HomeMy WebLinkAbout01/06/1981 LTENTATIVE AGENDA
REGULAR' SESSION SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA JANUARY 6, 1981
Mayor Harbeck presiding
1 ] Roll Call at 7 : 30 P.M.
2 ] Approval of Minutes of December 16, 1980
3 ] Communications :
a] Minnesota Building Movers Association re : placement of T.V. cables
b] N. S . P. re : the proposed 1989 Metro unit
c ] Craftmaster Homes , Inc . re : 4th Ave . watermain
4] Liaison Reports from Councilmembers :
a] Cncl . Colligan from the Fire Dep ' t . ; Jt . Seven Man Committee
and the Planning Commission
b] Cncl .Hullander
c ] Cncl .Lebens from the Community Services Board
d ] Cncl .Leroux from the Shakopee School Board
e] Cncl .Reinke from the Shakopee Public Utilities Commission
f ] Mayor Harbeck from Scott County Board of Commissioners
5 ] RECOGNITION BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF ANYONE PRESENT IN THE AUDIENCE
WHO DESIRES TO SPEAK ON ANY ITEM NOT ON THE AGENDA
6 ] Old Business :
a] Lease for copier - Res . No . 1766
b] VIP Sewer Interceptor
c ] 1980 Census Results
d] Farm Leases
aa] Res . 1756, lease w/Wm Hauer - tbld 12/16
bb] Res . 1757 , lease w/N. Theis - never offered
e ] Purchase of Land for Parking Lot - (Block 30, OSP)
f ] Sanitary Sewer in Main St . No . of 1st (Dorothy Egan sewer problem)
7 ] Planning Commission Recommendations :
8] Routine Resolutions and Ordinances :
a] Res . No . 1758 , Appointing A City Clerk and A Deputy City Clerk
b] Res . No . 1768 , Designating Official Depositories of City Funds
c ] Res . No . 1771 , Accepting Resignation of George W. Johnson
d] Res . No . 1770, Amending Res . No . 1521 Designating A Director and
An Alternate Director To The Suburban Police Recruitment System
e ] Res . No . 1777 , Restricting Use of the Basement in; the Pearson
Florist Building
f ] Res . No . 1769 , Setting Forth The Use of Park Fees
g] Res . No . 1772 , Amending Res . No . 1600, Establishing The Ad Hoc
Cable Communications Committee
h] Res . No . 1767 , Setting Garbage Fees
i ] Res . No. 1773, Final Approval of $490,000 I .R. Bonds for J & B
Enterprises
j] Res . No . 1774, Preliminary Approval of $9, 120,000 I .R. Bonds for
St . Francis Hospital
k] Res . No. 1775 , Preliminary Approval of $600,000 I .R. Bonds for
S & W Realty
9] New Business :
a] 8 : 15 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING - Proposed Assessment for Ed Siebenaler
Property
Res . No . 1779, Adopting Assessment for Ed Siebenaler Property
b] 8 : 30 P .M. PUBLIC HEARING - Vacation of drainage and utility
easement in Mn. Valley 3rd Addition
Res . No. 1780, Vacating Drainage and Utility Easements
c ] 8 : 35 P .M. - Consideration of applications for pool table licenses
for 1981
TENTATIVE AGENDA
January 6 , 1980
Page -2-
d] 8 :45 P.M. - Consideration of application for On Sale and Sunday
Intoxicating Liquor Licenses for Empire Vending & Music Co . , Inc .
e ] House of Hoy Inc . - Approval of new stockholder , W. J. Wilinski
f] Bingo and Gambling License Applications from American Legion
g] Designation of Official Newspaper
h] Authorize Payment for Tank for New Fire Truck
i ] Model Main Street Program
j ] Sale of Ambulance Leased to St . Francis Hospital
k] Contract for Electrical Inspection Services
1 ] Personnel - Assessing Department
m] Appointment to the Sewer Service Area Advisory Boards
n] Acquisition O' Dowd Lake Islands From Federal Government
o] East View Development
p] Comprehensive Development Plan
q] Appointments to Industrial and Commercial Development Commission
Z r] Election of An Acting Mayor
s ] Appointment to Planning Commission
10] Consent Business :
11 ] Other Business :
a] Liaison Appointments - Mayor Harbeck would like to discuss
b] Non-agenda and Informational Items - The Admr. would like to discuss
c ] Improvement of Bluff Avenue - Dakota to W line of Halo 1st
d]
e ]
12 ] Adjourn to Tuesday, January 20th at 7 : 30 P.M.
John K. Anderson
City Administrator
/
TENTATIVE AGENDA
SHAKOPEE HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
Annual Meeting January 6 , 1981
Chairman Hullander presiding
1 . Roll call at 7 :00 P .M .
2 . Approve minutes of November 5 , November 18 , November 24 ,
and December 2 , 1980.
3 . Elderly Highrise : status report .
4 . Fourth and Minnesota Neighborhood Revitalization Project
a . Closings under the 235 Homeownership Program
b . Selection of auditor
c . Landscaping
d . Release of contract
5 . Payment of bills
6 . Election of officers
7 . Other business
8 . Adjourn
Jeanne Andre
HRA Director
SHAKOPEE HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
REGULAR SESSION SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA NOVEMBER 5, 1980
Chrm. Hullander called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. with Comm. Lebens, Reinke
and Colligan present. Comm. LeRoux was absent. Also present were City Attorney
Julius Coller; Finance Director Gregg Voxland; Mayor Harbeck; City Engineer H. R.
Spurrier and HRA Director Jeanne Andre.
Colligan/Reinke moved to approve the minutes of October 7, 1980 as kept. Motion
carried unanimously.
The HRA Director presented alternatives for disposing of the property of Outlot B,
Macey Second Addition. It was recommended by the City Attorney that they let the
matter stand without action until after February 5, 1981. The HRA voiced general
agreement to deeding the land over to Mr. Werner.
The HRA Director presented several options regarding the movement of utility poles
in the plat oCMacey Second Addition. Discussion was held regarding the cost of
$9,225.00 to move the line and that these funds would be cut from other areas of
the budget. Therefore, it was recommended to postpone moving the poles and post-
pone development of Lot 3, Block 3 (and possibly Lot 4, Block 3) at the current
time until Outlot A is developed. A determination could then be made as to whether
the poles should be moved to tenefit development of all of these parcels.
The HRA Director presented a review of the program budget for 1973 CDBG. Comm.
Reinke asked if the final audit must be separate from the general HRA audit, and
was answered "yes." Chrm. Hullander asked if the sod and landscaping is only for
the lots which are developed, and was answered by the HRA Director that she would
like authorization to just do the lots that are developed now. Chrm. Hullander
requested staff to make sure there is enough black dirt available so all the lots
are pretty ready for landscaping.
Lebens/Reinke moved to authorize staff to procure sod and landscaping for lots in
Macey Second Addition to a maximum of $7,000.00.
Roll Call: Ayes; Unanimous Noes; None Motion carried.
The City Engineer presented the subject of the pedestrian crosswalk for the Senior
Citizens Highrise. Chrm. Hullander recommended having the State Department of
Transportation prepare plans and specifications for the pedestrian crossing.
Comm. Colligan and Reinke expressed concern that we should look further into the
purchase of property or condemnation proceedings for the approach to the crosswalk
to assure where the crossing will be located, and only after that commission the
plans and specifications for the crossing.
Claude Sinnen was present in the audience and stated he couldn't understand why a
crosswalk was wanted in the middle of the block. He stated there already was a
problem crossing at Fuller and Holmes. He was concerned that Fuller would be blocked
all the time, and also wanted information on whether or not parking would be allowed
on First Avenue in that block.
SHAKOPEE HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
- NOVEMBER 5, 1980
Page 2
Chrm. Hullander explained that the State would not allow a stop light and cross-
ing at Fuller and it was a State requirement that there be no parking on First
Avenue if the crosswalk was mid-block there. He then asked for further comments
from the audience regarding the proposed Senior Citizen Highrise crosswalk.
Several others in the audience expressed their dissatisfaction over the stipula-
tion that there be no parking on First Avenue.
Comm. Reinke asked if Lot 3 was purchased, if a parking lot could be made of the
excess which wouldn't be needed for the approach for the crosswalk. Chrm. Hullan-
der stated that no way could HRA provide parking. Comm. Reinke stated that they
had a responsibility to those whose parking is eliminated. Mr. Sinnen stated
that some of the homes there had no driveways.
Ms. Sinnen expressed her dissatisfaction with the lack of noti-
fication that the homeowners received regarding the regulations of the crosswalk.
She also stated she wished to be informed if the HRA has any plans regarding her
property, located next to the home they intend to buy. Pat O'Connor asked why
they had to have a crosswalk in the middle of the block.
Chrm. Hullander replied that the State would not allow them to put the crosswalk
at the intersection of Fuller and First because there wasn't enough room between
Fuller and the Holmes intersection. The City Engineer added that there was not
300 feet from the intersection of First and Holmes, and if the crosswalk was there
they would have to close Fuller to two-way traffic, not allowing exits from Fuller
to First. He stated he contacted three businesses which would be affected and
they stated that would interfere with their business too adversly, and so that
alternative was abandoned.
Pat O'Connor stated that it was working a hardship on the employees and customers
of the block to take away their parking.
Someone in the audience asked why the crosswalk could not be at Atwood.
Pat O'Connor requested a "Yield Right of Way to Pedestrians" sign.
Dave Dennison spoke from the audience as a landowner. He stated it was a bad
location for the highrise and that everyone should be notified of action, not just
businesses. He expressed his concern that the center island for the crosswalk
would cut off a lot of the highway and therefore the traffic, and especially the
semis, would be passing so close to the homes that it would just shake the houses.
Mayor Harbeck said his personal opinion is that the crosswalk in the center of
the block is the most dangerous situation there can be. It would be better to
make the residents of the highrise walk another half block than to cut off parking
for the people of the block. He would recommend more study before making a deci-
sion for the mid-block 'crossing.
Chrm. Hullander stated the crossing at the intersection of Fuller and First Avenue
is out. The study recommended the mid-block crossing as the next best alternative.
He asked the City Engineer if the State would sanction the crossing at Atwood since
it would not be coming directly from the Highrise.
The City Engineer stated it was rejected originally. The State traffic engineer
overlookedthe warrants at mid-block, but it was the only place they would. The
next thing to do would be to formally request waiver of specific guidelines the
State has to follow. Seldom is any variance made.
SHAKOPEE HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
• NOVEMBER 5, 1980
Page 3
Mayor Harbeck stated that he personally would be more than happy to speak to Mr.
Braun at the State Dept. of Transportation. Chrm. Hullander requested him to do so.
Chrm. Hullander recommended they table the matter until Mayor Harbeck can speak
to the people at the State concerning the Atwood Street crossing.
Mr. Dennison stated he would appreciate being notified of any information received.
He also asked about what happened to the idea of the overhead walkway,
Chrm. Hullander responded that it would cost in excess of $200,000.00, so it was
not financially feasible. He asked if the crosswalk was at the Atwood inter-
section, would parking still be eliminated on First Avenue. He directed the City
Engineer to research this and get back to them at the next meeting.
Mrs. Halgren spoke up stating that a real estate agency would not even take her
house for listing if there was no parking on First.
Chrm. Hullander requested the HRA Director to get the names and addresses of those
persons in the audience who were interested in being further informed of these
proceedin gs.
The HRA budget was presented by Gregg Voxland. He recommended that Jeanne Andre's
entire salary be picked up by HRA for budget purposes. Time keeping would still
be done by staff and the funds would be charged from the applicable budgets and
departments.
Lebens/Colligan offered Resolution No. 80-23, a Resolution Adopting a Tentative
General Fund Budget for 1981 and moved its adoption.
Roll Call: Ayes; Unanimous Noes; None Motion carried.
Colligan/Lebens moved to authorize the payment of $4.90 to Miller Davis for legal
forms, and the payment of $1448.00 to the Shakopee Public Utilities Commission
for installation of underground electrical service in Macey Second Addition.
Roll Call: Ayes; Unanimous Noes; None Motion carried.
HRA Director stated she had received a call from Goodwin Builders questioning
whether or not they should build the fourth unit for the Fourth and Minnesota
project. Goodwin Builders have stated they do not want to build the unit and
have it vacant for 6 months or until the project would be reinstated. They,
however, would be willing to build the fourth unit and hold it for a one month
time period after its completion.
Reinke/Colligan moved to wait unit funding is once again available for additional
units to be built for the Fourth and Minnesota Project. Motion carried unani-
mously.
Chrm. Hullander directed HRA Director to present to the HRA at the next meeting
any bills that are pre-committed to Goodwin Builders. This might include the
FHA appraisal costs.
Colligan/Reinke moved to adjourn. Motion carried unanimously. Meeting adjourned
at 8:15 p.m.
Jeanne Andre
HRA Director
Diane S. Beuch Jane Wostrel
Recording Secretary Editing Secretary
PROCEEDINGS OF THE SHAKOPEE
HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
SACIAL SESSION SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA NOVEMBER 18, 1980
Chrm. Hullander called the meeting to order at 7:05 p.m. with Comm. Reinke, Lebens
and Colligan present. Comm. Leroux was absent. Also present were HRA Director
Jeanne Andre; Assistant City Attorney, Rod Krass; .:ayor tiarbeck;City Engineer,
H.R. Spurrier and Acting City Administrator Tom Brownell.
Colligan/Reinke moved to accept the special meeting call. Motion carried unanimously.
Colligan/Reinke moved to approve the minutes of the Adjourned Regular Session of
October 14, 1980 as kept. Motion carried unanimously.
Chrm. Hullander reported on a discussion he had had with Gary Goodwin on construc-
tion of a fourth duplex on Lots 1 and 2, Block 3 of Macey Second Addition. He
summarized that at the last meeting we stated we would go along with whatever the
contract stated in terms of the time Goodwin would be required to hold the lot
before the HRA would take it over.
Gary Goodwin spoke up from the audience stating that he just didn't know if he should
go ahead with the construction or not. Would any other financing be available for
sale of the units if the 235 funds are still frozen.
The HRA Director said she had asked HUD if the unit could be sold on the open mar-
ket if we built it and 235 financing was not available, but she hasn't received
an answer. They should make a determination by the end of December.
Comm. Reinke asked if we are in a position with HRA funding to assume ownership of
the unit until it is taken care of through 235? The Director answered it would take
all our money, but we probably could do it.
Comm. Reinke asked if we changed the time limit from 6 months to 90 days, would
that be a practical solution? The HRA Director will check on the exact amount of
funds, and report back. Gary Goodwin will check with his subcontractors if that
would be satisfactory.
The problems of grading and fill on the lots was discussed, with Gary Goodwin stat-
ing that it was his understanding the city would provide fill and after repeated
requests, he finally got some, but needs approximately 500-600 yards more, both
fill and black dirt.
The City Engineer stated that they shot the elevation of rear of lot and foundation,
and based on the recommended elevation for garage slab, they are slightly higher
than recommended. That, coupled with the position of the swale, and not much exca-
vation on the site to generate fill, the site is requiring more fill than originally
anticipated.
SHAKOPEE HRA
November 18, 1980
Page 2
Chrm. Hullander asked if we could set a time limit on the delivery of the fill.
The City Engineer stated he wanted to give the original contractor an opportunity
to earn matey for moving the dirt, but apparently the contractor doesn't want to
move it, therefore we will take the money withheld for this work and have our own
forces do it.
The HRA Director stated the contractor was contacted about it and he said he would
move the dirt last Friday or Saturday.
Comm. Reinke stated the contractor called him and was concerned with the money being
withheld when he thought he had completed the contract. Last year when his equip-
ment was on the job he wanted to do it, but was told not to. Now it will cost him
more money to do the same job.
The City Engineer replied that he realized that, and that is why they now expect
him to spread only a fraction of the amount of dirt.
Chrm. Hullander stated the staff has been in touch with him weeks ago about the
dirt moving and it seems he just doesn't want to do it. If the job
isn't done by this Friday noon, our staff will do it in the afternoon.
Lebens/Colligan moved to authorize the appropriate HRA officials to make, execute
and deliver a deed to Lot 3, Block 2, Macey Second Addition to Joseph M. Miller
Development, Inc. in accordance with a contract for deed between Joseph M. Mille'
Development, Inc. and the Shakopee Housing and Redevelopment Authority for the
purpose of conveying said property to authorized buyer identified by the HRA.
Roll Call: Ayes; Unanimous Noes; None Motion carried.
Colligan/Lebens moved to authorize appropriate HRA officials to make, execute and
deliver a deed to Lot 4, Block 2, Macey Second Addition to Joseph M. filler Develop-
ment, Inc. in accordance with contract for deed between Joseph M. Miller Develop-
ment, Inc. and the Shakopee Housing and Redevelopment Authority, for the purpose
of conveying said property to authorized buyer identified by the HRA.
Roll Call: Ayes; Unaninous Noes; None Motion carried.
Mayor Harbeck reported on his meeting with Minnesota Department of Transportation
regarding the crossing for the Senior Citizen's Highrise. He said Commissioner
Braun could see no problem with having signalization at Atwood and First and the
traffic engineer would get back to him. The traffic engineer did have some ques-
tions about it, so Mayor Harbeck got in touch with the Fifth District Engineer,
Mr. William Crawford, and he said he saw no problem with warrants.
In response to questions from the audience, Mayor. Harbeck stated there would be no
center island at that crossing and there would be no problem with parking on First.
Mayor Harbeck said the sidewalk on Atwood and down Levee Drive would have to be a
part of the project, and the Commissioners should decide where and how much side-
walk is going in.
SHAKOPEE HRA
November 18, 1980
Page 3
A discussion was held regarding the parking spaces for the highrise residents and
parking spaces in the municipal lot, and the possibility of issuing stickers.
Mayor Harbeck suggested that each resident receive one sticker, and that they would
not include trailers, etc. , and also that after 2-3 months the parking spaces should
be checked to be sure they are being utilized. And also that the stickers would be
good for 24 hours, but during the winter the vehicles would have to be moved for
snow plowing.
Colligan/Lebens moved to authorize payment of the following bills:
$ 30.00 to VanKlug and Associates, for September professional services for
relocation elderly highrise tax-increment district
135.00 to Tom Siebenaler Sodding and Excavating, for sod for 467 - 469
Minnesota Street
1.40 to Scott County Recorder, for copies of Macey Second Addition I
Covenants
25.00 to Jeanne Andre, for attendance at a workshop on Housing and
Community Development
Colligan/Lebens moved to refund $475.00 to Joseph M. Miller Construction, Inc. for
the cost of a $95,000 bond for constructions at 467 and 469 Minnesota Street, cost
to be added on to the cost of the homes at closing. Motion carried unanimously.
Colligan/Lebens moved to adjourn. Meeting adjourned at 8:00 p.m.
Jeanne Andre
HRA Director
Diane S. Beuch
Recording Secretary
1
3
OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS OF HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA
SPECIAL SESSION NOVEMBER 24 , 1980
Chrm . Hullander called the meeting to order at 5 : 30 P .M. with
Commissioners Lebens , Colligan , and Reinke present . Comm. Leroux
arrived late . Also present were Mayor Harbeck, HRA Director Jeanne
Andre , Ass ' t . City Attorney Rod Krass , Acting Admr . Tom Brownell
and Finance Director Gregg Voxland .
Chrm. Hullander reported on letters received from U .S . Senator Dave
Durenberger and U.S . Representative Tom Hagedorn in response to
Shakopee ' s concern over the freeze on funds for the 235 Homeownership
Program .
Chrm . Hullander introduced Linda Henning from the local HUD office
who explained her job and the current status of the freeze on funds
for the 235 Homeownership Program.
Comm . Leroux entered and took his seat at 5 : 33 P .M .
Discussion ensued on the current dilemma in which the HRA is under
contract with Mr . Goodwin of Goodwin Builders to build a two family
dwelling , but the freeze on 235 funds makes it impossible for the
two prospective owners to purchase the homes . Mr . Goodwin is asking
the HRA to rewrite the contract so that the HRA would guarantee to
purchase the homes within three months , if the homes are not sold
under the low and moderate income requirements .
Ms . Henning assured the Commission that if the freeze is not lifted ,
her office would allow the HRA to sell the homes on the open market ,
and that she would send a letter so stating to our HRA Director .
Members of the Commission concurred to rewrite and enter into a new
contract with Goodwin Builders which would allow the two homes to
be sold on the open market , if the 235 program is not reinstated .
Lebens/Leroux moved that staff be directed to draft a proposed con-
tract for Goodwin Builders for the Commission ' s consideration at the
next meeting for Lots 1 & 2 , Block 3 , Macey 2nd Addition . Motion
carried unanimously .
The HRA Director reported that the City Public Works Dept . had dumped
20 loads of dirt on the Goodwin site (Lots 5 through 10, Block 2 ,
Macey 2nd Addition) last Friday and that Mr . Goodwin is requesting
more dirt . Discussion followed .
Leroux/Reinke moved that the HRA hereby requests the City to move
30 single axle truck loads of dirt across the street . Motion carried
unanimously .
The HRA Director reported that the ceiling mounted hood bid for the
congregate dining kitchen will not fit because there is insufficient
room in which to hang the hood and explained that there would be an
additional cost to change the order to a back-mounted hood .
Official Proceedings of Housing and
Redevelopment Authority
Page -2- November 24, 1980
The HRA Director was directed to contact the successful bidder and
instruct him to design a ceiling mounted hood that will fit and
conform to his bid , with the assistance of the design engineers
for the building , who have indicated that a ceiling mounted hood
can be installed .
Leroux/Colligan moved to adjourn at 6 :44 P .M .
Jeanne Andre
HRA Director
Judith S . Cox
Recording Secretary
a
PROCEEDINGS OF THE SHAKOPEE
HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
REGULAR SESSION SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA DECEMBER 2, 1980
Chrm. Hullander called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. Present were Comm.
Colligan, Lebens, Reinke and Leroux. Also present were the MRA Director, Jeanne
Andre; Finance Director Gregg Voxland; City Attorney Julius Coller; Acting City
Administrator Tom Brownell and City Engineer H. R. Spurrier.
Chrm. Hullander read the letter received from Minnesota Department of Transporta-
tion regarding the pedestrian signal system for the senior citizen's highrise . He
noted that the Highway Department will waive at this time the requirement that we
have an easement for a walkway to the crossing. He was concerned with the require-
ment of the parking restrictions for the proposed mid-block crossing, restricting
parking for 1/2 block in front of and 20 feet past the crossing.
The Commissioners were brought up to date on the communications which had occurred
since the last meeting, at which time it appeared the crossing at Atwood would be
approved. Apparently the MDOT staff would not go along with Mr. Braun's recommenda-
tions about Atwood. This is absolutely the best we can get out of MDOT.
A lengihly discussion ensued by Commissioners and audience about the rationale and
alternatives of this decision. The HRA Director pointed out that there were 8 dif-
ferent warrants to be met to have a signal, and we could not meet them at Atwood,
basically because there is not enough vehicular traffic. The minimum is 80 vehicles
per hour within an 8 hour period, and we have about 60.
Claude Sinnen from the audience stated he just could not understand having a mid-
block crossing, as the traffic was not going to stop for it. In his extensive tra-
vels, he has not seen a mid-block crossing.
Dr. warren Hallgren asked for clarification on the reason they would approve a mid-
block crossing. The HRA Director answered that it didn't need any warrants as it
controlled only pedestrians, not vehicles.
Lucy Rein expressed her concern about the restriction on parking before the cross-
walk, when there is no restriction on parking further down.
MaryLou O'Connor wanted clarification on the other warrants. The City Engineer
answered with a list of the warrants, none of which will be met at the intersection
of Atwood and First Avenue. The mid-block crossing is permitted because the
pedestrians have the right-of-way anyway, and they are not restricting traffic
anymore than it would be without a signal.
Claude Sinnen asked if it would be possible to go to the Legislature to get an
exception. It was replied it would be possible.
The Commissioners each stated their current position on the issue.
Comm. Reinke said if the choice is to accept this offer from MDOT or do nothing,
lets do nothing on this crossing and expedite the construction on Levee Drive.
SHAKOPEE HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
DECEMBER 2, 1980
Page 2
Comm. Leroux stated he would not feel comfortable with a mid-block crossing, but
still recognizes the need for a signal for the handicapped and those who need more
time for crossing.
Comm. Colligan said he couldn't see the mid-block crossing. He thought we should
pursue public transportation to move people. He would rather delay this crossing
and research it more. Comm. Lebens concurred.
Chrm. Hullander suggested we contact Rees and Schmidt and have them go to the Legis-
lature asking for a crossing at Atwood or Fuller and get crossing by Legislative
action, and at the same time pursue public transportation and construction of Levee
Drive.
Hullander/Lebens moved to table any action on mid-block or any crossing on First
Avenue with exception of encouraging our Legislators to pass a special bill for
Shakopee. Motion carried unanimously.
The HRA Director informed the Commissioners that the community room and kitchen
were supposed to be finished by December 1, 1980, but are not. Therefore, it is
unlikely there will be an open house before Christmas. '
Leroux/Colligan moved to authorize appropriate HRA officials to make, execute and
deliver a deed to Lot 7, Block 2, Macey Second Addition, subject to inspection and
approval by staff of improvements constructed therein, to Goodwin Builders, Inc.
This action to be in accordance with contract for deed between Goodwin Builders,
Inc. and the Shakopee Housing and Redevelopment Authority, for the purpose of con-
veying said property to authorized buyer identified by HRA.
Roll Call: Ayes; Unanimous Noes; None Motion carried.
Colligan/Leroux moved to authorize appropriate HRA officials to make, execute and
deliver a deed to Lot 8, Block 2, Macey Second Addition, subject to inspection and
•
approval by staff of improvements constructed therein, to Goodwin Builders, Inc.
This action to be in accordance with contract for deed between Goodwin Builders,
Inc. and the Shakopee Housing and Redevelopment Authority, for the purpose of con-
veying said property to authorized buyer identified by HRA.
Roll Call: Ayes; Unanimous Noes; None Motion carried.
Lebens/Colligan moved to authorize appropriate HRA officials to make, execute and
deliver a deed to Lot 9, Block 2, Macey Second Addition, subject to inspection and
approval by staff of improvements constructed therein, to Goodwin Builders, Inc.
This action to be in accordance with contract for deed between Goodwin Builders,
Inc. and the Shakopee Housing and Redevelopment Authority, for the purpose of con-
veying said property to authorized buyer identified by HRA.
Roll Call: Ayes; Unanimous Noes; None motion carried.
Colligan/Leroux moved to authorize appropriate HRA officials to make, execute and
deliver a deed to Lot 10, Block 2, Macey Second Addition, subject to inspection and
approval by staff of improvements constructed therein to Goodwin Builders, Inc.
This action to be in accordance with contract for deed between Goodwin Builders, Inc.
and the Shakopee Housing and Redevelopment Authority, for the purpose of conveying
said property to authorized buyer identified by HRA.
Roll Call: Ayes; Unanimous Noes; None Motion carried.
SHAKOPEE HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
DECEMBER 2, 1980
Page 3
Leroux/Colligan moved to authorize appropriate HRA officials to grant an easement
to Eldon and Muriel Barnard in Lot 7, Block 2, Macey Second Addition for the right
to dig, install, maintain, repair, use, enlarge, modify and service installations
installed therein, for the benefit of Lot 8, Block 2, Macey Second Addition.
Roll Call: Ayes; Unanimous Noes; None Motion carried.
Colligan/Lebens moved to authorize appropriate HRA officials to grant an easement
to Scott and Judith Gratz in Lot 10, Block 2, Macey Second Addition for the right
to dig, install, maintain, repair, use, enlarge, modify and service installations
installed therein for the benefit of Lot 9, Block 2, Macey Second Addition.
Roll Call: Ayes; Unanimous Noes; None Motion carried.
A letter from Senator Rudy Boschwitz regarding the HUD Section 235 funding was
briefly commented and acknowledged.
The HRA Director informed the Commissioners that Gary Goddwin does not want to
proceed under the conditions outlined at the last meeting regarding the Section
235 construction, therefore the Ass't City Attorney suggested we cancel the contract.
Colligan/Lebens moved to direct the legal staff to draw up a release of contract
with Goodwin Builders, Inc. and Miller Construction. Motion carried unanimously.
Leroux/Le,bens moved to authorize the payment of bills as presented, which are:
$ 67.79 to Von Klug and Associates for relocation services for the elderly
highrise tax-i.ncremenL district
426.00 to Suburban Engineering for mortgage loan surveys and certificates,
Lots 3,4,5,6,7,8,9 & 10, Block 2, 1:acey Second Addition
291.09 to Richard Hullander for expenses re National NAHRO conference, July 1980
25.00 to Minnesota HAHRO for individual membership for Jeanne Andre
Roll Call: Ayes; Lebens, Reinke, Leroux Noes; Colligan Abstain; Hullander
Motion carried.
Colligan/Lebens moved to adjourn. Motion carried unanimously. Meeting adjourned
at 7:50 p.m.
Jeanne Andre
Executive HRA Director
Diane S. Beuch
Recording Secretary
MEMO TO : Members of the Shakopee Housing and Redevelopment
Authority (HRA)
FROM: Jeanne Andre , Executive Director
RE : Payment of Bill to Barton-Aschman Associates , Inc .
DATE : December 22 , 1980
Introduction
The HRA hired Barton-Aschman Associates to conduct a study of
the pedestrian crossing for the new elderly highrise in Shakopee .
This work has now been billed to the HRA .
Background
The original quote from Barton-Aschman for their work on the
pedestrian crossing was worded as follows : "Based upon our
experience in studies of this type , we estimate that the above
stated listing of work tasks can be completed for a cost of
$1 ,000.00. We would not exceed that cost without receiving
prior authorization from you . " The firm has successfully
completed the project and has billed the HRA $1 ,443 . 78 . The
explanation for this higher bill is that "additional expendi-
tures were necessitated to complete the study within the one-
week time allocated to complete the project . " Mr . Mullen
(Vice President) explained that their computer system only
provides labor data every two weeks . Since this job was
completed in a one-week period , the job was over before the
data informed them of the projected overrun . He did also
indicate that they would abide by the contract terms for a
$1000.00 fee if so authorized by the HRA. Their intent was
to keep the HRA informed of the actual cost and accept the
terms under which the HRA chooses to proceed .
