. Sampling done in support of this environmental assessment is also questionable and is not
.representative. The fall of 2000 was the culmination of a very long term episode of water level
lowering, either from drought or more probably by draining of Dean's Lake by developers along
the shoreline. The fall 2000 measurements were taken at the very lowest levels since 1998.
These readings would naturally show a more degraded level of water quality than would those
taken during a more normal cycle. Likewise, the water chemistry reading in April 2001, would be
reflective of the very large snowmelt event that occurred during this time and would not be typical
of runoff during other periods of time.
( In this regard, Figure 7 appears incorrect, it seems that readings taken during the months of
September through October 2000 as shown in Figure 8, are not reflected on this chart,.. The last
data point reading on Figure 7 must be the reading taken in late April 2001.)
7. This type of interpretation, i.e., routing storm water to Dean's Lake is good for water quality,
2
is extremely misleading and self serving. It is not the opinion of the bulk of the scientific
community that storm water runoff will improve the water quality of a largely groundwater -fed
lake, nor is it consistent with planning documents written by the Metropolitan Council. The WSB
interpretations regarding the significance of the groundwater flow component to the lake is also
inconsistent with work done previously by the Lower Minnesota Watershed District, Larry
Samsted.
8. The EAW is also misleading and incorrect regarding other development planned in the area.
For instance, it makes no mention of the rerouting of County Road 16, the proposed Highway 21
across the same area as Alternative 3 and the heavy commercial development planned on both the
east and west side of Dean's Lake. The rerouting and widening of Hwy 16 and the future Hwy
21 traffic loads and runoff into the open ditch must be considered due to the proximity of these
features to Alternative 3. The Dean's Lake environmental impacts should not be considered in a
piecemeal fashion. All of these cumulative effects must be considered when deciding on an
alternative storm water routing.
9. The reports do not mention that the consent of the Sioux Tribe would probably be needed for
Alternative 3, since it would be on their property.
10. The area under consideration is listed as highly susceptible to groundwater contamination by
Scott County and State Groundwater Susceptibility Maps. Scott County has recently amended
their septic system ordinances to bring septic systems in areas of moderate to high susceptibility
into compliance quickly. It seems that routing storm water runoff and infiltrating contaminated
water into the groundwater system in these areas is not consistent with county plans. See Scott
County Groundwater Susceptibility map in Scott County Scene, December 2001 /January 2002.
In summary, these reports contain many technical assumptions which serve to sway the
conclusions and recommendations. Many of these assumptions are highly questionable or just
plain incorrect. The public would be better served by getting an unbiased environmental review
on matters concerning runoff into and draining of Dean's Lake.
I hope these comments are useful to you, and if you have any questions, please feel free to call.
Sincerely,
Linda Lehman
President
JAN -14 -2002 13:41 CITY OF SHAKOPEE 6124450252 P.03iO4
- M etro p olitan ouncil
Budding communities that work
January 9, 2002
Bruce Loney
City of Shakopee
129 Holmes Street
Shakopee, N1N 55379
RE: EAW Review — City of Shakopee, Blue Lake Watershed Drainage Improvement .Project
Metropolitan Council District 5
Referral File No. 18668 -1
Dear Mr. Loney:
Metropolitan Council staff has reviewed the Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) for the
proposed Blue Lake Watershed Drainage Improvement Project to determine its adequacy and accuracy in
addressing regional concerns. The project is located south of TH 169 between CSAH 83 and CSAH 18
in the city of Shakopee. The EAW analyzes three potential alignment alternatives for a trunk storm water
conveyance system to provide an improved and stable outlet channel for the Blue Lake Watershed. The
approximate total acreage of the project varies from 11.7 to 68 acres depending on the alternative.
Council staff finds that the EAW is adequate and accurate in addressing regional concerns and that an
EIS is not necessary for regional concerns. Council staff offers the following advisory conunents and
recommendations for your consideration:
Environmental Services (James Frost, 651 -602 -1078)
Council staff concurs that Alternative 3 will have the least environmental impact of the duee alternatives
evaluated.
Recreation Open Space (Michael McDonough, 651- 602 -1054)
Blue Lake is located within the Willcie Unit of the Minnesota Valley National Wildlife Refuge and
Recreation Area, which is a significant part of the region's open space system. Preserving water quality
and wildlife habitat is very important.
The consequences of letting a portion of the stormwater continue to collect in the existing depression is
not entirely clear in the report. If more water was retained and infiltrated in the depression area, the
stormwater runoff infrastructure and its impacts could seem to be reduced.
Alternative 3B appears to do the best job of preserving water quality, providing habitat, and does not
remove wood/forest land cover. The natural drainageway /greenway approach increases filtration and
infiltration of stormwater runoff and provides the potential for wildlife habitat preservation and
enhancement. Page 6 states that this alternative would improve the quality of the water discharged from
this watershed. It also provides the opportunity for a greenway corridor.
The description of the Dean Lake wetland complex describes it as not having much diversity. As a part
of this project, some ecological restoration should be done in and around the wetlands. This includes
removal of some =a-tic species and re- vegetation with native plant material to increase the diversity of
vD--= info Lane 802 -1888
www.met=c=undLatg
230 East r= Street (651) 602.1000 2 Fax 6021550 • TrY 2 ®1.0904
JAN -14 - 2002 13 =42 CITY OF SHAKOPEE 6124450252 P.04/04
- Bruce -Loney
7anuary 9, 2002
Page 2
P1 ants and wildlife. The plan greenway area should be vegetated in native plant materials only and have
the appropriate soil composition to support this native vegetation
Item 11— Based the aerial photo in appendix C, it appears that all of the alternatives direct the stormwater
to a pipe labeled "all alternatives," between Highway 169 and Blue Lake. A natural drainage / greenway
system like the one in alternative #B should be considered for this section too. The natural alternative
should also include provisions for wildlife crossings at both Hwy. 169 and Hwy. 101.
Item 14 - 1Vlsintaining. a drainage system, as close to the natural system as possible, is generally the best
for protecting natural resources.
Item 25 - The EAW should describe the public access that is proposed as a part of the greenway
alternative. There is a brief mention of a potential trail as apart of the greenway. As a part of the public
investment, there should be public access for fishing and wildlife observation.
This will conclude the Council's review of the EAW. The Council will take no formal action on the
EAW. If you have any questions or need further information, please contact Greg Pates, principal
reviewer, at 651 - 602 -1410.
Sincerel
Eli Cooper
Director, Planning and Growth Management
cc: Phil Riveness, Metropolitan Council District 5
Caren Dewar, Deputy Regional Administrator
Sherry Narusiewicz, MnDOT Metropolitan Division
Keith Buttleman, Environmental Services
Tom Caswell, Sector Representative
Cheryl Olsen, Referrals Coordinator
V: IWBRAR= 01, 0,PJNDV\P.F- FPRRAL\LF77ERS\2001 LeUC►s\5hakaD08 EAW 18668 -1 Blue Lk Drain lv,doo
TOTAL P.04
C
Shakopee
Sioux Community
2330 SIOUX TRAIL NW ® PRIOR LAKE, MINNESOTA 55372
TRIBAL OFFICE: 952.445 -8900 • FAX: 952.445 -8906
February 12, 2002
The Honorable William Mars
City of Shakopee
129 S. Holmes Street
Shakopee, MN 55379
RE: Comments on Blue Lake Watershed Drainage Improvements EAW
Dear Mayor Mars:
The attached comments of several departments of the Shakopee Mdewakanton Sioux
(Dakota) Community Tribal Government include most of the issues the Shakopee
Mdewakanton Sioux Community (Community) desires to address regarding the
Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW). I too have several comments on the
entire project.
OFFICERS
Stanley R. Crooks
Chairman
Glynn A. Crooks
Vice Chairman
Lori K. Crowchild
Secretary/Treasurer
As the situation currently exists, and given the project as currently planned. I must state
the Community's opposition to this project. The project attempts to use Community
lands for the sole benefit of the City of Shakopee (City). The City is not proposing a
joint project with mutual benefit. It is proposing to shift impacts from land it desires to
develop to land owned by the Community for the benefit of private developers.
To some extent, all three project alternatives require the Community to provide a right -of-
way of some kind. One of the alternatives causes potential environmental damage to
Community owned land. Community land use planning contemplates treating and
infiltrating stormwater from its development on site. The City should do the same, not
attempt to dump the result of poor development planning on its neighbors.
Past discussions of use of some tribal lands to infiltrate limited amounts of city
stormwater were predicated on certain conditions being present. These included: 1) the
land would be in trust status; 2) benefits would be mutual; and 3) impacts would be
shared. Presently, these conditions are not being met. The City, and a few developers,
are the primary beneficiaries of this project as planned. The project includes no
limitation on development, no techniques to limit runoff and no use of City jurisdiction
Mayor William Mars
February 12, 2002
Page 2
land for infiltration. It simply generates the runoff and then moves it to another
jurisdiction as quickly as possible.
Our ancestors gave up enough land to form the southern half of Minnesota and got very
little in return. The City wants the Community to give up more of its very limited land
holdings and offers nothing in return.. Based upon the lack of benefit to the Community, I
must state again the Community's strong opposition to providing its land to this project.
Sincerely,
Stanley R. Crooks
Tribal Chairman
Enclosures
SHAKOPEE MIDEWAKANTON SIOUX CONEVIUNITY
LAND AND NATURAL RESOURCES DEPAR NT
The following are the comments of the Shakopee Mdewakanton Sioux
Community (SMSC) Land and Natural Resources Department on the Environmental
Assessment Worksheet (EAW) for the Blue Lake Watershed drainage Improvement
Project. The City of Shakopee is the Responsible Governmental Unit (RGU). Comments
are grouped into three areas: 1) document consistency and general sufficiency; 2)
impacts and alternatives; and 3) human environment and socio economic impacts.
Comments are directed toward both the Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW)
and the Environmental Assessment of Water Quality /Quantity Impacts Associated with
Drainage improvements in the Blue Lake Watershed (November Assessment) dated
November 2001. WSB & Associates, Inc. prepared the November Assessment for the
City of Shakopee. The November Assessment is expressly incorporated irate the EAW by
reference in Section 11 of the EAW.
1 t lu 1 ►Y f ► ► : ►L1 \��C1i1'� � t� l '�7►C�`�
Comment 1
The EAW is contradictory and insufficient in content and analysis and should be
rejected. As drafted, the EAW is unclear as to the intent and purpose of the project and
may greatly overstate benefits while understating impacts. The information provided
cannot form a rational basis for a decision on the need for an Environmental Impact
Study (EIS). The document simply does not meet the minimum stated purpose for an
EAW.
Basis
The EAW is internally inconsistent. Alternatives shown on Appendix B, figures
1, 2 and 3 of the EAW differ from alternatives shown on Appendix A figures 2 and 3.
The difference is in the point of origin for the project. This is not a mere matter of poor
drafting or presentation. The change from the information in Appendix B to Appendix A
significantly alters the area benefited by the study and indicates two different purposes
for the proposed activity.
Land and Natural Resources, page 1
Paragraph 6.a. of the EAW describes a need for a regional trunk storm sewer
rather than a need to drain stormwater from a specific development that is in the planning
stages. The figures in Appendix B are from the original feasibility study for this project.
As drawn in Appendix B, the alternatives will provide some level of management for
stormwater originating over a broad area, much of which is underlain by clay rich soils.
The project description in paragraph 6. c. of the EAW cites a need to provide
drainage from a low point located near County 83 and Valley View Road. The stated
need for this is development planned on land lying immediately to the west of this low
point. Figures in Appendix A support this project description. The figures in Appendix
A, when superimposed on the sub - watershed map, indicate that the project will only
serve a small area just to the west of Scott County Highway 83 and north of Valley View
Road. If this is the case stormwater from that development should be manageable within
the development area itself. The Shakopee Comprehensive Stormwater Management
Plan identifies significant areas of hydrologic group A soil in the area being developed.
These souls are very amenable to treatment and infiltration within the limits of the
development itself.
The project may be unnecessary or of greater impact than required. If the project
benefits the smaller area, the environmental impacts related to construction alone are far
greater than the benefit provided. Long-term environmental impacts would only
exacerbate this situation. The project simply shifts the cost of providing on site
treatment, storage and infiltration from the developer and future residents'to the public.
Ultimately, residents of Scott County, the Shakopee Mdewakanton Sioux Community,
the State of Minnesota and, through the Minnesota Valley Wildlife Refuge, the taxpayers
of the United States will share in the cost of providing this benefit to a very small group
of people.
Until the EAW is amended to more clearly state the project purpose and to
adequately define the scope of the project it cannot be used as a basis for an
Environmental Impact Study (EIS) decision. The RGU should reject the EAW as drafted
and rewrite it to provide sufficient information to allow a clear decision path.
Land and Natural Resources, page 2
Comment 2
The EAW fails to raise, let alone consider, alternatives that lower environmental
impacts and reduce the need for the project.
Basis
There is no mention of requiring low- impact development (LID) techniques in
this area of Shakopee. Low - impact development uses undisturbed areas and on -lot and
distributed retention storage to reduce runoff rate and volume. The central tenet behind
LID is the reduction of the curve number while maintaining or increasing the time of
concentration.
Curve numbers are manipulated through:
• Narrower driveways and roads
• Maximizing tree preservation or forestation
• Site fingerprinting (minimal disturbance)
• Open drainage swales
• Preservation of soils with high infiltration rates
• Location of integrated management techniques on high- infiltration soils.
The time of concentration is increased or maintained by:
• Maintaining predevelopment flow path length
• Increasing surface roughness
• Detaining flows
• Minimizing disturbance
• Flattening grades in impacted areas
• Disconnecting impervious areas
• Connecting pervious and vegetated area
Low - impact development would be ideal on the highly permeable soils found in
BL D8, BL D 18 and BL D9. If these techniques are required where suitable in the
drainage are there would be a marked decrease in stormwater runoff_ The decreased
amount of stormwater could be infiltrated using a smaller system. Pipe diameter and
pond size requirements would be reduced if LID techniques were implemented.
Land and Natural Resources, page 3
Comment 3
The project, as shown in Appendix A of the EAW and the November Assessment,
will not drain the entire contemplated area thus all calculations are incorrect and the
entire EAW is suspect.
Basis
It appears that Alternative 1 and Alternative 2 will only be capable of draining BL
D8, BL D 18, BL D9, part of BLE 2B, and the northern quarter of BL D 7. The southern
portion"of the watershed (BL D9 — BLD 16, November Assessment, Figure 1) drains to
an existing channel that flows through BL D10 to BL D7, BL D2 and then to BL D1
before it reaches the Prior Lake outlet channel. Currently the southern half of BL D7
drains east and not north as is depicted in Figure 1. The channel is clearly visible in
Figure 1. The EAW does not explain how Alternative 1 or Alternative 2 will assist in the
drainage of any area below Valley View Road (excluding BL D9). _
Comment 4
The project design avoids using land located west of County 83 for ponding and
infiltration even though the land is suitable and such use would significantly decrease
overall environmental impacts.
Basis
The November Assessment and the EAW understate the ability of the sand layers
in BL D8, BL D18, BL D9, BL D10, BL D7,
BL D2 and BL D1 to infiltrate water. The
Scott County Soil Survey lists the dominant soils on the lower elevations along with their
infi ltration/permeability rates. The following data is from the Scott County Soil Survey.
As noted below, more current data is available elsewhere
i e
Hubbard fine sand
0 -12
1.0
A
12 -38
5 -10
38+
5 -10
Waukegan silt loam
0 -11
0.45
B
11 -31
2.5 -5.0
31+
10+
Dakota sandy loam
0 -24
0.6
B
24-120
5.0 -10
120
10+
Hayden (minor)
0 -12
0.25
B
Land and Natural Resources, page 4
With minor surface alterations, typically required of pond construction, these
dominant soils would have the infiltration rates of hydrologic group A soils. The area
west of-County 83 is well suited for the type of open channel ponding and infiltration
space shown in Alternative 3. Coupling this type of management with the LID
techniques mentioned above could significantly reduce the overall stormwater runoff
amounts. This would decrease the scope of any additional project, lower costs and limit
environmental impacts.
Comment 5
There are inconsistencies , assumptions and generalities in the modeling that
preclude definitive results thus the RGU should expand the EAW or order an EIS.
Basis
The modeling erroneously assumes consistent geologic conditions. Soils on the
bluff area (BL D9 — BLD 16) contain more clay and loam than the sands on the lower
elevation. These clay rich soils are less permeable and should be represented as such in
the hydrologic and water quality modeling process. This are should also be considered
for development patterns that minimiz stormwater runoff.
It appears that the hydrologic modeling and the water quality monitoring
incorporate different curve numbers for both the existing and proposed conditions. This
discrepancy should be rectified or better explained.
It appears that an average curve number was used for existing and proposed
conditions for most sub - watersheds. Further explanation should be made regarding the
use of a standard curve number across the entire watershed. Because the land use and
soil type differs markedly across the watershed, variable curve numbers are almost
certain.,- Modeling using a standard curve number is not likely to represent actual
conditions.
Land and Natural Resources, page 5
12 -36
0.8 -2.5
36+
0.8 -2.5
Hubbard loamy fine sand
0 -20
1.0
A
20-38
5 -10
38+
5 -10
With minor surface alterations, typically required of pond construction, these
dominant soils would have the infiltration rates of hydrologic group A soils. The area
west of-County 83 is well suited for the type of open channel ponding and infiltration
space shown in Alternative 3. Coupling this type of management with the LID
techniques mentioned above could significantly reduce the overall stormwater runoff
amounts. This would decrease the scope of any additional project, lower costs and limit
environmental impacts.
Comment 5
There are inconsistencies , assumptions and generalities in the modeling that
preclude definitive results thus the RGU should expand the EAW or order an EIS.
