Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
May 21, 2002
ADJ. REGULAR SESSION TENTATIVE AGENDA CITY OF SHAKOPEE SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA LOCATION: 129 Holmes Street South MAY 21, 2002 Mayor William P. Mars presiding 11 Roll Call at 7:00 p.m. 2] Pledge of Allegiance 3 ] Approval Agenda 4] Mayor's Report: 5 ] Approval of Consent Business — (All items noted by an * are anticipated to be routine. After a discussion by the Mayor, there will be an opportunity for members.of the City Council to remove items from the consent agenda for individual discussion. Those items removed will be considered in their normal sequence on the agenda. Those items remaining on the consent agenda will otherwise not be individually discussed and will be enacted in one motion.) 6] RECOGNITION BY CITY COUNCIL OF _ per person/subject . Longer presentations must be s eduD through E he (Limited to five minutes meeting is cablecast, speakers must approach the microphone at the podium for the ben fit viewers and other attendees.) *71 Approval of Minutes: April 16, 2002 *81 Approval of Bills in the Amount of $1,129,543.79 plus $45,568.85 for re pass through for a total of $1,175,112.64 funds, returns and 91 7:15 p.m. - Hearings on Alleged Liquor Violations 101 Communications 11] Liaison Reports from Council Members 121 Recess for Economic Development Authority Meeting: None 131 Re- convene 141 Recommendations from Boards and Commissions: A] Comprehensive Plan/Land Use Plan Amendment Request from Tollefson Development for property located E of CSAH 18 and S of CSAH 16 tabled April 2, 2002 B] Proposed Park Property on Lake O'Dowd TENTATIVE AGENDA May 21, 2002 Page —2- 15] General Business: A] Community Development 1. Interim Transit Services Agreement with Scott County *2. Michael Werth Appeal of Conditions for CUP —Res. No. 5708 *3. Beverly Koehnen Appeal Concerning Shakopee Gravel CUP —Res. No. 5727 4. Amendment to the City Code Regarding Planned Unit Developments — Ord. No. 626 5. Cost Participation for 17'' Avenue Corridor Study 6. Waiver of Minor Subdivision Criteria — Mark Cemensky — tabled 5/7 B] Public Works and Engineering I. Approve Plans for Sarazin St. and Valley View Road, Project 2001 -5 —Res. No. 5720 2. Cooperative Agreement with Scott County on CSAH 17 Improvements from CSAH 101 to Vierling Drive *3. Approve PIans for Bituminous Trail Connection from T.H. 169 to lf Avenue and a Limited Use Permit from Mn/DOT — Res. No. 5721 4. Award Contract for Tahpah Park Parking Lot and Vierling Drive Bituminous Trail from CR 79 to Sage Lane, 2002 -3 and 2002 -2 — Res. No. 5722 *5. Sanitary Sewer Root Control *6. 2000 Reconstruction, Project No. 2000 -4 — Assessment Appeal *7. Request of CB &I Water for Suspension of Hourly Restrictions on Construction Activities Cl Police and Fire *1. Self Contained Breathing Apparatus 2. Final Review of Police Building Plans and Use of Construction Management D] Personnel 1. Hiring Freeze /Added Positions a. Hiring One Police Officer b. Cable Technicians —Res. No. 5728 c. Cable Coordinator — Res. No. 5724 *2. Successful Completion of Probation — Sharon Proskin and Jaclyn Scheerz E] Parks and Recreation * 1. Authorize a Skate Park Supervisor and Amend Fees — Res. No. 5714 *2. Purchase of Cleaning Equipment *3. Trail Agreement with the DNR for a Trail through Memorial Park — Res. No. 5726 TENTATIVE AGENDA May 21, 2002 Page —3- F] General Administration *1. Changing the Meeting Date for the First Meeting in August — Res. No. 5698 2. Establishing Penalties for the Sale of Tobacco Products to Minors *3. Setting Sale for $3,750,000 General Obligation Improvement Bonds — Res. No. 5725 *4. Wine and 3.2 Beer Licenses — Dangerfield's Restaurant, Inc. *5. Temporary 3.2 Percent Malt Liquor License — Shakopee Lions Club *6. Agreement with the Access Corporation and Time Warner Providing for Assignment and Transfer of Community Programming Assets 7. Groundbreaking Ceremony - New Library *8. Removal of No Parking Signs on Park Place *9. Designating City Administrator as Goodwill Ambassador to the City of Malmo, Providence of Skane, Sweden — Res. No. 5729 *10. 2003 Assessing Contract 11. County Road 21 Extension from CR 42 to CR 18 12. Library Architectural Fees 16] Council Concerns 17] Other Business 18] Adjourn OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS OF THE Crry COUNCIL ADJ.REGIUAR SESSION SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA APRIL 16, 2002 Mayor Mars called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. with Council members Lehman, Sweeney, Link and Joos present. Also present: Mark McNeill, City Administrator, Judith S. Cox, City Clerk; Jim Thomson, City Attorney, R. Michael Leek, Community Development Director; Bruce Loney, Public Works Director; Gregg Voxland, Finance Director and Tracy Coenen, Assistant to the City Administrator. The pledge of allegiance was recited. The following items were added to the Agenda. 15.1 Application to Conduct Annual 2 -day Off -Site Gambling (Pull -Tabs) 15.F.10 Update on the Library bid opening. Four Council Concerns were added: These were: 1) The Mining Permit for Shakopee Gravel; 2) Heller Dry Wall CUP; 3) Annexation Draft Document and 4) Joint meeting with Planning Commission. Link/Joos moved to approve the Agenda as amended. Motion carried unanimously. Mayor Mars attended the Metropolitan Council Regional Task Force meeting on Affordable Housing. Mayor Mars stated finance people and contractors are trying to get a handle on how best to proceed with affordable housing. There is support for affordable housing by the 19 mayors that are on this task force. This task force needs to determine the best way to implement affordable housing into communities. Mayor Mars also noted that there was a deck seminar put on by the City of Shakopee. This seminar was very well attended and Mayor Mars commended City Staff for putting on this seminar. He also reminded the residents that April 27"` was Shakopee Clean -up day, Scott County clean -up day as well as park clean -up day. The following items were added to the Consent Agenda. 15.D.2 Traffic Control Signal Reimbursement with Southbridge Crossings. 15.F.1 Establishing New Precinct Boundaries, 15.F.7 Pass Through Purchase /Sale of MnDOT Parcel 55 and 151.9 Application to Conduct Annual 2 -day Off -Site Gambling (Pull- Tabs). Link/Joos moved to approve the Consent Agenda as modified. Motion carried unanimously. Link/Joos moved to approve the meeting minutes for March 12, 2002. (Motion carried under the Consent Agenda). Link/Joos moved to approve the bills in the amount of $640,511.59 plus $170,382.27 for refunds, returns and pass through for a total of $470,129.32. (Motion carried under the Consent Agenda). [The list of bills is posted on the bulletin board at City Hall for one month following approval]. Official Proceedings of the Shakopee City Council April 16, 2002 Page —2- Mayor Mars opened the public hearing on the proposed Vacation of an Easement located within the Plat of Shakopee Valley Marketplace West. Mr. Leek stated that this was a request for a vacation of an easement located within the Plat of Shakopee Valley Marketplace West. Mr. Leek oriented the property via an overhead. The reason for the vacation request is that the sanitary sewer line was relocated into Weston Court and therefore, the easement within the Plat of Shakopee Valley Marketplace West was no longer needed. If this easement is vacated there will be an impact on how the rest of the lots in the Plat of Shakopee Valley Marketplace West can be laid out. The Planning Commission did review this request for vacation and did recommend that the City Council recommend approval of the vacation of the easement located within the Plat of Shakopee Valley Marketplace West. Mayor Mars asked if there was anyone in the audience who wished to speak on the request. There was no response. Joos/Lehman moved to close the public hearing. Motion carried unanimously. Joos /Sweeney offered Resolution No. 5691, A Resolution Of The City of Shakopee Vacating An Easement Within Shakopee Valley Market Place West, City Of Shakopee, Scott County, Minnesota, and moved its adoption. Motion carried unanimously. Mayor Mars asked it there were any citizens present in the audience who wished to address any item not on the agenda. There was no response. Mayor Mars opened the public hearing on the application for a Currency Exchange License for GameCash, Inc. Ms. Cox reported that GameCash Inc. has made application for a currency exchange license at Canterbury Park. GameCash, Inc. if granted the license, will be replacing the current licensee, Chex Services, Inc. at Canterbury Park and will provide the service of cashing checks. The Police Department has advised Ms. Cox that they are not aware of any reason that the currency license should not be granted to GameCash, Inc. This is really just a transfer of service from one vendor to another. Deb Smith, 856 Minnesota Street, approached the podium and stated that GameCash, Inc. is a division of Travelers Express. GameCash, Inc stated that they would be doing check cashing, cash advances and ATM's. These same services are now provided by Chex Services. Lehman/Link moved to close the public hearing. Motion carried unanimously. Official Proceedings of the Shakopee City Council April 16, 2002 Page —3- Lehman/Link offered Resolution No. 5694, A Resolution Of The City Of Shakopee, Approving The Application of GameCash, Inc. For A Currency Exchange License at 1100 Canterbury Road, and moved its adoption. Motion carried unanimously. Tracy Coenen reported on the garbage and recycling pickup in the alley and street. Ms. Coenen stated that tonight she is looking for approval of a change in the garbage and recycling pickup. Dick's Sanitation and the City of Shakopee would like some of the alley pickups to become street pickups. She and several staff members have spoken to residents regarding the garbage pickup and based on those conversations /concems two additional criteria were determined to base the new garbage pickup proposal on. These criteria were: 1) If there is a steep hill or a retaining wall staff recommended that the garbage /recycling pickup remain in the alley and 2) If the street has less than two homes where the resident's only garage is in the alley, staff recommends the pickup will be in the alley. Ms. Coenen showed graphics depicting where garbage /recycling pickups are at this time. It was reported that curbside pickups are approximately 60% and the alley pickups are approximately 40 %. Dick's Sanitation would gain some operational efficiency's with having the curbside pickup versus alley pick and therefore, Dick's Sanitation would rebate back to the City an amount of $3,380 annually for the next three years following this year and the rebate from Dick's Sanitation would be pro -rated for this year and would be $1,690. Dick's Sanitation would install a free cardboard drop -off center at the Public Works facility. Rather than rebate this money back to the residents, with the administrative burdens to rebate this back individually, staff recommends that this rebate money be used toward the expenses of the annual clean day where all residents will benefit from the rebate. It Council concurs that these changes be implemented staff recommended that the changes go into effect as soon as MnDOT lifts the road restrictions on roads. The budget impact for the City falls under the Public Works Department. Public Works estimates that there will be a cost savings of around $13,000 annually because they will not have to grade some of the alleys as often. Because Ms. Coenen worked with the residents with follow -up phone calls, right now there is not much resistance to this proposal. Many of the residents who have alley pickup are requesting curbside pickup now. This proposal would allow much less duplication of services that Dick's Sanitation is now providing at residents requests. The City Attorney stated that it was his opinion that this was not a change in the contract. The contract was bid on a certain type of pickup and that pickup is being changed. Cost was not the only motivation involved for this proposed change, there was convenience to the residents to consider as well. It was noted there was a cost savings to the City through the Public Works Department. Official Proceedings of the April 16, 2002 Shakopee City Council Page —4- There was discussion on the services of Dick's Sanitation. Dave Domack, representing Dick's Sanitation, approached the podium and stated he appreciated all the help and work from City Staff on this issue. He addressed the valet service of Dick's Sanitation. The change in the refuse /recycling pickup in part was necessitated because of safety concerns. Dick's Sanitation would like to make this a fair situation for everyone. Joos /Sweeney moved to approve curbside refuse collection as proposed by staff on the map attached to the April 16, 2002, memo from Tracy Coenen, Assistant to the City Administrator. (CC Document No. 318) Cncl. Sweeney seconded with the possibility of amending the motion. Cncl. Sweeney would like it stated in the motion that this proposed area is not a final product. He felt there would be calls and some fine- tuning may need to be done. The motionmaker was open to accepting the friendly amendment by Cncl. Sweeney that curbside refuse collection as proposed by staff on the attached alley sheet is open to changes. City Attorney, Jim Thomson suggested that the motion have a time period. This was a second friendly amendment. Joos /Sweeney moved to approve curbside refuse collection as proposed by staff on the map attached to the April 16, 2002, memo from Tracy Coenen, Assistant to the City Administrator, for ninety days. (CC Document No. 318) Cncl. Joos felt this was a good compromise for the residents of Shakopee. Cncl. Sweeney concurred with Cncl. Joos. Cncl. Lehman was okay with a 90 -day trial period but after the 90 days he would like to see a list of the complaints so improvements to this plan can be addressed. Mayor Mars did not feel the numbers were compelling to make a change. Motion failed 3 -2 with Mayor Mars, Cncls. Link and Lehman voting in the negative. Ms. Coenen then asked for clarification. Under the contract with Dick's Sanitation there is to be alley and curbside pickup only. Ms. Coenen stated right now there is curbside pickup by Dick's Sanitation at the request of the alley residents [(alley /curbside) and curbside]. Right now some of the alley customers are receiving curbside pickup and some alley customers are receiving alley pickup resulting in Dick's Sanitation doing double work. Official Proceedings of the Shakopee City Council April 16, 2002 Page —5- Would the Council therefore like staff to look at a price increase for Dick's Sanitation so these residents can remain with this service or does Council what every garbage can back into the alley completely? Lehman/Sweeney moved to reconsider the motion to approve curbside refuse collection as proposed by staff on the attached alley sheet for ninety days. Motion carried 3 -2 with Mayor Mars and Cncl. Link dissenting. Sweeney /Joos moved to approve curbside refuse collection as proposed by staff on the map attached to the April 16, 2002, memo from Tracy Coenen, Assistant to the City Administrator, for ninety days. (CC Document No. 318) Motion carried 4 -1 with Cncl. Link dissenting. Cncl. Joos reported on the School Board meeting that he attended. The School Board is now grappling with getting the 2002/03 budget under control. There is approximately a $1 million budget shortfall. Cncl. Link stated that he was working the Fire Department on their remodeling of the Fire Hall. Mr. Leek, Community Development Director, reported on the amendment to the City Code regarding Planned Unit Development (PUD). Mr. Leek stated that when the PUD was updated in 1999 during the moratorium on building, the PUD was modified to be quite restrictive. Mr. Leek was recommending language changes to the Planned Unit Development amendment to make the amendment less restrictive and to create some flexibility within the amendment itself. As the amendment is now, a PUD development is a disincentive to a developer. Mr. Leek noted that no variances to the design standards of the underlying zoning requirements are allowed in the PUD approval process. Mr. Leek felt proposed PUD's with requested variations from the underlying design standards needed to be scrutinized by the variance criteria in the Zoning Code. This is really a disincentive to developers. Mr. Leek felt that within the next 1 -5 years many PUD's would come before the Council requesting flexibility so that the character of the site could be retained. There are two core revisions to the language in the Planned Unit Development amendment. These are: 1) Change to the language regarding the underlying zoning district in a PUD and 2) The deletion of specific variations. The design standards would either be the design standards found in the underlying zoning district or if the Council took specific action relating to a specific PUD then that site plan and the documents in that PUD would govern over the underlying zoning district regulations. The specific variations recommended by Mr. Leek to be deleted are: 55' right -of -way, 32'width streets and 10' front yard setback variances Mr. Leek noted a very minor change to the open space requirements. This was: the language change "that the open space proposed in the PUD exceeds the minimum required by this subdivision ". Official Proceedings of the April 16, 2002 Shakopee City Council Page —6- Mr. Leek would like the 15% open space requirement be changed to a higher percentage to be consistent with the proposed new revision. The Planning Commission has recommended approval of the text amendment to the PUD. If the City Council approves this text amendment the Planning Commission would like a joint workshop with the City Council so both bodies could discuss what the Council and Planning Commission would like to see for future PUD's in the City of Shakopee. Cncl. Link asked if the City was really trying to change the Shoreland Ordinance for one developer? Mr. Leek addressed this question and stated that this was not a proposal intended to make a change for just one developer. Mr. Leek stated this proposal does not propose to change the Shoreland Ordinance. Sweeney/Lehman moved to table the amendment to the City Code regarding Planned Unit Development until the next regular meeting May 7, 2002, of the City Council so the underlying zoning of the Shoreland Ordinance protection regarding this text amendment could be looked at. Motion carried 4 -1 with Cncl. Joos dissenting. Mayor Mars would like to have this joint workshop with the Planning Commission before the text amendment is finalized. Mr. McNeill stated this idea would be followed up on. Mr. Leek reported on the amendment to the City Code regarding minor subdivisions. Mr. Leek noted the reason behind this proposed amendment is that staff has encountered a number of problems in the use of the minor subdivision regulations to create new lots in the commercial business park or industrial setting. The current minor subdivision mechanism does not provide for much needed input on certain matters that is necessary so certainty of certain issues can be determined. Mr. Leek is recommending a language change that would still allow the use of the minor subdivision process to redraw a line in commercial and industrial settings or to combine lots but the minor subdivision would not be used to create new lots. The minor subdivision process would only be allowed to create new lots in the residential settings. There was a Planning Commission public hearing on the amendment to the City Code to the Minor Subdivision, Ordinance No. 625 and the Planning Commission did recommend approval of proposed Ordinance No. 625. Sweeney /loos offered Ordinance No 625, Fourth Series, An Ordinance Of The City of Shakopee, Minnesota, Amending Chapter 12.05 Minor Subdivisions, and moved its adoption. Motion carried unanimously. Link/Joos moved to authorize the Shakopee Fire Department to prepare plans and solicit bids /competitive quotations for repairs at Station 50 [2 Avenue station] with the funding for Official Proceedings of the April 16, 2002 Shakopee City Council Page —7- these repairs to come from the 2002 Capital Improvement Fund where $100,000 has been set aside for these repairs. (Motion carried under the Consent Agenda). Mayor Mars thanked Mr. Leek for all his efforts and hard work on getting this 1999 Comprehensive Plan where it is today. Mr. Leek reported on the 1999 Comprehensive Plan Update. Mr. Leek outlined three potential sets of action for the City Council tonight. 1) Adoption of the 1999 Comprehensive Plan Update. 2) Action on specific requests for re- guiding of land uses and/or extension of MUSA allocation and 3) Establish the area within the City that would have priority for the future allocation of the City's ten -year MUSA acreage allocation. Mr. Leek noted that the City is now in the process of doing a 2002 update to the Comprehensive Plan. Mr. Leek felt that no. 2 and no. 3 needed some additional time and discussion. Mr. Leek identified some of the specific requests for re- guiding of land uses and /or extension of MUSA allocation. Mr. Leek showed via an overhead the 1999 Comprehensive Plan and where MUSA expansion is possible. Mr. Leek noted this MUSA expansion does not include Jackson Township. The Metropolitan Council specifically noted that they were not approving MUSA for Jackson Township as part of this plan. If this property is annexed the Comprehensive Plan would need to be amended to include that land. Mr. Leek thought there would be a significant change in the amount of rural residential guiding between the 1999 Comprehensive Plan and the 2002 update to the Comprehensive Plan. Mr. Leek noted the Comprehensive Plan contains many different chapters that the City looks at frequently and there are many goals and policies contained in the document. Mayor Mars would like to see adoption of the 1999 Comprehensive Plan. He would like the Planning staff and the Engineering staff to generate a future footprint of where MUSA would be wanted /needed within the City from the City's perspective taking into consideration where this MUSA would make the most sense for an efficient way with the best use of the land. After this City blueprint is done then the City can get together with the individual landowners of the individual requests, as identified by Mr. Leek. Cncl. Sweeney would like to see cost figures along with sources for these costs for trunk sanitary and trunk storm sewer in the report that Mayor Mars has requested from the Planning and Engineering staffs regarding possible MUSA allocation. Mars /loos offered Resolution No. 5692, A Resolution Of The City of Shakopee, Minnesota, Approving The 1999 Comprehensive Plan Update, and moved its adoption. Motion carried unanimously. Official Proceedings of the April 16, 2002 Shakopee City Council Page —8- Sweeney /loos moved to direct staff to layout a blueprint in the most efficient manner including cost figures for where MUSA would be wanted/needed within the City from the City's perspective with the best use of the land. Motion carried unanimously. Cncl. Sweeney would like the land adjacent to the Shakopee Mdewakanton Sioux property to be looked at for possible MUSA extension because having MUSA in this area would be beneficial for the City and Cncl. Joos would like the Planning and Engineering staff to keep in mind the property that the School District has in Jackson Township for future MUSA expansion. City Council determined to leave the establishment of a primary MUSA expansion area until the Planning and the Engineering staff determined where the City would like see the MUSA- Mr. Leek reported on the Westridge Lake Estates Third Addition ISTS Plan. Mr. Leek stated this is the final stage of the Westridge Lake Estates development plan and this phase consists of about 13 acres with a proposed development of 13 houses. Mr. Leek did note that on October 16, 2001 the City Council did approve the final plat of the Westridge Lake Estates Third Addition with the condition that the final plat not be released for recording until Scott County approved the ISTS plan for that plat. The developer, Darrell Gonyea, has submitted two letters one dated December 19, 2001 to the City Council and one dated February 7, 2002 to Mr. Leek in which Mr. Gonyea states his lack of success getting approval for the ISTS for the Westridge Lake Estates Third Addition from Scott County. In the letters Mr. Gonyea asked the City of Shakopee to consider some alternatives to address the ISTS plan. The issue with this plat as Mr. Gonyea sees it is: His plat was approved under the City's ISTS Ordinance but Scott County is applying an ordinance that it revised in 1992. The City did not approve the same revision to its ISTS ordinance. In 1993 when the PUD and preliminary approval were given for Westridge Lake Estates it was under the City's ISTS ordinance, not the revised ordinance that Scott County had adopted. Mr. Gonyea would like a variance from the County and he would like the City of Shakopee to help him get this variance. He would also like the City of Shakopee to consider for purposes of approval of the ISTS plan for Westridge Lake Estates Third Addition and the initial building permits on those lots, the City retaking responsibility for the ISTS from the County. The changes in the ISTS ordinance seem to be that the County requires two sites on each lot for an ISTS with restrictions as to where this ISTS can be located on the lot and the County also has a size requirement on the ISTS. There is also some terminology change and these terminology changes no longer allow certain types of ISTS. The City did not have these requirements. The City is checking into all other rural residential plats to see if this problem will arise on any other plats. Official Proceedings of the April 16, 2002 Shakopee City Council Page —9- Jim Thomson, City Attorney, stated the legal issue in the case is: when the preliminary plat and the PUD plan for this development were approved the regulations were in the 1981 Ordinance No 78 ISTS plan. At that time the ISTS regulations did comply with the state regulations in 1993. When the final plats for the 1" and 2 nd additions for this development came through they were approved under the 1993 preliminary plat. In 1992 the County had amended its Ordinance, however this revision had not been incorporated by the City of Shakopee. Had the City kept their current ordinance in place and hadn't turned everything back to the County this third phase would have been reviewed just like the first two phases and the City would have allowed this subdivision under the 1981 ordinance because this was the ordinance in effect at the preliminary plat and this developer did get yearly extensions of that preliminary plat approval. The legal question is the ISTS regulations land use regulations. Mr. Thomson stated Land Use regulations cannot be changed between preliminary plat and final plat. Mr. Thomson stated that what the Council was requested to do tonight was to look at the possibility of an ordinance amendment in the City that would say when a plat was approved under the old regulations then those old regulations will be applied to all phases of that particular development. Joos /Sweeney moved to direct staff and the City Attorney to prepare an ordinance for consideration by the Council that would provide for the City to approve ISTS plans for preliminary plats (as well as initial building permits for lots within these plats) which were approved by the City under the 1981 ISTS regulations, but after the 1992 change in Scott County ISTS regulations. Cncl. Sweeney noted that the City Attorney recommended this action. This recommendation is in conflict with what staff recommended. Staff recommended that no further action relative to the final plat of Westridge Lake Estates Third Addition be taken. The approval of the PUD for Stonebrooke was discussed. Mr. Darrell Gonyea, developer of Westridge Lake Estates approached the podium and stated when Scott County decided to pass their 1992 Ordinance, they looked at the lots they had approved under the 1981 ordinance and Scott County put a paragraph into their 1992 Ordinance that said any lots approved before this date (1992) are under the 1981 ordinance. Motion carried unanimously. Link/Joos offered Resolution No. 5680, A Resolution Denying A Text Amendment to Section 11.22 Of The City Code Regarding Communication Towers, and moved its adoption. (Motion carried under the Consent Agenda). Official Proceedings of the April 16, 2002 Shakopee City Council Page —10- Link/Joos offered Resolution No 5696, A Resolution Authorizing The Execution Agreement No. 8314R- Traffic Control Signal Between MN/DOT, Scott County And The City Of Shakopee, and moved its adoption. (Motion carried under the Consent Agenda). Link/Joos moved to authorize the appropriate City officials to enter into an extension agreement with WSB & Associates for the design of a traffic control signal system at the intersection of Southbridge Parkway and Old Carriage Court North, and for an agreement to be entered into with the developer for the reimbursement for the design fees associated with this traffic control signal design. (Motion carried under the Consent Agenda). Link/Joos moved to approve the suspension of City Code Sec. 10.60, Noise Elimination and Noise Prevention, Subd. 3, Hourly Restrictions on Certain Operations, D, requested by S.M. Hentges & Sons, Inc. for hours of operation to be allowed from 6:00 a.m. to 9:00 p.m. Monday through Friday and 6:30 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. on Saturdays for Construction activities on CSAH 83 /CSAH16 improvement Project No. 2001 -4 and direct staff to publish notice of the suspension terms with the conditions as recommended by staff. (Motion carried under the Consent Agenda). Link/Joos moved to authorize staff to purchase from Sherwin Williams one Linelaser 111 5900 and one Line Driver for the price of $9,829.79 and also to purchase from Lano Equipment Inc. one Felling Trailer for the price of $1,728.68. The total cost of $11,558.47 to be expended from the Capital Equipment Fund. (Motion carried under the Consent Agenda). Link/Joos moved to authorize the appropriate City officials to execute the right -of -way agreement between U. S. Homes Corporation and the City of Shakopee for $40,000.00 regarding the right - of -way acquisition associated with the Valley View Road Improvement, Project No. 2001 -5. (Motion carried under the Consent Agenda). Link/Joos offered Resolution No. 5695, A Resolution Accepting Work On The 2000 Reconstruction Project 3r Avenue, From County Road 69 To Shumway Street; Harrison Street, From 6 Avenue to 3r Avenue; And Shumway Street, from 3 Avenue to 2nd Avenue, Project No. 2000 -4, and moved its adoption. (Motion carried under the Consent Agenda). Link/Joos moved to direct staff and the City Attorney to prepare an ordinance for consideration by the Council that would establish precincts within the City of Shakopee as outlined on Exhibit "B" to the memo dated April 12, 2002 from Judith S. Cox, City Clerk. (CC Document No. 319) (Motion carried under the Consent Agenda). Link/Joos offered Ordinance No. 627, Fourth Series, An Ordinance Of The City Of Shakopee, Minnesota, Establishing Fees For City Licenses, Permits, Services and Documents, and moved its adoption. (Motion carried under the Consent Agenda). Official Proceedings of the Shakopee City Council April 16, 2002 Page —11- Link/Joos offered Ordinance No. 628, Fourth Series, An Ordinance Of The City Of Shakopee, Minnesota, Increasing Membership On The Shakopee Public Utilities Commission From Three to Five, and moved its adoption. (Motion carried under the Consent Agenda). Link/Joos moved to set a hearing for Tuesday, May 21, 2002, at 7:00 p.m., or thereafter, to review the actions of the following alcohol licensees: Sabroso, Inc., 1120 East I" Avenue (3r violation), Tom Thumb Food Markets, Inc., 590 South Marschall Road (2n violation), Family Dining, Inc. (Budget Liquor), 6268 East Highway 101 (1" violation), Speedway Superamerica LLC, 1298 Vierling Drive East (1 violation), MGM Spirits Express, Inc. (MGM Liquor Warehouse), 471 Marschall Road (1' violation), AFFC, Inc. (Armes' Friendly Folks Club), 122 East I" Avenue (V violation), Bretbecca, Inc. (Pullman Club), 124 West I" Avenue (V violation) and TL Foods, LLC (Harwell's Steakhouse and Brewery), 1128 Vierling Drive East (V violation). (Motion carried under the Consent Agenda). Link/Joos moved to base residential sewer bills on water usage from October to April and to pursue adjusting for no/low usage months during that period. (Motion carried under the Consent Agenda). Link/Joos offered Resolution No 5693, A Resolution Amending The Small Cities Development Program Policies and Procedures, and moved its adoption. (Motion carried under the Consent Agenda). Link/Joos moved to execute a Quit Claim Deed for Parcel 55 between the Minnesota Department of Transportation and the City of Shakopee. (Motion carried under the Consent Agenda). Link/Joos moved to authorize the purchase agreement for the transfer of MnDOT Parcel 55 between the City of Shakopee and Town and County Development Corporation, Ltd. (Motion carried under the Consent Agenda). Mr. McNeill asked the Council to adopt a policy that would permit a change in the screening panel to interview candidates for Boards and Commission for the City of Shakopee. There has been a situation in which the interview panel, consisting of two Council members and the City Administrator, were unable to reach a unanimous decision on candidates. Mr. McNeill would like to see this interview panel permanently changed and to consist of two Council members with the third member to be appointed by the Mayor. This make -up would allow the City Administrator to remain A- political. There was discussion on the application process, application and the make -up of the interview committee. Mars /loos offered revised Resolution No. 5697, A Resolution Amending Resolution No. 2847 which Established Guidelines For Appointments To And Operations Of Boards and Official Proceedings of the Shakopee City Council April 16, 2002 Page —12- Commissions, and moved its adoption. Cncl. Joos offered a friendly amendment changing the word "Chair" of the Board/Commission to be the "Vice Chair" of the Board/Commission. Motion carried 3 -2 with Cncls. Sweeney and Lehman dissenting. There was discussion on having the interviews open to the public. Sweeney/Link moved to direct staff to bring forth a proposal regarding how the interview sessions for Board/Commission members should be open relative to the open meeting law. Motion carried unanimously. Link/Joos offered Resolution No. 5700, A Resolution Of The City of Shakopee, Minnesota Approving An Application From The Shakopee Lions Club To Conduct Annual Off -Site Gambling, and moved its adoption. (Motion carried under the Consent Agenda). Mr. McNeill reported on the opening of bids for the new Library. Mr. McNeill stated the architects estimated $4.57 million and the bids ranged from $3.47 million to $4.2 million. Mr. McNeill stated currently references are being look at for the three low bidders. There will be a recommendation at the Special Council Meeting, April 23, 2002. Mr. McNeill also stated there is a minimal amount of asbestos that will need to be dealt with at the New Library site and this asbestos may be able to be removed through standard demolition practices. The report on the ground water contamination will be coming next week but the ground water contamination does not appear to be a big problem either. W. McNeill will talk to the contractor about the Fire Department using the old library building for training purposes before it is demolished. It is anticipated that bids will go out June 4 for the new Police Station. There was discussion on the alternates that were bid. There was no action to delete any of the alternates. Mr. McNeill acknowledged all the hard work the Library Committee did to get this new library. Mayor Mars had a Council concern regarding Shakopee Gravel and their Conditional Use Permit (CUP). He would like to see a simple report from staff stating whether the CUP conditions are being met and he would also like to see the new soil boring information regarding the ground water. Joos /Sweeney directed staff to compile a simple report stating whether Shakopee Gravel, Inc. was complying with their conditions in the their CUP and to share the new soil borings information with the City Council relating to the ground water in the Shakopee Gravel mine. Cncl. Joos would like this information shared with the Board of Adjustments and Appeals also. Official Proceedings of the Shakopee City Council April 16, 2002 Page —13- Cncl. Sweeney noted the City had not been following through on the annual reviews on the CUP of Shakopee Gravel, Inc. Motion carried unanimously. Mayor Mars had a Council concern regarding Heller Dry Wall and the conditions in the CUP. He would like to see a follow -up on the hours of operation in the near future. He wanted the conditions in the CUP made known to the business operator again. Mr. Leek noted his staff is following -up on this issue. Mayor Mars would like each Council member to read the draft annexation agreement with Jackson Township and each member to give Mr. Leek his comments. Mayor Mars slightly discussed the joint meeting with the Planning Commission. A date was set for May 14, 2002 at 4:30 p.m. for the joint session. Link/Lehman moved to adjourn to Tuesday, April 23, 2002, at 4:30 p.m. Motion carried unanimously. The meeting adjourned at 9:42 p.m. Judith S. Cox City Clerk Carole Hedlund Recording Secretary CITY OF S AOEE Memoraiidacm TO: Mayor and Council Mark McNeill, City Administrator FROM: Gregg Voxland, Finance director RE: City Bill List -:!4# U CO N SE DATE: May 16, 2002 Introduction and Background Attached is a print out showing the division budget status for 2002 based on data entered as of 5/16/2002. 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 $45,568.85. The actual net expense amount is $1,129,543.79. Action Requested Move to approve the bills in the amount of $1,175,112.64. cz N Cl m m m C4 to Q. r O O M CD m I� M CD O m m to W M m O m m i to n to R m m m m N O M 4� I N' N m m n I- co p- m r- ti m r m co m- m: - co co co _ t6 co m Q Q I Q I m N 6 N 4 to - - N 1l 6 m 6 m OM M D. N M N N M N N M N M M N M N N D. ; x c x o x W i W w m O m m N O m N N t� � m O CD c� M to Q1 r m m N O N i N O O M f- m M N 01 m I- r- V m m to m O m! m 1� to M r 1�. m m C m V co � It Cl) � m V r V m O r.- CD V r 7 O to r to ' V M M m m O! O N V 7 O) O m to 7 CO O a O O O 1 O N D O O m r M M N to N to N M O O m m M Lo d' O CD r m O to M m to m M! M O CQ N t` Cp N m I O m I m m I I N i� O m N N m O W O M Cl) N to m V' C m O co N N M M i D1 ; l- I I M M ^ I DJ O Ol W T C m Q N CO O I-- m m m M N m N m 4] t� m O a M Cl) to to : m 1� N CM'S CMj C M Cq W D_ d N m O m 'v to ci O ui r pl M M co O m m r- m r- v to i tD o O O n: of a O O of ; cli m M 1 M p p w E p N I� W m v m -a m o CD r- m tD o ! p o o p o I to to I a U } r r r r O N r N N r O M F N } U M cc m m t6 m Q N O l co o a- M j LL a) J O I to N cD V (D r to t( O I- M M' U -p M to I.- to N of w to m M O R m m ml m Q V O O I I C o L N m M cc f'- t-j O N CD W to M 1� M M c O C V cl C' V N r M N to �q to r M V V m N cc I m a- N D] m R N T M cii N CO O O 1 of r c C O( O W N r O N N N r r O I o 5 o N 3 U I U U 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 R 0 R 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o O o 0 0 0 o 0 O o 0 o o 0 O o O 0 o N m to r O O 1� er O to O O) N O r m IZ{ M N M N- 7 m m cl O cc co R ccl er r cc cc m l m m CD O m to to V m tD to m m M m M r� M' M O O O N N f- N to m N m to cD m D1 m j m O O m co m m ml tin Cl) m C' Io M O N O m to O r c0 M cc O ? m C 'a = 7o C Q COI I 3 Q m C Q m I U I I Z p O J F- I- w m C7 m o o a' Z W F W _o a O CL _ m p O O z a Z W J -a U Z Z ro :a m p U F J > C7 z z p a p j 0 t O t Of C, p LL D Q> 1z Z i p I o a 0 o u m C7 Z w p� LU 0 < z c � w O z Q< i in ~ m w w O 3 W p Q U z J W Z W Z I Q Q O w U CL LL a C7 }~ Z w p Z O= Q Z O I w a ° i O t u ? o ° U a U U J U C7 o w m d O 'r LO x O N M to CD t: m N M N 7 m O N r N n tf) r Lo K W r r .-- .-- r �- r M M M d- V V t D] cD - O O O ^ O Q rr )n d W 2 w N M O) Of _ Y U U) m LL U O - U F � U Cj O O O O N N J 0 w Y U N O w ❑ U Z 0 O w LL F Y z U W z F W O > O w z J n ❑ a U U 0 D I J J w - O M I.- ¢ c m Z d m a C of U w ❑ w w W w C) z m mmmz O LL O O O O LL LL LL LL U- Y Z Y Y Y Y Z Z Z Z Z Z F Z w ~ F F F-- w n 0 n Z z z z w w z w z z w z w m w z z m z m z z z z z z z z z z z z z J J n J Z) :) J m J ❑ J D d n ❑ D ❑ n❑ 4. D :3 Z Z Z p Z) =) 7 p p Z) :) U U u- U U- L- U LL U p U L- � LL O u- 0 0 0 2 LL LL O O O LL w LL w LL LL w LL LL O w J J - j J -F -j J -j J d' J J J J Y J J F F F-- Q J J Q J J Q J J Q J J F- J J O O H O O w O w O ly Q Z w w w w Q W� w w w K K K K 2 0 w m w W z w w m W of 2 m W w� w 2 g g w wJ= m w w W w w w w m w Of w } } Z} Z Z} Z} } Z LL Z z d z z U U U z z z z z z z U z U z ¢ a w¢ w W a w¢ 3 a w¢ w� w 3�� a w W w W w w w w w w w w m w w w CL m(D a. (D O a 0 m U a 0 0 0 U a m U U U O 0 =rr- of 0 0 0 O 0 0 0 w O m 0 W w w (- W W W W W W w w W F F F Z F F F F F F F F F U U U O U w U U CO U U U U U } } } } J } } } } } } } } U U U ¢ U m U U U U U U U U W W w U J LU W r W w U W J W W w W w J J J Z m J a J J Z J m J J J J J c m m m w ¢ m a m m O m a to m m m m O ¢¢ a 4_ r¢ W¢ a a r¢ ¢ a a¢ w r r r 2 a r O r r F r a r r r r r .a;J a a a O w m a Z a¢ U¢ a¢ w a a m m LL m U J U n. m m- m .0 W J LL d d D- 0 U U n m w U w U U° U w U m U U U U °! w Z Z Z Z r 0 Z W Z Z° Z p Z >¢" Z F-- Z Z O O O w W D O a 0 0 w 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 U. w U U U W �- Z U m U U F U Z U �- U U U U a!a ¢ a a❑ a a¢ a❑ a a a a a p U U U W F i W W z O F Z m 0 2 m z F U w Y r z 0 Z Z a z 0 m d w p F w Q w d F U a U F [if N LL LL U « R' O O a z W F z O 0 z j z w w W 2 m z a w U ~ w �_ W F J U F J LL' 00 LLL LI F ¢ O x F F O w U O m F� LL o p 0 0 . U U W w 2' } W O U= H w Z W W U2' F H m a_ a¢ m a w z U U F a x H 0 0 0 Q OLL = U ¢ 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Z z m W 0 w w w w w w w Z w z W L) O O O of ¢ U cd ¢ 0 r r r r r r r m d d a a n. m a s W O U ¢ w w o m m m m m m m ¢ ¢ of r } te r r r r > > > > m a m m m a a F F F D D n D D D D ¢ a a ¢ a a ¢ 0 w = J U LLI wm r � U 2 O of F ? Q d� S Q W F CJ O ❑ W Z O Wa Z � z 2 > Q w -j m w EE ,s C/) w C/) m CS c ¢ ¢ w w w w w w w cc U Z U Z w Z Z w z W L) O O O of ¢ U cd ¢ 0 a a a a a m d d a a n. m a s W O U ¢ w w o Q d o of ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ of > > > > > > > cc U Z U Z w Z Z w z W L) O O O of ¢ U cd ¢ 0 ¢ = U n p 0 Z ¢ Z m LL O = o C7 0 O U w U W O U ¢ w w o Q d o of ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ of 2 �E 2 2 F F F F U U U U r r r r U � CA cn W w w W a a a d F F Z Z z Z D = = = O O O O U U U U a ¢ a a W U > z 1 U w L m O O W 0 ¢ U 0 Z W 2 z w Z O z a a z ¢ a w w w ¢ U F W m m m m y m m O Q O cn N © m M O N O O O M O o m N O m r m M O O o CO O M O O O N lfl c m o o co o m o Q M m m o v o 0 0 0 0 U o u. orn Lq L n o m .- o m 0 0 r- o O O m M o O m m N O m m O M m o UJ N N O m Lo O Q O Q m Q O m m o m O O O O m Q o m m N Q o o m o M m a m r O O M r m M M O O m m m M O m m O N m m O m 4J E m m r- m N Q O m m N M N m M O M M m O N Q O LD c0 LO Q M r r Y. Q m 0 m m O N M Q m r m m O N M Q m m w m m O N M Q m m m m m O N M Q U. rD m o m m r` n o o o c o o o 0 m m 0 m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m O o 0 0 0 0 o O o O O O c 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 M M M �- M M M N O to V O N � O N Z O co Lo d W N W n CL O ¢ U = m CD L LL O V U ~ O U U ❑ M O T C O r O Cl Z O cq N pp O O] N M O O N N Z) N O Cl N N LO O O M O O Q LL to O O t co ~ 1� N N 1 In � W O N 01 V I� M fD t� O N O 1 c ui r t0 r- O ol m m In N f O 0:1 l C N t _ O O N M h O] M N M M z N O { E . p (D w w ❑ ❑ M to ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ LL p ❑ ❑ p ❑ O p ❑ p ❑ ❑ ❑ p ❑ O ❑ O ❑ p ❑ ❑ ❑ LL O ❑ ❑ 2 ❑ Z LL ❑ Z z Z ❑ Z ❑ ❑ LL p Z O Z Z Z Z Z z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z j = Z Z Z z Z D Z z 7 Z Z it d z z >> 0 p D 0 7>> D D Z O LL LL O LL LL OQQ LL LL LL LL O LL LL LL C LL LL _ LL O LL O LL LL LL LL LL LL U- LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL 0 y W= Q LL 2 w w 2 LL' 2' CL K 2� W R R' W O O W O ? ❑ W Q �' LL' W W Q' 2 W == W W w= w fY w W w W W w w W W W W W 2 Z Z U Z Z Z Z U Z Z Z I W y Z W Z Z p. U Z U Z Z z Z Z z Z Z z Z Z Z z Z w Z W Z W U W Z W Z U W W U Ul W W U U) W W W W W W W W W N W W W W Q W W W W W W W W W W W w w W W W O C7 (7 (7 (7 w W (7 0 w w C7 C7 C7 (7 Of C7 (7 U O m • C7 W 0 w W m O N M V t17 co U M O lf] w n co O O W W w W w w W W W 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 ` r r r' N N r N N N N i+� c+) c+� c%� c%) c` i+� M M M M n M n L i+� i+) i+� c� c� c%� co c+� n � � � � � � � r � c+� co U) co U) U) J U) U) U) U) U) U) U) N U) co U) U) U) U) w U) U) in U) UJ J U) U U) (D co U) U) to V) U) U) co U) 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 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 a¢¢¢ m m m w W¢¢ m m a¢¢¢¢ � m m m m m m Q Q Q¢ Q Q ¢¢¢ w a a¢ Q Q Q a a Q Q a a a a a r r r r r r r r r r r r r r w¢¢ a a c a¢ a a a a Q a a a w¢ a a r a�¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ a a a ¢ a ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ a LL a LL a LL a a a a LL LL 2 LL LL fL ,ia a LL LL a LL LL LL a a LL LL m a m s 1L a a LL a a N N F FU- hU)- F h F I I-- F FU- F F z z z F F F F F FN- xx F D D 0 0 z 0 z 0 z 0 z 0 z 0 0 0 7 0 0 p: � D� 0 n n D D x n Q>> Q n D>> D m n n D D D 0 0 0 0 0 QU 0 0 0 0 0 �I n 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 U U U U U U w U U w U U U U U U U U U U U o U U U U 0 o U U o m U U U U U o:U U U U U U U U U o U m U U m o 0 0 0 0 o U o 0 0 0 o U o 0 a 0 a¢ a a¢¢ a a¢ Q a $�UU U o o U U Q a a a¢¢¢ a a a a Q Q¢ a a Q a a Q W a!Q Q¢ a a Q z U Z U Z F U W U) W z U U W U) W r z 0 U) w Z z Z (9 1t U Z a U z w = U' m F ? K N J w 0 _ 0❑ Z O Z F U w 2 ,� Q¢ F- F- O U =? O = U() z Z U` r W O Q 4 w W Q U g U J d W O W p z E IL W O? U- =) 2 0 Z LL W p� Q k Z 0 z F W W U) O Q � U m U CL p C U 2 U-j WU` WW 5 L� F; ¢ `t Z O CO i C a J U} F - o U LL= w Q z¢ I U Z 2 LL= Z Q cd Z => mQ¢ w m 0 J Q LL 2 Z U w-i W O Z U of Z U W o W w c W W U p o O Z (D Y Q w Y d W m O m 2 OU F z w o z W m x z¢ o O m Z z J w w 0 0 0 w o F > >_ w 0 0 a a 0 o= z g o oo D r a a w W LL > 0 0 0 O = x 0 ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ W LL LL LL LL LL LL a i m m m m m m m U 0000300 M O T C O r O Cl O O O cq N pp O O] N M O O N N O N O Cl N N LO O O M O O Q to O O t co ~ 1� N N 1 In � W O N 01 V I� M fD t� O N O 1 c ui m t0 r- O ol m m In N f O 0:1 l C N t _ O O N M h O] M N M M N O { E . M (D I� m M to O Q O N OD r- r " O N N 0 O J O W m O N M V t17 co U M O lf] (D n co O O N M 7 to (O N N N M M M M m M M M M M M M M M M Y (O O O O f� O co O 01 0 O N ` r r r' N N N N N N N i+� c+) c+� c%� c%) c` i+� M M M M n M n L i+� i+) i+� c� c� c%� co c+� n � � � � � � � r � c+� O) M J z m N LO a W C w N a rn Y i C C LL U O - U F O U U O O O N N .r� D J N O c`] 0 0 z 0 0 0 0 Z) z z LL n n o D o 0- o o o o a 0 0 :) ❑? 0 n n n n o n o 0 o 0 0 o 0 o 0 n Cl c6 a 0 0 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 =) W Z) Z y m m D n D p p D z D z _D D Q D n D= Q D Q D n ¢ D m D a D Q D d D n D D D Z) w Q Q? Q Q Z Q Q Q Q Q Q Q J Q Q Q Q Q g rt w w w w m Q ) I w w w w a o w w m w w w w w w w a w a w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w a w w w z z Z U J z Z❑ Z Z z z Z z z U Z U Z Z z Z z Z Z z z z Z z z Z Z Z Z Z 7 z z Z j W W O W w ❑ w w U'' 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 0 w W w m U' 0 LL C7 a m O O W O 0 U` U` 0 0 0= U` cf U O O 0 0 0 U` 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0,0 W 0 0 0 2 2 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 y W W w W W W W W W y y W 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 F F 0 F F F F F F- F F F Un Un F- U (n U U U) (n U) Un U Un U) Un U) Un CO (0 U) Un U) Co U) U) C/) U (1) (n CD to U (/J U) to CD U) Un U) co } } } } } } } } } } } } } } } } } } } } } } } } } } } } } } } } } } } } } CA (n (O In (n (A Un Cn Cn (n (n (/J Cn (n (A UQ In CA (n Cn (n Un (n Un (/] (!J (A J CA ❑ (1J (n (A (n fA U!J Un J J (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 co W W W w W W W W W < Q W 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 W W m ol¢ a ¢ ¢ a ¢ a ¢ ¢ a ¢ a ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ a ¢ ¢ a ¢ ¢ ¢ a w a a ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ a ¢ W w ¢ } } } } y } } } } U } } >- >- >- >- } } y U U } a >- >- y )- >- >- >- >- >- >- )- >- >- >- >- >- >- >- ;¢ a a a¢ a a¢ a¢ a¢¢ a¢ a a¢ a a a a¢ a a a¢ w a¢¢¢ a a a a¢ w w¢ Ala a m m m m m a a a- a m m a m m m a a a a a a m m m m a m m m m m m m m m I a m C 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 F F F F F F F F F F F F F F- F 0 i 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 � O O F 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 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 U U U U U U U U U U U u� U U m 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 ¢!a ¢ n a a¢¢ a s a¢¢ a¢ a a a a a¢¢ a¢ a¢ a¢¢¢ a a a¢ a¢¢ a¢ a a U a z Z) O O O w U J C9 z O ❑ O U) O t 0 a = U ¢ w O w `o . U O U Of a m z O w >l O a z z CD W n ma. Z J Z W Z = Y w U w U C) cr J CO 2 ? rn Z w U> } w O (D CD F W O O ¢ W w a' ¢ a' U z F LLJ F_ ¢ O W Q O w W W F w a ' W a . U d W Z } Y W a O w F ¢ a z 0 U) nw o' Z y w U) � 2 J ¢ U ❑ Z Z Z F Z� O J ¢ O Y Z Y U w m o o w w w D of 0 y a w w z z Y Y Y Y 1".L Y J J J :3 - U m a O it o z w 0 U LU O U F r Y U w w U ❑ U Z z¢ F w�F a CL m w W o Z F F¢- F- U O 0 Ow (r u) J Z (n M O W F z z o U> w of z w ug ¢ Q O u of W¢< 0 0 0 - w 0 O J O w¢ OY Z U U j U U OF w m Co co w Y F F J Q U U U W w w Z Z Z Z 0 0 D L�.t W�: w 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 z z O m N N O � O N O 7 N O O N O N O m m O O O r O O m 0 O m O O r C' r O O O O O) O r N r O N O N N O N O O (O T m O r O O m =' 6 6 o m m w o r r o o r m O ri N D) O o o r o �i m m o u) ui o N C. O O C' N m W M CO N O m M r Cp N r m N O O O r m (O r lO r N E co O N r N r r N O N O N u7 Lo r N M [O ¢ r r N m ! V r co r �- O O O V O O O O M O O O r O r C) m O O 7 cq O) of o o Ur w m of v r m 0 O M W 0 M m { Lo M C 7 r � N CD W CY U # r m CO r m m O N M C uJ (D r m Q) O N M V [O r m (A O N M V u) m r N �. to io uJ t2 ,2 !o u) m uJ m m c0 [O L 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 co M M M M U 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 r r r r r m N , O � � !D A Lo LL w m w y o = U ° LL O U U F 'o U U N cD Lo O M F ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ U p ❑ ❑ ❑ j ❑ ❑ z Z Z Z LLI Z z Z LL z LL Z z LL ❑ ❑ LL ❑ ❑ ❑ LL ❑ ❑ ❑ LL p O LL ❑ ❑ LL LL ❑ ❑ u j 00000 F ❑ ❑ cn ❑ ❑ LL ❑ ❑ LL ❑ 2 Z Z Z Z Z Z Z z Z LL ❑ Z Z z z n❑__ °___ ❑❑ z p z ❑ 7 z p❑ Z❑ C O LL LL O LL LL LL O LL LL LL O LL !1 z LL LL O O LL z LL F' z LL LL LL LL LL O LL LL F LL LL O LL LL O LL F J J �-- J J J F J J J �- LL co 0 LL J J i- F - J LL ¢ J ¢ W LL aaJ J Q J Q J QJ aaF J W J J Q F Q -JJ J F- JQQ m w w x w w Q' 2' w C' K w w 0 U Z 2 w x w w K K K K R' W O ¢ llJ 2 W K of w w of w w w x w w w w� ❑ w w w= x w tr w w w w w w w w w LL w w of w w w w U Z Z U Z Z Z U Z Z Z U U -� 0 Z Z U U Z 0 Z Q 0 Z Z Z z Z U z U Z z U Z Z U Z m' w 0 w C7 C w C C w w U m 0 0 c of � w0 0 0 0 0 0 0 c w O 0 0 w 0 0 w 0 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 w w w 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 U F F F F F F U F F F F F F > r ° ° m ° ° m ° m > m ° fn ° cn ° 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 r r r r r r r r} r co lf) U U (p fn U l/] U U fA N fn co U U y N to co U O fn y U y J U U❑ U co co J In f0 fA co U U 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 L i a u) w w w W w CD m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m w m m m m m m m m m m m m o¢ a¢ a a r ¢ a r a¢ a a¢ a¢ a a¢ a ¢ a a¢ a¢ a w a a a a¢ a w a¢¢ a¢¢ r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r} >- r r r r o r r r r r r U r r r r r r a¢ a a a¢ a a¢¢ a¢ a¢ a a a a ¢ a¢¢ a¢¢ w¢ a a¢¢ a w a¢ a a a a a LL a n. a a. a s n. a CL a CL a a a n. a a a a a a CL a LL a a d CL LL x a. LL CL a CL a m co U U U to In U U U U U U U U U U U) co fn U U U co U U cn (n CD co N fn U U co a) fn y Cn N 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 F F F F F F F F F F F F F F ° Z Z Z Z X Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z z Z z X 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 F 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 U U U U w U U U U U U U U U U U U U U w U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U v U U U U fA 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 a¢ a¢ a a a a a a a a a a¢ a a a a¢¢ a a a¢¢ a a¢¢¢ a a a C) w U Z � O > U LLI c U U w U Cl) Z J 1 z F F-'_ n } Z z 0 U J w U U z H Z U) U) W LL z U QQ p w J Z❑ O O F p w° U Q fn ❑ Of O} r F J ca Z K (� O> J z Q w m O Z Z ❑ Z w❑ LL w U g LLJ a z U w w o CD 0 0 U F m o w z 0 U a� J W> 0 0 O Z� 2 0 F{-. W 0 Q =¢ Z F� F z W LL LL w w w ~ 0 0 w o O O¢ w w w w 3 F w z a m O i x U- 0 z�)- ai LL : w ❑ O Z F F W W ¢ ° z U U O U F a m CL m z z F Z � w LL' O F 0 w N O a a ❑ CO Z w O O O U O J a w o w o w z H Z O z� U)i fn ¢¢ F x Q fq i F F- a 2 a ¢❑ FF ° - CO i Fyj w❑ z F w_ - 'o W W w F fn w Q fn g x O O O LL a¢ a w w Z 0 fn F a z Z F> >>¢ CL F- w x w x O K z U w w W 2 O r 0 0 0 U t11 x S 2 x x ❑ U CO co U U U U U F F F F F F O > I a O O O O K 2 K K CL LL' O oq v O n M o 0 0 o O O d o M c0 O o C O n n W N O n o O c0 n n o V C r O O O O m n N 1� In o r c7 o O O o O o (D w r O O O Q co M On r O M O n O N M O cD U) c0 O o O N O O o CO N O c? N O !n r N cD Lo O Ln N r O O lD O V o r O N �- M (A co M Cn 01 cU O r CD M Q) M n C N n N O O M V O C N C O r N O N Q r M tD O M R' O N N Cl) U') V to co cD Ol r .�-- O r M r O r > E; O ¢! O m r N co r CD N O N O LL7 O N O N n N O O J O w cc U n N O O N Co M V' � O n c] O O N Cl) M V cD n CO - O N N N N M N R N O N O N n N Co N u) Y O Ln U, O CD m O CD N O co M 01 v m UI ED (A O O W (P O N O O N N O N O N O N O O O N N . O . N N N N N N M N M N M _ N N N M M M N M N M N M N M N M N M N M N M a) r r r M n M n M n M n M n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n CD LO V � 7 O O rT D rn d w d W m IL O � Y 1 cJ LL U O - U F 0 U 0 U O u� 0 ch in w w w w U U U U ry- z Of Q� O O O O LL LL LL LL Y Y Y Y Z U C7 Z CJ C7 LL ❑ ❑ ❑ D ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ Z ❑ LL ❑ m 6 ❑ O Z Z Z Z Z Z z 0' Z M Z� Z Z z Z z > > ❑ Z ❑ 5 ❑ zz ❑ 5 ❑ — 5 LL J J c t U- LL O LL LL LL LL J LL J � F- w J = W J J N Q F- Q F- ¢ a Of w w w w w 2 a� C2 2 w w w Er W W w w of g W w n- w w y z z Z U z z Z z p z U z z z m W W W W >- W W W w W W W W W W w W >- W W w w �-" m F- F- F- F- F- F- F- F- F- {n F- F- F- F- U m Co m m m rn m m m m Co Cl) m m CO m m o m rn m rn rn U m m 1? m m m- m m m m W Q w W w w W W W w W W w w Q W w w w 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 p Q w Q ¢ ¢ Q Q Q ¢ Q Q Q a a W ¢ Q ¢ Q } U } } >. } >- } >. >- } } )- } U >- >- } > n a m m m a a m ¢ a m a m a (L cr m m a m N m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m [n m m 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 U U U U U U U U U U U U O U U U U U U Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q a Q a¢� Q Q U O w U LL :D IL U v > z LL LL LL LL I- w Z U (j) (/) r � Z O n w Z F Y} z w - LL . O m a, J m w J z p O Z x m W¢ w x m U O U z ❑ m a Q LLI 0 z } i m z Q m x 0¢ J O a = U U } _ ¢-j O � g Q� m w w O Q Of cr o w¢ Z 0 F r > O a ~ o U OU a z ai ~ n Y m w =� w Z U m X O 0 a m m w w w U n O a¢ Q� w a z W U U x w > } N C) (D x? z w 0 0 > 0 0 F- v C R co m O O O Lo r - c0 O O O t` O O O N r- M V C I co M N L C' u� O W C O O oD C' C' O C' c0 N M CD O N l r O O r N r- r` O N r- C' C' (O N o ) C' O m w co � O LO N M r M r - lIJ N M m M O ¢ r O C' r r r N N U D J U W K Lo Y Q7 O N co V En O r- M O O r N co C' U� O r U N M M M M M M M M M M V C' C' N N N N LL. L N N N N N N M N M N N M M N co N M N M N M N M N Cl) M co M M M 0 r M n M r Cl) n co r- r r r r r- r r , r r �- r r- r CO N O C' O N � O � O 6 LO LL w O_ d E c° O �'n O U c o U o U C C) O N O � N O C O O) O CI O C j E to I- O W a2 m N O to m O O O N "r 7 O I� a O O O N N 7 c0 O Lo N LLJ N ` r-- tq T T O tf! T ❑ W 1 m O ~ o K CL ❑ u LL F ❑ S ❑ W Z W ❑ Z D LL ❑ Z �¢' O CD ❑ W O W' 2 O LL (� LL ❑ H D W= d> m Z Z Z t!j ❑ 7 C7 O J LL J F W W J O d c� Z) �' 7 LL O �- Z w U � O ~ u- w LL w ¢ d ? W ° g Y F W ❑ W w O Q¢ rn w w = U' 5 3. u y c U' LL LL U 0 0 0= W [D (n W Q O O o N 0 N N N v o to O 0 O Cl O 0 O 0_ In N O C In E o O N O O 7 a m O V O c h t I- o7 O m O m U O O a O O O O O a a O O a a O a O 0 O Memorandum TO: Mayor and City Council Mark McNeill, City Administrator FROM: Judith S. Cox, City Clerk u 1 SUBJECT: Hearings on Alleged Liquor Violations DATE: May 14, 2002 City Council has set May 21, 2002, to hear the alleged violations of liquor licensees who sold alcohol to minors during a compliance check on November 11, 2001. BACKGROUND: City Council will want to follow the procedure for conducting the hearings as outlined in the attached memo from the City Attorney. On March 6, 2002, City Council adopted presumptive penalties for the sale of alcohol to minors. The ordinance adopted also allows the City Administrator to impose the presumptive penalties for a first or second incident upon an admission by the licensee that the licensee furnished or sold an alcoholic beverage to a minor. Three licensees have admitted to the violation and have signed the "Waiver and Admission of Violation": M.G.M. Spirits Express, Inc., Speedway Superamerica LLC, and Family Dining, Inc., dba Budget Liquor. The manager, Mr. Michael Maglich, of M.G.M. Spirits Express, Inc. also desires to address the City Council on May 21, 2002. Conduct hearings according to the procedure outlined by the City Attorney in attached memo. 2. Recognize Mr. Michael Maglich, Manager of M.G.M. Spirits Express, Inc. Although Mr. Maglich has admitted to the violation, he would like to address the City Council. over Hearings on Alleged Liquor Violations May 14, 2002 Page 2 3. Acknowledge receipt of the "Waiver and Admission of Violation" from M.G.M. Spirits Express, Inc., 471 Marschall Road, for the sale of alcohol to a minor and impose a presumptive penalty for the first violation in the amount of $1,000 and a suspension of the license for one day, June 3, 2002. 