Alternatives
The alternatives are payment of the original contracted amount
of $1 ,000.00, the invoice amount of $1 ,443 . 78 , or some amount
between these two figures .
Recommendation and Suggested Action
I recommend that the HRA authorize payment of the original
contracted amount of $1 ,000 .00 to Barton-Aschman Associates
for consultant services for a study of the pedestrian crossing
for the new elderly highrise , funds to come from the tax-
increment protect for the highrise . I make this recommendation
because the original proposal indicated that Barton-Aschman
could produce a report four days after authorization by the HRA .
Therefore the terms requested by the HRA (provision of a report
within five days) did not change the terms of the original proposal .
Cost overruns can be assumed to come from an estimating error by
Barton-Aschman rather than by any change in terms introduced by
the HRA.
JA/jms
//(2/
MEMO TO : Members of the Shakopee Housing and Redevelopment
Authority (HRA)
FROM: Jeanne Andre , Executive Director
RE : Closings Under the 235 Homeownership Program
Fourth and Minnesota Neighborhood Revitalization Project
DATE : December 31 , 1980
Goodwin Builders expects to be ready to close on the two units
still under construction in Macey Second Addition at the end of
January. The units are :
Lot 5 , Block 2 , to be purchased by Jay and Penny Skare ,
if funds are released for 235 financing .
Lot 6 , Block 2 , to be purchased by John and Cynthia Bollig.
The units are not yet complete , but will be before staff
arranges for the execution of the deeds . In addition it may be
necessary for the HRA to grant an easement to provide the owners
of one of the lots access to their individual water and sewer
services .
The following motions should be adopted by the HRA to prepare
for the closings :
1 . Authorize appropriate HRA officials to make , execute and
deliver deed to Lot 5 , Block 2 , Macey Second Addition ,
subject to inspection and approval by staff of improvements
constructed therein, to Goodwin Builders , Inc . This action
to be in accordance with contract for deed between Goodwin
Builders , Inc . and the Shakopee Housing and Redevelopment
Authority, for the purpose of conveying said property to
authorized buyer identified by HRA.
2 . Authorize appropriate HRA officials to make , execute and
deliver deed to Lot 6 , Block 2 , Macey Second Addition ,
subject to inspection and approval by staff of improvements
constructed therein, to Goodwin Builders , Inc . This action
to be in accordance with contract for deed between Goodwin
Builders , Inc . and the Shakopee Housing and Redevelopment
Authority , for the purpose of conveying said property to
authorized buyer identified by HRA.
3 . Authorize appropriate HRA officials to grant an easement to
Jay and Penny Skare in Lot 6 , Block 2 , Macey Second Addition
for the right to dig, install , maintain, repair , use , enlarge ,
modify, and service installations installed therein , for the
benefit of Lot 5 , Block 2 , Macey Second Addition .
JA/jms
2/ Z5
MEMO TO : Members of the Shakopee Housing and Redevelopment
Authority (HRA)
FROM : Jeanne Andre , Executive Director
RE : Selection of Auditor for 1978 Community Development
Block Grant
DATE : December 22 , 1980
Introduction
Staff have solicited proposals for the audit of the 1978 Community
Development Block Grant (Fourth and Minnesota Neighborhood Revitali-
zation Project) .
Background
The Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) requires an
audit of all block grants after two years or at the close of the
project , whichever comes first . Staff requested proposals from
three auditors . Two of the auditors declined to present proposals ,
Jerome Jaspers & Company submitted a proposal to perform the work
at a cost of $3 ,000 to $3 , 600 , "provided that all requirements
have been adhered to and the necessary data will be available for
the examination . "
The City Finance Director has informed me that not many firms are
willing or experienced in performing compliance audits as required
by HUD . Based on his experience with quotes for City audit work,
Jerome Jaspers is competitive and qualified to do the work.
Alternatives
The HRA can accept the audit proposal of Jerome Jaspers and Company
or solicit further quotations .
Recommendation and Suggested Action
The HRA authorize the selection of Jerome Jaspers to perform the
audit for the 1978 Community Development Block Grant , at a cost
not to exceed $3 , 600 .00 without prior authorization .
JA/jms
MEMO TO : Members of the Shakopee Housing and Redevelopment
Authority (HRA)
FROM: Jeanne Andre , Executive Director
RE : Landscaping for Fourth and Minnesota Neighborhood
Revitalization Project
DATE : December 19 , 1980
Introduction
At its November 5 , 1980 meeting , the HRA authorized staff to
provide up to $7 ,000.00 in landscaping for the Fourth and
Minnesota Neighborhood Revitalization Project . Due to several
problems which have since ensued , this issue must be discussed
once more by the HRA.
Background
A condition of final subdivision approval by FHA for Macey
Second Addition was the provision of one boulevard tree for
each lot . As the HUD Community Development Block Grant Repre-
sentative had already suggested landscaping as an eligible
project cost , the HRA Executive Director assured FHA subdivisions
that the trees would be provided . With HRA approval quotes
were solicited for the provision of trees and shrubbery for
the lots under construction the fall of 1980 . However land-
scaping is only an eligible cost prior to transfer of the prop-
erty into private hands . Final fill and grading for most of
the lots came just as the ground froze , therefore the land-
scaping planned for lots 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 and 10, Block
2 Macey Second Addition could not be installed prior to transfer
to the buyers . Now the HRA must determine if landscaping for
these lots should still be undertaken , and how the FHA subdivision
for boulevard trees will be met .
Quotes for landscaping were provided by Minnesota Valley Land-
scaping and Al ' s Landscaping and Nursery . The quote of S1 , 749 . 35
by Al ' s Landscaping was accepted and Mr. Landowski was waiting
for the final grading for installation of the trees and shrubbery .
Since Mr . Landowski was unable to install the landscaping in the
fall of 1980, he has asked to postpone the work, at the same price ,
until the spring of 1981 . I do not want to accept this proposal
without a determination of how payment for this work will be made .
Alternatives
Alternatives to be considered include both the extent of land-
scaping to be undertaken and the manner in which it will be paid .
A. Extent of Landscaping
1 . Do no landscaping.
2 . Provide only boulevard trees ( S449 . 75 from Al ' s Landscaping) .
3 . Provide $1 , 749 . 35 in landscaping proposed by Al ' s Land-
scaping) .
B . Payment for Landscaping
1 . The HRA can pay for whatever landscaping is undertaken
with monies from the General Fund .
2 . The HRA can try and find other eligible project costs
budgeted from the general fund to submit for block grant
reimbursement (eg . NAHRO conferences and membership) as
an alternative to the landscaping costs .
Recommendation
The HRA authorize the full package of landscaping proposed by Al ' s
Landscaping to be undertaken , with payment to be made from the HRA
General Fund . To the extent possible , compensating eligible project
costs budgeted to the General Fund will be charged to the project .
JA/jms
so 34t, >
7- Honorable Shakopee Council: 4831 Ridge Road DEC 2 4 1980
�- A. .. . Mtka,Mn,55343
Dec 9, 1980. CITY OF $HAKOFEE
I am writing in behalf of the Minnesota Building Movers Association
concerning the proposed T. V. Cable franchise that has been under
consideration by the cities at the present time.
Our industry is constantly being frustrated by the addition of
signals, overhead crosswalks, bridges, overhead signing and
freeways obstructing the few routes we have left to get about in
the cities.
For many years we have looked forward, with great anticipation,
to the day w''ien all utility wires would be placed underground.
These wires have been an eye sore from an esthetic point of view,
as well as an enormous obstruction in the movement of large loads
about in the cities.
We understand the T.V. franchise people are now planning to
put their wires overhead on poles already loaded with power and
telephone cables, adding additional difficulty and expense to all
truckers hauling large or bulky loads under these wires.
A lot of construction is built in factories now and hauled in
large sections by truck to sites. Houses and commercial buildings
are being saved and relocated.
That the people in the trucking industry feel is necessary is
2L4 feet of height clearance over the streets and highways to make
this trucking practical.
The power and telephone companies have gone through an enormous
amount of planning and expense to go underground and we feel putting
T.V. cables above ground is purely short term and profi' motivated
for installers, but a step in the wrong direction for the city.
Please do keep us informed as the matter progresses and thank you
for any consideration you may be able to give us when considering this
type of installation in your area.
Yours very truly,
''net Ernst
President
MINNESOTA BUILDING MOVERS ASSOCIATION
KRE/aaw
313
xsp
NORTHERN STATES POWER COMPANY
NORMAN DALE DIVISION
5309 WEST 70TH STREET
EDINA, MINNESOTA 55435
December 17, 1980
Dear Landowner:
You may remember receiving a letter from us in November 1979 in-
forming you about our study of eight sites in the Metro area as
possible locations for a proposed 200 Megawatt (MW) cogeneration
power plant to begin service in 1989. At that time, we pledged
to keep you informed about the study as your property is either
within or near one of the possible sites. Our reason for sending
this letter is to make sure that each of you is fully aware of
some recent changes in our plans for this plant that were announced
publicly in September.
In September, NSP revised its 15 year forecast of energy needs
and plans for new generating units. Because we are predicting
reduced growth in electrical demand during this period, we have
changed our schedule for the proposed 1989 Metro unit. Our latest
estimate is that the 200-MW plant will not be needed until some-
time in the 1990 ' s.
We would like you to know that as a result, NSP has delayed fur-
ther study of the possible sites. We anticipate resuming the
study at a later date and will continue to explore the feasibility
of district heating/cogeneration in the Twin Cities area .
Because our long term energy future is uncertain, we cannot pro-
vide you with a specific date for the proposed Metro unit. NSP
is continuously reviewing electrical supply and demand data and
will revise its 15-year forecast and plans for new plants each
year.
We will be sure to keep you informed of any further changes in
plans for the Metro siting study. If you have questions or con-
cerns feel free to call Stuart Fraser at 941-2992 and we will try
to help you.
Thank you for your cooperation and understanding.
Sincerely, y�,,
l
John H. Mertz
General Manager
SEF:njk
Business: 445-1011 vQ.
eliaktifta41e4 c ®4lyt.Pil, .901C0
Ted Jasper 1117 Harrison Street Shakopee, Minnesota
December 22, 1980
Mayor `falter Harbeck. Lit:{' '�
Council Members.
City of Shakopee. (^.`.,-•. , `' C. .. .:.s 'K :
Shakopee, Minnesota 55379
Dear Mayor and Council Members;
A numberof the owners of property in block one ilacey Plat are at odds with the
city on the method and lack of fairness you used in leveing the assessments on the
water main loop connecting Dakota and Minnesota streets.
Considering the Minnesota St. boondogel where you are developing lots that will
cost two to three times the present sale price of lots in the city of Shakopee, and as
I understand give them to the buyers of the homes you are building on the lots, you
take a rather tight fisted approache in sharein : the cost of the cross loop.
There may be a diffrence of openion with Mr. Sperrier on what is a fair share of
the loop cost but I was not I was not involved with him on the easement grant. I was
specific in my talk with Jean Andrae that I would sign the easement only if the city s
Minnesota St. project would pay half the cost of the loop and the loop only, any other
connections the city planned to make were not part of the agreement. She stated that
the city would share half the cost and on this basis I sided the easement.
When the city built the public service building the engineering department asked
my permission to drill test holes in block two of the :'Macey Plat, now block one
Clifton Addition. I granted permission to do the drilling and after the tests were made
it was determined there would be a consideral saving by installing the water service
through my property. I was asked for and promptly granted an easement to install the
water line. It seams now that with one of the largest buildings on the line chooses to
take a free ride on this property also. ,'fir. Spurrier pointed out that the city paid
there part by makeing other connections. That had no bearing on the loop. iie paid the
total cost of bringing the line from fourth Ave. and extending it to the east side of
Dakota st. The city did not share in this cost only the cost of extending it from the
end of our line to the new building.
Block two of Clifton should also have been included in this assessment district.
This is the only water line in the close service area of the lot.`i'hen we installed the
water and sewer service in the Macey Plat we laid a four inch line to the east side of
Dakota St. just north of the hydrandt on the north east corner of lot 5 block one.
This will provide the most econimical water service to this block. For some reason
for which Mr. Sperrier can!t give a sound reason this lot was not included in the
assessment area.The loop line was installed because by his determination the line in
Dakota St. was inadeouate for fire protection, this provides a hydrandt on the west
side of the lot as well as on the east side on the public works line.
I am writing this letter primarily in behalf of the owners of the Macey Manor
Condominiums. They are very upset not so much by the cost of the assessment amount
but by what they consider the unfair and shabby manor the city used in handeling this
project from start to finish.
Sincerely
cc. Harold Schroers Macey Tenor
R. C. Christensen
�r/? !/'�:!`''�,t�'�'f�'' `" �.yf-'lits,V --,..4.v'i' --(4, ..„.
,9'4_.r � rir.?t,.. c:\.
iGf
cc' 4Lil
MEMO TO : John K. Anderson , City Administrator
FROM : Gregg Voxland , Finance Director
RE : Lease for Copier
DATE : December 19 , 1980
Introduction
The lease on our present copier expires February 15 , 1981 . This
machine is a important part of the operation of City Hall .
Background
Various copiers were evaluated last year at this time . The Savin
600 was determined to be the most cost effective and the best
suited to our needs . Council declined any type of a lease/purchase
or purchase arrangement but opted instead for a one year lease .
That lease will expire February 15 , 1981 .
There is interest from several departments for a copier that will
reduce . There is presently not a machine on the market that has
all the features of our present machine and has reduction at a
reasonable price . I expect to do a more comprehensive review of
copiers next fall and expect there to be new products which will
have all desired features at a more reasonable cost .
The cost of copier rental is expected to be over $5 ,000 for 1981 .
Therefore quotations are required . The Sharp 450 was considered
but is physically too large . The Xerox 3400 has a significantly
higher cost ($622 . 65 for 19 ,000 cy/mo) . The Savin cost for 19 ,000
cy/mo under a proposed plan would be $470 . 25/mo . The current
rental plan , if renewed for next year , would be 304.00 plus $ .019
per copy over 9 ,000 cy/mo based on usage for the past year . The
new Savin plan for higher volume will probably be the least expen-
sive option for the City. The break-even point between the two
Savin plans is 17 , 710 cy/mo . We usually have a couple of large
months (in the 20' s) with months around 17 to 18 or 19 thousand
copies .
The 1981 budget does not contain a specific category for the
cost of copier rental . The intent is to charge each department ' s
printing and reproduction category for total copier costs based
on usage . This will reflect truer costs of the operation of
each department . Please see the attached memo regarding this .
Alternatives
1 . Renew current lease for Savin 600.
2 . Lease Savin 600 at higher volume plan .
3 . Lease Xerox 3400.
4 . Opt for a copier with different features/capabilities than
the present one and seek new quotes /bids .
Recommendation
Alternative number two is recommended because it best suits our
needs at the lowest cost for what is currently on the market .
See attached Resolution .
GV/jms
attachment
MEMO TO : John K . Anderson , City Administrator
FROM : Gregg Voxland , Finance Director
RE : Auditrons for Copier
DATE : December 9 , 1980
Introduction
Administration has previously paid the total bill for copier rental
with supplies allocated out to departments . With rising costs and
usage , a more equitable method of charging all departments for
copier costs is desired .
Discussion
Since our current copier was installed in February 1980 , usage has
been more than double the rate of the previous copier . We have
averaged over 19 ,000 cy/mo for the past 9 months . For the 1981
budget there is no separate object code for copier rental . The
total copier cost will be allocated to the departments on a per
copy basis . The three possible methods of allocating costs are
by guesstimate , auditron , or having everyone fill in a log sheet
each time the copier is used .
The guesstimate is subject to gross errors . The log sheet is
inconvenient , frequently forgotten and entails staff time in
tabulating usage . Auditrons are quick , accurate and relatively
-convenient . They do however cost money . Installation is $75 .00
and each unit is $35 .00. They are available for purchase only .
Cost can be spread over the contract life of the copier . We would
probably need 8 units for a total cost of $355 .00, spread over 12
months equals $29 . 58 per month , first year . The auditrons also
may enforce more discipline and help reduce unnecessary copies .
Alternatives
1 . Guesstimate Allocation
2 . Log sheet
3 . Auditrons
Recommenlat Lon
In view of the cost of the copier and the volume we are now
running , I would recommend the auditrons .
GV/jms
_ .
•
Ota
RESOLUTION NO . 1766 �Q
•
A Resolution Af hor i z i nt Leasing of Office Equipment
WHEREAS , the Shakopee City Council adopted Resolution No . 1553
on January 15 , 1980, authorizing leasing of a copy machine ; and
WHEREAS , it is desirable to continue io lease a copier .
NOW , THEREFORE , BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA that. City staff is authorized to execute a
rental agreement with Copy Duplicating Products , Inc . for the use of
one Savin Model 600 copier . Price ?-o he $470 . 25 per month and $ .017
per copy for usage over. 19 ,000 copies per month . Term of agreement
is to be one year .
Adopted in session of the City Ccunci_l of the City
of Shakopee , Minnesota , held this day of
1980 .
Fiaycir o± !.:he (::i_F Shakopee
ATTEST :
City Clerk
-- — ---
Approved as to form this
day of — , 1980 .
City Attorney -- ---------
MEMO TO : Mayor and City Council
FROM : John K . Anderson , City Administrator
RE : VIP Sewer Project
DATE : December 22 , 1980
Introduction
The day after the December 16 , 1980 City Council meeting, I was
talking to the City Engineer about the VIP Sewer Project and he
expressed some concerns about the action taken by the City
Council the previous evening . Specifically , he felt that the
scope of the area over which the assessments were to be spread
(including deferred assessments) was broader than originally
planned in the Engineer ' s report which would result in areas
assessed that hadn ' t been notified of the formal 429 public
hearing . As a result of this concern , I suggested we meet with
the Mayor and the Acting Mayor to determine whether or not we
had a problem .
Background
At a December 18 , 1980 meeting we traced the project ' s develop-
ment leading up to the December 16 , 1980 public hearing . Accord-
ing to the City Engineer , Resolution No . 1423 and tapes of the
City Council ' s discussion ordering the project indicated that
the area in Jackson Township served by the sewer should not be
included in the assessment . The Mayor supported this by recall-
ing that Jackson Township had sent a letter saying they wanted
nothing to do with the VIP Sewer Project so the area was "lopped
off . "
At the December 16 , 1980 public hearing , Mr . Roberts , a represen-
tative of Shakopee Sand & Gravel was present and he was told
that his "assessments would be deferred since he couldn ' t be
served ; " and the City Engineer was instructed to insure that
the people on the eastern end of the VIP didn ' t pay for inter-
ceptor oversizing that served areas to the south and west that
would ultimately benefit from the project - an instruction the
City Engineer took to mean that these areas were to be assessed .
At the December 18 , 1980 meeting , after considerable discussion ,
the following course of action seemed the most practical in light
of the potential problems discussed above :
1 . The portion of the area served by the project from 101 to
County Road #17 would be assessed . The proposed construction
stops at County Road #17 .
2 . The portion of the area served by the project between County
Road #17 and County Road #79 would have a deferred assessment
for oversizing (interceptor costs only) until sewer was
‘11 -
available .
Vavailable . Sewer will be available in 1985 when the MWCC
increases our sewer allocation and sewer can be (not neces-
sarily is) extended into this area .
3 . No other areas will receive a 429 type assessment .
4. The area west of County Road #79 (Jackson Township) and/or
the area south of the proposed by-pass lying east of County
Road #79 will be subject to an availability charge (tap-in
fee) similar to a WCC SAC charge for their fair share of the
cost of the proposed interceptor . The SAC charge would be
based upon a flow computation rather than a "size of pipe
computation" because the unique nature of the project requires
oversized pipe to serve the eastern end of the project with
or without the western portion .
5 . In this manner all areas ultimately benefited will pay for a
share of the interceptor cost and the city can proceed with
the project because it is not assessing areas not notified
of the 429 hearing December 16 , 1980. This approach also
provides needed flexibility because it would be difficult
to define today which area(s) would be served in the future -
Jackson Township or the area south of the proposed by-pass .
6 . Council may well have to pass a special levy to "front end"
the resulting two levels of deferred assessments - namely
the one between County Road #17 and #79 deferred until 1985
and the deferred assessments that will be collected in the
form of SAC charges . It was the consensus of those at the
meeting that the need for the levy would be checked each
year and "special levies" made when needed to retire the
bonds over their 10 year life .
7 . "Special levy" dollars levied to assist the PIR fund pay
for the bonds would be "reimbursed" when the delayed
assessment fees are collected and if the SAC fees are
collected . (There is the slight possibility that the
areas in question would not develop) .
Summary
The above implementation strategy will allow the project to go
forward and still incorporates the intent of council ' s action
December 16 , 1980 to "spread the assessments over everyone who
benefits . "
If any Council member sees a problem with this method of imple-
menting the VIP Sewer Project please call me on Monday so that
the City Engineer and I can do the necessary background work
before Tuesday night ' s meeting . If everyone concurs with this
implementation no further action is required at this time , however ,
it could well mean a "special levy" in the years ahead .
JKA/jms
RESOLUTION NO. 1423
A RESOLUTION ORDERING AN IMPROVEMENT AND
THE PREPARATION OF PLANS -
79-4 VIP TRUNK SANITARY SEWER
WHEREAS , a resolution of the City Council adopted the 2nd
day of May , 1979 , fixed a date for a Council hearing on the proposed
improvement of an area starting from a section of the existing
Shakopee Interceptor lying between CR-83 and CR-17 , thence
proceeding Southerly to CR-16 , thence Westerly to CR-17 , by
the installation of a trunk sanitary sewer ; .and
WHEREAS , ten days ' published notice of the hearing through
two weekly publications of the required notice was given and the
hearing was held thereon on the 22nd day of May , 1979 , at which
all persons desiring to be heard were given an opportunity to be
heard thereon.
NOW , THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA:
1 . Such improvement is hereby ordered as proposed in
the Council resolution adopted. May 2 , 1979 .
2 . William Price of Suburban Engineering is hereby
designated as the engineer for this improvement . He shall
prepare plans and specifications for the making of such improve-
ment .
Adopted in .f)kertli session of the City Council of the City
rtti
of Shakopee , Minnesota , held this day of ,_ d , 1979 .
Mayor. 02 the ity of S akopee
ATTEST:,
City,,OTer
Approved s to form this 3
day of co, , 1979 .
City ttory
MEMO TO : Mayor and City Council
FROM : John K. Anderson , City Administrator
RE : November 21 , 1980 Mailgram Informing Shakopee of its
Preliminary 1980 Census Results
DATE: December 22 , 1980
Introduction
City Council , at its December 2 , 1980 meeting received a copy of
the above mentioned mailgram estimating Shakopee ' s 1980 census
at 9 ,928 . The number was considerably less than the recent Metro
Council estimate (10,900) the City had been using, and Council
requested that staff prepare a report on possible courses of
action for its January 6 , 1981 meeting .
Background
I have reviewed the City files regarding this subject and also
discussed it with Doug Reeder . The following information is pro-
vided as a review of the subject :
1 . Shakopee ' s 1960 census count was 5 ,201 .
2 . Shakopee ' s 1970 census count was 6 , 876 .
3 . Metro Council established a preliminary 1980 estimate for
Shakopee in July of 1980 of 10, 900.
4 . The initial July 14, 1980 preliminary estimate from the
Census Bureau was 10,011 . (This estimate was the so called
"local review" estimate made before final tabulation of all
census questionnaires had been checked) .
5 . City staff provided local review of the Census Bureau numbers
because of the difference between theirs and the Metro Council
numbers by reviewing building permits issued between 1970 and
1980. The count was 1 ,443 vs . the Census Bureau count of 1 ,489
indicating that the Bureau hadn ' t under counted dwelling units .
The Bureau' s latest housing count , the one in the November 21 ,
1980 mailgram, matches exactly the City ' s count .
6 . City staff also checkedthe following agencies in an effort to
verify the Census Bureau count , but found they had no usable
information : Library , County Assessor , Metro Council , Commerce
Department and Scott County Planning and Zoning.
7 . The November 21 , 1980 revised preliminary estimate from the
Census Bureau was 9 , 928 with 3 ,321 housing units .
8 . On January 1 , 1981 the official count will go to Washington
for Congressional seat allocation and on April 1 , 1981 the
' States will receive similar numbers . These numbers will be
based upon a physical computer reading of all questionnaires .
Based upon the building permit count , the City did not "contest"
the Bureau' s preliminary estimate of 10,011 in July according to
Doug Reeder . The files do not contain any correspondence to the
Census Bureau contesting the Bureau' s July 14th count for the
"local review" .
Alternatives
I spoke with Mary Postman who is responsible for this region ' s
count (office in Kansas City , Kansas) . He outlined three courses
of action the City might take :
1 . If there is clear evidence that a block, apartment building
or facility was missed , we can send the information to his
office for verification . The problem is there is no way for
us to get this information except possibly an ad in the paper
or a random check of major apartment complexes . The Bureau
will only respond to specific evidence of missed blocks ,
buildings , etc . and will not respond to random misses .
2 . The City can apply for a special census at a cost ranging from
$ . 50 to $1 .00 per person or $5 ,000 to $10,000 for Shakopee .
If we have such a census the results are binding and could go
up as well as down .
3 . Take legal action in which case we could probably be part of
several cases already filed .
Summary & Recommendation
Mr . Postman suggested that a good rule of thumb is to check student
populations and/or to multiply the number of housing units counted
(3 ,321) by what the Bureau now feels will be the national average
of 2 . 70 (1970 average was 3 . 17) persons per household . In checking
these figures I find :
1980 Student Census 4, 525
1970 Student Census 4,397
Net Gain 128 students 0-18 years
Figures from Dr . Mayer ' s office
1980 Persons per household 2 . 70 X 3 ,321 = 8 ,966
which is less than the latest Census figure of 9 , 928
Based upon this information I do not feel it is worthwhile for the
City to pursue the issue . The worst possible financial implication
would be a $15 ,000 drop in 1982 revenue sharing . Local state aid
will not be affected because of a "hold harmless" clause that does
not permit aids to decrease with decreasing population .
I recommend dropping the matter .
JKA/jms •
V
MEMO TO : John K. Anderson , City Administrator
FROM : Gregg M. Voxland , Finance Director
RE : Farm Leases
DATE : December 31 , 1980
Introduction
On December. 12 , 1980 Council directed that staff obtain more
information on farm land rental rates and share cropping .
Background
I have talked to David Hart , County Extension Agent . He esti-
mated the land at Memorial Park should rent for $10 to $20 per
acre with the owner customarily paying the taxes . There is
approximately 55 acres tillable and Mr . Hauer has paid $968 .18
in taxes during 1980. This equals a total rental cost of approxi-
mately $26 . 69 per acre for Mr . Hauer .
Mr . Hart estimated the land at Lions Park should rent for $30
to $40 per acre and again the owner customarily paying the taxes .
There is approximately 18 acres tillable and the propose lease
for 1981 (as was 1980) is for $720 .00 with the City paying 30%
of that amount in taxes under MS272 . 67 . Mr . Hart explained a
40/60 split as follows . The owner would get 40% of the crop .
The owner also normally pays 40% of the cost of large machinery
($12-13 per acre) , 40% of fertilizer cost above starter fertilizer
( $15-20 per acre) and 40% of other chemicals ( $15-20 per acre) .
The owner normally has to haul and market his share of the crop .
This arrangement is not as common in the Metro area as it is
out-state because of absentee land owners . The City would stand
the chance of losing money under this arrangement .
Alternatives
1 . Share cropping arrangement .
2 . Lease for same terms as last year .
3 . Negotiate for higher fixed fee .
Recommendation
Recommend #2 because it falls within or above the "going rate"
as related by the County Extension agent and is much simpler
than #1 .
GMV/jms
dgiOgINIMOMML
MEMO TO : John K . Anderson , City Administrator
t6L-
FROM : Gregg Voxland , Finance Director
RE : 1981 Farm Lease
DATE : December 2 , 1980
The City has leased some of its land at Memorial Park for a
number of years to William Hauer . Resolution No . 1756
authorizes a lease for 1981. under the same terms and con-
ditions as 1980 .
Also , Norbert Theis has farmed land at Lions Park for many
years . Council authorized a lease for 1980 but Mr . Theis
never signed and returned the lease . I have sent him a
bill for the amount in the unexecuted lease . Resolution
No . 1757 authorizes a lease for 1981. .
Leases for 1981 will not he executed until payment is
received for 1980 .
GV/jms
J
RESOLUTION NO . 1756
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING LEASING OF CITY PROPERTY
WHEREAS , the City of Shakopee owns certain properties , and ;
WHEREAS , certain parcels are not currently utilized for
City functions .
NOW , THEREFORE , BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA , that the Mayor and City Administrator
are authorized Co enter into a one-year lease for 1981 with
William Hauer for the sum of not less than $250 .00, and not more
than $500 .00, prorated with crop loss due to flooding , plus ad
valorem taxes for the following property :
Government Lot 1 in Section 31 , Township 116 , Range 22 and
Government Lot 1 in Section 32 , Township 116 , Range 22 .
Adopted in _ session of the City Council of
the City of Shakopee , Minnesota , held this _ _ day of
1980 .
Mayor of the City of Shakopee
ATTEST :
City Clerk
Approved as to form this
day of , 1980 .
City Attorney
.
RESOLUTION NO . 1757 t �/
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING LEASING OF CITY PROPERTY
WHEREAS , the City of Shakopee owns certain properties , and ;
WHEREAS , certain parcels are not currently utilized for
City functions .
NOW , THEREFORE , BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF SHAKOPEE , MINNESOTA , that the Mayor and City Administrator
are authorized to enter into a one-year lease for 1981 with Norbert
Theis for the sum of $720 .00, for the following property :
18 acres in the NW4 SW4 Section 12 Township 115 Range 23
Adopted in session of the City Council of
the City of Shakopee , Minnesota held this day of
, 1980 .
Mayor of the City of Shakopee
ATTEST:
City Clerk
Approved as to form this
day of , 1980
City Attorney
MEMO TO : John K. Anderson , City Administrator
FROM: Gregg Voxland , Finance Director
RE : Purchase of Land for Parking Lot
DATE : December 5 , 1980
Introduction
Council is interested in purchasing railroad property to expand
parking facilities in downtown .