Basis
The modeling erroneously assumes consistent geologic conditions. Soils on the
bluff area (BL D9 — BLD 16) contain more clay and loam than the sands on the lower
elevation. These clay rich soils are less permeable and should be represented as such in
the hydrologic and water quality modeling process. This are should also be considered
for development patterns that minimiz stormwater runoff.
It appears that the hydrologic modeling and the water quality monitoring
incorporate different curve numbers for both the existing and proposed conditions. This
discrepancy should be rectified or better explained.
It appears that an average curve number was used for existing and proposed
conditions for most sub - watersheds. Further explanation should be made regarding the
use of a standard curve number across the entire watershed. Because the land use and
soil type differs markedly across the watershed, variable curve numbers are almost
certain.,- Modeling using a standard curve number is not likely to represent actual
conditions.
Land and Natural Resources, page 5
The water quality model (P8) uses a curve number of 61 for the proposed
alternatives. Assuming hydrologic group B with V4 acre lots and 38% impervious area
the Hydrology Guide for Minnesota suggests this number should be closer to 75.
The project may lead to increased pollution in waters of the State of Minnesota
and the United States. Under all three'alternatives total phosphorus (a leading indicator
of eutrophication), total kjeldahl, and lead concentrations increase. Using Carlson's
Trophic State Index and the 2000 sampling data gathered by WSB and Associates, Inc.
the lake would already be classified as euthrophic to hypereutrophic. Implementing
alternatives 2 and 3 could lead to further degradation of Dean's Lake and downstream
receiving waters.
Comment 6
The EAW makes general, declaratory and unsubstantiated statements regarding
water quality. These statements must be substantiated.
Basis
The EAW presumes that water quality in Alternatives 1 and 2 will be sufficient to
meet standards. This is based on pre - treatment in a system that is not shown and which
would, presumable, exist upstream form the system inlet. This pre - treatment system
must be described and evaluated for efficacy.
Comment 7
The EAW makes general, declaratory and unsubstantiated statements regarding
water quantity. These statements must be substantiated.
Basis
The EAW states that the rate and volume of flow to Dean's Lake will be
decreased over the existing level using ponds. These statements must be substantiated by
providing, at a minimum, the basic parameters for the ponding system. A plan for this
system does not exist in the Shakopee Stormwater Management Plan. If a system of
ponding and infiltration is planned to mitigate environmental impacts these plans must be
included as part of the overall project consideration.
Comment 8
The EAW uses outdated soil mapping information.
Land and Natural Resources, page 6
Basis
WSB derived soil types from the Scott County Soil Survey. This soil survey is
outdated and contains material that is ambiguous or inaccurate. Its use could affect the
modeling results. The University of Minnesota has updated the soil survey in their online
version, which replaced several ambiguous soil types such as Alluvial land with more
accurate soil types. This data should be used at a minimum.
Comment 9
At least one wetland area is not identified.
Basis
WSB survey of wetlands failed to identify an area west of McKenna Road as
wetland. This area occurs within the proposed footprint of Alternative 3. This area is a
constructed wetland with a classification of Palustrine, persistent emergent, and
intermittently flooded (PEM1J). It currently provides volume and rate control for treated
storm water originating on other portions of the SMSC Reservation.
Comment 10
The EAW does not provide sufficient information to evaluate the potential
impacts of Alternative 1 on a navigable water of the United States.
Basis
Negative water quality impacts on Blue Lake and its associated water bodies are
almost certain under Alternative 1. This alternative shortcuts miles of existing surface
water flow. It relies on undescribed and unqualified "treatment ponds" to address water
quality concerns. There is no clear statement of the planned development patterns in the
area drained other than a reference to one EAW completed for one development. There
is no analysis of potential contaminates. The EAW does not address potential releases of
chemicals or other materials at or near the inlet to the system. The EAW does not
address the original design capacity of the "K -Mart Pond" nor its current performance
levels. This issue is handled by declaring that there will be higher loading rates to this
pond without further clarification.
Minnesota.
Alternative 2 could do irreparable harm to waters of the State of
Land and Natural Resources, page 7
Basis
Alternative 2 does far more than perpetuate the existing drainage to
Dean's Lake (see EAW, page 10, paragraph 12, Alternative 2). It directs significant
amounts of storm water through a pipe directly into the lake and short cuts miles of
surface flow. The original drainage system provided opportunity for evaporation,
infiltration and cleaning as well as rate control. All of these functions will be eliminated.
This option is a death sentence for any remaining natural ecosystem elements in Dean's
Lake.
Comment 12
Alternative 3 increases regional environmental impacts, shifts impacts
from the City of Shakopee to other jurisdictions and disproportionately impacts the
environment on downstream lands to the benefit of the RGU.
Basis
As shown, Alternative 3 places all rate and volume control and all of the
infiltration sites on land owned by the SMSC, a federally recognized Indian Tribe and
several down stream land owners. Additionally, this alternative uses the existing Prior
Lake Drainage Channel to direct water into Dean's Lake. The impacts on these.
downstream parties could be significantly reduced by using low impact development
techniques, ponding and infiltration methods on land west of Scott County 83 and
requiring all development to manage storm water onsite as far as possible.
The net affect is to shift impacts from one jurisdiction into others leaving
the SMS C, the Prior Lake /Spring Lake Watershed district and the State of Minnesota
with the cost and problem of mitigating any problems that develop. The benefit is to the
City of Shakopee and, more directly, to persons developing land in that City.
MAN ENVIRONMENT AND, SOCIO - ECONOMIC IMPACTS
Comment 13
All three alternatives presented in the EAW represent a shifting of costs
and negative environmental impacts from the City of Shakopee to other jurisdictions
rather than actual limiting or mitigation of those cost and impacts.
Land and Natural Resources, page 8
Basis
Alternative 1 shifts impacts and costs to the State of Minnesota and the
United States Department of Interior. If the Minnesota Department of Transportation
allows use of the K -Mart pond it will be receiving a greatly increased amount of water.
This will increase maintenance costs and may require redesign of the pond in the future.
The Department of Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service is the ultimate recipient of this
storm water. Blue Lake and its associated water bodies will be impacted by
contaminates, increased fluctuation in water levels and potential spill and release impacts.
Alternative 2 shifts impacts and costs to the State of Minnesota and, to a
lesser extent, the Department of the Interior. Dean's Lake is a water of the state. It will
be heavily impacted by Alternative 2. Any contaminates in stormwater will be piped
directly in to the lake. It will be subject to rapid fluctuations in water input and level.
Many of the remaining native plants in the area are sensitive to such level fluctuations.
The lake will become, over time, less and less a natural water body and more of a
treatment pond.
Alternative 3 shifts the cost and impacts to the Shakopee Mdewakanton
Sioux Community, the Prior Lake /Spring Lake Watershed District and possibly to Scott
County. Nearly all of the treatment, rate and volume control and infiltration sites are
planned for SMSC land. This uses a large amount of land, a very scarce resource for the
SMSC. Any water that flows downstream must reach Dean's Lake via the Prior Lake
Channel. This will require the Watershed District to act to improve this channel. While
it is true that Shakopee will contribute to this effort, it will not pay 100 %. It is possible
that Scott County will become involved as additional county roads are constructed in the
area. These roads will have to be designed to deal with storm water originating miles
upstream within the City of Shakopee.
Land and Natural Resources, page 9
The Shakopee Mdewakanton Sioux Community Cultural (Community)
Preservation Office submits the following comments regarding the cultural resources
related issues in the Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) for the Blue Lake
Watershed Drainage Improvement Project from the City of Shakopee (City).
The EAW is insufficient because it completely fails to address the requirements of
Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act of 196 and related requirements
contained in 36 C.F.R. § 800.
Discussion
Because the proposed project areas will require federal permits and would impact
the lands of a federally recognized tribe, the City must address all requirements of
Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 and 36 C.F.R. § 800,
procedures of the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation for the protection of historic
properties. Each of the alternatives is addressed more specifically below.
Alternative I
In the City's EAW, section 25 (archaeological, historical or architectural
resources), the City, contrary to recommendations from the State Historic Preservation
Office (SHPO), maintains that it has determined it is not necessary to survey the area
north of TH101 because there is no "proposed construction". However, the proposed
project could have, in fact, an impact on the area around Blue Lake and could alter
potential sites. There are numerous previously identified earthworks, burial mounds,
artifact scatters, Ethic scatters, village sites etc. along the first terrace of the Minnesota
River in proximity to Alternative 1. Therefore, the potential of encountering such
cultural materials for Alternative 1 is very high. The survey of this area completed by
the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (MN DNR) for the State Trail in 2001
fiuther supports the extensive and intensive use of this area during the precontact and
contact period (this report was not yet available during this comment period). Many of
the previously identified sites in the area north of TH101 along the first terrace of the
Minnesota River near the project area are directly related to the Mdewakanton and the
entire area is of extreme cultural importance to the Community.
Cultural Preservation, page 1
Alternative 2
As with the southern portion of the Alternative 1 project area, much of the
Alternative 2 project area appears to be located along previously disturbed areas. In these
areas, there is no longer a great potential for encountering intact cultural materials.
However, as the project area nears Deans Lake, the likelihood for encountering cultural
material increases.
Previous archaeological surveys were completed in areas adjacent to Alternative
2. In 2000, the 106 Group completed a Phase I archaeological survey for the proposed
Valley Green Corporate Center, located just north and adjacent to alternative two. No
cultural materials were identified during this survey.
The timing of this survey was highly unfortunate. The City allowed the developer
to fill and grade the property before requiring the archeological survey. Regardless of the
skill and expertise of the survey party, it is impossible to identify cultural artifacts
beneath compacted fill. The northern portion of Alternative 2, in the northeast portion of
Section 16 and the northwest portion of Section 15, is located along the ridge of a
secondary terrace of the Minnesota River. In this area, a small portion of the proposed
alternative may extend into undisturbed land. While this secondary terrace is located two
miles south of the current Minnesota River channel, a review of survey reports indicates
that the archaeology of this terrace is relatively unexplored and there is a potential to
uncover cultural materials along the ridge of this terrace, especially near Deans Lake.
The Community recommends a survey of the project area, including the entire
area surrounding Deans Lake, an area that could see significant impact to potential sites
because of the proposed project. The area of potential impact must include all areas of
proposed soil disturbance, all area impacted by construction traffic, all land that may be
subject to any increased erosion from the project and all locations that may be impacted
by either increased on decreased water levels in wetlands, lakes or streams.
In addition the project area for alternative 2 area lies just north and east of a pre -
contact / contact period trail used by native people for traveling from the SAKPE village
area east towards the TEWAPA village / MAKAYUSOTA (Boiling Springs) area, with a
branch of the trail heading south to MDEMAYATO (now Prior Lake). In a previous
survey completed on tribal lands, cultural materials were found just off of the trail area.
Cultural Preservation, page 2
The project area for all three alternatives will cross the path of the former trail at some
point.
Alternative 3
The Alternative 3 proposed project area would have the greatest impact on
Community lands. The City has not consulted with the Community regarding cultural
resource information for Community lands. Much of this area has been previously
surveyed, and the City is required to consult with the Community regarding the potential
impact to cultural resources for this project area. In addition, land adjacent to the stream
running through Sections 14 and 23 exhibits a moderate potential for encountering
cultural iaterials, especially where the stream meets the edge of a secondary terrace to
the Minnesota River in the southeast portion of Section 14. Just one mile east, a number
of sites are located along a similar tributary (Eagle Creek) and its confluence with the
Minnesota River. Similarities can be drawn between the landforms, water resources and
potential for cultural resources to be associated with such an area. The archaeology of
this terrace is relatively unexplored and there is potential to uncover cultural materials
along this terrace ridge. The City must consider the impact to cultural resources in
undisturbed areas along this stream and terrace edge in Sections 14 and 23 (especially
considering that this alternative proposes the most ground disturbance).
COMMENT 2
The EAW is insufficient and incomplete because the City failed to consult with
the Shakopee Mdewakanton Sioux Community on potential impacts related to cultural
properties and archeological sites.
Discussion
The City must consult with the Community regarding cultural and archeological
matters for several reasons: 1) the Community is the nearest federally recognized Indian
Tribe; 2) the Community has a direct and immediate interest due to its history occupation
of the land; and 3) the Community holds title to the land being used under the proposal.
The City failed to consult with the Community regarding any aspects of the cultural
resources issues involved in their proposed project. The EAW submitted for comment by
the City of Shakopee is highly deficient in its assessment of the impact to cultural
Cultural Preservation, page 3
resources in the proposed project areas and must be considered incomplete and
inadequate.
COMMENT 3
The EAW fails to recognize, let alone address, the larger scope of impacts on
cultural and archeological resources related to completion of this project.
Discussion
The proposed project will enable large amounts of development upstream from
the inlet. It will also create extensive impacts downstream related to water level
fluctuations and potential erosion. All of these impacts are within a broad area of very
high cultural significance. The EAW should include, at a minim a Section 106
survey of the entire sub - drainage basin impacted by the project. The proper response
would be to require an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS). The EIS would provide
the proper forum for an extensive survey such as that required.
Cultural Preservation, page 4
WANWA
Shakopee Mdewakanton
Sioux Community
November 29, 2001
2330 SIOUX TRAIL NW • PRIOR LAKE, MINNESOTA 55372
TRIBAL OFFICE: 952.445 -8900 • FAX: 952.445 -8906
Ms. Lee Marlowe
WSB & Associates, Inc.
4150 Olson Memorial Highway, Suite 300 >' P
Minneapolis, MN 55422
Re: Response regarding initial proposed alternatives for the Blue Lake Watershed
Outlet EAW
Dear Ms. Marlowe:
OFFICERS
Stanley R. Crooks
Chairman
Glynn A. Crooks
Vice Chairman
Lori K. Crowchild
Secretary/Treasurer
Thank you for your letter requesting comments on proposed alternatives for the Blue
Lake Watershed Outlet in Shakopee, MN. I have also provided a copy of your letter to
Mr. Jim Warren, Cultural Resources Manager, and he will respond under separate cover.
My response will be limited to environmental and natural resources issues associated
with the proposals.
Regarding R,T, & E species, I have personally observed large flights of colonial
waterbirds (Great Blue Herons and Great Egrets) flying from presumed roosts and
nesting locations on the Minnesota River. I remember from past Minnesota database
searches that the state identifies these areas as well. These colonies consist of at least
several hundred individuals judging from the numbers flying to feeding locales.
The Minnesota River also serves as migratory area, and to a lesser extent, breeding area
for Bald Eagles. I have observed eagles over the proposed project areas.
I have also observed a small breeding concentration of Grasshopper Sparrows in the
SEl /4 of Section 9. This is not identified as a bird with designated status, but it is a rare
grassland bird due to lack of habitat in this area.
I do not know of any other significant environmental or natural resource issues associated
with the proposed alternatives at this time.
Thank you again for the opportunity to comment at this early stage, and please do not
hesitate to contact me (952- 496 -6153) with additional questions. If possible, can you
provide the Shakopee Mdewakanton Sioux Community with two copies of the EAW
when the document is complete and ready for public review? Both copies can be sent to
me, and I will distribute them to the appropriate individuals.
Sincerely,
�� I Wc� OA�
Michael B. Whitt
Environmental Specialist
15- a
LITTWI •i • ' � 1/
Mem
TO: Mayor & City Council
Mark McNeill, City Administrator
FRO M: Bruce Loney, Public Works Director
SUBJECT: Consider Approving Plans and Ordering Advertisement for
Bids for CSAH 83 /CSAH 17 Improvement Project No. 2001 -4
DATE: February 19, 2002
1191 1
Attached is Resolution No. 5657, which approves the plans and specifications and
authorizes staff to advertise for bids for Project No. 2001 -4 for improvements of CSAH
83, from 12 Avenue to 1870 feet south of the existing intersection of CSAH 16; and for
CSAH 16, from 850 feet west of CSAH 83 to 1500 feet east of CSAH 83. Also attached
are Resolution No.'s 5658, 5659, 5660, and 5661, resolutions approving plans for CSAH
83 and CSAH 16 as State Aid Projects and restricting parking on these highways. Also,
attached for Council Approval is the Cooperative Agreement with the County for the
project.
B ACKG R O UND:
On May 1, 2001, Resolution No. 5526 was adopted and ordered the preparation of plans
and specifications for CSAH 83 /CSAH 16 improvements. The plans have been prepared
by WSB & Associates, Inc. with cooperation of Scott County Highway staff to improve
these roadways, to improve the traffic in this area and accommodate traffic from the
Valley Green Corporate Center site.
The improvement of CSAH 83 /CSAH 16 was initiated by a petition received from the
property owner of the proposed Valley Green Corporate Center.
With this project, the plans have been completed by WSB & Associates and reviewed by
Scott County Highway Department staff. Scott County at their February 12, 2002
meeting, approved the Cooperative Agreement with the City of Shakopee for this project
and their estimated cost share. The County Board also included a provision to construct
CSAG 16 east of CSAH 83 to Plan "A ", the original design, if right -of -way was obtained
from the Shakopee Mdewakanton Sioux Community (SMSC) and if not, to utilize Plan
"B" which is a design with more temporary road construction.
Attached to this memo are the following items for Council review:
1. Resolution No.'s 5658, 5659, 5660 and 5661, approving CSAH 83 and CSAH 16
as the State Aid Projects and restricting parking on these roadways.
2. Cooperative Agreement from Scott County.
3. Option AB drawing on CSAH 16 east of CSAH 83.
4. Overall drawing of project showing cost share segments.
5. County Board Agenda Report on Cooperative Agreement.
At this time, the SMSC does not agree to grant an easement for CSAH 16. If this project
is to proceed, the project would have to proceed with Option `B ". The plans have been
prepared with the Option `B" design.