4. Acknowledge receipt of the "Waiver and Admission of Violation" from Speedway Superamerica LLC, 1298 Vierling Drive East, for the sale of alcohol to a minor and impose a presumptive penalty for the first violation in the amount of $1,000 and a suspension of the license for one day, June 3, 2002. 5. Acknowledge receipt of the "Waiver and Admission of Violation" from Family Dining, Inc. dba Budget Liquor, 6268 East Highway 101, for the sale of alcohol to a minor and impose a presumptive penalty for the first violation in the amount of $1,000 and a suspension of the license for one day, June 3, 2002. I:\ clerk\liquor \alcoholhearing5 -21 -02 TO: Mayor and City Council, City of Shakopee, Minnesota FROM: Jim Thomson, City Attorney DATE: May 16, 2002 Liquor License Hearings Notices have been sent to eight liquor licensees concerning alleged violations of selling alcoholic products to persons under the age of 21. These notices informed the licensees that the City Council will consider this issue at its May 21, 2002 meeting. The violations all occurred on November 11, 2001. Notices were sent to the following licensees: Third Violation Within Three Years — Sabroso, Inc., 1120 East 1st Avenue The presumptive penalty for a third violation within three years is a $2,000 fine and a ten -day license suspension. Second Violation Within Three Years — Tom Thumb Food Markets, Inc., 590 Marschall Road The presumptive penalty for a second violation within three years is a $1,500 fine and a five -day license suspension. First Violation Within Three Years — Family Dining, Inc., dba Budget Liquor, 6268 East Highway 101 Speedway Superamerica LLC, 1298 Vierling Drive East MGM Spirits Express, Inc., dba MGM Liquor Warehouse, 471 Marschall Road AFFC, Inc., dba Arnies' Friendly Folks Club, 122 East First Avenue Bretbecca, Inc., dba Pullman Club, 124 West 1st Avenue TL Foods, LLC, dba Harwell's Steakhouse and Brewery The presumptive penalty for a first violation within three years is a $1,000 fine and a one- day license suspension. Under the new ordinance adopted by the City Council on March 6, 2002, the presumptive penalties for a first or second incident can be imposed and administered by the City Administrator upon an admission by the licensee that the licensee furnished or sold an alcoholic beverage to a minor. Any licensee with a first or second violation within a three -year period who admits to the violation will not need to appear before the City Council. JJT- 214641v1 SH155 -23 The licensee with the alleged third violation and any licensees with an alleged first or second violation who have not previously admitted to the violation will be provided with the opportunity at the May 21, 2002 meeting to either admit the violation or deny the violation. If they admit the violation, there is no need for a further hearing. If, however, a licensee denies the violation, a hearing before an independent hearing officer will need to be scheduled if the City Council is considering suspension or revocation of the license. My recommendation as to how to proceed is as follows: I will give a brief summary of the background and purpose for the agenda item. 2. The Mayor would then call each of the cases where the licensee has not admitted the violation and where the licensee is charged with a third violation. Those licensees will have an opportunity to admit or deny the violation and to give any extenuating circumstances they feel are relevant. If the licensee admits the violation, the City Council can impose the penalty immediately. If the licensee denies the violation, we will need to schedule a hearing before an independent hearing officer, unless the Council is not considering a suspension of the license. I will be available at the council meeting to answer any questions. JJT- 214641v1 SH155 -23 PAS.' �,) `/C t � 0 . i I admit that an unauthorized sale of alcoholic products to a person under the age of 21 occurred at my business, TL Foods, LLC, dba Harwell's Steakhouse and Brewery, on November 11, 2001. I acknowledge that this violation is the first one at this location. I understand that I will be fined $1,000 for this violation and that my license will be suspended for one day, beginning at 12:01 a.m. on June 3, 2002 and ending at midnight on June 3, 2002. I waive my right to have the City Council review this matter and I waive my rights to have this matter heard before an independent hearing officer. Dated. ` 2002 TL Foods, LLC, dba Harwell's Steakhouse and Brewery B Its Jackie Jorgensen Office Manager UQU®R WAREHOUSE. 1124 Larpenteur Avenue West St. Paul, MN 55113 -6300 (651) 487 -1006 (651) 487 -9401 - FAX z s I-, I MI ; 1 All employees are trained with the TAM (Techniques of AlcohPJ M anagement ) Program. W e have 1 incentive program i place which reward th cas h i er t catching and passing 1 t l 1 I chec T his program 1 paid out 1 1 1 1 of dollars 1 our 11 1 1 t he system requires two people 1 to agree 1 the G 11 which stan before I • '11 is 21 years of or ol der. 1 the best o f our kn o wledge , no one I Shakopee has I a thorough system 7 6 1 1 1 '1 1 I I 1 I n i i � i � 1 I; At M.G.M. Liquor Warehouse, it is necessary that we have a few basic work rules. These work rules are designed to help build a good working relationship and to insure all employees of fair treatment. Violations of these work rules not only inhibit the operations of our stores, but it also creates extra work and an unfair work environment for your fellow employees. Therefore, any departure from these work rules necessitates disciplinary action. Disciplinary action will come in the form of either a written warning or suspension without pay. Infractions that are more severe may result in dismissal. So be sure you know the rules and what is expected of you. Your good judgement and willingness to cooperate will do the rest. Failure to adhere to the following work rules will result in disciplinary action: 1. Failure to successfully complete the T.A.M. (Techniques of Alcohol Management) program. 2. The illegal sale of alcohol with regard to selling to minors, intoxicated customers, second parties or after hours. 3. Failure or refusal to carry out a specific order or instruction that is necessary to operate a MGM Liquor Warehouse store. 4. Bringing, using, possessing or being under the influence of intoxicants or illegal drugs on company premises. 5. Deliberate damage to or unauthorized removal of company property or that of other employees. 6. Any unauthorized disclosure of privileged information such as salaries, sales, pricing, manuals, personnel records, etc. 7. Falsification of personnel or company records. 8. Excessive absenteeism or tardiness. 9. Unauthorized or unexcused absence. 10. Knowingly punching another employee's timecard or altering your own timecard. 11. Sleeping on the job. 12. Use of abusive or threatening language. 13. Use of unauthorized entrances or exits. 14. Continued low productivity or unsatisfactory quality of work. 15. Deviation from merchandising procedures without authorization. 16. Inattention to duties, loafing, visiting, idle loitering or wasting time. 17. Deviation from dress code. 18. from pricing procedures without authorization. 19. Any deviation in cash control procedures without proper explanation. 20. Unauthorized borrowing from the store's change fund. 21. An unexplained overage or shortage of individual's till of $10.00 or more. 22. Stealing of money, product or property. 23. Loss of money due to improper office security or cash register procedures. 24. Any action deemed not in the best interest of the store and /or company. 25. Harassment of any kind; sexual or discriminatory. I have read and understand the work rules of M.G.M. Liquor Warehouse and I will abide by them. Signature Date Laws & Policies Governing the Sale of Beverage Alcohol IT IS ILLEGAL TO: A) SELL TO UNDER-AGE CUSTOMERS 1) The legal drinking age in Minnesota is 21 years of age. It is MGM's policy that any customer purchasing any product (soda, ice, lottery, beverage alcohol, etc) must be 21 years of age or older. 2) With MGM's CARD ALL policy, it is mandatory to check every customers identification. (A manager must review any situation where a customer has no Valid ID or the customer has any form of ID other than a Minnesota Drivers License or Minnesota ID - Card.) 3) All members of a group must be 21 years of age or older, for any member of that group to purchase beverage alcohol. (Unless the under - age individual(s) is(are) accompanied by their parent or legal .guardian and then only the parent or legal guardian may purchase.) 4) Under the law, you do not have to sell beverage alcohol to anyone unless they rp ove to you that they are of legal age. B) SELL O CUSTOMERS USING FALSE 1 1) The following are legal forms of identification: a. State issued =VALID drivers license *(not expired, altered, forged, stolen, counterfeit, etc.) b. State issued VALID personal ID card (For all out -of -state ID's, refer to guidebooks to determine validity). 2) Any other form of ID is unacceptable REMEMBER: IT IS ILLEGAL TO SELL TO SOMEONE WITH AN ILLEGAL ID. C) SELL TO LN T OXICATED CUSTOMERS 1) The following are signs to watch for in an intoxicated person: a) Slurred speech b) . Staggering c) Loss of sound judgment/loud aggressive behavior d) Bloodshot eyes e) Vomiting f) Strong alcohol breath 1) A second -party sale is a legal customer trying to buy alcohol for under- age customers. (No under -age individuals shall be permitted to loiter or remain on any of the store's premises.) 1) The hours for Store # to legally sell beverage alcohol are: Monday - Thursday a.m. to p.m. Friday & Saturday a.m. to -p.m. Sunday - Closed - All employees must successfully complete a training program in "Techniques of Alcohol Management" '(TAM) before operating a cash register in the store. - If an employee is caught transacting an illegal sale in which the preceding policies /procedures were not followed, they shall be terminated immediately. I have read and understand the "Laws & Policies Governing the Sale of Beverage Alcohol" and will abide by them. I have been trained in how check ID's by viewing the TAM (Techniques of Alcohol Management) video and I have successfully passed the TAM Post Test. Signature: Printed Name: Date: - - - -- -Store management portion below line TAM video watched (yes /no) TAM program completed (yes /no) TAM Post Test Passed (yes /no) Manager on Duty Signature: Manager on Duty Printed Name: Date: S tore #.: Store #: Name (Printed): 1. You must be years old to buy beverage alcohol in the State of Minnesota. 2. What is a second parry sale? 3. The days and hours for legally selling beverage alcohol in store # are: 4. True/False: In your store, non - alcoholic beer usually does not require an ID to be checked. 5. Fill in the meaning of each letter of the SIR step: « 6a. The possible penalties under the law for failing to check under age customers for ID are: 6b. Our store's policy for failing to check under age customers for ID is: 7. Our company policy on checking customers for ID is: 8. The TAM step that helps you handle an alcohol related problem situation is: 9. Based on our store's policy, which of the following forms of identification are not acceptable for - purchasing alcohol? Valid state drivers license Immigrant registration card Birth certificate Social security card Military ID Student photo ID 10. What are the exceptions to selling alcohol after the legal hour? 11. The second "M" in MAAM stands for "Move On" and/or 12. What are three things that may indicate an ID is false? a. b. C. 13. Proof of age is the responsibility of 14. List three classic signs of intoxication: a. b. C. 15. List two secondary signs of intoxication: a. b. 16. Why should you never turn your back on a problem customer when you "move on" to other customers or work? 17. Two common alcohol related sales problems are listed below, list three others. a. Under age customers b. False or invalid identification C. I e. 18. The first "A" in the MAAM step is for keeping a good attitude. The second "A" is for 19. True/False: If a problem situation becomes serious, you should try to handle it alone. 20. Describe the two things that you can do if you are suspicious of an ID: 1. Signature: Name (Printed): Date: --------------------- - - - - -- - Store Manager on Duty Portion Below Line TAM Post Test Passed YES /NO Date: Manager Signature: Store #: EMPLOYEE WORKBOOK TECHNIQUES OF ALCOHOL MANAGEMENT DEVELOPED FOR THE NATIONAL LIQUOR STORES ASSOCIATION, INC. 5101 RIVER ROAD SUITE 108 BETHESDA, MARYLAND 20816 (301) 656 -1494 01987, NATIONAL LIQUOR STORES ASSOCIATION, INC. CO SPONSORED BY THE NATIONAL LICENSED BEVERAGE ASSOCIATION AND THE STROH BREWERY COMPANY •��r • There is a lot of concern about alcohol abuse these days. You may know someone who was hurt or killed by a drunk driver. Or, you may know someone who was fined, fired or jailed for selling alcohol illegally. In the wrong hands - especially young hands - the misuse of alcohol can have tragic consequences. Most people who drink use alcohol responsibly. They understand the effects of alcohol, and they know their limits. In moderation, alcohol can be beneficial to health. And like other product categories, it is an important part of the retail liquor store business. Most alcohol sales problems are caused by a small group of customers, so limiting everyone's right to buy alcohol isn't the answer. Controlling the sale, is. The liquor store industry must take a leading role in controlling alcohol sales by helping you deal effectively with this problem. After all, you are responsible for the alcohol sales in your store. It is important for you to be able to peform your job with confidence. To do that, you need to know store policy and the law. Equally important, you need the skills to spot alcohol problems and deal with them professionally. This training program, called "Techniques of Alcohol Management ", or "TAM ", is designed to help you learn how to handle alcohol sales. TAM principles are used in the supermarket, convenience store, drug store, tavern and restaurant industries, and have been adapted in this program to the liquor store industry. Basically, the TAM approach helps you understand what the alcohol laws are; how to obey them, how to handle the sale of alcohol legally, and how to minimize the problems you may face in refusing an alcohol sale. This way, you become part of the solution not the problem 1 Employee Workbook This workbook reinforces and expands on all the information presented in the TAM training videotape. This is your workbook. Note pages and fill -in areas are provided so that you can write down the points you need to remember as well as ideas from your instructor and other participants in the program. You may also be provided with tests and additional written materials. videotape The videotape covers ail the basic points of TAM. There are several "STOP THE TAPE" breaks in the videotape. During these breaks, your instructor should review the tape and may conduct a group discussion concerning the information presented. 2 ALCOHOL LAWS There are five very common problems you may face when selling alcohol: 1. Underage customers attempting to buy alcohol 2. Customers using false or invalid identification 3. Intoxicated customers 4. Legal -age customers with valid identification attempting to buy alcohol for under -age customers ( "second - party" sales) 5. Attempted off -hours sales All of these problems, and the actions that should be taken to deal with them, are governed by laws.. Some laws are set by the federal government; specifically, the U.S. Treasury, the Department of Justice, and the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms. Others are set by state governments or city and county' agencies. Many alcohol laws and regulations vary from one state or community to the next. In addition, laws may vary among industries. For example, certain regulations governing alcohol sales in restaurants (such as those dealing with on- premise consumption), may be different for liquor stores. Also, laws for distilled spirits, wine and malt beverages are often different within the same state. However, all laws must be obeyed properly, and all carry penalties if they are broken. It can be difficult to judge if a customer is of legal age, is intoxicated, or has other problems which could affect your decision to sell him /her alcohol. It can be even more difficult to refuse an alcohol sale to an insistent customer, or to a customer whom you know. . But no problem is an excuse to break the law or violate store policy. Remember that your company supports you in following the law and store policy. TAM will help you identify problems, follow the law, solve problems and protect yourself, your customers and your store from alcohol - related problems. To follow the steps in TAM, with your store's policies specific to your community. you need to become very familiar as well as laws and regulations 11 There are two simple steps to TAM. Both steps use key words that you should memorize. These words will help you recall the steps when you need them. The first step is SIR. SIR helps you recognize a problem. 'S" is for 'Size up" the customer and the situation. Note the customer's age, acceptability of identification, possible intoxication, or second -party sale. 'I' is for 'Interview" the customer, to check out any suspicions you might have. "R' is for "Rate' the customer, to determine if it's okay to sell the alcohol or not. The second step is MAAM. MAAM helps you handle a problem. "M' is for 'Move the alcohol away'. 'A' is for "Attitude" - be firm, fair and friendly. 'A' is for "Assert the law ", and store policy. "M" is for 'Move on' to other customers or work; or in serious cases, call the 'Manager'. Use SIR to find out if there is a problem. If there is none, you can sell the alcohol. If there is a problem.- use MAAM to handle it. Both of these steps are examined in detail on the following pages. A SIR: RECOGNIZING A PROBLEM "S® - "Size up° _ The first step in dealing with an alcohol sale is determining whether you can sell the alcohol on the spot or whether you should do some checking first. You will probably do most of your "sizing up" at the cash register, but you can evaluate a situation anywhere in the store. Some alcohol - related problem situations can be sized up immediately. Obviously intoxicated customers or off -hours sales usually can be spotted right away. Sizing up an underage customer or improper ID can take a little longer. Many times, it will be necessary to use the "Interview" step to "rate" if the sale is legal or not. ®I° - °Interview' If you suspect a problem with the sale after you have sized up the situation, you can use the "Interview" step to check out your suspicions. Getting the customer to talk can help you find out if there really is a problem. The following questions are examples of what you might ask yourself while interviewing the customer: Underage; 1. Does the customer sound underage? False ID: 2. Is the customer nervous? 3. Are answers about identification answered correctly? Intoxicated: 4. Is speech slurred? 5. Do answers show poor judgment? 6. Are the answers loud and aggressive? Second party ?. Could the customer be buying alcohol for sale: underage persons? (i.e., were young people talking to the customer earlier, or are they watching the transaction ?) 8. What is the response when you ask directly if the alcohol is for young people? 13 Avoid asking questions customers can answer with a yes or no. Use "open" questions, like "This is a lot of beer; what's the occasion ? ", or "What's going on with those kids you spoke to in the parking lot ?" The idea is to get people talking to you so you can find out if there really is a problem. It's really not complicated, and with a little practice you'll be "interviewing" without even realizing it. °R° - °Rate Once you have sized up and interviewed the customer, you must "Rate" the situation and decide if you should go ahead with the sale or not. The result is either "OK to Sell" or "Don't Sell ". OK to Sell: You can legally make the sale if SIR shows that: 1 - The ID is acceptable and valid 2 - The customer is of legal age 3 - The customer is not intoxicated 4 - The customer is not buying alcohol for underage persons 5 - There is no day or time restriction on selling alcohol at the time in question Don't Sell: You cannot legally make the sale if SIR has identified one of these problems: 1 - The ID is not acceptable or valid 2 - The customer is underage 3 - The customer appears intoxicated 4 - There is a potential second -party sale 5 - There is a time or day restriction in effect on alcohol sales If you rated the situation as "OK to Sell ", that's all you need from TAM. But if you rated the situation as "Don't Sell you will need to move on to the next step of TAM: MAAM. 14 � •s If SIR has turned up a. problem, you want to solve it quickly, quietly and legally, without embarrasing or concerning other customers, disrupting business, or leaving yourself open for trouble. MAAM will help you do this. "M' - 'Move the Alcohol Away' As soon as you have rated the situation as "Don't Sell ", move the alcohol away with a smooth, confident motion. Take it from the sales counter and place it under the counter or on the floor. Often, the customer will leave without protest when the alcohol is moved out of reach and sight. Moving the alcohol away can prevent possible theft or violence, and it ends arguments in many situations. CAUTION: When you are moving the alcohol away, be careful never. to touch the customer. That could be considered assault, and could lead to legal problems. NOTE: Be sure to ring up any non - alcohol items the customer has presented (soft drinks, ice, snacks, etc.) so you don't lose the entire sale. "A' - "Attitude' As you move the alcohol out of reach and sight, you must be firm and decisive. You want the customer to know you are_ in control. If you project confidence, you may be able to avoid an argument. But you must also be fair and friendly when you are refusing a sale. After all, you want the customer's future business. Always keep your temper in check, no matter how annoying or uncomfortable the situation might become. "A - "Assert the Law When you are refusing a sale, you need to explain your action. Do this by asserting the law and your company policy. Tell the customer clearly that the law and company policy will not allow you to sell alcohol, then give a specific reason: "I'm sorry, but the law says I cannot sell you alcohol if you appear to be (underage) (intoxicated) (using a false ID) (in a restricted time or day)" etc. Let the law and your store policy work for you. Let the customer see it is the law, not you, that determines your action. Let them be upset about a law or policy rather than with you. 15 "M" - "Move On® to other customers or work After you have moved the alcohol away and asserted the law (while maintaining a good attitude), move on to other work. By moving on, you not -only show the customer you are firm in your decision - You are-also busy. Turn your attention away from the problem customer and toward other customers or work. Make it clear you have other things to do, then proceed with them. CAUTION: 'Do not turn your back completely as you move on. This could be taken as an insult, cause an argument, cost you legal non - alcohol sales, or put you in danger. If the customer has other items besides alcohol to purchase, ring them up before moving on. This allows the customer to "save face ", complete the transaction, and leave with pride intact. "M" can also mean calling the "Manager" in serious cases. The other steps of MAAM will usually prevent arguments and belligerent behavior, but if they do not and the customer refuses to accept your decision - call the manager. If there is no "store manager" present, you may call on any other employee to assist you with the problem customer. Few such customers will persist when faced by two firm employees. 16 Now that you are familiar with the details of SIR and MAAM, you should understand how they can be applied to some of the problem situations mentioned earlier: 1. Underage customers attempting to buy alcohol 2. Customers using false or invalid identification 3. Intoxicated customers 4. Legal -age customers with acceptable valid identification attempting to buy alcohol for under -age customers ("second - party" sales) 5. Attempted (or off -day) sales. Each of these points needs explanation: 1. Underage customers The legal age for buying alcohol in the state of is Appearances can be deceiving. So if there is any doubt when sizing up a customer, ask for ID. Remember that it is the customer's responsibility to prove to you that he or she is of legal age. You are not required to sell alcohol to anyone who cannot prove his /her age. Many stores have guidelines for checking identification, such as: if a customer appears to be a certain age or younger, ask for identification. If your store has a similar policy for checking ID, write it in the space below: 2. False or invalid identification Age can be proven with only certain kinds of valid identification. Acceptable legal forms of identification are: A valid state- issued driver's license. A valid state - issued personal ID. 17 These government- issued documents are the only ones you can accept for the purpose of legal identification. Birth certifi- cates, social security cards, student ID's, visas, etc. are not acceptable. Neither are any otherwise valid documents that are expired or have been altered, borrowed, stolen, forged or counterfeited. Identifying false ID's is not always easy, but it helps if you know what to look for. Detecting false identification: Photo: Be sure it and the description match the person using the ID. Check for fuzzy or dark photos - indications of possible substitutions. Type: Check for erasure marks, type that does not match.or line up, damaged paper surface, and information pasted on. Usually these alterations appear around the birth date. Feel: Check for bumps or splits in the lamination. This would indicate the original was taken apart and altered. Act: Have the customer sign his /her name and compare with the signature on the ID. Obtain backup ID and compare signatures. Interview the customer to check address, birthdate, etc., and listen for nervous or inaccurate responses. 3. Intoxicated Customers It is illegal to sell alcohol to intoxicated customers. Note below the penalties for knowingly selling alcohol to someone who is intoxicated: Obviously intoxicated customers are easy to spot. They show some or all of the following classic signs of intoxication: Staggering, weaving or unsteadiness Slurred speech Bloodshot or red, irritated eyes Loss of good judgment Evidence of upset stomach You will rarely see obviously intoxicated customers in your store, so you should be aware of these secondary signs of intoxication as well: 18 Flushed or red, puffy face Strong odor of alcohol on the breath Loud, aggressive behavior Any one of these signs alone could be innocent; for example, slurring could be a speech impediment or staggering could be the result of a handicap. A combination of these signs, however, can indicate intoxication. Tact is urged, to avoid embarrassing a handicapped person. 4. Second -Party Sales It is illegal to sell alcohol to a legal age buying it for an underage person. Customers this may simply be ignorant of the law. Or, aware it is illegal, and try to conceal it. illegal. Some second -party sales are diffic it helps if you are aware of the signs: customer who is attempting to do they may be Either way it is ult to spot, but Young people approaching and talking to older customers (either inside or outside the store); money changing hands. Young people waiting for an older person buying alcohol, or watching the transaction. Signs of nervousness in a legal -age customer. Inappropriate purchases (such as an older woman buying a large quantity of alcohol products that usally appeal to younger consumers). 5. Attempted off -hours sales Attempted off -hours sales are problem situations that can be sized up and rated immediately. The times or days of the week that alcohol can be sold are regulated by your community. Note below the time of day or night as well as the day(s) of the week that alcohol cannot be sold in your store: There are no exceptions to off -hours sales. A sale a few minutes past the legal hour is just as illegal as a sale an hour past. 19 6. Drinking in the store and theft of alcohol These are not common problems in a liquor, package or party store, but they can occur. Like off -hours sales, these situations can be sized up and rated immediately. on- premise consumption of alcohol is generally prohibited in stores, but laws vary depending on the type of licenses you. have. Note below your community's laws governing drinking in the store based on your licenses: You may witness an alcohol theft at checkout or anywhere else in the store. Note below your store's procedures for dealing with a situation involving a theft: TAM REVIEW SIR: 'Sw - size up the customer and the situation. wIw - interview customers to check out suspicions. ®Rw - rate the customer or the situation as either "OK to Sell" or "Don't Sell ". MAAM® wMw - move the alcohol out of sight and reach. 'A' - your attitude must be firm, fair and friendly. "A° - assert the law and store policy. ® _ move on to other customers or work, or call the manager if the problem is serious. These "Techniques of Alcohol Management ", the laws in your • community, and the policies and procedures of your company are your guides to the successful sale of alcoholic beverages. They will help you sell wine, spirits, and beer legally, responsibly and professionally. You not only stay on the right side of the law, but you also do everyone a favor - your store, your customers, your community, and especially yourself. 7 1 CITY OF SHAKOPEE Memorandum CASE LOG NO.: 02 -23 TO: Mayor and City Council Mark McNeill, City Administrator FROM: R. Michael Leek, Community Development Director SUBJECT: Tollefson Request to Re -guide Muhlenhardt Property MEETING DATE: May 21, 2002 REVIEW T LINE: January 31, 2002 — May 31, 2002 On April 2, 2002 the Council tabled this item, with direction to City staff to discuss the water supply issues with the Shakopee Public Utilities Commission (SPUC) staff. During the week of April 29 both staffs met. SPUC staff said that they had met with City of Savage staff in April about separating the larger water sharing issues from the issue of Savage providing water service to this parcel. On Wednesday, May 15, 2002, City staff received a copy of the letter from the Savage City Administrator to the Shakopee Public Utilities Commission. On Thursday, May 16, Utilities Manager and the author of this report discussed the impact of Savage's letter, and it appears to leave a number of open questions. As a result, staff requested, and has received from the applicant, the attached letter assenting to an extension of the review period in order to further address the remaining questions. City staff suggests that the Council leave this item on the table until the meeting of June e to allow additional time for discussion in light of the Savage letter. The applicant has requested that they be allowed to submit a preliminary plat application. Council is asked to provide direction as to whether or not to accept such application at this time. ALTERNATIVES: 1. Remove the item from the table, and act affirmatively or negatively on the request. 2. Remove the item from the table, and provide City staff with additional direction. 3. Leave the item on the table until June 4, 2002. 4. Provide staff with direction as to whether to accept a preliminary plat application for the subject property at this time. 4 D. Staff recommends alternative no. 3, leaving the item on the table until June 4, 2002, and alternative no. 4. Leave the item on the table until the meeting of June 4 and provide direction to staff regarding whether to accept a preliminary plat application for the subject site. R. Michael Leek Community Development Director Developers 9 Land ITivvbW'r -"L — ' - May 16, 2002 Michael Leek City of Shakopee 129 South Holmes St Shakopee, MN 55104 Re: Muhlenhardt property - Time ExtenslOn Dear Michael - f Shakopee is requesting a time extension to act on the Y understand the City p company. The time extension is to comprehensive land use amendment submitted by my which lies been delayed allow the City to gather some moSrP information ye I fo agree to extend the time due to a death in the family of a t period until the 3une e, 2002 City Council meeting. ld like Due to the delays in action on the comprehensive plan gdm g as ffic ally o make the formal request to submit the preliminary plat before approved by the City Council- This is of course contingent on the comprehensive plan amendment being approved f sewered single-family homes. The preliminary Plat approv would be contingent upon the rezoning being approved for single - family homes. PPr please let me lmow what other information 1 can the PTOvide d el pment of the Development ighest and best forward to working with the City of Shakopee on the development p use for this property. Sincerely, , 1 ew el an roJ aget Tollefson Development 17271 l<enyon Ave-, Suite #103 a Lal(evile, WIN 55044 ® Phone (952) 435 -1010 ® FAX M)4) Email - Info ®tollefsondevelopment.com wwwetol I efson devel opm a ntx= Mai /'. IFFILLY1 To: Mayor and City Council Mark McNeill, City Administrator From: Mark McQuillan, Natural Resource Director Subject: Proposed Park Property on Lake O'Dowd Date: May 16, 2002 INTRODUCTION Below is a quick synopsis of the O'Dowd Lake Land Acquisition Project. Enclosed are copies of past reports in chronological order. To the very back are four 11 x 17 inch drawings of possible access scenarios to the park. The City's Engineering Department created the four plans. It's my understanding, the City Council requested the Parks and Recreation Advisory Board to consider a purchase price for the John Phillips property. On Monday, May 20, the PRAB will visit the property once more and determine if the City should: A) acquire or not acquire the property and B) if it is to acquire the property, what should be the price cap. A recommendation will be brought forward to the Tuesday, May 21, 2002 City Council Meeting. BACKGROUND 1. When the City acquired the Hauer property, Council stated that future park acquisitions for community parks be outside the MUSA area. Show Park Comp. Map. 2. Early July, Dave Brown, a realtor in the community, contacted the Mayor when he learned of some property for sale by O'Dowd Lake. The property that is for sale is a 43.33 acre parcel owned by Justin Phillips. 3 _ At the July 17, 2001 City Council Meeting, Council directed staff to do 1) a limited — summary appraisal of the property, 2) have engineering do a shoreline analysis, and 3) have the PRAB review the proposal for possible purchase. At a Budget Workshop on July 26, 2001, Councilor Morke asked staff to provide an estimate to develop the property and Mayor Brekke suggested the City look at all funding options. 4. The PRAB reviewed the proposal at its July 23, 2001 meeting and, again, at a special meeting held on September 10, 2001. Residents living in Wienandt Acres were notified of the meetings and many of them attended. Some for, some against. 5. According to out appraiser Patchin, Messner & Dodd the appraisal of the 43 acres has a most probable market value of $1,460,000.00 6. Review Development Costs $1.3 million. Found in a memorandum to the PRAB. 7. Access to the park see . 8. November 27, 2001 PRAB reverses its recommendation to acquire property. 9. On December 4, 2001, the City Council rejected the PRAB recommendation to not purchase the property and requested that Councilman Clete Link negotiate on behalf of the City. 10. The City Council asked that the new PRAB members review the land acquisition proposal one more time before May 21, 2002. I h. 1I To: Mayor and City Council Mark McNeill, City Administrator From: Mark McQuillan, Natural Resource Director Subject: PRAB Recommendation Regarding Land Purchase on O'Dowd lake Date: November 28, 2001 INTRODUCTION At the November 7, 2001 City Council Meeting, Council asked the Parks and Recreation Advisory Board to recommend a fair monetary offer for the 43 acres of land owned by Mr. John Phillips. O'DOWD LAKE PARK RECOMMEN The Parks and Recreation Advisory Board (DRAB) met on November 27, 2001 to discuss Council's request. After a considerable discussion, the PRAB unanimously recommended " to discontinue the pursuit of the Phillips property as the sole piece of property being considered and to direct staff to explore other parcels that could meet the City's Comp Plan criteria for a community park in that area or elsewhere in Shakopee. " The Board believes the Phillips property could potentially serve as a community park, but had too many concerns that could preclude the City from making full use of the land. For example: • Access into the park is limited through existing and future residential neighborhoods; • A good portion of the 43 acres would require extensive landscaping (grading); • The price tag is a little high for the amount usable land and • Aquatic activity on lakeshore is questionable. The PRAB would like the City to look at other land options within the City and possibility partner with Louisville Township in a joint acquisition. ACTION REQUESTED If the City Council concurs with the Parks and Recreation Advisory Board's recommendation, it should, by motion, release Councilor Link from further negotiations for the John Phillips property and direct staff to explore other land options that meet the City's Comprehensive Park Plan for a community park in at area or else ere in Shakopee. Z �o� ark J. McQ illan Natural Resource Director To: Parks and Recreation Advisory Board From: Mark J. McQuillan, Natural Resources Director Subject: Recommendation for Land Purchase on O'Dowd lake Date: November 21, 2001 INTRODUCTION At its November 7, 2001 meeting, the City Council requested the Parks and Recreation Advisory Board make a recommendation as to what is a fair offer for the 43 acres of land on O'Dowd Lake owned by John Phillips. The City Council has not indicated at this time which funding sources they would use if they decide to buy the property. BACKGROUND To assist you in your decision, consider the two questions below: 1. Do you want this property for a park? 2. Based on what you already know, what is fair offer for the property? AVAILABILITY OF LAND This property has been on the market for sale since July 1, 2001 for $1.5 million. APPRAISAL The appraisal for the 43.33 acres of land on the east side of Lake O'Dowd is complete and in the mail. Based on the inspection of the property and careful consideration of the many factors influencing market value, it is the opinion of Patchin Messner & Dodd Appraisals, Inc that the subject property has a most probable market value of $1,460,000.00. That equates to about $33,500.00 per acre. The asking price for the land is $1,500,000.00. ACCESS Current access to the propose park is Lil's Way, which is an unimproved road right -a- way in Weinandt Acres. There is potential for a second access from County Road 14 when the property to the south (Richard Logeais, owner) is developed. Staff will present four concept drawings of possible road accesses to the park at Tuesday's meeting. SHORELINE ANALYSIS The shoreline along the subject parcel is about 1500 linear feet. Starting at the north boundary, about 800 feet is sloped and heavily vegetated with trees. The remaining 700 feet is flat with tall grasses and lily pads in the cove and open water to the south boundary. The bottom is heavily silted and mucky. DEVELOPMENT COSTS A community park serves a broader purpose that a neighborhood park. Focus is on meeting community -based recreation needs, as well as preserving unique landscapes and open spaces. Community parks are generally 30 -50 acres. They allow for group activities and offer other recreational opportunities (active and passive) not feasible — nor perhaps desirable — at the neighborhood level. The menu of potential recreation facilities for this particular property may include: • two large picnic shelters w/ horseshoes and volleyball areas ($100,000); • fishing pier ($10,000); • hard and soft trails (1200 ft - $12,000); • nature study area ($0); • 3 -4 youth ball fields or soccer fields ($150,000); • large playground system ($100,000); • parking lot ($300,000); • roadway ($100,000); • restrooms ($70,000); • electrical power ($50,000); • additional grading ($150,000); • additional vegetation such as trees, shrubs and grasses ($25,000), and • engineering and design costs (25% of project estimate $250,000). A sw immin g beach was not included in our estimates. Staff s best estimate, based on previous projects, is about $1,333,750.00. ACTION REQUESTED Funding aside, should the City purchase this parcel for a park? If yes, what would you recommend to the City Council as a fair offer? Mark I McQuillan Natural Resources Director CITY OF SHAKOPEE MEMORANDUM To: Mayor and City Council Mark McNeill, City Administrator From: Mark McQuillan, Natural Resource Director Subject: Proposed Land Purchase By Lake O'Dowd Date: September 11, 2001 INTRODUCTION -1 At a special meeting held Mon y, September 10, 2001, the Parks and Recreation Advisory Board recommended - e City Council acquire 43.33 acres of land owned by Justin Phillips for a future community park. The Board also recommends the City acquire additional land (about 12 acres) adjacent to the property line on the south when the adjacent parcel comes under development. See Exhibit A. The PRAB recommends that Council use other City funds ($1.5 million) to acquire the property and to repay those funds with park dedicption fees over six years at $250,000 per year. fe, ALTERNATIVES 1. Offer and pass a motion to direct City staff to begin the process for acquiring of 43 acres of land owned by Justin Phillips. 2. Do not acquire the 43 acres of land owned by Justin Phillips. 3. Offer a motion to direct staff to provide more detail funding options for acquisition of the Phillips property. 4. Table for additional information from staff. ACTION REQUESTED Offer a motion consistent with alternatives 1 & 3. j FA `� Mark J. McQuillan Natural Resource Director ATTACHED EXHIBITS A = LAND PROPOSED FOR IMMEDIATE AND FUTURE ACQUISITION B = FUND ACCOUNTS BY FINANCE DIRECTOR GREG VOXLAND C = SEPT. 5 MEMORANDUM TO PRAB D = 2002 PARKS CIP E = LAND APPRAISAL OF SUBJECT PROPERTY BY PATCHIN, MESSNER & DODD F = SHORELINE ANALYSIS BY ENGINEERING STAFF To: Parks and Recreation Advisory Board From: Mark McQuillan, Natural Resource Director Subject: Proposed Park Property on Lake O'Dowd Date: September 5, 2001 INTRODUCTION The Parks and Recreation Advisory Board is asked to make a recommendation to the City Council as to whether the City should acquire or not acquire the 43 -acre parcel owned by Phillip Justice for a community park. BACKGROUND At the request of the City Council, the Parks and Recreation Advisory Board (PRAB) reviewed and discussed the possible land purchase by O'Dowd Lake at its July 23 meeting. About twenty -five residents from Weinandt Acres attended the meeting to express their disapproval and concerns for placing a city park at that location. More importantly, they were concerned with the decision making process. NEIGHBORHOOD CONCERNS Area residents were concerned with possible crime in the park, noise, a drop in property values, spending too much for the property, and the Lakeshore not suitable for s wimmin g or any other water related activities. The bottom line, they prefer the City look elsewhere. PRAB CONCERNS The Park and Recreation Advisory Board expressed an interest in acquiring the land, but not at the total expense of other park projects. They would like the City Council to consider borrowing from other City funds and repay those sources over a period of years from the Park Reserve Fund. The PRAB went on record stating the proposed land purchase on Lake O'Dowd meets the City's Comprehensive Park Plan objectives in terms of acreage and location, but wish to determine the viability of acquiring the property without jeopardizing current park projects. On August 20, 2001, the PRAB visited the site so they could ,,eta better feel of what the property physically looks like and to see if the property would adequately meet future park needs. CITY COUNCIL CONCERNS At its July 17, 2001 meeting, the City Council directed staff to do a Limited — Summary Appraisal of the property and to do an analysis of the shoreline for aquatic activities. Council would also like to know what it would cost to develop the land for a park. APPRAISAL The appraisal for the 43.33 acres of land on the east side of Lake O'Dowd is complete and in the mail. Based on the inspection of the property and careful consideration of the many factors influencing market value, it is the opinion of Patchin Messner & Dodd Appraisals, Inc that the subject property has a most probable market value of $1,460,000.00. That equates to about $33,500.00 per acre. The asking price for the land is $1,500,000.00. ACCESS Current access to the propose park is Lil's Way, which is an unimproved road right -a- way in Weinandt Acres. There is potential for a second access from County Road 14 when the property to the south (Richard Logeais, owner) is developed. SHORELINE ANALYSIS The shoreline along the subject parcel is about 1500 linear feet. Starting at the north boundary, about 800 feet is sloped and heavily vegetated with trees. The remaining 700 feet is flat with tall grasses and lily pads in the cove and open water to the south boundary. The bottom is heavily silted and mucky. See Engineering Report. DEVELOPMENT COSTS A community park serves a broader purpose that a neighborhood park. Focus is on meeting community -based recreation needs, as well as preserving unique landscapes and open spaces. Community parks are generally 30 -50 acres. They allow for group activities and offer other recreational opportunities (active and passive) not feasible — nor perhaps desirable — at the neighborhood level. The menu of potential recreation facilities for this particular property may include: o two large picnic shelters w/ horseshoes and volleyball areas ($100,000); o fishing pier ($10,000); o hard and soft trails (1200 ft - $12,000); o nature study area ($0); o 3 -4 youth ball fields or soccer fields ($150,000); o large playground system ($100,000); o parking lot ($300,000); o roadway ($100,000); o restrooms ($70,000); o electrical power ($50,000); o additional grading ($150,000); o additional vegetation such as trees, shrubs and grasses ($25,000), and o engineering and design costs (25% of project estimate $250,000). A swimming beach was not included in our estimates. Staff's best estimate, based on previous projects, is about $1,333,750.00. OPTION I Use the current fund balance of the Park Reserve Fund ($874,933.) and borrow the balance from another fund to acquire the property. Funds from park dedication fees will the borrowed amount of $625,067.00. Although, projects funded by Park Reserve Funds would have to wait until year 2003 or 2004. OPTION II Borrow $1 million from other City Funds, matched with $500,000 from Park Reserves, and repay, over four years ($250,000), the borrowed funds with income from park dedication fees. OPTION III Acquire the land with other city funds ($1.5 million) and repay those funds with park dedication fees over six years at $250,000 per year. OPTION IV Acquire the land with other city funds ($1.5 million) and not use any park reserve funds. Projects in Progress Park Reserves) Holmes park Play Equipment: $ 40,000 Skate Park: $ 50,000 Tree Trust Projects: $ 5,000 Tahpah Park Parking Lot (delayed) $400,000 {2002} ACTION REQUESTED To make a recommendation to the City Council on the possible land purchase for a community park on the east side of O'Dowd Lake. f , Mark I McQu' n Natural Resource Director W m r O O N L11 CL m U W O w LL IL A c Z G ul W a O Y a LL O I a 0 N V 0 0 °o_ C) C) o o_ o C) C) o o_ c o o o_ 00 0 coo o ° C o o _ r"ti Cl) o m N � V r V V C`) V O O O O O O O O O r O C) Co v N O O p C) O O O o O O o o O 0 C) O O LO O O C) t0 U O t0 O O O t0 M O CO O IT O N O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O (O O t c0 O Co LO � O N Co fo O O O O O O O O O O 0 O 0 O 0 O 0 O O O O O 0 O 0 O O O O C C C 0 O O O O 0 0 O a t[j M co U 0 V C) N O O O Cfl O O O O Co N O N LO O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O C Lo CD M t0 Lo t0 M V O O C) cio N _ O N r N a1 V 7 0 W OO m Z Z 0 Z w Z o 2' m Z m Z o Z w Z w L o Z m Z o Z o Z m Z a) L a) Z a to U) CDo(n _ a�ommoomm U) w U) w U) U) w 0 w0wo (1) ul w U) om ") w = m 0 0 o a) O m 0 0 0 o 11) m o m m G) (1) m a) a) C C C C Y Y Y ` Y `` Y6 ` Y Y Y R @` Y X [0 CL (0 a❑ O c� O ❑ a) a ❑ O U w a m a @ a m a N a a) a a) a a) a 7 m N a N a (G a a c� (C a N s a) L- 0 O 0 O 0 O 0 O 0 a 0 O 0 O 0 O 0 O 0 O 0 O 0 O 0 O 0 O 0 O 0 O 0 O 0 O 0 O 0 O 0 O 0 O 0 O 0 O 0 O 0 O nt O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O C G 1� O O O O O t") O O O to �!] t17 O V1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 LLi w �- to m V m 0 0 0 V 1. r-- V N O� O O O M O Lr O C O N y M �- CO I- V U') r Lo W N °D n w+ N O U 0 0 o ao = L U Y Y L a a N a cc m Co m c6 a)YY CL J J ca y a 3 v Z O C -p "O O O C - ' O a a) 0 0 O a_ E N a E Y C 0 �G .O O � N E U m O O E a fII X N O O O C ca O ` a) a) �- a- §? a 0 0 U CD Y Y O a C a) D. a) O 0, Y N E .� co W W m ca RS ` Y ` Q O Y (/� a cn Q a5 J` (n = O U fU �"" Y Q ` U L L as a a a a N L U ca . C) 0 0 a L `p 0 (C4 cu d a `� Q M a`) � L 3 ,� 0 cu v E o M 0 > o m o m o O a� m o . o . �wC� = =t- OmOaYCODUcn -1 o � z 0 t- d c, Y Y Y Y Y Y Y� 1 Y Y Y Y Y Y•_ L Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y 1 Y Y F <<<<g<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<< aaaaan a a a an.mamamma.amaaaaa I a 0 N V I August 29, 2001 t Ke+' hf � S r City of Shakopee -. w z • u „, 129 South Holmes Street Shakopee, MN 55379 -- ATTN: Mr. Mark McQuillan Director of Natural Resources RE: Limited Appraisal, Summary Report -Y >Philli s Pro p e - 4 43.45 Acres on O'Dowd Lake— Shakopee, Minnesota Dear Mr. McQuillan:~° This limited appraisal has bee .both- -the scope ofdata;reseai r wo to be 1 ,r 1" S , 4 - - " noted --that,this' I etter d' 9- -- 'an an oes n U L Ifsh66ld 6 6, not qualif appraisal to th6 :following report for,the supporting data,:analyses and conclu5 afi& `Uffiifih9--', section of this report should be thor6ughl -Ax _ bef6fe relying any information or analysis presented herein .The - uridersighed appraisers - . hereby.. certify, that, they. - have - invest �' believed, t&ihdicate the market value of the subject roperty. -:To the p bel i &Mhe statements i,contai h ed ..: in this.,: - report f aret'correct,J , t* forth herein: - If ' ou have any questions or comrr x6nditiongse e y ppra contact the firm. Certified to this 29th day of August, 2001 oWn . . . . . . . . . . . . . . PATCHIN MESSNER & DODD Sherril L.713rumm Minnesota Registered Real Property Licensees #20249948*_ W 20146 Owner: SUMMARY OF SALIENT FACTS AND CONCLUSIONS John J. and Justine Phillips V NOTE: County records show Richard and Martha Lyman as the fee owners of the eastern .15 acres fronting Marschall Road. This appraisal assumes that the entire 43.45 acres is owned in fee by John and Justine Phillips. Location: Located along the west side of Marschall Road, South of County Road #42 Shakopee, Minnesota Date of Value: July 26, 2001 Date of Inspection: July 26, 2001 Rights & Interests Appraised: Fee Simple Market Value Zoning: Ag, Agricultural Preservation Zone and RR, Rural Residential Zone. The entire site is guided RR, Rural Residential Zone. Highest & Best Use: Single Family Residential Site Area: 43.45 Acres (Acreage amounts based on Scott County Records.) Site Description: The subject is an irregularly shaped parcel. It has a rolling topography with approximately 1,500 lineal feet of frontage on O'Dowd Lake. A portion of the site has been used for agricultural purposes, with other portions of the site being wooded. Value Conclusions: Cost Approach: N/A Sales Comparison Approach: $1,455,575 Income Approach: N/A Final Estimate of Value: $1,460,000 PATCHIN MEssNER & DODD Valuation Counselors X1 I SUBJECT PLAT MAP I xii SUBJECT ZO NING MAP 20146 1 The subject of this report is a 43.45 acre tract of land located in Shakopee, Minnesota. A portion of this tract of land has been used for agricultural purposes. The western 43.30 acres of the subject property is owned by John and Justine Phillips. County records show Richard and Martha Lyman as the fee owners of the eastern .15 acres fronting Marschall Road. This appraisal assumes that the entire 43.45 acres is owned in fee by John and Justine Phillips. This document is intended to provide a limited appraisal in a summary report format of the subject property. This appraisal report is intended to comply with the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice and the Appraisal Institute. The data and analyses contained in this report (and the appraiser's files) provide the basis for our value conclusions. This appraisal includes the valuation of the real property only. In our analysis, we have examined the following data and concepts pertaining to the subject property. 1. Physical characteristics of real property including: Inspection of the subject. Review of available plat maps. Observation of the local market and the subject's place within this market. 2. Non - physical characteristics of real property including: Property rights. Legal descriptions. Assessment data. Zoning and Land Use Data. PATCfHIN MESSNER & DODD Valuation Couruelors 20146 •' 0 • • • , 3. Observations and data concerning the subject property's market and transactions within this market: Sales of land. Supply and demand dynamics of the market. Financing available within the market. Perception of the market as to the future. From the above data and concepts, we have made the following analysis. Highest and Best Use of the subject property. 2 The sales comparison approach to value for the subject property. (See the Appraisal Procedures and Techniques sections of this report for explanations of the approaches to value.) The effective date of this limited appraisal is July 26, 2001. INSPECTION The property was inspected on July 26, 2001. SALES HISTORY There have been no sales of the property for three years prior to the date of appraisal. The subject property is currently offered for sale at a listing price of $1,500,000. PATCHIN MESSNER & DODD Valuation Counselors 20146 3 The purpose of this limited appraisal is to estimate the market value of the fee simple interest of the subject property. The intended use of this analysis is to provide valuation guidance for possible acquisition. .. • . my" M. Woo The subject will be appraised by estimating the market value of the fee simple estate of the real property. For use in this appraisal, the market value of the fee simple interest in the real estate is subject to the following definition obtained on Page 140 of The Dictionary of Real Estate Appraisal, Third Edition, Appraisal Institute. Absolute ownership unencumbered by any other interest or estate, subject only to the limitations imposed by the governmental powers of taxation, eminent domain, police power and escheat. MARKETING TIME We project a marketing time of three to twelve months in order to achieve the market value stated in this report. Based upon inspection of the subject property, we have assumed that no environmental concerns such as PCBs, toxic and hazardous soil or ground water contamination exist upon the subject as of the date of this appraisal report. If any environmental contaminants do exist within the subject property, we reserve the right to adjust the estimated market value contained in this report accordingly. PATCHIN MESSNER & DODD Valuation Counselors 20146 5 LOCATION AND LEGAL DESCRIPTION Address: Address Unassigned Located along the west side of Marschall Road, South of County Road #42 Shakopee, Minnesota Property Identification Numbers: #27- 930 -004-5 (43.30 Acres in Section 30) #27- 929 -009 -1 (0.15 Acres in Section 29) Legal Description: Part of Sections 29 and 30, Township 115, Range 22, Shakopee, Minnesota. TAXES AND ASSESSMENT DATA TAX AND ASSESSMENT DA TA 4..