Discussion
There are four possible funds to provide front monies to buy the
subject property : General , Revenue Sharing , Capital Equipment
and Permanent Improvement Revolving. Both the Revenue Sharing
and the Capital Equipment Funds have monies available . However ,
it has been past practice and intent to restrict these monies to
equipment acquisition . The General Fund has money currently but
the purchase is not budgeted , the 1980 and 1981 budgets are
extremely tight and probably for more years after that and I
do not consider our General Fund - fund balance to be of a size
to very comfortably absorb the purchase of the property . Lastly ,
the P . I .R. fund has monies and if Council intends to provide a
permanent finance source such as assessments , this fund would
be the appropriate fund to use .
The acquistion and development could be set up as a project and
combined with an assessment project with a tax levy for the park-
ing lot portion . Alternatively , the acquisition and development
could be permanently financed by a G .O . bond issue if voters
supported it and it would be a very small issue .
Alternatives
1 . Short Term Funding
a . General Fund
b . Revenue Sharing Fund
c . Capital Equipment Revolving Fund
d . P . I .R . Fund
2 . Long Term Funding
a . General Fund ($500 ,000 available Fund Balance)
b. Revenue Sharing Fund ( $183 ,000 available Fund Balance)
c . Capital Equipment Revolving Fund ( $238 ,000 available Fund Balance)
d . P . I .R. Fund ($265 ,000 available Funds)
e . G .O . Bond Issue
f . Special Assessment within P . I .R . Fund
l
g . Special Assessment with other projects for a CP
G .O . Special Assessment Bond Issue
' h. Combine with other assessment projects and levy
for this project within one bond issue
Recommendation & Summary
Use P . I .R . fund for short term financing of the purchase ($133 , 300
per Mr . Houser ' s appraisal) . The real issue is long term financing .
Do we want to assess acquisition cost or not . The ' 67 parking lot
project assessed improvements but I have not been able to determine
if acquisition was also assessed . The ' 67 project assessed 50/ of
the cost .
We could acquire the land and do minimal improvements without assess-
ing using P . I .R . fund . This could preserve our option for future
alternative uses of the land depending on redevelopment or downtown
development and possible changes in the railroad situation (grade
or location) .
The attached map shows the properties assessed for the ' 67 project
(shaded) and the cross hatched area is the property considered for
purchase . Questions to be answered if assessments are contemplated
are : (1 ) what properties are to be benefitted ; and (2 ) by how much to
support an assessment . The City Engineer has suggested that an appraisal
might be in order to answer these questions .
GV/jms
. \
ti c a
4/? t
. . .. . .
.•........ .••••
• •• •..•.
. .. .....,..
) ./.....................................
_ 1
____- ---
1.
,
1--- ,'"------' —134 0
. ',
H. , .
.. . _.
p.... ... 1 ,. . .........
, ..„.. . .
„ : ;,, ..
' '
111' •••• '' ' • '
,
---
,,_
,n)
,'.$- 4., , -,7' ,
..?7,,,... ,.....L.:::........4,,, , ,..<--
= ,
. .\
\
. .
,
.
r
„.,`,44:4;1:1":14 •Vg -' ,-,,,..., , ”
\ _
, .
„, kl,., ,.444 '. ,,,,..,ye,01`.."":, • • ,. . , rr 1
., •
3 , ,•••,44 4.,..,.. „,, .4
.
• 4 i-AV-4', ,t
„ ,,,,
:',..?.• .,
— e4
$ 4:It ''...:-.4, --.1-
------- ';'1'...' ':,4,.,:,
,. .Zi.'-, •
4,.44,.. ..... .. .4.
vi. \ -4.,:- ---.. .. ,
...,,
_------ 11'3-s•••-, ' :.---"0, , c '
,, , 0,
.. ,,
•
...
0,„,_ .
. .. , ,"I r. 4,14—•
4,11, .1' ":, r•'.' , r ,W\ 4 '
*','',1***” 1 • 1
t
........,...11 7
.......... , ,
• amt. 1, —'*' •\'‘
,,
4° , 1
„4 Wkii.-11 ,
,=
C
r
--I
„o,;-it:-
• ,,,,-.1.,'„ , ,,,,,,, '.,
'‘,0-4 -
ts • ,,.
••it''''''
i •\5\,-'' Wf IT =••”,., -• ••••'s •• ,• .•,,,,”
,ei,„,?,4-,A,"!' .,, i ''& ,'„,0,4,'-',:,,I.4 C•i' ' .•4'•-''.;',4 !.
, .j. 44i kf i ,t 4-''' ' , " .1..4 "''.•."":','
';',1-i' ',:";z: ',.1 'tk.d;.,v`li*:,,,,, ,A ,T . - , - '..., • IC
..:.......:::............ .A . lib" ' '''''''
.....0' •
'f'°.''.j. : . 0. .. .p g • , 0.- t . • "
1 —
OIL
•,,,,3,-..,.• ,„,..,,,,,,
.. ,
.111
I'`!'.',,"'' •,,,i
1
.
, .. ,
.
4
• ''' T t 't(i‘'.,:-tll'
i-''k. .. ,,,f'7'.7t't
-a gi:".‘' '' ,. :'WV;''•:'NI "-".------737T:.; 4, —0
1,,,: '''...,-":. ti. "P.
• -N 1 el
..,,. -
.'
,,, ...
,-1Vtli.",, .:..7-,- - 'Pi•,' cril -
.,'\ ,
t.,,, 'f'.." .... ''''',.' ,,'',ti. It . '11`.!• ' 1' '.• ,4. ?Al'.
\ '
st
1,`"',1,'"'"',:s4;i1,;-i:t", j-- '' .,'1'. •40, I .-4 , -,„ r„c „--,. ..-..i,,,,r,
1 :‘": ,,,, .0 ' -1,10,6•1 II
• „ _ - ,.,,-
\L„,..L..;•—.43 - I-
1-)
' C) r- Tr..
smb ..t".1.- issialbrital at:,
'=t ,I ,440'. 111•11100••••11#4.',
, ' ',,,,,_•"1 10111.1.0101111441tt . :,i,,,L4,\Nil ..,
r,t.,"9,,,`,''''',r -fittlft!•111... -.1-.°•
i 4
I J. s .i...k
.
''. 01
,,!.
,,e4LI* 4:
, .
41,- if. ''
iL..',,. ',.•.`'Y1:7.- „t,,,i.to, , ,
ii'''''..,:'''' ',,, ,:'' ' , ••,,,,. ,-r,
.
.. t- G-) 01 ' -p•
• 0 . ---7
,
`--'00
-Z.
,
,.',-,, - • .-s.-----,
,---... ,- ..4,,,.. 'p,.:1...,
,- -2.1.7.
.,...:.•:•::*:::::•.%; i.:if' ,,44 ,..
o. .,.,,.-1.4 :.,•;'•''- ..••••••-•.•
ki
1.1.-- r .::"..:::'
. .
.•
..
::: :::.
..k_•.,.......:.• iirt“, 'rl''
t. ',,•• "--.,•, "-T-;
• " ' . 4
.
ir - , ,.•,,, 4 - ', ''
(Wtti,!7
• _, _. ,„, '41'1'
,1 t
.-------- 0 1
I C• .
,,•••, 7 1 •
't ;
..)
t ft
41
II ckb C:%(t
, ...... t
•
.-. %..
a 1 1 i i
10
. 0\
C. ..................;::......I....I.....
......,...b.1...-.........::
•.,,, ,-
...., i
3 os
-In
—--- CI)
0
(---, .
r
II
1 1111
Or
I e,
1
• • '
9 '
-P
VMEMO TO : John Anderson
City Administrator
FROM: H. R. Spurrier
City Engineer
RE : Sanitary Sewer in Main Street North of 1st Avenue
DATE : December 30, 1980
Introduction:
In Adjourned Regular Session December 16, 1980, City
Council directed staff to analyze the cost of providing
dependable sewer service to Dorothy Egan, 129 North Main Street .
Background:
The sanitary sewer was constructed prior to 1950, and is
very shallow. The pipe has less than 2 . 0 feet of cover at its
terminus . Consequently , this pipe has frozen on several
occasions . One of the residents served by the pipe has complained
about the performance of the pipe and requested compensation
for extraordinary costs incurred in service line maintenance .
Alternatives :
There are four alternative solutions in correcting this
problem:
1) Do Nothing - This alternative would be to leave
matters as they are now and continue to steam the
sewer once every two years . This cost is estimated
to be $ 165 . 27 each time the line is steamed. The
present worth of this alternative, assuming a 50
year life at 6 . 75 percent , is S1, 139. 10.
2 ) Maintain Existing Services - Dorothy Egan indicated
that the cost of steaming the sewer was $250 . 00
per year at a maximum. If done by the City this
would cost an estimated $ 165. 27 per year . The
present worth of this alternative must also include
the bi-annual steaming in Alternate No . 1 above ,
for main line steaming. The total present worth
of this alternative is estimated to be $3, 508 . 99 .
John Anderson -2- December 30, 1980
6
3) Insulate Sewer - There are approximately 75 linear
feet of the Main Street sewer with less than 6 feet
of cover. There are 3 service lines approximately
35 feet long for a total length of 105 feet of service
line . Insulation costs will amount to approximately
$6, 400. 00 . Insulation is no guarantee that the lines
will not freeze but it has been successful in a number
of instances .
4 ) Reconstruct Sanitary Sewer - The Bluff Avenue sanitary
sewer was completed in 1978 . It is possible to
reconstruct the Main Street sanitary sewer to the
Bluff Avenue sanitary sewer. This would eliminate
freeze potential and improve pipe gradient . Approx-
imately 150 linear feet of 8 inch pipe and 120 linear
feet of service line must be constructed. The recon-
struction may jeopardize the existing cast iron water-
main. Estimated cost $15 , 750 .00 .
Summary :
There are four clear alternatives . They range from "do
nothing" to a "permanent fix" . There is a substantial difference
in cost between alternatives .
The most expensive alternative of reconstruction need not
be considered now. It will always be an alternative, and other
work may eliminate the need to reconstruct the sanitary sewer.
Maintaining the existing sewer is not an acceptable alter-
native because it creates a situation where City forces are
performing work on private property .
The "do nothing" alternative is not judged to be effective
because the City will continue to face the problem and will be
subject to potential damages caused by a frozen sewer.
The most effective method of correcting the problem is to
insulate all of the line with less than 6 feet of cover. This
alternative has worked well in this region and is considered the
most cost-effective. There is a certain amount of risk but this
risk is considered to be reasonable since insulation has been
successful .
Recommendation:
It is the recommendation of the Engineering Department that
City staff be directed to prepare specifications for the insulation
of sanitary sewer in Main Street north of 1st Avenue.
HRS/j iw
Attachment
APPENDIX
Cost Estimates
Criteria :
1. 50 year life.
2 . Interest rate 6 . 75 percent .
3. All comparisons at present worth.
Alternate 1 -- Do Nothing:
1. 26 biennial payments .
2 . Simple interest 6. 75 percent .
3 . Estimated cost :
3 hrs . pickup @ $8 . 00 $ 24 . 00
3 hrs . steamer @ $8 . 00 24 . 00
6 hrs . labor @ $10 . 00 60. 00
3 hrs. Foreman @ $12. 00 24 . 00
Overhead 17% 16. 32
Insurance 4 . 95
Total $165. 27
Present worth - $1, 139. 10
Alternate 2 -- Maintain Private Services :
1. 50 annual payments .
2 . Interest rate 6. 75 percent .
3 . Estimated cost is $250. 00; pursuant to letter from
Dorothy Egan.
Present worth - $3 ,562. 37
Alternate 3 -- Insulate Sanitary Sewer:
Item Estimated Estimated Estimated
No. Description Quantity Unit Price Total`
1 Excavate & Insulate 180 L.F. $ 15 . 00 $ 2,700 . 00
Pipe
2 Patch Street 105 L.F. 12. 80 1, 792 . 00
3 Insulate Manhole 1 Ea. 800. 00 800 . 00
Subtotal $ 5, 292 . 00
10% Contingency 528 . 00
Subtotal $ 5 ,820. 00
10% Technical Services 580 . 00
Total $ 6, 400 . 00
Appendix - Cost Estimates (continued) j
Alternate 4 -- Reconstruct Sanitary Sewer:
Item Estimated Estimated Estimated
No. Description Quantity Unit Price Total
1 8" Sanitary Sewer 150 L.F. $ 15 . 00 $ 2,250 . 00
2 48" Diameter Manhole 1 Ea. 850. 00 850. 00
3 4" Service Wye 3 Ea. 75 . 00 225. 00
4 4" C . I. Service Pipe 120 L.F. 12 . 00 1,440. 00
5 Rock Excavation 200 Cu.Yd. 30. 00 6,000. 00
6 Patch Street 150 L.F. 15 . 00 2 ,250. 00
Subtotal $13, 015 . 00
10% Contingency 1,302 . 00
Subtotal $14 ,317 . 00
10% Technical Svcs . 1,433 . 00
Total $15, 750. 00
Law Offices of
KRASS , MEYER & KANNING
Chartered Phillip R. Krass
Shakopee Professional Building Barry K. Meyer
' 1221 Fourth Avenue East Philip T. Kanning
Shakopee, Minnesota 55379
(612)445-5080
MEMORANDUM
TO: Mayor and City Council of Shakopee
FROM: Phillip R. Krass
DATE: December 10, 1980
SUBJECT: Duties of City Clerk
Dear Mayor and Members of the Council :
I have been requested to do some research on a particular statutory duty
of a city clerk in relationship to council consideration of dividing the duties
of city clerk and city administrator.
More specifically, certain duties established in Minnesota Statutes 412. 151
which state:
"(The clerk) shall keep . . . an account book in which he shall
enter all money transactions of the city including the dates and
amounts of all receipts and the person from whom the money was
received and all orders drawn upon the treasurer with their payee
and object. "
The concern expressed to me was whether or not the statutory clerk was
required to keep a set of books in addition to those kept by the treasurer.
Right now, as we have an administrator-clerk in Shakopee, and since the
treasurer answers to the administrator-clerk, it can be argued that this statutory
duty is being fulfilled.
If, however, we divide those functions and make someone other than the
administrator clerk, then the treasurer is no longer working for the clerk and
this statutory duty becomes a problem.
I think there is , however, a very simple answer. I am recommending that
you make the treasurer a deputy clerk so that legally the clerk will be fulfilling
this statutory requirement by having a deputy clerk (our treasurer) handle the
finances. In theory, this will place the treasurer under the clerk while
functionally, I would expect the treasurer to be responsible to the administrator.
I think it would be in order if you create a separate clerk's position and
adopt a resolution appointing Judy city clerk, and have the same resolution appoint
Greg as deputy city clerk and indicate that he has the responsibility for fulfilling
the clerk's financial responsibilities under the above-enumerated statute. That
will make it perfectly clear that you do not expect Judy to keep a set of books
Mayor and City Council Cif
Page 2
December 10, 1980
separate from Greg's. While this may seem cumbersome, I think it may well be
the best method of handling this difficulty.
Yours very truly,
KRASS, MEYER & KANNING CHARTERED
Phillip R. Krass
PRK:ph
cc Mr. John K. Anderson
Ms. Judy Cox
Action Required :
Offer Resolution No . 1758 ,, A Resolution Appointing A City Clerk
and a Deputy City Clerk, and move its adoption .
RESOLUTION NO . 1758
A RESOLUTION APPOINTING A CITY CLERK AND A DEPUTY
CITY CLERK
BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE ,
MINNESOTA, that Judith S . Cox be and hereby is appointed City
Clerk of the City of Shakopee .
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED , that Gregg Voxland be and hereby is
appointed Deputy City Clerk and shall have the responsibility for
fulfilling the Clerk ' s financial responsibilities under Minnesota
Statutes 412 . 151 .
Adopted in Regular session of the City Council of the City
of Shakopee , Minnesota held this 6th day of January , 1981 .
Mayor of the City of Shakopee
ATTEST : •
City Clerk
Approved as to form this
day of — , 1981 . _
City Attorney
1
MEMO TO : John K. Anderson , City Administrator
FROM : Gregg Voxland , Finance Director
RE : Designation of Official Depositories
DATE: December 18 , 1980
Resolution No . 1768 is a "housekeeping" type resolution .
The statutes provide that the City Council designate
depositories for City funds for the year . This resolution
specifies the depositories and the respective dollar limits .
GV/jms
P.ESOI.iJTION NO . 1768 gT
A RESOLUTION DESIGNATING
OFFICIAL DEPOSITORIES OF CITY FUNDS
WHEREAS , M . S . 427 .02 provides that the City Council designate
depositories ; and
WHEREAS , the State of Minnesota Statutes 118 . 005 and 475 . 66
provide that cities may invest in time deposits .
NOW , THEREFORE , BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF SHAKOPEE , MINNESOTA, that the following institutions are desig-
nated as depositories with the respective dollar amounts as limits
and as secured by insurance and/or collateral .
First National Bank of Shakopee $ 500,000 .00
Citizens State Bank of Shakopee 300,000 .00
First National Bank of St . Paul 1 ,000 ,000 .00
First National Bank of Minneapolis 1 ,000 ;000 .00
Northwestern National Bank 1 ,500,000 .00
Peoples Savings and Loan Association 300,000.00
Minnesota Federal Savings and Loan 100,000 .00
Midwest Federal. Savings and Loan Association 1 , 500,000 .00
Marquette National Bank 1 ,000 ,000 .00
Adopted in _ session of the City Council of the
City of Shakopee , Minnesota , held this day of
1981 .
Mayor of the City of Shakopee
ATTEST :
City Clerk
Approved as to form this
day of , 1981 .
City Attorney
e �c
MEMO TO : John K. Anderson, City Administrator
FROM : Judith S . Cox , Deputy City Clerk
RE : Resignation of George W. Johnson
from the Assessing Department
DATE : December 30, 1980
Introduction
Mr. George W . Johnson has tendered his resignation from the City
of Shakopee and the City Council did accept his resignation on
December 16 , 1980 and directed the preparation of a resolution
accepting his resignation with regrets .
Background
It has been the general policy of the City Council to accept
resignations by motion . Under certain circumstances (ie :
longevity , outstanding performance , etc . ) the Council has
adopted resolutions commending employees and citizens who have
served on advisory bodies or as Councilpersons .
Pursuant to Council directive I have prepared the attached
resolution accepting the resignation of George W . Johnson ,
with regrets .
Action
Offer Resolution No . 1771 , Accepting Resignation of George W .
Johnson , and move its adoption .
JSC/jms
RESOLUTION NO . 1771
A RESOLUTION ACCEPTING RESIGNATION OF GEORGE W . JOHNSON
BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE ,
MINNESOTA , that the resignation of George W . Johnson from the
Assessing Department , is hereby accepted , with regrets .
Adopted in session of the City Council of
the City of Shakopee held this day of
1981 .
Mayor of the City of Shakopee
ATTEST:
City Clerk -- —`
Approved as to form this
day of 1981 .
City Attorney
g21
MEMO TO : John K. Anderson , City Administrator
FROM : Judith S . Cox , Deputy City Clerk
RE : Appointments to Suburban Police Recruitment System
DATE : December 30, 1980
Introduction
On November 20, 1979 the City of Shakopee adopted Resolution No .
1521 authorizing participation in the Suburban Police Recruitment
System and made appointments for City representation on the
System .
Background
With the recent change of City Administrators it is appropriate
to make a new appointment to the System.
Per your direction I have prepared the attached resolution appoint-
ing Tom Brownell as Director and yourself as the Alternate Director .
Recommendation
Offer Resolution No . 1770, A Resolution Amending Resolution No . 1521
Designating A Director And An Alternate Director To The Suburban
Police Recruitment System , and move its adoption .
JSC/jms
•
RESOLUTION NO . 1770
A RESOLUTION AMENDING RESOLUTION NO .. 1521
DESIGNATING A DIRECTOR AND AN ALTERNATE DIRECTOR
TO THE SUBURBAN POLICE RECRUITMENT SYSTEM
WHEREAS , the City of Shakopee has entered into a Joint and
Cooperative Agreement which established a Suburban Police Recruit-
ment System and which provided for City membership in said System ;
and
WHEREAS , there have been changes in City personnel and it is
appropriate to make new appointments for City representation in
the System.
NOW , THEREFORE , BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF SHAKOPEE, that Resolution No . 1521 be and hereby is amended by
designating Thomas G . Brownell and John K . Anderson as the City ' s
Director and Alternate Director in the Suburban Police Recruitment
System .
Adopted in session of the City Council of the
City of Shakopee , Minnesota , held this — _ day of
1981 .
Mayor of the City of Shakopee
Attest :
City Clerk
Approved as to form this
day of , 1981 .
City Attorney
RJ2.)
MEMO TO : Mayor and City Council
FROM : John K. Anderson , City Administrator (by Judith S . Cox)
RE : Pearson Florist
DATE : January 2 , 1981
Introduction
On December 16 , 1980 the Council considered a request from Mr .
Gene Pearson of Pearson Florist to allow the use of the base-
ment of his new building without requiring a special sprinkler
system .
Background
After listening to Mr . Pearson ' s request and considering the
recommendations of staff , the Council agreed to dispense with
requiring the special sprinkler system, with the condition
that the basement is not used by the general public . The
Council directed preparation of a resolution so stating the
Council ' s intent . The attached resolution is pursuant to
Council direction .
Recommended Action
Offer Resolution No . 1777 , A Resolution Restricting Use Of The
Basement In The Pearson Florist Building , and move its adoption .
JKA/jms
RESOLUTION NO , 1777
•
A RESOLUTION RESTRICTING USE OF THE BASEMENT IN THE
PEARSON FLORIST BUILDING
WHEREAS , Mr . Gene Pearson , filed a letter requesting an appeal
from the City Building Code as it relates to a sprinkler system
required for his basement in conjunction with improvement to his
business at 112 Sommerville ; and
WHEREAS , Mr . Pearson appeared before the Board of Appeals
pursuant to Section 204 of the Building Code December 16 , 1980; and
WHEREAS , the Board has reviewed Mr . Pearson ' s request along
with the written recommendations of the City Building Inspector ,
memo dated December. 4 , 1980, the City Fire Chief , memo dated
December 12 , 1980 , and Mr . Arnie Olson , Plan Reviewer for the
Building Codes Division of the State of Minnesota , letter and
sketch plan dated October 28 , 1980.
NOW THEREFORE , BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA :
1 . That Mr. Gene Pearson is not permitted to use the basement
of his business at 112 Sommerville for retail or educa-
tional purposes until such time that a "special sprinkler
system" is installed as specified in Mr . Olson ' s letter
of October. 28 , 1980.
2 . That Mr . Gene Pearson is permitted to use the basement of
his business at 112 Sommerville for purposes other than
those excepted above because he has installed two hour
fire walls , two exits , a one hour door and because the
sectional spaces in the basement do not exceed 1500 sq .
feet .
3 . That Mr. Gene Pearson , his heirs or successors , are
responsible for installing a special sprinkler system
and for obtaining the proper occupancy permit from the
City of Shakopee to change the use of said basement
space to a use that involves the general public in any
mannor .
Adopted in session of the City Council of the
City of Shakopee , Minnesota , held this day of
1981 .
Mayor of the City of Shakopee
ATTEST :
City Clerk
Approved as to form this
day of — 1981 .
City Attorney
. _ g
MEMO TO: John K. Anderson , City Administrator
FROM : Gregg Voxland , Finance Director
RE : Resolution on Park Dedication Fees
DATE : December 19 , 1980
Introduction
Resolution No . 1769 (attached) is prepared pursuant to Council
direction at the 12/16/80 meeting .
Background
This resolution allows more of the funds provided by the park
dedication fee to be spent for park improvements as opposed to
land acquisition than was allowed under Resolution No . 1365
which specified that 90% of the fees go to land acquisition .
GV/jms
ttjRESOLUTION NO .. 1769
A RESOLUTION SETTING FORTH THE
USE OF PARK FEES
WHEREAS , the Shakopee City Council adopted Ordinance No . 17
providing for the dedication of land for public use as parks ,
public sites and open spaces , at the time a tract of l.and ' i.s
platted or subdivided ; and
WHEREAS , said ordinance provides that in the absence of the
dedication of land , a cash , in lieu thereof , may he paid to the
City by the developer .
NOW, THEREFORE , BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF SHAKOPEE , MINNESOTA , that monies collected for park
purposes , pursuant to Ordinance No . 17 , shall be appropriated
as follows :
Sixty-five percent (65%) of park dedication fees to be
used for land acquisition .
Thirty-five percent (35%) of park dedication fees to be
used for capital improvements for. parks .
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED , that Resolution No . 1365 is hereby
repealed in its entirety .
Adopted in regular session of the City Council of the City
of Shakopee , Minnesota , held this day of
1981 .
Mayor of the City of Shakopee
ATTEST:
City Clerk ^�
Approved as to form this _
day of , 1981 .
City Attorney
((;7
MEMO TO : John K. Anderson , City Administrator
FROM : Jeanne Andre , Administrative Assistant
RE : Resolution No . 1772 , A Resolution Amending Resolution No .
1600 Establishing The Ad Hoc Cable Communications Committee
DATE : December 30, 1980
Introduction
An Ad Hoc Cable Communications Committee was established in 1980
to advise the City Council on the cable communications franchise
process . The committee has completed the tasks outlined as its
duties in Resolution No . 1600 and now needs further authorization
to take on additional duties .
Background
On May 6 , 1980 the City Council adopted Resolution No . 1600, A
Resolution Establishing The Ad Hoc Cable Communications Committee .
This resolution authorized the committee to research the cable
communications franchise process , access the needs of the community ,
and advise the City Council on the establishment of the cable ser-
vice territory (CST) . The initial resolution did not authorize
the committee to undertake the full franchise process in case it
might be determined that the City should join with other nearby
communities in franchising a cable operator. However the cable
committee advised , and the City Council concurred, to propose a
CST within the municipal boundaries of the City of Shakopee . Now,
if the City Council wants to continue to be advised by the committee
on the upcoming decisions regarding cable , a new resolution must be
adopted .
Alternatives
The City Council can become more directly involved in the franchise
process , or continue to rely heavily on the advice of the committee .
By law the City Council must adopt the ordinance establishing a
franchise .
Recommendation
The City Council adopt Resolution No . 1772 , A Resolution Amending
Resolution No. 1600 Establishing The Ad Hoc Cable Communications
Committee . This resolution assures the advisory status of the
committee , but provides for the committee to do the significant
groundwork for City Council decisions .
JA/jms
RESOLUTION NO. 1772
A RESOLUTION AMENDING RESOLD l ON NO . 1 600
ESTABLISHING THE AD I-IOC CABLE COMMUNICATIONS COMMITTEE
WHEREAS , the City Council of the City of Shakopee has recom-
mended the establishment of a cable service territory for the
municipal boundaries of the City of Shakopee ; and
WHEREAS , in Resolution No . 1600 the City Council established
an Ad Hoc Cable Communications Committee to advise the Council on
certain matters relating to franchising a cable communications
system ; and
WHEREAS , members of this Committee have served the City con-
scientiously in issues considered by the Committee to this date ,
and
WHEREAS , the duties of the Committee as outlined in Resolu-
tion No . 1600 are to terminate upon completion of a community
needs assessment and recommendation to the City Council regarding
continuation with the franchise process ; and
WHEREAS , the Committee is near completion of its assessment
of communication ' s needs in the community ; and
WHEREAS , the Committee recommended to .the City Council that
the City proceed with the franchise process at the September. 23 ,
1980 Council meeting ; and
WHEREAS , the City Council concurs with the Committee recommen-
dation to proceed with the franchise process and desires the
Committee to continue its efforts .
NOW , THEREFORE , BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF SHAKOPEE , MINNESOTA, that the duties of the Committee as
provided in Resolution 1600 are hereby amended to include the
following additional activities :
1 . Draft a Request for Proposals (RFP) from cable operators
for the operation of cable communications in Shakopee .
2 . Hear presentations from cable operators submitting pro-
posals to operate cable communications in Shakopee .
3 . Recommend to the City Council the cable operator who
can best serve the needs identified for cable communica-
tions in Shakopee .
4 . Prepare for consideration by City Council an ordinance
establishing a cable franchise in Shakopee .
Resolution No . 1772 UPage Two
•
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED , that the Committee shall continue to
function until disolved by action of the City Council subsequent
to the adoption of a cable franchise ordinance for Shakopee .
Adopted in session of the City Council of the
City of Shakopee , Minnesota , held this day of
1981 .
Mayor of the City of Shakopee
ATTEST:
City Clerk
Approved as to form this
day of , 1981 .
City Attorney
MEMO TO : John K. Anderson , City Administrator
FROM : Gregg Voxland , Finance Director
RE : Garbage Contract
DATE : December 17 , 1980
Introduction
Council needs to address garbage collection service for the City
for 1981 .
Background
A year ago , Council accepted the quotation of G & H Sanitation ,
Inc . for garbage collection service . A one year contract was
signed that allowed for the extension for a second year at the
City ' s option . The service has gone relatively smoothly this
year and I perceive no reason not to exercise the option for
the second year .
Alternatives
1 . Authorize staff to notify G & H that the City is exercising
its option to extend the contract .
2 . Cancel the contract and seek new quotations . The present
contract would expire 1/16/81 .
Recommendation
Alternative number one is recommended .
Attached is Resolution No . 1767 which adopts the new rates for
garbage service . This reflects the costs contained in the
second year of the G & H contract and continuing the past
practice of adding 10¢ per bill to cover other expenses of
operating the service . This represents a 20¢ or 9% increase
for the senior citizen rate and a 27¢ or 77 increase for regular
service .
GV/jms
attachment
RESOLUTION NO . 1767 0 fk/
A RESOLUTION SETTING GARBAGE FEES
WHEREAS , the City of Shakopee has previously entered into a
contract for garbage and refuse collection ; and
WHEREAS , said contract contains increased costs for the City .
NOW , THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF SHAKOPEE , MINNESOTA , that garbage and refuse collection fees
shall be $3 . 90 per month for urban residences and $2 . 55 per month
for senior citizens in urban residences .
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that Resolution No . 1543 is repealed
in its entirety effective February 28 , 1981 .
This resolution shall be in force and effect for bills sent
out on , or about , March 1 , 1981 .
Adopted in session of the City Council of the
City of Shakopee , Minnesota , held this day of
1981 .