The County has ordered eminent domain on the remaining parcels and would like the
City to begin construction in April or May of this year, in order to complete construction
by October. Reconstruction of CSAH 83 requires the closing of CSAH 83 for a certain
period. East -west traffic movements along CSAH 16 will be provided for most of the
project, except for certain periods to allow for CSAH 16 construction and connections to
CSAH 83.
A Planned Unit Development concept review for Valley Green Corporate Center has
been considered by the City for their new proposal of a business park and residential.
Staff has also received a letter from Ryan Companies supporting the CSAH 83 /CSAH 16
improvement project, as without this project, the development cannot move forward.
Staff has informed the current property owner of the Letter of Credit requirement of the
assessments that would be necessary before award of contract. Jon Albinson of Valley
Green is working on the Letter of Credit and will be submitting this before the award of
the contract.
This project will provide a substantial improvement to the County road system and to
T.H. 169 ramps. Additional items included in this project from the feasibility report
includes a right turn lane on CSAH 83 to 12 Avenue, concrete median on 12 Avenue
to facilitate the traffic control signal and additional storm sewer sizing to handle storm
water on future upgrades of CSAH 16 and McKenna Road.
The County has reviewed the plans and the County Board approved the Cooperative
Agreement for this project. The magnitude of this project is such that the entire
construction season is needed to build the improvements. Staff is bringing this item
forward now as the plans are complete. In order to begin construction in April or early
May, approval of the plans is necessary at the February 19, 2002 meeting or no later than
March 6, 2002 meeting for construction to occur this year.
ALTERNATIVES:
1. Adopt Resolution No.'s 5657, 5658, 5659, 5660 and 5661.
2. Deny Resolution No.'s 5657, 5658, 5659, 5660 and 5661.
3. Authorize the appropriate City Officials to execute the Cooperative Agreement with
Scott County.
4. Table for additional information.
Staff recommends Alternative No. 1, to approve plans and specifications in order to
proceed with this project so as to construct the improvements this year. Also, staff
recommends Alternative No. 3 to execute the Cooperative Agreement with the County on
cost participation. With the City of Shakopee, a large portion of this cost is assessments
to the Valley Green property. Other funds affected are the Trunk Sanitary Sewer, Storm
Drainage, and Capital Improvement Funds. A cost summary will be available at the
meeting.
I "MIN
1. Offer Resolution No. 5657, A Resolution Approving Plans and Specifications and
Ordering Advertisement for Bids for County State Aid Highway 83, from 12
Avenue to 1870 Feet South of the Existing Intersection of County State Aid
Highway 16; and for County State Aid Highway 16, from 850 Feet West of
County State Aid Highway 83 to 1500 Feet East of County State Aid Highway
83, Project No. 2001 -4 and move its adoption.
2. Offer Resolution No. 5658, A Resolution Approving Scott County Plans to
Improve County State Aid Highway 16, Between 900 Feet West of County State
Aid Highway 83 and 2,244 Feet East of County State Aid Highway 83, SAP 70-
616 -023 and move its adoption.
3. Offer Resolution No. 5659, A Resolution Approving Scott County Plans to
Improve County State Aid Highway 83 Between 3,997 Feet South of Trunk
Highway 169 and 804 Feet North of Trunk Highway 168, SAP 70- 683 -006 and
move its adoption.
4. Offer Resolution No. 5660, A Resolution Restricting Parking on County State Aid
Highway 83 Between 3,997 Feet South of Trunk Highway 169 and 804 Feet
North of Trunk Highway 169, SAP 70- 683 -006 and move its adoption.
5. Offer Resolution No. 5661, A Resolution Restricting Parking on County State Aid
Highway 16 Between 900 Feet West of County State Aid Highway 83 and 2,244
Feet East of County State Aid Highway 83, SAP 70- 616 -023 and move its
adoption.
6. Authorize the appropriate City Officials to execute the Cooperative Agreement
with Scott County for this project.
k ruceney
Public Works Director
BUprnp
RES5657
WHERE pursuant to Resolution No. 5526 adopted by City Council on May 1, 2001,
Bruce Loney, Public Works Director has prepared plans and specifications for the construction of
County State Aid Highway (CSAH) 83, from 12"' Avenue to 1870 feet south of the existing
intersection of CSAH 16; and for CSAH 16, from 850 feet west of CSAH 83 to 1500 feet east of
CSAH 83 by installation of sanitary sewer, watermain, storm sewer, street reconstruction, turn
lanes, concrete median, concrete curb & gutter, traffic control signals, concrete sidewalk,
bituminous trail and any appurtenant work; as described in the feasibility report and amendments,
and has presented such plans and specifications to the Council for approval.
NOW, THEREFORE, B T RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIEL OF T
CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA:
1. Such plans and specifications, a copy of which is on file and of record in the Office
of the City Engineer, are hereby approved.
2. The City Clerk shall prepare and cause to be inserted in the official paper and in the
Construction Bulletin an advertisement for bids upon the making of such improvement under such
approved plans and specifications. The Advertisement for Bids shall be published as required by
law.
Adopted in session of the City Council of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota,
held this day of , 2002.
Mayor of the City of Shakopee
Iii x.�11A
City Clerk
RESOLUTION .,,. • ; • COUNTY
TO EWROVE COUNTY 11 HIGHWAY 16
BETWEEN g" WEST OF 1 2,244 FEET EAST OF
SAP 70-616-023
WHEREAS, plans for Project No- SAP 70-616-023 showing proposed alignment, profiles, grades and
cross-sections for the co nsuuction, reconstruction or improvement of County State Aid Highway No. 16 within
the limits of the City as a State Aid Project have been prepared and • e.- -• to the
•1 • FORE, RESOLVED, ,. • • be a r• approved.
•
Adopted in session of the City Council of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota, held this
day of _ 2002.
William Mars, Mayor, City of Shakopee
City Clerk
City Attorney
City Clerk
mh \\hw blue \wp\ word\ project \616- 23kaolution approving.doc
RESOLUTION APPROVING • PLANS
TO EqyROVE COUNTY I/ HIGHWAY
BETWEEN 99 • is OF i 169 AND 804 FEET NORTH OF i
SAP 70-683-006
WHEREAS, plans for Project No. SAP 70- 683 -006 showing proposed alignment, profiles, grades and
cross- sections for the construction, reconstruction or improvement of County State Aid Highway No. 83 within
the limits of the City as a State Aid Project have been prepared and presented to the City.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that said plan be in all things approved_
Adopted in session of the City Council of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota, held this
day of , 2002.
William Mars, Mayor, City of Shakopee
City Clerk
City Attorney
STATE OF MINNESOTA
COUNTY OF SCOTT
CITY OF SHAKOPEE
I hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution is a true and correct copy of a resolution presented to and
adopted by the City Council of Shakopee at a meeting thereof held in the City of Shakopee, Minnesota, on the
day of , 2002, as discussed by the records of said City in my possession.
City Clerk
mh- w: \word\project \683 -06\resolution approving.doc
A RESOLUTION RESTRICTING PARKENG
ON COUNTy STATE AID EE[GHWAY 83
F 3,997 FEET SOUTH OF TH 169 AND 804 FEET NORTH OF TH 169
SAP 70-683-006
WHEREAS, the County of Scott has planned the improvement of County State Aid Highway 83 from 3,997
Feet South of TH 169 to 804 feet North of TH 169; and
WHEREAS, the County of Scott will be expending County State Aid Funds on the improvement of this
highway; and
WHEREAS, since this improvement lacks adequate width for parking on both sides of the road, approval of the
proposed construction as a County State Aid Project must therefore include certain parking restrictions.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE,
NE[NNESOTA:
That the City of Shakopee shall prohibit the parking of motor vehicles on both sides of CSAH 83 from 3,997 feet
South of TH 169 to 804 feet North of TH 169.
Adopted in session of the City Council of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota, held this
day of 2002.
Willi am Mars, Mayor, City of Shakopee
City Clerk
City Attorney
STATE OF NE LANES ®TA
COUNTY OF SCOTT
CITY OF SHAKOPEE
I hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution is a true and correct copy of a resolution presented to and adopted
by the City Council of Shakopee at a meeting thereof held in the City of Shakopee, Minnesota, on the day of
2002, as discussed by the records of said City in my possession.
City Clerk
mh- w: \wor&project \683- 06\resolution no parking.doc
RESTRICTI P• �i
•.,.. COUNTy AID i[ i
• P 70-6
WHEREAS, the County of Scott has planned the improvement of County State Aid Highway 16 from 900 feet
West of CSAH 83 to 2,244 feet East of CSAH 83; and
WHEREAS, the County of Scott will be expending County State Aid Funds on the improvement of this
highway; and
WHEREAS, since this improvement lacks adequate width for parking on both sides of the road, approval of the
proposed construction as a County State Aid Project must therefore include certain parking restrictions.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED EY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE,
SOTA:
That the City of Shakopee shall prohibit the parking of motor vehicles on both sides of CSAH 16 from 900 feet
West of CSAH 83 to 2,244 feet East of CSAH 83.
Adopted in s ession of the City Council of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota, held this
day of 2002.
William Mars, Mayor, City of Shakopee
ATTEST:
City Clerk
City Attorney
STATE OF MINNESOTA
COUNTY OF SCOTT
CITY OF SHAKOPEE
I hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution is a true and correct copy of a resolution presented to and adopted
by the City Council of Shakopee at a meeting thereof held in the City of Shakopee, Minnesota, on the day of
2002, as discussed by the records of said City in my possession.
City Clerk
rnh- w: \word\project \616- 23\resolution no parking.doc
SAP 70- 616 -23
SAP 70 -683 -06
City of Shakopee
County of Scott
ff-TA 9 51 IOUTISM
THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into this day of , 2002, by and
between the City of Shakopee, a body politic and corporate under the laws of the State of Minnesota,
hereinafter referred to as the "City " and the County of Scott, a body politic and corporate under the laws of
the State of Minnesota, hereinafter referred to as the " County ".
VIr=SSETH:
WHEREAS, the City and the County have been negotiating to bring about the improvement of County
State Aid Highway (CSAH) 16 from 2244 feet east of County State Aid Highway (CSAH) 83 to 900 feet west
of County State Aid Highway (CSAH) 83 in the City of Shakopee (Engineers Stations 201 + 223 + 43.54 and
307 + 33.85 to 316 + 34) as shown on the City Engineer's plans for State Aid Project 70- 616 -23, and County
State Aid Highway (CSAH) 83 from 3997 feet south of TH 169 to 804 feet north of TH 169 in the City of
Shakopee (Engineers Stations 99 + 53.49 to 150 + 84) as shown on the City Engineer's plans for State Aid
Project 70- 683 -06, which improvements contemplate and include grading, aggregate base, plant -mixed
bituminous pavement, concrete curb and gutter, storm sewer, bituminous sidewalk, landscaping, watermain,
sanitary sewer and other related improvements; and
WHEREAS, the above described projects lie within the corporate limits of the City; and
WHEREAS, the City Engineer has heretofore prepared an engineer's estimate of quantities and unit
prices of material and labor for the above described projects and an estimate of the total cost for contract work
in the sum of Five Million Two Hundred Twenty Nine Thousand Seventy Seven dollars an Fift cents
($5,229,077.50)
A copy of said estimate (marked Exhibit "A ") is attached hereto and by this reference made a part
hereof; and
WHEREAS, it is contemplated that said work be carried out by the parties hereto under the provisions of
M.S. Sec. 162.17, Subd. 1.
1
SAP 70- 616 -23
SAP 70 -683 -06
City of Shakopee
County of Scott
NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY AGREED:
I
The City or its agents will advertise for bids for the work and construction of the aforesaid State Aid
Projects No. SAP 70- 616 -23 and SAP 70- 683 -06, receive and open bids pursuant to said advertisement and
enter into a contract with the successful bidder at the unit prices specified in the bid of such bidder, according to
law in such case provided for cities. The contract is in form and includes the plans and specifications prepared
by the City or its agents, which said plans and specifications are by this reference made a part hereof.
II
The City shall administer the contract and inspect the construction of the contract work contemplated
herewith at the sole cost of the City. The County Engineer shall cooperate with the City Engineer and his staff
at their request to the extent necessary.
a
The County shall reimburse the City for its share in the construction cost of the contract work for said
projects and the total final contract construction cost shall be apportioned as set forth in the Division of Cost
Summary in said Exhibit "A." It is further agreed that the Engineer's Estimate referred to in this agreement is an
estimate of the construction cost for the contract work on said projects and that the unit prices set forth in the
contract with the successful bidder and the final quantities as measured by the Engineer shall govern in
computing the total final contract construction cost for apportioning the cost of said projects according to the
provisions of this paragraph.
IV
The terms and conditions of the Cost Participation Policy of Scott County pertaining to cost and/or
responsibilities may be revised or changed from time to time. Any such changes shall apply to this Agreement
and shall be binding upon both parties regarding costs and/or responsibilities incurred after the effective date of
the revisions to the Cost Participation Policy. Scott County shall notify the participating City of any such
revisions or changes and of the effective date prior to implementation.
V
The cost of the items in which the County shall participate shall be based on the unit prices in the
contract and the final construction quantities as determined by the Project Engineer in charge.
SAP 70- 616 -23
SAP 70 -683 -06
City of Shakopee
County of Scott
M
The City Engineer shall prepare monthly progress reports as provided in the specifications. A copy of
these reports shall be furnished to the County each month.
VII
In the event that a dispute arises, the County and the City agree that all disputes between them arising
out of or relating to this Agreement shall be submitted, upon agreement by both parties, to non - binding
mediation, unless the parties mutually agree otherwise, with the cost being shared equally.
VIII
All records kept by the City and the County with respect to this project shall be subject to examination
by the representatives of each party hereto. All data collected, created, received, maintained or disseminated for
any purpose by the activities of the City or County pursuant to this Contract shall be governed by Minnesota
Statutes Chapter 13, as amended, and the Minnesota Rules implementing such Act now in force or hereafter
adopted.
0
The County reserves the right not to issue any permits for a period of five (5) years after completion of
the project for any service cuts in the roadway surfacing of the County Highways included in these projects for
any installation of underground utilities which would be considered as new work; service cuts shall be allowed
for the maintenance and repair of any existing underground utilities.
X
The City shall, at its own expense, remove and replace all City owned signs that are within the
construction limits of these projects.
Upon completion of this project, the County, at its expense, shall place the necessary signs and the City,
at its expense, shall provide the enforcement for the prohibition of on- street parking on those portions of CSAH
16 and CSAH 83 constructed under these projects.
No modification of the above parking restrictions shall be made without first obtaining a resolution from
the County Board of Commissioners permitting said modification.
3
SAP 70- 616 -23
SAP 70 -683 -06
City of Shakopee
County of Scott
Mi
Neither the County, its officers, agents or employees, either in their individual or official capacity, shall
be responsible or liable in any manner to the City for any claim, demand, action or cause of action of any kind or
character arising out of, allegedly arising out of or by reason of the performance, negligent performance or
nonperformance of the hereinbefore described maintenance, restoration, repair or replacement work by the City,
or arising out of the negligence of any contractor under any contract let by the City for the performance of said
work; and the City agrees to defend, save and keep said County, its officers, agents and employees harmless
from all claims, demands, actions or causes of action arising out of negligent performance by the City, its
officers, agents or employees.
411
It is further agreed that neither the City, its officers, agents or employees, either in their individual or
official capacity, shall be responsible or liable in any manner to the County for any claim, demand, action or
cause of action of any kind or character arising out of, allegedly arising out of or by reason of the performance,
negligent performance or nonperformance of the hereinbefore described maintenance, restoration, repair or
replacement work by the County, or arising out of the negligence of any contractor under any contract let by the
County for the performance of said work; and the County agrees to defend, save and keep said City, its officers,
agents and employees harmless from all claims, demands, actions or causes of action arising out of negligent
performance by the County, its officers, agents or employees.
XIV
It is further agreed that each parry to this agreement shall not be responsible or liable to the other or to
any other person whomsoever for any claims, damages, actions, or causes of actions of any kind or character
arising out of, allegedly arising out of or by reason of the performance, negligent performance or
nonperformance of any work or part hereof by the other as provided herein; and each parry further agrees to
defend at its sole cost and expense any action or proceeding commenced for the purpose of asserting any claim
of whatsoever character arising in connection with or by virtue of performance of its own work as provided
herein.
IN
SAP 70-616 -23
SAP 70 -683 -06
City of Shakopee
County of Scott
M
It is further agreed that any and all employees of the City and all other persons engaged by the City in the
performance of any work or services required or provided herein to be performed by the City shall not be
considered employees, agents or independent contractors of the County, and that any and all claims that may or
might arise under the Worker's Compensation Act or the Unemployment Compensation Act of the State of
Minnesota on behalf of said City employees while so engaged and any and all claims made by any third parties
as a consequence of any act or omission on the part of said City employees while so engaged in any of the work
or services provided to be rendered herein shall be the sole responsibility of the City shall in no way be the
obligation or responsibility of the County.
Any and all employees of the County and all other persons engaged by the County in the performance of
any work or services required or provided for herein to be performed by the County shall not be considered
employees, agents or independent contractors of the City, and that any and all claims that may or might arise
under the Worker's Compensation Act or the Unemployment Compensation Act of the State of Minnesota on
behalf of said County employees while so engaged and any and all claims made by any third parties as a
consequence of any act or omission on the part of said County employees while so engaged in any of the work
or services provided to be rendered herein shall be the sole responsibility of the County and shall in no way be
the obligation or responsibility of the City.
XVI
The provisions of M.S. 181.59 and of any applicable local ordinance relating to Civil Rights and
discrimination and the affirmative action policy statement of Scott County shall be considered a part of this
agreement as though fully set forth herein.
5
SAP 70- 616-23
SAP 70 -683 -06
City of Shakopee
County of Scott
IN TESTIMONY WHEREOF, The parties hereto have caused this agreement to be executed
by their respective duly authorized officers as of the day and year first above written.