•�.•w�az.�se"_.3..:' >' �. �a.�: ..' - �- .^L� �...c�y_.zrx .�, ,:��,:.�*L,:� '� :.,a:..u.r •'w>:i.�€. _# Property Identification # 27- 930 -004 -5 27 -929 -009 -1 Total 2000 Assessor's Market Value Land $174,200 $400 $174,600 Improvements s0 $0 $0 Total $174,200 $400 $174,600 Real Estate Taxes Payable 2001 General Taxes $1,008.00 $4.00 $1,012.00 Special Assessments $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 Total $1,008.00 $4.00 $1,012.00 Effective Tax Rate 0.58% 1.00% 0.58% 2001 Assessor's Market Value Land $189,600 $400 $190,000 Improvements $0 $0 $0 Total $189,600 $400 $190,000 Real Estate Taxes Payable 2002 General Taxes NIA NIA WA Special Assessments NIA N/A NIA Total NIA N/A N/A PATCHIN MESSNER & DODD Valuation Counselors 20146 C-1 The majority of the site is zoned Ag, Agricultural Preservation Zone, and the remainder is zoned RR, Rural Residential Zone. In addition, a substantial portion of the site is located within the S, Shoreland District. This Shoreland District acts as an overlay zoning requirement in addition to the underlying Ag and RR classifications. In the Agricultural Preservation Zone, the predominate land use remains agricultural, but many single family homes and hobby farms exist. The entire subject property is guided RR, Rural .Residential according to the Shakopee Comprehensive Plan /2000 Land Use Plan (Draft). This guiding recognizes a continued pressure for additional residential development, which may be allowed at a maximum density of one unit per ten acres. As determined in the Highest and Best Use section of this report, the highest and best use of the subject property is for residential development. The purpose of the RR, Rural Residential District is to allow low- density residential development in areas which are not served by municipal urban services. Permitted uses within the Rural Residential Zone include the following: • Single Family Detached Dwellings • Agricultural Uses • Forestry and Nursery Uses • Utility Services • Public Recreation • Public Buildings • Day Care Facilities Serving 12 or Fewer Persons • Adult Day Care Centers Serving 12 or Fewer Persons • Group Family Day Care Facilities Serving 14 or Fewer Children • Residential Facilities Serving 6 or Fewer Persons Also in the RR Rural Residential Zone are uses that may be permitted by Conditional Use Permit. Examples of uses requiring Conditional Use Permits include the following: • Churches and Other Places of Worship • Cemeteries PATCHIIV MESSNER & DODD Valuation Counselors 20146 8 Size: 43.45 Acres (Acreage amounts based on Scott County Records.) Shape: Irregular Frontage: 79.0 +l- LF along Marschall Road Access: Currently, vehicular access is gained from Marschall Road (County Road #17). Marschall Road is a bituminous surfaced street with one lane of traffic in each direction. If subdivided, Scott County may not allow access from Marschall Road. Lil's Way, accessed off of Marcia Lane in the subdivision of Weinandt Acres, may provide access to the subject property. Lil's Way currently dead -ends at the eastern edge of the subject. NOTE: This appraisal assumes that the entire 43.45 acres is owned in fee by John and Justine Phillips. Terrain: The subject has gently rolling terrain. Much of the subject is open and tillable. Soils: We have assumed that the soils are stable and adequate to support normal building practices. We have not been provided with any soils tests or engineering data. Flood Hazard: Zone C, Area of Minimal Flooding Community Panel #: 270434 0007 C Flood Insurance Rate Map Effective: September 29, 1978 Utilities: Private. Outside of MUSA boundaries. Sewer and water are anticipated to be extended within five to ten years. Easements & Encumbrances: We are not aware of any easements or encumbrances which would have a deleterious impact on the subject property's market value or marketability. We have not conducted a title search in conjunction with this appraisal assignment. PATCHINI MESSNIER & DODD Valuaton Counselors 13 COMPARABLE • • `P 20146 SALES COMPARISON APPROACH TO VALUE 14 PATCHIN MESSNER & DODD Valuation Counselors 0 o m .O m L_ C C O • O L Q N T. 7 O- mo C73 n 3 W L N f4 12 N CO 7 - ❑ O ca ❑ O T IV N m O O= a L O= o cc co o m m to 3 m a m n m m a V ❑ 7 Of � = O] V 2 . a 2 H C Q O d to O � G U E R� U a J C 7 3: Q: a m ° o f ) v m p O Ll (•7 aD N U V a n a1 a7 F! V• cj N N N N cra ` L L K fR fA W 6q -i• O N O O a) c t m c R 0 o °- m N u1 m CL (p d t0 cD CY > co , a ❑ � � !9 fA ift LL N to O O N � a U Q p c7 Ci N t0 1— N c7 < Q Cn 'O > in Cc N Q: CO = LL a a) d U U = ❑ = O. y y O aJ K VJ� CU Z a iu c m -' m = O m rn o CD a a a a a N a. a U c J O v N - N m V O a7 U , c 2 d m m cU R a) N f` a3 E C O n1 d N m al �. _. (n O �a V a W m aY m 2 U¢ co was J C a O CL ❑ C > O Y m co L ❑ N D ul O O m p m Q) O O O m O O O m N N N ❑ co r m 0 3 m m � Y m a7 _ � a7 a1 a1 a1 O N O O O O > m m m m m 0 `m U s v c o a a�i a n o_ m m E n U o o J o u O a W L m L = � L y J zco N CO > a W U) � U 14 PATCHIN MESSNER & DODD Valuation Counselors 201 SALES COMPARISON APPROACH TO VALUE t7 z Z W H N Q Q W J CO Q Q IL n O U 15 C Q < I U m in PATCHIN MFSSNER & DODD n d to N n r CD a� n .- Q o ri of m Lf H v! h Vf N m 7 W tp p z J o 15 C Q < I U m in PATCHIN MFSSNER & DODD n O L7 L W O cli r N r co r C O p O J o Ir C m r U Q O N O O O O CL w w 15 C Q < I U m in PATCHIN MFSSNER & DODD tD m h p r r N r co r F- D y o Ir C m r U Q N co N r N CL w w �» O N 0 m U z o � p m a o O m r b N M m h m Q IH f9 fR A O W N N N p Cl! (n U Q O Q t0 CD cq N 0 0 0 W a' m N H o N n cm — — , 4 Q ¢ 4 0 N L cr cr m c 5 m m m m m m m o O O a m n o m e N m m e m m m e c m m cn 2 E S M J m w :w U � Y v a y v o. y n U m J ¢ o 0 U R o M v (n O n W z m N L CD o. E z °t U 15 C Q < I U m in PATCHIN MFSSNER & DODD 20146 • • •. • Explanation of Adiustments Property Rights: In this case, we are appraising the market value of the fee simple interest in the property. All of the comparable sales involved transfers of the fee simple interest. As such, no adjustment for property rights conveyed has been made. Market Conditions: The time adjustment is based upon a 15% increase per annum. Demand has been strong and the sales suggest a substantial increase in values since the late 1990's. Size: Typically, a smaller site will command a higher unit price than a larger site, all else being equal. Based on our observations of the market, an adjustment for size differences was not necessary. Arraying the land sales by size both before and after the adjustment process indicates no definable trend in value related to size. Therefore, no size adjustment was made. Location: Based upon observations of both the subject and the comparables. Factors such as access, availability of utilities, lake frontage and surrounding land use were considered when making this adjustment. Comparable Sale #1 required an upward adjustment of 20% due to this sale having no lake frontage. Comparable Sale #3 also has no lake frontage, but is located at the southwest corner of Mystic Lake, and was adjusted upward 10 %. Other: Comparable #1 is generally level and easily developable. This sale was adjusted downward 5% to reflect these lower potential development costs. Comparable #3 is approximately 30 %- 40% wetlands. This sale was adjusted upward 15% to reflect this inferior percentage of developable acreage. Comparable #4 was purchased as a single family residential building site. This property has negative access issues as a single building site, with a driveway of approximately 2,000 lineal feet. This sale was adjusted upward 30 %. 16 PATCHIN MESSNER & DODD 20146 17 SALES COMPARISON APPROACH TO VALUE Analysis Before adjustments, the four comparables ranged in unit price from $14,887 to $28,596 per acre, with an average of $23,707 per acre. After the adjustment process, the four comparables range in unit price from $25,159 to $36,417 per acre, with an average of $32,017 per acre. The com.parables provide similar results with the exception of Comparable #4. This comparable, although located adjacent to the subject property to the south, was purchased for one single family residential building site. Given the above, little weight is given to Comparable #4. The remaining three sales range in unit price from $33,171 per acre to $36,417 per acre, with an average of $34,303 per acre. Comparable #1 has no lake frontage, but was purchased for residential development. In addition, this sale is most similar in size to the subject property. Comparable #2 is located just north of the subject property along Marschall Road, and has similar frontage on O'Dowd Lake. In addition to these factors, this comparable also received the lowest level of both gross and net adjustments, and indicates a per unit value of $33,171 per acre. Comparable #3 has a higher percentage of wetlands than the subject property, and also has no lake frontage. Although this site was purchased by the Shakopee Mdewakanton Dakota Community, this transaction was reportedly arms - length. Giving the greatest weight to Sale #2, and also considering the adjusted average of all of the comparables, we conclude that the subject's most probable market value is $33,500 per acre. Thi ii5, 43.45 Acres x $33,500 Per Acre — $ 1,455,575 Rounded To $1,460,000 PATCHih MESSNER & DODD Valuation Counselors EXHIBIT MEMORANDUM DATE: September 7, 2001 TO: Bruce Loney, Public Works Director, P.E. FROM: Dale Gade, Engineering Intern Upon investigation of the proposed city park along O'Dowd Lake, I found several characteristics worth noting. The water clarity is no more than 3ft, confirmed by the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (see attached sheet.) The dominant bottom substrate consists of sand, silt, and clay. Rocks and boulders are also present as the driver of the boat collided with one in approximately Eft of water. Aquatic plant life is in abundant throughout the lake. Upon departure of the area a Blue Heron was spotted flying out. This visual survey was conducted on July 25 2001. 08/12/2001 Lake e: O'DOWD Alternate name: N/A Date of survey: 08/05/1996 Division of Waters inventory number: 70- 0095 -00 Nearest town: Shakopee, MN Primary county: Scott Public Access Ownership Type Location /Comments Minnesota DNR Concrete DNR operated public access on west central shore off of County Road 79. Lake Characteristics Lake area (acres): 258 -00 Area less than 15 ft deep (acres): 235.00 Maximum depth (feet): 22.00 Water clarity (secchi depth, feet): 3.00 Dominant bottom substrate (less than 4 feet deep): sand, clay, silt Abundance of aquatic plants: abundant Maximum depth of plant growth (feet): 6.00 Fish Sampled for the 19% Survey Year Number of Fish per Net Average Fash Normal Range* Species Cear Used Caught Normal Range* Weight(lbs) (Ibs) Black Bullhead Gill net 50.8 9.6 - 91.4 0.48 0.2 - 0.5 Black Bulthead Trap net 17.2 2.2 - 60.5 0.41 0.2 - 0.5 Black Crappie Gill net 4.7 1.5 - 14.7 0.13 0.1 - 0.3 Black Crappie Trap net 16.9 2.4 - 15.1 0.17 0.2 - 0.4 Pape 2 Lake Information Report for O'DOWD 0811212001 Fish Sampled for the 19% Survey Year (continued) Number of Fish per Net Average Fish Normal Range* Species "' Gear Used Caught Normal Range* Weight(lbs) (lbs) 8luegill` Gill net 20.3 MIA - MIA 0:09 MIA - MIA Bluegill - Trap net 115.1 1.9 - 29.5 0.11 0.2 - 0.3 Brown Bullhead Gill net 0.5 1.0 - 6.0 0.83 0.3 - 0.7 Brown Bullhead Trap net 0.3 1.4 - 6.6 0.71 0.3 - 0.7 Golden Shiner Gill net 0.5 0.4 - 4.3 0.09 0.1 - 0.1 Hybrid Sunfish Gill net 1.8 MIA - N/A 0.07 MIA - MIA Hybrid Sunfish Trap net 11.6 A/A - MIA 0.12 MIA - MIA Largemouth Bass Trap net 1.1 0.3 - 1.2 0.60 0.4 - 1.2 Northern Pike Gill net 8.8 1.5 - 7.0 2.99 1.5 - 3.4 Northern Pike Trap net 0.9 N/A - N/A 3.16 MIA - MIA Pumpkinseed Sunfish Gill net 0.2 N/A - N/A 0.04 N/A - N/A Pumpkinseed Sunfish Trap net 9.6 0.8 - 8.4 0.07 0.1 - 0.2 Walleye Gill net 1.3 1.0 - 7.3 3.82 1.0 - 2.8 Walleye Trap net 1.2 0.4 - 1.9 2.31 0.6 - 2.6 White Crappie Trap net 0.3 2.5 - 11.6 0.44 0.2 - 0.4 White Sucker Gill net 0.5 0.5 - 7.4 2.68 1.0 - 2.2 White Sucker Trap net 1.3 0.3 - 2.2 3.82 1.1 - 2.5 : Normal ranges represent typical catches for lakes with similar physical and chemical characteristics. Length of Selected Species Sampled from All Gear for the 1 Survey Year Number offish measured in the following length categories (inches)_ - Species 0-5 6,8 9 -11 12 -14 15 -19 20-24 25 -29 >30 Total Black Bullhead - 161 268 1 - - - - 430 180 Black Crappie 17 157 6 - - _ 581 Bluegill 370 211 - - - 6 Brown Bullhead - - 5 1 - - 115 Hybrid Sunfish 77 38 - - - 10 Largemouth Bass 4 5 - - - 1 - 11 - 33 - 14 3 61 Northern Pike - 87 Pumpkinseed Sunfish 82 5 - - - - 19 - 1 4 9 1 4 Walleye - White Crappie 1 2 Page 3 Lake Information Report for 0 DOWD 0811212001 Fish Stocked by Species and Size, 1995 - 2 Fi Year Species Age* Number 1995" Walleye Adult 82 Walleye Fingerling 607 - Walleye Yearling 635 -1996 Walleye Fingerling 7,134 1997- Walleye Fingerling 1,272 1998 Walleye Yearling 1,627 Walleye Fingerling 374 walleye Yearling 481 Wall eye Adult 1 1999 Walleye Adult 13 Walleye Yearling 364 Walleye Fingerling 736 2000 Walleye Fingerling 1,078 Walleye Adult 194 Walleye Yearling 309 4 Fry are recently hatched fish; Fingerlings are 1 summer old fish; Yearlings are fish between 1 and 2 summers old; Adults are fish 2 or more summers old. Status of the Fishery (as of 08/05/1996) O'Dowd Lake is presently populated with an abundance of below average sized bluegill and black crappies. Bluegill have shown a steady increase in abundance since 1991 and presently average 5.4 inches in length. Approximately 40% of bluegill collected in the 1996 survey were 6.0" or longer, and only 2.4% were found to exceed 7.0 inches. Black crappie, while down in abundance since 1991, have shown little improvement in size. Average length observed for crappies was only 7.0 inches. Growth rate for both species was found to be below average. Northern pike abundance has shown a steady increase since 1991 and over 25% of the netted sample was over 25 inches in length. The largest northern pike captured was 34.6 inches. Walleye abundance remains relatively steady with some quality fish present. The largest walleye handled was 28.2 inches and 9.0 pounds, however, the average was 18.5 inches and 2.9 pounds. Largemouth bass appear to be present in good numbers with some quality fish present. Growth rates for all three main predator species were found to be average or better. No yellow perch were captured during this survey and black bullhead abundance continues to decline in the seasonal sample. Pape 4 Lake Informat ion Report for O'DOWD 0811212001 Fish Consumption Advice Angling is;great in Minnesota and so are the fish. Fish are low in fat, high in protein, and may have substantial health benefits whey eaten in place -of high -f foods. While the quality of sport fish taken in Minnesota is among the highest in the Greaciakes legion, chemicals' like mercury and polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) have bees found in some fish from certain waters. While>most`people in Minnesota do not eat enough fish to cause harm, some individuals could be at risk. These :are: people _who eat predator fish more than once a week, pregnant women, women planning to be pregnant, and J children under six years of age. The Minnesota Fish Consumption Advisory booklet lists all lakes and rivers from which fish have been tested. This booklet is intended to give people advice on how much fish is safe to eat. The advisory gives consumption advice only for the species and length of fish tested and is based on mercury and PCB concentrations measured in uncooked skin -on fillets. If fish from this lake have been tested then a summary of the consumption advice is given below. More detailed advice is given in the fish consumption advisory. If a lake is not listed in the advisory booklet, this does not imply that the fish do not have contaminants. It means, that the fish in this lake have not been tested for contaminants. If no advice for this lake appears in the table below, or if the species you are interested in is not listed, then following some general guidelines can help reduce your risk when eating fish. • Keep smaller fish for eating. Large predatory fish (walleye, northern pike) contain higher levels of contaminants. • Substitute some meals of panfish (sunfish, crappie) for predator fish. • Eat smaller meals when you eat big fish and eat them less often. • Trim skin and fat. Belly fat especially should be filleted from all fish. Also, cut down on fatty fish such as carp, catfish, and lake trout. PCBs build up in fish fat, which is the dark tissue between the skin and flesh. • Broil or grill your fish. This allows some fat to drip off the fish. In particular, people who eat fish more than once a week, pregnant women, and children under six should follow these guidelines. Summary of Fish Consumption Advice Annual Consumption Advice* Species ** General Population Sensitive Population * ** Black Crappie unlimited I meal per week Northern Pike 1 meal per week 1 meal per mont Walleye 1 meal per week I meal per most White Sucker unlimited 1 meal per week * Advice listed in this table is for annual consumption. People who eat fish only during a vacation or season can safely consume more fish. See the consumption advisory for more information. ** Consumption advice varies according to length of fish. The advice listed is the most restrictive for that species. * ** The sensitive population includes women who are pregnant, women who may become pregnant to the next year, nursing mothers, and children under six years of age. For additional information or to obtain a copy of the Minnesota Fish Consumption Advisory, contact the Minnesota Department of Health at (651)215 -0950 or toll -free at (800)657 -3908. The advisory booklet is also available at most area DNR offices. 08/12/2001 Lake maps can he obtained from: Minnesota Bookstore 117 University Ave. St. Paul, NN 55155 (651) 297 -3000 or (800) 657-3757 To order, use C0797 map -id. Turn In Poachers MP): (800) 652 -9093 General Department of Health Information: Minnesota Department of Health 121 East Seventh Place, Suite 220 P.O. Box 64975 St. Paul, MM 55164-0975 (651) 215 -0950 or (800) 657 -3908 Weigh Your Fish With A Ruler Weighing a fish with a scale can harm or even kill it. You can estimate the weight of a fish safely and fairly accurately by measuring its length and finding the corresponding weight on the charts shown below. Northern Pike 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 3T 38 39 40 41 42 Inches 24 25 Pounds 3.9 4.4 5.0 5.6 6.2 7.0 7.7 8.5 9.3 10.2 11.2 12.2 13.3 14.5 15.7 16.9 18.3 19.6 21.2 Walleye Inches 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 Z2 Z3 24 25 26 27 28 29 Pounds 1.0 1.2 1.5 1.8 2.2 2.5 3.0 3.4 3.9 4.5 5.1 5.7 6.5 7.2 8.1 9.0 Largemouth Bass Inches 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 Pounds 1.0 1.3 1.7 2.1 2.5 3.0 3.6 4.2 5.0 5.7 6.6 7.6 Crappie Inches 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 Pounds 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.1 1.4 1.8 2.2 2.8 3.4 4.1 Mote: Weights given are estimations only. Actual weights vary by lake and stream. Copyright 2001- State of Minnesota, Department of Natural Resources. Reproduction of this material without express written authorization of the Department of Natural Resources is prohibited. W Z J W O Of CO Q W 0 _ LL UO ®W Wrr CO :D 0 a-U a- 3: W W 0 p 0 LL O 0 z w w= z a- zi m w0 0-1 CD 00 = t- w 0-1 CO LL w0 � = Z ~ w U a= O z 2 0 0 Z 3 Z W U d. `\ OK YY 1 tu" 4 6 4 -------- ---- - His >m who 1 1J T 7 ---- ------ its A . . . . . . . . . . . x m� -I �t ' 7Z -k z� J om. 1- wiv. pa jj. f p 41 `� a .... : - x9410 `,... // / / :' \ _ - _ _ _ ar,a x \ x \ _... , l rii.� n+:e • . ...... .. A 7-r Wvv A ---- --- 300 0 300 I OEM --- - ------ SCALE: 1 300' ----------------- --- x7 w., z ceaa 1 a / � 1' y - �j /•. `:x �- - .. 1 f f a + ;� __ !\. _ \ e -. �si \� •,,�` xana !jEa /Q Y -. � �rza.�� �sies' afar \ el, fi wc asl it rr : ---------- --- ------- "E it: it -------- - ----- W4 - --- ------- al • ..... .... 300 0 300 m6m 6� 6 SCALE: 1 300' .002 tt L :31vos rift 002 0 002 • ----------- . . .... ...... - --------- atsC v. - Z ... ......... Va. % 6 1 , - -------- - ------ "M4. IM it fm: .. ........... • t Ti t � �' '.. 'rein ~ ctn - n . rxab x cH:c a . .. ...... - i V"'Q 1t I / I To: Mayor and City Council Mark McNeill, City Administrator From: Mark McQuillan, Natural Resource Director Subject: PRAB Recommendation Regarding Land Purchase on O'Dowd lake Date: May 21, 2002 INTRODUCTION/BACK made another visit to Phillips Last night, the Parks and Recreation Advisory Board (PRAB) property. After much discussion, the Board voted 4 -0 to recommend to the City Council not to buy the Phillips property for a future community park. elft Even though there are new members of the Advisory Boar that a we e discuss din 2001, such as: l ast year, they brought up similar issues with this property d future residential neighborhoods; • Access into the park is limited through existing a adin • A good portion of the 43 acres would require extensive landscaping, (grading); amount usable land and • The price tag is a little high for the • Aquatic activity on lakeshore is questionable. The DRAB also stated that their recommendation w not till wishes to acquire ) but moving ahead with the purchase of the Phillip (p to use some sort of creative financing that would not o iequa � Wo g� like to move forward with an The PRAB still places land acquisition as a high priority alternative plan that is consistent with the Cit C a future City Council -P Tra RAB CIP Workshop- Plan. Further discussion of this could take p ace a The DRAB would like direction to look at other land options within the City or possibility partner with Louisville Township in a joint acquisition. With this recommendation, and with Council's approvaleths dentifi d for o m ove forward 2002. with the Tahpah Park Parking Lot Project and other pro, ACTION REQUES if the City Council concurs with the Parks and Recre her ne of ations for the John Phillips Property should, by motion, release Councilor Link from forth g and direct the Parks and Recreation Advisory Board to explore other land options that meet the City's Comprehensive Park Plan Mark J. Mc uilla Natural Resource Director CITY OF SHAKOPEE Memorandum TO: Mayor and City Council Mark McNeill, City Administrator FROM: R. Michael Leek, Community Development Director SUBJECT: Interim Transit Services Agreement with Scott County MEETING DATE: May 21, 2002 City and Scott County staff have been negotiating the terms of a long -term agreement for transit services. In the meantime, during the week of May 13, 2002, staff learned that Laidlaw Transit Services, Inc. intends to discontinue operating the dial -a -ride service effective June 1, 2002. In order to insure that Shakopee residents have continued access to dial -a -ride, staff is proposing that the City enter into a short-term agreement with Scott County lasting until August 31, 2002. The County Board will be reviewing this request on May 21', as well, and the author of this report will be in attendance at that meeting to provide information and answer questions. The City Attorney will be reviewing the draft agreement prior to the scheduled meeting, and any input from the attorney will be incorporated into the staff report at the meeting. A final contract will be brought to the City Council and County at a future date. The Council should be aware that the negotiation of that agreement is more complex, as it involves planning for connections between new transit circulator and express routes to be operated by the County. 1. Authorize the appropriate City officials to enter into an interim agreement with Scott County for transit services, said contract expiring on or about August 31, 2002 2. Do not authorize entering into an interim contract for transit services. 3. Table the item for additional information. 1 1 FAIT Authorize the appropriate City officials to enter into an interim agreement with Scott County for transit services, said contract expiring on or about August 31, 2002 r R. Michael Leek 020831 THIS AGREEMENT, by and between the County of Scott, Minnesota, through the Human Services Department of the Community Services Division, Government Center 300, 200 Fourth Avenue West, Shakopee, Minnesota 55379 -1220, hereinafter referred to as the "County," and The City of Shakopee, Mn 129 Holmes St, Shakopee, Mn 55372 hereinafter referred to as "City ". RECITALS: a. The County, through the Scott County Human Services Department, has the facilities and personnel available to provide transit services through the operation of dial -a -ride service to specified individuals; and b. The City has available resources and desires to make use of the transit services available from the Scott County Human Services Department. C. NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual undertakings and agreement contained herein, the County and City hereby agree as follows: CONSIDERATION AND TERMS OF PAYMENT Consideration for all services performed by County pursuant to this Agreement shall be paid by City as follows: Due to unusual circumstances relating to the discontinuance of Dial a Ride service to the city of Shakopee by Laidlaw and the finalization of a contract between Scott County and the city, an interim agreement is necessary to prevent disruption of services. For the Agreement starting June 1, 2002 within ten days following the conclusion of each month, the County shall report to the City the following information: total rides scheduled, rides denied, rides canceled after scheduling, rides "no- showed" by customer, rides missed by the County, and rides completed. For rides completed, the report shall show fares collected by fare category (single / multiple city; cash / transfer / pass). In addition, the County shall provide origin - designation information for all rides completed, and daily vehicle hours and mileage. Within thirty days from the receipt of such report in an acceptable fashion, City shall pay to the County for actual costs directly related to this service. The monthly amount billed to the city will be based on actual costs minus the amount of cash fares collected, per month, until the permanent contract is finalized. 2. SCOPE OF SERVICES The parties agree to the following during the term of the agreement: a. The County shall operate reservations and dispatching services within the normal parameters of its existing operation. The county shall provide additional services for reservations strictly for this project. Dispatchers shall accommodate same -day requests to the extent possible, and shall negotiate pickup /drop off times and locations with callers as needed to enable a ride to be scheduled. b. The County shall provide transportation services consisting of buses owned by the city to operate dial -a -ride service. The service shall operate starting June 1, 2002 until August 31, 2002 (inclusive), Monday through Friday. C. Additional trips may be scheduled to the extent possible on other County transit vehicles. Such rides shall be reported as City riders if reservations were made using the City reservation line and the rides are within the boundaries of the service area delineated herein. 3. d. The County will provide the necessary training to the reservation and driver positions assigned to this project. e. Customer Intake procedures: The receptionist position will handle customer service issues and will be the direct contact for the City for this purpose. Any serious issues will be directed to the Transportation Supervisor of Scott County Transit. All intake procedures will be written, assigned and managed by both an City representative, a Scott County representative, and the person chosen for the temporary receptionist position. f. The City will provide vehicles dedicated to this project. The City has informed the County that the buses will be safe, reliable and cost - efficient. The County will be responsible for insuring the bus and the driver(s) are considered County employees. g. The City will provide the necessary brochures, advertising, and promotional material for the proposed service. The information distributed will include but will not be limited to: Pricing, hours of service, phone numbers, scheduling information, service expectations, customer service expectations, coupon redemption, transfer information, fare card information etc. h. The City will allow some customers to ride on this service without monetary compensation. In these cases, the transportation will be set up in advance by the client themselves or a City representative. This may also be done in the way of a free ride coupon providing the customer acknowledges this at the time the reservations are made and prior to the driver arriving at the pick up location. The City or the County supervisors will authorize all free rides only. TERM OF AGREEMENT This Agreement shall be effective June 1, 2002, and shall remain in effect until August 31, 2002, or until all obligations set forth in this Agreement have been satisfactorily fulfilled or unless earlier terminated by either party, with or without cause, upon fourteen (14) days' written notice to City or the authorized agent of the County. The parties hereby appoint the following authorized agents for the purpose of administration of this Agreement: Nancy Dickinson, Contract Manager Scott County Human Services Government Center 300 200 Fourth Avenue West Shakopee, Minnesota 55379 -1220 (952) 496 -8276 Micheal Leek Economic Development Director City of Shakopee 129 Holmes St Shakopee, MN 55372 952 - 233 -3800 For other purposes County's agents are: 5. 21 VA 8. Program: Troy Beam Scott County Human Services Government Center 300 200 Fourth Avenue West Shakopee, Minnesota 55379 -1220 (952) 496 -8277 COUNTY AND STATE AUDIT Billing: Shelley Maxwell Scott County Human Services Government Center 300 200 Fourth Avenue West Shakopee, Minnesota 55379 -1220 (952) 496 -8589 Pursuant to Minn. Stat. Section 16C.05, Subd. 5 (1998), the books, records, documents, and accounting procedures and practices of Provider relative to this agreement shall be subject to examination by the County and the State Auditor. Complete and accurate records of the work performed pursuant to this agreement shall be kept by Provider for a minimum of six (6) years following termination of this agreement for such auditing purposes. The retention period shall be automatically extended during the course of any administrative or judicial action involving the County of Scott regarding matters to which the records are relevant. The retention period shall be automatically extended until the administrative or judicial action is finally completed or until the authorized agent of the County notifies Provider in writing that the records need no longer be kept. The County and City mutually agree to defend, indemnify, and hold harmless each other and their respective officers, board members, and employees for claims of any kind (including attorney fees and costs) that may arise in connection with the performance of this subsidy agreement, except for the portion of a claim that is caused by the negligence or intentional conduct of the other party. Nothing herein shall be construed as a waiver of the provisions of Minnesota Statutes Chapter 466. DATA PRACTICES Provider, its agents, employees and any subcontractors of Provider in providing all services hereunder, agree to abide by the provisions of the Minnesota Government Data Practices Act, Minn. Stat. Ch. 13, as amended, and Minn. Rules promulgated pursuant to Ch. 13. The Provider agrees to indemnify and hold the County, its officers, department heads and employees harmless from any claims resulting from the Provider's unlawful disclosure or use of data protected under state and federal laws. NOTICES Any notices to be given under this agreement shall be given by enclosing the same in a sealed envelope, postage prepaid, and depositing the same in the United States Postal Service, addressed to Provider at its address stated herein, and to the authorized agent of the County at the address stated herein. 9. CONTROLLING LAW The laws of the State of Minnesota shall govern all questions and interpretations concerning the validity and construction of this agreement and the legal relations between the herein parties and performance under it. The appropriate venue and jurisdiction for any litigation hereunder will be those courts located with the County of Scott, State of Minnesota. Litigation, however, in the federal courts involving the herein parties will be in the appropriate federal court within the State of Minnesota. If any provision of this contract is held invalid, illegal or unenforceable, the remaining provisions will not be affected. 70. SUCCESSORS AND ASSIGNS The County and Provider, respectively, bind themselves, their partners, successors, assigns, and legal representatives to the other party to this agreement and to the partners, successors, assigns, and legal representatives of such other party with respect to all covenants of this agreement. Neither the County nor Provider shall assign, sublet, or transfer any interest in this agreement without the prior written consent of the other. 11. CHANGES The parties agree that no change or modification to this Agreement, or any attachments hereto, shall have any force or effect unless the change is reduced to writing, dated, and made part of this Agreement. The execution of the change shall be authorized and signed in the same manner as for this Agreement. 12. SEVERABILITY In the event any provision of this agreement shall be held invalid and unenforceable, the remaining provisions shall be valid and binding upon the parties unless such invalidity or non - enforceability would cause the agreement to fail its purpose. One or more waivers by either party of any provision, term, condition or covenant shall not be construed by the other party as a waiver of a subsequent breach of the same by the other party. 13. ENTIRE AGREEMENT It is understood and agreed that the entire agreement of the parties is contained herein and that this Agreement supersedes all oral agreements and negotiations between the parties relating to the subject matter hereof as well as any previous agreements presently in effect between the County and City relating to the subject matter hereof. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have caused this Agreement to be duly executed intending to be bound thereby. APPROVED AS TO FORM: Thomas J. Harbinson Scott County Attorney DATE: Barbara Marschall, Chair of the Board SCOTT COUNTY BY: �t4 ATTEST: David J. Unmacht, County Administrator BY: BY: William Mars, Mayor DATE: By: Mark McNeil, City Manager Judith S. Cox, City Clerk CITY OF SHAKOPEE Memorandum CASE NO.: TO: FROM: SUBJECT: Mayor and City Council Mark McNeill, City Administrator Mark Noble, Planner I y F U Lji , Resolution No. 5708, Approving the Appeal of Michael Werth of Conditional Use Permit Amendment for Extended Hours MEETING DATE: May 21, 2002 At its May 7, 2002 meeting, the City Council directed staff to prepare a resolution reversing the decision of the Board of Adjustment and Appeals and granting a Conditional Use Permit amendment for extending the hours of Caffe' LaBarra, located at 238 Lewis Street. The attached resolution has been prepared for approval by the Council. ALTERNATIVES: 1. Approve the resolution as presented. 2. Approve the resolution with revisions. 3. Table the resolution for specific reasons. ACTION REQUESTED: The Council is asked to offer and pass Resolution No. 5708, a resolution of the City of Shakopee overturning the decision of the Board of Adjustment and Appeals and granting a Conditional Use Permit amendment for extending the hours of Caffe' LaBarra, located at 238 Lewis Street, from 5:00 a.m. to 1:00 a.m., subject to conditions as presented. RESOLUTION NO. 5708 WHEREAS, the City of Shakopee received an application from Michael Werth (Technics, Inc.), applicant and property owner, for a Conditional Use Permit Amendment to allow a Class H Restaurant with an outdoor dining area and extended hours from 5:00 a.m. to 1:00 a.m., where 5:00 a.m. to 11:00 p.m. are permitted; and WHEREAS, the property for which the application was made is legally described as follows: The south 60 feet of Lot 5, Block 30, City of Shakopee, Scott County, Minnesota; and WHEREAS, the subject parcel of land is presently zoned Central Business (B -3) Zone; and WHEREAS, the proper public hearing notices were sent, published or posted, and on April 4, 2002 a public hearing was held on the requested Conditional Use Permit amendment before the Board of Adjustment and Appeals (BOAR), at which it heard from the Community Development Director or his designee and invited members of the public to comment; and WHEREAS, the applicant timely appealed the determination of the Board of Adjustment and Appeals; and WHEREAS, the City Council reviewed the appeal of the applicant at it's meeting of May 7, 2002; and WHEREAS, the City Council reached the following findings with respect to the requested Conditional Use Permit Amendment and applicable ordinance criteria: Finding #1: The Council has not received any evidence that the use, with the conditions stipulated, will be injurious to the use and enjoyment of other property in the vicinity. Finding #2: The Council finds that the amendment to the conditional use, with the conditions stipulated, will not impede the normal and orderly development and improvement of surrounding property. Finding #3: Adequate utilities, access, drainage and other necessary facilities exist to serve the site. Finding #4: The use, with the conditions stipulated, is consistent with the purposes of the Central Business (B -3) Zone. Finding #5: The use is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan guiding for the subject site. NOW, THEREFORE 1 BY THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA, That the decision of the Board of Adjustment and Appeals is hereby overturned, and the applicant's request for extended hours from 5:00 a.m. to 1:00 a.m. is hereby granted, subject to the following conditions: 1. Conditional Use Permit Resolution No. PCO1 -074 is hereby rescinded. 2. Must comply with the State of Minnesota Department of Health requirements. 3. All on site lighting shall be directed on site (toward the structure, parking areas, etc.) and shall comply with the lighting requirements of the City Code. 4. All rooftop mechanical equipment shall be totally screened from view form adjacent properties and existing and planned streets, painted to match or complement the building or incorporated into an architectural design which is aesthetically compatible with the building. 5. Refuse containers shall be screened to a height of six (6) feet and include a cover. 6. Must comply with City Code, Chapter 10, Section 10.60 (Noise Elimination and Noise Prevention). 7. The applicant must obtain sign permits for any and all future signs. 8. A liquor license shall be required to sell alcohol. 9. Hours of operation are limited to 5:00 a.m. and 1:00 a.m. for the indoor dining area, and 5:00 a.m. and 11:00 p.m. for the outdoor dining area. Receipt by the City of complaints because of the indoor dining area being open between 11:00 p.m. and 1:00 a.m. will result in this CUP being reviewed by the Board of Adjustment and Appeals. 10. The outdoor dining area is restricted to the area shown on the submitted site plan and is to be utilized for outdoor dining only, excluding the sale, consumption or serving of alcoholic beverages. The number of tables and seats are to be consistent with the submitted site plan. 11. No live entertainment allowed beyond midnight. Receipt by the City of complaints because of the indoor dining area being open between 11:00 p.m. and 1:00 a.m. will result in this CUP being reviewed by the Board of Adjustment and Appeals. 12. This application shall be reviewed within one year for conformance with this resolution and other City Code requirements. Adopted in held the day of ATTEST: City Clerk session of the City Council of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota, -2002. Mayor of the City of Shakopee CERTIFICATION OF RESOLUTION NO. 5708 I, Judith S. Cox, City Clerk for the City of Shakopee, do hereby certify that the attached is a true and correct copy of Resolution No. 5708, presented to and adopted by the City Council of the City of Shakopee at a duly authorized meeting thereof held on the day of , 2002, as shown by minutes of the meeting in my possession. Dated this day of , 20 Judith S. Cox City Clerk M CITY OF SHAKOPEE Memorandum CASE NO.: 02 -050 TO: Mayor and City Council Mark McNeill, City Administrator FROM: Mark Noble, Planner I R. Michael Leek, Community Development Director SUBJECT: Resolution No. 5727, Denying the Appeal of Beverly Koebnen of Amendment No. 4 to Conditional Use Permit No. 376 and the Mineral Extraction and Land Rehabilitation Permit of Shakopee Gravel, Inc. MEETING DATE: May 21, 2002 INTRODUCTION: At its May 7, 2002 meeting, the City Council directed staff to prepare a resolution upholding the decision of the Board of Adjustment and Appeals and granting Amendment No. 4 to Conditional Use Permit No. 376 and the Mineral Extraction and Land Rehabilitation Permit of Shakopee Gravel, Inc., located at 1650 Canterbury Road. Staff has prepared the attached resolution for consideration and approval by the Council. Changes are identified by underlining. A copy of the boring report received from the applicant is attached for the Council's information, and a copy was also provided to the appellant, Beverly Koehnen. ALTERNATIVES: 1. Approve Resolution No. 5727, a resolution denying the appeal of Beverly Koehnen of Amendment No. 4 to Conditional Use Permit No. 376 and the Mineral Extraction and Land Rehabilitation Permit of Shakopee Gravel, Inc. as presented. 2. Approve Resolution No. 5727 with revisions. 3. Table the resolution for specific reasons. ACTION REQUESTED: The Council is asked to offer and pass Resolution No. 5727, a resolution of the City of Shakopee upholding the decision of the Board of Adjustment and Appeals and granting Amendment No. 4 to Conditional Use Permit No. 376 and the Mineral Extraction and Land Rehabilitation Permit of Shakopee Gravel, Inc., located at 1650 Canterbury Road, subject to conditions. Mar Noble, 1 er I RESOLUTION NO. 5727 WHEREAS, Shakopee Gravel, Inc., property owner and applicant, have filed an application dated December 20, 2001, for an Amendment to Conditional Use Permit No. CC -376 (and subsequent amendments No. 1, No. 2 and No. 3) under the provisions of Chapter 11, Land Use Regulation (Zoning), of the Shakopee City Code, Section 11.85, Subd. 2, for a Conditional Use Permit to operate a mine; and WHEREAS, this parcel is presently zoned Agricultural Preservation (AG) Zone with a Mining Overlay (MIN) Zone; and WHEREAS, the property upon which the request is being made is legally described as follows: The Northeast Quarter of the Northwest Quarter of Section 16, Township 115 North, Range 22 West, Scott County Minnesota. Also: the West Half of the Northwest Quarter of Section 16, Township 115 North, Range 22 West, Scott County, Minnesota, lying North and Easterly of the Northeasterly right of way line of the Chicago, Milwaukee, St. Paul and Pacific Railway. Also: That part of the Southeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter of Section 17 Township 115 North, Range 22 West, Scott County, Minnesota, lying Northeasterly of the Northeasterly right of way line of the Chicago, Milwaukee, St. Paul and Pacific Railway, and WHEREAS, notice was provided and on Nov. 4, 1993; Dec. 9, 1993; March 9, 1995; April 6, 1995; May 4, 1995; June 8, 1995; July 6, 1995; August 3,1995; and February 7, 2002, the Shakopee Planning Commission or 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, Ms. Beverly Koehnen timely appealed the determination of the Board of Adjustment and Appeals; and WHEREAS, the City Council reviewed the appeal of Ms. Koehnen at it's meeting of May 7, 2002; and WHEREAS, the City Council reached the following findings with respect to the requested amendment and applicable ordinance criteria: Finding #1: After reviewing the evidence in the record, the Council has concluded that, not , with the conditions stipulated, the use will not be injurious to the use and enjoyment of other property in the vicinity. Finding #2: The Council finds that the amendment to the conditional use, mineral extraction and land rehabilitation permit, with the conditions stipulated, will not impede the normal and orderly development and improvement of surrounding property. Finding#3: Adequate utilities, access, drainage and other necessary facilities exist to serve the site. Finding #4: The use, with the conditions stipulated, is consistent with the purposes of the Agricultural Preservation (AG) Zone and Mining Overlay (MIN) Zone. Finding #5: The use is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan guiding for the subject site. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA, AS FOLLOWS: That the decision of the Board of Adjustment and Appeals is hereby upheld, and the applicant's request for Amendment No. 4 to Conditional Use Permit No. 376 and the Mineral Extraction and Land Rehabilitation Permit is hereby granted, subject to the following revised conditions: The Shakopee Board of Adjustments and Appeals shall review the Conditional Use Permit and and Mineral Extraction and Land Rehabilitation Permit '' "'' � :�e annually. Both permits shall be renewed every three years. Owner /operator shall apply for review and/or renewal prior to expiration of the period. Applications for CUP and Mineral Extraction and Land Rehabilitation Permit review or renewal will include records of groundwatering monitoring information With each application for rene the applicant shall submit a consolidated and upd ated operat plan. 2. Approval of a Conditional Use Permit dal renewal or amendment is contingent upon Board of Adjustment and Appeals approval of the Mineral Extraction and Land Rehabilitation Permit. 3. Security fencing shall be used on the main access roads to control vehicular access to the mining and equipment area, and along the west property line adjacent to existing residential development. 4. The applicant shall obtain a County Road Entrance permit from the Scott County Highway Engineer. 5. County Road weight restrictions shall be adhered to. Truck traffic shall be limited to the use of County Road 83 to Hwy. 101 and County Road 42. Absolutely no truck traffic from the mining operation shall be routed through the urban portion of the City of Shakopee. 6. Berms with a minimum height of eight (8) feet shall be built around the perimeter of each phase, installed at no greater than a 3:1 grade. Berms must be fully seeded to prevent erosion. 7. The mining operation shall maintain the following minimum setbacks: 100 feet from any residential or commercial property line; 500 feet from any residential or commercial structure; 30 feet from any road right -of -way. 8. All portable buildings must be approved by the Building Official. 9. The hours of operation of any aspect of the mining operation shall be limited to 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m., Monday thru Friday. 10. Dust must be controlled by paving main access roads, watering haul roads and equipment and by any other means which will control adverse affects of dust on neighboring properties. 11. Noise emissions shall not exceed the noise limits as no in Section 10.60 (Noise Elimination and Noise Prevention) of the Shakopee City Code, nor the MPCA Standards. 12. There shall be no on -site storage of fuel and no use or storage of explosives except for two propane tanks, one 325- gallon tank located next to the scale building and one 100 -pound tank located next to the maintenance /electrical building. The propane shall be used to heat these two buildings only. The propane tanks must be installed and maintained in accordance with State Fire Marshall Rules (Chapter 7510.3100 — 7510.3280). 13. No direct exterior lighting shall be visible from adjacent properties or the public right -of -way. Two 125 -watt high- pressure sodium security lights can be installed on the site and they must be located on the site as shown on the submitted plan. 14. Stockpiles of gravel shall be allowed to exceed 25 feet in height, but not exceed the height of the surrounding berms and shall be setback from the property lines so that visual impact is minimal from the surrounding property. 15. The applicant shall be responsible for reimbursing the City for all costs incurred in reviewing the permit through the life of the operation. 16. The revised Gravel Extraction Plan and the End Use Plan, as submitted by the applicant, shall be adhered to, without modifications, unless approved in advance by the Board of Adjustment and Appeals. 17. The applicant shall prepare in report form, a plan for operation, which if acceptable, shall be adopted by resolution as the Mining Permit. The Plan for Operation shall be comprised of 1) the submitted maps A, B, C; 2) the conditions of the approved permits 3) background information as contained in the memo prepared by Merila and Associates, Inc.; dated April 30, 1985. 18. The City's approval of the permits (CUP and Mining) is made in reliance upon the applicant's representations regarding the life of the operation (17 years). Any factors, or future developments which significantly delay the completion of the mining operation, may be viewed by the City as sufficient grounds to deny the three -year renewal of the permit. 19. The Conditional Use and Mining Permits may be reviewed prior to the scheduled annual review, if the City receives complaints, supported by evidence indicating that the conditions of this permit are being violated. Upon receipt of such complaints, or by the Board of Adjustment and Appeals' own initiation, the City shall schedule a public hearing, in accordance with the proper procedures for notice and publication. 20. If the Board of Adjustment and Appeals finds that the applicants have substantially, or repeatedly violated the terms of this agreement, the Couneil Board of Adjustments and Appeals may revoke said permit. 21. Expand the operation to include the 5 -acre Rutt Farmstead. 22. Relocate the natural gas pipeline on the site. 23. Allow for the relocation of the central processing area. 24. Allow the final development grades to be between an elevation of 764 at the bottom of the proposed ponds and 832 feet. 25. The operation should be mined in five phases, except as modified by su bsequent amendment to or renewal of the CUP and Min permit. 26. A soil ber-ing test shall be dene to establish the etiffent-gound water- NISL Win T he applicant shall establish a monitoring well on the s ect site for grou water quality monitoring and shall regularly (at least annually record measurements from that well which measurements shall be submitted with any application for review, renewal, or amendment. Mining extraction shall not exceed a depth greater than ten (10) feet above the established ground water MSL elevation. A ddifio-Hal bx, annual tes ts by possible eoi+taminants eafffleeted with the mg operation. 27. ^' The mine shall operate for 17 years beginning on January 16, 1996, and terminating on January 16, 2013. 28. Provided that the applicant is granted access to future 17 Avenue, consistent with the end use development of the property, the applicant agrees to dedicate the right of way for future 17 Avenue at no cost to the City and accept assessments based upon the end use development of the property. 29. The sanitary sewer along future 17 Avenue is shown, but not approved. Future extension of 17 Avenue will determine the ultimate alignment and depth. The City Engineer shall determine and propose a mutually agreeable location and depth for the trunk sanitary sewer along future 17 Avenue. 30. Access spacing to future 17 Avenue and CSAH 83 will be determined by Scott County, City of Shakopee and the applicant upon approval of the preliminary plat for the end use. 31. Material imported onto the site for reclamation and final site grading shall be monitored to ensure that it is environmentally clean. Records shall be kept of all imported material and all of the necessary documentation shall be available. The applicant will certify that the property is environmentally clean at the completion of each phase of the mining operation. 32. Material imported onto the site and used in the reclamation and final site grading shall only include soil materials of a bearing capacity sufficient to support development, as proposed in the End Use Plan. The depositing and compaction of materials shall be done in accordance with specifications prepared by a licensed geotechnical engineer. 33. The site shall be reclaimed in accordance with the End Use Plan and be available for development within one construction season following the completion of mining activities, if not before. 34. The storm sewer discharge along future 17 Avenue shall not exceed the design capacity in the CSAH 83 trunk storm sewer as determined by the City Engineer. The development of the subject property will necessitate the lowering of the storm sewer along future 17 Avenue. The property owner shall pay the cost of lowering this trunk line. 35. No Construction cutting or filling in the Minnegasco Easement #1997 -7, recorded as document #0393488, except as authorized by Minnegasco. 36. The applicant is to provide to the city an earthwork quantity calculation, to be completed by a Registered Professional Engineer or Registered Landscape Architect, and the applicant is to provide to the city on an annual basis the quantity of export and import materials. 37. If the mining operation intends to bring solid waste material onto the site, a solid waste license must first be approved by the Scott County Environmental Health Department. Adopted in Shakopee, Minnesota, held the rani y w City Clerk session of the City Council of the City of day of 1 2002. Mayor of the City of Shakopee Prepared by: THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE 129 Holmes Street South Shakopee, MN 55379 I, Judith S. Cox, City Clerk for the City of Shakopee, do hereby certify that the attached is a true and correct copy of Resolution No.5727, presented to and adopted by the City Council of the City of Shakopee at a duly authorized meeting thereof held on the day of , 2002, as shown by minutes of the meeting in my possession. Dated this day of , 20 _ Judith S. Cox City Clerk R. K. Hoagberg Associates Consulting Geologists 12 South Sixth Street, Suite 1047 Minneapolis, MN 55402 (612) 338 -2322 Memorandum Report: On the Piezometer Installed on the Shakopee Gravel Property, in Shakopee, Scott County, Minnesota To: Bert Notermann, Owner Shakopee Gravel, Inc. From: Rudy Hoagberg ciefk R.K. Hoagberg Assos Re: Installation of a piezometer on the Shakopee Gravel Property near gravel operation Report 0205, Project 4915 Date: 3 May 2002 Copy: John Shardlow Dahlgren, Shardlow, and Uban, Inc. Introduction As requested by Joel Speer of your staff, on 25 April 2002, I arranged for a drilling rig capable of drilling a piezometer /well on the Shakopee Gravel Property in which the uppermost potentiometric or water table surface can be measured on an ongoing basis. Procedures I first estimated the depth to the water depth beneath current operations, based on Property information on three pre - operation exploration boreholes that was in my files. From that information I estimated that the water table is likely within the upper dolostone beds of the Shakopee Formation. Therefore a rig that is normally used for drilling domestic water wells would be needed to accomplish drilling through -the gravel - bearing sand and other glacial sediments, set casing in and drill into the bedrock to an appropriate depth below the water table_ R.K. Hoagberg Associates, Inc. Consulting Geologists (Rprt. 0205 cntd.) Accordingly, I contracted with a reliable firm, and a duly licensed water -well contractor, that I ha e used for a number of years to move onto a favorable site that was chosen on the-' of April, with the help of Mark Wachter, in the northwest corner of the Property (figure 1). Findings A welUpiezometer was drilled on 26' April at a site, prepared by Mark Wachter, and shown on a copy of the December 2001 "existing conditions" map of the Property at an 1 inch represents 300 ft (1:3600 scale). The attached Well and Boring Record (fig. 2) , prepared by Barott Drilling Services, and my Summary Log (fig. 3), describe the construction of the well/piezometer and the sequence of rock materials encountered to the total depth of about 91 ft. A depth to water of 84.0 ft was measured shortly after completion of the well/piezometer. Although the altitude of the casing stick -up has not been surveyed, it is estimated that the water table is at an altitude of 729.5 + 0.5 ft based on my `hand- leveling" from a altitude marked on figure 1. Thus the current water -table altitude is about 44 feet below the pond level (the lowest point of the operations) as measured on 12 December 2000. That sandy loam to loam materials, in that depth interval, likely have a relatively low vertical hydraulic conductivity. Conclusions The altitude at the top of the piezometer stick up needs to be determined in the near future so that the depth to water can be measured at about three -month intervals or as may be required. ......._ -- . ;7 - .,. —11 N2 ._ MINNESOTA u(UUe 'Vt. r • - A6U+121FS6TA DEPAi�Th1>J� OF HEAI."