Mayor of the City of Shakopee
ATTEST :
City Clerk --!---
Approved as to form this __
day of - — , 1.981
City Attorney
MEMO TO : John K. Anderson , City Administrator
FROM : Judith S . Cox , Deputy City Clerk
RE : $600,000 I .R. Bonds for J & B Enterprises
DATE : January 2 , 1981
Introduction
On August 26 , 1980 the City Council gave preliminary approval
to $600,000 I .R. Bonds for J & B Enterprises .
Background
The applicant is now requesting final approval of the I .R . Bonds .
Mr . Krass , Assistant City Attorney has been provided copies of
all the documents , has reviewed them and has informed me that
they are in order .
Recommended Action
Offer Resolution No . 1773 , A Resolution Authorizing the Acquisi-
tion And Construction Of A Project Under The Minnesota Municipal
Industrial Development Act And The Sale and Issuance Of A Commer-
cial Development Revenue Note To Finance The Project , And Authoriz-
ing The Execution Of Various Documents , and move its adoption .
JSC/jms
f )/
RESOLUTION NO. 11.73_
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING TUE ACQUISITION
AND CONSTRUCTION OF A PROJECT UNDER THE
MINNESOTA MUNICIPAL INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT
ACT AND TUE SALE AND ISSUANCE OF A COMMER-
CIAL DEVELOPMENT REVENUE NOTE TO FINANCE
THE PROJECT , AND AUTHORIZING 'I'llN EXECUTION
OF VARIOUS DOCUMENTS
BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City
of Shakopee, Minnesota, as follows :
1. It has been proposed that the City issue Its
Commercial Development Revenue Note (J & 13 L-'nterpr_ises
Project) (the "Note" ) , in the principal amount of $490 , 000 ,
to finance a portion of the cost of ac Iuir. i.ng and constructing
a manufacturing, sales and service facility in the City (the
"Project" ) , on behalf of J & B Enterprises , a Minnesota
general partnership (the "Obligor" ) , and to be leased by the
Obligor to Mastercraft Dump Bodies , Inc. The Council gave
preliminary approval to the proposal by resolutions duly
adopted February 19 , 1980 and August 26 , 1980 ,
and pursuant to those resolutions , the following documents
relating to the Project have been submi I Led lt.o the Council
and are now, or shall be placed, on file in the office of
the City Clerk:
(a) Loan Agreement (the "Loan Agreement" ) ,
proposed to be made and entered into between the City and
the Obligor;
(b) Assignment of Loan Agreement (the "Assignment" ) ,
proposed to be made from the City to First National Bank of
Hopkins (the "Bank" ) ;
(c) Mortgage and Security Agreement (the "Mortgage" ) ,
and Assignment of Rents and Leases ( the "Assignment of Rents") ,
proposed to be made from the Obligor and the Bank ;
(d) Guaranty (the "Guaranty " ) , proposed to be made
from certain individual partners of a general partner of the
Obligor to the Bank; and
(e) Form of Note.
2. It is hereby found , determined and declared
that :
(a) the Project to be financed constitutes a
"project" authorized by Section 474 . 02 , subd . la, Minnesota
Statutes;
(b) the purpose of the Project , as defined in
the Loan Agreement , is, and the effect thereof will be (i)
to encourage the development of economically sound commerce
in the City, (ii) to increase the Lax base of the City and
overlapping jurisdictions , and (iii) to provide additional
employment opportunities for residents of the City and
surrounding areas;
(c) the Project has been approved by the Commissioner
of Securities of the State of Minnesota as tending to further
the purposes and policies of the Municipal Industrial Development
Act;
(d) the Obligor is authorized , in accordance with the
provisions of Section 474 . 03 (6) , Minnesota Statutes , and subject
to the terms and conditions set forth in the Loan Agreement,
which terms and conditions the City determines to he necessary ,
desirable and proper, to provide for the construction of the
Project by such means as shall be available to the Obligor and
in the manner determined by the Obligor, and with or without
advertisement for bids as required for i he construction and
acquisition of munii:ip,tl. 1.1c• i I i. i ies ;
(e) it is desirable that the Note in the amount of
$490, 000 be issued by the City to the Bank , and that the City ' s
interest in the Loan Agreement and the payments receivable
pursuant thereto be pledged to the Bank as security for the
payment of principal and interest on the Note ;
(f) the payments required by the Loan Agreement are
fixed, and required to be revised from time to time as necessary ,
so as to produce income and revenue sufficient to provide for
prompt payment of principal of and interest on the Note , and the
Loan Agreement and Mortgage also provide that the Obligor is
required to pay all expenses of the operation and maintenance
of the Project including, but without limitation , adequate
insurance thereon and insurance against all liability for
injury to persons or property arising from the operation thereof ,
and all taxes and special assessments levied upon or with respect
to the Project and payable during the term of the Loan Agreement ;
(g) under the provisions of Minnesota Statutes ,
Section 474 . 10 , and as provided in the Loan Agreement and Note ,
the Note is not to be payable from nor charged upon any funds
other than the revenue pledged to the payment thereof ; the City
_ I
is not subject to any liability thereon; no holder of the
Note shall ever have the right to compel any exercise of
the taxing powers of the City to pay the Note or the
interest thereon , nor to enforce payment thereof against
any property of the City except the Project mortgaged by
the Mortgage ; the Note shall not constitute a charge ,
lien or encumbrance , legal or e(lui.table , upon any property
of the City except the Project; the Note shall recite
that it is payable solely from the revenue pledged to the
payment thereof; and the Note shall not constitute a debt
of the City within the meaning of any constitutional or
statutory limitation .
3. The general form of Loan Agreement , Assignment
and Note referred to in paragraph 1 is approved. Each such
document , with such variations , insertions and additions as
the City Attorney may hereafter deem appropriate , is directed
to be executed in the name and on behalf of the City by the
Mayor , City Clerk , and City Administrator. The general
m of the
Mortgage, Assignment of Rents and Guarantyis also approved
and the issuance of the Note is hereby conditioned upon
execution and delivery of said documents by the Obligor and
other parties thereto.
4 . In anticipation of the collection of revenues
of the Project, the City shall proceed forthwith to issue
the Note in the principal amount of $490 , 000 to the Bank ,
which is hereby authorized to disburse the proceeds to the
parties entitled thereto in paymnnt or co i.mhur.sement for
Project costs in accordance with the terms of the Loan
Agreement.
5 . The Mayor , City Clerk , City Administrator and other
officers of the City are authorized and directed to prepare
and furnish to the purchaser of the Note and bond counsel
certified copies of all proceedings and records of the City
relating to the Note , and such other affidavits and certificates
as may be required by bond counsel , and approved by the City
Attorney, to show the facts relating to the legality and
marketability of the Note.
Approved :
Mayor
Attest: __ ----
City Clerk
The foregoing resolution was duly seconded
by Councilmember , and upon vote being
- taken thereon , the following voted in favor :
and the following voted against the same :
whereupon the resolution was declared duly passed and
adopted.
MEMO TO : John K. Anderson , City Administrator
FROM : Judith S . Cox, Deputy City Clerk
RE : $9 , 120,000 I .R . Bonds for St . Francis Hospital
DATE : January 2 , 1981
Introduction
On December 2nd and 16th the Council held a public hearing on an
application of St . Francis Hospital for $9 , 120,000 Industrial
Revenue Bonds .
On December 16th staff was directed to prepare a resolution
giving preliminary approval .
Background
The Assistant City Attorney has reviewed the documents relating
to the bond sale and has informed me that they are in order .
Action Required
Offer Resolution No . 1774, A Resolution Relating To The Financing
Of A Proposed Project For St . Francis Hospital ; Determining To
Proceed With The Project And Its Financing ; Referring The Proposal
To The Commissioner Of Securities For Approval ; And Authorizing
Preparation Of Necessary Documents , and move its adoption .
JSC/jms
•
RESOLUTION NO . 1774
RESOLUTION RELATING TO THE FINANCING OF
A PROPOSED PROJECT FOR ST . FRANCIS
HOSPITAL; DETERMINING TO PROCEED WITH
THE PROJECT AND ITS FINANCING ;
REFERRING THE PROPOSAL TO THE
COMMISSIONER OF SECURITIES FOR
APPROVAL; AND AUTHORIZING PREPARATION
OF NECESSARY DOCUMENTS
BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of
Shakopee , Minnesota ( the Municipality ) , as follows :
SECTION 1
Recitals and Findings
1 . 1 . This Council has received a proposal that the
Municipality finance a portion or all of the cost of a
proposed project ( the Project ) under Minnesota Statutes ,
Chapter 474 ( the Act ) , on behalf of St . Francis Hospital ,
a Minnesota nonprofit corporation ( the Hospital ) ,
consisting of the construction , furnishing and equipping
of additions ( the Additions ) to its existing hospital
facilities ( the Existing Facilities ) and the refinancing
of certain outstanding indebtedness ( the Outstanding Debt )
incurred by the Hospital in the acquisition or betterment
of the Existing Facilities .
1 . 2 . At a public hearing , duly noticed and held on Dec . 2
and Dec . 16 , 1980, in accordance with the Act , on the
proposal to undertake and finance the Project , all parties
who appeared at the hearing were given an opportunity to
express their views with respect to the proposal to
undertake and finance the Project . Based on such hearing
and such other facts and circumstances as this Council
deems relevant , this Council hereby finds , determines and
declares as follows :
( a ) A substantial number of residents of the
Municipality are admitted to or are otherwise benefitted
by the Existing Facilites .
( b ) The Project would further the purposes
stated in Section 474 .01 of the Act .
(c ) A reduction in debt service charges to
patients and third party payors of the Hospital will occur
-2-
as the result of the proposed refinancing of the
Outstanding Debt , thus benefitting the residents of the
Municipality.
(d ) The construction , furnishing and equipping
of the Additions would provide increased opportunities for
employment for residents of the Municipality and
surrounding area .
(e ) This Council has been advised by
representatives of the Hospital that conventional ,
commercial financing to pay the cost of the Project is
available only on a limited basis and at such high costs
of borrowing that the Project would not he economically
feasible , but that with the aid of municipal borrowing ,
and its resulting lower borrowing cost , the Project is
economically feasible .
( f ) This Council has also been advised by
representatives of the Hospital that on the basis of their
discussions with potential buyers of tax-exempt bonds ,
revenue bonds of the Municipality could be issued and sold
• upon favorable rates and terms to finance the Project .
(g ) The issuance by the Municipality of its revenue
bonds under the Act to finance the Project would be a
substantial inducement to the Hospital to undertake the
Project .
SECTION 2
Determination to Proceed with the
Project and its Financing
N 2 . 1 . On the basis of information given the Municipality
to date , it appears that it would he desirable for the
Municipality to issue its revenue bonds under the
provisions of the Act to finance the Project in the
estimated total amount of $9 , 1.20 , 000 .
x 2 . 2 . It is hereby determined to proceed with the Project
and its financing , and this Council hereby declares its
present intent to have the Municipality issue its revenue
bonds under the Act to finance the Project . All details
of such revenue bond issue and the provisions for payment
thereof shall be subject to final approval of the
Municipality by further ordinance ( s ) or resolution (s ) of
the City Council , and the issuance of such revenue bonds
shall be subject to the approval of the Project by the
Minnesota Commissioner of Securities and may be subject to
- 3-
such further conditions as the Municipality may specify .
The revenue bonds , if issued , shall not constitute a
charge , lien or encumbrance , legal or equitable , upon any
property of the Municipality , and each bond , when , as and
if issued , shall recite in substance that the bond ,
including interest thereon , is payable solely from the
revenues received from the Project and property pledged to
the payment thereof , and shall not constitute a debt of
the Municipality.
' - 2 . 3 . The form of the Application to the Commissioner of
Securities , with attachments , is hereby approved , and the
Mayor , City Clerk, and City Administrator are authorized to
execute said documents in behalf of the Municipality .
2 . 4 . In accordance with Section 474 . 10, Subdivision 7a of
. the Act , the Mayor , City Clerk , and City Administrator are hereby
authorized and directed to cause said Application to be
submitted to the Commissioner of Securities for approval
of the Project . The Mayor , City Clerk , City Administrator , City
Attorney and other officers , employees and agents of the
Municipality are hereby authorized and directed to provide
the Commissioner with any preliminary information the
Commissioner may need for this purpose , and the City
Attorney is authorized to initiate and assist in the
preparation of such documents as may be appropriate to the
Project .
SECTION 3
General
3 . 1 . If the bonds are issued and sold , the Municipality
will enter into a lease , sale or loan agreement or similar
.agreement satisfying the requirements of the Act ( the
Revenue Agreement ) with the Hospital . The lease rentals ,
installment sale payments , loan payments or other amounts
payable by the Hospital to the Municipality under the
Revenue Agreement shall he sufficient to pay the
principal , interest and redemption premium, if any , on the
bonds as and when the same shall become due and payable .
3 . 2 . The Hospital has agreed and it is hereby determined
that any and all direct and indirect costs incurred by the
Municipality in connection with this Project , whether or
not the Project is carried to completion , and whether or
not approved by the Commissioner of Securities , and
whether or not the Municipality by ordinance or resolution
authorizes the issuance of the bonds , will be paid by the
Hospital upon request .
-4-
3 . 3 . The Mayor and City Clerk-Administrator are directed ,
if the bonds are issued and sold , thereafter to comply
with the provisions of Minnesota Statutes , Section 474 .01 ,
Subdivision 8 .
Adopted this day of , 1980.
Mayor
Attest :
City Clerk
The motion for the adoption of the foregoing
_ resolution was duly seconded by Member
and upon vote being tik thereon , the following voted in
favor thereof :
and the following voted against the same :
whereupon the resolution was deu] ared duly passed and
adopted and was signed by the Mayo: whose signature was
attested by the City Clerk-Administrator .
-5-
MEMO TO : John K. Anderson , City Administrator
FROM: Judith S . Cox, Deputy City Clerk
RE : $600,000 I .R. Bonds for S & W Realty
DATE : January 2 , 1981
Introduction
On December 2nd and 16th the Council held a public hearing on an
application of S & W Realty (Shakopee Shops) for $600,000 Indus-
trial Revenue Bonds .
On December 16th staff was directed to prepare a resolution
giving preliminary approval .
Background
For your information , S & W did not use the Dorsey Firm as their
bonding consultant , although they were informed at the onset that
the City did require that they do so . They used Briggs and Morgan ,
Professional Association.
Mr. Krass has carefully examined all the documents relating to the
bond sale and has informed me that they are in order.
Since the City does not have a written requirement that the Dorsey
Firm be used , and since we are so far along in the IR bond process ,
I would recommend that we do not now require the applicant to use
the Dorsey Firm and go ahead and give preliminary approval of the
Industrial Revenue Bond request .
Action Required
Offer Resolution No . 1775 , A Resolution Reciting A Proposal For A
Commercial Facilities Development Project Giving Preliminary
Approval To The Project Pursuant To The Minnesota Municipal
Industrial Development Act Authorizing The Submission Of An
Application For Approval Of Said Project To The Commissioner
Of Securities Of The State Of Minnesota And Authorizing The
Preparation Of Necessary Documents And Materials In Connection
With Said Project , and move its adoption .
JSC/jms
g /L
•
RESOLUTION NO. 1775
RESOLUTION RECITING A PROPOSAL FOR A
COMMERCIAL FACILITIES DEVELOPMENT PROJECT
GIVING PRELIMINARY APPROVAL TO THE PROJECT
PURSUANT TO THE MINNESOTA
MUNICIPAL INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT ACT
AUTHORIZING THE SUBMISSION OF AN APPLICATION
FOR APPROVAL OF SAID PROJECT TO THE
COMMISSIONER OF SECURITIES
OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA
AND AUTHORIZING THE PREPARATION OF
NECESSARY DOCUMENTS AND MATERIALS
IN CONNECTION WITH SAID PROJECT
WHEREAS,
(a) The purpose of Chapter 474 , Minnesota
Statutes, known as the Minnesota Municipal Industrial
Development Act ( the "Act" ) as found and determined by the
legislature is to promote the welfare of the state by the
active attraction and encouragement and development of economi-
cally sound industry and commerce to prevent so far as possible
the emergence of blighted and marginal lands and areas of
chronic unemployment;
(h) Factors necessitating the active promotion
and development of economically sound industry and commerce are
the increasing concentration of population in the metropolitan
areas and the rapidly rising increase in the amount and cost of
governmental services required to meet the needs of the
increased population and the need for development of land use
which will provide an adequate tax base to finance these
increased costs and access to employment opportunities for such
population;
(c) The City Council of the City of Shakopee,
Minnesota ( "the City" ) has received from S & W Realty ( the
"Company" ) a proposal that the City undertake to finance a
Project hereinafter described, through the issuance of revenue
bonds in the form of a single debt instrument ( "the Note" )
pursuant to the Act;
(d ) The City desires to facilitate the selec-
tive development of the community, retain and improve the tax
base and help to provide the range of services and employment
opportunities required by the population ; and the Project will
assist the City in achieving those objectives. The Project
will help to increase assessed valuation of the City and help
maintain a positive relationship between assessed valuation and
debt and enhance the image and reputation of the community;
(e) Company is currently engaged in the
business of owning and managing a shopping center located in
the City. The Project to be financed by the Note is the
renovation and expansion of the existing shopping center and
will result in the employment of up to 25 additional persons to
work within the new facilities;
( f ) The City has been advised by representa-
tives of Company that conventional, commercial financing to pay
the capital cost of the Project is available only on a limited
basis and at such high costs of borrowing that the economic
feasibility of operating the Project would be significantly
reduced, but Company has also advised this Council that with
the aid of municipal financing, and its resulting low bor-
rowing cost, the Project is economically more feasible;
(g) Pursuant to a resolution of the City
Council adopted on Nov . 5 , 1980, a public hearing on the
Project was held on Dec . 2 and Dec . 16 , 1980 , after notice was
published, and materials made available for public inspection
at the City Hall, all as required by Minnesota Statutes,
Section 474 . 01, Subdivision 7b at which public hearing all
those appearing who so desired to speak were heard;
(h) No public official of the City has either a
direct or indirect financial interest in the Project nor will
any public official either directly or indirectly benefit
financially from the Project .
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the
City of Shakopee, Minnesota, as follows:
1. The Council hereby gives preliminary approval to the
proposal of Company that the City undertake the Project
pursuant to the Minnesota Municipal Industrial Development Act
(Chapter 474, Minnesota Statutes) , consisting of the renovation
and construction of facilities within the City pursuant to
Company's specifications suitable for the operations described
above and to a revenue agreement between the City and Company
upon such terms and conditions with provisions for revision
from time to time as necessary, Sc) as to produce income and
revenues sufficient to pay, when due, the principal of and
interest on the Note in the total principal amount of
approximately $600, 000 to be issued pursuant to the Act to
,finance the renovation and construction of the Project; and
said agreement may also provide for-the entire interest of
Company therein to be mortgaged to the purchaser of the Note ;
and the City hereby undertakes preliminarily to issue the Note
in accordance with such terms and conditions;
2. On the basis of information available to this Council
it appears, and the Council hereby finds, that the Project
constitutes properties, real and personal, used or useful in
connection with one or more revenue producing enterprises en-
gaged in any business within the meaning of Subdivision la of
Section 474 . 02 of the Act; that the Project furthers the
purposes stated in Section 474 . 01, Minnesota Statutes ; that the
availability of the financing under the Act and willingness of
the City to furnish such financing will be a substantial
inducement to Company to undertake the Project, and that the
effect of the Project, if undertaken, will be to encourage the
development of economically sound industry and commerce, to
assist in the prevention of the emergence of blighted and
marginal land, to help prevent chronic unemployment, to help
the City retain and improve the tax base and 'to provide the
range of service and employment opportunities required by the
population, to help prevent the movement of talented and
educated persons out of the state and to areas within the State
where their services may not he as effectively used, to promote
more intensive development and use of land within the City and
eventually to increase the tax base of the community;
A 3 . The Project is hereby given preliminary approval by
the City subject to the approval of the Project by the Corn-
missioner of Securities, and subject to final approval by this
Council, Company, and the purchaser of the Note as to the ulti-
mate details of the financing of the Project;
4 . In accordance with Subdivision 7a of Section 474 . 01
Minnesota Statutes, the Mayor of the City is hereby authorized
and directed to submit the proposal for the Project to the
Commissioner of Securities, requesting her approval, and other
officers, employees and agents of the City are hereby
authorized to provide the Commissioner with such preliminary
information as she may require;
r
5. Company has agreed and it is hereby determined that
any and all costs incurred by the City in connection with the
financing of the Project whether or not the Project is carried
to completion and whether or not approved by the Commissioner
will be paid by Company;
6 . Briggs and Morgan, Professional Association, acting as
•
bond counsel, and Juran & Moody, Inc. , investment bankers, are
authorized to assist in the preparation and review of necessary
documents relating to the Project, to consult with the City
Attorney, Company and the purchaser of the Note as to the
maturities, interest rates and other terms and provisions of
the Note and as to the covenants and other provisions of the
necessary documents and to submit such documents to the Council
for final approval;
7 . Nothing . in this resolution or in the documents pre-
pared pursuant hereto shall authorize the expenditure of any
municipal funds on the Project other than the revenues derived
from the Project or otherwise granted to the City for this
purpose. The Note shall not constitute a charge, lien or
encumbrance, legal or equitable, upon any property or funds of
the City except the revenue and proceeds pledged to the payment
thereof, nor shall the City be subject to any liability
thereon. The holder of the Note shall never have the right to
compel any exercise of the taxing power of the City to pay the
outstanding principal on the Note or the interest thereon, or
to enforce payment thereof against any property of the City.
The Note shall recite in substance that the Note including
interest thereon, is payable solely from the revenue and
proceeds pledged to the payment thereof . The Note shall not
constitute a debt of the City within the meaning of any
constitutional or statutory limitation;
8. In anticipation of the approval by the Commissioner of
Securities and the issuance of the Note to finance all or a
portion of the Project, and in order that completion of the
Project will not be unduly delayed when approved, Company is
hereby authorized to make such expenditures and advances toward
payment of that portion of the costs of the Project to be
financed from the proceeds of the Note as Company considers
• necessary, including the use of interim, short-term financing,
subject to reimbursement from the proceeds of the be financed
from the proceeds of the Note as Company considers necessary,
including the use of interim, short-term financing, subject to
reimbursement from the proceeds of the Note if and when
delivered but otherwise without liability on the part of the
City.
K
Adopted by the City Council of the City of. Shakopee,
Minnesota, this day of , 1980.
Mayor
Attest:
City Clerk _
STATE OF MINNESOTA
COUNTY OF SCOTT
CITY OF SHAKOPEE
I, the undersigned, being the duly qualified and
acting Clerk of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota, DO HEREBY
CERTIFY that I have compared the attached and foregoing extract
of minutes with the original thereof on file in my office, and
that the same is a full, true and complete transcript of the
minutes of a meeting of the City Council of said City duly
called and held on the date therein indicated, insofar as such
minutes relate to a resolution giving preliminary approval to a
commercial facilities development project .
WITNESS my hand and the seal of said City this ___
day of 1980 .
City Clerk
(SEAL)
7a.
MEMO TO : John K. Anderson , City Administrator
FROM : Judith S . Cox, Deputy City Clerk
RE : Public Hearing for Assessment Against Ed Siebenaler
Property for Work Done on the 79-2 Fourth Avenue Project
DATE : January 2 , 1981
Introduction
By prior resolution , the Council set January 6 , 1981 at 8 : 15 p .m .
the time for a public hearing to consider an assessment against
the Ed Siebenaler property for the looping of the Fourth Avenue
Watermain Project from Minnesota Street to Dakota Street and from
the railroad track to 7th Avenue .
Background
Mr . Siebenaler entered into an easement agreement with the City of
Shakopee where in exchange for an easement to the City he would
agree to pay not more than $5 , 750 .00 as his assessment for the
benefit of the watermain to his four acre parcel .
The City has advertised the public hearing and the Siebenaler ' s
have been mailed notice thereof , just as we do public improvement
assessment notices .
Council should hold a public hearing and adopt the assessment just
as if this was a public improvement .
The assessment is being spread over 10 years at the rate of 87 ,
as was the assessment against all properties involved in the 79-2
Fourth Avenue Watermain Improvement .
Recommended Action
After closing the public hearing , offer Resolution No . 1779 ,
Adopting Assessments for Ed Siebenaler Property , and move its
adoption .
JSC/jms
17
RESOLUTION NO . 1779
A RESOLUTION ADOPTING ASSESSMENTS
FOR THE ED SIEBENALER PROPERTY
WHEREAS , a contract has been let and ar► improvement has been
made for a watermain between Minnesota Street and Dakota Street and
South of Fourth Avenue (79-2) , and
WHEREAS , it was determined that the watermain should be looped
from Minnesota Street to Dakota Street and from the railroad tracks
south to Seventh Avenue , and
WHEREAS , Ed Siebenaler provided the City with an easement , in
order that this looped watermain might be constructed upon property
owned by him, and
WHEREAS , said easement provides that Mr . Siebenaler would pay
an amount not to exceed Five Thoudand Seven Hundred Fifty Dollars
and No Cents ($5 , 750.00) for special benefit by the watermain to
his property which is described in Exhibit "A" , hereto attached , and
WHEREAS , pursuant to proper notice duly given , the City Council
of the City of Shakopee met and heard and passed upon all objections
to the proposed assessment of the Ed Siebenaler property for a water-
main between Minnesota Street and Dakota Street south of Fourth
Avenue (79-2) .
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA:
1 . That such proposed assessment in the amount of $5 , 750.00
against parcel number 27-906-5230-043-00 for the property described
in Exhibit "A" , attached hereto and made a part hereof is hereby
accepted and shall constitute the special assessment against the
land named herein and said tract is hereby found to be benefitted
by the proposed improvement in the amount of the assessment levied
against it .
2 . Such assessment shall be payable in equal annual install-
ments extending over a period of ten (10) years , the first install-
ment to be payable on or before the first Monday in January , 1982 ,
and shall bear interest at the rate of 8 .0 percent per annum
Resolution No . 1779
from the date of the adoption of this assessment resolution . To
the first installment shall be added the interest on the entire
assessment from the date of this resolution until December 31 , 1981 ,
and to each subsequent installment when due shall be added the
interest for one year on all unpaid installments . •
3 . The owner of any property so assessed may , at any time
prior to certification of the assessment to the County Auditor , pay
the whole of the assessment on such property , with interest accrued
to the date of payment , to the City Treasurer , except that no
interest shall be charged if the entire assessment is paid within
thirty (30) days from the adoption of this resolution ; he may
thereafter pay to the County Treasurer the installment and interest
in process of collection on the current tax list , and he may pay
the remaining principal balance of the assessment to the City
Treasurer .
4 . The clerk shall certify annually to the County Auditor
on or before October 10th of each year the total amount of
installments and interest which are to become due in the following
year on the assessment on said parcel of land .
Adopted in session of the City Council of the
City of Shakopee , Minnesota , held this day of
1981 .
Mayor of the City of Shakopee
ATTEST :
City Clerk
Approved as to form this
day of , 1981 .
City Attorney
l))
MEMO TO : John K. Anderson , City Administrator
FROM : Judith S . Cox , Deputy City Clerk
RE: Vacation of Easements in Minnesota Valley 3rd Addition
DATE: January 2 , 1981
Introduction
On December 2 , 1980, the Council adopted a resolution setting a
time and place for a public hearing on the vacation of drainage
and utility easements in Lots 3 through 7 of Block 3 , Minnesota
Valley 3rd Addition .
Background
Lots 3 through 7 , Block 3 of Minnesota Valley 3rd Addition have
been replated into Minnesota Valley 4th Addition. The developer
has provided the City with a drainage and utility easement covering
the plat of Minnesota Valley 4th Addition.
Both the Planning Commission and the City Council have approved
the final plat of Minnesota Valley 4th Addition .
Before the plat of Minnesota Valley 4th Addition can be filed,
the easements in Minnesota Valley 3rd Addition , Blocks 3 through
7 , must be vacated .
Recommended Action
1 . Open public hearing and hear members of the audience .
2 . Close public hearing .
3 . Adopt Resolution No . 1780, A Resolution Vacating Utility
Easements Lying Within Lots 3 Through 7 , Block 3 , Minnesota
Valley 3rd Addition .
JSC/jms
528 0/
• S?9922&7../y
3 I
\
1 9 k'I ,'';
I , 4/8,47°,
__
Minnesota Valley 3rd Add ' n2_ • •• • , /3/5&
, o
/2o.oo t (4 cj --;' C•1 \s) 2
18
. : ,)tiN ',,,?, 'c0 •" \O i /1/49,'Zi
' %I —
I /P.f/222)/e
: T-
/7/
0 NMn. Valley 4th Add 'n.
______
,
,,,, ,z1.0 ,
t____ _ _
C)
' c;, 17
rk-,
•), iN, 3
L 4/8g`,72,
- -
----
, tti -. ,
I
• .,)- , 1,,, LI
).. ' ...,..;
Cr ,- ,-/Y/3-0 1 I 4/1/275-5//,,- — ,--1- ,--:
, 1
L___ 4-
i Ir. .:';‘ _
' ,4% JO :)
- .
(/) ' -4.% ...
,'Ce)'8°27 r --- 73,4,
--
____ J '
i• C.4 .1
5
- -4.- 1
I CI I .; •, -... Xi/50 i „
' o .
N. •. tiW _ __ _ _
15 2 _
'156 —---------
N) r__ ------ , ,i/,947,,,,,.,7./._
L-
/Z ',1' t - —
I 6
1 —
..- 0 ... --/--„--,-,,--5---- --- - -- -, 1 4/gzezzi.',7
'. i ,,,
,...,,..