CITY OF SHAKOPEE
fM
Mayor
IM ,
L M
Upon proper execution, this agreement
will be legally valid and binding.
F1=
By By
County Attorney
Date Date
4 KGRUJIM
0
F
County Attorney
mh -w: \word \project \616- 23 \citycoop_doc
5/28/977/1/98
Rev_ 5/28/97
City Administrator
County Highway Engineer
0
CSAH 16/83
Cost Participation Group Breakdowns
City of Shakopee
Scott County, Wnnesota
Group A 100% County S.A.P. 70- 683 -06 (CSAH 83)
• Costs to construct 4 lanes of roadway from south termini to Sta. 124 +00.
• Mill & overlay costs for CSAH 83 from Sta. 135 +90 to 150 +75.
Group B 100% County S.A.P. 70- 616 -23 (CSAH 16 East Leg)
■ Costs to construct 2 lanes of roadway.
Group C 100% City S.A.P. 166 - 020 -08 (CSAH 16/83)
• Remaining work on CSAH 16 without the outside curb & gutter.
• Remaining work on CSAH 83 without the outside curb & gutter from south termini
to Sta. 124 +00 and right turn lane at 12 Avenue.
• TH 169 ramp work.
• CSAH 16 west leg.
Group D 50% County /50% City S.A.P. 70- 683 - 06/166- 020 -08
■ Outside curb & gutter from CSAH 83 south termini to Sta. 124 +00.
Group E 50% County /50% City S.A.P. 70- 616 - 23/166- 020 -08
® Outside curb & gutter on CSAH 16 east leg.
Group F 50% County /50% City S.A.P. 70- 683- 06/Local (City)
• All work on 12 Avenue.
• Signal system "C ".
Group G 50% County /50% City S.A.P. 70- 683 - 06/166 -020 -08
® CSAH 83 right turn lane at 12 Avenue.
Group H 100% City Funds
• Sanitary Sewer
• Watermain
Group I 41.5% County S.A.P. 70 -683- 06 /41.5% City S.A.P. 166- 020 - 08/17% Local City Costs
a Storm sewer costs.
C: \WINDOWS \TEMP \cost part grp brkdwn.doc
RYAN COMPANIES US, INC.
50 South Tenth Street, Suite 300
Minneapolis, MN 55403 -2012
WWW. RYANC OMPANI IES.00�1
January 31, 2002
Mr. Bruce Loney
City of Shakopee
129 Holmes Street South
Shakopee, MN 55379 -1328
RE: COUNTY ROAD 83 & 16
Dear Bruce:
612- 492 -4000 tel
612- 492 -3000 fax
FEB 2002
BUILDING LASTING RELATIONSHIPS
Thanks for the update regarding the reconstruction of the County Road 83 and 16 project. It is
very important for both Valley Green and Ryan Companies that this project continue to move
forward in 2002. Without the improvements as proposed Ryan Companies will not be in a
position to develop the property as we have shown at our Planning Commission and City
Council meetings. If there is a delay in the project, we may not be in a position to meet the
market demand as the economy begins to turn and companies look for growth opportunities.
Please keep us informed of the progress that you're making regarding the project. We look
forward to a successful completion in the Valley Green Corporate Center site.
Sincerely,
K qPident rlson
V
Ryan Companies US, Inc.
KMC:vmb
Cc: Jon Albimon, Valley Green
Mark McNeill, City of Shakopee
41.
H
- o M
-1
a x x m
22
1 m
m
p°
'L x
r
w w
'$
$ Q4 $ $ 8 $ 8 8 9
919 819 $ $ $ $ $ 8 $ $ o U 8 $ $ a a $ o $ a $
$ $ $ $
$ $
$ $ 8 '$
8 8 8 919
8 0
$ 8 $ 1 8 1 1
I"ols 1
8
s »
8 8 8 8 8 $
$$$�e18 asBP °�s�
gig $ 8 $ $ $ $ $ $ 8 $ 0 8 8 $ $ $ o $ o o $ $
$ $ $ $ $
$ $
$ $ $ $
$ $ $ $ $
$ a o $ $ $
$ $ $ $ $ $
$ $
$ $ 8
1
8
8 8 $
w � FF ,
y
y ? R Ap h
�+ O
-s^
"' -�a
uoez��
m
x
g
w r n 0
8 $
y+
^ o
$
N
C
C
C Q
�T Rl
8 8
411
A 1 - 1 - 1 -
10 Z
/° .O .O Y
H
40;i;
g ;
s
'
° F
� Y
o
a ££ a a
n n n n n n n n n n n n n
❑ '< < n
n n n n
O
z
z
Rp fs RP
g
~
V
y W W l5
n N
n ( t f
p Y^ p 2 P L�1 I' 1^' p 4 P P<
n
F fib W 9
O m
g
A
b
m
_ ee
�
C C
cCcCC
t� c C CC CC cc CC CC
cc CC CC cc cc CC
CC CC CC CC CC cc CC CC CC CC CC CC CC CC
CC CC cc
liTso
� §N�HH4
N�Nea��� ssssU
��sU "Ne >WT�224
seas .�
$ $ $
$ 8 $ $ $ 8 $ 8 8 $
$ $ $ $ 8 $ 8 $ $ 8 $ $ $ $ $
$ 8 $ $ $ $ $ 8 $ 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 $
$ $ 8 8
8 8 $ $
- -
°g - - -
11
- -
- 8 -
-
- -
S�
R
m e
0 3' r-
u J
S °° I " 8 b i� i G
}-
x
B g 6
8 $ $ 8 $ 8 $
8 S$
8 $ 8 $ $ 8 $8 $ 8
a S 3 8 S
8 0 8 8 $ 8 $ $ 8 $ $
$ 8 $ 888 8 8 $ 8 $ $ 8 8 8
88 8 $ 88 8 8 $88 8 8 $ 8 88
8 $ $ 8
$ 8 $ $
6
N
x m C S
m
F
a l
8
M
F
�
M
o � p
T1 I
�
C
Q o
e
sss$'s'8s
as$918$8 s$
a
m
-
8N
y
a ro �
C7
c �v
8
s
m
n
y
�
C
•�
P
8
8 8
(p
m
r
o
e$ 8 8 8 8 8 8 8
_
8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8
8 8
8 8 8 8
o°m y mmm
r d CCp�QgF yF^o 0 �..
�oo�� a58SM$oy�
p�yvoPy-
o X O -$ zyo cM cno
zmynn
tt'' to C�' tall r OH
zo�
zR1° �@
a4z
a�
az
0
m
fi
p
C
°
It,
r
M
w
z
° --- ---
y
O
°$
m-
y°
e a a
o p
m °
�i
=i
° g
D ? 5 9
s n
m n
F p Q
z z n H n
Q n a n
'Z ' > L
z e 0 6 3 z
° qr C r ' o 0 0
y0 `G'
>
o
Cn <
n °
-I X
Q < K < K < K < 'L H H -I
O O O
t+i
C O C g °
.Ky E ,< tJ A td n3 m ro
FFF
O
z
F
K K
n m a n m a
o
�
Q
0
a
S W
ss s 8 s
s
8 Him
sss88ss8s8
ss s -s8sss
sa
s s
Y °
8 $
$ o o $ U $ e
$ $
$ $ $ $ $ $ 8 $ $ $
S $ o N $ o u $ o $ a 919 8 9181
$ 181
1 $ $
m
R
y S �
R
> l
g 8
F
8$ e$' o
$ $ $
$$ o U$ $ 8 8
8 1 1
h
C'
M
tz
In
Q C
$ $
$ 8 B $ H
$ $
$ $ $ $ $ $ $
S $ 0 8 $ 8 N $ H $ o $ 8 $ $ $
8 $
$ $
z
c qq..
$
8
m
a
u
In y o
_
m
a
y
q � C
m
a
0
8
a � L\•'
�
It,
'Ih
i
■
a II
Original _ ;� !I
g .-
; I
I
I .
i ,� -� p
Design ;
I , 4 4
I t - ` E R/R -` N .
_ . �,U� ��C — - � — sl — _ _ _ _ -- - - -_ .A. o0
it - — - — ' \ '. 44 I � tZ _ :0 -_ Q � � � 1. 15' � WVE lempi g' _R - • ' � R T.7; February 11, 2002
- - ;414:::10,. ' ' ° ° °r°
r 1 1 _ �nr_��� r �� =- 1�'� . It" v ` „ EXISTING IIIL M
I do r , � - ` - — . `_\ `� `\�-
i �• ` �_``_\ a +.I
I ' I I E
, 1y
PROPOSED sew ' \` \ Ff Lp [ IN ` + ,,
d
. . 1 i--- -1
•
a H
Plan B . �i .
/
1 pi I
N
I I I I Ii
I '
� I I la le \ L Fr410PD5ED M E ,, , +\
■
i ..y . ', -. '""- _-:--z....- 0 100 200
�I _ _ ° ' �. . w . i J Pe CURB t DOTER s r �� ; . � '.
d !l�l:i�xF:F'a.,��., • • * Q (i �.M .1}F
r — - _L ".21`: :"rcL� 1 ►`20.— = -- - -- tom \.`? '.. ...... v.FVi — • � . a
��gy' o —az � ..��j ► / / / /.,. `s //iL�' % �l /\ � . `� y
\ .3 i/ // /®���'relli= nib +L/ //i �� �� P ss D � ��'� /ltti - , ,a` h
// / / / =_ I EXISTING M
~• _ - In :�p.3> I Itfi 0 .0559- T05.D0 �� � � -- '0pD< r
� _ _ — � ` 4•DD' MK . ,„c p.,sy ✓I� I' II �e °• ' -- •--_
— a • i ••
I ,,'� b 1 1 6 6 � __ I 4 Ex ISTIW RA I - - ~ ` \ `_ \ _ -\ s.
111E _ ' .
F
o I I _
.i
_. �I I
rL 40
I I , 1 I _1.--, F IEL❑ LINE
•
4150 Olson Mertwnal %hr
pligil
CSAH 16 Improvements
1
vvsa ���°
Sco Cit of Shako ee, Scott Count Minnesota SHAK()PF,F, City � �'�
1 . r '' % j \\ , \ �0��
.: I { ` - /
70-616-23 �� :� -a -_ = _� ____ M, 0 200 400
BEGIN S.A.P. / -
.:
r
r
STA 30 7 3 85 / / I 1 \
I
t c I
, , „.r BEGIN CON ST RUCTION I ; f ( / I .
, \\N\ \ -, I �� � R CSAH 16 (EAST) / � \ \ ' `! °1 [ R STA 201 +00.00 \ \ � w , ` I . l / r I V ,F �ln I � • I / i PROPOSED SIGNAL 1 -. J \ \ PROPOSED SIGNAL SYSTEM C
� • SYSTEM ., .
�_... J____ .. 1 ..._ — ..._... ... T - - — _
M :.�:�
_ mss a am �, ra - - _ — _ _
- - _..._ u ��
70-683-06
•
I, Y �I PROPOSED SIGNAL / — ” REVISED SIGN 1, FEVISED SIGNAL i I END S.A.P.
I 7I SYSTEM "A" SYSTEM - A it F •STEM "B' 1 BEGINS A.P. 70- 683 -06 r: f 1 I / / CSAH 83
CSAH 83 r I '1 , I � 1 ,j END CONSTRUCTIO I
' STA 150 +82.00
w II 1�� I I CSAH 16 (WEST)
STA 99+53.49 � . I ( � o_.. .�� —.- . — i
(pill f I I STA 316 +34 a
=<$1t1 II \ c •
UII i I � \� Z
1 I 1
I I I
I
II
I 1
1 1 I/
jiI; ' i 1
I I / % STAGE 1 - PHASE 1 (April 8 to May 6) STAGE 2 - PHASE 3 (July 8 to August 6) - MAINTAIN I' / 'II - CONSTRUCTTSANITARYNSEWER CSAH 16. -
FROM TH 169 TO CSAH 16. - CLOSE AND DETOUR ONTO LOCAL STREETS.
E- — — — — — _II � �= 1- — - CONSTRUCT WATERMAIN FROM CSAH 16 WEST LEG TO CSAH 16 EAST LEG
ALONG WEST SIDE OF CSAH 83.
STAGE 3 PHASE 1 (July 8 to September 20)
�
/ Y STAGE 1 - PHASE 2 (May 7 to May 28) - CLOSE AND CONSTRUCT CSAH 83 SOUTH OF EXISTING CSAH 16 / 83 INTERSECTION.
MAINTAIN TRAFFIC ON CSAH 83 AND CSAH 16. - PLACE WATERMAIN, SANITARY SEWER. AND STORM SEWER IN CONSTRUCTION AREA.
// - CONSTRUCT SANITARY SEWER AND STORM SEWER FROM CSAH 16 TO - EXISTING CASH 16 TO REMAIN OPEN FOR THROUGH TRAFFIC.
/ CSAH 16 EAST LEG ALONG EAST SIDE OF CSAH 83. - OPEN CSAH 83 81 SEPTEMBER 1. 2002.
/1 END S.A.P. 70- 616 -23 STAGE 2 - PHASE 1 (May 28 to July 8)
/ _ STAGE 3 - PHASE 2 (September 20 to October 18)
// CSAH 16 (EAST) - CLOSE AND RECONSTRUCT CSAH 83 FROM GEAR 16 / 83 INTERSECTION TO
/ STA 218 +60.00 SOUTH TH 1b9 RAMP'. AND DETOUR TRAFFIC. CSAH 83 OPEN.
// PLACE STORM SEWER IN CONSTRUCTION AREA. - CONSTRUCT CSAH 16 EAST LEG FINAL CONNECTION.
F R THRU TRAFFIC.
o • 11 WIDEN TH 169 NORTH EXISTING CSAH 16 ED REMAIN OPEN 0 T U C
- T 1 RTI RAMPS UNDER TRAFFIC.
REMOVE OLD CSAH 16 EAST LEG.
O . / / CONSTRUCT 12TH AVI;. IMPROVEMENTS.
o
/,/ STAGE 2 - PHASE 2 (June 24 to July 8) STAGE 4 (Completed June 15, 2003)
/ CLOSE CSAH 16 EAST LEG AND DETOUR TRAFFIC. - MILT_ CSAH 183 FROM TH 169 TO 12TH AVENUE.
52
in
- -- / CONSTRUCT THE TWO NB CSAH 83 LANES THRU CSAH 16 INTERSECTION. - OVERLAY FINAL WEAR ON ENTIRE PROJECT.
i
/ - CONSTRUCT TEMPORARY CONNECTION TO CSAH 16 EAST LEG. - COMPLETE FINAL REPAIRS AND CLEANUP.
00
N p NO. DATE BY CHK REVISIONS Design By: I HEREBY CERTIFY TWAT IRIS RAN. SPECIFICATION. OR REPORT VAS PREPARED BY ON OAxR 415D QIBOn MBlnOliBl Hgf SHEET
a n ITCH Y DIRECT SPERYIA AFO TRAI n A DULY LICENSED PROESSIOM ENGINEER UNDER S 300 CSAH 83 / CSAH 16 Improvements CITY OF SHAKOPEE / SCOTT COUNTY 7SC
P I an By _ ME Ens a THE STATE a plsmA. SCO 1 1 1
o� '- J RJ . DAJ IAf D Minneapolis, MN 554 OF
C"' - - - Checked By: ri/ 783.54 4850 $3 City of Shakopee
° Dws CERTIFIED BY ENGINEER �, � „_ „� CONSTRUCTION STAGING LAYOUT OUT
LICENSED PROFESSIONAL ENGER - DONALD V. STERNA. P.E. & Assaciales, Inc /Arc COUNTY Scott County, Minnesota S.A.P. 70- 683 -06 I S.A.P. 70-616 -23.1 S.A.P. 166 - 020 -08 SHEETS
2w - ADProvetl By:
¢-i DWS DATE: 12/14/01 A IC. ND: "103 INFRASTRUCTURE A ENGINEERS • PLANNERS
Et t....
MINNES SCOTT COUNTY,
RE QUEST • R BOARD ACTIO
MEETING DATE 1 1
The purpose of this agenda item is to approve the Cooperative Agreement with the City of Shakopee for the
reconstruction of CSAH 83, CSAH 16, and the installation of traffic signals, under state -aid projects 70- 683 -06,
70- 616 -23, and 70- 683 -05. These projects propose the reconstruction of CSAH 83 from 3,997 feet south of TH
169 to 12� Avenue, re- alignment of the east and west legs of CSAH 16, and the installation of traffic signal
systems, all in the City of Shakopee. The reconstruction contemplates widening existing portions of CSAH 83,
south of CSAH 16 from a rural two lane roadway to an urban 4 lane divided facility, and north of CSAH 16
additional turn lanes and signalized intersections. The realignment of the west leg of CSAH 16 will bring it
northerly to a signalized intersection with CSAH 83 at the entrance to the Valley Green Corporate Center
property. The realignment of the east leg will bring it southerly, along the existing gravel city street to a new
signalized intersection with CSAH 83.
Work involves grading, aggregate base, plant -mixed bituminous pavement, concrete curb and gutter, storm
sewer, city utilities, traffic signal installation, and related improvements. The estimated cost share for the County
is $1,422,508. The City will have overall authority to administer the contract.
A copy of the agreement, including estimated cost breakdowns, is available in the Recording Secretary's Office.
Greg Ilkka will be present to discuss this item. Staff is currently working with the City of Shakopee to finalize the
proposed alternative design for the east leg of CSAH 16 which eliminates the requirement for an easement on
SMSC owned lands at this time. Copies of the original and alternate designs will be provided at the meeting.