�t'i �l/U ✓� Z veLLOCA - nON F-LL AND BORING RECORD ; z?;.d P t�T+e y - Minnerolir Slsiutes.Ctx�tter ia3i S W- w -OEPYN {cranplel d) Dat4 Work Go 'y�r Setion o No. Fra�in t d °, l Towt6ttp K� To+vnsitig N °- t � No. c � q I . er F1rc Nuttwer DRiLLiN cable TD O Onvert Dug CiLYy. aMyP C��w� � Q CedzToU � 1eRed o Auger RO Skc�h rpah of well ipratiotk 0 st}ort oT wcf in se Iton 90 with "X . Sharing Prtp". PM M WELL HYDRQFRA=REO? OYES 'K'NO c , iK� DA UNG FLUID }} hh fYi'+" ,'+ tl IK.. FROM USE © Mvnhorng 17 Ns �nglCootirK3 G Dom* p community PWs 0 Indw � 0 laigaton 0 Nore nimuw'tyPWS 0 V ow j + _ nwron.sors►;ote C3 De++9 Fed G l --- w J r ^r r j CA51niG Drive Shoe? Y� O N° F;DLE OlAM '°" sr fit' Ttvaaaea fl Wekiod =- 5 ' „. CASING DIAMEIgt W> =7GHF PROPS F[ Y OVYMER S NAME ih, t° tL r RYS tL in S° r �t 4'4 F� BFI' C .vim.• 1 irL to ft. t= AL in, 109 f Fmperty ownEYs mwTw* a n if different than well 16 2bm addre;& Irov;:wed above• n t0 _, �_ A. — ftAt aL to — R SCRSSW °Post N Make _ fRn, ��" ,4SO � ( IL Type D1am. - S!°I,c3alrz` Length Set betweon r, h. and _ - fL FT nNGS: ST WA R N L WELL OWNEFVS NAME _ ft. � baf°w G above tans =& flste rrleasur®d • - < 27 6 �� ft v , PUM ' Well Qwn°rs mS tg addre-s E off- Nt trian property ownces address M*C=tea above. !' V ft, after WELL BEAD C4MPLEI)ON Q Pitle=Stlapterma r Model Q C*' nN Protection ' 73 -- : D 'tE> - fq, 721n, abwe gr-zdc ❑ At-gmdc (nTArmreeAta( WeUs and Dotings ONLY) GRO=M. INFDRMAYION We4 grouted? 1S Yv; 0 No GEDLOGICAL MATERIALS COLOR HARQNESS OF FROM TTO C a-- M teri d Netat cstrtertt O Sarrtonite ❑ Concrete �Hith Solids SRntOnirc MATERIAL fro" - ?� to L9 _ - 1L - � 2 _ _ o Y A bags from to tc 0 bag: N> AnaESr MOWN sotsRc5- CC- coNraMUUT1oN teat dlrC�on newt if \ C4tir'C� � � 7 ��-� �["j � +-/ - w� �inEeeiBd ugCn ptY)Ptetlon? ❑ Y>; ,�,Q No PUMP' 6 ' p Not itistaltea Dei9 ltrstllied /� ( f. {� t Gj Msclufwturcr'sntme 651 -7 Model number HP volts L�gth of drop pipc IL Capw 0. 7 -I } Type_ 11 Subl*tdble CI LS.'rwtke 0 Rcc�procstk,g O Jet 0 A3ANDO WELLS } bocc property nave arty nor in else laid not sealed wel!(6)? ❑ Yes '4 NO VARIANCE W;�- a vari3= granted from the MOM Tor mts w91l7 0 Y,n 10 No TNtt t WELL COWRACTOR CZATfPCATION Ucn a aa�nd utaeL if ner rxJ 7hii W69 wRg d6fW undor my =*ervt; son and in acmrdar c with M1nno -Jota A W & Ch=Tiw 4723. f REMARKS, ELI VA770N, SOURCE Or DATA. etc_ 7h° information contained in M!s report is truq to the b�.t of my knowkm;sge, t c. Rsg. No, -..fM, o � �irrfhonze[I Rnpn�mr4YWc S�t)dkllB py� I - t i { bile Or Ddlar Dete WORK COPY i t F ?f'-Q 2R5 -07(R2v. VM l R. K. Hoagber'g Associates. SUMMARY [AG 0 Co nsulting Geologists PROJECT: 6h ff i q e�e 67 Y' 4- � •f Y; NO: CLIENT. -'s 604/0?t � r I, PROPERTY: �5; p jVC, p (, PIDPO - 'Ir CONTRAOTOR- D r I AIYIIIY5 NO.: REMARKS. vt (Cw" 37 y-< j Z--f R 6 r al GRAPHIC LOG C� kj DEPTH (ALT.) UNIT 'Y 1�7 l� err r7 Z 0 C� kj LOCATION: r e lf - INITIATED DATE f TIME COMPLETED: DATE ,4-�/j�'LTIME= I;" 12t, a4, - �A ( D , -P v >t S' c -A- ) dtqP4 SAMPLE DESCRIPTION AND REMARKS Y 2v , - If - f" 4. - Y4 - COLLARALT. v 141-5 - ' � 7 -70'*3"6 DEPTH: 9 1, e TO ALT.: 7 Z 3 j 0. 5 -�� LOGGED BY. P --e# [ A(,Yd� 5 x y X1 L� I SAMPLE NO- SLOWS RECOV. ? r.,,\ I &FOOTAGE I . I (*/) I 0-10 4, . eC,- L 70 Ap , it Y - 12 6,2 p ch ?p (b �4 - p ( 9, 2 0 VO - 7 4 6 4 e V 0 (77 of C(al. (0 (17-v C u 4i r if,7 y Itly'l y-P?C(ecf 7t& -CIC, crvv SHEET I OF I DEPTH: FROM TO im l� err r7 LOCATION: r e lf - INITIATED DATE f TIME COMPLETED: DATE ,4-�/j�'LTIME= I;" 12t, a4, - �A ( D , -P v >t S' c -A- ) dtqP4 SAMPLE DESCRIPTION AND REMARKS Y 2v , - If - f" 4. - Y4 - COLLARALT. v 141-5 - ' � 7 -70'*3"6 DEPTH: 9 1, e TO ALT.: 7 Z 3 j 0. 5 -�� LOGGED BY. P --e# [ A(,Yd� 5 x y X1 L� I SAMPLE NO- SLOWS RECOV. ? r.,,\ I &FOOTAGE I . I (*/) I 0-10 4, . eC,- L 70 Ap , it Y - 12 6,2 p ch ?p (b �4 - p ( 9, 2 0 VO - 7 4 6 4 e V 0 (77 of C(al. (0 (17-v C u 4i r if,7 y Itly'l y-P?C(ecf 7t& -CIC, crvv SHEET I OF I DEPTH: FROM TO im Figure ¢ Mineral- and rock - particle -size classification 100 0 Figure - A common classification of mixtures of sand -, silt- and clay - size, rock and mineral particles clay R.K. Hoagberg Associates Consulting Geologists 'A �� 50 c` ` G� sandy Q 0 clay . clay loam sandy \ clay loam sand 0 100 \ loam sandy silty loam \ loam silt 50 E— percent sand R.K. Hoagberg Associates Consulting Geologists ° m 50 silty clay silty clay loam L 100 0 Size Phi U.S. Particle Size Range Scale Standard Commercial Sizes (mm) (0) Sieve No. BOULDER i 256 8 Ri ra R rap large COBBLE 128 small -6 1Y2' i t * I t very large 64 Coarse 1 large 16 Aggregate Gravel PEBBLE medium 8 5 /8" 3/8 l Pea Rock small -2 -1 4 8 1 Buck Shot 4 GRANULE 2 very coarse 1 0 16 Concrete Sand coarse 30 Mortar Sand SAND medium 0.5 1 40 Plaster Sand 025 2 50 Fine fine 100 Aggregate Sarid very fine — 0.125 3 200 + 0.0625 4 SILT 0.005 8 CLAY 0.00024 COLLOIDS Figure ¢ Mineral- and rock - particle -size classification 100 0 Figure - A common classification of mixtures of sand -, silt- and clay - size, rock and mineral particles clay R.K. Hoagberg Associates Consulting Geologists 'A �� 50 c` ` G� sandy Q 0 clay . clay loam sandy \ clay loam sand 0 100 \ loam sandy silty loam \ loam silt 50 E— percent sand R.K. Hoagberg Associates Consulting Geologists ° m 50 silty clay silty clay loam L 100 0 1 ! In Z s{ Ni S F7 /A X O, •� 7 y s fl •a �•a ;� t. �) (� C m _x X - O T1 t x 9 :*: D I J c m z C m . o�u..wc w.s Accx c "cc.co n�o gum tNrs _ ar or W 0 n� zc mZyy �a�m in �AS•?�s =� N 3 <gR s• Rocs $ s 8 8 (b. SO 9 -1 m D 0 0 F ��O - 9 K pp+ D DaH• 3 .30 P 00. - �Orl fA r^ zu- tz am e tx -C {Dm O U,O Zna - C-• U ^�-y}S w• eR?k _ m r 4 °30 - .. $ r1�2 Z In y0 y am t�+ DaZ' =KC •'�'� X2A11 C N O { O m o Z Z O N to DOx z 0 �= 2a DN� O a _� yD x. Og Z� Rx g I m OjOD � N a N O ?;O 2' v >Fp-+ 3.5 h• a o yyZC a jo�� � u o` Yz CY o5 ;� t. �) (� C m _x X - O T1 t x 9 :*: D I J c m z C m . o�u..wc w.s Accx c "cc.co n�o gum tNrs _ ar or W 0 n� zc mZyy �a�m in ti Q �In=� C� Q ya (b. SO 9 -1 m D 0 0 yI D = $ p D pp+ D , U 2 00. - �Orl ?A fA r^ zu- tz am e tx -C {Dm O U,O Zna m C-• U DNOm' tvlol < m r N - .. $ r1�2 Z In y0 y am t�+ DaZ' =KC •'�'� X2A11 C N O { O m o Z Z O N to DOx z 0 �= 2a DN� O a _� yD �g Dm Og Z� I m OjOD o22 N a N O ?;O 2' O >Fp-+ mzQ• mm a o yyZC a jo�� nAp x yD� o` Yz � { •Tj N REVISIONS CrannCATION I SCHOELL & MADSON. INC. CLIENT LOCATION AUOLDJIOI % U..111GI B_DLIYAI._GU p -..A u ' �j 'p...N,enA'IM1 °t CNGWCCRS SURVEYORS • PWINERS WLNLt(L1lII0LYl'.[IL1( C °m ° Ik.n..d land ^.u.vgm .M.. tM OIL ICSIING CNNRONMEWAL SERVICES -t. °' Y1e °•io1a• — —' 10580 WAYZATA BOULEVARD. SURE 1 SHAKOPEE GRAVEL, INC. SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA VINNETONxA UN 557115 0°la: Lic.na. N°. 196]9 I (61Z) 546 -7601 FAX.-U6-9065 m z % L (1 71 h+ • N m A m� n PAGE etA n � PAGE.• Ae (113.47) E SHEETTITLE CONDITION FOR GRAVEL, INC. m x z C) D N rs. �.3 . CITY OF SHAKOPEE Memorandum CASE NO.: 02 -050 TO: Mayor and City Council Mark McNeill, City Administrator FROM: R. Michael Leek, Community Development Director SUBJECT: Amended Resolution No. 5727, Denying the Appeal of Beverly Koehnen of Amendment No. 4 to Conditional Use Permit No. 376 and the Mineral Extraction and Land Rehabilitation Permit of Shakopee Gravel, Inc. ME ETING DATE: May 21, 2002 Since the original staff report for May 21, 2002 was written and provided to the City Council, City staff received a complaint about the fuel tanks for the equipment on the site. While the applicant's representative believes these are allowed as part of the processing equipment, n reviewing the conditions of the draft resolution (No. 5727), staff does not believe these are specifically addressed. For that reason, staff has asked to have this item removed from the consent agenda, and has attached a copy of the resolution with proposed language modifying condition no. 12. The language proposed could allow for the complained of tanks to remain if they have /do receive any requirement environmental permit (e.g. PCA). The language proposed would also allow other tanks, so long as they receive prior permit approval) ALTERNATIVES: 1. Approve Resolution No. 5727, a resolution denying the appeal of Beverly Koehnen of Amendment No. 4 to Conditional Use Permit No. 376 and the Mineral Extraction and Land Rehabilitation Permit of Shakopee Gravel, Inc. as with the proposed amendment to condition no. 12. 2. Approve Resolution No. 5727 without the proposed amendment to condition no. 12. 3. Table the resolution for specific reasons. 1 1 The Council is asked to offer and pass Resolution No. 5727, a resolution of the City of Shakopee upholding the decision of the Board of Adjustment and Appeals and granting Amendment No. 4 to Conditional Use Permit No. 376 and the Mineral Extraction and Land Rehabilitation Permit of Shakopee Gravel, Inc., located at 1650 Canterbury Road, subject to conditions, including the proposed amendment to condition no. 12. R. Michael Leek Community Development Director II 015 0 11 full II 1 1, a I I 10ri WHEREAS, Shakopee Gravel, Inc., property owner and applicant, have filed an application dated December 20, 2001, for an Amendment to Conditional Use Permit No. CC -376 (and subsequent amendments No. 1, No. 2 and No. 3) under the provisions of Chapter 11, Land Use Regulation (Zoning), of the Shakopee City Code, Section 11.85, Subd. 2, for a Conditional Use Permit to operate a mine; and WHEREAS, this parcel is presently zoned Agricultural Preservation (AG) Zone with a Mining Overlay (MIN) Zone; and WHEREAS, the property upon which the request is being made is legally described as follows: The Northeast Quarter of the Northwest Quarter of Section 16, Township 115 North, Range 22 West, Scott County Minnesota. Also: the West Half of the Northwest Quarter of Section 16, Township 115 North, Range 22 West, Scott County, Minnesota, lying North and Easterly of the Northeasterly right of way line of the Chicago, Milwaukee, St. Paul and Pacific Railway. Also: That part of the Southeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter of Section 17 Township 115 North, Range 22 West, Scott County, Minnesota, lying Northeasterly of the Northeasterly right of way line of the Chicago, Milwaukee, St. Paul and Pacific Railway, and WHEREAS, notice was provided and on Nov. 4, 1993; Dec. 9, 1993; March 9, 1995; April 6, 1995; May 4, 1995; June 8, 1995; July 6, 1995; August 3, 1995; and February 7, 2002, the Shakopee Planning Commission or the Board of Adjustment and Appeals conducted a public hearing regarding this application, at which it heard from the 1 DIZA to ' 1 k 1 1 4 :f i Community Development Director or his designee and invited members of the public to comment; and WHEREAS, Ms. Beverly Koehnen timely appealed the determination of the Board of Adjustment and Appeals; and WHEREAS, the City Council reviewed the appeal of Ms. Koehnen at it's meeting of May 7, 2002; and REAS, the City Council reached the following findings with respect to the requested amendment and applicable ordinance criteria: Finding #1: After reviewing the evidence in the record the Council has concluded that. not • ed n e •ia nee tha th e , with the conditions stipulated the use will not be injurious to the use and enjoyment of other property in the vicinity? Finding #2: The Council finds that the amendment to the conditional use, mineral extraction and land rehabilitation permit the conditions stipulated, will not impede the normal and orderly development and improvement of surrounding property. Finding#3: Adequate utilities, access, drainage and other necessary facilities exist to serve the site. Finding #4: The use, with the conditions stipulated is consistent with the purposes of the Agricultural Preservation (AG) Zone and Mining Overlay MW Zone. Finding #S: The use is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan guiding for the subject site. THEREFORE BE IT RE/ 1 BY C 1' COUNCIL *F THE OF SHAKOPEE, 11 I FOLLOWS: That the decision of the Board of Adjustment and Appeals is hereby upheld, and the applicant's request for Amendment No. 4 to Conditional Use Permit No. 376 and the Mineral Extraction and Land Rehabilitation Permit is hereby granted, subject to the following revised conditions: 1. The Shakopee Board of Adjustments and Appeals shall review the Conditional Use Permit and Nfinri Pe and Mineral Extraction and Land Rehabilitation Permit ha be e. ". ' °' annually. Both permits shall be renewed every three years. Owner /operator shall apply for review and/or renewal prior to expiration of the period. Applications for CUP and Mineral Extraction and Land Rehabilitation Permit review or renewal will include records of groundwatering_monitoring information. With each application for renewal the applicant shall submit a consolidated and updated operations plan. 2. Approval of a Conditional Use Permit renewal or amendment is contingent upon Board of Adjustment and Appeals approval of the Mineral Extraction and Land Rehabilitation Permit. 3. Security fencing shall be used on the main access roads to control vehicular access to the mining and equipment area, and along the west property line adjacent to existing residential development. 4. The applicant shall obtain a County Road Entrance permit from the Scott County Highway Engineer. 5. County Road weight restrictions shall be adhered to. Truck traffic shall be limited to the use of County Road 83 to Hwy. 101 and County Road 42. Absolutely no truck traffic from the mining operation shall be routed through the urban portion of the City of Shakopee. 6. Berms with a minimum height of eight (8) feet shall be built around the perimeter of each phase, installed at no greater than a 3:1 grade. Berms must be fully seeded to prevent erosion. 7. The mining operation shall maintain the following minimum setbacks: 100 feet from any residential or commercial property line; 500 feet from any residential or commercial structure; 30 feet from any road right -of -way. 8. All portable buildings must be approved by the Building Official. 9. The hours of operation of any aspect of the mining operation shall be limited to 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m., Monday thru Friday. 10. Dust must be controlled by paving main access roads, watering haul roads and equipment and by any other means which will control adverse affects of dust on neighboring properties. 11. Noise emissions shall not exceed the noise limits as noted in Section 10.60 (Noise Elimination and Noise Prevention) of the Shakopee City Code, nor the MPCA Standards. 12. There shall be ne en site „ .,U„ e e exeept Two propane tanks shall be permitted one 325 -gallon tank located next to the scale building and one 100 -pound tank located next to the maintenance /electrical building. The propane shall be used to heat these two buildings only. The propane tanks must be installed and maintained in accordance with State Fire Marshall Rules (Chapter 7510.3100 — 7510.3280). There shall be no other fuel tanks on -site unless said tanks receive permit approval from the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (RCA) or other required agency. There shall be use or storage _of explosives except as approved in advance as a part of this conditional use and mining permit. 13. No direct exterior lighting shall be visible from adjacent properties or the public right -of -way. Two 125 -watt high- pressure sodium security lights can be installed on the site and they must be located on the site as shown on the submitted plan. 14. Stockpiles of gravel shall be allowed to exceed 25 feet in height, but not exceed the height of the surrounding berms and shall be setback from the property lines so that visual impact is minimal from the surrounding property. 15. The applicant shall be responsible for reimbursing the City for all costs incurred in reviewing the permit through the life of the operation. 16. The revised Gravel Extraction Plan and the End Use Plan, as submitted by the applicant, shall be adhered to, without modifications, unless approved in advance by the Board of Adjustment and Appeals. 17. The applicant shall prepare in report form, a plan for operation, which if acceptable, shall be adopted by resolution as the Mining Permit. The Plan for Operation shall be comprised of 1) the submitted maps A, B, C; 2) the conditions of the approved permits 3) background information as contained in the memo prepared by Merila and Associates, Inc.; dated April 30, 1985. 18. The City's approval of the permits (CUP and Mining) is made in reliance upon the applicant's representations regarding the life of the operation (17 years). Any factors, or future developments which significantly delay the completion of the mining operation, may be viewed by the City as sufficient grounds to deny the three -year renewal of the permit. 19. The Conditional Use and Mining Permits may be reviewed prior to the scheduled annual review, if the City receives complaints, supported by evidence indicating that the conditions of this permit are being violated. Upon receipt of such complaints, or by the Board of Adjustment and Appeals' own initiation, the City shall schedule a public hearing, in accordance with the proper procedures for notice and publication. 20. If the Board of Adjustment and Appeals finds that the applicants have substantially, or repeatedly violated the terms of this agreement, the Couneil Board of Adjustments and Appeals may revoke said permit. 21. Expand the operation to include the 5 -acre Rutt Farmstead. 22. Relocate the natural gas pipeline on the site. 23. Allow for the relocation of the central processing area. 24. Allow the final development grades to be between an elevation of 764 at the bottom of the proposed ponds and 832 feet. 25. The operation should be mined in five phases, except as modified by ? ny subsequent amendment to or renewal of the CUP and Mining permit � — befing test shall be done te establish the euffent gfound watef NISL elevation. The applicant shall establish a monitoring well on the subject site for ground water quality monitoring and shall re ug laxly (at least annually) record measurements from that well which measurements shall be submitted with any application for review, renewal, or amendment. Mining extraction shall not exceed a depth greater than ten (10) feet above the established ground water MSL elevation. AddifienaRy, annual tests of the gr-etmd wate sha ll b een + ensufe th th + .,1'+ e + +' 1 ' + .1 ; y'1'R'C ° tT' cfn'oti ii ° `cP�scia`v�i`y' uii�u�c� by possible eentaninants eenneeted with the -f 27. A}low-The mine shall operate for 17 years beginning on January 16, 1996, and terminating on January 16, 2013. 28. Provided that the applicant is granted access to future 17 Avenue, consistent with the end use development of the property, the applicant agrees to dedicate the right of way for future 17 Avenue at no cost to the City and accept assessments based upon the end use development of the property. 29. The sanitary sewer along future 17' Avenue is shown, but not approved. Future extension of 17 Avenue will determine the ultimate alignment and depth. The City Engineer shall determine and propose a mutually agreeable location and depth for the trunk sanitary sewer along future 17 th Avenue. 30. Access spacing to future 17 th Avenue and CSAH 83 will be determined by Scott County, City of Shakopee and the applicant upon approval of the preliminary plat for the end use. 31. Material imported onto the site for reclamation and final site grading shall be monitored to ensure that it is environmentally clean. Records shall be kept of all imported material and all of the necessary documentation shall be available. The applicant will certify that the property is environmentally clean at the completion of each phase of the mining operation. 32. Material imported onto the site and used in the reclamation and final site grading shall only include soil materials of a bearing capacity sufficient to support development, as proposed in the End Use Plan. The depositing and compaction of materials shall be done in accordance with specifications prepared by a licensed geotechnical engineer. 33. The site shall be reclaimed in accordance with the End Use Plan and be available for development within one construction season following the completion of mining activities, if not before. 34. The storm sewer discharge along future 17 th Avenue shall not exceed the design capacity in the CSAH 83 trunk storm sewer as determined by the City Engineer. The development of the subject property will necessitate the lowering of the storm sewer along future 17 th Avenue. The property owner shall pay the cost of lowering this trunk line. 35. No Construction cutting or filling in the Minnegasco Easement #1997 -7, recorded as document #0393488, except as authorized by Minnegasco. 36. The applicant is to provide to the city an earthwork quantity calculation, to be completed by a Registered Professional Engineer or Registered Landscape Architect, and the applicant is to provide to the city on an annual basis the quantity of export and import materials. 37. If the mining operation intends to bring solid waste material onto the site, a solid waste license must first be approved by the Scott County Environmental Health Department. Adopted in Shakopee, Minnesota, held the session of the City Council of the City of day of 1 2002. Mayor of the City of Shakopee City Clerk Prepared by: THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE 1 1''• I: 1' .Ii 129 Holmes Street South Shakopee, MN 55379 4101 9 1 401WE I 1 1 I 1 I, Judith S. Cox, City Clerk for the City of Shakopee, do hereby certify that the attached is a true and correct copy of Resolution No.5727, presented to and adopted by the City Council of the City of Shakopee at a duly authorized meeting thereof held on the day of , 2002, as shown by minutes of the meeting in my possession. Dated this day of 1 20 Judith S. Cox City Clerk �I Mem CASE LOG NO.: 02 -011 TO: Mayor and City Council Mark McNeill, City Administrator FROM: R. Michael Leek, Community Development Director SUBJECT: Amendment to City Code Section 11.50, Planned Unit Development District, Subd. 5, Design Standards, and Subd. 6, Special Provisions for Planned Unit Developments ME ETING DATE: May 21, 2002 On May 14, 2002 the City Council and Planning Commission met in joint work session. While there were a wide variety of opinions expressed by the members of both bodies, the following seemed to have some consensus; • In order for a PUD to be approved, a greater, general public benefit should be realized by the City than would be realized with a traditional subdivision project. This could take many forms; e.g. greater open space, more and better trail connections, more affordable housing, higher quality design and construction. • Street widths and designs should be guided by the needs of public safety. • PUD proposals should include greater variety in land uses and design. • There is concern that the change could result in lesser quality proposals being brought forward or approved, and staff the Commission, and Council need to guard against this. At the conclusion of the discussion the Council directed staff to bring the proposed text amendment to the Council for consideration on May 21. Attached to this report is Ordinance No. 626 for the Council's consideration. Two changes have been made since the work session. First, Subdivision 6 has been revised to more clearly indicate that these are the criteria for approving a PUD, and language has been added regarding the public benefit to be realized. Second, the summary section has been revised to facilitate publication in the official newspaper of the City. Council did ask for DNR's opinion about the relationship of the City's general PUD and Shoreland provisions. Attached for Council's information is Mr. Pat Lynch's May 14 letter that addresses that issue. The City Attorney has also been asked to provide his opinion on that same issue for the Council's information, which will be provided to the Council when it is available. City Code states that the City Council may grant a zoning ordinance amendment when it finds that one or more of the following criteria exist. Staff has prepared draft findings for the Council's consideration: Criteria #1 That the original zoning ordinance is in error; Finding #I The original zoning ordinance is in not in error. Criteria #2 That significant changes in community goals and policies have taken place; Finding #2 Significant changes in community goals and policies have taken place. Specifically, the City of Shakopee desires to promote development that does a better job of preserving open space, ecological systems and values, and providing life -cycle housing opportunities within the City. Criteria #3 That significant changes in City -wide or neighborhood development patterns have occurred; or Finding #3 Si changes in development patterns have occurred Because of demographic and market trends, the City of Shakopee has been presented with an increasing number of proposals for mixed use developments This type of development can require more flexibility than is afforded by traditional zoning districts if community values of open space, environmental preservation and enhancement, and life cycle development are to be preserved Criteria #4 That the Comprehensive Plan requires a different provision. Finding #4 The Comprehensive Plan does not require a different provision. 1. Approve Ordinance No. 626 as presented, and direct the appropriate City officials to publish the summary of the ordinance in the City's official newspaper. 2. Approve Ordinance No. 626 with revisions, and direct the appropriate City officials to publish the summary of the ordinance in the City's official newspaper. 3. Deny the proposed amendments, and direct staff to prepare a resolution with findings relative to the denial for action at the next, regularly scheduled City Council meeting. 4. Table the matter, and request additional information. • 1 X 1 1 � � 1 1 1. � The Planning Commission reviewed the proposed ordinance amendment on February 7, 2002, and recommended that the City Council approve the proposed changes. 1 Offer and pass Ordinance No. 626 an ordinance of the City of Shakopee amending City Code Sec. 11.50. Planned Unit Developments, Subd. 5. Design Standards, and Subd. 6, Special Provisions for Planned Unit Developments. 2 F UTURE& I 1 ORDINANCE AN OF Ct OF 1 MINNESOTA, 1 AMENDING CITY 11 E SECTION 11.50. PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENTS. SUB1 DESIGN STANDARDS Section 1 - That City Code Sec. 11.50, Planned Unit Developments, Subd. 5. Design Standards, is hereby amended by deleting the language that is struck through, and by adding the language which is underlined Subd. 5. Design Standards A. Except as otherwise provided in this subdivision applicable underlying zoning district requirements other than use restrictions described in Subd 3 above are superseded by the approval of a PUD development plan by the City Council The PUD development plan establishes the requirements for a planned unit development and shall govern and take precedence over underlying zoning district's provisions except where the PUD development plan is silent as to a specific provision. In reviewing requests for increases in density or variations from other requirements beyond that allowed in the underl dig strict the Council may take into account the following factors Increases sha4l eiffily heal Awed when the fellewing ef4er-ia are fn Of That the open space proposed in the PUP exceeds the minimum required by this subdivision; 2. Geologic and/or topographic features unduly restrict development opportunities on 30% or more of the gross project area.} 3. Environmental features exist on the site and the variations are necessary to preserve natural features Environmental features may include but are not limited to the following defined features; A. Slopes in excess of4:1; B. Tree cover measuring six (6) inches in diameter and/or. six (6) feet in height covering 20% or more of the gross project site; 4 C. The existence of wetlands lakes marches streams springs or other natural water bodies. B. Open space: a planned unit development, which includes dwellings, shall provide at least 15% of the project area as open space. If the planned unit development is to be developed in phases, the applicant must include the entire site in the plat of the first phase of development and designate public open space. Open space is a landscaped area or areas available for the common use of and is accessible by all residents or occupants of the buildings within the planned unit development. Open space shall be calculated on a net basis which excludes private yards, private streets from back of curb to back of curb, public rights -of -way, any areas within an easement or any other non - recreational impervious surface area. Dedicated parkland shall not be used in calculating open space for a development. The applicant shall be required to submit, along with the PUD site plan, an open space plan illustrating the use and/or function of the open space area or areas. The open space plan shall include any proposed improvements and/or design of the open space area. Private yards shall be defined as that portion of a lot not occupied by a structure and under the ownership and/or control of the individual property owner or those areas adjacent to the residential units which are typically viewed and/or utilized by the occupants of the residential units as an extension of their dwelling unit. There shall not be any credit given to the open space requirements. C. (Deleted, Ord. 544, April 15, 1999) FP OUR- The proposed planned unit development shall be comprised of at least ten (10) acres of contiguous land. PUD's of five (5) to ten (10) acres in size shall be allowed if the following criteria are met: 1. Regional easements cover 30% of more of the project area; or /and 2. Environmental features exist on the site which will be preserved through the PUD development process; or /and 3. The subject site is adjacent to an existing PUD and the PUD process will provide additional compatibility between the PUDs. E. The parcels of land, which are the subject of the PUD application, shall be under the applicant's control at the time of application. The development plan shall provide for the development of all of the parcel(s) included in the application. In addition, the development plan must include provisions for the preservation of natural amenities. F. The total coverage of residential buildings shall not exceed 20% of the total residential area in the PUD. G. All PUDs shall have municipal sewer and water service available. H. No design standards shall be modified in any way, which violates or compromises the fire and safety codes of the City. I. More than one (1) building may be placed on one (1) platted lot in a PUD district. J. Any PUD plan proposed to be constructed in stages shall include full details relating to staging and the City Council may approve or modify, where necessary, any such proposals. K. The staging shall include estimates of the time for beginning and completion of each stage. Such timing may be subsequently modified by the City Council on the showing of good cause by the developer. Subd 6 Special Provisions for Planned Unit Developments. A. Criteria for Granting a Planned Unit Development Application. The City Council shall base its decision to grant or deny an application for a planned unit development upon the following factors, and shall adopt findings relative to these criteria 1. Whether the proposed development is consistent in all respects with the comprehensive plan and with this Section; 2. Whether the proposed development, including deviations from design standards of the underlying zones, is compatible with surrounding land uses; 3. Whether the proposed development, including deviations from development standards of the underlying zone, provides adequate open space, circulation, parking, recreation, screening, and landscaping; 4. Whether the primary function of the PUD is to encourage development that will preserve and enhance the worthwhile, natural terrain characteristics and not force intense development to utilize all portions of a given site in order to arrive at the maximum density allowed. In evaluating each individual proposal, the recognition of this objective will be a basic consideration in granting approval or denial; 7 5. Whether there exists an overall compatibility of land uses and overall appearance and compatibility of individual buildings to other site elements or to surrounding development. However, the architectural style of buildings shall not solely be a basis for denial or approval of a plan. 6. Whether the proposed PUD plan would afford a greater general public benefit than would be realized under the underling zoning district and/or general zoning provisions. Section 2 — Ordinance Summary. The City Council hereby determines that the text of the summary of this ordinance marked "official Summary of Ordinance Nod' a copy of which is attached hereto, clearly informs the public of the intent and effect of the ordinance. The Council further determines that publication of the title and such summary will clearly inform the public of the intent and effect of the ordinance. Section 3 - - Effective Date This ordinance becomes effective from and after its passage and publication. Adopted in session of the City Council of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota, held the day of , 2002. Mayor of the City of Shakopee ATTEST: City Clerk Published in the Shakopee Valley News on the day of 2002. 8 Im Dij 1 The following is the official summary of Ordinance No. 626, Fourth Series, approved by the City Council of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota on May 21, 2002. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA, AMENDING CITY CODE 1 1 UNIT 1 1' 1 1 DESIGN STANDARDS Subd.S. Design Standards.A. This provision is amended to allow the City Council to exercise greater flexibility in approving alternate design standards as a part of a PUD development plan. Subd.S. Design Standards.E. This provision is deleted because it simply re- states the City Council's authority to approve alternate design standards. Subd.S. Design Standards.f. This provision is deleted, and significant portions re- located to Item A. A printed copy of the ordinance is available for inspection by any person at the Office of the City Clerk and at the Scott County Library. 69329 671 ((e- (Y(( U:)/ lef u1:: Ij.GI tvv. ICU Viiv' -nneS ants aoRoad a eso ilg CeS Telephone. (651) 772 -7910 Fax: (651) 772 -7977 May 14, 2002 Mr. Michael Leek City of Shakopee 129 So. Holmes Street Shakopee, Minnesota 55379 RE: Shorcland Zoning, West Dean Lake Dear Mr. Leek: Thank you for meeting with me and representatives of RLK Kuusisto last Friday morning to discuss development on the west end of Dean's Lake. We met at the request of Joe Samuel of RLK- Kuusisto, who is providing enginoeriing services to a prospective site developer (Rym Companies)- At the meeting, I was provided a drawing emitted 'Concept Site Exhibit", dated April 2, 2002. T was also given an 11" x 1T' document called Valley Green. Corporate Centre, Reminiscence on Dean's Lake. It is clear to me considerable time and effort have gone in to the design up to this point Based upon my cursory review (I had not seen the concept before last Friday), it appears the requirements of shorcland zoning are not Hart with the development as depicted on the drawing. As I indicated. to you in my April. 24 letter and again at our recent rn=tin& if the site is developed as a Planned Unit Development (PUD), shoreland PUD standards must be applied. These are the PUD standards found in the city's shoreland ordinance, and are consistent with the minimum statewide standards of Niinrtesota Rules 6120. Deviation from these minimum standards adopted by the community would require text amendments to the shoreland ordinance, which requires DNR. approval. I recommend the developer proceed with a PUD analysis for the site, following the tiered approach spelled out in the shoreland ordinance. Drawings should clearly indicate the location of the shorcland tiers. A$erperforming such an. analysis, it will be readily apparent whether the development as designed meets the density, open space, setback, and other minimum shoreland requirements. Please call me at 651- 772 -7917 if you have any questions. sinzem. l Patrick 7. Lynch III DNR Area hydrologist DNR Information: 651 -296 -6157 - 1- 888 - 646 -6367 o TTY: 651- 296 -5484 e 1- 800 -657 -3929 An Equal Opportunity Employer Printed on Recyded Paper Containing a who Vafucs DiVeTsiry 0 Minimum of 20% Post - Consumer Waste MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Council, City of Shakopee Agenda Item 15.A.4 FROM: Jim Thomson, City Attorney DATE: May 21, 2002 RE: Amendment to City Code Regarding Planned Unit Development Districts — This agenda item relates to an amendment to City Code Section 11.50, Planned Unit Development Districts. A question has been raised with respect to the effect of this amendment on property located within the shoreland district. Under the City's zoning ordinance, property in the City's shoreland area is regulated by Section 11.54 of the City Code entitled "Shoreland Overlay Zone." Property, such as the proposed Valley Green Corporate Center site, that is located in the Shoreland Overlay Zone and is proposed to be developed as a Planned Unit Development must also comply with Section 11.50 of the City Code, which establishes a planned unit development overlay district. The proposed amendment to Section 11.50 does not apply to Section 11.54. Therefore, any proposed PUD development within the Shoreland Overlay Zone must also comply with Section 11.54. It is my opinion that the amendment to Section 11.50 does not affect any of the requirements in Section 11.54. I have reviewed the May 14, 2002 letter from Patrick J. Lynch of the Department of Natural Resources. In that letter, he indicates that he has reviewed a concept plan for the proposed Valley Green Corporate Center, and it appears to him that it does not meet all of the requirements of the Shoreland Overlay zoning district. He indicates that any deviation from those requirements would require a text amendment to the shoreland ordinance. I have not reviewed the concept plan referenced in Mr. Lynch's letter. If the concept plan does not comply with the requirements in Section 11.54, the developer would need to seek a variance from those requirements. Variances for property in the Shoreland Overlay Zone are governed by Section 11.54, Subd. 3.C. Section 6120.390 of the Minnesota Rules authorizes such variances. It does not appear to me that deviations from the standards in the City's shoreland ordinance would necessarily require a text amendment as suggested by Mr. Lynch. Until the staff has had an opportunity to review any proposed development of the property, it seems to me that it is premature to conclude whether a text amendment would be required. JJT- 215043v1 SH155 -23 1 w uq, . . TO: Mayor and City Council Mark McNeill, City Administrator FROM: R. Michael Leek, Community Development Director SUBJECT: Proposed Cost Participation for 17'' Avenue Corridor Study E G DATE: May 21, 2002 Scott County Highway Department staff has prepared the attached, draft scope of services document and proposed cost participation for a 17' Avenue corridor study. Council is asked to give city and county staff direction regarding 1) whether the City is willing to participate in the cost of the proposed study, and 2) at what level. County staff is seeking this input from both the City and Township before taking the proposal to the County board. 1 � A few years ago, when the City first began discussing the realignment of CSAH 16 at CSAH 83 and Scott County staff s interest in 17 Avenue becoming a county road all the way to 169, it seemed apparent to City staff that planning for that street's alignment through the township should be undertaken. With the realignment of CSAH 16 at CSAH 83 underway now, discussions regarding orderly annexation proceeding toward an apparent agreement, and the expectation that 17 Avenue would eventually be turned over to the County, Scott County staff has undertaken to prepare a scope of services for such a study. At the most recent meeting on orderly annexation, I expressed my belief that, because of the amount of money the City has had to spend in connection with county road projects within the City, there may be reluctance on the part of the City to share in the cost of a 17� Avenue corridor study that addresses the roadway outside the City limits, at least at the level indicated. County staff will be invited to attend the meeting to answer any questions the Council may have of them. ALTERNATIVES: 1. Direct city staff to communicate to Scott County the City's willingness to participate in the cost of the 17 Avenue at the level indicated, or some other level. 2. Direct city staff to communicate to Scott County that it does not wish to participate financially in the cost of a 17 Avenue corridor study. 3. Table the item for additional information. / 1 1 Offer and pass a motion consistent with the Council's willingness to participate in the cost of the 17 Avenue Corridor Study. R. Michael Leek Study Objective: The primary objective of this study is to develop the following for the extension of 17 Avenue, an east - west arterial, from the existing westerly terminus at County Road 79 to the west in Jackson Township: a future horizontal alignment a concept design a definition of the right -of -way needs for the future roadway The future roadway must meet the transportation needs of Scott County, the City of Shakopee, and Jackson Township consistent with the County's and City's Comprehensive Plans. By providing a concept plan for future 17 h e, the esults provi horities with a tool for preserving right -of -way and D fut evel ly growing area of Scott County. Scope of o Task 1 — Project Management: This task includes the development of a schedule for the project, periodic meetings with Scott County Staff as project administrator and the project management team to discuss status of project development, and general project management issues. Monthly accounting and progress reports will be provided to the County. Task 2 — Data Collection Data will be collected from Scott County, the City of Shakopee, and Jackson Township as needed. This data will include, but is not limited to, existing and projected traffic and land use data along the corridor, Natural Resource Inventory (estimated completion date of June 2002) as -built plans, available GIS data in electronic format, section corner information as available, and mapping of the corridor in electronic format including elevation data. Scott County will provide the electronic base mapping for the corridor. Scott County will provide existing control and landowner information for use in the right -of -way determination. The consultant will obtain supplemental surveys if required to document any unusual situations. This is anticipated to be a minimal effort since this is a planning level study. Task 3 — Concept Plan Development / Geometric Layout The consultant will prepare a geometric layout for the following project segments considering current and potential future land use scenarios: CSAH 78 to CR 69 CR 69 to CSAH 15 CSAH 15 to CR 79 This will include determination of the typical section of the roadway and consideration for access points. This task will also include the development of horizontal and vertical alignments through the corridor. One primary alternative will be developed for the entire corridor. Additional alternative alignments connecting CSAH 78 to CSAH 15 may need to be developed, depending on feasibility and issues raised in the area. The location of access along with impacts on alternative land use layouts for each developable property in the corridor shall be analyzed for each alignment developed. Task 4 — Right -of -Way Determination /Cross - Sections Task 7 — Public Involvement The consultant shall assemble a thorough public participation process that is acceptable to the County (see the attached "Transportation Study Process Guidelines"). The consultant will be responsible for preparing all necessary exhibits and information for 2 public information meetings: 1. A project kick off meeting to describe the work plan and obtain comments. 2. A public "open house" for landowners and other interested parties where concept layouts and alternatives are presented. The consultant may be asked to assist with presenting to the County Board and /or City Council/Town Board to keep them updated on the study as it progresses. The information from the public information meetings will be tabulated and presented to the County Board. It is assumed that County Staff will lead the public meetings with assistance from the consultant. Task 8 — Report Preparation The consultant will prepare a draft report documenting the data collected, the study methodology and the results of the concept plan development. This report will be prepared and presented to the County, City of Shakopee, and Jackson Township for their review and comment. Following receipt of comments from all agencies and the public, a final report will be developed and submitted to the County Board, City Council, and Jackson Township Board for their acceptance. Schedule: The consultant shall submit a proposed timeline for the study that includes important steps in the process, including public involvement and involvement of the County Board, City Council, and Township Board. The attached "Transportation Study Process Guidelines" shall be a starting point for development of the study schedule. DRI=P' Cyst: Paretic- t jon Esti m:ated,T_QtA :Cost: 4 2 02 u Rd :69: r ty $3c 0 .0 .city $11 -25.0 T&w.nship l3 50. Pot�ti.rirs�aoi. =C335tr1c�flQ Sn�tr �rtt 5Q °le: -P .... :..... NaTE Tf� Studyec�p e..w il! be taisl t spe}_ mt?fe. dat�l .tarr.:trastand :s.or�.the:a�ie; I He V CITY OF SAKOPEE Memorandum TO: Mayor and City Council Mark McNeill, City Administrator FROM: Mark Noble, Planner I SUBJECT: Waiver of Minor Subdivision Criteria — Mark Cemensky DATE: May 21, 2002 Mark Cemensky owns the property known as 1002 3 rd Ave. E. in Shakopee (see attached plot plan). The property presently consists of one (1) lot and a portion of the previously vacated Shawmut Street, on which the applicant wishes to construct a twin home. The applicant would like to split the property into two (2) lots. For this to occur, he is requesting a waiver of the minor subdivision criteria to allow a minor subdivision that would not comply with the minimum requirements established in the Zoning Ordinance. The applicant has been working with staff to minimize the waiver of criteria requests. At this time he has requested that this item be table to allow additional time to work with staff on this project. GAC62002 \05 -21 \cemensky minsub.doc (27- 004164 -0) CITY OF SHAKOPEE Memorandum TO: Mayor & City Council Mark McNeill, City Administrator FROM: Bruce Loney, Public Works Director SUBJECT: Plan Approval for the Sarazin Street and Valley View Road Improvement, Project No. 2001 -5 DATE: May 21, 2002 INTRODUCTION: Attached is Resolution No. 5720, a resolution approving plans and specifications for Sarazin Street, from Mooers Avenue to Valley View Road; and Valley View Road, from Sarazin Street to the east plat line of Pheasant Run 6 th Addition, Project No. 2001 -5. . BACKGROUND: Previously, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 5597, a resolution ordering the preparation of plans and specifications for the Sarazin Street and Valley View Road improvements, Project No. 2001 -5. At the time of the adoption of this resolution for plan preparation, Council also did authorize an extension agreement with Bolton & Menk, Inc. to design this improvement project. Plans have been completed and a plan informational meeting was held with the property owners on April 29, 2002, to go over the plans and receive comments. Issues were identified during this meeting were as follows: • Number of sewer and water services to be provided and at what location. • Mailbox delivery during the project. • Maintenance of access during construction. • Driveway location and width. • Tree planting on the project. • Soil correction needed for Valley View Road. Since the authorization to prepare plans, staff has been working on right -of -way acquisition, assessment agreements and utility relocation necessary for this project. From the various items presented to Council, right -of -way has been obtained from Betaseed and U.S. Homes and an agreement with U.S. Homes to provide sanitary sewer and storm sewer connections to the Valley View Road Project. Eminent domain proceedings have also been authorized by the City Council and the City will be obtaining the necessary right -of -way on July 26, 2002. Staff has had meetings with the property owners on assessment agreements and has received direction from City Council on what to offer property owners in the way of assessment agreements for this project. At this time most of the property owners would like to know exactly what the assessment costs would be before considering any assessment agreement. It is staff s intention to have the plans approved and advertise for bids in order to see what the assessments costs will be. Bolton & Menk, Inc. has submitted the plans to Shakopee Public Utilities Commission (SPUC) and has made corrections based on their comments. From the issues identified from the informational meeting the following responses can be made: 1. Sewer and water service locations — Staff has indicated to the property owners that the number of sanitary sewer services desired by each property owner will be provided and assessed to the property owner. SPUC does not provide more than one water service to properties unless they are platted. The watermain has been designed to be placed in the boulevard area in order for future water services to be bored under the improved Valley View Road so as not to disturb the new street. 2. Mailbox delivery— With this project it is customary to have the contractor place a temporary central mailbox system near the project site in order for residents to still receive mail nearby their residence but allowing for the construction work to be completed. 3. Maintenance of access during construction — It is the intent of this project design to close Valley View Road, except for local traffic only, and for the contractor to maintain access to the residents during the construction of the improvements. 4. Driveway location and width — Existing driveways will be installed as part of this project and will be placed in the location and width as desired by the property owners. Any additional driveways requested by the property owners can be installed if deemed appropriate by the City Engineer and assessed to the property owner. 5. Tree planting — Trees will be planted along Sarazin Street, similar to previous Sarazin Street planting and per City collector street standard. Additional trees are recommended to be planted in the area where Sarazin Street curves into Valley View Road in order to provide additional screening for property owners. Tree plantings will not be provided along Valley View Road due to the overhead power lines to be relocated along Valley View Road on the south side, and on the north side there is a limitation of boulevard width and boulevard trees and this width is not adequate to install boulevard trees. 6. Soil correction — The existing Valley View Road was built in the time where the removal of topsoil was not done and the existing topsoil still exists under the gravel surface of Valley View Road. The soil's engineer recommends the topsoil needs to be removed and a topsoil thickness is approximately 18 inches to 24 inches. This topsoil within the Valley View Road area will require additional excavation and additional import of materials in order to construct the roadway. Staff is recommending approval of the Sarazin Street and Valley View Road improvement project plans, at this time, in order to obtain bids at the end of June and for Council consideration either for the July 2 nd or July 16 Council meeting. With bids received, staff can provide the property owners and Council with a more accurate cost determination of the project. Staff has sent a letter notifying the property owners of the proposed plan approval on May 21 and staff will do a brief presentation on the plans at the Council meeting. ALTERNATIVES: 1. Adopt Resolution No. 5720, a resolution approving plans and specifications and ordering advertisement for bids for the Sarazin Street and Valley View Road improvements, Project No. 2001 -5. 2. Do not adopt Resolution No. 5720. 3. Table for additional information. Staff recommends Alternative No. 1, so as to receive bids in order to determine the costs for Sarazin Street and Valley View Road and to construct this project in the 2002 construction season. ACTION REQUESTED: Offer Resolution NO. 5720, A Resolution Approving Plans and Specifications and Ordering Advertisement for Bids for Sarazin Street, from Mooers Avenue to Valley View Road; and for Valley View Road, from Sarazin Street to the East Plat Line of Pheasant Run 6 th Addition, Project No. 2001 -5 and move its adoption. Bruce Loney Public Works Director BUpmp MEM5720 WHEREAS, pursuant to Resolution No. 5597 adopted by City Council on October 16, 2001, Bruce Loney, Public Works Director has prepared plans and specifications for Sarazin Street, from Mooers Avenue to Valley View Road; and Valley View Road to the east plat line of Pheasant Run 6 th Addition by installation of sanitary sewer, watermain, storm sewer, street reconstruction, bituminous paving, curb & gutter, concrete sidewalk, bituminous trail, street lighting and any appurtenant work and has presented such plans and specifications to the Council for approval. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE 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 ATTEST: City Clerk CITY OF SHAKOPEE Memorandum TO: Mayor & City Council Mark McNeill, City Administrator FROM: Bruce Loney, Public Works Director SUBJECT: Cooperative Agreement with Scott County on CSAH 17 Improvements, from CSAH 101 to Vierling Drive DATE: May 21, 2002 INTRODUCTION: Attached to this memorandum is a Cooperative Agreement with Scott County on the improvements to CSAH 17, from CSAH 101 to Vierling Drive, as previously indicated on November 30, 2001 from the Scott County Public Works Division. The improvement of safety along CSAH 17, from CSAH 101 to just north of Vierling Drive is an issue that was addressed by Scott County with a traffic study done by Short, Elliott, Inc. (SEH). The conclusion of this traffic study was the best alternative to provide safety and yet provide mobility and efficiency on CSAH 17 was to reconfigure the existing four lane undivided roadway to a continuous two way center left turn lane, with coordinated permissive phasing of the traffic control signals. The plans have been completed by Scott County, in conjunction with SEH, for a two lane roadway with a continuous left turn lane on CSAH 17, with revisions on the signals at CSAH 101, 4th Avenue, Gorman Street and 10 Avenue. The Cooperative Agreement is for this improvement project and for the City to participate in the revisions of the signals and the striping work associated with crosswalks along this corridor. The City's participating cost is estimated to be $29,783.00. The County intends to revise the signal system, place a bituminous overlay on CSAH 17 with new striping and signing to accommodate the two lane with the continuous left turn lane for traffic movement. Attached to this memo is the signing and striping plans for CSAH 17, from Vierling Drive to CSAH 101. The City's cost participation amount is proposed to be from the Capital Improvement Fund and was not included in the 2002- 2006 Capital Improvement Fund. As this Council may recall, this issue was discussed at length in the Fall of 2001. It was not anticipated to be a project until late last year so was unable to be included in the Capital Improvement Fund. The Capital Improvement Fund does have sufficient funds to handle this additional expenditure and staff recommends approval of the Cooperative Agreement for this project. 