1
. ..Z1.5-WO 4/88S-527.2c- -'• ' 4 \,
;•
14
•
4/827':5-3--/.,- : ,,c, _ ..1 1,, /3/50
. _, — 4/29,"270./E ,: i 1 7
,
,
1 ,z -ijel ,4 , .r.17;;;; ----.--::: ---1
, 5 `‘\r 13 :,7' ',; 'T, ---7_76:6--
,-,
-,'
,
/ 27 L.•-, i N
N ,
_Aigi_°7/ 7
ort, • • , -- --,
h "7 /2dm . 4 , 73./.co
1 I — ..,,1 ,n 49/SO
' . r ,4 :',, 12 ,,,,, 1,
..)1 9
,,.. 49,9°5527
4 Al I
% , -----------
.. t".or — ' /J/co- - ----/fi ---4,--
\
V ,c.,
' te II ,-11- vl
' I% 10
. N IN
7 ,`'• N --', -;--, z t c,
. ,, ...„.
c41 t 80 '
, L a( 3- ': L _ /.7/5-4
, ,r'77 /7",4 : fi • /9 y/ --
.A. •
tyga
A-,. N, /20•0.6-
_
THIRTEENTHi ci Li
487 - Y
' 8,00-1P r 1,99,j-O
0
\
„......,................_ . .
. . .
. •
28,;,,,,,,.. ... . .
.1%
. -.,
'is •
()\I ! -
-N, „c"` i •_,:i p :'-:
,
_ :. ._ /2007 /0002 5-592 8/1 2 '' '' 3
3 • l. !
- . 1 ,. . t ' a0
ta.;,.....
- .•
653 66 $c96°s6-%a"ii/ - - -
frAiiiimbiuk, -;-:, , ,41.7.'°'e'sweql,,,,- - ' • ,,v,:,,,,,-1"l' 4 t v ii',‘','t;''',:;'7,,?Pe":"IlVai'340;:, 0 ,qt,,..k,t4'4.44404 ,NaLitZlitAtti;,..,-...A.aekuon44114iaiiii4giati010401a' s'.1,-
• � o
RESOLUTION NO . 1780
A RESOLUTION VACATING UTILITY EASEMENTS LYING WITHIN
LOTS 3 THROUGH 7 , BLOCK 3 , MINNESOTA VALLEY 3RD ADDITION
-
" on
WHEREAS , the plat of Minnesota Valley 4th Addition , which has
been approved by the City of Shakopee and presented to the County
Recorder for recording, is a replat of Lots 3 through 7 of Block 3 ,
Minnesota Valley 3rd Addition , and
WHEREAS , the City has received from the developers of Minnesota
Valley 4th Addition, all necessary drainage and utility easements , and
WHEREAS , it has been made to appear to the Shakopee City Council
that the drainage and utility easements lying within Minnesota Valley
3rd Addition to the City of Shakopee hereinafter described will serve
no public use or interest after the filing of the proposed plat of
Minnesota Valley 4th Addition , and
WHEREAS , the Council has set a date for a public hearing at
which time to consider said vacation and due notice of the hearing
has been given , as prescribed by law , and
WHEREAS , all persons desiring to be heard on the matter were
heard at the public hearing in the Council Chambers in the City of
Shakopee , and
WHEREAS , the Council has been fully advised in all things .
NOW , THEREFORE , BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF SHAKOPEE , MINNESOTA:
1 . That it finds and determines that the vacation , hereinafter
described , is in the public interest and serves no further
public need ,
2 . That the drainage and utility easements lying within Lots
3 through 7 inclusive , Block 3 , Minnesota Valley 3rd
Addition as platted and recorded in the office of the
County Recorder , Scott County , Minnesota , are hereby
vacated ,
3 . That, after the adoption of this resolution , the City
Clerk shall file certified copies hereof with the
County Auditor and County Recorder of Scott County .
Resolution No . 1780
• Adopted in regular session of the City Council of the City of
Shakopee , Minnesota , held this 6th day of January , 1981 .
Mayor of the City of Shakopee
ATTEST:
City Clerk
Approved as to form this
day of , 1981 .
City Attorney
9c
MEMO
TO: John K. Anderson , City Administrator
FROM : Judith S . Cox, Deputy City Clerk
RE : 1981 Pool Table Licenses
DATE : January 2 , 1981
Introduction :
Pool Table Licenses are renewed annually at the beginning of
the year .
Background :
I sent applications for renewal of pool table licenses to the five
establishments currently holding a pool table license : Shakopee
Bowl , R . Hanover , Inc . , Shakopee House , Abeln ' s Bar and House of
Hoy , Inc .
To date I have received applications from Shakopee Bowl for two
pool tables , Abeln ' s Bar for one table and the Shakopee House
for one table .
Should I receive additional applications prior to the January 6th
meeting, I would hope that the Council would consider them also .
Recommended Action :
1 . Approve the application and grant a pool talbe license for 1981
to Shakopee Bow1 ,222 East First Ave . , for two pool tables .
2 . Approve the application and grant a pool table license to
Abeln ' s Bar , 220 West 2nd Ave . , for one pool table .
3 . Approve the application and grant a pool table license to
The Shakopee House , 1583 East First Ave . , for one pool table .
JSC :plk
Ci(j
MEMO TO : John K. Anderson , City Administrator
FROM : Judith S . Cox , Deputy City Clerk
RE : Applications for On Sale and Sunday Liquor License
for Empire Vending & Music Company , Inc .
DATE : December 31 , 1980
Introduction
The City has received applications from Empire Vending and Music
Company, Inc . for an On Sale and a Sunday On Sale Liquor License ,
to be located in the Minnesota Valley Mall where Garcia ' s is now
located .
Background
The Police Department has done a background check on the sale
stockholder, Thomas Green , and recommends issuance of the licenses .
I have received the appropriate fees , and the insurance policy is
in order ; however, the bond is not in order at this time . It is
hoped that the bond will be in order by the January 6 , 1981
meeting and if so, the Council could consider the applications .
Recommendation
1
1 . If bond is in order :
Approve the applications and grant an On Sale and a Sunday
Liquor License to Empire Vending & Music Company , Inc .
1145 Minnesota Valley Mall , upon surrender of the liquor
license now held by Garcia ' s Inn Inc . , no later than
January 9 , 1981 at 4 :30 P .M.
2 . If bond is not in order :
Table the applications for an On Sale and a Sunday Liquor
License for Empire Vending & Music Company, Inc .
JSC/jms
?42,)
MEMO TO : John K. Anderson , City Administrator
FROM : Judith S . Cox, Deputy City Clerk
RE : New Stockholder of House of Hoy Inc .
DATE : January 2 , 1981
Introduction
I have been informed by Mr . Walter Joseph Wilinski that he intends
to purchase the stock of House of Hoy Inc . from Paul A . Scherber .
Background
Since this proposed change is internal (change of stockholders)
rather than a sale between corporations or individuals , it is
not a new license . Mr. Coller has explained that the Council
can approve of the new stockholder , but there will be no approval
of issuance of a license , since the corporation itself already
holds a license .
Mr . Wilenski has completed the Police Department General Informa-
tion Application and the Police Department has completed a back-
ground investigation and as a result of such has recommended
approval .
Recommendation
Motion to approve Mr . Walter Joseph Wilinski as the new stock-
holder of House of Hoy Inc .
JSC/jms
f
' ` `�` Citgo of Shakopeeg -9" " '- "
/%` 5,A K o ` POLICE DEPARTMENT ENT `�.', /
NES "1 lei .Aim
�� � ,, 1i/, _ ; 476 South Gorman Street �`
J `, qi SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA 55379 ;';‘: -
P ' •-.41Tel. 445.6666
O i I CE . j`� c
1.
11:
14.
`'1
TO: Mayor, Council Members
FROM: Thomas Brownell , Chief of Police
DATE: January 2 , 1981
SUBJECT: On Sale-Sunday Liquor License Application
A background investigation has been conducted relative to an On
Sale-Sunday Liquor License application submitted by Walter
Joseph Wilinski Jr .
No information was developed which would indicate denial of a
license to be appropriate.
I recommend issuance of a license to the applicant.
Sincerely,
Thomas G. Brownell
CHIEF OF POLICE
TGB:dmh
/O �E2VE ) �20/tct
MEMO TO : John K. Anderson , City Administrator
FROM : Judith S . Cox , Deputy City Clerk
RE : Bingo and Gambling License Applications from
the American Legion
DATE : December 30 , 1980
Background
We have received applications from the American Legion for both
a bingo and a gambling license for calendar year 1981 .
I have checked with the Chief of Police and he has no problem
with the renewal of the licenses .
The Legion has conducted bingo games for a number of years in
this community without any problems .
The fees and appropriate documents required to be filed with
the City have been filed and are in order .
Recommendation
Approve the applications and grant a gambling license and a
bingo license for 1981 to the American Legion Post #2 , 1266
East First Avenue .
JSC/jms
MEMO TO : John K. Anderson, City Administrator
FROM: Judith S . Cox, Deputy City Clerk
RE : Official Newspaper
DATE : December 31 , 1980
Introduction
One of the actions which needs to be taken at the first Council
meeting of the year is the designation of the official newspaper
for the City of Shakopee .
Recommended Action
Move to designate the Shakopee Valley News as the official news-
paper for the City of Shakopee for the year 1981 .
JSC/jms
CVL
MEMO TO : John K. Anderson , City Administrator
FROM : Gregg Voxland , Finance Director
RE : Payment for Tank (New Fire Truck)
DATE : December 22 , 1980
Introduction
Council has previously accepted the quotation of Yarusso Manu-
facturing for the building of a tank for the new Fire Department
tank truck. The tank is complete and on the truck . The Fire
Department is putting on the finishing touches before the truck
is put into service .
Recommendation
Request council to authorize payment to Yarusso Manufacturing in
the amount of $7 , 160.00 as per quotation .
GV/jms
00
MEMO TO: John R. Anderson , City Administrator
FROM : Jeanne Andre , Administrative Assistant
RE : Model Main Street Program
DATE : December 18 , 1980
Introduction
A notice appeared in the December issue of the Housing and
Community Development Briefs regarding a Model Main Street
Program proposed by the Office of Local and Urban Affairs
of the State Planning Agency (see notice attached) . I con-
tacted John Morse of that office to see if Shakopee could
reasonably be selected .
Background
Mr . Morse provided the following information regarding the
type of city the agency hopes to select and the objectives
they will try to achieve in the operation of the program .
The city will probably have a population of 2500 to 25 ,000,
have some type of organization with downtown revitalization
as a priority area of interest and one person who can coor-
dinate efforts . The City should be ready-to-go , but without
very specific plans in mind .
The type of assistance the State Planning Agency will pro-
vide includes fact-finding and organization . This could
include market information and an approach to planning and
implementation - without actually carrying out the full
planning process . They also have a little money to bring
in consultants if special problems are encountered .
Recommendation
This sounds like an ideal program for Shakopee considering
the current interest in downtown revitalization . As the
application form is so brief , very little effort needs to
be expended to notify the agency of the city ' s interest .
The only committment needed by the city is to become part
of a support network for downtown revitalization in other
cities . Therefore I recommend that the Council authorize
staff to submit an application to participate in the Pilot
Main Street Program of the Office of Local and Urban Affairs ,
Minnesota State Planning Agency .
JA/jms
attachment
, 71,4'
Recommendations for Funding Source Downtown Development
Representatives
• HUD should expand information provided to planners, Awards Competition Open
city managers, and other local officials on CDBG and
housing guidelines, including specific recommendations The Downtown Research and Development Center
on how and when these dollars can be used directly or recently announced its third annual downtown develop-
indirectly to support human services; reconsider its ment awards competition, designed to honor private or
mandate that comprehensive CDBG grants be awarded public sector developers whose innovative efforts have
only to communities that can designate a neighborhood helped revitalize downtown areas of cities and towns. Of
strategy area; and eliminate the provision that a crucial importance is how the project enhanced the
community seeking funds to do"public service"projects be downtown economy, environment, and job base.
denied funding from other sources before requesting Only completed projects (or those with a significant,
CDBG funds. discrete phase completed) are eligible. Previous awards
• The Minnesota State Department of,Education should have gone to developers in Mankato as well as Baltimore;
Washington, Pennsylvania; Frederick, Maryland;
give more emphasis to disseminating Community
Education funds in the state with regard to human services, Middletown, Ohio; Eugene and Portland, Oregon; and
and investigate the charges that some Community Philadelphia.
Education programs pay excessive rent for school building Entry forms must he submitted to the Center,along with
use, thereby siphoning off the CE dollars for regular a $75 fee, by January I, 1981. Detailed supporting
education programs. materials that answer the question "In what ways did this
For a free copy of the full report or more information project benefit its downtown?"are encouraged. For entry
contact Jim Franczyk, Coordinator of Human Services forms or more information, contact Mary Dalessandro,
Policy Research, State Planning Agency, 101 Capitol Coordinator, Downtown Research and Development
Square Building, St. Paul, MN 55 101 (612/296-4849). Center, 27() Madison Avenue, New York, NY 10016
(212/889-5666).
The answer to the question of whether downtowns will survive is an emphatic"Yes." The main issue is how to ensure that public and
private leadership will form a partnership in individual communities to make sure that main streets do survive and thrive.
—Irwin L. Davis
Model Main Street Program Proposed
The Office of Local and Urban Affairs is planning a model Main Street program for facilitating downtown revitalization
in Minnesota's smaller cities. While the long-range goal of this program is to establish a support network of downtown
resources for small cities, the immediate objective is to develop a limited pilot program.
The pilot program would consist of a series of workshops,held for two selected cities and tailored to their particular needs
and goals, to identify:
• the types of people and organizations needed to initiate a downtown revitalization program
• the elements needed for forging a solid public/private partnership
• the steps necessary to prepare a downtown or "main street" plan
• the methods and resources needed to implement the plan
Two cities will be selected for the pilot Main Street program by the end of February, with the workshops scheduled to
begin in the spring of 1981. Cities interested in participating should submit the short application form below by January 15,
1981. For more information,contact John Morse,Office of Local and Urban Affairs, State Planning Agency, 200 Capitol
Square Building, St. Paul, MN 55101 (612/296-2532; Toll-free, 1-800-652-9747).
e 1'1LOT MAiN STREET PROGRAM
is interested in the Main Street Program.
(Name of City)
name of local organization with downtown revitalization as a priority area of interest.
name and phone number of person(public or private sector)committed to downtown
revitalization and available to work on the pilot program.
Applicants must agree to participate in 3 or 4 workshops during the course of the program and must he willing to he
part of a support network for revitalizing downtown areas in other communities.
Return this application form by January 15, 198/ to:John Morse, Office of Local and Urban Affairs, State Planning
Agency, 200 Capitol Square Building, St. Paul, MN 5510/.
PA MAN-e.-a®-0.LMMMAN M'3 SAM man WML.Ai®®®MA®MM MAN VT7 B'.£7 EZN=°9. CCM ENO ORM NMmaw G•:9MAN=M®@Ca IMS
MEMO TO : John K . Anderson , City Administrator
FROM : Jeanne Andre , Executive Director
RE : Sale of Ambulance Leased to St . Francis Hospital
DATE : December 22 , 1980
Introduction
The City purchased an ambulance in 1970 which has been leased
to St . Francis Hospital for emergency services . The hospital
now wants to terminate the lease agreement , thereby leaving
the City with the question of how to best dispose of the ambu-
lance .
Background
In 1970 the City of Shakopee purchased an ambulance for the
sum of $8 ,890.00. Half of the funds for this purchase were
provided by local business and service organizations . The
other half of the funds were provided under a grant from the
National Highway Safety Act , administered by the Minnesota
State Department of Public Safety. Terms of the grant require
that the vehicle be used as an ambulance and that proper main-
tenance and insurance be provided for the vehicle . The City
entered a lease agreement with St . Francis Hospital that indi-
cated that the hospital would operate the ambulance and provide
appropriate maintenance and insurance . The City still holds
the registration of the vehicle .
The hospital recently purchased a new ambulance . With this new
ambulance and another ambulance purchased since 1970, the hospital
no longer needs the City ambulance even for back-up . Therefore
the hospital is terminating the lease agreement , which places
the ambulance back in the control of the City . As the City has
no interest in operating its own ambulance service , the most
likely course of action is sale of the ambulance .
The hospital has requested that the City donate proceeds of the
sale of the ambulance to help defray the cost of the new ambu-
lance , which cost $38 ,000. (See attached letter) . This seems
like a reasonable request since funds originally contributed
by local groups and businesses were intended to go toward the
provision of ambulance services . However there are certain
restrictions on the use of proceeds of the grant funds . Regula-
tions regarding the sale of items purchased under a grant include
the following provisions : 1) the City can collect 10% or $100.00
(whichever is more) for the administrative expenses involved in
the sale of the vehicle ; 2) after administrative expenses are
subtracted from the proceeds , 50% of the remainder would belong
to the City with no restrictions (because the City was responsible
for providing a 50% match, in this case provided by local business
and service organizations . ) ; 3) the other 507 of the proceeds
must be spent by the City for a traffic safety expenditure .
_
As an example , if the ambulance is sold for $1 ,000, $100 would go
toward administrative expenses incurred in the sale of the vehicle ,
$450 would go directly to the City with no restrictions , and $450
would be required to be dedicated to expenditures for traffic
safety . A donation to St . Francis Hospital for purchase of a new
ambulance would not satisfy this last requirement . Examples of
expenditures likely to be approved include : police training,
traffic safety meetings , EMT training, radar equipment .
Alternatives
The City Council can keep the ambulance or arrange for its sale .
If the ambulance is sold , the proceeds can be kept in the capital
equipment development fund or the portion that the City controls
can be donated to the hospital .
Recommendation
The City Council authorize the staff to take steps necessary to
arrange for the sale of the ambulance .
The City Council authorize the City Administrator to contact St .
Francis Hospital and inform the Executive Director that the ambu-
lance will be sold and the City Council plans to donate funds to
the hospital to help defray the cost of the new ambulance . The
exact amount of the donation to be determined by the amount recap-
tured from the sale of the ambulance under the grant regulations .
JA/jms
/ .
St.Francis Hospital
325 WEST FIFTH AVENUE/SHAKOPEE,MINNESOTA 55379/(612)445-2322
December 19, 1980
Mr. John K. Anderson
City Administrator
City of Shakopee
129 East First Avenue
Shakopee, MN 55379
Dear Mr. Anderson:
On June 23, 1970, the hospital entered into an agreement with the
City of Shakopee to lease a 1970 Chevrolet ambulance. This agree-
ment is still in effect.
Recently the hospital purchased a new ambulance, capable of providing
Advanced Life Support Service, to replace the 1970 ambulance. Therefore,
please consider this letter as our thirty day notice to terminate the
lease agreement. Upon termination of this agreement the vehicle will
be returned to the City.
We would like to ask the City to consider donating any proceeds from
the sale of the 1970 vehicle, if it is sold, back to the hospital to
help defray part of the cost of the new ambulance. The cost of the new
ambulance was approximately $38,000. We understand that there were
some federal funds used in the initial purchase of this 1970 ambulance
which may complicate matters.
If there are any questions, please contact myself or Mike Sortum.
Sincerely,
Sistet Agnes Ottig,
Executive Director
SAO: fpl
cc: Eldon Berkland, Ambulance Supervisor
SPONSORED BY THE FRANCISCAN SISTERS OF ST. PAUL, MN
1MIEMO TO : Mayor and City Council
FROM : John K. Anderson, City Administrator
RE : Contract for Electrical Inspection Services
DATE : December 30, 1980
Introduction
Roy N . Baker has been doing the City ' s electrical inspections for
a number of years . For much of that time Roy operated under a
contract with the State Board of Electricity , and he inspected for
a number of cities . That contract is no longer in force and the
City should replace it with its own contract .
Proposed Contract
The proposed contract was drafted using Mr . Baker ' s contract with
the State as a guide and is very similar to that document . The
contract has been reviewed by Mr. Baker and the City Building
Inspector and both feel that it properly reflects the responsibil-
ities Mr . Baker is to perform.
The method of payment is the same one we have used in the past
under the State contract .
Alternatives
1 . Continue to operate without a contract .
2 . Approve the proposed contract which keeps the present working
relationship but formalizes it .
3 . Modify the contract or draft a new one .
Recommendation
The City has had an excellent working relationship with Mr . Baker,
therefore , I recommend alternative #2 , approval of the attaches?
contract .
JKA/jms
attachment
CONTRACT FOR ELECTRICAL INSPECTIONS 1:4C
CITY OF SHAKOPEE
Roy N . Baker , 1110 South Division Street , Northfield , Minnesota ,
55057 is hereby appointed an electrical inspector for the City of
Shakopee to serve at the pleasure of the City Council .
The City of Shakopee acknowledges receipt of his electrical
inspector ' s bond in the amount of $1 ,000 payable to the City of
Shakopee in case of default .
As such inspector , he hereby agrees to enforce the Minnesota
Electrical Act , the Rules and Regulations of the State Board of
Electricity thereunder and the appropriate ordinances of the City
of Shakopee , as pertaining to the licensing of electricians and
inspection of electrical installations . The rate of compensation
for his services shall be 80% of the electrical inspection fees
collected by the City of Shakopee .
In addition to any other rules , regulations or directives
promulgated or issued under authority of the City of Shakopee , he
hereby agrees to comply with the following rules :
1 . Report to this office when called upon .
2 . Supply the City of Shakopee with a verification of
automobile liability insurance on Form 1927 in the
amounts of not less than $50 ,000 for any one person ,
$100 ,000 for any one accident for personal injury and
$10,000 for property damage .
3 . Supply a monthly report of inspections completed .
(Payment shall not exceed percentage of work completed) .
4. Deposit with the City of Shakopee any inspection fees
received in the field .
5 . Delegate authority and responsibilities to no one except
duly authorized representatives of this office upon
request .
6 . Keep a Journeyman or Master electrician ' s license in
force at all times .
By this appointment , the City of Shakopee places trust and
authority upon Roy N . Baker as art independent contractor qualified
and certified as such to make electrical inspections in behalf of
the City of Shakopee in the geographical area defined by the City ' s
corporate limits .
This certification shall be dated concurrent with said bond ,
which shall terminate on December 31 , 1981 , unless amended or
withdrawn previous to that date by the City of Shakopee or its
duly authorized agents .
Approved by the Shakopee City Council this day of
, 1981 .
SIGN ONE COPY BELOW & RETURN CITY OF SHAKOPEE
.v vg2
Insp- '.toy ' s Signature Mayor
///G',.5:6' S
Present Address ` �r.5--7 City Administrator
City Clerk
E
.e0I re.„ CITY OF SHAK V PE
129 East First Avenue, Shakopee, Minnesota 553799f—e
/Ci7kI «`�
MEMO
TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator
FROM: Larry D . Martin, City Assessor
SUBJECT: Personnel
DATE: 12-22-80
Introduction :
• The recent termination of the cities C . E . T.A. position has
left the Assessing Department with a gap in it ' s workload
distribution. As you know, the mainstream of George Johnson' s
activity for the City of Shakopee was, ( 1 ) conducting field
inspections, ( 2) routine clerical-type duties. Because it
is unlikely that we will be able to fill this gap with someone
of Georges caliber, re-analysis of the departments personnel
make up is necessary.
Background:
The first step in this analysis is to lay out the duties that
will have to be shifted or assumed by new personnel as tot_lown :
1 ) Field Inspection Duties
A) Annual 25% (approximately 1 , 000 parcels @ 20 per day =
50 working days or approximately 21/2 months)
B) New Construction ( roughly 300 permits per year @ 15
per day = 20 working days or approx .
1. month )
2 ) Clerical-Type Duties
A) The following duties are fairly routine and require
regular attention
1 ) Records Upday i . e. property ownership , legal desc .
2) C .R .V. handling
3) Sales Ratio Calculations
4) Updating Permit Lists
5) Updating Ownership Maps
6) Updating Sales Maps
Page 2
?' „,1
3 ) Special Projects
A) Farm Land Regrading ( completed for 1980 assessment )
B ) Preparding new ownership maps ( 4 , 000 parcels @ approx .
100 per day s 40 working
days or approx. 2 months)
C ) Preparding new sales maps( this project is presently
roughed out and will probably
require 1 to 2 weeks attention
to transfer data from rough
map to final product . )
D) Address Cross Reference File( this project is just entering
the exploration stage. It ' s
need stems from the probable
introduction of computer
technology to the Assessing
Dept . in planning this project
examples will probably be
obtainable from communities in
Hennepin Co. A data base may be
obtainable from SPUC . )
E) Property Data File( This project is on a start and stop
phase at this time . Both LeRoy & George
have worked on it when time is available.
To project a time frame requires a more
definite plan of action. )
ALTERNATIVES :
With the presentation of the foregoing data, we can draw the
following alternatives .
1 ) Continue with present personnel and shift duties. Hire
part time help for 25% annual inspection. BUDGET EFFECT :
We are budgeted for part time help in 1981 in the amount
of $3 , 000.
2 ) Continue with present personnel and shift duties. Hire
part time help for -Clerical Duties . BUDGET EFFECT : $3 ,000
in 1981 budget .
3) Continue with present personnel and hire an appraiser
trainee to assume terminated position duties. BUDGET EFFECT :
requires money not available in City budget ; C .E . T .A. program •
is a possibility.
4) Continue with present personnel , shift duties and hire
clerical help . BUDGET EFFECT : Required money not available
in City budget . C . E . T. A . Program iu a possibility
Page 3
SUMMARY:
Alternatives #1 & #2 are both viable possibilities. However,
because they are both short term the effect on the workload
distribution would be minimal . Service deterioration is
probable.
Alternative #3 is most desirable and would have the maximum
effect on the workload distribution, however, City money is not
available. Further, it is rather unlikely that we could establish
a position of this caliber through the C .E . T.A. funding.
Alternative #4 is the second most desirable . City money is not
available , however, if C .E . T.A. funding is available I believe a
clerical position could be filled especially if we highlite
the educational support that C .E .T.A. provides.
RECOMMENDATION:
I believe the most practical solution is Alternative #4, seeking
C .E.T.A. Funding. The person filling this position would assume
the clerical duties described earlier along with working on the
special projects planned. Direct supervision will be provided
by Phyllis with indirect supervision from the City Assessor.
Field inspection duties will be assumed by the City Assessor.
Some of the positive effects of this alternative are as follows :
1 ) Desirable workload distribution which will aid in
maintaining quality of service .
2) Part time money now budgeted will be kept in reserve
for possible overload
3) The temporary nature of the C .E . T .A. position will allow
us personnel flexibility during the planning stages of
automation.
The only negative effect produced by this alternative that comes
to mind is the loss of time by the City Assessor in the areas of
managing duties, special requests & projects ( i . e . Lindemann
condemnation, Plekkenpol appeal , etc . )
Again one of the most important aspects of this alternative is
the flexibility it will provide, as the time draws near when the
City will decide if computer technology is necessary for our
Assessing department, and if the City decides to pursue this
this technology our demand for personnel will undoubtedly
experience fluctuations.
LDM: plk
vu-
a°'./t,_ ,
•
November 21, 1980 �yy`
ter,
The Honorable J. Edward Quest r
Mayor of Dccphaven
20225 Cottageaood Road
Excelsior, MN 55331 DEe 2 4
Dear Sar: „
The Metropolitan Waste Control Commission is desirous of improving
and expanding its communications with the over 100 local units of
government it serves in the seven county metropolitan area.
When the Metropolitan Sewer Act was enacted by the legislature over
a decade ago, it provided for the establishment of Sewer Service
Area Advisory Boards (SSAAB) for the purposes of reviewing, casting
and advising the Oimission on its various activities.
The Comrmission would like to re-activate these service area advisory
hoards, therefore we would like to suggest that you and your council
appoint a member of the council or an employee to serve on this
Advisory Board. The responsibilities of the Advisory Board would
be to review and Garment on such matters as the cost allocation
system, operating budgets, capital improvement programs, air/water
quality standards, future wastewater standards and related operating
and capital costs, and other such matters that would require review
and ozaanent. In aaaition, many of the problems and misunderstandings
that occur frau time to time may be better handled in this process.
We would appreciate it very much if your appointment can be made by
January 10, 1981. If you have any questions, please call
Mr. Anthony C. Cnerre at 222-8423.
This suggested procedures is not intended to be a forrral organization
with decision making or policy powers, for that would be contrary
to the laws of the State which impose upon the Commission these
responsibilities. Rather, this is an effort to gain the advice and
knowledge of the communities pities and to share with the communities facts
and expertise available to the Commission in as expeditious a way
as possible.
•
Your cooperation on this matter will be greatly appreciated and should
provide a greater opportunity to serve the people of this region in
a rrore productive and efficient manner. Attached is a schedule
identifying communities within each service area. Because of the
variations in size, each SSAAR may well set up different procedures
and meeting schedules; we would hope that there would at least be
semi-annual meetings by each.
Ve_y truly yours,
550 MET RO/OURRE BLDG. ! Salisbury Adams
7TH&ROBERT/TREET! CrmaLZTIaTl
/FM PPUL Mn 551O1
612 222.8423
SA:pd cc. Commissioner representing service area
?/712/18/$0
Memp To John Anderson
Subject : Acquisition Q'D y d Lake IslandB From Federal Government
Introduction
During the past two years I have corresponded with with Mr
Jerome Heinz of the Federal BLM Office in Duluth regarding
their transfer o:f ownership of five of the islands on O'Dowd
Lake in Scott County, City Of Shakopee, to the City Of Shakopee.
In addition last spring while the League Of Minnesota Cities
was convening in Convention at Duluth Na- Doug Reeder visited
with Mr Heinz regarding this subject.
In no way are they able to properly supervise this land or many
others around the country that they are responsible far. As a
result they are sympathetic to the idea. This whole idea of
transfer of ownership is being initiated by them. The islands
are contiguous to the City's present park land. Its
include the large four acre island on the sout C of the lake .
It does include four very islands and the larger one at the
end of the point.
Backgroun
For any transfer to take place the BLM needs to develop a
plaza. Public drop-in type hearings have been scheduled including
one in St Paul on January 8. If we wish to proceed in this
transfer we should be represented. In light of last spring's
reversal of direction by our City Council regarding park acqui-
sition at O'Dowd Lake we need to determine if we should proceed
in this process to acquire these islands. This would not involve
any dollars.
CA Alternatives
1 . Proceed with plan of acquisition working with BLM leadership
at the Duluth regional office.
2. Drop the whole idea.
D` Recommendation
Proceed with plan of acquisition (or transfer of ownership ).
The property is basically contiguous to present owned park
land and therefore is compatible.
No other governmental agency is in a position to properly
supervise this land. Potential negative factors could be a
problem, for the future park and therefore be a detraction.