BACKGROU NDIJ USTIFIC IO :
1
___.401.—__ X
I , S I \ . \
/ \ C , °--- - 0 200 400
BEGIN S.A.P. 70- 616 -23 ? I - - `k ,
CSAH 16 (WEST) � ; I Z \ , � ...— . ..- .. -. -.1
r
STA 307 +33.85 / ' \ 1 -� w
°X. \ ) m l
j I . I -I Bra-
• BEGIN CONSTRUCTION I \ ,} a wl /
.
CSAH 16 (EAST) / . N /1
STA 201 +00.00 / A +1 I i j \ \ \ \ i
� / I PROPOSED SIGNAL I I W ,
1 • 1 f - SYSTEM "6' • = : E
z
�.L_... F - - -- la ® +w ay.
t AA
a
- __ , _ -- �, .- ._..— .L— .+:x�M r.. -,rs_ ..e -_ . M ��a - • � I . � III •
I' I PROPOSED SIGNAL / / C y ` E ND S.A.P. 70- 683 -06
BEGIN S A.P. 70- 683 06 I_ SYSTEM "A A' l' /' _ ' , r' $ Y CSAH 83
CSAH 83 w 1 1 1 END CONSTRUCTIO � STA 150 +82.00
STA 99 +53.49 i _II • � CS 16 (WEST) i i
'111,1 1 I 1 STA 316 +34.00
l a
2 1 1
\ I E
C)11 ' it I LL
� Z
�Ij I
I
�' 1
I 'IV/ I
ill
I� I: j ti /-
1 1 I
1 I 1 1, STAGE 1 - PHASE 1 (April 15 to May 9) STAGE 2 - PHASE 3 Jul 15 to August 6
1 1l I Il (P Y ) (July 9 6)
I /' - MAINTAIN TRAFFIC ON CSAH 83 AND CSAH 16. - CLOSE CSAH 16 WEST LEG AND DETOUR ONTO LOCAL STREETS.
1 I -WARY SEWER AND STORM SEWER FROM TH 169 TO CSAH 16. - CONSTRUCT CSAH 16 WEST LEG.
E_ - 1/ 1 —
- CONSTRUCT WA FROM CSAH 16 WEST LEG TO CSAH 16 EAST LEG
ALONG WEST S DE OF CSAH 83.
/ STAGE 3 - PHASE 1 (July 15 to September 27)
/ STAGE 1 - PHASE 2 (May 13 to June 7) - CLOSE AND CONSTRUCT CSAH 83 SOUTH OF EXISTING CSAH 16 / 83 INTERSECTION.
- MAINTAIN TRAFFIC ON CSAH 83 AND CSAH 16. - °LACE WATERMAIN. SANITARY SEWER. AND STORM SEWER IN CONSTRUCTION AREA.
/ 1 - CONSTRUCT SANITARY SEWER AND STORM SEWER FROM CSAH 16 TO - EXISTING CASH 16 TO REMAIN OPEN FOR THROUGH TRAFFIC.
1 CSAH 16 EAST LEG ALONG EAST SIDE OF CSAH 83. - OPEN CSAH 83 BY SEPTEMBER 1. 2002,
/// END S.A.P. 70- 616 -23 STAGE 2 - PHASE 1 (May 28 to July 13)
/ STAGE 3 - PHASE 2 (September 20 to October 25)
// CSAH 16 (EAST) - CLOSE AND RECONSTRUCT CSAH 83 FROM CSAH 16 / 83 INTERSECTION 70
/ STA 218 +60.00 SOUTH TH 169 RAMPS AND DETOUR TRAFFIC. - CSAH 83 OPEN.
// - PLACE STORM SEWER IN CONSTRUCTION AREA. - CONSTRUCT CSAH 16 EAST LEG FINAL CONNECTION.
'
- EXISTING CSAH 16 TO REMAIN OPEN FOR THRU TRAFFIC.
a ./ / -. WIDEN TH 165 NORTH RAMPS UNDER TRAFFIC. REMOVE OLD CSAH 16 EAST LEG.
o • /1 CONSTRUCT 12TH AVE. IMPROVEMENTS.
0 1
/, STAGE 2 - PHASE 2 (June 24 to July 13) STAGE 4 Completed June 15, 2003)
o / / - CLOSE CSAH 16 EASI LEG AND DETOUR TRAFFIC. - MIII. CSAH"r FROM TH 169 TO 12TH AVENUE.
m
r / / - CONSTRUCT THE TWO NB CSAH 83 LANES THRU CSAH 16 INTERSECTION. OVERLAY FIINAL WEAR ON ENTIRE PROJECT.
- CONSTRUCT TEMPORARY CONNECTION TO CSAH 16 EAST LEG. - COMPLETE 'FINAL REPAIRS AND CLEANUP.
0
0
O I(] NO. DATE BY CAR REVISIONS Design By: I HEREBY CERTIFY WE PHIS PLAN. SPFCII ICAIION. OR REPOVI NAS PREPARED BY BR UWER 4150 Olson Memorial Highway •~ SHEET
p 1 M RCH W B SIPERYISIOI AN] 111A1 I AN A ONLY LICENSED PRIFESSIOI111 ENGINEER NON Su i t e 300 CSAH 83 / CSAH 16 Improvements CIT OF SHAKOPEE / SCOTT COUNTY Y5 catt
Plan By: IMF Los OF TIE sort a MINNESOTA WSB SCOT I 1
o1 J RJ . DAJ S Minneapolis, MN 55422
w Checked By: 763- 541 -4800 83 City of Shakopee OF
w DWS CERTIFIED BY PAx763- 541 -1700 / �/lI , CONSTRUCTION STAGING LAYOU 1
LICENSED PROrCSSIRIAL ENGINEER - DONALD 11. <P . STERNA. P.E. Associates, Ina COUNTY Scott County, Minnesota
zw Approved By: S.A.P. 70- 683 -06 / S.A.P. 70- 616 -23 / S.A.P. 166 - 020 -08 SHEETS
a� DWS DAYS: 12/14/01 LIB. ND: 19103
Cost Participation Layout
\,__ I I \-
i
1 1' il \ 1i.—____--- , \
❑ E i I
F _
i 0 D
�� I 0 � £ ' i \ a 4 I 0 / i • � a x Signal System A ) j LRev a ed s Ifl s Ys t eP/ A -.7j'-'-1- ® e 75% C oun State Aitl U _ b i ' � 1 O j I ° — — (Develop 25 %City State Aid 100% Grq GROUP D \
W -
CSAH 83 :__����._____ — _ - - .- . — �1.1
_ Mme; I _ _._ _�.-� pm --
11 1 11 II I/ G
-I
—f � y - - - - ` �� - - � s� Il o
GROUP D A f ir _
� -,
e - • �. \\ R wised S ignal System B
,u 10 %GroupC
V • / / A / Signal System B \
GROUP E r GROUP E 100% Group C \\ \ \ I I // •
\ I /, / (Developers Cost) \ \ \ I li
LEGEND I I '• ,
l� /4&". / � \ I 1
� � I i/
A I GROUP A II /
S.A.P. 70683 -06 ` \ I I (4 LANES OF CSAH 83 SOUTH OF EXISTING CSAH 16) I / / ,
i if \ \\ 'I
iI II \
GROUP B iO II / \ ,
■ S. A.P. 70- 6'16 -23 I //
(2 LANES OF CSAH 16 EAST LEG) I \ I
\\ `
I . I
f / /11 1 GROUP C I l r
S.A.P. 168- 020 -08
(CITY OF SHAKOPEE) I I . I E' - z /
I I
GROUP D Nr Ai
* ,� 'I I
S.A.P. 70 -083-06 (SCOTT COUNTY - 50% I/ / i r/
S.A.P. 168 -020 -08 (CITY OF SHAKOPEE - 50 %) ' ••` /
(OUTSIDE CURB OF CSAH 83 SOUTH OF EXISTING CSAH 16)
•
GROUP E / r
S.A.P. 6 2 (
0 (SCOTT COUNTY - % /..
1
S.A.P. 166 -6- 020 -08 (CITY OF SHAKOPEE E - 50 %)
(OUTSIDE CURB OF CSAH 16) r / I
• /.. /I
I
GROUP F / -
S.A.P. 70683 -08 (SCOTT COUNTY - 50% / //
NON - PARTICIPATING (CITY OF SHAKOPEE - 50 %)CSAH 16) / r /
! /
GROUP G / / /
S.A.P. 70683 -08 (SCOTT COUNTY - 50% j /
S.A.P. 166 - 020 -08 (CITY OF SHAKOPEE - 50 %) i /
�/
- -
).- GROUP H - SEWER AND WATER 1 t /
I — (CITY OF SHAKOPEE - 100 %) 11 �J 1
T `
»— GROUP I - STORM SEWER
(SCOTT COUNTY - 41.5 %)
S.A.P. 166 -020 -08 (CITY OF SHAKOPEE - 41.5 %)
NON - PARTICIPATING (CITY OF SHAKOPEE - 17 %)
0 70(1 n00
CSAH 83 / CSAH 16 Improvements
City of Shakopee Minnesota
CONSTRUCTION COSTS CSAH 83 /CSAH 16-- Shakopee Scott County MN
City State -aid ($155,256.14)
Trail $20,482.50
Traffic Signal $51,250.00
Curb & Gutter $17,855.00
Local City Funds Storm Sewer $46,543.01
Right Turn Lane $19,125.63
S126,293.40 County ($1,282,944.41)
CSAH 83 $805,852.00
CSAH 16 $250,032.00
CSAH 83 (50% C &G) $16,535.00
Trunk Storm Sewer CSAH 16 (50% C &G) $2,795.00
$272,609.04 12th Ave $121,293.40
Storm Sewer $86,437.01
Trunk Sanitary Sewer
$591,227.50
\\ A
SPUC
$41,959.80 —_
r County
■ Assessable
❑ SPUC
❑ Trunk Sanitary Sewer
• Trunk Storm Sewer
• Local City Funds
• City State -aid
Assessable
$2,802,560.21
5 g
FIZZ-
Mem
: Mayor & City Council
Mark McNeill, City Administrator
FROM: Bruce Loney, Public Works Director
SUBJECT: Declaring Adequacy of Petition, Ordering an Improvement,
Approve Plans and Specifications for 17 Avenue, from
C.R. 79 to Colonial Street, Project No. 2002 -1
DATE: February 19, 2002
The developer of Providence Pointe 2 nd Addition and property owner of property south of
Providence Pointe have submitted petitions for the construction of 17 Avenue, from
C.R. 79 to Colonial Street.
The developer for Providence Pointe has petitioned the City to construct 17 Avenue.
Attached is Resolution No. 5662, declaring adequacy of petition and ordering an
improvement. With 100% of the property owners petitioning the improvement, no public
hearing is necessary, thus the project can be ordered. The property owner and proposed
purchaser is expected to have an executed petition by Tuesday's meeting. If the petition
is not received, this agenda item will be removed.
The plans and specifications for these improvements will be done by City staff.
1. Move to approve Resolution No. 5662, declaring adequacy of petition, ordering an
improvement and preparation of plans and specifications for 17 Avenue, from C.R.
79 to Colonial Street.
2. Do not approve Resolution No. 5662.
3. Table this item for additional information.
Staff recommends Alternative No. 1.
Offer Resolution No. 5662, A Resolution Declaring the Adequacy of Petition, Ordering
an Improvement and Preparation of Plans and Specifications for 17 Avenue, from
County Road 79 to Colonial Street, Project No. 2002 -1 and move its adoption.
Bruce Loney
Public Works Director
UV IMA b a 0
WHERE certain petitions requesting construction of 17' Avenue, from County Road
79 to Colonial Street, has been filed with the Council on February 19, 2002; and
WHERE this petition is hereby declared to be signed by 100 percent of the property
owners affected thereby, no public hearing or notices are required, as per Minnesota Statutes
Section 429.031.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIEL OF T.90
CITY OF •P i� • -
1. That the improvement is ordered as hereinafter described:
17 Avenue, from County Road 79 to Colonial Street including street construction,
turn lanes, storm sewer, sanitary sewer, watermain, street lighting, sidewalk
bituminous trail and any appurtanant work.
2. Bruce Loney, Public Works Director, is hereby designated as the engineer for this
improvement. He shall prepare plans and specifications for the making of such improvements.
3. The work of this project is hereby designated as part of the 2002 -1 Public
Improvement Program.
Adopted in session of the City Council of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota,
held this day of
Vvll�
►11
Mayor of the City of Shakopee
City Clerk
CITY OF SHAIK(
PETITION FOR PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS AN
WAIVER OF ASSESSMENT RIGHTS
A. The undersigned is the fee owner of certain real Property legally described as
Outlot A, Providence Pointe 1' Addition ("the Property "), which is being platted as
Providence Pointe 2nd Addition.
B. As part of the subdivision and platting process for Providence Pointe 2nd Addition, the
undersigned will be dedicating right -of -way for 17th Avenue.
C. The undersigned desires the City of Shakopee to install the public improvements and
assess the costs against the Property.
D. The undersigned understands that 17th Avenue will be designated as a collector street,
but that the assessments for 17th Avenue will be based on the equivalent local street costs in
accordance with the City of Shakopee's ( "City ") assessment policy.
E. It is understood by the undersigned that the City will be doing the Chapter 429 Public
Improvements solely at the undersigned's request and for the undersigned's convenience and that
the City would not be installing the improvements described in this petition without this waiver.
F. The undersigned is voluntarily submitting this petition and understands that the
City is relying on it as a condition of subdivision approval and proceeding with the public
improvements.
NOW, TBEREFORE, the undersigned agrees as follows:
1. The undersigned petitions the City to install the following improvements and to assess
them against the Property pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 429: 17th Avenue
from the most Easterly line of Outlot A, Providence Pointe I" Addition to CR 79
including street construction, turn lanes, storm sewer, sanitary sewer, watermain,
street lighting, sidewalk and bituminous trail and appurtenant work; and, extension of
sanitary sewer and watermain to 17th Avenue ("Improvement Project ").
2. The undersigned represents and warrants that it is the fee owner of the Property and that it
has the full legal authority and power to encumber the Property.
The undersigned requests that the cost of the Improvement Project be assessed against the
Property. The current estimated amount of the assessments is $565,675.00. The undersigned
understands that the exact amount of the assessments cannot be determined at the present
time, and understands that the final assessment will be determined in accordance with the
City's adopted assessment policy. The undersigned understands that the waivers contained in
this Petition are effective for the current estimated amount of the assessments and for any
increases that are the result of requests made by the undersigned or any increases that are
otherwise approved in writing by the undersigned.
4. The undersigned waives notice of hearing and hearing pursuant to Minnesota Statutes
429.031 on the Improvement Project and notice of hearing and hearing on the special
assessment to be levied to finance the Improvement Project pursuant to Minnesota Statutes
429.061 and specifically requests that the Improvement Project be constructed and special
assessments be levied without hearing against the Property.
5. The undersigned waives all right to appeal or otherwise contest or challenge the levy of the
special assessment, including but not limited to the right to challenge whether the increase in
fair market value resulting from the construction of the improvement project is at least equal
to the amount of the project cost that is assessed against the Property and that such increase in
fair market value is a special benefit to such parcel. The undersigned further agrees that any
requirements of Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 429 are waived to the extent that such
requirements are not met.
6. The covenants, waivers and agreements contained herein shall run with the property and shall
bind the heirs, successors and assigns of the undersigned. It is the intent of the City and the
undersigned that this document be recorded as a part of the land records of Scott County,
Minnesota.
JJT- 205654v2 2
SH155 -23
7. The terms and conditions set forth in this Petition shall terminate upon the final payment of all
special assessments levied against the Property regarding the Improvement Project, and the
City shall execute and deliver such documents, in recordable form, as are necessary to
extinguish its rights contained herein upon receipt of such final payment.
Dated this 7 day of {,t — , 20 O - L .
Town & ountry Hom s, Inc.
� -
Its
Homes, Inc., a Minnesota corporation, on behalf of the corporation.
N
C ommission My •.
Drafted by:
Kennedy & Graven (JJT)
470 Pillsbury Center
200 S. Sixth Street
Minneapolis, MN 55402
[i: l clerk judyldeveagre /pet- TownCountryJ
Revised: November, 2001
JJT- 205654v2 3
SH155 -23
FBA"A -
V --•- -- V- -- --- . -4 -LAJ
N
C ommission My •.
Drafted by:
Kennedy & Graven (JJT)
470 Pillsbury Center
200 S. Sixth Street
Minneapolis, MN 55402
[i: l clerk judyldeveagre /pet- TownCountryJ
Revised: November, 2001
JJT- 205654v2 3
SH155 -23
is a.Y
CITY OF i'
Memorandum
TO: Mayor and City Council
Mark McNeill, City Administrator
Michael Hullander, Public Works Supervisor
SUBJEC Purchase of Loader
1' , 20CN
Ila V '11 �
Public Works has identified a need in the 2002 Capital Equipment Budget to replace the
1975 Fiat Allis Loader through the Minnesota Cooperative Purchasing Venture.
L. s • , � II1►1 i
The Public Works Department has requested to purchase a new loader with a cost
estimate of $150,000.00 in the 2002 Capital Equipment Budget. Staff currently utilizes
three loaders year round for Street, Park, Sanitary and Storm Sewer maintenance. These
loaders include a 1975 Fiat Allis, 1990 and 1992 Case 621C. The duties include: snow
plowing, sand/salt mixing and loading, large street and alley repairs, sanitary and storm
sewer repairs, snow removal from the downtown and other locations, park landscaping
and repairs, material handling and loading.
When staff purchased the 1992 Case 621C Loader it had decided it would be beneficial to
retain the 1975 Fiat Allis for use as a yard loader. This decision was based on the loss of
productivity and costs associated with traveling from work sites to load and unload
materials from the yard. This is highly excessive in snow plowing operations. The 1990
and 1992 Case 621C Loaders have both front and wing plow set -ups and are assigned
plow routes with a large number of cul -de -sacs. This has been efficient in snow plowing
operations, but the benefits are lost when a loader is continually pulled off the route to
load trucks that need salt/sand mix.