1. Authorize the appropriate City officials to execute the Cooperative Agreement with Scott County on the CSAH 17 Improvement Project No. 70- 617 -019. 2. Do not execute the Cooperative Agreement with Scott County. 3. Table for additional information. �. Staff recommends Alternative No. 1, as the project is a follow -up to the safety concerns along CSAH 17 and the Cooperative Agreement is per the Cost Participation Policy between Scott County and the City of Shakopee. ACTION REQUESTED: Authorize the appropriate City officials to execute the Cooperative Agreement with Scott County on the County State Aid Highway 17 Improvement Project No. 70- 617 -019. 4 ce Loney Public Works Director BUpmp AGREEMENT70- 617 -019 E cc O L a- co O LL E J > o >? CD =3 E N Off O- O E Q m Rf °�U c c L C) � U C) U D N O O N O O 1- TI- C> O O m O O co 00 ~O O V' CO N O O Cl d to V T N CIA h EF} - � OOco co O O co co O O cn Un O O " N CO O O O N N N T N ti co m O O r O Cl rt Co O O U') LO Ln 0 Izi T L Cl O O LC) O N '- T N ti q' LO O O O O O O N N O O 'IT dt V d' m t� O O O N N N I` f{� N O O Dn Lt) O O O O O O IZI 't O V N co 0 0 0 0 O N eq O O 0 co co T T O 0 0 O O 0 0 O O N 04 O O O O O O Dn L co co T T O O O O L L co O T T .. ti T ti m co C C' m m m co 1— ";I LO O) LO d I Dn 0o m —I m rn � 0) co ti - � a) m �i q' EFT O N co m N O , It Co co O O T co tf q' LO It 6s ' O N N 00 't N 0 O t I* O d Dn �l � 1 O :Y ..;r - O O T T O O ' N O O O� co U') � ti to O) U D O d N CO N N LO V) O c OOOcq I N r d0 �f O ca "T N I ea c T LO CD O O ti ti O o CT 0 0 0 0 O co co N «co Lt) N T N f— N N O U V a 0 � a _ � N W o c D o v o 0 W U) c J N O y T a) N ca i U) :2 c N �' M 7 E c CD Q U C LL cc U c y c Z a CD a) c N m E a) cn a) a) U o c s O ca U Q CD °� x z i a o O N a) .. Lu LU cQ m 0 a) F- c 1 Z w -p 6 U CD c W 'U L i 0 Q 0 X h- of " m o F' w m V c CD W� c c W W W I-- C /) c c a. ca ~ ti m � W 0 7-5 0) � - � ..;r - O O T T O O ' N O O O� co U') � ti to O) U D O d N CO N N LO V) O c OOOcq I N r d0 �f O ca "T N I ea c T LO CD O O ti ti O o CT 0 0 0 0 O co co N «co Lt) N T N f— N N O U V a 0 � a _ � N W o c D o v o 0 W U) c J N O y T a) N ca i U) :2 c N �' M 7 E c CD Q U C LL cc U c y c Z a CD a) c N m E a) cn a) a) U o c s O ca U Q CD °� x z i a o O N a) .. Lu LU cQ m 0 a) F- c 1 Z w -p 6 U CD c W 'U L i 0 Q 0 X h- of " m o F' w m V c CD W� c c W W W I-- C /) c c a. ca ~ ti m � W 0 7-5 7-5 C r%- ViNSTRUCTION THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into this day of , 20_, 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, the County and the City have been negotiating to bring about the improvement of CSAH 17 from north of Vierling Drive to CSAH 101 as shown on the County Engineer's plans for SAP 70- 617 -19 which improvement contemplates and includes milling, plant -mixed bituminous pavement, traffic signal revisions, striping and other related improvements; and WHEREAS, the above described project lies within the corporate limits of the City; and WHEREAS, the County Engineer has heretofore prepared an engineer's estimate of quantities and unit prices of material and labor for the above described project and an estimate of the total cost for contract work in the sum of One Hundred Seventy -three Thousand, Eighty -one Dollars and no cents ($173,081.00). 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 NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY AGREED: I The County or its agents will advertise for bids for the work and construction of the aforesaid Project No. SAP 70- 617 -19, 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 counties. The contract is in form and includes the plans and specifications prepared by the County or its agents, which said plans and specifications are by this reference made a part hereof. II The County shall have overall authority to administer the contract and inspect the construction of the contract work contemplated herewith. The County shall have ultimate authority in initiating and dete change orders, supplemental agreements and final quantities. The City Engineer shall cooperate with the County Engineer and his staff at their request to the extent necessary, but shall have no other responsibility for the supervision of the work. III The City shall reimburse the County for its share in the construction cost of the contract work for said project and the total final contract construction cost shall be apportioned as set forth in the Division of Cost Summary in said Exhibit "A" attached hereto. 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 project 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 project according to the provisions of this paragraph. IV In addition to payment of the City's proportionate share of the contract construction cost, the County and the City further agree to participate in the Preliminary Engineering, which includes all costs of planning, design and preparation of plans and specifications, in an amount of ten percent (10 %) of the cost of construction. The County and City further agree to participate in the Construction Engineering, which includes the complete staking, inspection and supervision of the construction, in an amount of eight percent (8 %) of the final contract amount. 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. 2 V The City shall, based on the contract price, deposit with the Scott County Treasurer one hundred percent (100 %) of the estimated City's share of the construction and engineering costs as partial payment within thirty (30) days after award of contract and execution of this Agreement, whichever is later. The final amount of the City's share of construction and engineering costs of this project shall be determined and any amount due paid to the County upon completion of the project and submittal to the City of the County's final, itemized, statement of the project costs. In the event the initial payment exceeds the City's share of these final costs, such overpayment shall be returned to the City by the County. VI The County Engineer shall prepare monthly progress reports as provided in the specifications. A copy of these reports shall be furnished to the City upon request. 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. VEI 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 County or City 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. IX 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 Highway included in this project 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. 3 X 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. /: 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. XII It is further agreed that each party 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 fizrther 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. 10 071 ILI 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. XIV 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. 61 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, The County and the Consultant by their authorized partner or officer have hereunto subscribed their names in duplicate. ATTEST: SCOTT COUNTY, MINNESOTA David J. Unmacht County Administrator DATED: APPROVED AS TO FORM: By: Thomas Harbinson County Attorney DATED By: Barbara Marschall Chair, Board of Commissioners DATED: am Bradley J. Larson County Engineer DATED: • • (SEAL) By William Mars Mayor Date mh -w: \word \project \6 - o 19 \city_coop.doc And Mark McNeill City Administrator Date And Judy Cox City Clerk ME 0 s IT s d 0 0 N D 3 d 0 m O 000 m m 0 n � N 50 N zzz mo y o o o 0�0 zmX c== m O D � 0 m 0 CA m D v � D O p A x� r M r cn p o Z O m M C ;o --i �m O M C � � .ZI s � � 0 Z G) Or- Z rr- Cn m m 0 (1 { 7 D CS 0 Z D Z Z G) O 0 co D r Z co :0 co co O Z O `/ O CD -q c D m X _2 W E N N . . N N N N N " N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N Cn 00 m Cn m m m m m m m m m m m a, m m m Cn (n m o - m m m m m m m m m m m to m m m m m O O W m N O w � co Z M b� m m [n Cn p A A A .4 A .P A A. .A 91 A. A A o�mmmcnm A W 9) A O mmcm N p m m m m m O m W O O W W 0 O W W o 0 W W 0 0 W W 0 0 W W 0 0 N N 0 0 N i N 0 N N 0 -� 0 0 p - 1 p T Cl) m m x;o x N ?? N N m A A .P A A A A 'p 'p -{ D D -I 3 O - I O z m c m m rnmm ««� =000momcnw < «<� v v "13r-a) F0 z 000000 0 0 0 0 0 O O r O 0 0 r r m m m T T c C m m r - C -- zDmwwmm000 O m m m m m r r C v rrm C m 3 z z 3 z m m i T< g -i c p D r O G)G)OOCCrZ r m m Z r z Z r r ZZ -I -I-Ip p D A K— -_I -< z DDDDDmmm z z z z Z Z Z m Cl) OOZ CO r m r m m 9 E 9 z g m Z 0 Z m r - r- r r�� �rr m z m m �2� mmrn CD Cn --Imm Cn ;a �OZ C z [n CD Cn v) cn m m x o o -< cn v� cn p w z m < lrrmr�� r 1DDDrzO z m mz z C/) - m i - -q - m i�oom m zz � z Oc m �3�����mv nDvrr� ___ G) m� mz °Oma < C� mmZO D 0-n co m K G) rridCiaiD_ _ _ _ D0 X�00�00 - {X > > x co Z : pm po �0 zz z 00 co D v z � c O m ➢ p v m { O co coC13 rrrrrrrrr r r C Co W z z Z Z Z z z Z z z fmnR�77tC�T7 D D D --0 D 0 m mmmm � T I�-t TTTTTTTTSSp(n2 i-I I + -I-i -I =Zj(Tp c c pm� D m 0 -J -� W Nj V -a C + - f]n Co W N � s N V cD Z 7 � r O 0 'j8 0 m W O o o M m o O Cn m o o N m O O m W s N s m N !+ MCI N W W W W N O N A Cn m Z1 Z 000 IP 0 O O O O O O N ° 0 0 O 0 0 0 0 Cn Vt rn N� N -+ -+ O s O p 0 po p p m O m 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Cl 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 D CA o'wn� cn_ -gym- C), j �n -�cn� omm 30 t7 O m N 0 Ut 0 O .P. 0 0 O Cn 0 0 Co Cn VI N Ja m O W -+ O m O� (lt m _s m W 0 0 O O 0 o m A 0 0 V V j 0 O c 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Cn p 0 p 0 p 080 p 0 0 0 0 0 . N N O Z O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ......... 0 0 0 T C) O N � D O V N Z Z () N m Ut o N CJt n o O o m O O O O O O O o 0 0 0 0 0 o a o o T1 CA D = J., -M O CA ( n m O N N O N N rn ( V O 0 N ( N A N Gn m cD N m W [n O �I 0 0 m O N -t V W C W N" <O A C p O p O p O p p O O O O p p O O O O Z -I 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O loo co O O fc) cn o O j,cn s �� N V O O Cn W Cn (T m 0 0 [ m 0 0 m O m 0- O Z W m 0 m i m m N [i9 O V O O 0 O m U[ UT N V W W O m m Gn m m O 00 O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O (n 0 0 O 0 0 0 0000 0 0 O O CD O o O O o o O O 0 o A o N O o 0 co :0 co co O Z O `/ O CD -q c D m X _2 W E N: \1PRU ECT\A- EVULUTH \0208 \271NT1.D 2 ° m M tQ a z m m < MATCH LINE - SEE ABOVE RIGHT c s y i 0 CR 0 LINE - SEE NEXT SHEET MATCH LINE - SEE BELOW LEFT VIERLING DRIVE I' I I I . wy o O c II z O r O F C O � v D to --I Z5 V) Z z r 0 m Oz II x* z mo D Z - u Z 'U z in D m o x L ;o D m 8 m z O aD z o O om En 2 z z n r D �K r D O Dr z r nm r (n O �v m z DD D -C Ln z 0 z o O c z o N 0 (n (310d 03d NO) 30dldNl 11TH AVENUE 4 t K � 0 ONi 9 v sc," S �MEO 3� 1Np�' 0 ° b OL N N 30d1dNl 7 30VIdN1 SCHOOL DRIVEWAY 31 0 C 0 INPLACE az —�M INPLACE PRAIRIE LANE 30b''idNl Q0 g p r� o — Z ° U W6 -1 S & R RIGHT Q si Q yq± C L ° M R3 -3OAC F & I 0 z 1 038 1 T ( M ADAPT HIGHWAY mmr mxn wrs _ INPLACE O ' z 2 $ z a 9E =1 INPLACE 2T �$ A P_ ° S9 2 3 > s� Y ? b 0 CR 0 LINE - SEE NEXT SHEET MATCH LINE - SEE BELOW LEFT VIERLING DRIVE I' I I I . wy o O c II z O r O F C O � v D to --I Z5 V) Z z r 0 m Oz II x* z mo D Z - u Z 'U z in D m o x L ;o D m 8 m z O aD z o O om En 2 z z n r D �K r D O Dr z r nm r (n O �v m z DD D -C Ln z 0 z o O c z o N 0 (n (310d 03d NO) 30dldNl 11TH AVENUE 4 t K � 0 ONi 9 v sc," S �MEO 3� 1Np�' 0 ° b OL N N 30d1dNl 7 30VIdN1 SCHOOL DRIVEWAY 31 0 C 0 INPLACE az —�M INPLACE PRAIRIE LANE 30b''idNl Q0 g p r� o — Z ° U W6 -1 S & R RIGHT Q si Q __OFC m \ \\ { I t ;n0 @ \R % I)l � ; MM %g777 ) \�� !g§ m 27m� � !_§ (d§ §§2 � �(} \§� 2 m| ` « } \ \\ @ 2§¢ f� !� §@) @ 9 cn O Z � 0 O O a > D Z � � � 7 ■ CO @ K m / 8 )= 2 \ � ] - I 2 \ I m ,_ A_« 0 � � 2Fn \ » »� ! A aa m ( ! A ZO &O 5 10TH AVENUE \4% \4 4 e » \ \ § o § z ` S / / / / @ /G q 0z k2 " 9 \ m= z $o ¢ § 2 z __ 0 r® §7 G/ z c a n m 3 2 z 9 n > m o P > £ % r c /% r )2 \ z q T) £ j z 0 2 z / \ 3 G \ I (�D � \� P k 7 m k ! m b b nr § ■ � a � a e maw # emu - � v o x m > RI $Q AA x Z Z m Z o cc 47 G1 � .DWG d A - SEE ABOVE RIGHT N N !Q °1. X y g:n p � p 0 d0£ —£21 0 O n 2 AINO CAP I + 9 C A C O M Z S C IR Q s o�(Z A y 8 ^y Y R II ... Z r LANE q I I > A D R3 —9b z � m F & I c°urtr 27 INPLACE C �mr �m SPEED OMIT 40 INPLACE S & R R3 -30AD y g:n p � p 0 d0£ —£21 F & I AINO CAP rl GI ${� � SV A C O M Z S C IR o�(Z A y 8 R II ... Z r (n I I > A D z 8�9 P A z � m � Z 96 —�21 2 Q ;Y� �x O A�NO y T p� 0 y o -G N g r m z i p N� �Yp �j v S a 30dldNI $ I 11WI1 433dS y Q MATCH LINE - SEE NEXT SHEET K Z ®® >Z � O c°urtr 27 INPLACE C �mr �m SPEED OMIT 40 INPLACE S & R PREVIO MATCH UNE - See X OUE N I* II -n Z O � O — Z II 0 0 C r O D to -C > G) Z? r- p m oz 0 � II X9 m Z -o Z - v Z� Z Vl D U) 0 2 -{ ;a D m '-I o m z 0 oD Z 0 G) 0 M z Z D ---�� O r D 0 D� z F 0m cn O En 0 o z -1 m D Ln Z O Z O O C Z 0 . O L� y ha ISl �i 0 A ) T 1 C L o n Z 4 O a1 q I 4 GARDEN LANE I m N N I I MATCH LINE - SEE BELOW LFF7 R3 -30AD F & I CAP rl b ... Z r (n I I > A D c Z 96 —�21 2 O A�NO p� 0 Q Y311Ci� I y Q MATCH LINE - SEE NEXT SHEET PREVIO MATCH UNE - See X OUE N I* II -n Z O � O — Z II 0 0 C r O D to -C > G) Z? r- p m oz 0 � II X9 m Z -o Z - v Z� Z Vl D U) 0 2 -{ ;a D m '-I o m z 0 oD Z 0 G) 0 M z Z D ---�� O r D 0 D� z F 0m cn O En 0 o z -1 m D Ln Z O Z O O C Z 0 . O L� y ha ISl �i 0 A ) T 1 C L o n Z 4 O a1 q I 4 GARDEN LANE I m N N I I MATCH LINE - SEE BELOW LFF7 N: \1PRO.ECT\A- E\DULUTN \0208 \271N79.DW0 N: \IPROJECT \A- E\oulu7H\0206\271Nn.OWO 333z o_go_0 \� \q ;o \ 0 /f/ \/\ \X0 zm� f3� f § n M � \\ \? II \� C/) k� o? M® M mƒ \� 0z 4 k/ r \ m 0 \ � « § m _ 0 m z a . \ Z f 0 0 \ / � : � � � ! # � CITY OF SHAKOPEE Memorandum TO: Mayor & City Council Mark McNeill, City Administrator FROM: Bruce Loney, Public Works Director SUBJECT: Approval of Limited Use Permit from Mn/DOT on Bituminous Trail, from T.H. 169 to 12 Avenue DATE: May 21, 2002 Attached to this memo is a resolution and limited use permit for Council consideration and approval in conjunction with the bituminous trail, from T.H. 169 to 12 Avenue along CSAH 83. On April 2, 2002, at the City Council meeting concerning the award of contract for CSAH 83/16 improvement project, the City Council did pass a motion ordering plans to be revised to include a bituminous trail, from T.H. 169 to 12 Avenue along CSAH 83. Attached to this memorandum is a revised plan showing the bituminous trail connection in Mn/DOT right -of -way, from T.H. 169 to 12 Avenue along CSAH 83. Also attached is a limited use permit, as required by Mn/DOT, for maintenance of the trail and a resolution authorizing the limited used permit be executed by the appropriate City officials. The cost of this additional segment of bituminous trail is $36,590.90, as calculated by WSB & Assoc., utilizing the unit bid prices from the CSAH 83/16 improvement project contract. The cost of bituminous trail would be from the City's Capital Improvement Fund and would be 100% cost to the City. The Capital Improvement Program had budgeted $50,000.00 for a sidewalk along 1" Avenue for this year and it is unlikely this project will be done this year. For the bituminous trail to be constructed, the City Council would need to approve a motion approving the plans for the bituminous trail along CSAH 83, from T.H. 169 to 12 Avenue, and add it to the existing CSAH 83/16 improvement project contract. The City Council also needs to adopt a resolution authorizing the appropriate City officials to execute the limited use permit with Mn/DOT for the construction and maintenance of a bituminous trail in Mn/DOT's right -of -way. 1. Approve a motion approving the plans for bituminous trail connection, from T.H. 169 to 12 Avenue, along CSAH 83. 2. Adopt Resolution No. 5721, a resolution authorizing the appropriate City officials to execute the limited use permit agreement with Mn/DOT. 3. Do not approve the trail plans or the limited use agreement at this time. 4. Table for additional information. Staff recommends Alternative No. 1 and No. 2, in order to complete the bituminous trail connection in this corridor and complete the construction work from 12 Avenue to 17 Avenue along CSAH 83. 1. Approve a motion approving the plans for bituminous trail connection from T.H. 169 to 12 Avenue, along County State Aid Highway 83 and add this work to the County State Aid 83/16 contract. 2. Offer Resolution No. 5721, A Resolution Authorizing the Appropriate City Officials to Execute the Limited Use Permit Agreement with Mn/DOT for a Pedestrian Trail in the Right -of -Way of Trunk Highway 169 at County State Aid Highway 83 and move its adoption. A Bruce Lone Public Works Director BlUpmp MEM5721 WHEREAS, the City of Shakopee is a political subdivision, organized and existing under the laws of the State of Minnesota; and, WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Shakopee has approved a plan to construct a pedestrian trail in the right -of -way of Trunk Highway 169 to promote the orderly and safe crossing of the highway; and, WHEREAS, the State of Minnesota, Department of Transportation requires a Limited Use Permit for the construction and utilization of said pedestrian trail. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA: that the City Council of the City of Shakopee hereby enters into a Limited Use Permit with the State of Minnesota, Department of Transportation for the following purposes: 1. To construct, operate and maintain a pedestrian trail within the right -of- way of Trunk Highway 169 (TH 169 = 005) of the State of Minnesota along CSAH 83. The City of Shakopee shall construct, operate and maintain said trail in accordance with the Limited Use Permit granted by the Minnesota Department of Transportation. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the City Council and the Mayor are authorized to execute the Limited Use Permit and any amendments to the Permit. Adopted in session of the City Council of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota, held this day of 2 2002 Mayor of the City of Shakopee ATTEST: City Clerk (SEAL) STATE OF T • l t - • - C.S. City of Shakopee County of Scott In accordance with Minnesota Statutes Section 161.434 and Federal -Aid Policy Guide, Part 652, a Limited Use Permit is hereby granted to the City of Shakopee, the Permittee. This permit is for the purpose of constructing, maintaining and operating a pedestrian /bike trail, (hereinafter called trail), within the right -of -way of Trunk Highway 169 (T.H. 169 = 005) as shown in red on Exhibit "A ", which is attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference. This permit is executed by the Permittee pursuant to the attached resolution. In addition, the following special provisions shall apply: 1. The construction, maintenance, and supervision of the trail shall be at no expense to the Minnesota Department of Transportation. 2. Before construction of any kind, the plans for such construction shall be approved in writing by the Minnesota Department of Transportation through the District Engineer. 3. No permanent structure(s) or advertising device(s) in any manner, form or size shall be constructed, placed or permitted to be constructed or placed upon the State of Minnesota right -of -way. 4. No commercial activity or activities shall be allowed to operate upon said State of Minnesota right -of -way. 5. Any and all maintenance of the trail shall be provided by the Permittee; this includes, but is not limited to, the plowing and removal of snow, and the installation and removal of regulatory signs. 6. This permit is non - exclusive and is granted subject to the rights of others, including, but not limited to public utilities which may occupy said right -of -way. 7. The Permittee shall preserve and protect all utilities located on the lands covered by this permit at no expense to the Minnesota Department of Transportation and it shall be the responsibility of the Permittee to call the Gopher State One Call System at 1- 800 -252- 1166 at least 48 hours prior to performing any excavation. Page 1 of 4CADocuments and Settings \BLoney.SHAKOPEE \Local Settings \Temporary lnte 8. Any crossings of the trail over the trunk highway shall be perpendicular to the centerline of the highway and shall provide and ensure reasonable and adequate stopping sight distance. 9. The Permittee shall construct the trail at the location shown in the attached Exhibit "A" subject to verification by the Minnesota Department of Transportation District Engineer that the construction geometrics and procedures result in a trail that is compatible with the safe and efficient operation of the highway facility. 10. Approval from Minnesota Department of Transportation District Engineer shall be required for any changes from the approved plan. 11. Upon completion of the construction of the trail, the Permittee shall restore all disturbed slopes and ditches in such manner that drainage, erosion control and aesthetics are perpetuated. 12. This permit does not release the Permittee from any liability or obligation imposed by federal law, Minnesota Statutes, local ordinances, or other agency regulations relating thereto and any necessary permits relating thereto shall be applied for and obtained by the Permittee. 13. Any use permitted by this permit shall remain subordinate to the right of the Minnesota Department of Transportation to use the property for highway and transportation purposes. This permit does not grant any interest whatsoever in land, nor does it establish a permanent park, recreation area or wildlife or waterfowl refuge facility that would become subject to Section 4 (f) of the Federal -Aid Highway Act of 1968, nor does this permit establish a Bikeway or Pedestrian way which would require replacement pursuant to Minnesota Statutes Section 160.264. 14. This permit shall be subject to cancellation and termination by the Minnesota Department of Transportation, with or without cause, by giving the Permittee 60 days written notice of such intent. Upon said notice of cancellation, the trail shall be removed within 60 days, at no cost to the Minnesota Department of Transportation, by the Permittee and at the sole expense of the Permittee. Upon cancellation of said permit or any portion thereof, the Permittee will be required to return and restore the area to a condition satisfactory to the Minnesota Department of Transportation District Engineer. 15. The Permittee, for itself, its successors, and assigns, agrees to abide by the provisions of Title VI Appendix C of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which provides in par that no person in the United States, shall on the grounds of race, color, or national origin, be excluded from, or denied use of any trail. 16. The Permittee shall hold harmless and indemnify the State of Minnesota, its Commissioner of Transportation and employees and its successors and assigns, from liability claims for damages because of bodily injury, death, property damage, sickness, disease, or loss and expense arising from the operations of the trail or from the use of the portion of highway right -of -way over which this permit is granted. Page 2 of 4CADocuments and Settings \BLoney.SHAKOPEE\Local Settings \Temporary Inte 17. The Permittee shall hold harmless and indemnity the State of Minnesota, its Commissioner of Transportation and employees and its successors and assigns from claims arising or resulting from the temporary or permanent termination of trail user rights on any portion of highway right -of -way over which this permit is granted. 18. The State of Minnesota, through its Commissioner of Transportation, shall retain the right to limit and /or restrict the parking of vehicles and assemblage of trail users on the highway right -of -way over which this permit is granted, so as to maintain the safety of both the motoring public and trail users. 19. The Permittee will hold harmless and indemnify the State of Minnesota, its Commissioner of Transportation and employees from claims resulting from temporary or permanent changes in drainage patterns resulting in flood damage. 20. The Permittee shall not dispose of any materials regulated by any governmental or regulatory agency onto the ground, or into any body of water, or into any container on the State's right -of -way. In the event of spillage of regulated materials, the Permittee shall provide for cleanup of the spilled material and of materials contaminated by the spillage in accordance with all applicable federal, state and local laws and regulations, at the sole expense of the Permittee. 21. The Permittee (for itself, its contractors, subcontractors, its materialmen, and all other persons acting for, through or under it or any of them), covenants that no laborers', mechanics', or matenalmens' liens or other liens or claims of any kind whatsoever shall be filed or maintained by it or by any subcontractor, materialmen or other person or persons acting for, through or under it or any of them against the work and /or against said lands. for or on account of any work done or materials furnished by it or any of them under any agreement or any amendment or supplement thereto; agrees to indemnify and hold harmless the State of Minnesota from all such liens and claims. Page 3 of 4CADocuments and SettingsMoney.SHAKOPEE\Local Settings7emporary Inte AD I M I '• : O• 0 Date 0 Date: William P. Mars, Mayor District Engineer And Mark McNeill, City Administrator Director, Office of Land Management The Commissioner of Transportation by the execution of this permit certifies that this permit is necessary in the public interest and that the use intended is for public purposes. And Date Judith Cox, City Clerk Page 4 of 4CADocuments and Settings \PPennington.SHAKOPEE \Local Settings7emporar LIMITED PERMIT ROUTING APPLICANT H OFFICE NO. COMMENTS DATE RIGHT OF WAY SURVEYS PLANNING PRE- DESIGN WATER RESOURCES DETAIL DESIGN TRAFFIC PROJECT ENGINEER MUNICIPALITY A.D.E. A.D.E. FHWA PERMIT OFFICE sm 00 7 anueAv qjz6 x GAI!J(] Ispejejoes I I il -------------- ------- ------- 169 TNnk LLI co -- — --------- — — ------ --- ------------- — ----------- rl I co l cis 1 9 , cu --------- - b Cl) 00 Ct) LM IIV iU CITY OF SHAKOPEE Memorandum TO: Mayor & City Council Mark McNeill, City Administrator FROM: Bruce Loney, Public Works Director SUBJECT: Award of Contract for Tahpah Park Parking Lot & Vierling Drive, from C.R. 79 to Sage Lane Bituminous Trail, Project No.'s 2002 -3 and 2002 -2 DATE: May 21, 2002 INTRODUCTION: Attached is Resolution No. 5722, which accepts the bids and awards the contract for Tahpah Park parking lot, Project No. 2002 -3 and Vierling Drive bituminous trail, from C.R. 79 to Sage Lane, Project No. 2002 -2. BACKGROUND: On April 21, 2002, City Council adopted Resolution No.'s 5678 and 5686 authorizing advertisement for bids on the above referenced projects. The plans for Tahpah Park were prepared by Bolton & Menk, Inc. and the Vierling Drive trail plans prepared by the City's Engineering Department. On May 3, 2002, sealed bids were received and publicly opened for these projects. A total of three bids were received and are summarized in the attached resolution. The low bid was submitted for both improvements by Northwest Asphalt, Inc. in the amount of $413,733.60 including alternate. The Engineer's estimate for this project was approximately $355,000.00 for Tahpah Park and $50,000.00 for Vierling Drive. The low bid received for Tahpah Park improvements including Alternate "A" work was $358,768.50 by Northwest Asphalt, Inc. The low bid received for Vierling Drive trail improvements is $54,465.00 by Northwest Asphalt, Inc. The 2001 CIP had estimated a cost of $200,000.00 for Tahpah Park Parking lot improvements and a cost of $70,000.00 for Vierling Drive trail improvements Also, since the funding for Tahpah Park improvements are from the Park Reserve and the Council is considering purchase of property by O'Dowd Lake, sufficient Park Reserve Funds may not be available to fund this project. The low bids received for these projects are summarized as follows: Bidder Tahpah Park Plus Alternate Vierling Drive Bituminous Trail Northwest Asphalt $358,768.80 Bituminous Roadways $361,655.25 DMJ Corporation $378,301.10 $54,965.00 $54,991.50 $55,732.00 Staff has contacted Northwest Asphalt, the low bidder on both projects, and they would be interested in the Vierling Drive trail project, if Tahpah Park parking lot project does not move forward. In addition to awarding the contract to the low bidder for this project, staff is requesting that an extension agreement with Bolton & Menk, Inc. be entered into to perform the surveying services, inspection, administration and construction services, as necessary to complete the project. If the Council awards this project, staff is also requesting that City Council authorize a contingency amount equal to 5% of the contract to cover minor change orders or quantity adjustments that may occur on the project 1. Accept the low bid of $413,733.60 for Tahpah Park and Vierling Drive improvements and adopt Resolution No. 5722, awarding the contract to Northwest Asphalt, Inc. 2. Accept the low bid of $54,965.00 for just Vierling Drive improvements and adopt Resolution No. 5722 awarding the contract to Northwest Asphalt, Inc. 3. Reject the low bid and award the bid to another bidder. 4. Reject all bids and rebid. 5. Authorize the appropriate City officials to execute an extension agreement with Bolton & Menk, Inc. to provide consultant services on this project for the City of Shakopee. 6. Authorize a 5% contingency amount for use by the City Engineer in authorizing change orders or quantity adjustments on this project. Staff recommends Alternative No.'s 1, 5 and 6 or Alternative No.'s 2, 5 and 6 depending on available Park Reserve Funds. 1. Offer Resolution No. 5722, A Resolution Accepting Bids on the Tahpah Park Parking Lot and Vierling Drive Trail Improvements, from County Road 79 to Sage Lane, Project No.'s 2002 -3 and 2002 -2 and move its adoption. 2. Authorize the appropriate City officials to execute an extension agreement with Bolton & Menk, Inc., to provide consultant services for the City of Shakopee. 3. Authorize a 5% contingency amount for use by the City Engineer in authorizing change orders or quantity adjustments on this project. 4 ruce Loney Public Works Director BL/pmp MEM5722 0 0 1 M Z • 1 I I Tahpah Park Parking Lot And Vierfing Drivt- Trafl Improvements, From County Road 79 To Sage Lane Project , 1I and II WHEREAS, pursuant to an advertisement for bids for the Tahpah Park Parking Lot and Vierling Drive trail improvements, from C.R. 79 to Sage Lane, Project No.'s 2002 -3 and 2002 -2, bids were received, opened and tabulated according to law, and the following bids were received complying with the advertisement: Total Bidder * Schedule "A" * * Schedule "B" Amount Northwest Asphalt, Inc. $358,768.60 $ 54,965.00 $413,733.60 Bituminous Roadway, Inc. $361,655.25 $ 54,991.50 $416,646.75 DMJ Corporation $378,301.10 $ 55,732.00 $434,033.10 * Schedule A is for Tahpah Park parking lot improvements. ** Schedule B is for Vierling Drive trail improvements. WHEREAS, it appears that Northwest Asphalt, Inc., 1451 Stagecoach Road, Shakopee, MN 55379 is the lowest responsible bidder for the Tahpah Park Parking lot and Vierling Drive trail improvements. AND, WHEREAS, the City of Shakopee desires to award a contract for the Tahpah Park Parking lot and Vierling Drive trail improvements. O BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA: 1. The appropriate City officials are hereby authorized and directed to enter into a contract with Northwest Asphalt, Inc. in the name of the City of Shakopee for the Tahpah Park Parking Lot and Vierling Drive bituminous trail improvements, from C.R. 79 to Sage Lane, Project No.'s 2002 -3 and 2002 -2, according to the plans and specifications therefore approved by the City Council and on file in the office of the City Clerk. 2. The City Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to return forthwith to all bidders the deposits made with their bids, except that the deposits of the successful bidder and the next lowest bidder shall be retained until a contract has been signed. Adopted in session of the City Council of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota, held this day of , 2002. Mayor of the City of Shakopee City Clerk /5 Z3 �/ PROPOSED TRAIL EXTENSION ALONG CSAH 83 ESTIMATED ESTIMATED nrnrvc iIIQir TTNTT PR iCR OUANTITY COST 2021.501 IMOBILIZATION LUMP SUM $3,000.00 1 $3,000.00 REMOVE CURB AND GUTTER LIN FT $2.10 40 $84.00 REMOVE SEWER PIPE (STORM) LIN FT $8.00 12 $96.00 P2104 REMOVE CONCRETE WALK SQ YD $3.50 168 $588.00 REMOVE CONCRETE APRON EACH $15000 1 $150.00 SALVAGE CONCRETE APRON (24 " & 36 EACH $200.00 2 $400.00 . SALVAGE CONCRETE APRON (42 ") EACH $300.00 1 $300.00 2105.501 COMMON EXCAVATION (CV) P CU YD $4.00 1160 $4,640.00 2105.523 COMMON BORROW (LV) P CU YD $4.00 1100 $4,400.00 2211.503 AGGREGATE BASE (CV) CLASS 5 CU YD $18.90 281 $5,310.90 2350.501 TYPE LV 3 WEARING COURSE TON $39.75 236 $9,381.00 2501.561 15" RC PIPE CULVERT DES 3006 CL V LIN FT $22.00 26 $572.00 2501.561 24" RC PIPE CULVERT DES 3006 CL H LIN FT $31.00 10 $310.00 2501.561 36" RC PIPE CULVERT DES 3006 CL II LIN FT $75.00 10 $750.00 2501.561 2501.573 2501.573 42" RC PIPE CULVERT DES 3006 CL Il INSTALL CONCRETE APRON INSTALL CONCRETE APRON (42 " LIN FT EACH EACH $100.00 $400.00 $650.00 16 2 1 $1,600.00 $800.00 $650.00 2503.602 CONNECT TO EXISTING STORM SEWER EACH $250.00 1 $250.00 2521.501 2531.502 4" CONCRETE WALK CONCRETE CURB DESIGN B624 SQ YD LIN FT $20.75 $16.00 0 4.00 4 0 $3 $640 .00 $640 2557.501 WIRE FENCE DESIGN 60 -9332 LIN FT $12.00 70 $840.00 $38,496.90 is S. S CITY OF SHAKOP E MEMORAND UM TO: Mayor & City Council Mark McNeill, City Administrator FROM: Michael Hullander, Public Works Supervisor SUBJECT: Sanitary Sewer Root Control DATE: May 21, 2002 INTRODUCTION: a Public Works is requesting to treat approximately 13,000 feet of Sanitary Sewer with an herbicidal foam to control tree root growth. BACKGROUND: Public Works has been televising approximately 30,000 feet of Sanitary Sewer pipe annually to monitor the condition and detect problems within the sewer pipe. Sewer televising has made us aware of several sections of sanitary sewer that tree root invasion has caused or could potentially cause sewer back -ups. In 2000 and 2001 Public Works hired Duke's Sewer Root Control Specialists and they have successfully controlled root growth using an herbicidal root foam. Public Works is requesting to expand the program to treat approximately 13,000 feet of sanitary sewer. Staff has received two quotes for this service and is requesting to hire Duke's Sewer Root Control Specialists with the low quote of $19,361.06. See attached quotes. ALTERNATIVES: 1. Accept the low quote from Duke's Sewer Root Control Specialists to provide sanitary sewer root control for $19,361.06, with payment to be expended from the Sanitary Sewer Fund. 2. Deny the request. 3. Table for additional information. MTMTLR 1. Accept alternative #1. Authorize staff to contract with Duke's Sewer Root Control Specialists for the price of $19,361.06 for sanitary sewer root control, with payment to be expended from the Sanitary Sewer Fund. Michael Hullander Public Works Supervisor May-01-02 09:014 SEWER ROOT CONTROL SPEC'ALIz, May 1, 2002 Mike Huffl2nder Public 1, ,Norks Supe:-% City of Shako pee 12z,- Holmes St. So Shakopee. MN 5.5379 Dear MF. HLfllander As her your reqje 4 for quola tion for foarning root control service, submit the st loliowing: P - 012! SYRACUSE, NY DAI LAS. TX ATLANTA, CA Pipe Sizze Footage Price Per Foot Total .3 inch WA $1.49/foot N/A B inch 12.496 feet $1 -4g /fool $18.619. G4 1C i n c h 447 feet $1.66/foot $742.02 12 inch TIIA $1.82 /fool WA. 15 i NUA $2,63/foot NIA GRAND T OTAL: $ Prices are cori)Pited per linear foo - . manhole to rnanhoie, and Duke's Standard guarantee app, to a i saT-otary sewers teated 11 you require any further information. please cai' 1-800-447-6687, Tank you for your interest tn our service. gri I-I e 'If ro r, UUI Fs SALES & S VIII, iNC 1020 HIA�VATHA BLVD- '9,TP-Sr SYHP.CUSE, NEW YORK '13204-1,` ,i. CALL TOLL FREE 1-800-44-1100 IS '315) 472- FAX J-DI: 475-4LZOJ Visu-Sewer Clean & Seal, Inc. 7905 Beech St. N,E, Fridley, YEN 5543" 763-w252-0004 To: City of Shakopee 129 Holmes Street S Shakopee, MN 55379 From 4 Am Akers visas -Sewer Clean & Seal, Tno, Dstr. 5121 Project Root Control 'vTisu is Pleilsed to olrl�T the following &--nrice: Herbicidzd root control of approxumtely 13,000 feet of sat itary =wer L1 the City of Si pee ming Thr vaporooter. System 3 8175. Nee - 8" Pipe $ 1.59 PcHinear fo"m " 3 1,- f 10" pipe S 1.79 per linear foot '7 7 'I 6y, The City of Shy opee shall pm access to all mmholm detailed mq)s amd water for our jet truck E-Om Flees by bydva Al'isu-Sewer wW provide labor, mter ffa and qptipmmw to COrnplete tht' jm&ct Tl=t You for the op - tl� portumty to quote w,, s project If you have Any questio pdease d. not h--sitate to contact us a 888-876-84M At'! matc6A', .9"Mrkk-*l to b" ,mss &PxiR4 'U1 work to k C=v1'-zmi in a au'aa'�ndal �workwwJikw aiW&W Ucordille la SpecificationX Albmkt Txx Is v, W be execato - w�Tjtt, sundudywums- AV aftemfoit a. dv;4atim from the iaVt+ =Lm w!�, - A only up on in oMem ?nd wil bc*= uncxtm Ck=v-- v"er and ',above tbz est"e, Ail WMrznt, ckAf,7zg,1t 4p*Ti gnkm, wm&M� a: rzllay , v bsyowl COO OnMI. O%W W MMY I �� & � op sjnl fi r e turmlo exid other imuuwx. O w 0 .1, r.11, cxw,,�� by romrmsation ha TbL� py, o awy It mitt im-n Snot 4 -witbic 3kl Osyta Tefm!? - 1 10 ds)-z. Acceptance of Proposal The above prices, spe aid conditioiris we saiis&-trjxry and are heretw acc-cpied. VSC&S, In--. is authmi2td to Flo the work as specified. Date. sigwxum: CITY OF SHAKOPEE Memorandum TO: Mayor & City Council Mark McNeill, City Administrator FROM: Bruce Loney, Public Works Director SUBJECT: 2000 Street Reconstruction, Project No. 2000 -4 DATE: May 21, 2002 C u Associated with the 2000 Street Reconstruction, Project No. 2000 -4, there were appeals on assessments from property owners on this project. Staff has one assessment appeal and is requesting Council approval of the new assessment amount. • Staff, in conjunction with the City Attorney's office, has settled on an assessment appeal on the property owned by Paul Sullwold. The reduction in assessment that has been agreed upon is $500.00 from the levied amount. The previous assessment levied was $35,255.30. The property owner is agreeable for the City to make payment of $500.00 versus a reduction of assessment. The Finance Director recommends this method of reduction versus assessment reduction due to the small amount involved. ALTERNATIVES: 1. Authorize payment to Paul Sullwold in the amount of $500.00 for the settlement of the assessment appeal associated with Project No. 2000 -4. 2. Do not authorize payment. Staff recommends Alternative No. 1. Approve a motion authorizing payment of $500.00 to Paul Sullwold, 1420 3 Avenue West, Shakopee, MN, Parcel No. 27- 015015 -0, for settlement of the assessment appeal associated with the 2000 Reconstruction, Project No. 2000 -4. � Bruce Loney Public Works Director BL/pmp SETTLELMENT k� CONSENT CITY OF SHAKOPEE Memorandum TO: Mayor & City Council Mark McNeill, City Administrator FROM: Bruce Loney, Public Works Director SUBJECT: Request of CB &I Water Regarding Hourly Restrictions on Construction Activities DATE: May 21, 2002 INTRODUCTION: By letter dated May 14, 2002, CB &I Water, the contractor for the water tower in Dominion Hills for Shakopee Public Utilities Commission has requested that City Code Sec. 10.60, Noise Elimination and Noise Prevention, Subd. 3, Hourly Restrictions on Certain Operations, be suspended for certain work hours. The above named section of the City Code restricts the hours of operation from 7:00 A.M. to 10:00 P.M. on weekdays, and from 9:00 A.M. to 9:00 P.M. on weekends and holidays. CB &I Water is requesting a suspension on the hours as follows: Saturdays, Sundays and Holidays, from April 25, 2002 to June 7, 2002 to erect and paint the tower starting at 7:00 A.M. versus 9:00 A.M. and stop at 7:00 P.M. Staff would recommend that if the suspension of hours is granted, that the approval is subject to the following conditions: 1. Approval is contingent upon minimizing noise exposure near residential areas. 2. If residential complaints are received by the City, the suspension can be revoked at the discretion of the City Engineer. If Council approves the suspension, a public notice to meet the City Code requirements and notice such as a news release would be placed in the Shakopee Valley News. Staff would point out that this water tower is located in Dominion Hills which is a rural residential subdivision. Also, by allowing this suspension, the water tower can be completed faster and inconvenience to the neighborhood minimized. 1. Approve the suspension of City Code Sec. 10.60, Noise Elimination and Noise Prevention, Subd. 3, Hourly Restrictions on Certain Operations, per this memo, and direct staff to publish notice of the suspension terms with the conditions as recommended by staff. 2. Approve the suspension of City Code Sec. 10.60, Noise Elimination and Noise Prevention, Subd. 3, Hourly Restrictions on Certain Operations, for some other period of time as determined appropriate by the City Council, and direct staff to publish notice of the suspension terms. 3. Do not approve the suspension of City Code Sec. 10.60, Noise Elimination and Noise Prevention, Subd. 3, Hourly Restrictions on Certain Operations. Staff recommends Alternative No. 1. ,I��JI �C17�i7�C11119fy1 Offer a motion approving a suspension of City Code Sec. 10.60, Noise Elimination and Noise Prevention, Subd. 3, Hourly Restrictions on Certain Operations, per this memo, and direct staff to publish notice of the suspension terms with the conditions as recommended by staff. / f 4 42ateLoneyy Public Works Director BL/p-p RESTRICT MAY 14 2002 3:30PM HP LASERJET 3200 05/14/02 09.32 FAX 515 254 9515 PDNI r5 May 14, 2002 Shakopee Public Utilities 1030 East Fourth Ave. Shakopee, MN 55379 -1699 ATTN : John Crooks RE: 130962 Shakopee, MN Tank NoA Project Gentlemen: 9525469065 p.2 (� 002 CB&I Water a division of CB &t Constructors, Inc. 9550 Hickman Road Clive, 1A 50325 515 254 9228 As noted in the preconstruction meeting minutes, any variance in the allowed work hours will require prior approval by the City of Shakopee. CB &I respectfully requests approval from the City of Shakopee to work the following hours. The request is for the CB &I field- painting crew. Monday through Saturday- Start at 7:00am Stop at 7:00pin Sundays and Holidays - Start at 7:00am Stop at 7:00pm Field painting schedule is 4 -25 -02 to 6 -7 -02. Thank you for your consideration of this matter. DOW /jjs /Y, C. ]i CONSENT Memo to: Honorable Mayor and City Council Members City Administrator From: Terry Stang, Fire Chief Date: 5/6/02 Re: Self Contained Breathing Apparatus Introduction The 2002 Fire Department budget contains a line item of $20,000 for the purchase of 4 Self Contained Breathing Apparatus (SCBA). Background Self Contained Breathing Apparatus (SCBA) is an air pack that is worn by fire fighters to enter burning buildings. They allow fire fighters to breath in a smoke filled environment. The Fire Department has received two quotes for SCBA packs with a spare air cylinder and Alert System. They are: • Ed M Feld Equipment Co., Inc. $4355.00 each • Wayfest Safety, Inc. $4901.00 each Discussion Ed M Feld Equipment Co., Inc. has the lowest quoted price for the SCBA units. The Fire Department recommends the purchase of four (4) SCBA packs with a spare air cylinder and Alert System for a total price of $17,420.00 from Ed M Feld. Action Requested If City Council concurs, they should, by motion authorize the purchase of four (4) SCBA packs with spare air cylinder and Alert System from Ed M Feld Equipment Co., Inc. for the price of $17,420.00. Jan-21. 2002 12:02PM WAYEST SAFETY N0.8883 P. 2 Q UOTE FORM Please a n n iOrzn OUt completely Company: & � �� 4 Address City, Stat z i p r , rt Y s• cces rr . Quoted Ev. r ' am Shi Via: ��k�� l /.� � POE: 0 W t_ Estimated Ship Bate. FROM : RICKMCGonigle- CLPRIONN PHONE NO. : 5155322623 Jan. 25 2002 09:39RM P1 ED A FELD EQUIPMENT CO INC. 113 N. Griffith Road CARROLL, IOWA S 1401 (712) 792 - 3143 ° 800 568 - 2463 E -mail: feldfire ®pionet.net L` L aOC naC.4,- SiE`�• vao.+st7/c - r'. 12 12 19 _2 5333 PLEASE INDICATE THE ABOVE NUMBER WHEN ORDERING I / `—ION : A DA'E P SAiE f � INQUIRY DATE INQUIRY NUMBER J it 13 48 - .6 4 A Ii ';� c. St 41.v ble mte� c_ '4 9, S6 v\ %6it1V_ X255 0V\ -E w'e-eT ® -f ®a PRICE:• � `IF3 1 00-1 I .. ..._ ...._....._____ _.i .. .. r nLl.• r..... a...•_..__..... rr •,•. rr rhn. rynu ,',r.:lv�r::t_- .!.__._tr_t:.L �I Il�I4L..L.L_..... _ � , I -n ,...__:._,.0 _ s, fia_ n,,. aa:,. n6uhnr._... L. r .... ...........r___.,a¢.,•,.ur.:.._ ...__.._...._.. _ ...,...... .. . _.. :.. -.._ _.. _ _ ... ... ...:._. .. .. - r.,, d,.,•,n..... ,_r_un t,•.t.:..,- ...,r._,: -,. •.t _..._........ ... VT AnE FLEISED i"v SUdv�iT TriE rus7VE OvOiAFiOiJ FGR'n"3UR CONSIDEFv T N. SHOULD YOU PAL AN ORDER, BE ASSURED IP WILL RECEIVE OUR PROMPT ATTENYtON. THIS OVOTA71ON IS SUBJECT TOTHE CONDITIONS PRINTED ON REVERSE SIDE. AND IS VAUO FOR DAYS. 'THEREAFTER R IS SU&JECTTO CHANGE WTw4 7T NOTICE BY ACCEP I FD DATE SIGN AND RETURN YELLOW ACCEPTANCE COPY WHEN ORDERING. ® ® 6 CITY OF SHAKOPEE Memorandum TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Mark McNeill, City Administrator SUBJECT: Police Building Final Review — Construction Management Discussion DATE: May 16, 2002 At its meeting of May 21 the Council will be given an opportunity to review the plans for the new Police building, so that any last changes may be incorporated into those plans before they go to bid. In addition, the Council will also be asked to give consideration to utilizing Construction Management (CM) for the Police building, rather than a traditional general contractor. BKV Architects is nearing completion of the plans for the Police building. As with the Library, it is recommending that the City Council be given an opportunity to review one final time those plans. Any comments or changes would then be incorporated into the final plans, which will likely be brought back to the City Council on June 4 for adoption, and recommendation to go to bid. Last time that this was reviewed with the City Council, one comment that was made was a concern about costs associated with security fencing for police vehicles and police employees. The attached memorandum from Sergeant Bob Forberg addresses the Department's views on that, and recommendation that security fencing be included in the bid. Any other comments by Council should be made at this time, so that those can be included in the final document. The Council is also being asked to consider utilizing a construction management company, rather than going to a bid for a general contractor, which what was done for the Library. The attached information from BKV outlines the concept of construction management, and its advantages to an owner, such as the City. In essence, the architect will recommend three potential construction management companies to the City. The City will then interview those, and select one. The designated construction management company will then be responsible for seeking bids, not on the project as a whole, but rather, for the 20 to 30 components which make up the components of construction. In other words, there would be separate bids for such things as structural steel, floor covering, glass installers, and the like. While there is a cost for the construction management company, it should be comparable to the overhead and profit that would otherwise be realized by the general contractor. The main advantage to the City is the ability to manage subcontractors, and eliminate those that present problems. This is an important issue, and sufficient time should be taken to be certain that the Council is comfortable with the final product. This discussion will be scheduled during the regular portion of the May 21 City Council meeting. Regarding scheduling, the intent had been that the Council would approve plans and specifications, and order going to bid on June 4 However, if the interviews for construction manager are to take place, it is possible that the construction manager would not be designated until the meeting of June 18 at which time direction could be given by the Council to seek advertisements for the construction components. If the Council does choose to proceed with the construction management, it should designate a panel to interview the prospective construction management companies. I recommend the following City representatives on the panel: Councilor Clete Link, Police Department Project Manager Jerry Poole (Deputy Chief), one other Police Department representative to be designated by the Chief, Assistant to the City Administrator Tracy Coenen, and Public Works Director Bruce Loney. A recommendation regarding the CM- designated company would be forthcoming, possibly at the June 4 th meeting. The architect has indicated that construction information went to the estimator on May 15 It is unlikely that that estimate will be available in time for the May 21 meeting. The current project budget (building portion) is $4,318,865. funding is to come from the Building fund, with an interfund loan from the Sanitary Sewer fund if needed. 1 17 , 1111 11 I recommend that the following actions be taken: A final review be made of the construction documents. Approval be given to the concept of utilizing construction management; and If the Council concurs with CM, an interview team should be designated to interview the prospective CM companies recommended by the architect. If the Council concurs, it should review the plans, indicate its acceptance of construction management for coordination of the project, and designate a construction management company interview panel. Mark McNeill City Administrator MM:th CITY OF SHAKOPEE POLICE DEPARTMENT DATE: March 21, 2002 TO: Dan Hughes, Chief of Police FROM: Sgt. Bob Forberg SUBJECT: Police Department Parking Lot In the past ten years there have been a several of acts of vandalism to employee and Police Department vehicles while they have been parked in our north parking lot. These acts of vandalism consisted of tires slashed or punctured, windows and lights broken, scratches, kicks, dents and nasty notes written on the sides of vehicles or left on vehicles. The cost to repair the damage to vehicles would be estimated in the thousands of dollars. The Police Department's parking lot is a shortcut for many residents, children and adults, who live in surrounding neighborhoods. There have been several instances where a squad, often leaving the parking lot in an emergency response mode, has had to avoid colliding with non - police vehicles and pedestrians cutting through our parking lot. This happens at all hours of the day and night. The Scott County Sheriff's Office sworn personnel take their squads home and park them in either their garages or driveways. Their squads and personal vehicles spend very little time in Sheriff's Office parking lot. Please let me know if you have any questions or require additional information. Sgt. Bob Forberg BF:pm Shakopee Police Station Q:PROJ \1536.02 \BUS \DDCOST- 031902.XLS Difference $11,408 *Additional S.F. required due to increase in mechanical mezzanine to accommodate mech. Unit Project Budget Page 1 DESI�IIF:L7EVELOP.MENT COST ES: TIMA: TE::.:.:.:.:.: .:.:.:.:::.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:. :.:.:.:.:.::.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:. .............................................. ............................... ..... .:..........: 0 Prelim Budget -5.11.01 SD Estimate - 1.24.02 DD Estimate -3.19.02 ..................... .......... PROPERTY COST Soils Correction allowance $100,000 $100,000 $100,000 Survey allowance $5,000 $5,000 $5,000 Preliminary Soils Testing $1,500 $1,500 $3,4903 Financing costs verify $30,000 $30,000 $30,000 Appraisal fee verify $3,000 $3,000 $3,000 Legal fees verify $10,000 $10,000 $10,000 Other fees verify $5,000 $5,000 $5,000 SUBTOTAL $154,500 $154,500 $156,490 CONSTRUCTION COST Building Cost Budget @ $160 per s.f., including site costs 25,978 S.F. *27,100 S.F. $4,318,865 26,000 S.F. $4,282,130 $4,282,130 2 Scenarios were presented for facilities ranging from 24,000 to 28,000 - final program should come as close to median as possible SUBTOTAL $4,282,130 $4,282,130 $4;318,865 Difference $36,735; OTHER PROJECT EXPENSES $342,570 $342,570 $342,570 Professional Fees (Building and Site) Furniture and Equipment Design Fees (8 %) - Per * Allowai $29,000 $29,000 $24,000 Needs Assessment Fee Furniture & Equipment Allowance *Furniture $324,000 $324,000 $300,000 *Signage $10,000 $10,000 $10,000 *Audio Visua $30,000 $30,000 $30,000 Telephones $15,000 $15,000 $15,000 Equipment $0 $0 $0 Water Availability Charge allowance $4,000 $4,000 $4,000 MCES Sewer Charges allowance $6,000 $6,000 $6,000 Soils Testing- detailed allowance $4,000 $4,000 $4,000 City Sewer Charge allowance Reimbursables, printing, travel etc. allowance $3,000 $18,000 $3,000 $18,000 $3,000 $18,000 Special Testing costs allowance Subtotal $10,000 1 $10,000 1 $10,000 $795,570 $795,570 $766,570 Subtotal Project Costs $5,077,700 $5,077,700 $5,085,435 $511,443' Contingency 10.00% $507,770 $507,770 11 COST ESTIMATE $5,585,470 $5,585,470 $5,596,878 Difference $11,408 *Additional S.F. required due to increase in mechanical mezzanine to accommodate mech. Unit Project Budget Page 1 Comparison of Construction Contract Methods Team vs. Traditional Bid Project Budget Team Method Traditional Method Establish early in the design phase No contractor cost input during before working drawings are design phase. complete. No surprises Only final bid on complete plans will Costs continually monitored. fix owner's budget. Contractor cost analysis for design Difficult to adjust budget after final alternatives bidding. Trade contractors' input will verify Change orders are likely due to lack budget estimates of contractor's input into construction details and coordination. Audit trail allows owner to adjust final Change orders are likely due to lack scope of the project to meet his budget of contractor's input into before final plans are complete. construction details and coordination. Cost Control From design through construction, a Open book cost accountability is not constant monitoring of all costs within used. an open book, user - friendly format. No surprises Coordination more difficult without Owner involved in all cost related prior involvement by total team. decisions. Savings All savings resulting from contractor All savings accrue to the contractor. input, i.e., value engineering, constructibility analysis, etc. or final project buy out revert to the owner. Scheduling Overall master schedule established Only contractor input on overall with owner, architect, and contractor construction schedule. input (total team commitment). Trade contractor sub - schedule Coordination more difficult without becomes part of bid packages. prior involvement by total team. Trade contractor schedules coordinated with master schedule. Trade contractor and supplier input for construction scheduling. Fixed Fee Negotiated up front based on overall Contractor's fee is included in over - project scope. all lump sum bid. Change Orders No contractor generated change orders Possible contractor generated due to contractor input during the change orders due to design and construction document misinterpretation of architect's phase. plans and specifications. Complete understanding of project by the contractors before final price is guaranteed. Change orders only generated by owner. SECTION 01030 ALTERNATES PART 1 - GENERAL 1.1 DESCRIPTION A. Conditions of Contract and Division 1 - General Requirements govern Work of this Section. B. This Section describes the limits of the requested alternates to the basic contract work. Refer also to the technical specifications, drawings, for information pertaining to the work of each alternate. C. Each proposal under an Alternate shall include Work of the trades as they may be affected and adjustments to accommodate the changes shall be made. Work shall meet the requirements of drawings and specifications. In submitting the Proposal and in accomplishing the Work, provisions for future work or future completion shall be made, unless otherwise stated. Work shall be provided in accordance with appropriate details and specification sections, and provided (or omitted as appropriate) by the subcontractor for that section. D. Each alternate proposal shall be submitted as an individual cost for the particular Alternate (not accumulative) and shall be proposed under the premise that no other Alternates have been accepted. Should the Work of an Alternate called for by the Proposal form not affect the cost of the work, "No Change" shall be stated. E. Alternates may be accepted by the Owner in any order. F. The Owner may, at his option, vary the scope of the Work by ordering alternates which either add to or deduct from the Work, or he may substitute materials, equipment or methods by ordering materials alternates. If alternates are ordered prior to execution of the contract, they shall be ordered in the Agreement. If alternates are ordered subsequent to execution of the Contract, they shall be ordered in accordance with Article 7 of the General Conditions. 