George F. Muenchow
Attachments
•t y =i ♦ •I' ; i t i y • �► r rytig f�n l
}�-k X •711'4l f' ,{Kt r A 'i�••:!'i Sj .K i .Jt•+'•. o # r J Sr,� •, AA J .,
•
1 ,41-$40 ••' Y 7)---a °! I t,s T," I R t { s n. J'S. 2 ,e{.r J1`: 1
i♦ •. C' Vp h I ,y,r 1.;.i .1 1 ,4. tri'44:-:''
s '' .;.'N ��1lt yr '} M. ., r Y . 1 • r ' a y •
a y}d4.: i" � y\r{ "S 1 i "� {h7 1.{ �IIi � ) tk f [ _r dj + cam. ~ .j' s },. +..
r I , fy`5 ..1 Q { {, t.$ ; '!t' r y''''4f'.-J,..- 3'`]F M r }fid C�` Jrx�"J:'
• +, +�t ',: ,{ i,,;tf i'r."ec'1 -s ;7u` t -0 . •:,7314-...,::,,,..,0,— •
•t'� i I s ..sq, I,:�'r24' •.
•
.- r- ' , ". ,...4 p. 0,;Cy,F.)':•• 1 y �' �J� r, i
� 'y!. �+ ,..a +1", Y,4,„. .,7` /l' 1}kWl i �,Jl.: tt �g,�{};
,.ry,a 4�L , y ,,y, ,rr.
�: tb� • • •• kn '-'i',-4 0,, v ;
,0*'$1 OF.j� IN REPLY REFER TO
% -� !
..
, . 7 It/
1605 (080)
If you wish to comment or inspect the management plan, but are unable to attend a
workshop, you may call or visit the Lake States Office in Duluth from 8:00 a. m. to
4:30 p. m. , Monday through Friday.
If you have questions or would like more information, please contact Larry Johnson, ,
Environmental and Planning Coordinator (218) 727-6692, extension 378.
Sincerely, .
4_ ..._.6,,,,,,,,,..„.(7,cez.
Jerome M. ei.11z
• Manager
Attachments:
•
PUBLIC WORKSHOP SCHEDULE
DATE TIME PLACE
Monday, January 5th 1-5 p. m. Room S-108, Science Building,
Rainy River Community College
Highway 11 and Highway 71
International Falls, MN.
Tuesday, January 6th 1-5 p. m. Room A -303, Administration Bldg.
Fergus Falls Community College
Fergus Falls, MN.
Wednesday, January 7th 1-5 p. m. Room 317
Brainerd Community College
College Drive at SW 4th Street
Brainerd, Mn.
Thursday, January 8th 1-5 p. m. Room 166
Earle Brown Cont. Ed. Center
University of Minnesota
1890 Buford Avenue
St. Paul, MN.
Tuesday, January 13th 1-5 p.m. Bureau of Land Management
Lake States Office
125 Federal Building
Duluth, Minnesota 55802
..........— ..„,!.........., • .______L__ ... ?'•tik ".
-I ct T° r, f*cv fti
I G, - y U 70
rri IP
111 rU jC3 "a .-. 10 1�i i,� �
Fri .."1 T L- Q aro � � 0 1
O -Ti1 U �t� y /� i 7�C7
—1
�{ .. i M rT 1 I ^) ' (7 I i 1 ' (�
ri c) Z r. Z -G 7C3 Gr )pCr {r1 -P'.. "� n In
r%N Z . . tn IU' F c- r— In ,.•
•
r
' 0 .. 1. •
cr;`V '/
,--ii <I
i
=• P I y = 1- rF7N, " ' - 1o
r,1 till` r 1 ; U i I .
g. v 0 �` c • .� `p 'C ' O
i • Y c
.. n;,:i r r- (Th -� U C j
VO , cp r- F ';;- ;5- ' Tni-. rl ! r-)". _L" r6 1::;-: -7ki
1 � ! , 1 b I G� } +, >.7 N O ,7b --1
Z J, i� H 1 0 ' I � i �7_ �,-i
0 ow c4' i. I ' r
O N 1 f ...1• l 1
-r t. I
11
'11 :{ q Sr 7°
"IA c
?
M L�
" rJ1 •
17
D I C)
UI
I it ./I - J
kp ' , •C
1 e '
7C7
MEMO TO : Mayor and City Council
FROM: John K. Anderson, City Administrator
RE : Eastview Development
DATE : December 23 , 1980
Introduction
On Thursday, December 18 , 1980, Walt Harbeck, Eldon Reinke , Doug
Reeder, Bo Spurrier and I met with Bill Chard to clarify the issues
involved in the Eastview development with the intention of solving
as many of them as possible .
Issues
1 . Bill Chard wanted to know how the final quantities compared
with the estimates which would affect final assessments . Bo
reported that the project has not been completed and that.
final quantities were not yet available - miscellaneous work
to be done includes alleys , storm sewer, final clean-up and
seeding. Bill asked to be sent final quantity and cost
figures .
2 . Eldon asked who would pay for the extra work done to redo the
water and sewer lines . Bo said that the total cost to the
developer will not change due to the extra work on the utilities
and that the only changes in the developer ' s cost would be due
to final quantities .
3 . The question was asked about how the present assessments were
determined since the assessments were spread before final costs
were in . The Mayor noted that the City went into the project
with its eyes open knowing that it would have to set an assess-
ment that wasn ' t based upon actuals , but engineer ' s estimates .
He also noted that the philosophy at the time was to reassess
the project if costs were way out of line , but that if there
was a small difference the City would absorb it .
4 . Eldon asked about the status of the watermain leak. Bo stated
that the leak was caused by a rock caught in a curb stop and
that there was no real damage that might add to project cost .
Bo also stated that the problem had been fixed and the line
passed a second pressure test and was 100% complete .
5 . Several questions were raised about the actual assessment costs
for the various lots . Bill Chard and Doug agreed that the
Shakopee Avenue assessments had been set at $3074 .47 and that
the other lots were to be assessed $6282 . 92 (includes the
homestead on Shakopee Avenue that didn ' t receive new sewer and
water service) .
At this point staff brought up the fact that the 1976 storm
sewer assessment and the 1974 street assessment hadn ' t been
spread over the 48 lots and should be spread immediately . Bill
stated that as per an agreement when he purchased the parcel ,
' he paid the assessment on the larger parcel that had been green
acred, and that he had just received the assessment bill for
1981 . Thus , any assessments spread over the 48 lots for the
two assessments would be for payable 1982 assessments .
Two problems resulting from this were discussed : Bill was
paying assessments on a parcel that had been subdivided and
no longer existed (it was now 48 lots) and that technically
lots already sold on Shakopee Avenue owed an additional $883 . 59
per year and the balance of the lots owed an additional $212 .00.
These lots presented the biggest problem and Doug suggested
that perhaps the best way to handle them was for Bill to pay
the balance of the assessments due on these lots . Bill stated
that all of the lots he had sold were subject to a title search
by Rod Krass ' s firm .
6 . Bill Chard questioned why we were charging him 8-3/4% for
interest on the assessments when the Developer ' s Agreement
called for 8%. It was explained that the 8% was a preprinted
number in the agreement that should be left blank, because
City policy requires a charge of 2% over the cost of the bonds .
7 . Bill questioned the interest charged him for interim financing
when : (1) the bond sale proceeded the actual work and hence
actual expenditure of the bond proceeds by several months , and
(2) precisely when in the project financing did we start
charging him interest . To clarify these issues Bill asked if
he could receive a chronologicallisting of key project dates .
8 . Bill stated that he felt that "someone" was eligible for
liquidated damages in the project at $100/day for some 90-100
days because of project delays . It was the consensus of those
in attendance that it was up to the City to make any such
claim and that if Bill was unsatisfied with the action taken
he could take whatever steps he felt appropriate .
9 . John Anderson , concerned about comments made about one of the
lots sold on Shakopee Avenue , stated that all lots sold would
be treated equally and would pay all the assessments due .
Summary & Recommendations
Issues number 1 , 2 , 4 and 9 were clarified at the meeting and need
no further action . Issue number 3 can only be clarified when final
invoices are paid and copies of the total project cost are reviewed
by Council . Council can then determine if a reassessment is neces-
sary . The same figures can be sent to Bill as per his request
(see issue #1) .
Issue #5 regarding assessments due on lots already sold (ie . 74 and
76 assessments not spread when the parcel was subdivided) is a
problem. Bill stated that he had a commitment to pay the assessments
because of what he told the• purchasers , but there appeared no way ,
other than by prior agreement with Bill , to get the assessment paid
in full . This will not be the case with the balance of the lots
yet to be sold .
Issue #6 regarding the 8-3/47 vs . 8% interest charged all assess-
ment payments and issue #8 regarding liquidated damages can only
be cleared up with a Council policy decision and/or an agreement
between the City and Bill Chard .
Issue #7 can be calculated and the numbers presented to Council
for their consideration . Any decision Council makes on this issue ,
however, will have a long term effect on all projects for which
bonds are sold in advance of construction (eg . VIP Sewer Project) .
Bill Chard should receive copies of the data he has requested re-
garding this issue .
It is my recommendation that the City enter into an agreement with
Mr . Chard to resolve issues #3 , 5 , 6 , 7 and 8 . In the agreement I
would recommend that the City take the following positions on the
issues :
Issue #3 That a copy of the Engineer ' s final project costs be sent
to Mr . Chard for his information , and that Council take formal
action on whether or not it will reassess the project once the
numbers are finalized .
Issue #5 That Mr . Chard agree to pay in full the 1974 and 1976
assessment on lots not yet sold when the building permit is issued,
and that the assessment for the 9 lots already sold be taken from
the 150% (50% overage) on the balance of the lots as they are sold .
Issue #6 That the City not revert to charging the 8/ assessment
interest specified in the Developer ' s Agreement, because the pre-
printed 8% actually refers to a payment method not selected by
the City (ie . 5 equal annual installments) . To change the rate
would require a reassessment hearing and a method for handling
interest paid to date . It would also set a precedent, because
Halo I and II and Weinandt are using the same financing method
that Bill Chard is using and could request the same change .
Issue #7 That the City make no adjustments in the assessments due
to the timing of the bond sale and the payment of bills as requested
by Mr . Chard.
Issue #8 That the City make no liquidated damage claim against the
contractor who installed the utilities as was suggested by Mr.
Chard . The City Engineer does not feel it is in the City ' s best
interest to file such a claim .
Any such agreement should be drafted by the City Attorney and
include a clause stating that Mr. Chard waives his right to
contest any other items if a reassessment hearing is held for
the purpose of reflecting final project costs .
JKA/jms
I (3
MEMO TO : John Anderson, City Administrator
FROM: Tim Keane, City Planner
r o
RE : Comprehensive Plan Review )141'‘/.
if
DATE : January 2, 1980
Attached is : 1) The findings of fact and conclusion of the
Metropolitan Council ' s staff .review of the Shakopee Comprehensive
Plan (the full text of these comments were forwarded to you in
November) ; 2 ) The City staff ' s comments in response to that
review .
The review of the Comprehensive Plan is to be completed according
to the following schedule :
Transmittal to Metro Council Physical Development
Committee January 14 , 1981
Physical Development Committee Review January 22, 1981
Metropolitan Council Review February 10, 1981
The City Council and Planning Commission are requested to review
the staff prepared response and offer comments or revisions .
These responses , upon City Council and Planning Commission
approval will be forwarded to the Metropolitan Council as the
City ' s official response to their review .
Shakopee ' s Comprehensive Plan has been prepared and is being
reviewed pursuant to the Metropolitan Land Planning Act , Minnesota
Statutes Section 473 . 175 and Section 473 . 851 to 473 . 872 . Generally ,
the Council ' s responsibility is to review and adopt findings
and determinations with regard to the local plans :
1. Conformity with Metropolitan plans
2 . Compatibility with plans of adjacent local government
units .
3 . Consistency with other adopted Metropolitan Development
Guide chapters .
The Metro Council may provide advisory comments with regard to
other aspects such as adequacy , completeness , and its internal
consistency .
As part of the review, the Metropolitan Council :
"may require a local governmental unit to modify a
comprehensive plan or part thereof which may have a
substantial departure from metropolitan system plans" .
Page -2- January 2, 1981 9)12
Essentially, the Metro Council comments fall into three categories :
1) Those that are required by Minnesota Statutes to
bring the City ' s Plan in conformance with the
Metropolitan System Plans .
If the City were not to comply with those modifi-
cations required by statute to conform to the
Metropolitan Systems, the impact on Shakopee could
be significant . The Metropolitan Council controls
the budgets of its four major operating agencies
of metropolitan services for sewers, buses , airports
and parks . All significant local sewer extension
plans are controlled and must be approved by the
Metropolitan Waste Control Commission. The 1976
Land Planning Act gave the Metro Council the authority
to review local plans and if found consistent with
the "Metropolitan Systems" to mandate a change in
the local plan. Since the Metro Council has not
exercised this authority to date , the implications
of such action is unknown. The testing of the Land
Planning Act ' s authority is a much discussed topic
with conjecture on court proceedings a central
theme .
2) Those changes that would be necessary to bring the
Shakopee Plan in conformance with the Metropolitan
Development Guide chapters .
Failure to comply with these recommended changes
would have less absolute impacts , but the results
may be significant . The Metropolitan Council is
designated the area ' s federal regional review
agency . This designation of A-95 reviewer provides
the Metropolitan Council comment authority on local
units of government federal grant application.
A negative comment by the Metro Council on a
municipality ' s grant application may be very influen-
tial in determining whether grants are received or
not . Each case warrants its own merit , but park,
CB influenced. and housing are by programs that may
e nfluenced.
3) Those comments that are advisory on technical adequacy,
completeness or internal consistency .
I would not anticipate significant negative impacts
for failure to comply with recommended changes of
this sort .
-3- s 17
Metropolitan Comments :
RECOMMENDATION VII B:
Modify plan so that the 1990 sewer flow does not exceed
3 . 12 M.G .D.
The City has to play ball with the Metro Council on
this item. The problem arose principally as a result
of the City opening up enough sewered area in the 1990
plan that the hypothetical saturation development
condition greatly exceeds the flow allocated in the System
Statement . This hypothetical saturation development
condition is based on an assumed saturation flow rate
of 2000 gallons per acre per day (G .A.D . ) . Based on
historical flow rates in the industrial area, City staff
and the City ' s consulting engineer, believe that 1000
G.A.D. is a more realistic saturation figure. Current
industrial land consumption is averaging approximately
800 G.AD.
Alternatives :
1) Do Nothing. This alternative would leave the City ' s
Comprehensive Plan in non-conformance with the
Metropolitan Systems Plan.
Discussion - The failure of the City to comply with
the Metropolitan Systems Statement on this sewer
element has been discussed in No. 1 above . The
Waste Control Commission and the Pollution Control
Agency could preclude any sewer extensions within
the City of Shakopee by not approving them.
2 ) Reduce the 1990 service area in size so that the
proposed flow for the City does not exceed 3. 12
M.G .D.
Discussion - In order to do this , the City would have
to reduce the 1990 service area by approximately
1500 acres . The Planning Commission and City Council
in development of the Comprehensive Plan wanted to
open up enough service area so as to not artifically
restrict the available industrial land which would
drive up the prices of the available land. This'
alternative would be acceptable to the Metropolitan
Council but not to the City of Shakopee.
3) Develop and adopt a flow management plan.
Discussion - The staff of the Metropolitan Council
has indicated to the City that it would be acceptable
if the City could develop and implement a plan
-4-
whereby the service area identified in the 1990
plan would not develop to the maximum saturation
so as to stay within the 3. 12 M. G .D . flow allocation.
1+1 "The implementation devices would have to have
a force of law to be acceptable to the Metropolitan
Council .
The City staff would recommend that the City Council adopt
an allocation policy that requires that proposed land uses not
exceed approximately 1000 gallon/acre/day (G.A.D. ) sewer flows .
This would have the effect of requiring "wet" industries to
acquire and hold that land necessary to keep the average flows in
the service area below that rate that allows the City to stay
within the 3. 21 M. G .D. allocation. Land uses such as warehouses ,
non-water intense industries and offices would not be affected
by such a policy.
Staff would also recommend that the City go on record that
Shakopee will petition for a change in the original systems
allocation that restricts the City ' s total flow to 3 . 12 M. G.D.
RECOMMENDATION VII C :
The Plan is in conformance with the Metropolitan Systems
Plan for transportation; provided that Page 66 is corrected to
say that CSAH 18 is not a metro facility .
That CSAH 18 is not included as a metropolitan facility
in the Metropolitan System Plan is a fact and the City Comprehensive
Plan would reflect this .
Staff would recommend that the language on Page 66 be
corrected as noted in the review. Staff would also recommend
that the City go on record requesting that this facility should
be included in the Metropolitan System Plan.
RECOMMENDATION VII C-2 :
Conformity with the Metropolitan System Plan to incorporate
an airspace zone map in the Comprehensive Plan.
City staff has a representative on the Joint Airport Zoning
Board. The proposed airspace zoning has a negligible effect on
Shakopee since the affected areas are almost exclusively in the
flood plain. Staff would recommend that the City incorporate
the airspace zone map only at thi.f'time that the map is approved
by the Joint Airport Zoning Board and adopted by the affected
municipalities .
-5-
RECOMMENDATION VII C-3 :
a. Modify sewer policy plan (noted above) .
b . Modify the Comprehensive Plan to make the land use
and sewer elements consistent .
This requires that Map 9 in the Comprehensive Plan
and the Sewer Service Area map be consistent . The
attached maps note the changes necessary to accomplish
this . Map 9 from the Land Use Plan would add those
areas shaded Al' This does not change the substance
of the land use plan but brings it into conformance with
the sewer plan. The sewer plan would be changed to
take out old service area 16 (Shiely pit , Blue Lake
Peaking Station) , old service area 17 (Blue Lake
Treatment Plant , Wilke Regional Park) and add new
service area 16 (east of Valley Fair - 55 acres ) .
City staff and the Engineering consultant recommend
that these changes be made .
c . On-site system management program consistent with
procedure 10 (attached) of the Water Quality Manage-
ment Policy Plan.
The Metro Council comments find that the 2 . 5 acre
lot size in the rural residential area is of sufficient
density to require the adoption of Procedure 10 policies
in order to be consistent with the Water Quality
Management Plan. The City in earlier action, has
gone on record to the Council stating that "it does
not anticipate additional record keeping of pumping
and maintenance" and that it "plans to rely on
Scott County for obtaining and maintaining work
records" .
Although this recommendation is not within the sphere
of the metro systems elements that require conformance,
the City Plan would be found not in conformance with
the System Policy Plan if no revisions are made
(note Number 2 above) .
The City, at present , does not have the personnel •
required to keep the records , inspect the systems and
administer the on-site management techniques identified
in Procedure 10 . City staff estimates that this
would require very near a new full-time position.
-6- /
The Metro Council staff has indicated that the
• City may find the 2 . 5 acre rural land use more
acceptable if the City can demonstrate : 1) that
the actual densities will be substantially less
when wetlands , steep slopes , etc . , are excluded
and; 2 ) what on-site system record keeping and
licensing the City does plan to get involved in.
City staff is preparing calculations of the net
densities and exploring what on-site system management
techniques the City may get involved in without
creating additional expense or burden on staff.
Staff will report on these findings at the City
Coundil meeting.
TK/j iw
Attachments
'C7
-24- Y
The City should allocate the anticipated revenues
when more than one funding source is to be used.
The improvements appear to be fully funded.
The debt schedules are precise enough to show the
city council and the citizens what the annual
payment is , the amount that will be used from each
revenue source (special assessments , general levies ,
sanitary sewer revenues) , and the amount outstanding
for any year in the future. New debt should be
included.
The city may wish to add some other features to the
CIP to enhance its service to the citizens:
o An estimate of future operation and maintenance
costs of each project so that the citizens may
appreciate the full cost.
o A map(s) showing ' specific improvements and
specific sites within the CIP.
o Insofar as possible, show projects of other
governmental jurisdictions that may occur
within the city on the same schedule. The most
obvious ones would be highway improvements of
the county and state, new school buildings and
MWCC interceptor extensions.
6 . Solar Access
The Plan does not contain a Solar Access Element as
required in the Section 473 . 859 of the Metropolitan
Land Planning Act, as amended.
V. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS
A. General Findings .
1. The Shakopee Comprehensive Plan has been submitted
to the Council for review pursuant to Sec . 473 . 175
and Sec. 473 . 851 to 473 . 872 of Minnesota Statutes .
2. The City is located along the northern boundary of
Scott County in Council District 16 . It is bordered
by the Townships of Jackson, Louisville , and Spring
Lake and by the Cities of Prior Lake, Savage, Eden
Prairie and Chanhassen.
3 . The City has certified that its comprehensive plan
has been circulated to adjacent governmental units
at least six months prior to submittal to the
Council .
4 . The Plan does not have a Solar Access Element.
-25-
B. Conformity with Metropolitan System Plans
1. Transportation
The Shakopee Comprehensive Plan is in accord with
the Metropolitan Tranportation Policy Plan, but
there are several matters that require
clarification. Specifically , that the configuration
of the proposed interchange on the east end of the
Shakopee bypass is likely to be altered; that the
discrepancy in the text on the timing for construc-
tion of the CSAH 18 crossing be corrected; that the
location of the crossing shown on map 20 should be
made more general; and that page 66 be corrected to
say that CSAH 18 is not a metro facility .'``
2. Sewers
a. Shakopee ' s sewer element of the city ' s
comprehensive sewer plan meets the content
requirements of a sewer policy plan, but not a
comprehensive sewer plan.
b. Shakopee ' s sewer policy plan is not in
conformance with the city ' s system statement or
the Water Quality Management Policy Plan since
it would permit flows of 6 . 17 mgd instead of
3 . 12 mgd.
c. Shakopee ' s sewer policy plan cannot be found
consistent with Procedure 10 concerning on-site
system management due to insufficient
information provided describing the on-site
system management program proposed for the rural
area to be developed at one unit per 2 . 5 acres .
d. Shakopee ' s sewer policy plan does not appear to
be consistent with the city ' s land use plan
given the information presented in maps 9, 31
and table 20 .
3 . Parks
The Shakopee plan is in accord with the Regional
Recreation Open Space System Plan . In the review
text a few minor corrections are suggested.
4 . Airports
Although there are no airport facilities within
Shakopee, the City is within the Flying Cloud
Airport ' s aircraft traffic pattern and zoning
Area. A joint airport Zoning Board, including
Shakopee, has been established to update information
on these matters . Until additional information is
available , the plan must be considered inconsistent
-26-
with the Aviation chapter of the MDG due to the
absence of the existing airspace zoning map and the
absence of specific reference in the implementation
section to state regulations on "Obstructions to
Airspace. "
C . Consistency with Other Guide Chapters
1. Metropolitan Development Framework
The general configuration of the Shakopee Plan is
consistent with the Metropolitan Development
Framework . However , several inconsistencies were
identified.
a. Several parts of the Rural Residential area,
especially farmsteads , which ordinarily would be
designated agricultural, are not and, therefore,
are not eligible for Metropolitan Ag . Preserve
Act protection. A specific case is cited in a
letter from the Scott County Soil and Water
Conservation District.
b. The 2 . 5 acre density in the Rural Residential
Area is considered urban by the Development
Framework and, therefore, inconsistent. One
acre per 10 density as recommended by the
Framework would protect the City from being
forced to provide urban services prematurely .
c. Tables and Maps which address future land needs
appear to be inconsistent with one another , and
inconsistent with Council land demand estimates.
2 . The Environmental Protection, Solid Waste and
Housing elements are all in accord with the
Metropolitan Council policy plans
VII . RECOMMENDATIONS
That the City of Shakopee be advised that:
A. This report constitutes the Council ' s official review
required under the Metropolitan Land Planning Act;
40 That one plan modification is required as authorized in
Minnesota Statutes Sec. 43 . 175, Subd. 1; specifically ,
�:'. � s a� "= ` d`•�` `� ' a``:s'- o that the 1990 sewer flow
does not exceed the figure of 3 . 12 M.G . D. cited in the
Shakopee System Statement.
-27-
C. The Plan conforms to the Metropolitan System Plans as
follows :
1. The Plan is in conformance with the Metropolitan
System Plan for transportation; provided that page
66 is corrected to say that CSAR 18 is not a metro
facility.
2. Conformity to the Metropolitan System Plan for
airports would require Shakopee to incorporate the
attached airspace zone map in the Comprehensive Plan
until the Joint Airport Zoning Board has new and
approved information to substitute; and to reference
the state rules on "Obstructions to Airspace" MnDOT
rule 14 MCAR 1. 3015 subsections (c) and (d) in the
plan implementation sections .
3 . Conformity with the Water Quality Management Policy
Plan would require Shakopee to:
a. Modify its sewer policy plan to not exceed a
1990 flow of 3 .12 M. G.D. (See item VII. B. ,
above) .
b. Modify its Comprehensive Plan to make the land
use and sewer elements consistent.
c. Provide clarification and additional material to
make the on-site system management program
consistent with Procedure 10 of the WQM Policy
Plan.
4 . Conformity with the metropolitan system plan for
recreation would require the City to:
a. Correct the alignment of the Scott-Hennepin
Regional Trail as described in the review text .
b. Revise Tables 37 and 38 to correctly classify
Shakopee Memorial Park as a community park and
to include Wilkie Park Reserve in the analysis
of future park needs .
D. The Plan discussion of forecasts is consistent with
Development Framework Forecasts .
E. The Plan appears to be in conformance with adjoining
governmental units and affected school districts except
for the 2. 5 acre lot size planned for the rural resi-
dential area. This is not in conformity with the plans
of adjacent communities to preserve the agricultural
area. Shakopee submitted copies of comments from ad-
jacent governmental units, most of which are highlighted
in Section VI . B. 1 . It is not clear whether these have
been addressed by Shakopee.
-28- Cr?
F. The Plan is consistent with other Metropolitan
• Development Guide chapters as follows :
1. The Plan is consistent with the Protection Open
Space and Wa,te_,r Resources chapter of the
Metropolitan Development Guide and Council policies
for stormwater management, the Housing chapter , and
the Solid Waste Management Plan.
2. The Plan is consistent with the Metropolitan
Investment Framework .
3 . The Plan is consistent with the Metropolitan
Development Framework in terms of general
configuration; but to be in full conformity would
require the City to modify the lot size of the Rural
Residential area to approximate a one per 10 density
for this area.
4. The City is urged to review the delineation of the
Rural Residential area to determine if certain parts
of this area would be more appropriate in the
agricultural area so that they would be eligible for
the protection of the Metropolitan Agricultural
Preserve Act.
5. The City is requested to correct inconsistencies
between Tables 18 , 19 , and 20 and Maps 9 and 31 in
terms of location and extent of urban land needs
through 1990 .
6. The Plan is consistent with the Metropolitan
Investment Framework; but is it requested that:
a. The City be encouraged to maintain and update
the capital improvement program as a current and
valuable tool in its development.
b. The City show the anticipated revenues from each
funding source for each project.
c. The City include a schedule ( s) of the new debt
that would result from the implementation of the
CIP.
d. The City add the following information to its
CIP:
i . Map ( s) specifically locating the
improvements .
ii . An estimate of future operation and
maintenance costs for each project .
iii . Projects of other governmental
jurisdictions .
-30-
•
e. That the City notify the Council when amending
its Capital Improvement Program.
G. That the City add a Solar Access Element as required
by Minn. Stat. 473. 859.
JS :sje
S085PR
06 . 11. 80
Revised 10 . 01. 80
and 10 . 24 . 80
and 10 . 31. 80
7-E4.0 F
DE(
-fa/l5637 cr?%"14,4—E•b 18 , l 4 z a 1980
Table 17•
Existing Vacant Urban Service Area Land Supply - 1978
Single-Family 70 acres
Commercial 60 acres
Industrial 300 acres
Multi-Family 90 acres
An added indication of the private market commitment reveals that much of the
residential vacant land is platted in anticipation of near-future development,
nearly 50 acres.
Future Demand For Urban Services
Shakopee's existing service area coupled with future growth forecasts calls for
an ever expanding demand for servicable land. Table 18 lists the cumulative
land needs by types of urban land uses.
Table 18 (Revised 12/80)
Future Urban Land Service Needs in Acres
1980 1985 1990
Total Urban Land Needs* 2,780 3,330 3,680
Residential 925 1 , 150 1 ,375
Commercial 285 385 485
Industrial 450 575 700
Total Rural Land Use 11 ,420 10,870 10,520
By offsetting existing supply against future demand, expansion needs are
established. Clearly in a supply-demand framework, to the year 1990, most
urgent is residential Hand, while commercial and especially industrial are
less pressing.
Table 19 (Revised 12/80)
Future Service Area Land Acreage Expansion Needs
Additional Needs
1980-85 1985-90 1978-90
Industrial +125 +125 +250
Commercial +100 +100 +200
Residential +225 +225 +450
TOTAL +450 +450 + 900
-38-
Urban 'Service Staging Approach
Months of performing engineering studies and evaluating alternative sewer
extension systems took place to select the most appropriate system. The
systems reviewed included the Jackson-Shakopee interceptor sewer, extensions
off the Prior Lake interceptor sewer, and a continuation of the VIP interceptor
line. The staging area was selected primarily on the most feasible urban
service expansion alternative. All the other staging alternatives either
would create future development areas spatially independent and separate from
the existing urban service area or represented unwise sanitary sewer expansion
design. Even though some of the other alternative staging schemes would be
cost efficient regarding sanitary sewer expansion, other related urban services
and utilities of water supply and transportation, etc. , would be prohibitive.
'1, i , other alternative staging schemes that seem reasonable and are contiguous
to built up areas were either lacking a sound sanitary sewer expansion approach
or system costs were excessive.
Therefore, the three major policy areas for Shakopee' s planning program as
illustrated on Map 10 are: 1 ) the existing urban service area, 2) the 1980-1990
future urban service area expansion, and 3) the 1990 rural service area. The
policy definitions of these areas follow:
Urban Service Area - the built up area of Shakopee; the city area where the
services of sewers, water supply, parks, schools, police and fire exist.
Redevelopment is encouraged here along with maintenance of existing
structures and utilities.
A. Provide a full complement of urban services and utilities in a
viable city sone for a full sc ,pe of .:lctivi e:ies to take place for
citizens to worl: , shop, reside, and phy.