The 1975 Fiat Allis Loader is used primarily as a yard loader for material and equipment
handling, loading of salt/sand mix, road aggregate, red ball diamond aggregate, top soil,
wood mulch/chips, landscape block/brick, sanitary and storm sewer pipe, pre -cast
manholes, manhole block, frames and covers, and catch basins. This loader is also used to
load snow from parking lots while the other two loaders are removing snow from the
downtown area. The 1975 Fiat Allis was used extensively in the storm of 1998 and the
floods of 1993,1997 and 2001.
The 1990 Case 621C Loader meets the requirements for replacement. Staff believes due
to the loss of power and wear that it should be removed from mainline plowing
Public Works is requesting to purchase a new loader and trade in the 1975 Fiat Allis and
utilize the 1990 Case 621C as the yard loader. Staffs request is to have three loaders in
rotation in its fleet. If the City chooses not to have three loaders in rotation, then staff in
order to retain plowing efficiency, would have to request to purchase one additional plow
truck for mainline plowing. Staff would also have to consider an additional pick -up truck
with plow to handle the numerous cul -de -sacs. The cost of both of these acquisitions is
estimated to be around $140,000.00. Because plow trucks can only be used for hauling
purposes, when not in snow removal operations, staff feels it is more cost effective to
have three loaders with multiple uses in its fleet.
1 '
The State CPV is a multiple award process that allows local agencies to choose which
vendor and machine it wants based on its specific needs. For example: Prior Lake has
chosen to purchase a Cat 938G, which is comparable to the Case 721C, both are larger
series loaders than we recommend.
The State CPV requires vendors to have a 5 -year re- purchase guarantee in their bids. This
allows agencies to purchase a machine and keep it for 5 years, then sell it back to the
vendor at a guaranteed price. (The vendors have to buy a bond to guarantee this re-
purchase provision, the cost of which is passed on to the purchaser.) Agencies can benefit
from this provision by using the equipment for the best 5 -year period in the life of the
machine where there should be no major maintenance costs. The drawback is the agency
would then have to purchase another machine to replace the re- purchased one, staff
believes it is more cost effective to retain the loader for the 12 to 15 years and in our
situation continue to use the loader in the yard until the next loader comes up for
replacement. Staff also recommends purchasing a 5 -year full machine warranty.
1 � 1
CAT 9286
Base $108,134.00
CASE 621D
Base $98,787.00
Plow/Wmg
$28,275.00
Plow/Wing
$23,690.00
Warranty
$3,100.00
Warranty
$1,950.00
L ess trade
($10
Less trade
($ 11.000.00)
TOTAL
$129,009.00
TOTAL
$115,577.00
SALES TAX
$8,385.59
SALES TAX
$7 512.50
T
$137,394.00
TOTAIL
$123,039.50
Re- purchase
Price $73,000.00
Re- purchase
Price $66,131.00
Any of these loaders will be delivered within 90 days of order. These State Bid prices are
good until February 28. 2002.
5. Deny the purchase request at this time.
1 I 1. O
Staff recommends Alternative No. 1, Purchase the Case 621D for the purchase price of
$123,039.50 from St. Joseph Equipment, Inc. and retain it for the 12 to 15 year life cycle.
y DICE 1
Authorize the purchase utilizing State Bid Pricing of one new Case 621D Loader from St.
Joseph Equipment, Inc. for the purchase price of $123,039.50, to expended from the
Capital Equipment Fund.
Michael Hullander
Public Works Supervisor
Y �`(
r t
CITY OF SHAKOPEE
Memorandum
TO: Mayor & City Council
Mark McNeill, City Administrator
FROM: Bruce Loney, Public Works Director
SUBJECT: Street Light Agreements with Scott County for
CSAH 18 at CSAH 16 (Eagle Creek Blvd.) and
CSAH at CSAH 16 (134 Street) in the City of Shakopee
DATE: February 19, 2002
INTRODUCTION:
SE: N T
Scott County has a street light policy in which the County would pay for street lights that
meet warrants at County road intersections. The County has completed a warrant study
for the intersections of CSAH 18 at Eagle Creek Boulevard and 134 Street in the City of
Shakopee. Both of these intersections meet the warrants for the installation and operation
of a street light. Per Scott County cost participation policy, Scott County will pay 100%
of the street light installation with the City of Shakopee responsible for electrical
operating costs and maintainance of the street lights.
The action requested would be for the City of Shakopee to enter into these agreements for
the installation and operation of a street light at the intersections previously referenced.
ALTERNATIVES:
1. Authorize the appropriate City officials to execute the agreement for cost
participation, installation and operation of a street light for the intersection of
CSAH 18 and CSAH 16 (Eagle Creek Boulevard) within the City of Shakopee.
2. Authorize the appropriate City officials to execute an agreement for cost
participation in the installation and operation of a street light at the intersection of
CSAH 18 and CSAH 16 (134 Street) within the City of Shakopee.
3. Do not enter into the agreements at this time.
4. Tale for additional information.
��
Staff recommends Alternative No. 1 and No. 2, to enter into these agreements for the
installation and operation of street lights at these intersections. With these installations,
the City would be responsible for the power and maintenance of the street lights. With
these street lights, the City of Shakopee receives electrical energy from Shakopee Public
Utilities and maintenance of bulb replacement, thus the City of Shakopee has very little
financial impact with this proposal.
ACTION REQUESTED:
1. Authorize the appropriate City officials to execute the agreement for cost
participation, installation and operation of a street light for the intersection of
CSAH 18 and CSAH 16 (Eagle Creek Boulevard) within the City of Shakopee.
2. Authorize the appropriate City officials to execute an agreement for cost
participation in the installation and operation of a street light at the intersection of
CSAH 18 and CSAH 16 (134 Street) within the City of Shakopee.
A
Bruce Loney
Public Works Director
BL/p-p
STLIGHTAGREEMENTS
► • •, 11 IN I •' •
HIGHWAY DEPARTMENT ° 600 COUNTRY TRAIL EAST ° JORDAN, MN 55352 -9339
(952) 496 -8346 . Fax: (952) 496 -8365 . www.co.scott.mn.us
BRADLEY J. LARSON
PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR/
COUNTY HIGHWAY ENGINEER
February 8, 2002
Bruce Loney, P.E.
Public Works Director
City of Shakopee
129 South Holmes St.
Shakopee, MN 55379
Subject: Streetlight Studies:
CSAH 18 @ CSAH 16 (Eagle Creek Blvd.) &
CSAH 18 @ CSAH 16 (134 Street)
Dear Bruce:
As requested by the City, we have been monitoring both intersections of CSAH 18 & CSAH 16 for
the possible installation of streetlights. Based on current County guidelines for streetlight
installation, streetlights are justified at this time at both intersections based on counts taken in late
November, 2001.
Enclosed are four (two for each intersection) copies of an Ao eement for Participation in the
Installation and Operation of a Street Light for this intersection. Per Scott County cost
participation policy, Scott County will pay 100% of the street light installation with the City of
Shakopee being responsible for the electrical operating cost and maintaining the street light (i.e.
bulb replacement).
Your earliest attention to this matter would be sincerely appreciated. If you have any questions
about the warrant analysis or the street light agreement, please call me at 496 -8060.
Sincerely,
Brian K. Sorenson, P.E.
Transportation Engineer
Enclosure
C: Brad Larson, Public Worics Director
Darin Holmgren, Highway Utility Inspector
w: \word \traffic \letters \18& 161ights.doc
An Equal Opportunity /Safety Aware Employer
CSAH 18 & CSAH 16 (Eagle Creek Blvd.)
City of Shakopee
County of Scott
WA
1 r
THIS AGREEMENT, Made and entered into this day of , 2002, by and
between the County of Scott, a body politic and corporate under the laws of the State of Minnesota, hereinafter
referred to as the "County" and the City of Shakopee, a body politic and corporate under the laws of the State
of Minnesota, hereinafter referred to as the "City ".
WITNESSETH:
WHEREAS, It is considered mutually desirable to install a street light at the intersection of County State
Aid Highway (CSAH) 18 & CSAH 16 (Eagle Creek Boulevard) within the City; and
WHEREAS, The City has expressed its willingness to participate in the operating cost of said street
light; and
WHEREAS, Said work shall be carried out by the parties hereto under the provisions of M.S.
Sec. 162.17.
NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS AGREED AS FOLLOWS:
I
The County shall install, or cause the installation of a street light at the intersection of CSAH 18 &
CSAH 16 (Eagle Creek Boulevard). Such installation, as described immediately above, shall be hereinafter
referred to as the "project."
II
The City agrees that any City license required to perform electrical work within the City shall be issued
to the Contractor or the County at no cost to the Contractor or the County. Electrical inspection fees shall be
not more than those established by the State Board of Electricity in the most recently recorded Electrical
Inspection Fee Schedule.
fl
CSAH 18 & CSAH 16 (Eagle Creek Blvd.)
City of Shakopee
County of Scott
11'
It is further agreed that each parry to this agreement shall not be responsible or liable to the other or to
any other person whomsoever for any claims, damages, actions, or causes of actions of any kind or character
arising out of, allegedly arising out of or by reason of the performance, negligent performance or
nonperformance of any work or part hereof by the other as provided herein; and each party further agrees to
defend at its sole cost and expense any action or proceeding commenced for the purpose of asserting any claim
of whatsoever character arising in connection with or by virtue of performance of its own work as provided
herein.
I
It is further agreed that any and all employees of the City and all other persons engaged by the City in
the performance of any work or services required or provided herein to be performed by the City shall not be
considered employees, agents or independent contractors of the County, and that any and all claims that may or
might arise under the Workers` Compensation Act or the Unemployment Compensation Act of the State of
Minnesota on behalf of said City employees while so engaged and any and all claims made by any third parties
as a consequence of any act or omission on the part of said City employees while so engaged in any of the work
or services provided to be rendered herein shall be the sole responsibility of the City shall in no way be the
obligation or responsibility of the County.
Any and all employees of the County and all other persons engaged by the County in the performance of
any work or services required or provided for herein to be performed by the County shall not be considered
employees, agents or independent contractors of the City, and that any and all claims that may or might arise
under the Workers' Compensation Act or the Unemployment Compensation Act of the State of Minnesota on
behalf of said County employees while so engaged and any and all claims made by any third parties as a
consequence of any act or omission on the part of said County employees while so engaged in any of the work
or services provided to be rendered herein shall be the sole responsibility of the County and shall in no way be
the obligation or responsibility of the City.
X
The provisions of M.S. 181.59 and of any applicable local ordinance relating to Civil Rights and
discrimination and the affirmative action policy statement of Scott County shall be considered a part of this
agreement as though fully set forth herein.
3
CSAH 18 & CSAH 16 (Eagle Creek Blvd.)
City of Shakopee
County of Scott
IN TESTIMONY WHEREOF, The parties hereto have caused this agreement to be executed by their
respective duly authorized officers as of the day and year first above written.
Date
ATTEST:
By:
David Unmacht, County Administrator
Date
Date
w: \word \agrmt \light\ 18&1 6n-sh. doc
12/6/96, Rev. 11/3/99
in-
Barbara Marschall, Chair
Scott County Board ofCommisisoners
Date
RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL:
..
Bradley Larson, Director of
Public Works /County Engineer
Date
CSAH 18 & CSAH 16 (134' St.)
City of Shakopee
County of Scott
by and between the County of Scott, a body politic and corporate under the laws of the State of Minnesota,
hereinafter referred to as the "County" and the City of Shakopee, a body politic and corporate under the laws
of the State of Minnesota, hereinafter referred to as the "City".
WITNESSETH:
WHEREAS, It is considered mutually desirable to install a street light at the intersection of County State
Aid Highway (CSAH) 18 & CSAH 16 (134' Street) within the City; and
WHEREAS, The City has expressed its willingness to participate in the operating cost of said street
light; and
WHEREAS, Said work shall be carried out by the parties hereto under the provisions of M.S.
Sec. 162.17.
NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS AGREED AS FOLLOWS:
I
The County shall install, or cause the installation of a street light at the intersection of CSAH 18 &
CSAH 16 (134` Street). Such installation, as described immediately above, shall be hereinafter referred to as
the 11 project."
H
The City agrees that any City license required to perform electrical work within the City shall be issued
to the Contractor or the County at no cost to the Contractor or the County. Electrical inspection fees shall be
not more than those established by the State Board of Electricity in the most recently recorded Electrical
Inspection Fee Schedule.
fl
CSAH 18 & CSAH 16 (134"' St.)
City of Shakopee
County of Scott
III
The City shall provide the electrical energy for the operation of the street light to be installed under the
project, all at the sole cost and expense of the City.
IV
Upon completion of the work, the City shall maintain the street light including, but not limited to
photoelectrical controls, relamping, glassware, and cleaning of the glassware thereof at the sole cost and
expense of the City. The City may assign this responsibility upon written approval from the County.
V
The construction of this project shall be under the supervision and direction of the County. However,
the City Engineer shall cooperate with the County Engineer and his staff at their request to the extent necessary,
but shall have no responsibility for the supervision of the work.
VI
Neither the County, its officers, agents or employees, either in their individual or official capacity, shall
be responsible or liable in any manner to the City for any claim, demand, action or cause of action of any kind
or character arising out of, allegedly arising out of or by reason of the performance, negligent performance or
nonperformance of the hereinbefore described maintenance, restoration, repair or replacement work by the City,
or arising out of the negligence of any contractor under any contract let by the City for the performance of said
work; and the City agrees to defend, save and keep said County, its officers, agents and employees harmless
from all claims, demands, actions or causes of action arising out of negligent performance by the City, its
officers, agents or employees.
VII
It is further agreed that neither the City, its officers, agents or employees, either in their individual or
official capacity, shall be responsible or liable in any manner to the County for any claim, demand, action or
cause of action of any kind or character arising out of, allegedly arising out of or by reason of the performance,
negligent performance or nonperformance of the hereinbefore described maintenance, restoration, repair or
replacement work by the County, or arising out of the negligence of any contractor under any contract let by the
County for the performance of said work; and the County agrees to defend, save and keep said City, its officers,
agents and employees harmless from all claims, demands, actions or causes of action arising out of negligent
performance by the County, its officers, agents or employees.
2
CSAH 18 & CSAH 16 (134`' St.)
City of Shakopee
County of Scott
11
It is further agreed that each parry to this agreement shall not be responsible or liable to the other or to
any other person whomsoever for any claims, damages, actions, or causes of actions of any kind or character
arising out of, allegedly arising out of or by reason of the performance, negligent performance or
nonperformance of any work or part hereof by the other as provided herein; and each parry further agrees to
defend at its sole cost and expense any action or proceeding commenced for the purpose of asserting any claim
of whatsoever character arising in connection with or by virtue of performance of its own work as provided
herein.
1
It is further agreed that any and all employees of the City and all other persons engaged by the City in
the performance of any work or services required or provided herein to be performed by the City shall not be
considered employees, agents or independent contractors of the County, and that any and all claims that may or
might arise under the Workers' Compensation Act or the Unemployment Compensation Act of the State of
Minnesota on behalf of said City employees while so engaged and any and all claims made by any third parties
as a consequence of any act or omission on the part of said City employees while so engaged in any of the work
or services provided to be rendered herein shall be the sole responsibility of the City shall in no way be the
obligation or responsibility of the County.
Any and all employees of the County and all other persons engaged by the County in the performance of
any work or services required or provided for herein to be performed by the County shall not be considered
employees, agents or independent contractors of the City, and that any and all claims that may or might arise
under the Workers' Compensation Act or the Unemployment Compensation Act of the State of Minnesota on
behalf of said County employees while so engaged and any and all claims made by any third parties as a
consequence of any act or omission on the part of said County employees while so engaged in any of the work
or services provided to be rendered herein shall be the sole responsibility of the County and shall in no way be
the obligation or responsibility of the City.
X
The provisions of M.S. 181.59 and of any applicable local ordinance relating to Civil Rights and
discrimination and the affirmative action policy statement of Scott County shall be considered a part of this
agreement as though fully set forth herein.
3
CSAH 18 & CSAH 16 (134"' St.)
City of Shakopee
County of Scott
IN TESTIMONY WHEREOF, The parties hereto have caused this agreement to be executed by their
respective duly authorized officers as of the day and year first above written.
IEn
Date
COUNTY OF SCOTT
ATTEST:
By: B y'
David Unmacht, County Administrator Barbara Marschall, Chair
Scott County Board ofCommisisoners
Date
Upon proper execution, this agreement
will be legally valid and binding.
A-PPROVED AS TO EXECUTION
William Mars, Mayor
(SEAL) Date
And:
Mark McNeill, City Administrator
Thomas Harbinson, County Attorney
Date
w: \word \agrmt\hght\ 18 & 16 s -sh. doc
12/6/96, Rev. 11/3/99
Date
RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL:
Lo
Bradley Larson, Director of
Public Works /County Engineer
Date
El
CITY OF SHAKOPEE
T: Mayor & City Council
Mark McNeill, City Administrator
FROM: Bruce Loney, Public Works Director
SUBJECT: Authorize Agreement for Right -of -Way on the
Valley View Road Improvement Project No. 2001 -5
ATE: February 19, 2002
Staff would like Council to consider an agreement with U.S. Homes on their property for
right -of -way associated with the Sarazin Street and Valley View Road, Project No. 2001-
5.
With the Sarazin Street and Valley View Road improvement project, right -of -way is
needed to complete this improvement project. U.S.Homes Corporation/Orrin Thompson
has purchased ten acres from Joan Schultz and has received preliminary plat approval on
this property known as Prairie Village 7 th Addition. The City does need approximately
32,553 square feet of new highway right -of -way, 7,851 square feet of permanent utility
and drainage easement, and an additional 17,424 square feet for sanitary and storm sewer
easements within the proposed plat of Prairie Village 7 th Addition.