1.2 DESCRIPTION OF ALTERNATES ALTERNATES Alternate A -1: State the amount to deduct from the base bid to delete (2) motor operated rolling security gates, one each at the vehicular entrances to the secure parking lot. Refer to Spec. Section 02821. Alternate A -2: State the amount to deduct from the base bid to delete the perimeter security chain link & barbed wire fencing from the perimeter of the secure parking lot. Refer to Spec. Section 02821. Alternate A -3: State the amount to deduct from the base bid to delete (24) bollard mounted parking lot electrical outlets, associated circuits, hardware and bollards. Alternate A -4: State the amount to deduct from the base bid to delete the parking lot, driveway, curb cut, and associated sidewalk south of the main public entrance sidewalk as indicated on the Site Plan. Alternate A -5: State the amount to deduct from the base bid to provide perforated linear metal plank ceiling system as specified in Section 09547, in lieu of linear wood ceiling system by Section 06400, as indicated on Reflected Ceiling Plan A8.1. Alternate A -6: State the amount to deduct from the base bid to provide 60 mil ballasted EPDM Membrane Roofing System as specified in Section 07530 in lieu of the 4 -ply Bituminous Built- Up Roofing System as specified in Section 07510 for roofing type R -1. Deduct shall also include providing 60 mil Fully Adhered EPDM Membrane Roofing System as specified in Section 075XX in lieu of the 4 -ply Bituminous Built- Up Roofing System as specified in Section 07510 for roofing types R -2 and R -3. END OF SECTION Shakopee Police Facility 01030 1536.02 1 Alternates /57 0. J1 K A 1 41,11 1*1 1 MI TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Mark McNeill, City Administrator SUBJECT: Hiring Freeze /Added Positions DATE: May 16, 2002 '11 � The Council is asked to consider action regarding the hiring freeze that has been in place since January 15 FRENSTA l When the magnitude of the State budget shortfall was made known late last year, there were concerns expressed that the State would attempt to address its budgetary problems on the backs of local government. The proposal to address the shortfall from Governor Ventura would have significantly reduced State aids long after any opportunity to address cities' in FY 02 budgets. As a result, in January, the Shakopee City Council enacted a hiring freeze for all employee positions. That was later qualified to apply to budgeted, but previously unfilled positions. On May 14 the legislature took action to balance the FY 02 budget. While details are still being made known as of this writing, it appears that Cities will be untouched this fiscal year. However, many of the fixes are short term in nature, and did not address the root of the State's financial problems. This means that the 2003 Legislature will have to address this issue again, and will not have many of the "one time" budget - fixers available to this year's legislature. There are concerns as to what that will mean for all levels of government. At this time, there are some decisions that need to be made by the City Council. Memoranda from Police and the Assistant to the City Administrator are attached: Police — There are seven budgeted patrol officers in the Police Department. Some of these had been anticipated to be partially funded by Federal grants in 2002; however, those grants were not approved. Chief Hughes is asking that one position beyond those currently filled be considered now. The Civil Service Commission, with City Council approval, has continued to interview for all positions. It is likely that more positions will be requested to be filled in the near future. 2. Cable Television Staffing — Cable Consultant Paul Ryan has submitted his resignation, and will no longer be providing cable services to the City as of May 31 The Assistant to the City Administrator Tracy Coenen is recommending that two part-time positions be hired by the City to fill in for the contract employees that had been previously provided by PFR Productions. Funding would come from the cable franchise fees, so there is no impact on the general fund. These should be considered "interim fixes. There is also a recommendation to advertise for a full time cable position. At this time, there is a great deal which is not known about the impact of next year's projected budget shortfall at the State level, on local governments. It is likely not to be pleasant. Therefore, while the City is in good shape for 2002, Council should exercise caution before committing to expenditures which will be ongoing for 2003 and beyond. Unfortunately, we do not know what prudent expenditure levels are at this time, when needing to balance budget concerns with the need for services. I recommend that the Council discuss, and give direction as to lifting the hiring freeze. The positions described on the attached memos should be directed to be filled or advertised accordingly. 1 The Council should give direction regarding the hiring freeze. Further the Council should approve the departmental requests as described to: 1. Hire one police officer 2. Hire two part time Cable Technicians 3. Adopt a job description for the full time Cable Coordinator, and advertise for that position. Mark McNeill City Administrator MM:th CITY OF SHAKOPEE Memorandum TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Mark McNeill, City Administrator SUBJECT: Hiring Freeze Positions — 15.D.1. DATE: May 21, 2002 The following positions have been on hold as a result of the hiring freeze currently in place: 1. Seven Police Officer Positions 2. .75 Community Service Officer (Police Department) 3. Maintenance Operator — Public Works Department 4. Planner /Transit Planner — Community Development Department 5. Three Fire Fighters 6. Intern for Natural Resources 7. Two part-time Cable Technicians, and one full time Cable Production position (the cable positions will be funded through cable revenues). A'ka Mark McNeill City Administrator MM:th 09 M ' U CITY OF SHAKOPEE Police Department Memorandum Honorable Mayor and City Council Mark McNeill, City Administrator Dan Hughes, Chief of Police Authorization to Hire One Police Officer May 13, 2002 The Police Department is requesting Council approval to hire one police officer. The Police Civil Service Commission conducted the necessary testing that created the eligible register. The following names are the top three candidates listed, in alphabetical order, on the eligible register established by the Police Civil Service Commission: • Paul Barta • Jennifer Hauer • Ryan Olson Minnesota State Statute Chapter 419 requires the Police Civil Service Commission to submit the top three names listed on the eligible register to the Appointing Authority (City Council), to fill any vacancy. BUDGET IMPACT: The position will be compensated at an entry -level rate. The current labor agreement establishes $3,135.33 per month as Tier 2, Step 1 wage for a probationary police officer. This position is funded in the 2002 Police Department budget. ALTERNATIVES: 1. Do not authorize the hire. 2. Authorize hire. 3. Table and provide staff with additional direction. Alternative #2. Staff recommends Council authorize the hiring of Paul Barta as a probationary police officer. If the Council concurs, they should, by motion, authorize the hiring of Paul Barta 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. DH:pm Cc: Marilyn Remer, Payroll/Benefits Coordinator CITY OF SHAKOPEE Police Department Memorandum TO: Mayor and City Council Mark McNeill, City Administrator FROM: Shakopee Police Civil Service Commission SUBJECT: Police Officer Eligible Register DATE: May 9, 2002 The Shakopee Police Civil Service Commission conducted the appropriate testing and established the following eligible register, in alphabetical order, in accordance with the provisions of M.S.A. 419. 1. Paul Barta 2. Jennifer Hauer 3. Ryan Olson Res ectfully submitted, Stan VonBokern, Chair Shakopee Police Civil Service Commission SV:pm City of Shakopee Memorandum TO: Mayor and City Council Mark McNeill, City Administrator FROM: Tracy Coenen, Assistant to the City Administrator SUBJECT: Future of Public /Government Access/Employee Hires MEETING DATE: May 21, 2002 Introduction On April 17, Telecommunications Commission recommended the hiring of one full -time cable coordinator and 2 part-time cable technicians to staff the functions of government and public access. In the interim period, staff recommends hiring 2 temporary part-time cable technicians. Background PFR Productions has serviced the Cable Access Corporation and the City of Shakopee for almost a decade in many facets of public television productions. After reviewing the contract that will expire at the end May, the Telecommunications Commission and city staff believe that for the services render in the contract, that this is not the best option for the City. The Telecommunications Commission was presented with 3 different options from city staff to continue public and government access services 1) renew PFR Productions contract 2) send out RFPs for consulting services 3) hire city employees to perform the functions. The Commission did discuss, at previous meetings, that it did not want to consider the closing of the public access studio or discontinuing the taping and broadcasting of city meetings; however, this is still an option for the City Council. The Commission discussed the three options and based their recommendation to hire city employees based on the following factors: 1. Do Not Renew PFR Productions Contract 1) Increased price, over $44,000 /year, with no additional services for a p -t consultant (25 hours /week). Other options are more cost effective and can produce more programming and services for the community. 2) Telecommunications Commission and City's desires for more government programming would significantly increase PFR Production's cost to the City. PFR Productions did do some programming for the Access Corporation (Community Connections); however, this was in addition to the contract price. With the type and amount of programming that could be done for the residents, city staff estimates that it would push the price tag to well over $55,000 /year. 3) Now that the Telecommunications Commission is a city commission, services like insurance, payroll, etc. are being duplicated, which result in a higher price from a consultant. 4) Commissioners felt that a full -time city employee would take more interest in the access studio and government progr many felt that the p -t staff and public access studio has not received the needed attention. 2. Do Not Send Out RFPs The Telecommunications Commission also ruled out sending out RFPs as a viable option. After contacting numerous cities, staff learned that most have city staff that performs public /government access functions or the cable company oversees public access. Turning public access back over to Time Warner is probably not a good option, given that Time Warner would need to agree to finance it and the city would have less control over operations and programming. In addition, city staff was unable to find a video production firm that would be interested in operating the cable access studio, since most are in the business of producing television productions and not taping city meetings or helping residents edit their productions. 3. Hiring City Employee(s) Hiring a full -time cable coordinator and two part-time cable technicians appears to be the best option for the city. The Telecommunications Commission based their recommendation on the following factors: 1) Currently, the City has no original government programming. City meetings are taped and rebroadcast; however, the public does not receive regular and original programming on important and time sensitive events like development projects or safety issues. A f -t cable coordinator could focus some of his/her time on producing original government programming and use time spent to "man" the access studio to edit productions, when public access users are not being assisted. 2) After contacting numerous communities, a full -time cable coordinator and part-time cable technicians to cover the duties of "managing" the public access studio, taping city meetings, assisting customers with editing and programming, updating city and community bulletin boards, assisting with the web site, and producing original public and government programming can be done for $55,000 /$60,000 /year. Attached is the full -time Cable Coordinator job description for Council's approval. 3) There is a market to hire the new city employees, for less than what the city would pay a p -t consultant. Burnsville/Eagan recently posted a similar f -t cable coordinator position, requiring a 2 -year technician degree in video production and one year of experience for $30,576 /year plus benefits and received 101 applications. Other communities like Chaska have also been successful in hiring similar positions for the low to mid $30,000 range. I 4) A full -time employee can streamline efforts with other city staff to promote public and government access, this would be additional costs with a consultant. Currently, the public access studio is rarely used and only by a few users. After looking at records, the number of users has not changed much in the 17 years since the public access studio was created. 5) As the city continues to grow, a consultant will not be able to meet our growing needs of public and government access, and this appears to be a good time to make this transition for the future. 6) The position(s) would report to the Assistant to the City Administrator allowing for management support in areas like scheduling, budget, hiring, training and the like. Currently, the Assistant to the City Administrator serves as the staff liaison to the Telecommunications Commission, and wants to continue to promote producing more information for the residents of Shakopee, and sees this as an excellent opportunity for increased communication. If the City Council concurs with staff's recommendation of hiring city employees to perform public /government access functions, staff would advertise the positions and move quickly to fill the positions. Temporary part-time staff would be used to make the transition from PFR Productions to a full -time cable coordinator (roughly 2 month timeframe), since the contracts expires on May 30. This would allow the continuation of the taping of city meetings and some public access studio hours, and cost less than extending the PFR Productions contract. The Telecommunications Commission and city staff would work together to determine 1) public access studio hours 2) type of public /government progr 3) number of city meetings to be taped 4) other general duties for the new positions. Budget Impact Last year, the Cable Access Corporation received roughly $165,000 in revenues, the city is now receiving those revenues. Currently the main expenses are 1) PFR Production contract (over $35,000 /year, but would increase to at least $44,000 in 2003, since PFR Productions would no longer use the city video equipment) 2) legal fees for the cable franchise renewal, which will drop significantly once the renewal is completed 3) purchasing new equipment and 4) administrative services from City Hall. $55,000/$60,000 would be budgeted for the new positions. Most communities spend the majority of their franchise and peg fees on administrative costs. There would be NO impact to the general fund. Attached is a job description for the full -time cable coordinator, the final description and pay range will be presented, on the table, at the Council meeting. The full -time pay schedule will need to be amended by Council, based on the consultant's recommendation. Telecommunications Commission did discuss hiring only a f -t cable coordinator, but 3 realized that more bodies were needed to meet the objectives and goals of government and public access. A f -t cable coordinator is needed for the expertise in video production and promoting government and public access, and two p -t cable technicians are needed due to the increase in the number of night meetings. Alternatives 1) Approve the Cable Coordinator job description, authorize the full -time position at the recommended pay range, and authorize the advertising of the Cable Coordinator position. 2) Adopt Resolution No. 5724 amending the full -time pay schedule. (On the table). 3) Adopt Resolution No. 5728 amending the part-time pay schedule. 4) Recommend sending out RFPs for video production services. 5) Direct city staff to negotiation a new contract with PFR Productions for review by the Telecommunications Commission and the City Council. 6) Recommend discontinuing public and/or government access services. Staff Recommendation Staff recommends Alternates No. 1, 2, 3. Action Requested Offer a motion approving the Cable Coordinator job description as presented, and authorize the posting, at the appropriate pay grade, of the full -time Cable Coordinator position. Adopt Resolution No. 5724 to amend the part-time pay schedule and adopt Resolution No. 5728 amending the full -time pay schedule. Tracy f nen Assistant to the City Administrator M SUAIMARY This position is responsible for performing a variety of technical video production duties under the direction of the Assistant to the City Administrator. Responsibilities include broadcast and videotaping of City meetings, editing and production support for television programs, web site development, and overall audio - visual support for the city organization. ESSENTIAL DUTIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES include the following. Other duties may be assigned: Coordinate and review work of part-time staff on video production and multi-media equipment, training as needed. Research and recommend video and multi -media equipment purchases and coordinate the ordering of necessary supplies for the public access studio. Maintain communications equipment and in good working order. Train users in the use of television equipment and make equipment available for public access producers to check out and/or utilize. Serve as citywide audio - visual resource — be available to assist city staff with audio - visual needs and advice and consult as needed. Make videotape copies for staff and public where needed. Produce a programming schedule of shows played back on cable. Determine and schedule which shows should be aired on City Cable Channels. Schedule shows in such a way as to maximize public interest and ease of viewing. Cover live local meetings of public interest, tape, and play back on appropriate city cable channel. Update and receive information; posting the information on the bulletins in a visually pleasing and effective manner. Update public access studio policies and user guidelines in accordance with all local, state and federal regulations. Job Description Job Title: Cable Coordinator Department: Administration Location: Community Center (Public Access Studio) Shift: Flexible schedule including nights and weekends Reports To: Assistant to the City Administrator FLSA Status: Non - Exempt Prepared By: Tracy Coenen Prepared Date: 5 -16 -02 Approved By: City Council Approved Date: Pay Grade: Salary Range: Starting Salary: SUAIMARY This position is responsible for performing a variety of technical video production duties under the direction of the Assistant to the City Administrator. Responsibilities include broadcast and videotaping of City meetings, editing and production support for television programs, web site development, and overall audio - visual support for the city organization. ESSENTIAL DUTIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES include the following. Other duties may be assigned: Coordinate and review work of part-time staff on video production and multi-media equipment, training as needed. Research and recommend video and multi -media equipment purchases and coordinate the ordering of necessary supplies for the public access studio. Maintain communications equipment and in good working order. Train users in the use of television equipment and make equipment available for public access producers to check out and/or utilize. Serve as citywide audio - visual resource — be available to assist city staff with audio - visual needs and advice and consult as needed. Make videotape copies for staff and public where needed. Produce a programming schedule of shows played back on cable. Determine and schedule which shows should be aired on City Cable Channels. Schedule shows in such a way as to maximize public interest and ease of viewing. Cover live local meetings of public interest, tape, and play back on appropriate city cable channel. Update and receive information; posting the information on the bulletins in a visually pleasing and effective manner. Update public access studio policies and user guidelines in accordance with all local, state and federal regulations. Promote the use of cable access television as a communication tool for City staff and the residents of Shakopee. Encourage and promote the use of public access television by the residents of Shakopee, civic organizations, and school groups. Maintain the video library for public and government access. Monitor the cable communications annual budget. Assist department staff in web site development and utilization of other communications technology where appropriate. These examples are intended only as illustrations of various types of work performed and are not necessarily all - inclusive. The job description is subject to change as the needs of the employee and requirements of the job change, and all other duties as assigned or apparent. SUPERVISORY RESPONSIBILITIES None, unless otherwise assigned. QUALIFICATIONS: To perform this j ob successfully, an individual must be able to perform each essential duty satisfactorily. The requirements listed below are representative of the knowledge, skill, and/or ability required. Reasonable accommodations may be made to enable individuals with disabilities to perform the essential functions. EDUCATION and/or EXPERIENCE Minimum Qualifications: Two Year Degree from a Technical College or Television Broadcast School and one year experience in the areas of video production; OR equivalent combination of education and experience. DESIRABLE QUALIFCATIONS Four Year College Degree in a related field. Knowledge of municipal operations and procedures. MS Office products (word, excel, PowerPoint), Adobe Photoshop, and Front Page or other web site development software. LANGUAGE SKILLS Excellent written and oral communication skills. Ability to develop and maintain effective work relationships with City staff, public, and other government agencies and organizations. Knowledge of word processing, spreadsheets, and other software applications. Ability to use software packages allowing for desktop publishing, web site development, and Internet use capabilities. MATHEMATICAL SKILLS Ability to apply concepts such as fractions, percentages, ratios, and proportions to practical situations. REASONING ABILITY Ability to define problems collects data, establish facts, and draw valid conclusions. Ability to interpret an extensive variety of technical instructions in mathematical or diagram form and deal with several abstract and concrete variables. CERTIFICATES, LICENSES, REGISTRATIONS Valid drivers license required. OTHER SKILLS AND ABILITIES High level of public contact requiring tact, courtesy and good judgment. Ability to travel independently to and from events being videotaped. Willingness to work independently and provide self - direction within a flexible schedule. Ability to work independently to and from events being videotaped. Ability to work hours outside normal City Hall hours of operation, including evenings and weekends. Knowledge of the technical requirements of television production including microphone and line audio levels, composite and component video signals, and be able to phase, white and black balance, and adjust cameras to gray scale. Knowledge and ability to understand the processes necessary to completing a video project from start to finish, using all tools available. Working knowledge of basic video maintenance /engineering and equipment. Ability to perform multiple tasks, often changing tasks on short notice. Ability to communicate effectively verbally and in writing with a wide variety of people. PHYSICAL DEMANDS The physical demands described here are representative of those that must be met by an employee to successfully perform the essential functions of this job. Reasonable accommodations may be made to enable individuals with disabilities to perform the essential functions. While performing the duties of this job, the employee is regularly required to sit; use hands to finger, handle, or feel objects, tools, or controls; and talk and hear. The employee frequently is required to stand and reach with hands and arms. The employee must occasionally lift and/or move up to at least 50 pounds (camcorder and tripod). Specific vision abilities required by this job include close vision, distance vision, color vision, peripheral vision, depth perception, and the ability to adjust focus. Must have discriminating sense of color. Must have the eye/hand coordination necessary to operate existing videotape editing equipment. Must be able to hold and operate camera/recorder complete with batteries, microphone, and wireless receiver. Must be able to monitor sound with headphones during videotaping. WORK ENVIRONMENT The work environment characteristics described here are representative of those an employee encounters while performing the essential functions of this job. Reasonable accommodations may be made to enable individuals with disabilities to perform the essential functions. While performing the duties of this job, the employee occasionally works near moving mechanical parts; in high, precarious places; and in outside weather conditions and is occasionally exposed to risk of electrical shock. The noise level in the work environment is usually moderate. NON-DISCRIMINATION POLICY The City of Shakopee does not discriminate on the basis of handicapped status in the admission or access to or treatment of employment in its programs and activities. EEO /AA The City of Shakopee does not discriminate on the basis of race, color, national origin, sex, religion, age or disability in the admission or access to, or treatment or employment in, its programs, activities or services. WHEREAS, on December 4, 2001, the City Council of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota, adopted Resolution No. 5625, approving the 2002 Pay Schedule for the part- time employees of the City of Shakopee; and WHEREAS, certain conditions and circumstances have changed, therefore it is necessary to amend the 2002 Part-Time Plan by adding the Cable Technician classification to Grade H. NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA, that the attached 2002 Part-Time Pay Plan is hereby amended to include the classification of Cable Technician, Grade H. Adopted in session of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota, held this _ day of ) 2002. Mayor of the City of Shakopee ATTEST: City Clerk Start 6 months 1 year 2 years 3 years Title Grade Step 1 Step 2 Step 3 Step 4 Step 5 Accountant M $14.103 $14.517 $14.932 $15.762 $16.591 Engineering Inspector M $14.103 $14.517 $14.932 $15.762 $16.591 Building Inspector M $14.103 $14.517 $14.932 $15.762 $16.591 Snow Plow Operator M $14.103 $14.517 $14.932 $15.762 $16.591 Recreation Instructors L $13.230 $13.619 $14.008 $14.786 $15.564 Not Used K $12.411 $12.776 $13.141 $13.871 $14.601 Not Used 7 $11.592 $11.933 $12.274 $12.955 $13.637 Asst Aquatic Manager I $10.867 $11.187 $11.506 $12.145 $12.785 Code Enforcement Officer H $10.142 $10.441 $10.739 $11.335 $11.932 Recording Secretary H $10.142 $10.441 $10.739 $11.335 $11.932 Office Clerical Worker H $10.142 $10.441 $10.739 $11.335 $11.932 Water Safety Instructor H $10.142 $10.441 $10.739 $11.335 $11.932 Building Supervisor H $10.142 $10.441 $10.739 $11.335 $11.932 Arena Supervisor H $10.142 $10.441 $10.739 $11.335 $11.932 Maintenance Laborer H $10.142 $10.441 $10.739 $11.335 $11.932 Mechanics Helper H $10.142 $10.441 $10.739 $11.335 $11.932 Engineering Intern H $10.142 $10.441 $10.739 $11.335 $11.932 Cable Technician H $10.142 $10.441 $10.739 $11.335 $11.932 Studentlntem G $9.511 $9.791 $10.071 $10.630 $11.190 Lifeguard F $8.880 $9.141 $9.402 $9.925 $10.447 Water Safety Aid F $8.880 $9.141 $9.402 $9.925 $10.447 Recreation Leader F $8.880 $9.141 $9.402 $9.925 $10.447 Service Desk Attendant F $8.880 $9.141 $9.402 $9.925 $10.447 Unused E $8.329 $8.574 $8.819 $9.309 $9.799 Rink Attendant C $7.282 $7.496 $7.710 $8.139 $8.567 Recreation Asst. C $7.282 $7.496 $7.710 $8.139 $8.567 Aquatics Assistant C $7.282 $7.496 $7.710 $8.139 $8.567 Not Used A $5.5588 $5.8858 $6.2128 $6.5398 CITY OF SHAKOPEE Police Department Memorandum TO: Mayor and City Council Mark McNeill, City Administrator FROM: Bob Forberg, Sergeant SUBJECT: Successful Completion of Probation DATE: May 8, 2002 �1 The Council is asked to grant three- quarters permanent part-time status to Police Records Technician Sharon Proskin and Community Services Officer Jaclyn Scheerz. ;. '� l Sharon Proskin began her employment with the City on November 19, 2001 and her six - month probationary period will end on May 19 Jaclyn Scheerz began her employment with the City on November 5, 2001, and her six -month probationary period ended on May 5 Both employees have performed the responsibilities of their positions in a satisfactory manner over the past six months. Staff recommends that Sharon Proskin and Jaclyn Scheerz be retained in their respective positions and be granted permanent part-time status. If the Council concurs, they should, by motion, approve the satisfactory completion of probation and authorize the retention of Sharon Proskin as a Police Records Technician effective May 19 and the retention of Community Service Officer Jaclyn Scheerz effective May 5th. BF:pm CITY OF SHAKOPEE MEMORANDUM To: Mayor and City Council Mark McNeill, City Administrator From: Mark Themig, Facilities and Recreation Director Date: 15 May, 2002 Subject: Authorize Skate Park Supervisor and Amend Fees INTRODUCTION C ,- City Council is asked to authorize the Skate Park supervision and fees that were discussed at the May 7 meeting, and adopt Reslution No. 5714 amending the 2002 Fee Schedule. BACKGROUND AND DISCUSSION At the May 7 City Council meeting, I presented options for providing and funding supervision at the Skate Park. Based on direction from Council, I am presenting resolution No. 5714, which amends the 2002 Fee Schedule for the Skate Park. Fees would be $1 /day for residents of Shakopee, and $5 /day for non - residents. In addition, Skate Park admission would be included with a Community Center membership. The revenue collected from these fees would fund on -site supervision during high -use hours. REQUESTED ACTION If City Council concurs, move to: 1. Approve Resolution No. 5714, A Resolution Amending Resolution No. 5636, the 2002 Fee Schedule. 2. Authorize staffing for the skate park. Mark Themig Facilities and Recreation Director WHEREAS, the Shakopee City Council desires to designate a resident fee for the Shakopee Skate Park; and, WHEREAS the Shakopee City Council desires this fee to be included in a Community Center daily admission or membership; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA, that the 2002 Fee Schedule is amended to include: Shakopee Skate Park Fees Daily Admission: Residents of Shakopee $1, Non - Residents $5 Admission also included in a Community Center Membership. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that this resolution shall become effective from and after June 1, 2002. Adopted in session of the City Council of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota held this day of May, 2002. Mayor of the City of Shakopee Attest: City Clerk E 0 CITY OF SHAKOPEE MEMORANDUM To: From: Date: Subject: Mayor and City Council Mark McNeill, City Administrator Mark Themig, Facilities and Recreation Director 16 May, 2002 Purchase of Cleaning Equipment INTRODUCTION City Council is asked to authorize the purchase of a carpet extractor and floor scrubber. BACKGROUND AND DISCUSSION The 2002 operating budget provides funding for the purchase of floor and carpet cleaning equipment. Two items are being proposed: a carpet extractor and a floor scrubber. We have researched and tested several models, and recommend the following: Carpet Extractor The Community Center contains over 18,000 fe of carpeted areas. In either 1997 or 1998, the City purchased a carpet cleaner. However, this unit has a 12" cleaning surface, which is considerably undersized. (It currently takes three days to clean all carpets wall -to- wall.) In addition, the unit's broom -type cleaning head design contains no agitation, which is critical to removing dirt and debris. We are proposing an Aqua Max Carpet Extractor. This unit has large solution and recovery tanks, 25" cleaning head, agitation unit, and is battery operated. The unit is similar to the units used by Shakopee Public Schools, and will reduce cleaning time while improving the quality of the cleaning. Floor Scrubber The second unit is a floor scrubber. The scrubber being proposed will be used to clean hard surfaces, including the walking track, gymnasium floor, arena matting around the rink and in the arena lobby, and the arena floor during shut down. We currently rent equipment to clean some of these areas, and use a mop on others. The floor scrubber will provide a superior cleaning, and will allow us to clean the areas more frequently. The unit being proposed is a Tennant 5520. This unit has a 34" cleaning surface, large solution and recovery tanks, and will fit in the elevator to reach the walking track. Additional Comments ■ We solicited pricing on commercial carpet cleaning services, which were used prior to the purchase of the existing cleaner. Rates for cleaning the Community Center carpet would be approximately $1,300 per cleaning. With the traffic flow and dirt carried in, it would be ideal to clean carpets on a monthly basis, especially during the winter months. ■ Staff in other City facilities could use these units. ■ Finally, although we have a contracted cleaning service, the contract does not provide for carpet cleaning, cleaning the walking track, gymnasium, and arena areas. Staff is responsible for cleaning these areas, and would be using this equipment. BUDGET IMPACT We ohtained the followina auotes: Unit Supplier Cost Aqua Max Carpet Extractor Hill and $7,145 Merit Supply, Inc. $8,939 Nilfisk- Advance, Inc. $8,939 Tennant 5520 Floor Scrubber* Dalco $5,945 Lake Country Marketing $6,450 *Due to vendor sale region limitations, we were only able to obtain two quotes on this item. The 2002 Operating Budget contains $17,500 for these units. Total for the low bid on this equipment is $13,090. REQUESTED ACTION If City Council concurs, move to authorize the purchase of: 1. An Aqua Max Carpet Extractor from Hillyard in the amount of $7,145. 2. A Tennant 5520 Floor Scrubber from Dalco in the amount of $5,945. Mark Themig Facilities and Recreation Director f" CITY OF SHAKOPEE MEMORANDUM To: From: Subject: Date: Mayor and City Council Mark McNeill, City Administrator Mark McQuillan, Natural Resource Director 'COMISENT Approval of Trail Agreement between the State of Minnesota (DNR) and City of Shakopee May 15, 2002 INTRODUCTION Attached is Resolution No. 5726, a resolution approving a cooperative agreement between the State of Minnesota Department of Natural Resources and the City of Shakopee granting the Minnesota Valley State Trail permitted use of a corridor of land in Veterans Memorial Park BACKGROUND The proposed trail is being installed over an existing trail the city constructed in the mid- 1970s. The trail will traverse east toward the old Ferry Bridge. The limited use permit allows the MNDNR the right to construct, operate and maintain the trail shall be at the sole expense of the MNDNR. The period of permitted operations will be "year round." Except with respect to the City, the MNDNR, as operator of the State Trail, shall also have the right to close off the trail, as deemed necessary. No City funds are involved with this project. ALTERNATIVES 1. Approve Resolution No. 5726 2. Deny Resolution No. 5726 3. Table for Further information. RECOMMENDATION Alternative number #1. ACTION REQUESTED Offer Resolution No. 5726, a Resolution authorizing the execution of an agreement between the State of Minnesota Department of Natural Resources and the City of Shakopee, which will allow the MNDNR use of a corridor of land in Veterans Memorial Park for the construction, operation and maintenance of a paved recrea on trail as part m of the Minnesota Valley State Trail Syste and move fo adoption Mark J. McQuillan' Natural Resource Director • • • • Mel • • • -• • •- . Whereas: a LIMITED USE PERMIT is desired by the City of Shakopee from the State of Minnesota, Department of Natural Resources to facilitate the extension of the Minnesota Valley State Trail System, Whereas: the final plans will be review approved by the City prior to construction, Whereas: the construction, operation and maintenance of the trail shall be at the sole expense of the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources, Whereas: said permit shall be non - exclusive and is granted subject to the rights of others including, but not limited to, public utilities that may occupy the said corridor, Whereas: this permit is for the term of 50 years from the date of the last dated signature, and NOW, THEREFORE, E IT RESOLVED that the City of Shakopee (City) enter into an agreement with State of Minnesota, Department of Natural Resources the use of a corridor of land in Veterans Memorial Park and the construction, operation and maintenance of a paved recreation trail. Adopted in Session of the City Council of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota, held this day of May, 2002. Mayor of the City Of Shakopee City Clerk LIMITED USE PERMIT FOR MINNESOTA VALLEY STATE TRAIL PURPOSES THIS LIMITED USE PERMIT is granted by the City of Shakopee( "City ") to the State of Minnesota,.Department of Natural Resources ( "State" or "MNDNR ") to facilitate the Minnesota Valley State Trail by permitting the use of a corridor of land for the construction, operation and maintenance of a paved non - motorized recreation trail as part of the Minnesota Valley State Trail system. PROVISIONS 1. This permit is granted solely for the purpose of constructing, operating and maintaining a paved non- motorized trail, as part of the Minnesota. Valley State Trail system. The corridor is to be forty (40) feet wide and its location is that shown in yellow on the engineering maps attached hereto as Exhibit A. 2. The MNDNR will construct, operate and maintain the trail in accordance with its applicable laws, rules and regulations. The MNDNR will construct the trail in accordance with its specifications for the Minnesota Valley State Trail. The final plans shall be approved by the City before construction of the trail will commence. Prior to construction the MNDNR will obtain all necessary approvals and permits for the project. 3. During construction the MNDNR will clear and keep clear the lands within the permit area to the extent and in the manner directed by the designated project manager and dispose of, as appropriate, vegetative and other material cut, uprooted, or otherwise accumulated during the construction. 4. The construction, operation and maintenance of the trail shall be at the sole expense of the MNDNR. 'The period of such permitted operations will be "year round." Except with respect to the City, the MNDNR, as operator of the State trail, shall also have the right and responsibility to close off the trail, as deemed necessary. 5. This permit is non - exclusive and is granted subject to the rights of others, including, but not limited to, public utilities that may occupy said corridor. 6. This permit is for a terns of fifty (50) years from the date of the last dated signature. 7. Each party shall be responsible for its own acts and omissions and the results thereof to the extent authorized by lati,- and small not be responsible for the acts or omissions of the other party and the• resuh's thereof. CITY OF SHAKOPEE STATE OF MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES By Its Mayor By Its By Its City Administrator By Its City Clerk Date Date Attached is a copy of the City resolution approving this permit. o ^' w X TA. 90 +30 BEGIN PROJECT S W J AWCUT EXISTING PAVEMENT 0 QL d � I `� i 1. ' i o nV L"II�C I'.1I Iii O V p to co • - 1 Ji CA ol _�. % X • t _ ^�) t I � did ��: +._^`�' t W max. ` _ -_ `.\ I l \ `\ ` • t ` v � /- t �; :•t - ',{ 'I .i � �: ter-- / . w x t0 W , 1 l •� j ..y- �s..ri .� ID Lo cp - _ N I I _ I '1 t ! / ) \ ' .1 � X - /` I W . 7 � •. X �'`� N Cl r ; fljti / `� L .ter -„•_ - ,-,` `. l!! • /� j i b �i o 0 Y, /SF /, CITY OF SAKOPEE Memorandum TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Mark McNeill, City Administrator SUBJECT: Change of Meeting Date — First Meeting in August DATE: May 16, 2002 \ � S no, -j U 'a0 i- The City Council is asked to change the date of the first meeting in August from Tuesday, August 6 to the following day. The Council normally meets the first and third Tuesdays of the month at 7:00 p.m. In August, that falls on August 6 which is also the annually scheduled "National Night Out to Fight Crime ". This is an event that is observed across the United States, and provides neighborhoods with an opportunity to get together to meet and greet their neighbors. One of the outcomes of this, in addition to building communities, is for people to get a better knowledge of their neighborhood and their neighbors. That can lend to better opportunities to fight crime. Last year, there were seven block parties that were registered that evening with the Shakopee Police Department; this year, the Shakopee Police anticipates perhaps three times that number. One of the stated short-term goals of the Shakopee City Council is to promote citizen involvement; specifically, the National Night Out was cited as an opportunity to connect with citizenry. For that reason, the Council may wish to reschedule its first meeting in August to the following evening, Wednesday, August 7 so as to afford the Council the opportunity to meet with neighborhood groups on the 6th. If the Council desires to participate in the National Night Out, it should reschedule the August 6 regular meeting, to Wednesday, August 7 The meeting would remain at 7:00 p.m. ' I If the Council concurs, it should, by motion, adopt the following: RESOLUTION NO. 5698 A RESOLUTION CHANGING THE AUGUST 6, 2002 COUNCIL MEETING DATE T L/0 fv� � Mark McNeill City Administrator MM:th RESOLUTION NO. 5698 A RESOLUTION CHANGING THE AUGUST 6, 2002 CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE WHEREAS, the Shakopee City Code has set the first Tuesday of each month as the regular meeting date for the City Council; and WHEREAS, the Shakopee City Code allows the City Council to change the meeting date by adopting a resolution at least one week prior to the regularly scheduled meeting. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL - OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA, that the August 6, 2002 regularly scheduled City Council meeting be changed to , at 7:00 p.m. Adopted in adj. regular session of the City Council of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota, held this 21 day of May, 2002. Mayor of the City of Shakopee ATTEST: City Clerk o F. Z. Memorandum TO: Mayor and City Council Mark McNeill, City Administrator FROM: Judith S. Cox, City Clerk . SUBJECT: Establishing Penalties for the Sale of Tobacco Products to Minors DATE: May 14, 2002 - 1 11 0 City Council is asked to consider administrative penalties for licensees who sell tobacco products to minors and to set a meeting date at which time an ordinance incorporating the penalties will be considered for adoption. At the regular City Council meeting on February 19, 2002, staff was directed to look at penalties imposed by other communities for the sale of tobacco to minors. On March 6, 2002, City Council adopted presumptive penalties for the sale of alcohol to minors. On April 2, 2002, City Council imposed administrative penalties for tobacco violations that occurred on October 27, 2001. On May 21, 2002, City Council will be holding a hearing on alleged sales of alcohol to minors that occurred on November 11, 2001. It is, therefore, now timely for City Council to look at making any changes to the current administrative penalties for sales of tobacco products to minors. The Shakopee City Code currently provides for the following administrative penalties for the sales of tobacco products to minors: 1St $200 fine 2nd $500 fine 3rd $1,000 fine Subsequent $1,000 fine [Within a 36 -month period] + 1 — 10 day suspension + 1 — 20 day suspension + 30 day suspension or revocation + 30 day suspension or revocation Exhibit "A" identifies penalties imposed by the City Council within the past 36 months. Nine cities and two counties were contacted. Exhibit `B" identifies the penalties imposed by these governments. As a starting point for Council discussion, staff is identifying the following as possible penalties: I' offense $200 fine 2 offense $500 fine 3 offense $1,000 fine 4` offense $1,000 fine Subsequent $1000 fine + 1 day suspension + 10 day suspension + 30 day suspension + 30 day suspension or revocation + 30 day suspension or revocation [Within a 36 -month period] After reviewing the ordinances of the cities surveyed, it appears that some licensees appear before the City Council and some appear before the City Manager for the hearing and imposition of the fine. Council may want to consider implementing the same procedure as was done for liquor violations and allow the alleged violators to admit to the City Administrator and waive the hearing for the first and second violations and require the violator (licensee) to appear before the City Council for the 3r and 4 violations. Council may want to consider adopting presumptive penalties as was done for liquor violations. This would allow the City Council to deviate from the adopted penalties for extenuating circumstances. The city code requires the city clerk to make reasonable efforts to send the Scott County Community Health Services and all tobacco retailers thirty (3 0) days' mailed notice of the City's intention to consider a substantial amendment to this Section. After City Council determines the desired penalties and directs staff to prepare the appropriate ordinance, the ordinance will be brought back to City Council after compliance with this section of the city code. 1. Determine desired penalties 2. Determine if there is a desire to allow licensees to admit violations to the City Administrator for the 1S and 2 violations — as is currently done for liquor violations. 3. Determine if there is a desire to adopt presumptive penalties — as is the case for liquor violations. After determining desired penalties and other options identified above, direct staff to prepare the appropriate ordinance to be considered at the July 2, 2002 meeting. I: \clerk\licenses \tobacco - penalties EXHIBIT A M SHAKOPEE DATE OF OFFENSE PENALTY 1 ST OFFENSE PENALTY 2' OFFENSE Pullman 11/1997 $200 fine plus 10 day suspension KC Hall 11/1997 $200 fine — suspended for 1 year (told Council they are not renewing their license) Tom Thumb 11/1997 8/1999 $200 fine plus 1 day suspension $500 fine plus 15 day suspension Berens 11/1997 $200 fine plus 1 day suspension SuperAmerica #4035 115 5 E. 1 St Avenue 11/1997 $200 fine - suspended for 1 year; and 1 day suspension suspended for 1 year Koehnen's Amoco 11/1997 8/1999 $200 fine — suspended for 1 year; and 1 day suspension suspended for 1 year $500 fine plus 15 day suspension and imposed $200 fine and 1 day suspension that was suspended on 11/10/98 Arnie's 11/1997 $200 fine (has no current license) Shakopee Eagle's 11/1997 $200 fine —suspended for 1 year (told Council they are not renewing their license) Kmart 11/1997 12/1998 $200 fine - $100 suspended for 1 year; and 1 day suspension $500 fine plus 20 day suspension Hennen's ICO 11/1997 $200 fine plus 1 day suspension Total Mart 12/1998 $200 fine plus 3 day suspension Oasis Market 1147 Canterbury Road 12/1998 $200 fine plus 3 day suspension Canterbury Park 8/1999 $200 fine plus 3 day suspension Budget Liquor 8/1999 $200 fine $500 fine 10/2001 plus 3 day suspension plus 20 day suspension suspend 10 days if buy card machine Food n Fuel 7/2001 $200 fine $500 fine 10/2001 plus 10 day suspension plus 10 day suspension SuperAmerica #4035 10/2001 $200 fine 1155 E. 1 St Avenue plus 2 day suspension Oasis Market 10 /2001 $200 fine 615 S. Marschall Road plus 2 day suspension I: Li censes/Tobacco V iolationPenalties + N CD N � O O CD W En w N K w O n O x x C F-I �-r• H 0 td b CD A� �r CD CD W � d> � ('D CD + �s ::� + C + N N co N CD N CD CD CD .... (D � (D + N CD N � O O CD W En w N K w O n O x x C F-I �-r• H 0 td b CD A� �r CD CD W � d> � ('D CD + �s ::� + C + N N co N CD N CD CD (D � (D O O O CD CD CD O O r CL Z O � O bg f fy9 + b9 f b4 G + E!? -" G { N tj N N N 0 W (D � ;, ' N P W 01 O W 01 d1 CD W 01 O CD 0 In C O CD O O COD CAD G + N CD N � O O CD W En w N K w O n O x x C F-I �-r• H 0 td b CD A� �r CD CD W � d> � ('D CD + �s ::� + C + N CD N CD CD (D � (D O O O CD CD CD + N CD N � O O CD W En w N K w O n O x x C F-I �-r• H 0 td b CD A� �r CD CD W � d> � ('D CD a 6 n A O O O C r C CD PD �~/] p O � � �•' � CD + 64 z bg N F o . C➢ CD �� .+ b9 ��� CD oil o o 0 �o z � 64 N o N N N Q E >C N CD rn CD '� O ` CD Z O CL 4 9 h � • � .�. CD � C � � O O � CD + bg + N G Z G + b9 W UN �co �h 64 -r x CD 0 CD N CD cn cn O O O O O CD a Cp i� cn CA �' N cn CD cn W O CD rA c N } N + b9 .p c O `S O / b O .- C CD O Q N N CD CD N O CD O CD p `C CD O O Z CA En cn CD M CITY OF SHAKOPEE MB1710Y11IZdLl1Yl CONSENT TO: Mayor and Council Mark McNeill, City Administrator FROM: Gregg Voxland, Finance Director SUBJ: Setting Bond Sale for 2002B G.O. Improvement Bonds - Resolution No. 5725 DATE: May 15, 2002 Introduction Council is requested to set the sale date for bonds to finance the CR 83/16 project. Background This sale provides the permanent financing for the CR 83/16 project. This is a routine process for a "plain vanilla" bond issue. Bond counsel has prepared the resolution setting the sale. Reguested Action Move to offer Resolution No. 5725 A Resolution Providing For the Issuance and Sale Of $3,750,000 General Obligation Improvement Bonds, Series 2002B. Gregg oxirand Finance Director G: \cash \bonds \sa1e2002B.doc Extract of Minutes of Meeting of the City Council of the City of Shakopee, Scott County, Minnesota Pursuant to due call and notice thereof a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Shakopee, Scott County, Minnesota, was held at the City Hall in the City on Tuesday, May 21, 2002, commencing at 7:00 o'clock P.M. The following members of the Council were present: and the following were absent: The following resolution was presented by Councilmember , who moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION PROVIDING FOR THE ISSUANCE AND SALE OF $3,750,000 GENERAL OBLIGATION IMPROVEMENT BONDS, SERIES 2002B BE IT RESOLVED By the City Council of the City of Shakopee, Scott County, Minnesota (City) as follows: 1. It is hereby determined that: (a) the following assessable public improvements (the Improvements) have been made, duly ordered or contracts let for the construction thereof, by the City pursuant to the provisions of Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 429 (Act): Project Designation & Description Total Project Cost CR83 /CR16 Improvements Project Costs Capitalized Interest Underwriter's Discount Costs of Issuance 3,611,330 76,720 31,875 30,075 $3,750,000 (b) it is necessary and expedient to the sound financial management of the affairs of the City to issue $3,750,000 General Obligation Improvement Bonds, Series 2002B (Bonds) pursuant to the Act to provide financing for the Improvements. 