B. Encourage the use of existing puLlic services .
C. Encourage developments which will rein; , rce redevelopment forces.
Future Urban Service Expansion Area - that area which is programmed to
,receive urban services in preparation of concentrated development in five
year increments. The expansion will be staged outward from the existing
urban service area consciously guiding growth into areas contiguous to the
existing city area.
a. Expand the urban service area in a sequential manner which is
peripheral to the existing urban service area.
b. Discourage leap-frog development patterns with urban services
which increase utility costs in sewer, road and water system
construction and also place greater burden on public services
and private utilities.
c. Control the overall desired development pattern of the City by
guidinu the future location and provision of urban services in
an orderly planned fashion.
d. Use the design and facility planning exercise of sanitary sewers
to dictate overall urban service area expansion.
e. Extend urban services as a complement and not individually and
haphazardly.
f. Provide services in anticipation of development and not as a
response to.
g. Forecast the expansion of future urban service areas accoring
to new household, -population, and land consumption forecasts.
h. Rezone rural service areas to urban land uses in anticipation and
prior to the expansion of the urban service area.
As the plan map expresses, to expand first, 1980-85, is that area designated
as 'A' and offers additional service in an elbow shaped area from Highway 101
to C.R. 17, north of the by-pass. While the first stage is in search of
residential , single-family land south of C.R. 16, significant industrial , commercial
and multi-family residential zoned acreage is also provided. Estimated for
service expansion sometime around 1985, stage 'B' to the year 1990 services that
land area predominantely above the by-pass corridor aside from 80 acres of the two
southern quadrants of the by-pass/C.R. 17 intersection. Timing with the by-pass
construction is planned for coordinat;on. Total acreage of each stage is in
Table 20.
-10-
Table 20 (Revised 12/80)
Future Service Area Expansion Acreage
Phase 'A' 1980-1985 Phase 'B' 1985-1990
Single-Family
Residential 240 150
Commercial 215 160
•
Industrial 660 145
Multi-Family 120 -0-
Total 1235 455
Rural Service Area - that area in Shakopee where urban services are not
present or programmed for expansion at least to the year 1990. Future
development in this area should be predicated on the provision of private
services for sewage disposal , water supply, recreation, and limited public
roads to maintain the rural atmosphere and to prevent premature expansion
of the urban service area in unprogrammed manners.
a. Maintain a rural service area by discouraging urban type development.
b. Develop a land use regulation system which permits rural residential
development and farming.
c. Restrict urban dense residential developments from rural service
areas until such time when logical city growth takes place.
d. Protect rural resident investments in private service systems.
e. Select a minimum lot size in rural residential areas which will
preclude future demand for urban services and enforce the rural
lifestyle way of living.
f. Enhance and protect rural character and lifestyle.
g. Permit only non-service demanding developments of industrial and
commercial nature in non-sewered areas.
-'11-
./Ltr'
WATER QUALITY
W/12/79
, \ - > '° : t=
A V tp1.►-.
Minnesota Statutes, Section 473.05, Sub- the term of new offerings by use of the "drop-
division 5, if: off"-of retired issues.
a. The interceptor eliminates the need for a 3. The right of redemption should be reserved to
treatment works not existing on January 1, the fullest practical extent, and call premiums
1970, that could have been constructed should be discouraged.
consistent with Minnesota Pollution Con-
trol Agency and Metropolitan Development - 4. Subsequent issues should be correlated to the
Guide standards in effect when the decision necessary capital programs to provide for a
is made to construct the interceptor, or quarterly issuance and should he combined
eliminates the need for a treatment works accordingly.
existing on January 1, 1970, or improve-
ments to it; and 5. Any Council agency fiscal demands may be
combined in subsequent issues to provide for
b. The decision to build the interceptor was flexibility within the programs.
or is made to protect or improve a water
resource of metropolitan significance. The
term "water resource of metropolitan Metropolitan Council Procedure No. 10.
significance" shall include any lake or any L •I Comprehensive Sewer Policy Plan
portion of a major river used as a source of
municipal water supply or designated by General Discussion
the Metropolitan Council as a water area to
be protected. The 1976 Metropolitan Land Planning Act, Section
473.859, Subdivision 3, Paragraph (h), requires
5. Once an interceptor has been determined to he local governments to prepare a public facility plan,
of metropolitan benefit, the costs eligible for and in {particular a sewer policy plan.
allocation under the metropolitan benefit
provision shall be those current costs incurred The requirement of this act is similar to that of
after December 31, 1971, the 1969 Metropolitan Sewer Act (Minnesota
Statutes, Section 473.503), which requires local
6. When the Council makes a determination of governments to submit comprehensive sewer plans
metropolitan benefit, the Commission shall describing sewerage service needs from the
compute the amount of current costs allocat- Metropolitan Waste Control Commission. The
able thereto in preparing its budget year. The 1974 Metropolitan Reorganization Act (Laws
amount of current costs allocated to a service 1974, Chapter 422) requires the Council to adopt
area in such year is the amount of current a Waste Management (sewerage) Policy Plan. The
costs that would have been allocated to the Council's Development Guide Policy Plan on Water
service area if the lowest cost disposal system Quality Management, adopted March 9, 1979,
alternative had been retained, selected or serves as the Waste Management Policy Plan
constructed consistent with Paragraph 1. required under this act.
The following adopted procedure allows the
Metropolitan Council Procedure No. 9. Council and the Commission to coordinate their
Bond Issues review requirements for these two sewer plans.
1. Additional debt service of new offerings should The local sewer policy plan and amendments to
be kept to the amount necessary to amortize this local plan are to he submitted to the Metro-
the issue over 30 years or less, with even annual politan Council as part of the comprehensive
combined payments of principal and interest. plan for review and comment. After the Council's
review and recommendations, with or without
2. New debt service should be correlated with continents, the local government is to submit the
outstanding debt to provide a uniform annual adopted comprehensive sewer policy plan portions
debt service budget and to permit reduction of of the comprehensive plan to the Commission for
119
WATER QUALITY -- — — ,
W/12/79
•
approval. After January 1, 1981, the Commission responsihle for notifying all parties and
is not to recommend any change in service for a arranging all meetings.
local government to the Minnesota Pollution Con-
trol Agency unless the local government has a
3. Alter the Commission has completed its review
Commission-approved comprehensive sewer policy
plan. Such a plan should include the collection, of the local comprehensive sewer policy plan,
treatment and disposal of all sanitary sewage, a memorandum will he forwarded to the
including on-site sewage disposal system ordinances, Council within 60 days of the Chairman's plan
administration system, and adequate operation and review order date on the local sewer plan and
maintenance system. its relationship to the regional Water Quality
Management Policy Plan.
The local sewer policy plan is an important means
of determining the impact of local systems upon 4. An appropriate committee of the Commission
the regional system, as well as future system may review the local sewer policy plan and
expansions or modifications. The Council adopts staff comments, and forward recommendations
the following procedure for its participation in to the Council; or the Commission may elect to
the sewer policy plan review process to ensure allow the Chief Administrator to formulate
conformity of the local plan to regional develop- recommendations on the plan and forward
these to the Council for consideration. These
ment policy and metropolitan sewer system
expansion. recommendations from the Commission are to
be forwarded to the Council within 75 days of
the Chairman's plan review order date.
A. Handling Procedure
5. An appropriate committee of the Council will
1. The Council's referral administrator shall sub- review the local sewer policy plan, Commission
mit a copy of a local comprehensive plan to comments and local government concerns, and
the Metropolitan Waste Control Commission forwarda recommendation to the Council. The
Council will review the committee's findings
immediately upon the Chairman's issuance of
and transmit its recommendations to the local
an order to commence the plan review. The
Commission staff is to review this plan and government and the Commission.
submit a response, in writing, to the Council
6. Local governments are to make changes to the
staff within 20 days of the Chairman's plan
review order if the plan has a major conflict comprehensive sewer policy plan as necessary
with the regional Water Quality Management in accordance with Council comments, recom-
with
Plan or if major information is not mendations and requirements, and submit the
included in the plan. locally adopted plan to the Commission for
approval. The Commission is to approve plans
2. During the review process of a comprehensive that are consistent with Council review of and
plan, the Council staff shall arrange a joint recommendations on the local comprehensive
meeting of the Council and Commission staff sewer policy plan.
with the affected local government units, if 7. In those cases where review of the entire local
necessary, to discuss the Council and Corn-
mission staff comments on the local compre- sewer policy plan cannot be made because in-
hensive sewer policy plan. formation regarding adjacent local governments
or proposed regional facilities is either uncertain
or unavailable, the Council shall reserve corn-
Any subsequent communication initiated by ment on those features and make its recom-
the Council or Commission staff with the mendations to the Commission only on those
local government units shall include mutual plan elements that, in its judgment, are clearly
notification between the Council and Corn- understood. The Commission should condition
mission. To the extent practicable, the Council its approval of the local sewer policy plan
shall coordinate all meetings initiated by the accordingly.
Council or Commission staff with the local
government units. The Council shall be 8. Subsequent to such review and approval by the
120
WATER QUALITY --- --__---
41/12/79
Council and Commission, any local govern- Quality Management Policy Plan for overall
ment proposing to alter or improve any existing direction on development. If a local unit of
sewers or other disposal facilities in a manner government determines that the programmed
not specifically approved by the Commission availability of metropolitan sewer service con-
in its review of the local sewer policy plan shall flicts with local need, it may request the
submit its proposal to the Commission for Council and Commission to consider amend-
review as a local sewer policy plan amendment mens of the Policy Plan or Development
before application to the Minnesota Pollution Program. Such requests will be considered
Control Agency for a sewer construction pursuant to administrative and operational
permit, procedures established by the Council.
9. All amendments to an approved local sewer 2. The local sewer policy plan submitted to the
policy plan shall be reviewed by the Council Commission for review should be consistent
and Commission in accordance with the above with the adopted comprehensive plan of the
procedures. local government unit.
3. The local sewer policy plan should contain
B. Content of Local Comprehensive Sewer Policy the following information at a level of detail
Plan: General Discussion sufficient to describe existing and future sewer
issues, and recommend solutions and appropri-
The local comprehensive sewer policy plan (CSPP), ate facilities.
as part of the comprehensive plan required under
the Land Planning Act, is broader in scope Wan
the previously required comprehensive sewer plans a. Community Physical Facilities
(CSP) of local governments. The sewer system
engineering and ultimate system design may change Surface water drainage districts, including:
very little or not at all from the original CSP. The area or subarea boundaries; area of district
CSPP identifies localized service area timing and and subdistricts in acres; drainage direction;
includes a map showing where and when service points of collection; ponding areas; rivers;
would be provided in a certain area. This service streams; floodplains; ponds; lakes; and
area and timing for sewer construction is to be wetlands.
consistent with the comprehensive plan of the
local government. b. Existing and Proposed Sewerage Facilities
In those areas where sanitary sewer is not planned, i. Location, size, capacity, and design
adequate on-site sewage systems are to be con- flows for existing and proposed later-
structed and maintained so premature installation als and trunk sewers, lift stations,
of sanitary services across rural or open areas is forcemains and septic tank pumpage
prevented and will not he a burden on the local and other waste disposal sites in the
government. The development of ordinances and collection system.
administrative programs to ensure the prevention
of premature sanitary sewer installation is to he a ii. Any sewerage facilities being used
part of this CSPP. To clarify the local govern- jointly with another local government
meat's intention to implement this program, each unit, including area of service, the
plan should contain adopted specific policies to number of connections and service flow
carry out the plan. volume.
iii. Location, type and capacity of all
C. Content of Local Comprehensive Sewer Plan existing treatment facilities for public
use whether municipally or privately
1. Local government units are expected to use the owned, including their appropriate
1980, 1990 and 2000 population and employ- National Pollution Discharge Elimina-
ment data included in the regional Water tion System (NPDES) permit.
121
WATER QUALITY
W/12/79
iv. Existing sewered population and esti- water, including domestic, commercial,
mated increase in sewered population, industrial and institutional, as well as
by year, for the next five years. identification of individual industrial
dischargers whose average daily flow
v. Existing and projected sewered con- exceeds 50,000 gallons or exceeds five
nections and/or residential equivalent percent of the total local governmental
for next five years. flow or contains toxic wastes.
c. Community Development v. Sewer system design date for areas of
sclvice outside the community bound-
i. Description and location on map of ,.fries.
existing sewerage problems, including
on-site sewage disposal systems, mal- vi. Time schedule for construction by year
function problems, needs associated for the first five-year period and by five-
with continued operation of existing year periods for twenty years, including
treatment facilities,whether municipally a local sewer construction program
or privately owned, and sewer system adopted by the local governmental unit.
capacity limitations. Connection to the metropolitan and/or
local system is required within two years
ii. Existing and proposed land use, includ- of service availability consistent with the
ing, where practicable, proposed streets, Council policy plan and the Waste Con-
highways, open space, etc., consistent trol Commission rules and regulations.
with an adopted local comprehensive
plan. vii. Timetable for upgrading all nonmuni-
ciloll treatment plants that do not meet
iii. Existing and projected ultimate zoning slate effluent and water quality stand
and land use, including designated open ards as identified in the NPDES permit
space, floodplain and similar restricted or for terminating plant operations.
areas.
e. On-Site Sewage Disposal Facilities
iv. Any proposed changes in governmental
boundaries affecting the community, The local comprehensive sewer policy plan
including any areas designated for is to contain ordinances, administrative
orderly annexation by the Minnesota procedures and enforcement procedures
Municipal Commission. that will adequately meet the need of
trouble-free on-site sewage disposal.
(NOTE: Items ii, iii and iv may be in
local comprehensive plans and need not The recommended plan content guidelines
be duplicated in the local sewer policy for on-site system management for local
plan.) government are:
d. Design Considerations for New Sewerage 1. On site system plans and ordinances
Facilities shall contain appropriate design, com-
position, construction, location, siting
i. Design time period and design and use requirements relating to all
population. standard and/or alternative systems
that may be installed.
ii. Per capita design flows, average and
maximum. 1.1 Alternative Systems. On-site system
ordinances that permit the use of
iii. Minimum design standards for the alternative systems shall contain
control of inflow/infiltration into the specific standards applicable to such
sewer system. permitted alternative systems.
iv. Types, amounts and strengths of waste- 1.2 On-site system plans and ordinances
122
1
WATER QUALITY — — — —
C.
W/12/79
should generally prohibit the installa- and approved prior to covering the
tion of standard on-site systems in: system. Final system approval should
be given only where a system has been
a. areas where problems are likely to installed consistent with the ordinance
occur because of soil constraints requirements and any specific condi-
or other geologic or hydrologic tions contained in the installation per-
characteristics; init.
b. low swampy areas or areas subject 3. Local units of government should
to recurrent flooding; adopt on site system ordinances and
controls that contain inspection and
c. areas where the highest known maintenance requirements, where nec-
groundwater table, bedrock or essary and consistent with Policy 44
impervious soil conditions are of the Council's Water Quality Man-
within three feet of the bottom of agement Plan, and should help to
a system. ensure that system owners receive
appropriate education and technical
2. On-site system ordinances shall contain assistance with system operation and
application and review procedures and maintenance.
requirements for the issuance of on-
site system permits.Such requirements 3.1 Inspection. On-site systems should he
should provide for the receipt of a inspected on a regular basis, where
permit to install an on-site system necessary and consistent with Policy
prior to, or in conjunction with, the 44 of the Council's Water Quality
issuance of a building permit. Applic;;r Management Plan. Inspection should
tion and installation requirements check the sludge and scum accumula-
should provide for the transmission of tion in a septic tank, or appropriate
adequate system and site information equivalent, if any, in an alternative
and a review procedure to ensure system. Inspection should occur no
compliance with the ordinance. less than biennially.
2.1 Ordinances shall require that applica- 3.2 Maintenance. Where necessary and
tions contain a description of the site's consistent with Policy 44 of the Coun-
characteristics, including a soils and cil's Water Quality Management Plan
subsurface evaluation based on bor- and Paragraph 3.1, local governments
ings, percolation tests, and a descrip- • should require maintenance of a septic
tion of the proposed system. tank when inspection reveals that
sludge reaches a point 12 inches below
2.2 Subdivision (or other) ordinances the bottom of the outlet baffle and/or
should provide for the approval of the scum reaches a point three inches
plats only following a determination above the bottom of the outlet baffle.
that the soils in the platted area gen- Maintenance requirements for alterna-
erally are suitable for the installation tive systems should be established in
of on-site systems consistent with the the ordinance or at the time of installa-
on-site system ordinance requirements. tion permit approval.
2.3 Separate site testing should be per- 4. Recordkeeping. All local programs
formed in connection with all on-site should provide for recordkeeping re-
system applications. On-site system hating to the design and location of
ordinances should contain installation, new and/or renovated on-site systems.
inspection and acceptance procedures System owners or their agents should
that require all new installations, mod- be required to submit a final descrip-
ifications'or repairs to he inspected tion of the system as installed to the
123
1
----------
WATER QUALITY ---- - _ _ ------ -- ---------------------- ---
W/12/79
local government. The description 6.1 Consistent with Policy 44 of the
should include such information as: Council's Water Quality Management
site address, location and layout of Plan, programs and controls should
system on the site, type and design of establish appropriate requirements
system installed, type of building and measures applicable to installers,
served and the results of the site pumpers and haulers that ensure satis-
suitability analysis (percolation tests factory performance, liability coverage
and/or soil borings). and compliance with local ordinances.
4.1 Where necessary and consistent with 6.2 Consistent with Policy 44 of the
Policy 44 of the Council's Water Council's Water Quality Management
Quality Management Plan, local Plan, work records should be obtained
programs should provide for on-site on a regular basis by each local unit of
system data collection and record- government from licensed pumpers,
keeping covering the frequency of haulers and maintenance operators
complaints, pumping and/or other regarding their activities in the local
maintenance activities for each sys- jursidiction as a condition of licensing.
tern.
7. Local on-site systems management and
5. Remedial Action. Programs should control programs shall be adequately ,_,
include measures to identify the staffed and funded. Administrative itkoz
location of systems creating nuisances powers, responsibilities and rights
and/or endangering public health shall he specified in local ordinances.
and/or endangering the safety of any
domestic water supply, and/or pollut- 7.1 Administrative powers that should be
ing or contaminating any water of specified in ordinances include those
the state. relating to: performance of investi-
gatory review, site inspection, permit
5.1 The local on-site system ordinance analysis, inspection, and the issuance
should include provisions for correc- of orders relating to enforcement
tion, replacing or terminating the use activities.
of any system identified in Paragraph
5 above. 7.2 Communities shall ensure the appoint-
ment of trained and qualified persons
5.2 Ordinances should require that exist- as administrators/inspectors, the
ing systems comply with the adopted absence of any conflicting business or
on-site system standards in situations interest within the jurisdiction, and
where work other than maintenance should provide express standards relat-
is being proposed for an existing ing to removal of administrative
system. personnel.
6. Authorized Metropolitan Area coun- 7.3 Ordinances should provide opportunity
ties and/or local units of government for cooperation or the selective dele-
should collectively and cooperatively gation to administrators from other
establish programs and standards for units of administrative responsibilities,
licensing system installers, pumpers, particularly where funding/staffing is
haulers, site evaluators and maintain- marginally adequate.
ers operating within their jurisdiction.
Licenses shall be issued only to those 8. Enforcement.Ordinances shall contain `p'
who meet training and knowledge appropriate appro riate a '�
ppeal, variance and en-
requirements as evidenced by the forcement provisions.
satisfactory completion of a certifica-
tion program. 8.1 Ordinances should contain specifica-
124
( IJ
---- –— /
WATER QUALITY -- –
,.: W/12/79
tion as to violations, fines, penalties inspection and maintenance when the
and other remedies associated there- same are not performed in compliance
with. with ordinance requirements.
8.2 Ordinances should contain provisions 8.5 Ordinances should provide for the
enabling the administrator or other recovery of costs relating to system
official to issue orders to: suspend or maintenance from owners of on-site
revoke permits or stop action where systems to which such problems are
performance is occurring in violation attributable.
of requirements; require the correc 8.6 Ordinances should contain procedures
tion of new or existing systems where, for
following inspection and review, a appeal of administrative actions.
system is determined to be defective; 8.7 Ordinances should contain a variance
require owners to cease and desist provision that allows dimensional
from the use of an on-site system variances and the ability to impose
operating in a manner creating hazard alternative or additional design, site
to public health, safety or welfare. or location requirements with respect
to variance applications. Provisions in
8.3 Ordinances should contain govern-
theordinance that are nonvariable
should authority to inspect existing be specified.systems following adequate notice.
Ordinances should contain provisions 9. Areas of the community where on-
requiring governmental inspection of site systems are permitted as temporary
systems for which there is probably and permanent facilities should be
cause to believe that a hazard to pub- delineated on a map using U.S. Soil
lic health, safety or welfare exists. Conservation Service soil classes, in-
cluding high groundwater table, steep
8.4 Ordinances should provide authority slopes and underlying rock close to
for the local government to perform ground surface.
ley
125
_— __
`
w
/
`
' ;
" �� .\
1 -i i, - IF , ,,,,_ _ ,,
ii-r4P,,,, N ,
i , . 9t....,-.
o
, ;,' 1 41 // -A NA''\ *Ark /'
| |
sa, , w.___
, 1,.. --z,t,, :-•c.,>, 1
..„,i______I 1 -(-1:‘\,0 ' , I, . .
iti, ._....„2,1140111411' . i
. , (i,,,,) ,i,..x, ,,--c.2.,, uvolot, , .,
NNij..... ii(N j ,,,i7c-:- / ' -r- ! — --- k It• / Allit vit. kiii- \
-0 99 \I' ', k - Ik(' Ll,,,,i I 1 (115
, 00.0 rs . I III - ' ///:./-SA litli, 44/1; I
r\ , ,,,„----- , 1 CITY or SII1XOP
_, ,,,/, -, -40 ,i___,....,„,,,,
:, \ ') (, k.., , r
11 :. ,
ritir . , , vi . .:
„A .0- A
1!* 1. 741 INr410,/lIP ' ,..t /'.4.
, r,\/. . i i___47, i, :, . / .,
, , ,,, ,, ,
_ , 3 . ,,, , v\.. .---..
, ,, __ .
____ ________,----,_ __ ___i _ ___„ _ , t • ,
r . v - .,. „--47, , , ,,,,,• ,/,•
AV
. / * f I '\,ri I, /_ _
U-----
/ LA 1 ti @-.), ___ _r__ ___.. _
.- , . . .
, ,,, t ,,
i , .._ i.rpi . ,,, ON CI v.16.• •16 6, ,. \ ,:.9
\ .4. 0 —1 / st‘
•
_ _ t.. r ..
--' ,r , I,C.::, I
fii —L
/ r
(1-? ,-- .: - - ----i illi
/111 ..._.,__ .
. 7 :?_''.
./ 44 1.//,'S7 ' ,.....Cg
.// ,-: ;//' vi / .
cs.,, I' ,„k. .r r . / ,j),. ,._, ti/ ,i,i
•
/j , N.... (
LI _ e
11._____...2, • .
,... i L
'„ L) /
„ , i CI,
c...„,......f...
01:/, . / :
I..t- '411W/ ./
'
MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator (/J�
'FROM : Judith S . Cox, Deputy City Clerk
RE : Appointments to Industrial and Commercial Development
Commission
DATE : December 30, 1980
Introduction
On August 15 , 1978 the Council adopted Ordinance No . 11 which
established an Industrial and Commercial Development Commission
comprised of five members serving staggered five-year terms . {"
Background
On October 3 , 1978 the Council appointed six persons to the
commission , plus Mr . Ray Connelly to serve as consultant , to
serve staggered terms which will be determined at a later date .
The terms have never been established and it would appear that
two terms have now expired .
Mayor Harbeck is suggesting that the Ordinance establishing the
committee be amended to provide for six members serving three
year terms .
It would be appropriate to adopt the ordinance at this meeting
and the City Attorney has advised me that it would then be in
order for the Council to make nominations to fill the positions .
Nominate two commissioners whose terms will expire January 31 ,
1982 , two expiring January 31 , 1983 , and two expiring January 31 ,
1984. Election can take place on January 20, 1981 .
Alternatives
1 . Leave the ordinance as is and nominate only one individual
to the Commission (with his term expiring January 31 , 1986)
thus bringing the number of members down to five , each
serving a staggered five year term. Nominate four commissioners
whose terms will expire one on January 31 , 1982 , one on January 31 ,
1983 , one on January 31 , 1984 and one on January 31 , 1985 .
2 . Amend the ordinance to provide for a six member commission
serving staggered three year terms and nominate two commissioners
whose terms will expire January 31 , 1982 , two expiring January 31 ,
1983 , and two expiring January 31 , 1984 . Election can take
place on January 20, 1981 . A three year term would provide
for a shorter commitment on the part of the commissioners .
Action
1 . ' Offer Ordinance No . 52 , Amending Ordinance No . 11 Establishing
An Industrial and Commercial Development Commission .
2 . Nominate two commissioners whose terms will expire January 31 ,
1982 , two expiring January 31 , 1983 , and two expiring January 31 ,
1984. Election can take place on January , 20, 1981 .
JSC/jms
CITY OF SHAKOPEE I f
INDUSTRIAL/COMMERCIAL COMMISSION
Appointments made October 3 , 1978 .
Roger Peterson h�
Citizens State Bank
480 Marschall Road
Shakopee , Minn. 55379
Jim Raduenz
135 West 3rd Avenue
Shakopee , Minn. 55379
Don Woodward
7900 Xerxes Avenue South
Minneapolis , Minn. 55431
Al Furrie
1221 East Fourth AvenueS',)
Shakopee , Minn . 55379
Marjorie R. Henderson
905 So . Holmes
Shakopee , Minn. 55379
Jim O' Neill
'f
Glen:: Ellyn Park
Shakopee , Minnesota. 55379
Gary Eastlund (advisor)
Scottland Inc .
Valley Industrial Drive
Shakopee , Minn. 55379
Ray Connelly, Consultant
201 Travelers Trail
Burnsville , Minn .
ORDINANCE NO.52
Fourth Series
An Ordinance of the City of Shakopee Amending the City Code, Chapter 2
Entitled "Administration and General Government" by Repealing Subd 2 of
Section 2.55 and Adopting a New Subd 2 in Lieu Thereof and Adopting by
Reference Shakopee City Code Chapter 1 and Section 11.99
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE ORDAINS:
Subd. 1 Repeal
Subd 2 of Section 2.55 of the City Code is hereby repealed.
Subd. 2 Composition of Commission
The Industrial and Commercial Development Commission shall consist of six
members appointed by the Shakopee City Counciland shall have staggered term of
three years each. Appointment shall be made by Resolution naming the Commissioners
and setting the term of office. Vacancies occurring thereafter shall be filled for
the unexpired term of the vacant office and shall be by Resolution adopted by majority
vote of the Council.
Subd.3 Adopted by Reference
General provisions and definitions applicable to the entire City Code
including the penalty provisions of Chapter 1 and Section 11.99 entitled "Violation
a Misdemeanor" are hereby adopted in their entirety by reference as though repeated
verbatim herein.
Subd. 4 When in Force
After the adoption,signing and attestation of this Ordinance, it shall be
published once in the official newspaper of the City of Shakopee and shall be in
effect on and after the date following such publication.
Adopted in session of the City Council of the City of Shakopee,
Minnesota held this day of , 1981.
Mayor of the City of Shakopee
ATTEST:
City Clerk
Prepared and approved as to form this
3 day of December, 1980.
Ju us A. Coller, II
City Attorney
, ,,..0 L ,.. .ynKk .,fel Hx.dx
MEMO TO : John K. Anderson, City Administrator
FROM : Judith S . Cox, Deputy City Clerk
RE : Planning Commission Appointment
DATE : January 2 , 1981
Introduction
Pursuant to the City Code appointments to advisory boards shall
be filled by appointment by the Council in January of each year .
Background
Mr. John Schmitt ' s five-year term on the Planning Commission
expires January 31 , 1981 .
It would be in order for nominations to be made at this meeting
to fill the upcoming vacancy .
For your information , I am attaching a copy of Resolution No .
1562 which set forth the policy on appointments .
Mayor Harbeck is going to check with Mr . Schmitt to see if he
is interested in being reappointed for another five-year term.
Recommended Action
1 . Motion to open nominations for an appointment to the
Planning Commission.
2 . Each Council person shall be polled for a nomination .
Each nomination must be seconded .
3 . Motion to close nominations .
JSC/jms
.
RESOLUTION NO . 1562• L�
A RESOLUTION SETTING FORTH CITY COUNCIL
PROCEDURAL POLICY ON APPOINTMENTS TO
CITY BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS
WHEREAS , in accordance with the City Code , the Shakopee City
Council has the authority and obligation to appoint persons to
the various City boards and commissions ; and
WHEREAS , the City Council desires to establish a procedure
for the appointment of persons to the various City boards and
commissions .
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Shakopee City Council
hereby establishes the following procedure to appoint persons to
the various City boards and commissions :
1 . When an appointment is required , the City Administrator
shall notify the City Counc l as early as possible
before the appointment is put on the City Council. agenda .
2 . The City Council shall make an appointment to a City
board or commission only if the appointment appears
on the printed agenda of that meetingor if the appoint
ment was tabled from a previous meeting.
3 . The City Council shall follow Roberts Rules of Order, .
Newly Revised , in making nominations for any appoint-
ment to be filled . Any Councilmember can nominate
an individual and the nomination must be seconded by
another member . Each Councilmember who nominates a
person for an appointment should either pass out a
resume of that person to the other Councilmermbers or
be able to recite some background information about
the nominee .
A motion to close nominations can be made and seconded
at any time after each Councilmember present has been
polled for a nomination . Once nominations are closed ,
no further applications will be received and vote
will be made at the next Council meeting .
4 . After nominations have been closed , if there is more
than one person nominated for an appointment , the
City Administrator shall distribute paper upon which
each Councilmember shall write his preference for
the appointment .
5 . The Mayor shall open the paper ballots and declare
the person getting the most votes and whether or not
he or she received a majority vote of the Council-
members present .
2D516 . If the person receiving the most votes does not
have a majority vote of the Councilrnembers present ,
then there shall be a second paper vote between
•
the top two candidates . If the vote is a tie
between the top two candidaLes , there shall
then be an additional- paper vote between the top
two candidates .