The developer at this time is not planning on moving forward with a final plat of Prairie
Village 7 th Addition. However, staff has been in contact with the developer and has
reached a tentative agreement for the purchase of right -of -way that is necessary for this
improvement project with conditions. Attached to this memorandum is a letter stating the
City's proposal in regard to the right -of -way purchase of Valley View Road under
conditions and they are as follows:
® City would offer $40,000.00 in total for all easements that are necessary for the
construction of Valley View Road and Sarazin Street, as well as for the sanitary
and storm sewer easements and any temporary easements that are needed to
facilitate construction.
® Orrin Thompson would enter into a petition and a waiver of assessment appeal for
the improvements associated with Sarazin Street and Valley View Road project.
® Orrin Thompson Homes would support the City project by constructing the
sanitary sewer and storm sewer through their development to the Sarazin Street
and Valley View Road improvement project at their cost.
Staff believes this is a fair proposal considering if right -of -way acquisition does move
forward for this parcel, the City would pay several thousand more dollars. Also, with this
proposal, the City would have the developer install sanitary and storm sewer lines to
facilitate the construction of Valley View Road and Sarazin Street. The developer would
be dedicating the right of way and easements if they recorded a final plat, however, the
timing is such that the platting will not occur this year. Approximately 60% of the right
of way cost will be assessed with the remaining cost to be paid by the city as Collector
Street over sizing.
The purpose of this memo is to ask Council authorization for the City Attorney to enter
into an agreement with developer for the purchase of right -of -way as suggested by this
memo and the attached letter.
1. Authorize the City Attorney to prepare an agreement for right -of -way acquisition
between the City of Shakopee and U.S. Home Corporation for right -of -way
acquisition associated with the Valley View Road and Sarazin Street
improvement, Project No. 2001 -5, with conditions as outlined in this memo.
2. Authorize the City Attorney to prepare an agreement as stated in Alternative No.
1, except with conditions as modified as by City Council.
3. Table for additional information.
4. Do not authorize the City Attorney to prepare an agreement and provide staff with
direction on right of way acquisition for this project.
Staff recommends Alternative No. 1, to acquire the right -of -way from this parcel in order
to proceed with the construction of Sarazin Street and Valley View Road for the 2002
construction season. Due to the fact that this development is not final platted, the city
would need to acquire the right of way from the property owner. In the feasibility report,
right of way acquisition was anticipated from the previous property owner and included
in the project cost. For the amount of easement obtained and utility work performed by
the developer, staff believes this is a fair agreement and allows the city to proceed on this
project that is needed for trunk watermain extension and collector street construction.
Authorize the City Attorney to prepare an agreement for right -of -way acquisition
between the City of Shakopee and U.S. Home Corporation for right -of -way acquisition
associated with the Valley View Road and Sarazin Street improvement, Project No.
2001 -5, with conditions as outlined in this memo.
kruceney
Public Works Director
BL/pmp
PROJN0.2001 -5
02/14/2002 16:38 FAX 9524737401 LUNDGREN BROS. CONST. 0002
Corporat ion
Family of-Builders Minnesota's Enduring Standard of Value
Feb 14, 2002
Mr. Bruce Loney
Public Works Director
City of Shakopee
129 Holmes Street South
Shakopee, NIN 55379 -1351
Dear Mr. Loney.
I am in receipt of your letter dated February 11, 2002 regarding Right -of -Way acquisition
for Valley View Improvements. I would like to include additional language to clarify the
intent of the agreement.
1. In two letters I suggested a discounted land value of 548,200 and $46,875 —
assuming we agree on all other terms I would be willing to accept $40,000 for
Right of Way and easements necessary to construct Valley View Road.
2. We would enter into an agreement to waive our right of assessment appeal for
improvements that are agreed upon to be assessed against this project.
3. At this time, given market conditions and lots available in Prairie Village 6`
this project is on hold with US Home Corporation. We do not have the
necessity for these lots and thus would not final plat within the construction
season of 2002. In order to facilitate constriction of Valley View it would be
necessary for storm sewer and sanitary sewer improvements to be completed
through this property, which would require US Home Corporation to final plat
to install these utilities_ I would be willing to accelerate my final plat and
prematurely develop this property or grant the City an easement to construct
utilities.
4. Depending on the schedule of the City of Shakopee, Orrin Thompson Homes
would.
a. install sanitary and storm sewer extensions through our development as
part of our development process in lieu of being assessed for these
improvements as outlined in the Feasibility Study.
or
b. if our schedule is not compatible with the Valley View improvements,
in which case the sanitary and storm sewer extensions are necessary
prior to our scheduled installation, Orrin Thompson Homes will grant
935 East Wayzata Boulevard 0 Wayzata, Minnesota 55391
952.473.1231 Phone 952.473.7401 Fax
02/14/2002 16:38 FAX 9524737401 LUNDGREN BROS. CONST. Q003
Corporation
Family of Builders Minnesota's Enduring Standar of Value
easements for construction and be assessed for these costs as indicated
in the Feasibility Study.
5. I do not believe we should be assessed for any sanitary sewer in Sarazin as
there is no benefit to this property-
6. In the final paragraph of your memorandum I would like to add this language.
'This agreement would supercede the condition set forth in the preliminary
plat approval that; as a condition of final plat 'US Home Corporation would
dedicate Right -of -Way for Valley View Improvements"
As I have stated before we are in support of your project and would like to
accommodate your improvements. Please let me know if you have any further
thoughts or discussion on this matter.
Best Regards..
Co ere
Sr. Land Manager
Thompson Land Division
935 Eaut Wayzata Boulevard Wayzata, Minnesota 55391
952.473.1231 Phone 952.473.7401 Fax
dk0MdhhII6- Ad
MEMOM
pp-
February 11, 2002
Cory Lepper
Orrin Thompson Homes
8421 Wayzata Blvd., Suite 300
Golden Valley, MN 55426 -
RE: Right -of -Way Acquisition for Sarazin Street and Valley View Road,
Improvement Project 2001 -5
Dear Mr. Lepper:
This letter is in response to your letter dated December 4, 2001 on the right -of -way
acquisition the City needs from Orrin Thompson Homes for the Sarazin Street and Valley
View Road improvement project. In your letter you are making a proposal to the City for
the purchase of right -of -way for the property that is preliminary platted as Prairie Village
7 Addition for the roadway, sanitary and storm sewer easements. After review of your
proposal and understanding the situation in that this property will not be final platted
before the City needs to construct the improvements in the spring and summer of 2002, I
would offer the following counter proposals for your consideration:
1. The City of Shakopee would offer $40,000.00 in total for all easements that are
necessary for the construction of Valley View Road and Sarazin Street, as well as
the sanitary, storm sewer and any temporary easements that are needed to
facilitate construction.
2. Orrin Thompson Homes would enter into a petition and a waiver of assessment
appeal for the improvements associated with Sarazin Street and Valley View
Road.
3. Orrin Thompson Homes would support the City project by constructing the
sanitary sewer and storm sewer through their development to the Sarazin Street
and Valley View Road improvement project.
In your letter, one other item that you listed that could be included with this proposal is to
grade the roadway within your property line as part of the Orrin Thompson Homes
grading effort. At this time I would suggest that the grading work be done under one
contract for the Sarazin Street and Valley View Road project and not have two
contractors grading in the area. Ultimately they may have disputes, in as far as who is
responsible, if a failure of the roadway does occur. One other question that you raised in
your letter is in regard to the sidewalk improvement and assessments associated with this
improvement. It is the City's policy to assess the sidewalk to the new development and
not to assess this sidewalk on property that is currently developed on City collector
COMMUNITY PRIDE SINCE 1857
129 Holmes Street South • Shakopee, Minnesota • 55379 - 1351.952 233 -3800 • FAX 952 -233 -3801 • www.ci.shakopee.mmus
streets. In the feasibility report, the estimated assessment for sidewalk is $6,500.00 and is
proposed to be assessed to this parcel.
I believe this is a fair proposal that would enable to the City of Shakopee to proceed
forward and would provide Orrin Thompson Homes additional dollars for this right -of-
way. If this proposal is acceptable to you, please let me know and I will have the City
Attorney draft an agreement on this proposal and take this item to a future Council
meeting for approval.
Sincerely,
Bruce Loney, P.E.
Public Works Director
BI/prnp
LEPPER
Cc: Jinn Thomson, City Attorney
fire
Minnesota's Enduring Standard of Value
December 4, 2001
n r r �n c
t
Mr. Bruce Loney
City of Shakopee
129 Holmes Street South
Shakopee, MN 55379
Dear Mr. Loney:
JAN 2 -
S S`
C., j
As you are aware Orrin Thompson Homes has purchased the +/- 9.8 Acre site, previously owned
by Joan Schultz, north of Valley View Road. Recent economic situations have slowed sales in
Prairie Village and we are not sure when we will proceed with the final plat of Prairie Village 7`
Addition. My understanding is that the city would like to acquire the Right of Way for Valley
View so as to proceed with improvements in Spring/ Summer 2002. To assist the City with a
timely construction schedule I believe we need to reevaluate the land acquisition to find a
mutually acceptable resolution.
As part of the preliminary plat approval it was conveyed to us that we must dedicate
approximately 1 acre of land for the Valley View Road improvement. The feasibility study for
Valley View indicated that Beta Seed, Schultz, O'Laughlin, Smith and Hennes would be
compensated for needed Right of Way. As the purchaser of the Schultz property our
understanding was that we would be compensated in a similar manner as all the other property
owners for this land. Given the small size of this land I believe giving 10% of our land for this
city project is not equitable and is a burden that will be reflected in the increased lot prices that
future homeowners pay to live in Shakopee.
We purchased this property for approximately $62,500 per acre. Currently similar single family
land has been purchased for $65,000- $80,000 per acre in Shakopee. At a per acre price this land
is worth a minimum of $62,500. We mus also consider that if Sarazm ran straight south into
Valley View we would have been able to plat four additional lots that may yield $150,000. Given
the nature of the issue and the desire to find an acceptable resolution I would propose a price of
$48,200. Orrin Thompson Homes would also be willing to grade the road, within our property
line, as part of our mass grading. The land price and additional grading is a significant value for
the City of Shakopee that will allow both parties to proceed as scheduled.
The feasibility'study proposes that the City would install the sanitary sewer, watermain, and
storm sewer from the stub of Prairie Village 5 addition through the 7 addition down to Valley
View Road. I would propose that Orrin Thompson Homes would install these utilities in lieu of
being assessed for these improvements. This will be a great benefit to the City as we will be able
to bring the utilities to Valley View and minimise the responsibility of the City through this
property. It also occurs to me that we are being assessed for sanitary and watermain in Valley
8421 Wayzata Boulevard, Suite 300 e Golden Valley, Minnesota 55426
(763) 544 -7333 phone (763) 544 -9086 fax
Minnesota's Enduring Standard of Value
View Road. Given the fact that we will be installing these utilities in our internal roads there is
not a benefit to this land and I do not believe we should be assessed for these improvements.
The feasibility study addressed a sidewalk improvement on the west and south side of Valley
View and a trail improvement on the east and north side of Valley View. My understanding is
that sidewalk is assessed to the owner directly adjacent the improvement while trail is considered
a city improvement that is paid and installed by the city. I believe the feasibility study is
incorrect as our 9.8 acre site is being assessed for the sidewalk that is on the other side of the
road. While the homeowners on the south side are not being assessed for their sidewalk. Is this
assessment in error?
In brief, Orrin Thompson is supportive of the Valley View project and we would like to work
with the City to get the improvements completed. I would like the City to evaluate the land
acquisition and purchase the Right of Way for this project and Orrin Thompson Homes will
install the utilities that run through this land to connect to Valley View in lieu of assessments.
am also very interested in the final alignment and would like to be included in the design and
development as it proceeds with your engineers.
I appreciate your time and please contact me if you have any questions.
8421 Wayzata Boulevard, Suite 300 • Golden Valley, Minnesota 55426
(763) 544 -7333 phone (763) 544 -9086 fax
O
i
or sac fa rsa. rfa Rcs..es
3
- — — sooie aura nr rH xoxra ar.rs
—
is U .
4 a a a
( 4D
I
I
a
ni 1 I
I
I
1
z
o
I
1
z F --- - - - --I
I
�
S
I
Q rs
SL
� v3�
9.
S 4
e e
m I
m 1 > I
3
I — —
— — — —
m I
9
i - - -- ! J
=
I
� z
p
m '
- --
o D
- I
I
I
l s o I
r
i-- - -
- - --
3
a
I
p
I
I I
I
I
I
o
'PRAIRIE VILLAGES
1 5TH ADDITION I
I
I
i BLOCK 3 I
1 I
s
I
I
1
DMIOA6 RIGHT OF WAY PER
N
PRAIRIE VILLAGE WH ADOMN A L D E
N
A V E
N U E
°
o
S
0
O
i
or sac fa rsa. rfa Rcs..es
ggi
°H
- — — sooie aura nr rH xoxra ar.rs
—
is U .
4 a a a
( 4D
I
I
O
®
q•q
: 0 Z
ggi
°H
'bm L
S >
a, ;a .
RA
G ° rt +
is U .
4 a a a
a �s �
a
o s
I
i
a
ni 1 I
I
I
1
z
o
I
1
z F --- - - - --I
I
1
I
1
I
Q rs
SL
� v3�
S 4
e e
m I
HG F
z
$li
A
x
S
JQQ
fly
$�
S
ISg
i
.... ..4 cm = 19 I 1 I 1
1rORr aA'i O r rHd 3 f { Or 3SC 19. 1' P._ f I6. RG ffi I _ _ _ L —
1 13 12
I 1 i
I'� I 15 IBLOdK 21 1
=� I PRAIRIE I VILLAG 4TH — A DITION 1
M 0 0 E R S A V E N U E
Q
Ag
m
m
5OO'12'43'E ' }�
57.99 I
S5TO5 \'
g 246 24.46 YYY
` \ \ CH BRC. °9jO7
\ \\
1 3 {J W
\
A ---- 7 T--- T- - --T—
IPRAIRIE I VILLAGE_ _A
5TH DC
r-------- - - - - -� l
o N I I 8 L10CK 1
J J
J
c
v
l
m N ----- - --- i
r - - --
—
a�30
>I I
I
i
a
ni 1 I
I
I
1
W
H1
I
1
z F --- - - - --I
I
1
I
1
I
e e
m I
m 1 > I
3
I — —
— — — —
m I
9
i - - -- ! J
=
I
� z
p
m '
- --
o D
- I
I
I
l s o I
r
i-- - -
- - --
a
I
p
I
I I
I
I
I
'PRAIRIE VILLAGES
1 5TH ADDITION I
I
I
i BLOCK 3 I
1 I
I
I
1
DMIOA6 RIGHT OF WAY PER
PRAIRIE VILLAGE WH ADOMN A L D E
N
A V E
N U E
Q
Ag
m
m
5OO'12'43'E ' }�
57.99 I
S5TO5 \'
g 246 24.46 YYY
` \ \ CH BRC. °9jO7
\ \\
1 3 {J W
\
A ---- 7 T--- T- - --T—
IPRAIRIE I VILLAGE_ _A
5TH DC
r-------- - - - - -� l
o N I I 8 L10CK 1
J J
J
c
v
l
.-,
r
•
Y
O
D
d =
--1
O
T i
D
I
a�30
i
ftw
En
m I
9
0
�
� z
p
.-,
r
•
Y
O
D
d =
--1
O
T i
D
I
a ,
CITE OF SHAKOPEE
Police Department
Memorandum
Mayor and City Council
Mark McNeill, City Administrator
Dan Hughes, Chief of Police f/
Successful Completion of Probation
February 13, 2002
The Police Department is taking this opportunity to notify the City Council that the
services of Jon Kegley, Fred Radde and Sean Zauhar have been satisfactory and
recommend they be retained in the position of Police Officer as authorized by Section
VIII, paragraph H -4 of the Personnel Handbook
The City Council authorized the appointment of Jon Kegley, Fred Radde and Sean
Zauhar to the position of probationary police officer effective February 20, 2001.
Officers Kegley, Radde and Zauhar have performed the responsibilities of the position in
a satisfactory manner over the past 12 months.
Staff recommends that Officers Kegley, Radde and Zauhar be retained in the position of
Shakopee Police Officers.
The City Council, if they concur, should by motion acknowledge the satisfactory
completion of probation and authorize the retention of Jon Kegley, Fred Radde and Sean
Zauhar as Police Officers effective February 20, 2002.
DH:pm
sae
CITE' OF SAKOPEE
b�
Memorandum
TO: Mayor and City Council
Mark McNeill, City Administrator
FROM: Judith S. Cox, City Clerk
SUBJECT: Temporary Liquor Licenses - Church of St. Mary
DATE: February 13, 2002
The Church of St. Mary has made applications for temporary on -sale intoxicating liquor licenses
for their Irish Dinner on March 10, 2002 and for their Feast and Fun Festival on June 23, 2001.
I have been in contact with the Deputy Chief of Police regarding these applications. These
events are something that have been going on for a number of years. There is no problem with
these activities.
Their applications and insurance certificates are in order.
Move to approve the applications and grant temporary on -sale liquor licenses to the Church of St.
Mary, 535 South Lewis Street, for March 10, 2002 and June 23, 2002.
— I '�]" ) L -,
Cit "C erk I
1
i\j can ette\I iquor \strnary
/
City of Shakopee
Memorandum
TO: Mayor & City Council
Mark McNeill, City Administrator
FROM: Tracy Coenen, Assistant to the City Administrator
SUBJECT: Adopting New Telecommunications Resolution No. 5655
MEETING DATE: February 19, 2002
Introduction
The City Council is asked to adopt Resolution No. 5655 creating the new
Telecommunications Advisory Commission.