2. To provide financing for the Improvements, the City will issue and sell Bonds in the amount of $3,718,125. To provide in part the additional interest required to market the Bonds at this time, additional Bonds will be issued in the amount of $31 The excess of the purchase price of the Bonds over the sum of $3,718,125 will be credited to the debt service fund for the Bonds for the purpose of paying interest first coming due on the additional Bonds. The Bonds will be issued, sold and delivered in accordance with the terms of the following Terms of Proposal: IN Mel • '•�• • 0,, CITY OF • MINNESO 3ENERAL OBLIGATION IMPROVEMENT BONDS, SERIES 2002T Proposals for the Bonds will be received on Tuesday, June 18, 2002, until 11:00 A.M., Central Time, at the offices of Springsted Incorporated, 85 East Seventh Place, Suite 100, Saint Paul, Minnesota, after which time they will be opened and tabulated. Consideration for award of the Bonds will be by the City Council at 7:00 P.M., Central Time, of the same day. SUBMISSION OF PROPOSALS Proposals may be submitted in a sealed envelope or by fax (651) 223 -3046 to Springsted. Signed Proposals, without final price or coupons, may be submitted to Springsted prior to the time of sale. The bidder shall be responsible for submitting to Springsted the final Proposal price and coupons, by telephone (651) 223 -3000 or fax (651) 223 -3046 for inclusion in the submitted Proposal. Springsted will assume no liability for the inability of the bidder to reach Springsted prior to the time of sale specified above. All bidders are advised that each Proposal shall be deemed to constitute a contract between the bidder and the City to purchase the Bonds regardless of the manner of the Proposal submitted. DETAILS OF THE BONDS The Bonds will be dated July 1, 2002, as the date of original issue, and will bear interest payable on February 1 and August 1 of each year, commencing February 1, 2003. Interest will be computed on the basis of a 360 -day year of twelve 30 -day months. The Bonds will mature February 1 in the years and amounts as follows: 2004 $295,000 2005 $255,000 2006 $745,000 2007 $730,000 2008 $715,000 2009 $210,000 2010 $205,000 2011 $200,000 2012 $200,000 2013 $195,000 Proposals for the Bonds may contain a maturity schedule providing for a combination of serial bonds and term bonds, provided that no serial bond may mature on or after the first mandatory sinking fund redemption date of any term bond. All term bonds shall be subject to mandatory sinking fund redemption and must conform to the maturity schedule set forth above at a price of par plus accrued interest to the date of redemption. In order to designate term bonds, the proposal must specify "Last Year of Serial Maturities" and "Years of Term Maturities" in the spaces provided on the Proposal Form. BOOK ENTRY SYSTEM The Bonds will be issued by means of a book entry system with no physical distribution of Bonds made to the public. The Bonds will be issued in fully registered form and one Bond, representing the aggregate principal amount of the Bonds maturing in each year, will be registered in the name of Cede & Co. as nominee of The Depository Trust Company ( "DTC "), New York, New York, which will act as securities depository of the Bonds. Individual purchases of the Bonds may be made in the principal amount of $5,000 or any multiple thereof of a single maturity through book entries made on the books and records of DTC and its participants. Principal and interest are payable by the registrar to DTC or its nominee as registered owner of the Bonds. Transfer of principal and interest payments to participants of DTC will be the responsibility of DTC; transfer of principal and interest payments to beneficial owners by participants will be the responsibility of such participants and other nominees of beneficial owners. The purchaser, as a condition of delivery of the Bonds, will be required to deposit the Bonds with DTC. REGISTRAR The City will name the registrar which shall be subject to applicable SEC regulations. The City will pay for the services of the registrar. OPTIONAL REDEMPTION The City may elect on February 1, 2010, and on any day thereafter, to prepay Bonds due on or after February 1, 2011. Redemption may be in whole or in part and if in part at the option of the City and in such manner as the City shall determine. If less than all Bonds of a maturity are called for redemption, the City will notify DTC of the particular amount of such maturity to be prepaid. DTC will determine by lot the amount of each participant's interest in such maturity to be redeemed and each participant will then select by lot the beneficial ownership interests in such maturity to be redeemed. All prepayments shall be at a price of par plus accrued interest. SECURITY AND PURPOSE The Bonds will be general obligations of the City for which the City will pledge its full faith and credit and power to levy direct general ad valorem taxes. In addition the City will pledge special assessments from benefited properties. The proceeds will be used to finance various improvements within the City. TYPE OF PROPOSALS Proposals shall be for not less than $3,718,125 and accrued interest on the total principal amount of the Bonds. Proposals shall be accompanied by a Good Faith Deposit ("Deposit") in the form of a certified or cashier's check or a Financial Surety Bond in the amount of $37,500, payable to the order of the City. If a check is used, it must accompany the proposal. If a Financial Surety Bond is used, it must be from an insurance company licensed to issue such a bond in the State of Minnesota, and preapproved by the City. Such bond must be submitted to Springsted Incorporated prior to the opening of the proposals. The Financial Surety Bond must identify each underwriter whose Deposit is guaranteed by such Financial Surety Bond. If the Bonds are awarded to an underwriter using a Financial Surety Bond, then that purchaser is required to submit its Deposit to Springsted Incorporated in the form of a certified or cashier's check or wire transfer as instructed by Springsted Incorporated not later than 3:30 P.M., Central Time, on the next business day following the award. If such Deposit is not received by that time, the Financial Surety Bond may be drawn by the City to satisfy the Deposit requirement. The Deposit received from the purchaser, the amount of which will be deducted at settlement and no interest will accrue to the purchaser, will be deposited by the City. In the event the purchaser fails to comply with the accepted proposal, said amount will be retained by the City. No proposal can be withdrawn or amended after the time set for receiving proposals unless the meeting of the City scheduled for award of the Bonds is adjourned, recessed, or continued to another date without award of the Bonds having been made. Rates shall be in integral multiples of 5 1100 or 1/8 of 1 %. Rates must be in level or ascending order. Bonds of the same maturity shall bear a single rate from the date of the Bonds to the date of maturity. No conditional proposals will be accepted. The Bonds will be awarded on the basis of the lowest interest rate to be determined on a true interest cost (TIC) basis. The City's computation of the interest rate of each proposal, in accordance with customary practice, will be controlling. The City will reserve the right to: (i) waive non - substantive informalities of any proposal or of matters relating to the receipt of proposals and award of the Bonds, (ii) reject all proposals without cause, and, (iii) reject any proposal which the City determines to have failed to comply with the terms herein. BOND INSURANCE AT PURCHASER'S OPTION If the Bonds qualify for issuance of any policy of municipal bond insurance or commitment therefor at the option of the underwriter, the purchase of any such insurance policy or the issuance of any such commitment shall be at the sole option and expense of the purchaser of the Bonds. Any increased costs of issuance of the Bonds resulting from such purchase of insurance shall be paid by the purchaser, except that, if the City has requested and received a rating on the Bonds from a rating agency, the City will pay that rating fee. Any other rating agency fees shall be the responsibility of the purchaser. Failure of the municipal bond insurer to issue the policy after Bonds have been awarded to the purchaser shall not constitute cause for failure or refusal by the purchaser to accept delivery on the Bonds. CUSIP NUMBERS If the Bonds qualify for assignment of CUSIP numbers such numbers will be printed on the Bonds, but neither the failure to print such numbers on any Bond nor any error with respect thereto will constitute cause for failure or refusal by the purchaser to accept delivery of the Bonds. The CUSIP Service Bureau charge for the assignment of CUSIP identification numbers shall be paid by the purchaser. SETTLEMENT Within 40 days following the date of their award, the Bonds will be delivered without cost to the purchaser through DTC in New York, New York. Delivery will be subject to receipt by the purchaser of an approving legal opinion of Kennedy & Graven, Chartered of Minneapolis, Minnesota, and of customary closing papers, including a no- litigation certificate. On the date of settlement, payment for the Bonds shall be made in federal, or equivalent, funds which shall be received at the offices of the City or its designee not later than 12:00 Noon, Central Time. Unless compliance with the terms of payment for the Bonds has been made impossible by action of the City, or its agents, the purchaser shall be liable to the City for any loss suffered by the City by reason of the purchaser's non - compliance with said terms for payment. CONTINUING DISCLOSURE In accordance with SEC Rule 15c2- 12(b)(5), the City will undertake, pursuant to the resolution awarding sale of the Bonds, to provide annual reports and notices of certain events. A description of this undertaking is set forth in the Official Statement. The purchaser's obligation to purchase the Bonds will be conditioned upon receiving evidence of this undertaking at or prior to delivery of the Bonds. OFFICIAL STATEMENT The City has authorized the preparation of an Official Statement containing pertinent information relative to the Bonds, and said Official Statement will serve as a nearly final Official Statement within the meaning of Rule 15c2 -12 of the Securities and Exchange Commission. For copies of the Official Statement or for any additional information prior to sale, any prospective purchaser is referred to the Financial Advisor to the City, Springsted Incorporated, 85 East Seventh Place, Suite 100, Saint Paul, Minnesota 55101, telephone (651) 223 -3000. The Official Statement, when further supplemented by an addendum or addenda specifying the maturity dates, principal amounts and interest rates of the Bonds, together with any other information required by law, shall constitute a "Final Official Statement" of the City with respect to the Bonds, as that term is defined in Rule 15c2 -12. By awarding the Bonds to any underwriter or underwriting syndicate submitting a proposal therefor, the City agrees that, no more than seven business days after the date of such award, it shall provide without cost to the senior managing underwriter of the syndicate to which the Bonds are awarded 150 copies of the Official Statement and the addendum or addenda described above. The City designates the senior managing underwriter of the syndicate to which the Bonds are awarded as its agent for purposes of distributing copies of the Final Official Statement to each Participating Underwriter. Any underwriter delivering a proposal with respect to the Bonds agrees thereby that if its proposal is accepted by the City (i) it shall accept such designation and (ii) it shall enter into a contractual relationship with all Participating Underwriters of the Bonds for purposes of assuring the receipt by each such Participating Underwriter of the Final Official Statement. Dated May 21, 2002 BY ORDER OF THE CITY COUNCIL /s/ Judith Cox City Clerk 3. Springsted Incorporated is authorized and directed to negotiate the Bonds in accordance with the foregoing Terms of Proposal. The City Council will meet at 7:00 o'clock P.M. on Tuesday, June 18, 2002, to consider proposals on the Bonds and take any other appropriate action with respect to the Bonds. 4. The City reasonably intends to make expenditures for the Improvements (or has made such expenditure within 60 days before the date of approval of this resolution), and reasonably intends to reimburse itself for such expenditures from the proceeds of debt to be issued by the City in the maximum principal amount of $3,750,000. The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by Councilmember , and upon vote being taken thereon the following members voted in favor of the motion: and the following voted against: whereupon the resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. JKP- 214468v1 SH155 -121 STATE OF MINNESOTA > COUNTY OF SCOTT ) CITY OF SHAKOPEE ) I, the undersigned, being the duly qualified and acting City Clerk of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota, hereby certify that I have carefully compared the attached and foregoing extract of minutes of a regular meeting of the City Council of the City held on Tuesday, May 21, 2002, with the original minutes on file in my office and the extract is a full, true and correct copy of the minutes, insofar as they relate to the issuance and sale of $3,750,000 General Obligation Improvement Bonds, Series 2002B of the City. WITNESS My hand as City Clerk and the corporate seal of the City this day of 2002. City Clerk City of Shakopee, Minnesota (SEAL) JKP- 214468v1 SH155 -121 • • . , rip 1111p w go= $ General Obligation I• • Bonds Series 2002B Mayor William Mars Members, City Council Mr. Mark McNeill, City Administrator Mr. Gregg Voxland, Finance Director City of Shakopee 129 Holmes Street South Shakopee, MN 55379 -1376 SPRINGSTED Public Finance Advisors Study • : S0750N4 SPRINGSTED Incorporated May 14, 00 RECOMMENDATIONS Re: Recommendations for the Issuance of $3,750,000 General Obligation Improvement Bonds, Series 2002B The proceeds of the Bonds will be used to finance various improvement projects within the City. We recommend the following for the Bonds: 1. Action Requested To establish the date and time of receiving bids and establish the terms and conditions of the offering. 2. Sale Date and Time Tuesday, June 18, 2002, at 11:00 A.M. with award by the City Council at 7:00 P.M. that same evening. 3. Authority The Bonds are being issued pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Chapters 429 and 475. 4. Principal Amount of Offering $3,750,000 5. Repayment Term The Bonds will mature annually February 1, 2004 through 2013. Interest will be payable semi - annually each February 1 and August 1, commencing February 1, 2003. 6. Source of Revenues The Bonds will be general obligations of the City, repaid from the collection of special assessments. The first interest payment due on the Bonds is due February 1, 2003 and will be made from capitalized interest. 7. Prepayment Provisions The City may elect on February 1, 2010, and on any day thereafter, to prepay Bonds due on or after February 1, 2011 at a price of par plus accrued interest. 8. Credit Rating Comments An application will be made to Moody's Investors Service for a rating for the Bonds. The City's current credit rating on its general obligation debt is "A2." Page 1 City of Shakopee, Minnesota May 14, 2002 9. Federal Treasury Regulations Concerning Tax - Exempt Obligations (a) Bank Qualification Under Federal Tax Law, financial institutions cannot deduct from income for federal income tax purposes, expense that is allocable to carrying and acquiring tax - exempt bonds. There is an exemption to this for "bank- qualified" bonds, which can be so designated if the issuer does not issue more than $10 million of tax exempt bonds in a calendar year. Issues that are bank - qualified typically receive slightly lower interest rates than issues that are not bank - qualified. It is our understanding the City expects to issue less than $10 million of tax - exempt obligations in 2002, therefore this Issue is designated as bank - qualified. (b) Rebate Requirements (c) Bona Fide Debt Service Fund All tax - exempt issues are subject to the federal rebate requirements, which require all excess earnings created by the financing to be rebated to the U.S. Treasury. The requirements generally cover two categories: bond proceeds and debt service funds. There are exemptions from rebate in both of these categories. Since the City expects to issue less than $5 million of tax exempt obligations in 2002, the City qualifies as a "small issuer" and will be exempt from rebating excess earnings on this Issue to the federal government. The City must maintain a bona fide debt service fund for the Bonds or be subject to yield restriction. A bona fide debt service fund is a fund for which there is an equal matching of revenue to debt service expense, with a carry-over permitted equal to the greater of the investment earnings in the fund during that year or 1/12 of the debt service of that year. Additional diligence should be exercised in monitoring the debt service fund due to the potential accumulation of assessment prepayments, which could cause the fund to become non -bona fide. Page 2 City of Shakopee, Minnesota May 14, 2002 (d) Federal Reimbursement Regulations Federal reimbursement regulations require the City to make a declaration, within 60 days of the actual payment, of its intent to reimburse itself from expenses paid prior to the receipt of Bond proceeds. It is our understanding the City has taken whatever actions are necessary to comply with the federal reimbursement regulations. (e) Economic Life The average life of the Bonds cannot exceed 120% of the economic life of the projects to be financed. The economic life of the improvements exceeds 20 years. The average life of the Bonds is 5.271 years, therefore the Bonds are within the economic life requirements. 10. Continuing Disclosure This Issue is subject to the continuing disclosure requirements. The SEC rules require the City to undertake an annual update of its Official Statement information and report any material events to the national repositories. Springsted currently provides continuing disclosure services for the City under separate contract. An amendment to that contract adding this Issue has been provided to City staff. 11. Attachments Sources and Uses Schedule Assessment Income Schedule Debt Service Schedule • Terms of Proposal DISCUSSION The proceeds of the Bonds will be used to finance the County Road 83 and County Road 16 projects. The sources and uses schedule for the Bonds is shown on page 5. The City will use cash contributions from the following to reduce the borrowing amount. Water Fund Sewer Fund Storm Water Scott County State Aid Total Fund $102,750 $431,356 $309,119 $1,654,231 $454,984 $2,952,440 Page 6 shows the City's projected assessment income for the Bonds. Special assessments for the financed projects totaling $3,877,000 of principal will be filed on or about November 1, 2002. Assessments will be filed with even annual principal payments over a term of 10 years. Interest on the unpaid balance of assessments will be charged at a rate of 5.50 %. According to the City forty percent of the assessments are expected to be prepaid during the third, fourth, and fifth years of collection. Therefore, the projected assessment income shown on page 6 has been modified to reflect the expected prepayments of assessments. Page 3 City of Shakopee, Minnesota May 14, 2002 Because the February 1, 2003 interest payment will come due prior to receipt of assessment income, the Bonds have been sized to include capitalized interest sufficient to make that payment. Thereafter, each year's first -half collection of assessments will be used to pay the interest payment due August 1 in the year of collection. Second -half collections of assessments plus surplus first -half collections will be used to pay the February 1 principal and interest payment due in the following year. The assessment income over the principal and interest due on the Bonds annually will be transferred to the City's Capital Improvement Fund. Our recommended principal repayment structure for the Bonds is shown on page 7. Debt service has been structured around the anticipated assessment income receipts developed on page 6. Page 7 contains the following information: • Columns 1 through 4 show the annual principal, estimated interest rates and projected total principal and interest payments, given the current market environment. • Columns 5 and 6 show the capitalized interest and net debt service requirements. • Column 7 shows the 5% overlevy which is required by State statutes and serves as a protection to bondholders and the City in the event of delinquencies in the collection of assessments. • Column 8 shows the total projected assessment income developed on page 6. • Column 9 shows the net surplus for this Issue, which represents the difference between the projected assessment income and 105% of debt service. As shown in column 9 on page 7, we expect that the City will not be required to levy ad valorem taxes to pay debt service on the Bonds. We appreciate again being of service to the City of Shakopee. Respectfully submitted, e SPRINGSTED Incorporated Ilr Provided to Staff: a) Contract Amendment for Continuing Disclosure Services Preliminary City of Shakopee $3,750,000 General Obligation Improvement Bonds, Series 2002B SOURCES & USES Dated 07/01/2002 Delivered 07/0112002 SOURCES OF FUNDS ParAmount of Bonds .......................................... ............................... $3,750,000.00 County Cash Deposit..... .......... ................ .................................... -- 1,654,231.00 Water, Sewer, & Storm Fund Cash Deposit .................. ..................... 843,225.00 State Aid Cash Deposit ........ ............................... 454,984.00 Capitalized Interest Funded With Cash ............... ............................... 76,720.00 TOTALSOURCES .............................................. ............................... $6,779,160.00 USES OF FUNDS Construction........................................................ ............................... 5,356, 890.00 Engineering and Administration .......................... ............................... 1,023,750.00 Contingency....................... ......................... . .. ..... ............................... 259,850-00 Deposit to Capitalized Interest (CIF) Fund. ............................ ........... 76,720.00 Total Underwriter's Discount (0. 850%) ............... ............................... 31,875.00 Costs of Issuance ............................................... ............................... 30,075.00 TOTALUSES ..................................................... ............................... $6,779,160.00 Springsted incorporated Advisors to the Public Sector File = Shakopee.sf- SINGLE PURPOSE 51612002 4:06 PM Page 5 Preliminary SIGNIFICANT DATES FilingDate ................................................................................................. ............................... 11/01/2002 FirstPayment Date ................................................................................... ............................... 12/31/2003 Springsted Incorporated Advisors to the Public Sector File = Shakopee.sf- SINGLE PUKPUSE 413012002 12.52 PM City of Shakopee General Obligation Improvement Bonds, Series 2002B Assessment Income ASSESSMENT INCOME Date Principal Coupon Interest Total P +I 12/3112002 - - - " 12/31/2003 232,620.00 5.500% 248,774.17 481,394.17 12/31/2004 232,620.00 5.500% 200,440.90 433,060.90 12/31/2005 749,553.33 5.500% 187,646.80 937,200.13 12/31/2006 749,553.33 5.500% 146,421.36 895,974.69 12/31/2007 749,553.34 5.500% 105,195.94 854,749.28 1213112008 232,620.00 5.500% 63,970.50 296,590.50 12/3112009 232,620.00 5.500% 51,176.40 283,796.40 12/31/2010 232,620.00 5.500% 38,382.30 271,002.30 12/31/2011 232,620A0 5.500% 25,588.20 258,208.20 12/31/2012 232,620.00 5.500% 12,794.10 245,414.10 Total 3,877,000.00 - 1,080,390.67 4,957,390.67 SIGNIFICANT DATES FilingDate ................................................................................................. ............................... 11/01/2002 FirstPayment Date ................................................................................... ............................... 12/31/2003 Springsted Incorporated Advisors to the Public Sector File = Shakopee.sf- SINGLE PUKPUSE 413012002 12.52 PM Preliminary Dated ......................... ............................... Delivery Date ............. ............................... First Coupon Date ..... ............................... 7/01/2002 7101/2002 2/01/2003 YIELD STATISTICS BondYear Dollars ...................................................................................................... ............................... $19,767.50 AverageLife ............................................................................................................... ............................... 5.271 Years AverageCoupon ........................................................................................................ ............................... 3.7150879% NetInterest Cost ( NIC) .............................................................................................. ............................... 3.8763374% TrueInterest Cost ( TIC) ............................................................................................. ............................... 3.8786675% Bond Yield for Arbitrage Purposes ............................................................................ ............................... 3.6963446% AllInclusive Cost ( AIC) .............................................................................................. ............................... 4.0526505% IRS FORM 8038 NetInterest Cost ........................................................................................................ ............................... 3 WeightedAverage Maturity ....................................................................................... ............................... 5.271 Years Springsted Incorporated Advisors to the Public Sector File = Shakopee.sf- SINGLE PURPOSE 51612002 4:06 PM Page 7 City of Shakopee $3,750, General Obligation Improvement Bonds, Series 2002B NET DEBT SERVICE SCHEDULE Capitalized Assessment Date Principal Coupon Interest Total P +I Interest Net New D/S 105% of Total Income Surplus (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) 2/01/2003 - - 76,720.00 76,720.00 (76,720.00) - - - - 2/0112004 295,000.00 2.500% 131,520.00 426,520.00 - 426,520.00 447,846.00 481,394.17 33,548.17 2/01/2005 255,000.00 2.900 % 124,145.00 379,145.00 - 379,145.00 398,102.25 433,060.90 34,958.65 2/01/2006 745,000.00 3.200% 116,750.00 861,750.00 - 861,750.00 904,837.50 937,200.13 32,362.63 2/01/2007 730,000.00 3.450% 92,910.00 822,910.00 - 822,910.00 864,055.50 895,974.69 31,919.19 2/0112008 715,000.00 3.700% 67,725.00 782,725.00 - 782,725.00 821,861.25 854,749.28 32,888.03 2/01/2009 210,000.00 3.850% 41,270.00 251,270.00 - 251,270.00 263,833.50 296,590.50 32,757.00 2/01/2010 205,000.00 4.000% 33,185.00 238,185.00 - 238,185.00 250,094.25 283,796.40 33,702.15 2/01/2011 200,000.00 4.100% 24,985.00 224,985.00 - 224,985.00 236,234.25 271,002.30 34,768.05 2/01/2012 200,000.00 4.200% 16,785.00 216,785.00 - 216,785.00 227,62425 258,208.20 30,583.95 2/01/2013 195,000.00 4.300% 8,385.00 203,385.00 - 203,385.00 213,554.25 245,414.10 31,859.85 Total 3,750,000.00 - 734,380.00 4,484,380.00 (76,720.00) 4,407,660.00 4,628,043.00 4,957,390.67 329,347.67 Dated ......................... ............................... Delivery Date ............. ............................... First Coupon Date ..... ............................... 7/01/2002 7101/2002 2/01/2003 YIELD STATISTICS BondYear Dollars ...................................................................................................... ............................... $19,767.50 AverageLife ............................................................................................................... ............................... 5.271 Years AverageCoupon ........................................................................................................ ............................... 3.7150879% NetInterest Cost ( NIC) .............................................................................................. ............................... 3.8763374% TrueInterest Cost ( TIC) ............................................................................................. ............................... 3.8786675% Bond Yield for Arbitrage Purposes ............................................................................ ............................... 3.6963446% AllInclusive Cost ( AIC) .............................................................................................. ............................... 4.0526505% IRS FORM 8038 NetInterest Cost ........................................................................................................ ............................... 3 WeightedAverage Maturity ....................................................................................... ............................... 5.271 Years Springsted Incorporated Advisors to the Public Sector File = Shakopee.sf- SINGLE PURPOSE 51612002 4:06 PM Page 7 $3,750,000 CITY OF . • • '' GENERAL OBLIGATION IMPROVEMENT BONDS, SERIES 2002B Proposals for the Bonds will be received on Tuesday, June 18, 2002, until 11:00 A.M., Central Time, at the offices of Springsted Incorporated, 85 East Seventh Place, Suite 100, Saint Paul, Minnesota, after which time they will be opened and tabulated. Consideration for award of the Bonds will be by the City Council at 7:00 P.M., Central Time, of the same day. SUBMISSION OF PROPOSALS Proposals may be submitted in a sealed envelope or by fax (651) 223 -3046 to Springsted. Signed Proposals, without final price or coupons, may be submitted to Springsted prior to the time of sale. The bidder shall be responsible for submitting to Springsted the final Proposal price and coupons, by telephone (651) 223 -3000 or fax (651) 223 -3046 for inclusion in the submitted Proposal. Springsted will assume no liability for the inability of the bidder to reach Springsted prior to the time of sale specified above. All bidders are advised that each Proposal shall be deemed to constitute a contract between the bidder and the City to purchase the Bonds regardless of the manner of the Proposal submitted. DETAILS OF THE BONDS The Bonds will be dated July 1, 2002, as the date of original issue, and will bear interest payable on February 1 and August 1 of each year, commencing February 1, 2003. Interest will be computed on the basis of a 360 -day year of twelve 30 -day months. The Bonds will mature February 1 in the years and amounts as follows: 2004 $295,000 2005 $255,000 2006 $745,000 2007 $730,000 2008 $715,000 2009 $210,000 2010 $205,000 2011 $200,000 2012 $200,000 2013 $195,000 Proposals for the Bonds may contain a maturity schedule providing for a combination of serial bonds and term bonds, provided that no serial bond may mature on or after the first mandatory sinking fund redemption date of any term bond. All term bonds shall be subject to mandatory sinking fund redemption and must conform to the maturity schedule set forth above at a price of par plus accrued interest to the date of redemption. In order to designate term bonds, the proposal must specify "Last Year of Serial Maturities" and "Years of Term Maturities" in the spaces provided on the Proposal Form. BOOK ENTRY SYSTEM The Bonds will be issued by means of a book entry system with no physical distribution of Bonds made to the public. The Bonds will be issued in fully registered form and one Bond, Page 8 representing the aggregate principal amount of the Bonds maturing in each year, will be registered in the name of Cede & Co. as nominee of The Depository Trust Company ( "DTC "), New York, New York, which will act as securities depository of the Bonds. Individual purchases of the Bonds may be made in the principal amount of $5,000 or any multiple thereof of a single maturity through book entries made on the books and records of DTC and its participants. Principal and interest are payable by the registrar to DTC or its nominee as registered owner of the Bonds. Transfer of principal and interest payments to participants of DTC will be the responsibility of DTC; transfer of principal and interest payments to beneficial owners by participants will be the responsibility of such participants and other nominees of beneficial owners. The purchaser, as a condition of delivery of the Bonds, will be required to deposit the Bonds with DTC. REGISTRAR The City will name the registrar which shall be subject to applicable SEC regulations. The City will pay for the services of the registrar. OPTIONAL REDEMPTION The City may elect on February 1, 2010, and on any day thereafter, to prepay Bonds due on or after February 1, 2011. Redemption may be in whole or in part and if in part at the option of the City and in such manner as the City shall determine. If less than all Bonds of a maturity are called for redemption, the City will notify DTC of the particular amount of such maturity to be prepaid. DTC will determine by lot the amount of each participant's interest in such maturity to be redeemed and each participant will then select by lot the beneficial-ownership interests in such maturity to be redeemed. All prepayments shall be at a price of par plus accrued interest. SECURITY AND PURPOSE The Bonds will be general obligations of the City for which the City will pledge its full faith and credit and power to levy direct general ad valorem taxes. In addition the City will pledge special assessments from benefited properties. The proceeds will be used to finance various improvements within the City. TYPE OF PROPOSALS Proposals shall be for not less than $3,718,125 and accrued interest on the total principal amount of the Bonds. Proposals shall be accompanied by a Good Faith Deposit ( "Deposit ") in the form of a certified or cashier's check or a Financial Surety Bond in the amount of $37,500, payable to the order of the City. If a check is used, it must accompany the proposal. If a Financial Surety Bond is used, it must be from an insurance company licensed to issue such a bond in the State of Minnesota, and preapproved by the City. Such bond must be submitted to Springsted Incorporated prior to the opening of the proposals. The Financial Surety Bond must identify each underwriter whose Deposit is guaranteed by such Financial Surety Bond. If the Bonds are awarded to an underwriter using a Financial Surety Bond, then that purchaser is required to submit its Deposit to Springsted Incorporated in the form of a certified or cashier's check or wire transfer as instructed by Springsted Incorporated not later than 3:30 P.M., Central Time, on the next business day following the award. If such Deposit is not received by that time, the Financial Surety Bond may be drawn by the City to satisfy the Deposit requirement. The Deposit received from the purchaser, the amount of which will be deducted at settlement and no interest will accrue to the purchaser, will be deposited by the City. In the event the purchaser fails to comply with the accepted proposal, said amount will be retained by the City. No proposal can be withdrawn or amended after the time set for receiving proposals unless the meeting of the City scheduled for award of the Bonds is adjourned, recessed, or continued to another date without award of the Bonds having been made. Rates shall be in integral multiples of 5 /100 or 1/8 of 1 %. Rates must be in level or ascending order. Bonds of the same Page 9 maturity shall bear a single rate from the date of the Bonds to the date of maturity. No conditional proposals will be accepted. FAUM The Bonds will be awarded on the basis of the lowest interest rate to be determined on a true interest cost (TIC) basis. The City's computation of the interest rate of each proposal, in accordance with customary practice, will be controlling. The City will reserve the right to: (i) waive non - substantive informalities of any proposal or of matters relating to the receipt of proposals and award of the Bonds, (ii) reject all proposals without cause, and, (iii) reject any proposal which the City determines to have failed to comply with the terms herein. BOND INSURANCE AT PURCHASER'S OPTION If the Bonds qualify for issuance of any policy of municipal bond insurance or commitment therefor at the option of the underwriter, the purchase of any such insurance policy or the issuance of any such commitment shall be at the sole option and expense of the purchaser of the Bonds. Any increased costs of issuance of the Bonds resulting from such purchase of insurance shall be paid by the purchaser, except that, if the City has requested and received a rating on the Bonds from a rating agency, the City will pay that rating fee. Any other rating agency fees shall be the responsibility of the purchaser. Failure of the municipal bond insurer to issue the policy after Bonds have been awarded to the purchaser shall not constitute cause for failure or refusal by the purchaser to accept delivery on the Bonds. CUSIP NUMBERS If the Bonds qualify for assignment of CUSIP numbers such numbers will be printed on the Bonds, but neither the failure to print such numbers on any Bond nor any error with respect thereto will constitute cause for failure or refusal by the purchaser to accept delivery of the Bonds. The CUSIP Service Bureau charge for the assignment of CUSIP identification numbers shall be paid by the purchaser. SETTLEMENT Within 40 days following the date of their award, the Bonds will be delivered without cost to the purchaser through DTC in New York, New York. Delivery will be subject to receipt by the purchaser of an approving legal opinion of Kennedy & Graven, Chartered of Minneapolis, Minnesota, and of customary closing papers, including a no- litigation certificate. On the date of settlement, payment for the Bonds shall be made in,federal, or equivalent, funds which shall be received at the offices of the City or its designee not later than 12:00 Noon, Central Time. Unless compliance with the terms of payment for the Bonds has been made impossible by action of the City, or its agents, the purchaser shall be liable to the City for any loss suffered by the City by reason of the purchaser's non - compliance with said terms for payment. CONTINUING DISCLOSURE In accordance with SEC Rule 15c2- 12(b)(5), the City will undertake, pursuant to the resolution awarding sale of the Bonds, to provide annual reports and notices of certain events. A description of this undertaking is set forth in the Official Statement. The purchaser's obligation to purchase the Bonds will be conditioned upon receiving evidence of this undertaking at or prior to delivery of the Bonds. Page 10 OFFICIAL STATEMENT The City has authorized the preparation of an Official Statement containing pertinent information relative to the Bonds, and said Official Statement will serve as a nearly final Official Statement within the meaning of Rule 15c2 -12 of the Securities and Exchange Commission. For copies of the Official Statement or for any additional information prior to sale, any prospective purchaser is referred to the Financial Advisor to the City, Springsted Incorporated, 85 East Seventh Place, Suite 100, Saint Paul, Minnesota 55101, telephone (651) 223 -3000. The Official Statement, when further supplemented by an addendum or addenda specifying the maturity dates, principal amounts and interest rates of the Bonds, together with any other information required by law, shall constitute a "Final Official Statement" of the City with respect to the Bonds, as that term is defined in Rule 15c2 -12. By awarding the Bonds to any underwriter or underwriting syndicate submitting a proposal therefor, the City agrees that, no more than seven business days after the date of such award, it shall provide without cost to the senior managing underwriter of the syndicate to which the Bonds are awarded 150 copies of the Official Statement and the addendum or addenda described above. The City designates the senior managing underwriter of the syndicate to which the Bonds are awarded as its agent for purposes of distributing copies of the Final Official Statement to each Participating Underwriter. Any underwriter delivering a proposal with respect to the Bonds agrees thereby that if its proposal is accepted by the City (i) it shall accept such designation and (ii) it shall enter into a contractual relationship with all Participating Underwriters of the Bonds for purposes of assuring the receipt by each such Participating Underwriter of the Final Official Statement. Dated May 21, 2002 BY ORDER OF THE CITY COUNCIL /s/ Judith Cox City Clerk Page 11 CITY OF SHAKOPEE Memorandum TO: Mayor and City Council Mark McNeill, City Administrator FROM: Judith S. Cox, City Clerk SUBJECT: Applications for Wine and Beer License Dangerfield's Restaurant Inc. dba Panzanella Bread Company DATE: May 15, 2002 INTRODUCTION: 15. F �. City Council is asked to consider the applications of Dangerfield's Restaurant Inc. for an On Sale Wine and an On Sale 3.2 Percent Malt Liquor license. ::: . �111►`L1 The City has received applications from Ghassan Khwice, Dangerfield's Restaurant, Inc., dba Panzanella Bread Co., for a Wine and Beer license at 1561 East 1 Avenue (formerly The Market). The applications and evidence of insurance are in order. The applicant has applied for a Conditional Use Permit for a Class II Restaurant, which allows for the sale and consumption of alcohol in a B -1 Zone. The Board of Adjustment and Appeals did approve the CUP on April 18, 2002. The customary background investigation has been conducted by the Police Department and there is nothing that would preclude the approval of the licenses. The applicant has applied for the necessary permits. The wine and beer licenses will not be released until final inspections are completed by the Building Department. Approve the applications and grant an On Sale Wine and an On Sale 3.2 Percent Malt Liquor license to Dangerfield's Restaurant, Inc., dba Panzanella Bread Co., 1561 East 1 Avenue, conditioned upon final inspections being completed by the Building Department. X l Judith S. Cox, City Clerk JSCjs I: j eanette/l iquor /p anzanel la 15F S CITY OF S ®PFiFi CONSENT Memorandum TO: Mayor and City Council Mark McNeill, City Administrator FROM: Judith S. Cox, City Clerk SUBJECT: Temporary 3.2 Percent Malt Liquor License — Shakopee Lions Club DATE: May 16, 2002 INTRODUCTION: The Shakopee Lions Club has made application for a temporary on -sale 3.2 percent malt liquor license for a softball tournament at Tahpah Park on June 22 and 23, 2002. The application and certificates of insurance are in order. The Police Department has advised that they are unaware of any reason to deny the license and that there will be off duty officers present. Move to approve the application and grant a temporary on -sale 3.2 percent malt liquor license to the Shakopee Lions Club, in the designated beer garden adjacent to the concession stand at Tahpah Park, June 22 and 23, 2002. A- City Clerk JSC /j s o eanettediquor/LionsTemp Beer) City of Shakopee Memorandum 1 L TO: Mayor & City Council Mark McNeill, City Administrator FROM: Tracy Coenen, Assistant to the City Administrator SUBJECT: Agreement Providing for the Assignment and Transfer of Community Programming Assets MEETING DATE: May 21, 2002 Introduction City Council is asked to accept and move forward with the agreement to provide for the assignment and transfer of Community Programming Assets. Background Council adopted Resolution No. 5699, May 7, authorizing the agreement with the Shakopee Community Access Corporation and accepted the transfer of Community Access Progr Assets. City Council approval is needed to move forward with the final agreement to transfer the assets of the Cable Access Corporation to the City of Shakopee and to accept all future franchise revenues from Time Warner /AOL. Action Accept and move forward with the agreement to provide for the assignment and transfer of Community Programming Assets. i VAN 09 M C IA-My i LVA Ii OrMIN- By THIS AGREEMENT is entered into this day of , 2002, by and between the Shakopee Community Access Corporation, a Minnesota non -profit corporation ( "SCAC "), and the City of Shakopee, a Minnesota municipal corporation ( "City"). WHEREAS, the City has issued a cable franchise ordinance authorizing the delivery of cable service within the City and requiring, among other things, the provision of channels for community access progr and; WHEREAS, Amzak Cable, Midwest, Inc. d/b /a Time Warner Cable ( "Time Warner ") currently provides cable television and other communications services in the City, and; WHEREAS, the City established SCAC to provide community access progr on the access channels provided by Time Warner, and; WHEREAS, SCAC has received equipment and monetary support for access progr pursuant to an agreement with Time Warner dated August 1, 1996 ( "Access Agreement") which agreement is attached hereto as Exhibit A, and; WHEREAS, the City has determined to provide community access programming through a city commission, and; WHEREAS, SCAC will assign and transfer its assets, accounts, equipment, facilities and other resources including the Access Agreement, and all rights thereunder, to the City and thereafter be dissolved, and; WHEREAS, pursuant to Minn. Stat. § 465.03, the City intends to accept said grant of assets and maintain them for the benefit of its citizens in accordance with the terms herein. NOW THEREFORE, the parties agree as follows: Section 1. SCAC agrees to grant the assets and property described in Section 2 ( "Assets RJV- 212050v1 1 SH155 -22 Granted ") to City upon the terms and conditions set forth in this Agreement. City agrees to accept the Assets Granted upon those terns and conditions. Section 2. Assets Granted The Assets Granted are as follows: (a) the Access Agreement attached hereto as Exhibit A (b) the equipment list attached hereto as Exhibit B. (c) the lease of Access Studio attached hereto as Exhibit C. (d) the Independent Contractor agreement with PFR Productions, attached hereto as Exhibit D. (e) all bank accounts and other deposits or accounts in the name of SCAC. (f) all investment accounts in the name of SCAC; (g) all other contracts, goodwill, name, logo, and other intangible rights and assets of SCAC. (h) all books, records and other business documents maintained by SCAC. Section 3. SCAC Representations SCAC represents that: (a) SCAC is in good standing under the laws of the State of Minnesota; (b) all acts required to authorize SCAC to enter and execute this agreement have been duly and validly taken and SCAC has duly authorized the transaction contemplated by this agreement; (c) SCAC has the power to carry out the transaction contemplated by this agreement and this agreement is legally binding on SCAC and its members; (d) the Assets Granted are free and clear of all encumbrances and represent substantially all assets of the SCAC; (e) SCAC is unaware of any liability or unfulfilled obligation, other than any such liability or obligation known to or disclosed to the City in writing; and RJV- 212050v1 2 SH155 -22 (0 No legal or other proceeding has been instituted against SCAC that could prevent this transaction from being completed as agreed to under this agreement. Section 4. City Representations The City represents that: (a) The City is validly existing and in good standing as a municipal corporation under the laws of the State of Minnesota; (b) The City has full and complete authority to enter into this agreement and to accept the Assets Granted. All actions necessary to make this agreement have been duly taken; and (c) The execution and consummation of this agreement will not violate any applicable law, rule or regulation. Section 5. Responsibilities at Closing The transaction contemplated by this agreement will be closed at City Hall on or about August, 2002. SCAC will deliver at closing a bill of sale granting all right and title in the Assets Granted to the City. The City will deliver at closing a resolution accepting the Assets Granted. Section 6. Nonassumption of SCACs Liabilities To the extent permitted by law, SCAC's liabilities and obligations will remain solely SCAC's. No liabilities and obligations of the SCAC will be assumed by the City. The City expressly disclaims all responsibility for SCACs obligations and liabilities based upon or arising out of matters or transactions that occurred prior to closing. Section 7. SCAC Will Cease Operations Upon closing: (a) SCAC will cease operations; (b) SCAC will take all steps necessary to dissolve the corporation (the City will assist in and pay for all resultant costs). (c) SCAC representative will not knowingly take any action or fail to take any action that will cause a breach of any contract, license or other assignment; RJV- 212050v1 3 SH155 -22 (d) SCAC representatives will not enter into any contracts or agreements and will not sell or otherwise dispose of any of the Assets Granted. Section 8. Termination of Agreement (a) This agreement may be terminated by City at any time before the Closing if. (i) any of the representations and warranties made by SCAC are materially false or misleading (unless the false or misleading representation or warranty was waived in writing by City prior to the purported termination); or (ii) if SCAC has materially failed to perform in accordance with the provisions of this Agreement. (b) Notice of termination is accomplished by the City giving written notice to SCAC. (c) If this agreement is terminated neither party will have any further liability to the other party. Section 9. Agreement Binding This agreement will be binding on and will insure to the benefit of the parties to this agreement and their heirs, executors, successors and assignees. Section 10. Governing Law This agreement will be governed by the laws of the State of Minnesota. RJV- 212050v1 4 SH155 -22 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this agreement on , 2002. SHAKO COM MUNITY C C Its: M Its: CONSENT OF TIME WARNER Time Warner hereby consents to SCAC's assignment of the Access Agreement to the City. • C 1 1 1 I` 1 � � p In Its: RJV- 212050v1 5 SH155 -22 ACCESS SUPPORT AGREEMENT BETWEEN SHAKOPEE COMMUNITY ACCESS CORPORATION, A MINNESOTA NON- PROFIT CORPORATION AND AMZAK CABLE MIDWEST, INC. THIS AGREEMENT made and entered into this I a. day of 1 1996, by and between the SHAKOPEE COMMUNITY ACCESS CORPORATION, A MINNESOTA NON - PROFIT CORPORATION (hereinafter referred to as "SCAC ") AND AMZAK CABLE MIDWEST, INC. A TEXAS CORPORATION (hereinafter referred to as "Grantee ") WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, Grantee is desirous of receiving relief in the form of franchise modifications and deferrals from certain obligations set forth in the City of Shakopee Cable Communications Ordinance ( "Franchise ") granted by the City of Shakopee, Minnesota; and WHEREAS, the City of Shakopee has agreed to grant a deferral of Grantee's obligations to provide public access and local progr equipment, support, and funding as set forth in Section 5.05 of the City of Shakopee Cable Communications Ordinance ( "Franchise ") and Form K of Grantee's Proposal in the event that Grantee enters into a written Agreement between n 7 S 1 n n l ' tl d .+ 7 00 �.,a 1 . >larinaS fi�lfillm�nt of local access and other Grantee and ��n�. wLuc� un e��les a nd acul0:vle ffe L �._ local programming support to the satisfaction of SCAC; and WHEREAS, SCAC is desirous of assuming certain access and local progr responsibilities related to the Shakopee Cable Television System ( "System "); and IN CONSIDERATION of the covenants, conditions, undertakings and premises contained herein the parties agree as follows: Commencing April 1, 1996 and continuing until the expiration or termination of this Agreement, SCAC hereby covenants and agrees to the following: 1.01 SCAC shall assume all responsibilities for the operation of the public access channel cablecast on the System and shall assume responsibility for coordination of educational access channel programming and governmental access channel programming as it relates to the public access channel, public access staff, public access - studio availability and public access equipment to the .extent that such matters were, prior to the execution of this Agreement, the responsibility of Grantee, and to the extent not specifically established under this Agreement as a continuing responsibility of the Grantee. 1.02 SCAC shall assume all responsibility for staffing the public access studio, and any successor thereto, located in the City of Shakopee for facilitation of access programming on the System. 1.03 SCAC hereby leases and takes all right to use of all equipment owned by Grantee as of the date of execution of this Agreement and being used as of that date for access progr all of which is set forth in the equipment list attached hereto and made a part hereof as Attachment A. SCAC shall pay Grantee the lease amount of one dollar ($1.00) per year payable April 1, 1996 and each April 1st thereafter until the expiration or termination of this Agreement for the leasehold rights set forth in this Section. 1.04 SCAC, in conjunction with the City of Shakopee and in a manner approved by the City of Shakopee, shall repair and maintain all studio equipment set forth in Attachment A - 7 hereto. 1.05 SCAC shall, at times throughout the life of this Agreement maintain in place rules 2 governing the use of public access channels on the System and provide public access and local programming equipment for all public, educational and governmental access programming in a manner acceptable to and at all times subject to direction by, the City of Shakopee. SECTION II MO UVERM Commencing April 1,1996 and continuing until the expiration or termination of this Agreement, Grantee hereby covenants and agrees to the following: 2.01 Grantee shall provide to SCAC all equipment owned and being used by Grantee for access and other local programming for the System as of the effective date of this Agreement all as set forth in the equipment list attached hereto and made a part hereof as Attachment A. 2.02 Grantee shall pay to SCAC on quarterly basis commencing April 1, 1996 two thousand four hundred dollars ($2,400.00) per quarter for studio related expenses including but not limited to rent, utilities and equipment for use by SCAC, all public access users and all designees of SCAC. For the purposes of this Section, utilities shall be defined to include, telephone, heat, air conditioning, electricity, snow plowing, and any other regular studio operating costs being incurred by Grantee at the time of the execution of this Agreement. 2.03 Commencing April 1, 1996 grantee shall pay SCAC, or its designee, two thousand five - hundred dollars ($2,500.00) per year and increasing by $100.00 per year for each year thereafter and payable on April lst of each year thereafter for studio equipment maintenance until the expiration or termination of this Agreement. 2.04 Grantee shall provide SCAC, or its designee, the dollar amount equal to forty cents - - ($0.40) per cable customer per month commencing April 1, 1996. This Financial Support shall be paid to SCAC or its designee on September 15th of each year for subscriber fees that are collected between the preceding April 1st through August 31st and April 15th of each year for subscriber fees collected the preceding September 1 st through March 31st. Grantee shall be entitled to assess a subscriber fee to fund this commitment. 2.05 Grantee shall be responsible for keeping the public access studio and all equipment set forth in Attachment A insured against loss for their replacement value. All such insurance shall be approved in advance by SCAC and the City of Shakopee. Grantee shall furnish to the City of Shakopee and SCAC certificates evidencing such coverage to be in effect upon the effective date of this Agreement and shall provide a copy of any policies require d by this Section when such policy becomes available. In addition, Grantee shall maintain liability insurance, as required under Section 9.08 of the Franchise and shall name the City of Shakopee and SCAC and SCAC's agents or assigns of any of SCAC's responsibilities under this Agreement as additional insured on all such liability policies. Grantee shall furnish certificates evidencing such coverage to be in effect upon the effectiveness of this Agreement and shall provide a copy of any such policies to the City of Shakopee and SCAC when such policy becomes available. 3.01 The term of this Agreement shall commence upon the execution of this Agreement by both parties and shall be effective until the expiration of the franchise (October 26, 2002) unless extended by mutual agreement of the parties or terminated earlier as provided herein. 3.02 In the event the City grants additional or subsequent franchises to cable or non -cable wired competitors which do not contain the same terms and conditions, or which contain conditions less burdensome or more favorable, as those imposed on the Grantee this agreement will be subject to renegotiation by either parry. 2 ►Ln ►1 • MO MAN 4.01 This Agreement shall be binding upon and shall innure to the benefit of the parties hereto and their respective successors and assigns. 