7 . After a candidate has received a majority vote on
a paper ballot , the Mayor shall announce his or
her name and the fact that he or she has a majority
vote . At that time , a motion is in order to appoint
that person to the position . This motion shall be
voted on and if the person receives a majority , he
or she is then appointed .
Adopted in regular session of the City Council of the City
of. Shakopee , Minnesota , held this 5th day of February , 1980 .
Mayor of' the City of Shakopee
ATTEST:
City C;.l.-erk
Approved as to form this
day of February , 1980.
41111 i1
City Attorney
1 '
MEMO TO : 'Mayor and City Council
FROM: John K. Anderson, City Administrator
RE : Non-agenda and Informational Items
DATE : December 31 , 1980
Introduction
At the present time Council members pick up their mail and
miscellaneous non-agenda items at City Hall . In addition,
you occasionally receive non-agenda material in your agenda
packet and even less frequently you are called, usually
reminder calls , by the City office . I would like to intro-
duce the "Non-agenda and Informational Items"memo as a
method of getting the bulk of this information to all of
you at the same time on a regular basis .
Proposal Background
It has been my experience that a systematic method of getting
informational items to all Council members on a regular basis
(in your twice monthly agenda packets) can be beneficial to
both Council members and City staff . I may go slightly over
board in my efforts to get the same information to all Council
members , be it regular agenda material or miscellaneous infor-
mation, but it is a practice that has been appreciated by the
Councils I have worked for.
The "Non-agenda and Informational Items" memo would not include
items that require Council action. It would include items such
as :
• Minutes of Board and/or Committee meetings that are of general
interest to Council .
• Copies of letters to the City that require no action but could
be of interest to Council members .
• Miscellaneous comings and goings at City Hall and elsewhere
in the City operation.
• Status reports on items that Council has requested, but are
not due on the agenda and/or require postponement until the
next meeting .
• Administrative policy(s) or clarification that would not
normally require Council action under the City Code , but
that Council should be aware of .
• Departmental monthly (or quarterly) reports . (Note this is
an item I plan to require as a management tool but it can
be of interest to Council . )
• Other items Council would like to see regularly to study,
read or skim.
Examples
The following items present a small sampling of items that can be
included in such a memo .
1 . Minutes of the December 10, 1980 Industrial. Commercial Commis-
sion (attached) .
2 . Monthly report from the Building Inspector for the period
ending November 30, 1980 (attached) .
3 . Informational report from Jeanne Andre on Transportation
Alternatives in Shakopee (attached) . (Note that Jeanne
anticipates having something for Council in the near future . )
4. Memo clarifying City policy on gifts , luncheons , etc .
(attached) . (Believe it or not , departments wanted some-
thing in writing particularly with Christmas approaching . )
5 . LeRoy Houser ' s mother has been seriously ill , is in the
hospital , and LeRoy has been out of the office much of the
week because of this .
6 . Because of LeRoy ' s absence ; and because of the reason for that absence ,
I have not yet discussed the vacation issue with him and
Gregg. Hopefully, I can resolve this early in January.
I ' ll provide Council with a memo on this when it is resolved .
7 . We have started a Suspense File (S .F. ) . Judy is responsible
for it and you are welcome to use it for material you want
to retrieve , check or review on a specified future date .
Just mark the note/letter S .F. 2/16/81 with your name and
she will get it to you.
8 . Memo with Jim Karkanen' s follow-up on Mrs . Leben' s concern
about the storm sewer kids are playing in (attached) .
(Note individual requests for information and follow-up
can be handled the same way but only the Council member
asking for it would get a copy. )
9 . Memo from the City Planner on Actions and Recommendations
made by the Planning Commission at meeting held December 18 ,
1980 (attached) .
Recommendation
I would like to try providing Council with a "Non-agenda and In-
formational Items" memo for three months . At the end of that
period, I would recommend that Council evaluate it and make a
decision to keep it , modify it or drop it . You can let me know
at the end of Tuesday ' s Council meeting how you feel about this
idea .
JKA/jms
MINUTES OF INDUSTRIAL/COMMERCIAL COMMISSION
SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA Dec. 10, 19804/1e7
Chairman Henderson called the meeting to order at 6:00 P.M. .
Present were: Furrie, O'Neill , Raduenz, Henderson, and B. Wermerskirchen,Liaison.
Absent: Eastlund, Woodward, Peterson.
The minutes of the November 12, 1980, meeting were approved.
Chairman Henderson introduced the new City Administrator, John Anderson, who was
in attendance at the meeting.
An amendment to the zoining ordinance allowing a conditional use permit was
discussed. It was apparent to the ICC that the B-1 Area is almost used up,
and therefore, a conditional use permit would he necessary. The ICC felt there
should be certain limitations, however. A recommendation was made to defer an
actual motion until the next meeting.
Chairman Henderson explained that the City Council has established a new policy
in making appointments to the ICC. The January meeting will be open to nominations.
Appointments will be made in February and members will he rotated.
Tour Reports : Furrie has checked with the Mgr. of the KC Hall . He will verify
its availability soon. O'Neill reported for Eastlund on the helicopters for the
Tour. The Bell Helicopter would carry two passengers plus the pilot at a fee of
$160.-$175. per hour. The Jet Ranger which carries four passengers would cost
$320. per hour. It was felt that two helicopters for two hours should be
sufficient (ten trips per hour 0 4 or 5 minutes per trip) . O'Neill recommended
the Bell Helicopter because he felt it was more of a thrill for the passengers
and the glass body gives a good all around view. The motion was made to give
Eastlund permission to contract for the Bell Helicopter. Also recommended was
that preference should be given to Bruce Schiltz, in renting the helicopter,
since he is a local person and would he familiar with the tour area.
O'Neill requested that members bring pecific Tour Plans to the January meeting.
Information on gift packets, tour maps , city maps, invitation, etc. should he
presented at the meeting. Also, the Tour Route and Tour Directors should he
decided upon.
A special meeting was set for January 8, 1921 , at 6 P.M. . Larry Martin, City
Assessor, will he present to explore the Industrial Tax methods and evaluations.
The East end resolution will again he discussed.
O'Neill/Furrie moved to adjour the meeting at 7 P.M. .
M. Henderso.:, Chairman
// 4
- 'CITY OF SIIAKOPEE
.BU1 LDING ACTIVITY REPORT November, 1980
PERMITS ISSUED Nov. Yr. to Date Total .Previous Year
5225 - 5247 Number Number Valuation Number Valuation
MO . YTD .
Single Dwellings 2 26 1 , 576, 240 4 80 4, 434,032
Multiple Dwellings - 16 3 , 182 , 438 1 2 1 , 766,000
( Mo .Uni:ts) (YTD Units) - ( 105) (4) ( 60)
Dwelling Additions - 18 104,000 3 20 176, 550
Other FOUNDATION ONLY 1 2 28 ,000 - - -
Business Dist . - - 9 3, 317 , 500 1 10 1 , 119 , 200
Agricultural 1 3 36,000 1 1 5 , 200
Industrial Dist . 2 25 23, 039 , 390 - 19 7 , 172 ,060
Accessory/Garages - 30 143, 418 1 64 247 , 395
Signs & Fences 6 23 47 , 633 - 22 19 , 169
Sidewalks & Drives - - - 1 1 500
Grading/Excavation . 1 5 31 , 100 2 13 1 , 550, 200
Remodeling (Res. ) 3 53 88 , 252 13 45 75 , 250
Remodeling ( Inst . ) 1 5 506 ,000 - 9 364, 758
Remodeling (Other) 6 44 700,320 1 17 3, 387 ,088
TOTAL TAXABLE 22 254 32 , 450, 791 28 294 19 , 952 , 644
TOTAL INSTITUTIONAL 1 5 506 , 000 - 9 365 , 758
GRAND TOTAL 23 259 32 , 800, 291 28 303 20, 318 , 402
MO. YTD . MO . YTD .
Variances - 9 1 18
Conditional Use 1 15 3 24
Re-Zoning - 8 - 4
Moving - 2 1 6
Electric Permits 23 199 21 196
Plmbg. & Htg. Permit 21 172 15 211
Razing Permits :
Residential - 1 - 1
Commercial - - - -
Total dwelling units. in City after completion of all construction permitted
to date 3 , 422 -
Phyllis Knudsen
Deputy City Assessor
) /7 `/'
f0 CITY OF SHAKOPEEBUILDING PERMITS ISSUED IN NOVEMBER, 198O
1
5225 Certain-Teed Corp. Alter. $ 6 ,00C
5226 Lee Schumacher 8700 Hwy 101 Off/Whse . 1 ,O46, 8OC
5227 Superamerica E . 1st Ave . Repair 6,O0C
I
5228 Robert Rawson 5215 Eagle Creek Fence IOC
5229 Sports Stop 101 S . Lewis Sign 10C
5230 Barbers Exceptionale 112 Holmes Sign/Remod. 10C
5231 Mn. Valley Mall Sign 3, 100
5232 Valley Liquors 1104 Mn. Valley Mall Alteration 30,000
5233 Northwest Asphalt 1451 Co . Rd. 89 Tanks 31 ,00'
5234 Conklin Remodel 5 ,000
5235 Betaseed Pole.Barn 13 ,00(
5236 Jerald Wilking 1716 Co.Rd. 89 House 1OO,O0C
5237 SCOTT COUNTY COURTHOUSE Remodel 349 , 500
5238 Jack Brambilla 115 N. Lewis Sign 100
5239 Gerald Ubel 2083 Bridge Crossing House 65 ,O0C
5240 E & Z Property 109 Lewis Remodel 3 ,000
5241 Laurent Bldrs. FOUND.ONLY 16 , 00(
5242 Steve Hentges 1503 W. 3rd GRADING ONLY 5OC
5243 Charles Goebel 702 Madison Remodel 2,00(.
5244 Scottland Sign 8,000
5245 Rubber Industries Remodel 1O,O0C
5246 Tom Curtis 1453 E . Shakopee Fireplace 1 , 950
5247 H.R. Bindewald 535 W. 3rd Wood Stove 201
$1 , 697 , 45C
// t
MEMO TO : John K. Anderson, City Administrator
FROM: Jeanne Andre , Administrative Assistant
RE : Transportation Alternatives in Shakopee
DATE : December 24 , 1980
Introduction
Through the encouragement of the Mayor and with the cooperation
of the Shakopee Area Chamber of Commerce I have been involved
in looking at transportation alternatives for Shakopee .
Background
Mayor Harbeck initiated conversations with local industries and
with Norbert Schmitt (local school bus operator) regarding the
possibility of promoting local bus service , particularly to pro-
vide transportation from the core of the City to the Industrial
Park. Industries in the Industrial Park have provided basic
data as to the number of employees and their city of origin.
Mr. Schmitt has indicated willingness to purchase three new
buses and operate a private local service . He has requested
the City to help collect data he needs to establish routes and
apply for necessary state permits .
I have also involved the Minnesota Department of Transportation
(MDOT) , which is now promoting van and car-pooling alternatives
likely to appeal to industrial park employees residing in other
cities besides Shakopee . MDOT has a standard presentation to
solicit employer involvement in car and van pools .
The bus and pooling alternatives are to be jointly presented
to local employers at the January 26 , 1981 meeting of the
Chamber of Commerce . Background on alternative modes of trans-
portation will be provided to the employers and their coopera-
tion solicited. With the help of the employers , employees can
be surveyed to determine potential participation in a bus or pool .
Summary and Recommendation
The outcome of the January Chamber meeting, as well as the results
of the survey will be subsequently reported to you and the City
Council . It can then be determined what , if any, further role
the City might take in promoting energy conservation through
alternative modes of transportation.
JA/jms
)( //t/
MEMO TO : All Department Heads
FROM: John K. Anderson , City Administrator
RE : Policy on Gifts , Luncheons , etc .
DATE : December 18, 1980
Introduction
As per our discussion at the December 17 , 1980 staff meeting,
the following policy has been established regarding gifts ,
luncheons , etc .
Policies
1 . No individual gifts shall be received by City employees
at the office or at home (including food , liquor , tickets ,
etc . ) .
2 . Small gifts for an office such as fruit baskets , candy ,
etc . may be accepted if placed where the public can also
help themselves . This obviously excludes any liquor.
3 . Working luncheons (meals) are a problem. The consensus
was that we should have a flexible policy, and that each
individual should make his/her own decision . The criteria
decided upon were : 1) what is the client ' s intent and
2) is it a working luncheon .
4. Any individual gifts delivered by an unknown gift giver
should be given to the County Human Services Department
which will in turn give them to needy families . Call
Lois Weckman at 445-5712 or Human Services at 445-7750
to make arrangements to drop off the gift .
Summary
Please make an effort to communicate this policy to clients
that you deal with. Once they become accustomed to the policy
it will be less awkward to live with. Please be sure that all
your employees are aware of this policy too .
JKA/jms
e Speed Letter. f �P
To �. .`i \,V \ From `�'
f •
r
Subject ad-4/tA (4)( ,i-r/ Al 'Ar.
/ 4/016
-No.9 610 FOLD
MESSAGE /
i---azoiu _ pavu A0-.2, , ,itA/, Ak
'9 f .` Y "� / � /Lam '✓t1t�. �... / oi/�
a - % � , — �� -
£l Ovok— /a,4 l� ".11A 'it-. 7
Date 17 Signedlizi/ Date �7 A(41— . _.
4
REPLY � 4L� ,)(26 /v�L �pZ � .
Ae 77 61e4-1 - .,47-- i k.-11,vJ)2 IJ 1 A.177/1-<.1 I
Glc - S a i 1-L 64-re'A ‘14J; 6 r-S ¶)0,
i .—
‘2/4 9 S./ i'4 j-, -5 --' /9,14 e-iti 7-- (Air g i re) V'' frode.0? .s- zn. /5
Alm 0 toff r2.4-----. _ 8is/ El& e rr,� ro 7 c
-No.9 FOLD
-No.10 FOLD tijd riirki y v�-.3 / O 7 cQS ,;-, al l
f alt°
Date Signed Krrki
Wilson Jones Company
o1978NE•PRINTED W U.S A.FORM 09-902 3-PART RECIPIENT—RETAIN WHITE COPY, RETURN PINK COPY
O 1978
1
4/
,MEMO TO: John K. Anderson
City Administrator
FROM: Tim Keane
City Planner
RE : Actions and Recommendations made by the Planning
Commission at meeting held December 18, 1980
DATE: December 19, 1980
The following actions and/or recommendations were made by the
Planning Commission at their meeting held December 18th:
1) Granted approval of Conditional Use Permit Resolution No.
268 , which allows for exterior storage and operation of
an open sales lot in an I-2 zone . The applicant is
Case Power & Equipment . This permit was necessary in order
to develop the site for the sales and service of construction
equipment . Site location - T. H. 101, West of Raceway Park.
2) Discussion on permitting sales in an I-2 zone will again
be brought back to the Planning Commission at their meeting
scheduled for January 8th. Input from the Industrial/
Commercial Commission has been requested, & will be given.
3 ) Height limitations was discussed and Planning Commission
requested further study; to be brought back to Planning
Commission at a later meeting.
4) Minnesota Valley 5th, 6th, 7th Additions was discussed and
Planning Commission requested engineering studies on the
traffic flow for this area. This case will come up again at
the February meeting.
5) The renewal of the Conditional Use Permit for the Shakopee
Sports Center was considered. The applicant was present and
informed the Planning Commission that he was in the process
of cleaning up the area. This was the renewal for an open
sales lot to provide an area upon which boats could be
displayed in an B-1 (Highway Business) zone . The Planning
Commission gave the applicant until their meeting of January 8th
to comply with all conditions of the Conditional Use Permit
and at that meeting a decision will be reached on the renewal.
John Anderson -2- December 19, 1980
6 ) The Planning Commission will be holding a special meeting /(
'CV
on January 22nd for discussion on the newly proposed
Subdivision Ordinance .
7) Comments on the Comprehensive Plan Amendments to the Metro
Council will be made by the Planning Commission at their
meeting of January 8th.
8 ) Discussion was held on the newly proposed Sign Ordinance;
further research was requested and will be once again
reviewed at any early 1981 Planning Commission meeting.
Jiw
AD HOC CABLE COMMUNICATIONS COMMITTEE '6PY�(
Adjourned Special Session December 15 , 1980
Chairman Foudray called the meeting to order at 7 : 10 P .M. in the
Council Chambers of City Hall , with committee members present :
Abeln, Christensen , Davis , Gorman and Kirchmeier . Also present
was Administrative Assistant Jeanne Andre .
Davis/Abeln moved to approve the minutes of December 1 , 1980 as
presented . Motion carried .
Jeanne Andre reported on the hearing held at Minnesota Cable
Communications Board (MCCB) on December 12 , 1980. There were no
objections , and acceptance of the proposed cable service territory
(CST) is anticipated at the January meeting. Eileen Christensen
indicated that one of her neighbors voiced opposition to the CST
as proposed and she recommended he file comments with MCCB . Barry
Kirchmeier indicated comments he has received expressed interest
in gaining a cable system for Shakopee as quickly as possible .
Individual letters have been sent out to institutions identified
at the previous meetings as important in the needs assessment
process . Committee members will personally contact representatives
of these institutions before the January meeting to eiplain .
Chairman Foudray indicated he has already met with Sister Agnes
at the hospital . She voiced an interest in getting more informa-
tion about cable before defining cable needs for the hospital .
The Chairman recognized Rocky Schlichter and Rick Anderson of
Cable System Services from the audience . They described their
background in the development of cable systems for communities .
Discussion was held on procedures of franchising in Minnesota
and cable services available to communities who have recently
franchised .
Jeanne Andre reported that approximately 31% of the social and
civic organization surveys have been returned and 41% of the
longer individual survey . Most of the short , post-card surveys
have been sent to Public Utilities , and a count is not available
at this time . Many of the responses from social and civic
organizations were limited due to a lack of knowledge about cable
services pertinent to their operations .
A short discussion was held regarding possible ethical problems
committee members (and other city officials) might encounter
during the franchise process due to lobbying by cable operators .
The committee agreed to review procedures used in other communities
as a basis for possible procedures to be adopted in Shakopee .
Davis/Gorman moved to adjourn at 8 : 33 P .M . Motion carried .
R. Gene Foudray
Chairman
Jeanne Andre
Recording Secretary
r
/4-
/ 7 ,-4 '
v
o -
J
I--
lit, O _
n a
o 3
J
_ 1
1 „_____ a ,III 0141 Ye, T )
<1:1;-@ i i.c...
4)
. . _
11 cif! 4 ' : ; 3 0 =I
�' Co
ME
Az
It 23 - a M
M EMI
a 6 0, u6 5 0
r
I
1 PI DA/OrA P ; 10t Mill
no i,u
I.
130 I O 1}T± A
r"—�'_ t'_ Ti _ TIE.
1 ��
PETITION AREA 2, 677 Acres Petition - Front Footage 980 Linear Feet
BENEFIT AREA 5 . 688 Acres Benefit - Front Footage 2070 Linear Feet
47 . 06 Percent Petition 47 . 3 Percent Petition
•
MEMO TO : John Anderson
City Administrator
FROM: H. R. Spurrier
City Engineer
RE: Improvement of Bluff Avenue -- Dakota Street to
the West Line of Halo 1st Addition
DATE : January 2, 1980
Introduction:
Property owners on Bluff Avenue between Dakota Street and
the west line of Halo 1st Addition have petitioned for water and
sewer service ; 47. 3% of the benefited property has petitioned.
Background :
On September 16, 1980, City Council passed Resolution No . 1689
directing the advertising of bids for improvement . of Halo 2nd
Addition pursuant to conditions in a Developer' s Agreement .
The improvements requested in the petition could replace the
facilities required in the Developer' s Agreement for Halo 2nd
Addition. Therefore , it is appropriate to consider the alternatives
available at this juncture .
Alternatives :
There are two alternatives : One, to continue with the 429
project ordered and cause the construction of improvements in
Halo 2nd Addition according to the drawing on file or to receive
the petition to order feasibility report on the improvement of
Bluff Avenue and order the postponement of bid opening for improve-
ment of Halo 2nd Addition.
The first alternative is the "do nothing" alternative. If
no action is taken, bids will be received January 30th and approx-
imately 900 linear feet of watermain will be installed in Halo 2nd
Addition. This pipe will benefit approximately 4 . 16 acres . No
area outside Halo 2nd Addition will benefit from the construction of
this watermain. The watermain completes a loop required by
Shakopee Public Utility Commission (SPUC) for Halo 1st Addition and
one lot in Halo 2nd Addition.
John Anderson -2- January 2, 1981 1(6/
The second alternative is to receive the petition and order
the feasibility report for a watermain which also completes the
loop required by SPUC . This alignment benefits approximately 2070
front feet and 8 . 694 acres . This alignment requires construction of
approximately 1450 linear feet of watermain.
Summary :
In the event , alternative one is selected, the City will
cause the construction of a watermain loop which has little lateral
benefit and virtually no general benefit to the system as a whole .
In the event the second alternative is selected, there exists a
possibility that a watermain will be constructed which will be of
general benefit to the system as a whole and particular benefit to
an additional 4 . 526 acres and 2070 front feet .
Recommendations :
Staff finds that the second alternative is the most reasonable
alternative since selection of alternate two does not rule out
returning to alternate one by readvertising the project . Staff
finds that alternative two makes more effective use of the 429
process in benefiting a much larger area with little increase in
scope of the project .
Therefore, pursuant to State Statute 429, it is recommended
that Council pass Resolution No. 1781, A Resolution Accepting A
Petition And Ordering The Feasibility Report For The Improvement
Of Bluff Avenue Between Dakota Street And The West Line Of Halo
1st Addition; and that Council pass Resolution No. 1782 , A
Resolution Postponing The Bid Opening For Halo 2nd Addition
Improvement 1980-10.
The Utility Manager was unavailable for comment at the
time this report was prepared, therefore, a supplemental report
will be presented on the table detailing the position of SPUC .
HRS/j iw
Attachment
`j 69
PETITION FOR ASSESSABLE PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT
CITY OF SIIAKOPEE
Dace p E. C.r_=I'fle r,.
We , the undersigned , owners of the following described
real property , abutting on the proposed improvement and beneficed
thereby , hereby petition the Common Council of the City of
Shakopee , for the following public improvements ;
\,ti'A'i rk -t- Itt (4 _ — I
- I
on 3Lo' FF St . /(Ave). , between tiAv %-\ KAEC-r
Sc . and DA k` '4 Sc . /Ave . , and request chat the same be
made during the year /'0 (
I
PETITIONER LO'l' BLOCK
1,7 /./ . . _
Am).
J,f - i c
-;4:460.1 d.52,4,.;,,,,-„,de- ‘46-2 Zf.i...,.. / ..) 2 r-- 4.9s 7-5./IA A"erc?,.'
le ..„),..‹, ,,,, „Ar - ,c„..?„,..., ,,, ,,,,,,,..„„4; 1 u ,2 3 .c-/ ) NAi;crtiE-
�E; i ,ice ,� C r �� 5�� '' ' 'J1�.(��'' ,_ J7 ' 1,1 , i )//ii /c,'i'-r-
j'C--,A )A,L ��{t. ' . . � _ L/ i �C f i,� � N,-C`�-.ji-J
'',//-')/ ,/ ' ,- _ , i , . :. --
I , hereby , verify chat I circulated the above petition and chat
the above signatures of the property omars and petitioners were
affixed in my presence .
Circulator
Approved this day of , 19 .
City Attorney
RESOLUTION NO. 1782
A Resolution Postponing The Invitation For Bids For
Halo 2nd Addition Improvement 1980-10
WHEREAS, the City Council has adopted Resolution No. 1689, A
Resolution Approving Plans And Specifications And Ordering Advertising
For Bids - Halo 2nd Addition Improvement 1980-10; and
WHEREAS, Council has determined that it is appropriate to
postpone the bid opening.
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA :
1. The City Clerk shall prepared and cause to be - inserted
in the official paper and in the Construction Bulletin a correction
to the advertisement for bids which shall postpone the bid opening
until further notice . Said advertisement shall be published once .
Adopted in session of the City Council
of the City of Shakopee, held this — day of
1981.
Mayor of the City of Shakopee
ATTEST:
City Clerk
Approved as to form this
day of , 1980 .
City Attorney
I -(1//)
RESOLUTION NO . 1781
A Resolution Declaring The Adequacy Of Pet:
And Ordering Preparation Of Report
. Improvement Of Bluff Avenue - Dakota Street To The West Line Of
Halo 1st Addition
WHEREAS, the Council has received a petiton from property
owners along Bluff Avenue between Dakota Street and the west line
of Halo 1st Addition; and
WHEREAS, the petition requests that the City Council improve
said land by water and sewer mains; and
WHEREAS, 47 . 3 percent of the property to benefit by said
improvement has executed said petition .
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA :
1. A certain petition requesting the improvement of Bluff
Avenue by watermain and sanitary sewer is hereby declared to be
signed by the required percentage of property owners affected thereby ,
the declaration is made in conformity to the Minnesota State
Statutes Section 429. 035.
2 . This petition is hereby referred to Henry R. Spurrier,
City Engineer, and he is instructed to report to the City Council
with all convenient speed advising the Council in a preliminary way
as to whether the proposed improvements are feasible, as to whether
the proposed improvement should be made as proposed or in connection
with some other improvement , and the estimated cost of the proposed
improvement as recommended.
Adopted in session of the City Council
of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota, held this day of
, 1981.
Mayor of the City of Shakopee
ATTEST :
City Clerk
Approved as to form this
day of , 1980 •
City Attorney
//C/
MEMO TO : John K. Anderson , City Administrator
FROM : Judith S . Cox , Deputy City Clerk
RE : Resolution No . 1783 , Directing The Institution of Legal
Proceedings
DATE : January 5 , 1981
Introduction
At the last Council meeting the City Attorney reported that the
City was given a warrantee deed for the property now occupied
by the library expansion when in fact the seller did not have
power to do so .
Since the seller has not made the corrections asked by the City
Attorney, Jack has prepared the attached resolution authorizing
the institution of legal procedures in order that the City may
acquire a clear title of record to Lot 3 , Block 29 Original
Shakopee Plat .
Recommended Action
Move to offer Resolution No . 1783 , A Resolution Authorizing And
Directing The Institution Of Legal Proceedings , and move its
adoption .
JSC/jms
l
RESOLUTION No. 1783
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING THE INSTITUTION OF LEGAL PROCEEDINGS
WHEREAS, On June 1, 1978, David W. Fladhammer and wife Jane E. Fladhammer for
good and valuable consideration, receipt and sufficiency of which was acknowledged
made, sold and delivered to the City of Shakopee a Warranty Deed to Lot 3, Block 29,
excepting the railroad right-of-way in the City of Shakopee, County of Scott and
State of Minnesota, and
WHEREAS, In truth and in fact, the said David W. Fladhammer and wife Jane E.
Fladhammer were not then and have not since become the fee owners of said Lot 3,
Block 29 in the City of Shakopee, contrary to their representations, but were and
are merely Contract for Deed purchasers of said property and other property from the
record .owners Doctor Joseph C. Huber and wife Lorraine G. Huber, and
WHEREAS, Contrary to representations said property is not free and clear from
encumbrances, but together with other property is covered by a mortgage of .record, and
WHEREAS, by virtue of the action of the said David W. Fladhammer and Jane E.
Fladhammer the City has been and still is wrongfully and unlawfully deprived of a good
title of record to the property reputedly conveyed to it by said Warranty. Deed of
June 1, 1978, and
WHEREAS, on November 10, 1980, and again on December 10, 1980 demand was made on
the said Fladhammers for delivery to it of a good title of record free and clear from
all encumbrances, but the said Fladhammers have failed and neglected so to do.
THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE SHAKOPEE CITY COUNCIL That the City Attorney
forthwith in the name of the City institute a suit against the said David W. Fladhammer
and wife Jane E. Fladhammer for specific performance of the terms of their agreement
with the City and for delivery of clear title of record to Lot 3, Block 29 in the City
of Shakopee less the railroad right-of-way, and for damages and the expenses and costs
of this litigation.
Passed in session of the Shakopee City Council held this
day of , 1981.
•
Mayor of the City of Shakopee
ATTEST:
City Clerk
(P"rapare4 and„�approved as to form this 31st day of December, 1930.
3 , Julius A. Coller, II, City Attorney
%MEMO TO : John Anderson
City Administrator
FROM: H. R . Spurrier
City Engineer
RE: Levee Drive -- Scott Street to Sommerville Street
DATE : December 31, 1980
Introduction:
Resolution No. 1778 is a resolution ordering feasibility study
for Levee Drive -- Scott Street to Sommerville Street .
Background:
In meeting of December 16, 1980 , the Council directed staff to
prepare a resolution ordering feasibility report for Levee
Drive between Scott and Atwood and Levee Drive between Lewis
and Sommerville Streets .
The attached resolution orders the preparation of the feasibility
report .
Alternatives :
Order the feasibility report and :
1) Refer the report to William Price, Suburban Engineering, for
study , or;
2) Refer the report to H. R. Spurrier, City Engineer, for study .
Based on present workload, this project may not be under contract
until late summer if prepared by City staff.
Recommendation :
Do not adopt Resolution No. 1778 , ordering the report of an improve-
ment of Levee Drive until after the list of 1981 projects has been
prioritized; then take action on Resolution No. 1778, January 20, 1981.
HRS/j iw
Attachment
//
•
RESOLUTION NO. 1778
A Resolution Ordering The Preparation Of A
Report On An Improvement
(Levee Drive )
WHEREAS, it is proposed to improve Levee Drive between
Atwood Street and Scott Street ; and Levee Drive between Lewis Street
and Sommerville Street by roadway construction, and to assess the
benefited property for all or a portion of the cost of the improve-
ment , pursuant to Minnesota Statutes , Chapter 429 .
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA , that the proposed improvement be
referred to
for study and that he is instructed to report to the Council with
all convenient speed advising the Council in a preliminary way
as to whether the proposed improvement is feasible and as to
whether it should best be made as proposed or in connection with
some other improvement , and the estimated cost of the improvement
as recommended .
Adopted in session of the City
Council of the City of Shakopee , Minnesota, held this day
of , 1981 .
Mayor of the City of Shakopee
ATTEST:
City Clerk
Approved as to form this
day of 1981.
City Attorney