Background
In the early 1980s, the City Council created a Cable Commission Advisory Board to
assist the Council with its newly found responsibilities from its first cable franchise. The
Cable Commission was only advisory in nature, thus it did not have its own funding.
As part of the cable franchise, the City would receive its own public access (cable)
channels to broadcast information to its residents. Initially, the public access studio was
the responsibility of the cable company; however, as the cable company and City began
to grow, this responsibility was shifted to the City. To provide quality public access
programming for its residents, the City Council created the Shakopee Cable Access
Corporation. The Corporation is a non -profit organization, appointed by the City
Council, to "oversee" the revenues generated from the franchise agreement. At the time
of adoption, the two cable committees worked well; however, as the City continues to
grow it has become too burdensome for a volunteer non -profit board to handle the
revenues and responsibilities generated from the cable franchise agreement.
Realizing the current organizational structure may not be the best fit for the residents of
Shakopee, the two cable committees entered into strategic planning, which resulted in
recommending a Telecommunications Commission. City staff, Cable Access
Corporation, and Cable Commission worked together to develop the Telecommunications
Commission to move to the broader area of telecommunications, rather than just cable.
Discussion
On February 6, both cable committees unanimously approved Resolution No. 5655.
However, the attendance policy of two (2) unexcused absences requiring removal as a
member, that the cable committees approved was not consistent with staff's
recommendation or City policy of one (1) unexcused absence, so staff has "amended" the
cable committees recommendation from two (2) unexcused absences to one (1)
unexcused absence in order to be consistent with City policy on boards and commissions.
(Resolution No. 5655 #4 Removal).
Combining the two cable committees into one Telecommunications Commission will
allow more latitude in the scope and nature of topics, and allow better City access to
revenues that have been currently reversed only for cable television. If Council concurs
with the adoption of Resolution No. 5655, it is City staff's and the cable committee's
recommendation that a dedicated Telecommunication Fund be established within the City
budget. (Please see budget impact for more detailed information).
Unlike other commissions, Resolution No. 5655 gives the Telecommunications
Commission the authority to act on behalf of the City, subject to appeal to the City
Council, on the issues of 1) subscriber complaints 2) franchise compliance 3) PEG
Channels and Public Access Studio Operation. This was done in an effort to maximize
the expertise of the commission and save City Council time. Ultimately, the commission
works from City documents like the cable franchise that is adopted by the City Council.
The majority of the Commission's duties will still be advisory in nature and will include:
1) ordinance changes 2) renewal or Refranchising 3) budget 4) telecommunication issues
5) Institutional Network (I -Net) 6)Annual Report.
Budget Impact
Cable Access Corporation receives 3 different sources of funding 1) rent from Time
Warner for the cable access studio 2) $.40 /month/cable customer for Public, Educational,
Governmental Funding (PEG) 3) franchise fees from Time Warner that are negotiated
every 15 years by the City. In 2000, it is estimated that the above three funds generated
roughly $175,000 of which 100% went to the Cable Access Corporation.
City staff proposes that 1) all current and future assets (equipment, money, and future
revenues) be turned over the City; 2) all revenues be placed in a dedicated City fund titled
"Telecommunications;" 3) within the Telecommunications Fund, 100% of the PEG
money (.40 /month/customer) would be used only for public access purposes, rent money
would continued to be used for rent, and the franchise money would be used for
telecommunications, but could also be used for public access as well.
Setting up a dedicated City fund gives the commission and cable customers, that are
charged, the security of knowing that the money won't be used for general City projects
like paving roads, and also gives the cable customers assurance through the City Council
that the money is not being "abused" by an independent board. It will also eliminate the
need for a volunteer treasurer, since City staff would take care of routine day -to -day bill
paying, audits, and helping to format budgets.
Tentative Telecommunications Timeline
If City Council is supportive of the new Telecommunications Commission concept, it
will take roughly 2 -3 months to put the Commission in place. Staff will bring back
reports to inform Council of the progress and transactions.
Recommended Action
Adopt Resolution No. 5655 creating the new Telecommunications Commission.
2
Resolution NO. 5655
A RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING THE SHAKOPEE TELECOMMUNICATIONS
ADVISORY COMMISSION
WHEREAS, the City of Shakopee is in need of an advisory group to study issues and
recommend solutions relating to the provision of telecommunication services for the City,
residents, and businesses in Shakopee; and
WHEREAS, an advisory group, whose members are interested in, and knowledgeable
about telecommunication issues would be of significant assistance to the City Council of
the City of Shakopee as it considers new telecommunication programs and policies;
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA, that:
1. COMMITTEE ESTABLISHED: The Shakopee Telecommunications
Advisory Commission is hereby established.
2. MEMBERSHIP, OATH AND TERMS OF OFFICE: T he Commission will have
five (5) members whose terms of office shall be three years. Membership will
consist of Shakopee residents, no more than one (1) business representative, and
township residents residing in the cable franchise area. Every appointed member
shall, prior to discharge of his duties, take an oath that he will faithfully discharge
the duties of his office. The initial terms of office shall be established to provide
for staggered terms, one term ending 2003, two terms ending 2004 and two terms
ending in 2005, or until the successors are appointed and qualified.
3. VACANCIES: Vacancies on the Commission shall be filled in the same manner
as the original appointment(s) and are made for the unexpired portion of the term
vacated.
4. REMOVAL: Any member who shall miss three (3) consecutive regularly
scheduled meetings without having first been granted by majority vote of the
Commission a leave of absence for good cause or one (1) unexcused absence shall
be deemed to have vacated his office and the Council shall fill said vacancy as
provided herein. The Council may also remove any member by majority vote
and the unexpired portion of the term vacated shall be filled as provided herein.
5. Members of the Commission shall serve without compensation and shall not
directly or personally benefit from any recommendations of the Commission.
6. ORGANIZATION: Except as herein specified, the Commission shall follow
Roberts Rules of Order, Newly Revised.
a. Quorum: A majority of the appointed and qualified members of the
Commission shall constitute a quorum for the transaction of business at all
regular or special meetings thereof.
b. Meetings: At its organizational meeting the Commission shall establish a
regular periodic meeting time, which shall continue in effect until revised
by majority vote of the Commission.
c. Annual Meeting: The annual meeting shall be conducted each year in
May, to be coordinated with the regular meeting schedule.
d. Officers: Officers shall be elected at the annual meeting as follows, a
Chairman, whose function will be to preside at each meeting and a Vice -
Chairman, whose function will be to preside in the absence of the
Chairman. In order to be elected as Chairman, the member must have
served on the Commission for at least one year.
7. POWERS AND DUTIES:
A. The Commission shall be advisory in nature, with all final decisions forwarded to
the City Council as recommendations, with respect to the following issues:
Ordinance Changes, Renewal or Refranchising, Budget, Telecommunications, R,ET,
Annual Report.
a. Ordinance Chan ges: Conduct hearings and make recommendations on
proposed amendments to the cable franchise, including, but not limited to:
changes in ownership and system ownership. Consider requests for
variance from the franchise ordinance forwarded by the City
Administrator or his/her designee or the City Council.
b. Renewal or Refranchising: The Commission shall recommend whether
and under what terms the franchise shall be renewed or a new franchise
shall be authorized.
c. Budget: Recommend proposed telecommunications budget to City
Council from funds delivered through 1) PEG (Public, Education,
Government) fees 2) cable access studio rent 3) franchise fees 4) other
revenues. The budget shall be presented to the City Council no later than
June 15.
d. Telecommunications: Provide direction to the City Council on new
developments and policies regarding telecommunications.
e. E ET(Institutional Network): Recommend and develop policies in relation
to the Joint Powers Agreement for the INET.
f. Annual Report: Submit an annual report to the City Council outlining the
Commissions activities during the past year and any recommended
directions, goals and objectives for the new year.
B. The Commission shall act on behalf of the City, subject to appeal to the City
Council, concerning the following matters:
a. Subscriber Complaints: The Commission shall hear and act on subscriber
complaints not satisfied by appeal to the cable operator.
b. Franchise Compliance: The Commission shall monitor cable operator
compliance with City of Shakopee Cable Communications Franchise
Ordinance, and initiate any franchise compliance actions with the cable
operator.
c. PEG Channels and Public Access Studio Operation: The Commission
shall develop and adopt advisory policies for the operation of the public
access studio and PEG Channels.
Commission recommendations shall include but not be limited to the foregoing matters
regarding telecommunications in the Shakopee Cable Service Territory.
Adopted in session of the City Council of the City of Shakopee,
Minnesota, held this day of , 2002.
Mayor, City of Shakopee
Memorandum
TO: Mayor and City Council
Mark McNeill, City Administrator
FROM: Judith S. Cox, City Clerk
SUBJECT: Establishing Presumptive Penalties for Alcohol Violations
DATE: February 12, 2002
INTRODUCTION:
City Council is asked to give direction on presumptive penalties desired for alcohol violations of beer
and liquor licensees.
BACKGROUND:
After considering penalties for alcohol violations on December 4, 2001, the City Council asked staff
to look at penalties of other Cities and to amend Shakopee's penalty policy to a step structure for
both the length of suspensions and the administrative fine to be similar to those of other cities.
Information was gathered from 10 cities that have adopted presumptive penalties, see attach Exhibit
A.
Shakopee has not adopted presumptive penalties for alcohol violations. Shakopee follows the State
law, which allows revocation or suspension for a period not to exceed sixty days or the imposition of
a civil fine not to exceed $2,000 for each violation on a finding that the licensee has failed to comply
with a statute, regulation or provision of the City Code relating to alcoholic beverages. Exhibit B
shows the penalties imposed by the Shakopee City Council since compliance checks began in 1999.
Taking this history into consideration, staff is proposing the following as a beginning point for
Council discussion:
City I' Offense 2nd Offense 3rd Offense 4 th Offense
Shakopee $1,000 fine $1,500 fine $2,000 fine $2,000 fine
+ 2 day suspension + 5 day suspension + 5 -60 day
suspension or
revocation
Within 3 years Within 3 years Within 3 years
Most cities treat all alcohol violations the same whether on or off sale and whether beer or liquor,
except Minnetonka and Golden Valley. They both have adopted the same penalties. Their penalties
are more severe than those that have been imposed by Shakopee in that they do impose a suspension
on the 1' violation for on and off sale liquor and on sale beer.
Burnsville (for the first violation) and Minnetonka (for 1S and 2n violations) allow staff to meet with
the violators. If the violators admit to the violation and agree with the presumptive administrative
penalty, the penalty is placed on the City Council agenda as a consent item. The City of Eden Prairie
notifies an alleged violator of the alleged violation and of their right to be heard on the accusation.
They must pay the fine or request a hearing. Payment of the fine constitutes admission of the
violation. [1St, 2nd, and ai violations that are admitted do not go to City Council. Staff provides
Council with an fy.i. memo.]
All cities have a set time frame within which the violations occur to cause a more severe penalty.
Some cities include language in their ordinance that will allow the City Council to deviate from the
presumptive penalties where Council finds reasons making it more appropriate to deviate, i.e.: a
licensee's efforts in combination with the state or city to prevent the sale of alcohol to minors. In
such a case, the Council provides written findings that support the penalty selected.
As an incentive to discourage sales to underage buyers, Minnetonka provides a reward to an
individual for incidents that can be verified by the police department. A $50 reward is provided to a
person who checks identification, discovers an underage person attempting to purchase alcoholic
beverages, and cooperates with the city in attempting to obtain a conviction.
ALTERNATIVES:
1. Determine the desired penalties from among the many options utilized by other cities.
2. Continue with the current practice of treating each violator on a case -by -case basis.
3. Delegate to staff (i.e.: Chief of Police or City Administrator) the responsibility of meeting
with violators with 1S and 2 violations and bring the presumptive penalties to City Council
for action as a consent item.
4. Continue to have violators appear before the City Council to admit whether or not they
have committed alcohol violations.
5. Table for additional information.
RECOMMENDATION:
After discussion and reaching a consensus on penalties desired, direct staff to prepare the appropriate
ordinance incorporating the desired presumptive penalties.
I:\jeanette\licenses\penalties
rA
rA
.. ...
......
0
0
0
Ln
En
rA
S'r
>�l
0
RS
C)
cn Cd C�3
C14
..
....
O
o
En
jC+4
0
rn
rn
'A
M
os
Cd
m
a)
CA
U3
CL
C'n
In
c
14
c
cq
Es
Fz
C
6
C)
>
CD ,
C's
C>
c:
C)
00
.......
......
......
......
.......
....
......
I I I ....
...
.....
O
O
Cq
cd
CL
w
cq
=118>
z;
C)
C)
C
C)
c) C > ,3'
C>
4.1
+
on
cd
O
ti
CL
......
.....
Ewn
C>
C) C;l
C)
C)
......
......
kn
...... xn
.. ...
kr)
4-4
6 +
1
69
.....
......
.....
Cd
C,
tn
tn
L 4
Cd
Cd
s
-0
>1
Cd
O
U
N
ti
t.,
O
y
C�
'C3
M
U
O
y
L.y
w
W O
"°
o �
Cd
0 o
� o
Eos
c o
a�
.V c
W t. o
� o
� c;;
kn
rA
O o
� o �
O o
o �
a�
=� C ai
,� H o
O
�: «_�:
p
cd
cd
cd
cd
cd
E O
O
O
O
5
O
O
N
Ln
CL
c
N O
cd : »::::; rn
U <::::i:: U O
CL
U
U
En
p y
U
O
Cd
.` °O 'C
0 0
00 'CS
00 'O
.- ? ; >_ O
O
O
O O
.�
3 >< 6s +
GS +Gos+
rs +
3
#? O
O
O
O
O
O
O
0
rA<<`s
N 0.
h
h
W
4:
U L
y y
M
O
• :;
C
< <:•:
cd
:::'> O
O
°
'" O M
M
O M
M
kr) M
''
X.
r+
r—
w
o o o .°
o
° C4
v� cd CL a� ti
o, S
Ln C rA
o I
o kn
cd 3:in M N
tn
�
+ 64 ff? + +
r + 6 6
°
> y
t,
O
^ U y
O
x
N
°'
<` cd
cd a
U O3
Gq
o
•<
� `
� ri
(a.) ti
ri
-C rig
O
U
N
ti
t.,
O
y
C�
'C3
M
U
O
y
L.y
w
W O
"°
o �
Cd
0 o
� o
Eos
c o
a�
.V c
W t. o
� o
� c;;
kn
rA
O o
� o �
O o
o �
a�
=� C ai
,� H o
EXHIBIT "B"
SHAKOPEE
DATE OF
OFFENSE
PENALTY
1 ST OFFENSE
PENALTY
2' OFFENSE
SuperAmerica
4/1999
$500 fine
p lus 5 day suspension
Oasis Market
4/1999
$500 fine
p lus 10 day suspension
Crossroads Liquor
4/1999
8/1999
$1,000 fine
plus 10 day suspension,
suspended if no
violations for liquor/
tobacco for 1 year
$2,000 fine
plus 2 day suspension
and 8 day suspension,
suspended if no
violations for liquor/
tobacco for 1 year
Canterbury Park
8/1999
1,000 fine
Valleyfair
8/1999
$1,000 fine
plus 10 day suspension,
suspended if no
violations for liquor/
tobacco for 1 year
Turtle's
8/1999
$1,000 fine
Tom Thumb
8/1999
$1,000 fine
plus 5 day suspension
Sabroso
9/1999
5/2001
$1,000 fine
$2,000 fine
plus 2 day suspension
and 8 day suspension,
suspended if no
violations for liquor for
1 year
VFW
10/1999
$1,000 fine
Arizona's (Canterbury
Inn)
10/1999
$1,000 fine
American Legion
10/1999
$1,000 fine
A lebee's
10/1999
$1,000 fine
Eagles Club
10/1999
$1,000 fine
Pizza Hut
10/1999
$1,000 fine
p lus 10 day suspension
CITY OF SHAKOPEE
Memorandum C - U A ' ` 6
TO: Mayor and Council
Mark McNeill, City Administrator
FROM: Gregg Voxland, Finance Director
SUBJ: Ordinance No. 618 - Collection of Fees
DATE: February 13, 2002
Introduction and Background
Currently, action for the collection of non - payment of false alarm fees
requires going to conciliation court. Ordinance No. 618 makes going to
court permissive rather than mandatory. There are cases where other
action such as assessment may be more effective.
Requested Action
Move to offer Ordinance No. 618, AN ORDINANCE PERTAINING TO COLLECTION
OF DELINQUENT CHARGES FOR USER FEES AND AMENDING SECTION 4.41, SUBD. 3D
OF THE CITY CODE, and move its adoption.
Gregg Uoxland
Finance Director
C: \gregg \memo\
ORDINANCE NO. 618, FOURTH SERIES
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA, PERTAINING TO
COLLECTION OF DELINQUENT CHARGES FOR USER FEES AND AMENDING
SECTION 4.41, SUBD. 3D OF THE CITY CODE
The City Council of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota, Ordains:
Section 1. Section 4.41, Subd. 3D of the Shakopee City Code is amended to read as follows:
D. All delinquent charges for user fees computed as provided in paragraph (C)
above may either be collected by the City in a civil action or may &ha4 be
forwarded to the City Clerk who shall prepare an assessment roll each year
of the delinquent amounts against the respective properties serviced, which
assessment roll shall be delivered to the City Council for adoption on or
before October 10th of each year.
Section 2. Effective Date. This ordinance becomes effective from and after its passage and
publication.
Adopted in adj. regular session of the City Council of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota,
held the 19th day of February, 2002.
Mayor of the City of Shakopee
ATTEST:
City Clerk
Published in the Shakopee Valley News on the day of 12002.