4.02 This Agreement, and execution hereof, is subservient to all obligations of the Franchise to the extent inconsistent or contradictory to the operation of the Franchise. The City of Shakopee shall construe this Agreement, on all matters in order to coordinate its operations with the obligations set forth in the Franchise. This Agreement is accepted and we agree to be bound by all its terms and conditions. DATED: 1 T �� SHAKOP CO , ACCESS COR.PORATI N By 6� Its r� N T Y DATED: JUDITH S COX NOTARY PUBUG- M**eSQTA MY CDMWSS*N EXPMES I-" -"000 AMZAK CABLE MIDWEST, INC. By Its N y DATED: 160my JEAN W. STRINGER NOTARY PUBLIC - MINNESOTA HENNEPIN COUNTY Comm. Expires Jan. 31, 2= 4 ; • PAGE 1 O F IT M 1/2" PANASONIC PLAY DECK 1/2" PANASONIC EDITOR PANASONIC EDITING CONTROLLE 2- PANASONIC 10" MONITORS SONY 13" MONITOR PANASONIC 5 1/2" MONITOR 3 BANK MONITOR PAN. OMNIVISION VHS1 /2" DECK JVC PRO '1/2" PLAYBACK DECK FORA T19E BASE CORRECTOR TEAL AUDIO NIIXER REALISTIC AM -FM STEREO T UNER BEI AUDIO DIST. SYSEM VIDEO DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM FOSTER PATCH BAY FURMAN PATCH BAY PANASONIC CAMERA PANASONIC CAMERA PANASONIC VIDEO DIST. SYSTEM PANASONIC ELEC VIEWFINDER WV-555 BATTERY POWER SUPPLY /WV -555 PANASONIC VIEWFINDER REALISTIC FM TRANSRECEIVERS ( CAMERA HEADPHONES )DEL # SERIAL# AG -6300 D6TA00445 NV -8500 L2HL00336 RA500 6BO60017 CT100 MAKB2640706 KB2640715 PVM -13 UJ424120 -- UJ2001643 CT500V UJ424120 WV5203B 37203470 37ZO3541 52A : B292830 ' LVS5850A 2110023' VM8PRD 783371 783372 PV1360 PGSA81714 BR640OU 13313664 FA-3002 432600 MB -20 620199 TM102 012304 AD1B 903001027768 VDA -100A 0080016 3010 ER PB -40 NA WV -555 46Al2278 43AO0543 D-5000 7XA10618 WJ -300B 20Z00476 WV -VF32 54Z00005 WVPA37 53Z00663 53Z00666 WV777 26AO0143 WV3805A 32ZO6563 32ZO6598 21-403 0034730 0034376,0002739 TEXTRONIC WAVEFORM MONITOR LEADER VECTROSCOPE VIDEO TEK COLOR MONITOR WU �. �, • jwovAd PAGE 2 OF 4 ITEM MODEL # SERIAL# 5000 POWER SUPPLY WV -PS03 7XA10618 BOGEN TRIPOD 3061 NA BOGEN TRIPOD 132 NA DOLLY FOR STUDIO TRIPOD 114 NA REALISTIC BULK ERASER 44-233 NA SHURE AUDIO MIXER M68FCA 863100170 MARANTZ CASSETTE DECK NA 3 201405 3 B TEAL AUDIO CONSOLE NA NA LIGHTING GLOVES 7650 -A BlTC00133 LOWELL LIGHT KIT 3- LIGHTS; 2- STANDS BET= COLORTRAN SCOOPS 6 ITEMS GEL FRAME SCOOPS 6 ITEMS GEL FRAMES 6 ITEMS BARN DOORS 7 ITEMS ALTMAN 6" FERNEL LIGHTS 8 ITEMS SUN CONTROL SC28F 9909900390 PANASONIC 1/2" CAMERA AG180 JOHB00817 PANASONIC AG180 AC ADAPTER AG-B3 G7032787D NICJSIC LIBRARY AV 200 202 PANASONIC BATTERY CHARGER PANASONIC SVHS NTSC CAMERA PANASONIC CAMCORDER PANASONIC AG190 AC ADAPTER SHURE LAVALIER MICS (2) BOGEN TRIPOD BOGEN TRIPOD , 'QrICKSET" TRIPOD BOGEN TRIPOD BAG 3 5 77 BOGEN TRIPOD BAG 45' VDO- POWERBELTS (2) REALISTIC MINI HEADSETS PANASONIC MONITOR PANASONIC SVHS PLAYER PANASONIC SVHS EDITOR 206 AG - B745 J8A1386TJ WV -F250 08200058 AG-190 B2HB01788 AG -86P B201515YD SM11 -CN NA 3246 028B/0911 3211 144B/0901 S- 95818 -6A 03923653 3280 NA 3 281 NA PE6V 10 NA 33 -1000A NA CT1331Y EE 11220197 EE 1220094 7650 -A BlTC00133 7750 -AG C1TC00036 PAGE 3 OF 4 ITEM MODEL # SERIAL# CHARACTER GENERATOR STUDI040 10840 SONY 3/4" PLAYBACK DECK VO -2680 NA PANASONIC 1 /2 "S -VHS DECK WV ®91 PANASONIC S -VHS CAMERA F250B 29A08 PANASONIC VIEWFINDER WV-NF39 29200669 PANASONIC F250B AC ADAPTER WV -PS31 29IS1245 pANASONIC F250 AC ADAPTER AA -P47U D7812094 BATTERIES FOR AG180 & AG190 AG -BP212 310192 190990 130990 PANASONIC SWITCHER WJ -NIX50 26AO4918 PANASONIC RECEIVER /MONITOR 1382 MB10180443 AMIGA MONITOR 1080 16297360 2 TELEX WIRELESS MICS TELEX WIRELESS RECEIVER CORDED LAPEL MICS (1) PRO HAND -HELD MIC 4 -L NA SHURE HAND HELD MIC SM 48 NA ELECTRO -VOICE HAND HELD MIC (2) 635 -A NA BOGEN CAMCORDER TRIPOD 211 MISC. CABLES, CONNECTORS AND ADAPTORS FOR ALL ABOVE EQUIP. KNOX SWITCHER W /STEREO AUDIO RS16X16 16404 KNOX WINDOWS DRIVER NA NA P HILIPS 25" MONITOR REC. PB4025C 47303653 TECH PLAYBACK SYSTEM TECH PVC -4 NA TECH SOFTWARE PVC 8 -RI -WIN NA - PANASONIC SVSH HI FI DECK AG1980 ISTC00402 PANASONIC SVHS HI FIDECK AG1980 LSTC00405 pANASONIC 13"COLOR VIDEO MT CT- S1390Y N/A PANASONIC S -VHS CAMERA AG -455U H3HBO2336 PANASONIC S -VHS CAMERA AG -455U H3HBO1041 PANASONIC VCR AG -1970 H3TA0053 2 -STAR "CASE F -4 RACK MOUNT CASE PANASONIC 10" MONITOR CT -1030M KK3340200 • C • • ' ,' PAGE 4 OF 4 ITEM MODEL # PLAY DECK AG -DS540 EDIT DECK AG -DS550 CONTROLLER AG-A350 3 MONITORS CT1384Y PANASONIC AN MIXER WJ -MX50 3 -SHARP 4 -HEAD VCR XA -505 SONY CASSETTE DECK TC- KE400S SONY CD PLAYER CDP -XE400 WINSTED EDIT CONSOLE E4116 WINSTED KEYBOARD SHELF 47083 PANASONIC S -VHS CAMCORDER AG -4560 TMARK PENTIUM 100 COMPUTOR WITH MONITOR SERIAL# A6TCO0400 C6TCOOO96 B6TNAl293 LB61530245 61530251 61530243 62AO0717 601729602 601729639 601729403 ORDERED 501-8112661-6 N/A N/A K5HB00725 * NOT WORKING - DONATED TO SHAKOPEE HIGH SCHOOL ELECTRIC CLASS ** AT CITY HALL INSTALLED IN COUNCIL CHAMBERS *** ORDERED BUT NOT RECEIVED SHAKOPEE PUBLIC ACCESS UPDATED INVENTORY 2 -2001 ALL ITEMS AT 1255 S FULLER - SHAKOPEE LOCATION ITEM MODEL MODEL SERIAL# ORIG VALUE MICROPHONES. PRO HAND -HELD MIC 4L NA $125 ELECTRO -VOICE HAND HELD MIC (2) 635 -A NA $90 SHURE LAVALIER MICS (1) SMll -CN NA $65 2 TELEX WIRELESS MICS $400 SHURE HAND HELD MIC SM 48 NA $75 SOUND BOOTH MIC - ELECTROVOICE D056 NA $160 2 AUDIO TECHNICA ATM41 A NA $125 2- SCHURE 512 HEADSET MIC $230 EDITING STATIONS PLAY DECK AG -DS540 A6TC00400 $5000 EDIT DECK AG -DS550 C6TC00096 $3000 CONTROLLER AG -A350 B6TNAl293 $1000 PANASONIC A/V MIXER WJ -MX50 62AO071 $7000 PANASONIC A/V MIXER WJ -MX50 26AO4918 $7000 SONY CASSETTE DECK TC- KE400S $200 SONY CD PLAYER CDP -XE400 501 - 8112661 -B $140 WINSTED EDIT CONSOLE E4116 N/A $800 WINSTED KEYBOARD SHELF 47083 NIA $200 MUSIC LIBRARY AV 200 202 $175 206 $175 MUSIC BAKERY LIBRARY 11 CD'S $1001 PANASONIC SVHS PLAYER 7650-A BlTC00133 $2500 PANASONIC SVHS EDITOR 7750 -AG ClTC00036 $4000 PANASONIC SVHS PLAYER AG7350 -P C9TC00106 $3278 PANASONIC SVHS PLAYER AG7350 -P BOTC00115 $3278 EDITING CONTROLER A500 6BO60017 $2500 CHARACTER GENERATOR STUDI040 10840 $4000 CHARACTER GENERATOR STUDIO 40 21344,21349 $2627 NIARANTZ CASSETTE DECK NA 32014053B $200 CASABLANCA EDITOR $8000 5 HARD DRIVES FOR ABOVE 18 GIG $1000 /EACH RACK -MOUNT ITEMS FOR PLAYBACK KNOX SWITCHER RS16X16 16404 $4000 TECH PLAYBACK SYSTEM TECH PVC-4 NA - $3063 PANASONIC SVSH HI FI DECK AG1980 L5TC00402 $1450 PANASONIC SVHS HI FIDECK AG1980 H8TC00038 $1450 PANASONIC VCR AG -1980 H3TA0059 $1450 PANASONIC SVHS HI FIDECK AG7350 F2TB00436 $7000 OMNIVISION VHS1 /2" DECK PV1360 PGSA81714 $200 JVC PRO 1/2" PLAYBACK DECK BR640OU 13313664 $200 BEI AUDIO DIST. SYSEM AD1B 903001027768 $200 VIDEO DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM VDA -100A 0080016 $200 VIDEO DIST. SYSTEM WJ -300B 20200476 $250 2 -SHURE AUDIO MIXER M68FCA 863100170 $600 3 -SHARP 4 -HEAD VCR XA -505 601729602 $200 601729639 $200 601729403 $200 TMARK PENTIUM 100 COMPUTOR $1250 WITH MONITOR $275 PEE PUBLIC ACCESS UPDATED INVENTOR 2 -2001 TRIPODS 4- BOGEN TRIPOD 3046 Base F2TB00436 $3278 2- PANASONIC 10" MONITORS 3036 Head NA $800 /Each BOGEN TRIPOD 3246 028B/0911 (BLACK) $800 BOGEN TRIPOD (Small Black) 3211 base $2700 LIGHTING EQUIPMENT 3126 Head $250.00 3 -BOGEN BLACK TRIPOD (3 CAM) 3066 $1600 /Each BOGEN TRIPOD BAG 35" 3280 NA $40 BOGEN TRIPOD BAG 45" 3281 NA $40 PORTABLE SWITCHING SYSTEM PANASONIC 1 /2 "S -VHS DECK AG 7350 F2TB00436 $3278 2- PANASONIC 10" MONITORS CT100 MAKB2640706 $400 KB2640715 $400 MX30 SWITCHER $2700 LIGHTING EQUIPMENT LIGHTING GLOVES $40 LOWELL LIGHT KIT $300 LOWELL LIGHT KIT DT98 $1000 BERKLEY COLORTRAN SCOOPS 6 ITEMS $150 GEL FRAME SCOOPS 6 ITEMS $150 GEL FRAMES 6 ITEMS $50 BARN DOORS 71TEMS $ 70 ALTMAN 6" FERNEL LIGHTS 8 ITEMS $400 SUN LIGHT CONTROL SC28F 9909900390 $850 MISC. EQUIPMENT VDO- POWERBELTS (2) PE6V10 NA $700 SONY 3/4" PLAYBACK DECK VO -2680 NA $200 REALISTIC BULK ERASER 44 -233 NA $60 LEADER VECTROSCOPE LVS5850 2110023 $400 MISC. CABLES, CONNECTORS AND ADAPTORS FOR ALL ABOVE EQUIP. $800 2 -STAR CASE F-4 RACK MOUNT CASE $600 FORA TIME BASE CORRECTOR FA -300 2 432600 $300 SHURE AUDIO MIXER MB -20 620199 $450 SHURE 6- CHANNEL MIXER M367 H00210305 $600 4- REALISTIC FM TRANSRECEIVERS 21 -403 0034730 (CAMERA HEADPHONES) 0034376 0002739 $450 /EACH SCALA CHARACTER GENERATOR IC 20OPC $9300 IMAC COMPUTER IMAC3 50 $1200 SHAKOPEE PUBLIC ACCESS UPDATED INVENTORY 2 -2001 ALL ITEMS AT 1 255 S FULLER - SHAKOPEE LOCATION ITEM MODEL # SERIAL# ORIG VALUE CAMERAS PANASONIC SVHS NTSC CAMERA WV -F250 08200058 $12,500- PANASONIC S -VHS CAMERA WV F250B 29AO8291 $8000 PANASONIC S -VHS CAMERA WV F -260H 7XA00152 $8475 3 -REAR LENS CONTROL LK36 $3882 PANASONIC S -VHS CAMERA AG -455U H3HBO2336 $1700 PANASONIC S -VHS CAMERA AG -455U H3HBO1041 $1700 PANASONIC S -VHS CAMCORDER AG -456U K5HB00725 $2400 PANASONIC S -VHS CAMCORDER AG -4560 17H800081 $1895 PANASONIC S -VHS CAMCORDER AG -456U 17HB00786(J9HB00814)$1895 PANASONIC CAMCORDER AG -190 B2HBO1788 $1200 PANASONIC AG190 AC ADAPTER AG -B6P B201515YD $60 &BATTERIES FOR AG 455,456 PVBP50 ID #'S 130296130296, 210695, 210695 ,210695030893,241096,080496 $40 /EACH MONITORS 3 -PAN F -250 MONITORS WV -F65B $2600 MONITOR PVM- 345 UJ424120 $300 UJ2001643 $300 PANASONIC 5 1/2" MONITOR CT500 UJ424120 $200 3 BANK MONITOR WV5203B 37ZO3470 $450 37ZO3541 WAVEFORM MONITOR 52A B292830 $600 VIDEO TEK COLOR MONITOR VM8PR 783371 $350 783372 $350 PANASONIC RECEIVER /MONITOR 1382 MB10180443 $450 AMIGA MONITOR 1080 16297360 $300 PHILIPS 25" MONITOR REC. PB4025C 47303653 $450 PANASONIC 13 "COLOR CT- S1390Y N/A $200 PANASONIC 10" MONITOR CT -1030M KK3340200 $400 13" PANASONIC MONITORS CT1384Y LB6153OZ45 $300 61530251 $300 61530243 $300 PANASONIC MONITOR CT1331Y EE 11220197 $300 EE 1220094 $300 8 -PANASONIC 13" MONITORS CT- 1386YD MB00420736 $300 MB92510034 $300 LB00410005 $300 MB00420446 $300 LB00410363 $300 MB00420003 $300 LB00410373 $300 MB00420571 $300 3- PANASONIC 5" MONITORS WVBM503 02W11056 $350 02W11055 $350 02W11054 $350 )k LEASE AGREEMENT Dated: A 0 , 1996 Lessor: City of Shakopee, Attention: City Administrator, 129 S. Holmes Street, Shakopee, MN 55379 Tenant: Shakopee Public Access Corporation Premises: That portion, as described more fully in Exhibit A attached hereto and incorporated herein, of the Shakopee Civic Center, Shakopee, Minnesota, including reasonable ingress and egress. Rent: $7,200.00 per year Term: one year, commencing on January 15, 1996, subject to automatic renewal on a month -to- month basis or termination as set forth below. In consideration of the rents to be paid by Tenant, Lessor hereby leases to Tenant the above - described Premises for the above - described Term subject to the following conditions and mutual agreements: 1. Rent. Tenant shall pay to Lessor one - twelfth of the annual rent above set forth in advance on the first day of each and every month included within the Term. The rent as set forth above includes all utilities, and cleaning expenses. Rent for any partial calendar month at the beginning or at the end of the Term shall be prorated on a daily basis. Payments shall be made to Lessor by delivering same to the City Director of Finance. 2. Operating Expenses. Tenant shall pay all the following expenses which become due or payable during the Term arising in connection with Tenant's occupancy of the Premises: a. Real estate taxes payable during the Term prorated on a calendar year basis; b. Property and casualty insurance covering the building and building contents located on the Premises; C. Telephone bills; d. Routine maintenance, upkeep and repair of the Premises, subject to normal wear and tear, but excluding any repairs or replacements of a capital nature; and e. Such other normal operating expenses as are necessary to keep the Premises in a tenantable condition suitable for Tenant's present use and occupancy. 3. Use. During the Term Tenant shall use the Premises for the purpose of a public access cable television studio, and for no other purpose, in compliance with all applicable governmental laws, ordinances and regulations. Tenant shall commit no waste upon the Premises and shall not permit any nuisance to exist upon the Premises. Tenant agrees to observe such reasonable uniform rules and regulations as from time to time may be put in effect by Lessor for the general safety, security, comfort, and convenience of Lessor, its officers and employees, the general public, and occupants and tenants of the building. 4. Inspection. Tenant shall give Lessor access to the Premises at all reasonable times, without charge or diminution of rent, to enable Lessor to examine the same and to make such repairs, additions and alterations as Lessor may deem advisable and to exhibit the Premises to prospective tenants, purchasers or others. 5. Alterations. Tenant shall make no alteration of or additions to the Premises without the prior written approval of Lessor. 6. Assictnment . Tenant shall not assign this Lease or its rights hereunder or sublet the Premises or any part thereof without the prior written approval of Lessor. 7. Damage. In case of damage to the Premises or to the Building by fire or other casualty, Tenant shall give immediate notice to Lessor, who shall thereupon cause the damage to be repaired with reasonable speed, at the expense of the Lessor, subject to delays which may arise by reason of adjustment of loss under insurance policies, and for delays beyond the reasonable control of Lessor. To the extent that the Premises are rendered untenantable, the rent shall proportionately abate, except in the event such damage resulted from or was contributed to by the act, fault, or neglect of Tenant. Tenant's employees or agents, in which event there shall be no abatement of rent. In the event the damage shall be so extensive that the Lessor shall decide not to repair or rebuild, this Lease Agreement and Term shall, at the option of Lessor, be terminated as of the date of such damage by written notice from the Lessor to the Tenant, and the rent shall be adjusted to the date of such damage and Tenant shall thereupon promptly vacate the Premises. 8. Waiver of Liability. Tenant agrees that Lessor and its officers and employees shall not be liable to Tenant for any injury to persons or damage to or loss of personal property in the Premises unless such injury, damage, or loss is the result of the 2 gross negligence or willful acts of Lessor or its officers or employees, and Lessor and its officers and employees shall not be liable to Tenant for any such damage or loss, whether or not the result of their gross negligence, to the extent Tenant is compensated therefor by Tenant's insurance. In addition, Lessor agrees that Tenant and its officers and employees shall not be liable to Lessor for any injury to persons or damage to or loss of the Building or other improvements or property on the Premises unless such injury, damage or loss is the result of the gross negligence or willful acts of Tenant, its officers or employees, and Tenant and its officers and employees shall not be liable to Lessor for any such damage or loss, whether or not the result of their gross negligence, to the extent the Lessor is compensated therefor by Lessor's insurance. Each party shall cause each insurance policy obtained by it to provide that the insurance company waives all right of recovery by way of subrogation against either party in connection with any damage covered by any policy. 9. Delivery Upon Termination. Upon the termination of this Lease Agreement and the said Term in any manner whatsoever, Tenant shall remove Tenant's goods and effects and those of any other person claiming under Tenant, and quit and deliver up the Premises to Lessor peaceably and quietly in as good order and condition as the same are now in or hereafter may be put in by Lessor or Tenant, reasonable use and wear thereof, damage by casualty, and repairs which are Lessor's obligation excepted. Goods and effects not removed by Tenant at the termination of this Lease Agreement shall be considered abandoned and Lessor may dispose of the same as it deems expedient. 10. Termination. Either party may terminate this Lease, with or without cause, by giving written notice thereof to the other party, specifying the effective date of such termination, which shall not be less than 30 days after the date of such notice. 11. Holding Over. Should Tenant continue to occupy the Premises after expiration of the Term, or after termination of the Term under the provisions hereof, such tenancy shall be from month to month on the terms and conditions of this Lease Agreement appropriate to a monthly term, and in no event from year to year or for any longer term without Lessor's written agreement. Any holding over after the expiration of this Lease shall not operate to renew this Lease. .12. Insolvency. If Tenant shall be adjudicated bankrupt, or petition for such adjudication, or a trustee or receiver of Tenant shall be appointed for insolvency of Tenant, or if Tenant shall make assignment for benefit of creditors, or if Tenant shall default in making its payments hereunder or any of them or in performing any of the other agreements, terms and conditions of this Lease, then, in such event, Lessor, in addition to all other rights and remedies available to Lessor, by law or by other 3 provision hereof, may, without notice, re -enter immediately into the Premises and remove all persons and property therefrom, and at Lessor's option, annul and cancel this Lease as to all future rights of Tenant, and Tenant hereby expressly waives the service of any notice in writing of intention to re- enter. Neither this Lease nor any interest or estate hereunder shall pass to any trustee or receiver or assignee for benefit of creditors or otherwise by operation of law. Tenant further agrees that in case of any such termination Tenant will indemnify Lessor against all loss of rents and other damage which Lessor may incur by reason of such termination, including but not being limited to, costs of restoring and repairing the Premises and putting the same in rentable condition, costs of renting the Premises to another Tenant, loss or diminution of rents and other damage which Lessor may incur by reason of such termination, including reasonable attorneys' fees and expenses incurred in enforcing any of the terms of this Lease. Neither acceptance of rent by Lessor, with or without knowledge of breach, nor failure of Lessor to take action on account of any breach hereof or to enforce its rights hereunder shall be deemed a waiver of any breach, and no waiver or consent by Lessor shall extend to any other default or event. 13. Breach In the event of the breach by Tenant of any covenants or agreements of this Lease, then Tenant shall remedy said breach within ten (10) days after written notice thereof, and if said breach shall not be corrected within said ten (10) days, then Tenant shall vacate and relinquish possession of said Premises immediately upon the expiration of said ten (10) day period. Noth- ing herein shall be taken to excuse the Tenant from any damages occasioned by Tenant's breach. 14. Notices. Any notices required or contemplated hereunder shall be effective upon the placing thereof in the United States mails, registered or certified, return receipt requested, postage prepaid and addressed to the other party at the addresses stated above• Copies sent to parties' respect ive Y s Attorney for Lessor: Karen Marty, Esq. City Hall 129 Holmes St. South Shakopee, MN 55379 Attorney for Tenant: W 15. Governing Law. This Agreement has been made under the laws of the State of Minnesota and such laws shall control its interpretation. TENANT: SHAKO E CESS - RATION G / By Its No Its [ 5MEM01 LESSOR: CITY OF SHAKOPEE o2f By Its 54 ty Admin s rator By It City Clerk a4• G^_ EXHIBIT A - - -- .. - I I - . 1 Qf 7 c - , I -m7.-q � - 4 y 1 [mill 6 ,1 1 A USINECIRI RNM 1 This agreement is made as of , 2001 between the Shakopee Community Access Corporation, a Minnesota non -profit corporation ( "SCAC ") and PFR Productions ( "Contractor "). A. SCAC and the Contractor have entered into an agreement dated March 5, 1997 (the Agreement) by which the Contractor agreed to perform certain services related to the operation of the Shakopee Public Access Studio. B. By an Agreement dated July 2, 1997, SCAC and the Contractor entered into Amendment No. 1 to the Agreement. C. By an Agreement dated April 1, 1998, SCAC and the Contractor entered into Amendment No. 2 to the Agreement. D. By an Agreement dated March 3, 1999, SCAC and the Contractor entered into Amendment No. 3 to the Agreement. E. By an Agreement dated March 7, 2000, SCAC and the Contractor entered into Amendment No. 4 to the Agreement. F. SCAC and the Contractor desire to amend the Agreement, as amended, to modify Paragraph 12, entitled "Consideration ". NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual promises and covenants contained in this Amendment, SCAC and the Contractor agree as follows: 1. Paragraph 12 of the Agreement is amended to read as follows: 12. Consideration A. Public Access The SCAC agrees to compensate the Contractor for services rendered in this agreement as they relate to the basic public access activity, at a cost not to exceed $25,152 for the contract period. The Contractor shall invoice SCAC monthly in the amount of $2,096 for the basic services rendered. B. Government Access ° The SCAC agrees to compensate the Contractor on an actual cost basis of $14.16 per hour for services related to staffing live broadcasts of the public meetings as directed by the City Council. The contractor shall invoice SCAC monthly for these services. Amendment No. 5 to Shakopee Public Access Studio Service Contract Agreement Page Two C. Additional Services The SCAC agrees to compensate the Contractor at a rate of $19.32 per hour for station open hours in addition to 25 hours per week approved by SCAC per clause 3B above. D. Remote Broadcasts The SCAC agrees to compensate the Contractor at a rate of $17.84 per hour for services relating to remote broadcasts. 2. Expect as otherwise provided for in this Amendment, all provisions of the Agreement remain in effect and are unmodified. IN THE PRESENCE OF: SHAKOPEE COMMUNITY ACCESS CORPORATION By Its Date PFR PRODUCTIONS By Its Date CITY OF SHAKOPEE Memorandum TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Mark McNeill, City Administrator SUBJECT: Groundbreaking Ceremony — New Library DATE: May 16, 2002 The Council is asked to set a time for a groundbreaking ceremony for the new Library. According to the schedule currently in place, demolition of the existing Library building is expected to take place the first week of June, with start of construction for the new Library on June l O . So that a formal groundbreaking ceremony may take place, we recommend a time when the Council will be together, and that the individuals on the Library Study Committee who have been instrumental in working on this project can also attend. A suggested time would be 6:30 p.m., Tuesday, June 4 just preceding the regular 7:00 p.m. Council meeting that evening. � � I recommend that a groundbreaking ceremony for the new Library be scheduled for Tuesday, June 4 at 6:30 p.m. If the Council concurs, it should, by motion, establish a groundbreaking ceremony to be held at 6:30 p.m. Tuesday, June 4 for members of the City Council, Shakopee Library Study Committee, and other interested parties. J 0 cz Mark McNeill City Administrator MM:th CC: Tracy Coenen CITY OF SHAKOPEE Memorandum TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Mark McNeill, City Administrator SUBJECT: No Parking Signs — Park Place DATE: May 16, 2002 g > The Council is asked to consider removing the no parking signs on the east and south sides of Park Place, from 12 Avenue to Valley Park Drive. Attached is a copy of a memorandum dated October 16, 2001, from Public Works Director Bruce Loney. That memo was written in response to a request from ADC last year to have No Parking signs placed on both sides of Park Place in the vicinity of the ADC properties, on Park Place, from 12 Avenue, to Valley Park Drive. The east west portion of that street, west of Valley Park Drive, is also known as Broad Band Boulevard. ADC has now requested that those signs be removed, so that parking can take place on the east and south sides of the street. Staff has affirmed that this is the request of ADC; the problem that generated the need for the parking restrictions in the first place was related to construction traffic. According to Section 7.03 of the City Code, Council action is required for any device, sign, or signal to be erected (and, removed) for parking or traffic control purposes. Staff recommends that "No Parking" signs be removed on the east and south sides of Park Place from 12 Avenue to Valley Park Drive. If the Council concurs, it should, by motion, direct that the No Parking signs on the east and south sides of Park Place from 12 Avenue to Valley Park Drive, be removed. t, 1l ° # Mark McNeill City Administrator MM:th CITY OF SEUKOPEE Memorandum TO: Mayor & City Council Mark McNeill, City Administrator FROM: Bruce Lon- y,.Riiblic—Works Director SUBJECT: Consider No Parking for Park Place; From 12 ' Avenue to Valley Park Drive DATE: October 16, 2001 This item is for Council consideration to post no parking for Park Place, from 12 Avenue to Valley Park Drive. -` The City has received a letter from Tom Bahe, Operations Manager with ADC Telecommunications, requesting no parking on Park Place from 12"' Avenue to Valley Park Drive. This request is due to the difficulty of semi- trailers passing each other with cars parked on one side. Previously on August 15, 2001, Council restricted parking to one side only on Park Place. Staff has reviewed this request and no negative responses were received. Mr. Bahe has stated to staff that adequate policy exists on ADC's site for their employees. Per City Council Code, Section 7.03, Parking and Traffic Control, this requires Council Action for any device, sign or signal to be erected or maintained for traffic or parking Control, thus the Council must approve the installation of such. Staff is recommending that "No Parking" signs be installed on Park Place from 12 Avenue to Valley Park Drive. Direct staff to install "No Parking" signs on Park Place, from 1P Avenue to Valley Park Drive as described in this memorandum. 2. Direct staff to leave the traffic signs as is. 3. Table for additional information. i ;, •alai .u. • Staff recommends Alternative No. 1, to install "No Parking" signs on Park Place, from 12 Avenue to Valley Park Drive in order for semi - trailers to use the street in a safe way. Direct staff to install "No Parking" signs on Park Place, from 12 Avenue to Valley Park Drive and as mentioned in this memorandum. r�� �l I °a f��t �✓� Bruce Loney Public Works Direc or IACLERK\Lori\Parkingmemo.doc P.O. Box 1101 Minneapolis, Minnesota 55440 -1101 September 28, 2001 Bruce Loney City of Shakopee 129 Holmes Street So. Shakopee, MN 55379 RE: On- Street Parking /1187 Park Place Telephone (612) 938 -8080 FAX (612) 946 -3292 Ch Dear Mr. Loney: As I discussed with you on the telephone this morning, ADC is requesting the city to install `No Parking' signs on the East Side of Park Place extending from 12 Avenue to Valley Park Drive. When vehicles are parked along the street, it is very difficult for North and South bound semis and other general traffic to pass each other. This situation becomes worse during the winter months. We feel this has become a significant safety hazard. We realize that most of the cars parked along this stretch belong to ADC employees. We have repeatedly tried to discourage our employees from parking on the streets surrounding our facilities. However, this has proven to be ineffective. We feel the only effective option is for the City to restrict parking. Each of our facilities located in the Valley Green Business Park has more than adequate parking for all employees. In fact, last year, we expanded the parking lots at 1187 Park Place and 1000 Valley View. Therefore, parking on the street is not necessary. After your meeting with the City Counsel, please contact me with the decision on this matter. Simerely, Tom Bahe Operations Manager Shakopee Facilities 952/403 -8823 r OWN CITY OF SHAKOPEE Memorandum C,nuo,;%r NNSR TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Mark McNeill, City Administrator SUBJECT: Goodwill Ambassador Designation DATE: May 16, 2002 The Council is asked to approve a resolution that may be presented by City Administrator Mark McNeill to elected officials in Sweden during his upcoming city manager exchange. From May 25 — June 1 I'll be going with 20 other Minnesota City Managers on a foreign exchange delegation to Sweden. During the week that we are there, participants will be living in the homes of Swedish and Danish City Managers. A full week of activities is planned, including lectures, tours of commercial and housing developments, public facilities, water treatment plants, wind generators, farms, public transit, senior housing, and regional planning demonstrations. The delegation will be attending at least one City Council meeting during the week it is there. In September, a return delegation of Swedish and Danish managers will visit Minnesota. As part of the visit, it has been recommended that the City Councils of participants officially designate those administrators /managers as representatives, and Goodwill Ambassadors of the participating city. It is intended that this designation, in the form of a resolution, would be presented to elected officials in Sweden during the visit. Please note that I will be picking up the entire cost of this trip personally, and that I will be taking vacation for the time that I am absent from Shakopee. 1 . §- I recommend that the Council adopt the attached resolution. 1 1; If the Council concurs, it should, by motion, adopt the following resolution: RESOLUTION NO. 5729 A RESOLUTION DESIGNATING CITY ADMINISTRATOR MARK MCNEILL AS GOODWILL AMBASSADOR FOR THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA TO THE CITY OF MALMO, AND PROVINCE OF SKANE, SWEDEN Mark McNeill City Administrator STIUV � CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. 5729 A RESOLUTION DESIGNATING CITY ADMINISTRATOR MARK MCNEIIL AS A GOODWILL AMBASSADOR FOR THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA TO THE CITY OF MALMO, AND PROVINCE OF SKANE, SWEDEN WHEREAS, City Administrator Mark McNeill intends to participate in an international exchange program arranged through the Minnesota City Management Association and known as the International Exchange Program with Swedish Managers; and WHEREAS, through the International Exchange Program City Administrator McNeill will have the opportunity to explore Swedish approaches to a variety of challenges faced by municipalities, including planning, redevelopment, public transit, senior housing and inter- governmental cooperative projects; and WHEREAS, it is expected that City Administrator will gain valuable experience through the exchange program that will enhance his performance as an employee of the City and will benefit the City's interests; and WHEREAS, the City of Shakopee has an interest in expanding its knowledge about other approaches to municipal concerns as well as sharing the City's knowledge about such issues with administrators from other parts of Minnesota, United States and the world. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA, that City Administrator Mark McNeill is designated as a representative and goodwill ambassador for the City of Shakopee to the City of Malmo, and the Province of Skane, Sweden, in connection with the International Exchange Program with Swedish Managers. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Mayor and City Council of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota, send their best wishes to their Swedish counterparts, in conjunction with this program Adopted in adjourned regular session of the City Council of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota, held this 21�` day of May, 2002. William P. Mars, Mayor City of Shakopee, Minnesota ATTEST: Judith S. Cox, City Clerk CITY OF SHAKOPEE Memorandum TO: Mark McNeill, City Administrator FROM: Gregg Voxland, Finance Director SUBJ: 2003 Assessing Contract DATE: May 15, 2002 Introduction Council approval for an assessing agreement with Scott County for 2003 is requested. Background Attached is the proposed amount is increased from increase. The number of last year and 9,981 this the per parcel cost comp assessment agreement for 2003. The $74,400 to $89,400, a 20.20 parcels in Shakopee was about 9,300 year. This is a 12.3% increase in .red to a 6.7% increase last year. Also authorized by the Legislature is the option to transfer Board of Review duties and powers to the County Board of Equalization. The transfer can be permanent or for a specified number of years. There is a three year minimum for the transfer. Action Move to authorize the proper city officials to execute the assessment agreement with Scott County for the 2003 assessment year in the amount of $89,400. Gregg`Voxland Finance Director C: \gregg \memo \assess03 CITY OF SHAKOPEE Memorandum TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Mark McNeill, City Administrator SUBJECT: County Road 21 Extension — CR 42 to CR 18 DATE: May 17, 2002 /5� /'Z. / 119 The Council is asked to endorse a letter to go to the Scott County Board, expressing support for extension of County Road 21 from CSAH 42, north to its intersection with CSAH 18, just south of Southbridge Parkway. On Tuesday, May 7 the Scott County Board tabled the decision to approve an EIS scoping study on the extension of this segment of 21 between CSAH 42 and CSAH 18. According to the County Administrator, the tabling was designed to seek input from the Cities of Savage, Prior Lake, and Shakopee, regarding this roadway extension. On Tuesday, May 14 the City Council, along with the members of the Planning Commission in attendance at a joint meeting on CSAH 16, expressed concern that C.R. 21 was not receiving sufficient attention from the County. Mayor Mars has asked that a letter be drafted and be signed by all members of the City Council, expressing a strong desire that financing, planning, and right -of -way acquisition proceed for C.R. 21. Mayor Mars suggests that this roadway construction should be an even higher priority than construction of the easterly end of County Road 16. I recommend that the City Council approve the draft letter, or a similar one with any necessary changes. Mayor Mars suggests that all members of the Council sign this letter. G 117 X1;1 If the Council concurs, it should, by motion, direct that a letter be sent to the Scott County Board of Commissioners, expressing strong concern for the timely planning and completion of the County Road 21 extension from CSAH 42 to CSAH 18. Mark McNeill City Administrator MM:th Chair Barbara Marschall Members of the Scott County Board of Commissioners Scott County Government Center 200 Fourth Avenue West Shakopee, MN 55379 Dear Members of the County Board: The Shakopee City Council of the City of Shakopee wish to make known their strong support for the funding, planning, and construction of the proposed County Road 21 from CSAH 42 north to CSAH 18. This was discussed by members of the City Council and the City of Shakopee Planning Commission, at a joint meeting between the two bodies held May 14 The purpose of that joint meeting had been to discuss the future improvements to CSAH 16. However, in our opinion, the completion of County Road 21 is of even higher priority than improvements to the east end of CSAH 16, including the realignment of the intersection of CSAH 16 and 18, to the north of the present northerly intersection. The completion of County Road 21 will provide a second badly needed outlet to the Southbridge development, which upon completion will have 880 dwelling units. Currently, those residents, and future users of the Red Oak Elementary School, have only one egress to CSAH 18 — Southbridge Parkway. That intersection will only get more congested, when the future commercial development in Southbridge Crossings, and users of the Red Oak Elementary School, come on line. The completion of County Road 21 will provide a second access to the west. We urge you to provide for planning, funding, and completion of County Road 21 at the earliest possible time. Sincerely, William P. Mars, Mayor Robert Sweeney, Councilor Cletus Link, Councilor Terry Joos, Councilor Matthew Lehman, Councilor d candidate for Senate District 34," iin talk and the value of each indi- t of my friends and neighbors here Ike sound economic decisions about laily, such as education, transporta- ild son and the wife of former Uni- :)layer John Shasky. She previously outreach coordinator for U.S. Rep. )r Congress campaign as the finance )lications to fill a recent vacancy on J. to the City Council relating to rec- plications may be obtained at City Isiness hours or by calling 952 -233- ns for the following: Transit Com- 3tments and Appeals and Housing s will be accepted until the positions I k open as drive-in )ee branch office on Vierling Drive > to consolidate 16 of its 125 offices .Iisition of Marquette Banks because �cluded the Wells Fargo branch at ple of miles away from the larger Road S_ However, plans changed. at both drive -up facilities, and our ill those customers at just one loca- facility open as an auto bank," said iager. In addition, the office's drive- I close July 15 a By John Mueller STAFF WRITER Unsure of whether it wants to move forward with the long- awaited extension of County Road 21 at this time, the Scott County Board wants its three largest cities to weigh -in on the need and timing for the road- way. Scott County had been planning to start the initial phase of an envi- ronmental impact statement (EIS) on the extension. For over a decade, the county has been planning to build County Road 21 north from County Road 42, eventually merging it with County Road 18 where it would take motorists over the Bloomington Ferry Bridge. The county had pur- chased land for right -of -way and has been setting aside money in its high- way capital improvement project (CIP) fund for the extension. But last week, the County Board unanimously voted in favor of shelv- ing consideration for a month, allow- ing staff time to consult with the cities of Shakopee, Prior Lake and Savage. Commissioner Art Banner- man of Shakopee wants the county to hold off on construction until the Minnesota Department of Transpor- tation (MnDOT) takes care of the traffic lights at key intersections in Eden Prairie and west Bloomington along Highway 169. That work is scheduled to start in 2007 — about the same time the county would .start . County Road 21 under the current schedule. Bannerman said an improved County Road 21 would simply get more people to a bottleneck faster, exacerbating a bad traffic situation_ He opposes improving County Road 21 until MnDOT improves Highway 169. "Why get more people to a bottle- neck faster ?" Bannerman said. The initial phase of the EIS would cover the three -mile corridor in which County Road 21 is to be built and take about a year to com- plete, said Scott County Engineer Brad Larson. It is expected to cost about $55,000, said Jenny Ross, the project manager ofthe scoping phase ofthe EIS. In 1992, the County Board approved an alignment that extends the roadway north from its ending point at the intersection of County Road 42 in Prior Lake_ The county's plan is to extend the roadway north into Shakopee, and just after it crosses County Road 16 the roadway would curve to the east and eventu- ally hook up with County Road 18. From there, the road would turn north . and serve as an access to the Bloom- ington Ferry Bridge and Highway 169. Construction likely wouldn't commence for up to 10 years after completion of the EIS, Larson said_ Ross said the initial step looks at the range of alternatives and the vary- ing issues that should be studied during the second phase of the EIS. The second phase should take from 12 to 18 months before a draft EIS is ready for public comment. "The length of time will depend on the complexity of the issues to be stud- ied," Ross said. She said data used 10 years ago will be updated during the initial phase and an informational meeting will beheld, likely some- time.during the summer, for residents who may not be familiar with the background of the County Road 21 issue. Shakopee Mayor Bill Mars wants progress on the roadway to continue_ He said the Southbridge housing project was developed based on the county's stated intent of extending Co. Rd. 21 to Page 13 Michael Forbes, D_D.S. 144 5-1352 IL n Z I continued from Page 3 Lehman lives just east of the current corridor and wants the oak trees in the area saved from the impacts of construction as well as the daily use of the expanded roadway. After reviewing the rationale for the current corridor over a more easterly option, commissioners agreed to stick with the corridor that was selected in 1992. Commissioner Art Bannerman of Shakopee noted that switching the alignment to "the east would be far more expensive because of residential development that has taken place in the past decade. A more ..easterly alignment • . would also - bisect larj1 owned•byAhe ti YIVdA,oinmssone�Jori.;rii' : stressed the importance oftrymg td avoid taking the YMCA land. But moving the alignment any further west could place the corridor. into . land owned by the Shakopee Mde- wakanton Dakota Community.' Bannerman said that further con- sideration of an alternative' route would be "a waste of time." The current alignment only skirts . the western boundary of the YMCAs property. In 1996, the county also acquired about a half -mile of right - of -way for the future roadway along the southern boundary of the South- bridge housing development, Larson County Road 21. "They've put a lot of effort into that south [of County Road 421 into Prior Lake, but it doesn't connect to anything," Mars said. "The missing link is between 42 and [Highway] 169." The extension of County Road 21 is part of Prior Lake's transportation plan. Prior Lake Mayor Jack Haugen said he was not familiar enough with the issue and the history of the road- way to take a firm stand on the road- way. But as one of the three cities in the state's fastest - growing county, Haugen said the city sees the,: extended roadway as "an asset to the . community" in the future. But not everyone is pleased with the alignment the study will review. Last week, Prior Lake resident Linda Lehman asked the County Board to consider a different alignment for County Road 21 north from County Road 42. Lehman suggested County Road 21 be merged with westbound County Road 42 and then be built north to County Road 83, or extended to the northeast across farmland. She also suggested that traffic from east- bound County Road 21 be funneled on to County Road 82 so motorists could use County Road 17 as a north- bound route to Highway 169. D a.7 TL t oncontinued fr o activity, which has consumed the last year, was to write a new farm bill for the entire country. I believe that the presence of five of Minnesota's 10- member congressional delegation on the House and Senate Agriculture committees made abig difference in shaping this farm bill for the greater benefit of Minnesota. Gil Gutknecht, Collin Peterson and Mark Kennedy are on the House Agriculture Com- mittee, and Paul Wellstone and I are both on the Senate Committee. I don't have the space in this column to list all the benefits in this bill for Minnesota's agricul- tural economy. For more informa- tion, please visit my Web page htty' / /day nate.rz ton se v. Very briefly, although the loan rates are lower than in the Senate bill and much lower than in a proposal I offered last year, they are still higher than in current law. In addition, when combined with counter- cyclical assistance, Min- nesota farmers should be better off financially than they are now. Ad- ditionally, a producer will be able to receive up to 50 percent of the direct payments in the winter before they harvest their crop so that they can __ T...._,...a3oc mtt}lhr m Page 4 said. But Lehman contends that the planned route is environmentally inadvisable, saying that it will damage wetlands and woodlands, create too much noise for neighbor- ing homeowners and have a negative impact on farmland along the corri- dor. She said that'the county moving ahead with this alignment is "irre- sponsible" and that the county is not looking at the big picture for manag- ing traffic, especially for motorists heading north from the west side of the county. "It's totally myopic to the west side of the county," Lehman said- 11W e need to Iook at the big picture. if 'they only look at the one, alterna- tive, they have nothing to compare it against" Larson. said the roadway is needed in that area — a midpoint between County Road 83 and County Road 18. Scott County's 2020 Trans- portation Plan projects the expanded County Road 21 will serve between 1$,800 vehicles per day at its inter- section with County Road 42 and about 21,500 vehicles per day at its junction with County Road 18. "We really do have quite a gap between county roads 18 and 83," Larson said. on conservation. A new program, championed by Sen. Tom Harkin, D- Iowa,_ will encourage sound en- vironmental practices on working lands by providing incentive pay- ments to farmers. I am very disappointed that the Farm Bill lacks any disaster assis- tance, meaningful payment limits, and restrictions on packer livestock ownership. But while this legislation took way too long to complete, in balance, the additional money for Minnesota farmers and ag programs should be well worth the watt. Sen. Mark Dayton, D- Minn., is in his first term. percent of the difference between $16.94 and the Boston Class I price, for up to 2.4 million pounds .annu- ally. I was very pleased that the biodiesel fuel education program, which I championed in the Sen- ate, was funded at a mandatory $1 million dollars per year. it will complement two provisions I spon- sored which passed the Senate as part of the Energy Bill: A tax credit for biodiesel, and a requirement for all 600,000 federal vehicles to use biodiesel and ethanol. In addition, I welcome the in creased emphasis this bill places Member Chaska 120 Pic If y consi publi makc rates Be non] CORRIDOR CSAH 21 CSAH 42 to Shakopee Bypass l- e DATE DESCRIPTION November 1989 / The CSAH 21 extension between CSAH 42 and the Shakopee Bypass was Spring 1990 initially studied as part of the Scott County "County Road 18 Corridor Alternatives." This study started in November 1989, and was completed in late spring, 1990. 1991-1992 The selection of the preferred alignment (Alternate B) was the result of the Scott County "CSAH 18 and CSAH 21 Feasibility Study." This study was started in 1991 and completed in 1992. Alignment `B" was recommended and approved by the Scott County Board of Commissioners on May 26, 1992. F. A IMM "A INITIAL CONSTRUCTION FUTURE CONSTRUCTION SCOTT CO. HIGHWAY DEPT. FIGURE 11 STRGAR-ROSCOE-FAUSM INC RECD ED CONSTRUCTION SRF CONSuLTD;C, ENGINEERS COUNTY ROAD 18 STAGING STUDY I T - T- 7 0� Feet F 2000 o — Q: P 2000 I I ; TJi. 1011SHAKOPEE BYPASS CITY OF SHAKOPEE DEAN; LAKE? - -------------- i �. EAGLE CREEK I i STABLES ALTERNATIVE i II i i ALTERNATIVE B I ! ; - -� � .1 y' f i — C. S.A.H: 16 . Fj Et \1 , YM CAMP s C EU Y 1 I ( L} i [ f C ? PIKE LAKE'�� C/TY OF PRIOR LAKE i i C.S.A_FL 2, i t� C.S.A_H. 42 ( (' Id id ;ro 7 Feet 0� 0 2000' 2000' V --- - ------------ C 1993 CONSTRUCTION FUTURE CONSTRUCTION T.H. 101/SHAKOPEE BYPASS ----------------- CITY OFSHAKOPEE, — - --------------- ----------- bEAN LAKE 1 #-o 1 (47�GLI CREEK STABLE L- �� __ f ir -- q _ � = — =_ -_ �i I�� ! L 6 I i L-2,1 C.SJLH. 16 it ci.1- 4 CL- z , YMCA C-1.1 UJ,: I t N1- \ P �E IK CITY OF PRIOR LAKE 77 1 L— I SU Strgar-Roscoe-Fausch, Inc. Consulting Engineers SCOTT COUNTY C.S.A.H. 18 and C.S.A.H. 21 FEASIBILITY STUDY FIGURE 6 PROPOSED STAGING , ' CITY OF SHAKOPEE Memorandum TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Mark McNeill, City Administrator SUBJECT: Library Architectural Fees DATE: May 17, 2002 •1 •` The Council is asked to consider a proposal by BKV Architects for the Shakopee Library, to change the compensation for design and construction management from a percentage of project cost, to the equivalent of a "flat rate ". Last year, the City Council entered into a contract with BKV Architects for the design of the Shakopee Library. This was after a committee had reviewed qualifications, and interviewed a number of architectural firms. The Council accepted the recommendation to hire BKV, and to establish a compensation for design and basic construction management in the amount of 9% of the total construction cost of the Library building. It was later determined that BKV would also be the design architect for the police building; because of the two projects being done by the same firm, the City and BKV agreed to compensate in an amount of an 8% of total construction cost for the police building. On April 16 bids were opened for the Library. All of the bids received were far below the architect's estimate of $4.574 million. The low bid of Westra Construction, Inc., $3,470,000, reflected a very competitive bidding market, one that has not been seen in many years. While that is a true benefit to the City, it does leave BKV in a difficult situation. Their compensation had been based on a percentage of the contract amount, and had been anticipated (and budgeted by the City) to be $411,660 (9% of $4,574,000 architect's estimate). Instead, based on the low bid of Westra, total compensation would be nearly $100,000 less - $312,300. With the actual construction cost now known, BKV has billed nearly the entire amount to which it would be entitled under the contract, with construction not even started. BKV principal partner David Kroos sent the attached letter, dated May 16 In that, he expresses concern about the percentage reimbursement, and asks that the City Council consider a compromise. He asks that the architects fee remain as budgeted, recognizing the work that they have done. In exchange for that, BKV would assign Jon Rall as a Construction Manager and Owner's Representative in the field, which would more than double the normal construction phase activities on the project. Mr. Kroos also notes that the existing contract has had services above and beyond what had been originally anticipated in the scope of the project. For example, Project Manager John Sponsel spent more than 40 hours additional time reviewing bidder qualifications related to this project. In discussing this with Mr. Kroos, he indicates that the majority of the architectural industry has gone to a lump sum compensation, and the percentage base coming a thing of the past. The advantage of a lump sum is that it protects the architect (and the owner) from fluctuation on what the compensation is as a result of variations in the bid amount. It also removes any incentive for an architect to add expense to the project in order to increase compensation fees. Mr. Kroos emphasized that this has not been, nor never would be the case here. DISCUSSION: The City has a contract with BKV, and there is no obligation that the City has to accommodate the request. However, our recommendation would be to hire a construction administrator, which would need to be negotiated as an extra cost. How much of the approximately $100,000 at stake here is unknown. On the other hand, if the bid amounts came in significantly above the architects estimate, and the architect would realize a windfall, would the City be asking for lump sum reimbursement? It is likely that the City would look for ways to reduce the fees - if the project came in significantly above budget, the City would pare the project scope, or simply not build the building, meaning that compensation owed to the architect would be at the amount called for in the contract, and based on the architect's estimate. I believe that BKV has merit in their request, and the Council should consider the proposal. I have briefly discussed this with Councilor Link, who concurs that it may be a fair way to address the architect compensation issue. A representative of BKV will be in attendance to answer questions. 1 1 If the Council concurs, it should by motion, direct a modification of the contract with BKV to reflect a lump sum proposal based on $411,660 total This would also include the additional services of Construction Administrator and Owners Representative in the field, plus any work on necessitating additional attention by the architect during construction of the Library project. L(d Ii LA LU Mark McNeill City Administrator 6123396212 BKPU & ASSOCIATES 983 P02 MRY 16 1 02 12:51 G R O U P Architecture Interior Design Enginearing Boarman Kroos Vogel May 16, 2002 Group Inc. 222 North Second Street Mark McNeill, City Administrator Minneapolis, MN 55401 City of Shakopee 129 Holmes Street South Telephone 612.339.3762 . Facsimile: 612.339.6212 Shakopee, Minnesota 55379 www.bkvgroup.com EOE pear Mark Now that a and r t exp const uetion phase services s few issues to resolve regarding our expanded t h ere are our current compensation for the project The day we received bids on the library, we were all delighted and relieved that the project almost $900,000 under came in under budget What is remarkable is that the low bid was construction budget, ket. to as extremely com petitive arketplacce resulted n tremendous mar savings and value to the City of Shakopee. The dilemma the BKV Group faces under the current terms of our percentage agreement effort we have already invested in the project is that a significant amount of the time and will go a City r work effort and fairre resolution for both BKV e to a mutually move sation equitably and that we compensation eq y Group and the City of Shakopee. We therefore, propose that the architect's fee remain as budgeted and that we provide within that amount. This the expanded construction phase services the Ci ty requires Administrator and the Owner's proposal assigns Jon Rail as our Construction in the field, more than doubling his normal construction phase activities on Representative It would also include any additional work required by John Sponsel, Project the arise. project. Manager, or myself to resolve any construction or contractor issues that may Jon Rail's high profile presence during construction will give the Owner aggressive adherence to schedule and representation and set the tone for quality construction, and to minimize contractor related change orders. Jon will conduct manpower needs, weekly on site meetings to monitor progress and will also schedule pre - installation will serve to assure that the meetings on critical components of the project. His efforts that the City is only paying for building is constructed according to the documents and work that is completed and approved. We are hopeful that the City views this proposal as fair and acceptable. We look forward and the City of to continuing on with the construction phase of this project providing high level of service through its successful completion. Shakopee with a D J111 �V--�to � Minnesotans and their political leaders should consider seriously the $10 billion they can save over the next 20 years by encouraging the Twin Cities to grow in a more responsible, efficient manner. A recipe for those savings was of- fered last week by the Metropolitan council. The Flew plan springs not fr=om the paternalistic coercion that critics tend to associate with the council, but from the common sense of citizens themselves. Re- sponsible governments are obliged to engage the public, ponder the fu- ture and plan in ways that respect &e taxpayers' burden. In pursuing its new Blueprint. 2030, the council offers a truly con- servative approach, one that will not only save money (perhaps $250 a year for the average metro taxpay- er) but conserve farmland, preserve natural features, ease traffic conges- tion, lessen urban decay and, in the process, make Minneapolis -St Paul a- more attractive and competitive r$gion. Mounting traffic congestion makes it plain that the inner seven metro counties have reached a criti- cal point Either development con- tinues to spread outward in its cur- rent far -flung pattern — gobbling 2'85 square miles of rural land every decade and requiring even more driving — or it goes on a sensible diet With .the new approach, the same growth— about 580,000 peo- ple per decade — can be accommodated on half as much land. In essence, this dietary plan Pets the urban become more urban while conserving more pastoral countryside — 140 more square miles per decade. = Viewed from the air, then, a new Twin Cities would look less like two f ied eggs dropped into a pan with the whites spreading ever outward, apd more like a spider with legs of transit- oriented communities, separated by ample areas of far roomier development; in other words, it would offer something for everyone. This prescription didn't come from a bunch of dreamy -eyed planners but from hundreds of Minnesotans who turned out at workshops throughout the metro area over the past year. The process will continue into public hearings next fall. Using maps and Olor -coded chips, the workshops . challenged citizens to imagine 11ow growth in their communities should best be handled. The an- swer came loud - and clear: more variety on less land. Anticipating their own aging as vJell as the best interests of their children, people said they wanted more types of housing, less dri-, ving, more walking, more transit, easier access to nature, more jobs and shopping close to housing and a greater "community feel" to their suburbs. Not surprisingly, these desires match national surveys that are starting to make believers of lenders and home builders. The traditional nuclear family now constitutes only a quarter of current households. An aging popu- lation and an increasing impatience with long commutes is creating a market for communities that more closely resemble the streetcar neighborhoods of the early 20th century: bungalows, townhouses, corner stores, frequent parks and a grid of streets. Encouraging this change, however, is a huge challenge for the Twin Cities where ordi- nances often prevent traditional neighborhoods; where developers cling to the big -lot, autocentric for- mula of the 1950s; and where con- servative politicians ferociously oppose any investment in transit and, thus, any return to a more tra- ditional form. Still, the advantages of the new growth scenarios are so plain that it's Bard not to expect that one of two similar versions will be -adopt- ed. These scenarios double or triple the number of walkable neighbor- hoods foreseen under current plans, mostly by clustering housing and leaving lots of room for nature. They encourage up to triple the number of new homes in older neighborhoods. They double the number of new homes within two miles of jobs and within a half -mile of parks. They more than triple new homes located near transit lines. As a result, driving declines by more than 10 percent while the popula- tion rises, and air quality improves 'markedly. . Perhaps the best news involves . cost.. Savings in sewers and road- ways alone amount to as much as $6 billion over 20 years. Additional savings in school construction, health care, public safety and other government functions easily push the overall savings beyond $10 bil- lion, even with new and necessary transit investments. Met Council Chairman Ted Mondale and his staff have done remarkable, work, thanks, in part, to funding from the McKnight Foundation and the expertise of Calthorpe Associates, the nation's top regional planning consultants. Together with hundreds of citi- zens, they've made clear the criti- cal choice now facing the metro area: Either it settles for "more of the same," as traffic- choked At- lanta has so painfully experienced, or it demands a saner less- costly and more livable future.