HomeMy WebLinkAbout09/25/1984 TENTATIVE AGENDA
ADJ .REG.SESSION SHAKOPEE , MINNESOTA SEPTEMBER 25, 1984
Mayor Reinke presiding
11 Roll Call at 7 :00 P.M.
2] RECOGNITION BY CITY COUNCIL OF INTERESTED CITIZENS
31 Communications: None
41 Public Hearings: None
51 Boards and Commissions:
Planning Commission:
a] Amendment to City Code redefining the description of the B-2
District - Ordinance No. 150
b] Amendment to City Code by rezoning certain parcels - Ord. No. 151
c] Preliminary and Final Approval of Century Plaza Square 2nd fiddn. -
Resolution No. 2308
d] Planning Commission Vacancy
61 Reports from Staff:
a] On Sale Intoxicating Liquor Licenses - bring item 11Q from
Sept. 18th agenda
b] Taylor Street South of 12th Avenue - bring item 11S from
Sept. 18th agenda
c] Res. No. 2309 , Adopting Assessments for 1984 Sidewalk Replacement
Program - memo on table
d] Huber Park Trail Restrooms - Sidewalk
e] Six Year CIP - bring copy
f] 1985 Budget - bring copy
7] Other Business:
a] Adjourn to Executive Session to discuss Police Labor Negotiations
b]
c]
8] Adjourn.
Jahr K. Anderson
City Administrator
i
j
MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator
FROM: Judi Simac, City Planner
RE: Amendments to the B-2 Zoning District
DATE: September 21 , 1984
Introduction:
Following a public hearing on September 20, 1984 to consider
amendments to the existing B-2 District , both text and zoning
map, the Planning Commission approved a motion to recommend to
the City Council the following amendments :
A. Proposed Amendments to Section 11. 30 Community Business
(Please refer to the existing language which is attac ed)
Subd. 1 Purpose . The Community Business District will allow
local retail sales and services along with office
space opportunities to serve local population demand
and needs of non-highway orientation. (Proposed)
Subd. 2 Permitted Uses (Remain unchanged)
Subd. 3 Conditional Uses (Remain unchanged)
Subd. 4 Permitted Accessory Uses (Remain unchanged)
Subd. 5 Lot Area, Height , Lot Width and Yard Requirements
A. Building Height - unchanged
B. Minimum Lot Area - 1 acre (Proposed)
C. Front Yard: The front yard setback for all
principle structures from planned right of way
lines shall be 70 feet for principle and inter-
mediate arterials , 50 feet for minor arterials ,
40 feet for collectors and 30 feet for all other
streets . (Proposed)
Rear Yard : 30 feet (Proposed)
Side Yard: 15 feet (Proposed)
ron
D thg i�the 100 feet (Prowed)
. (Remain unchan ���
B._ Proposed Amendments to Section 11.21 Zoning Map
Following the discussion of several alternative plans for
proposed zoning changes in the area of the B-2 District ,
the Planning Commission chose to recommend the attached
revisions .
(Please refer to attached exhibit ) .
Action Requested:
1 . Motion to approve and adopt Ordinance #150, an ordinance
that amends Section 11 . 30 of the City Code (on table) .
2 . Motion to approve and adopt Ordinance #151 , an ordinance
thAf amends Section 11 . 21 of the City Code (on table) .
, S
c"
AttAthmeht,
L. A drainage plan shall be designed and approved
for the area with such on-site construction as determined neces-
sary by the City Engineer to adequately ' handle all drainage.
M. Whereas a B-1 use abuts or is across the
street from an R District, a fence or compact evergreen hedge not
less than 50 percent opaque nor less than 6 feet high (except
when adjacent to a street where it shall be not higher than 3
feet in height) , shall be erected and maintained in the front
yard portion of the lot and along the side or rear property line
that abuts the R District.
SEC. 11. 30 . COMMUNITY BUSINESS (B-2) .
Subd. 1. Purpose. The Community Business District
will allow local retail sales and services along with office
space opportunities to serve local population demand and needs of
non-highway orientation. This District will encourage a compact
center for retail sales and services by grouping businesses in
patterns of workable relationships , by limiting and controlling
uses near residential areas and by excluding highway-oriented and
other business that tends to disrupt the shopping center or its
circulation patterns.
Subd . 2 . Permitted Uses. Within any Community Busi-
ness District, no structures or land shall be used except for one
or more of the following uses:
A. Retail businesses - stores and shops selling
household goods over the counter .
B. Offices and banks. w "
C. Theatre.
D. Service establishments.
E. Medical and dental clinics.
F. Physical culture and dance studios.
G. Restaurants , Class I .
H. Essential services.
Subd. 3 . Conditional Uses. Within any Community Busi-
ness District no structure or land shall be used for the follow-
ing uses except by conditional use permit:
A. Restaurants (Class II) when located within a
hotel, motel or shopping mall .
' B. Taverns.
C . Private lodges and clubs.
D. Essential utility service structures.
E. Commercial recreational , cultural and frater-
nal organizations.
F. Public buildings.
G. Motor fuel stations.
H. Liquor store.
I . Car wash.
J. Motel and motor hotels.
"r K. Any building over 35 feet high.
L. Newspaper publishing and printing.
-310-
Subd. 4 . Permitted Accessory Uses. Within any Commu-
nity Business District the following uses shall be permitted ac-
cessory uses: ' z RiT ,
,1 1° w
A. Same as in B-1. r ` I
Subd. 5. Lot Area, Height, Lot Width and Yard Require-
ments.
A. No building shall exceed 35 feet in height.
B. Minimum Lot Area : 5 acres.
C. Front, side, rear setbacks: 60 feet.
D. Minimum setback from side or rear residential
area: 100 feet.
E. If more than one building, an open space equal
to one-half the sum of the heights of the two buildings must be
provided between the buildings.
F. Design shall include adequate internal circu-
lation not less than 22 feet wide exclusive of required parking.
G. Curb cuts shall not exceed 24 feet in width.
H. The entire area shall be landscaped, occupied
by building or parking areas so treated as to control dust.
Should the development be undertaken in stages, all of the area
required to conform to that portion undertaken shall be developed
to meet the preceding requirements.
I . A drainage plan shall be designed and approved
for the area with such on-site construction as determined neces-
sary by the City Engineer to adequately handle all drainage.
J. Whereas a B-2 use abuts or is across the
street from an R District, a fence or compact evergreen hedge not
less than 50 percent opaque nor less than 6 feet high (except
when adjacent to a street where it shall be not higher than 3
feet in height) , shall be erected and maintained in the front
yard portion of the lot and along the side or rear property line
that abuts the R District.
SEC. 11. 31. CENTRAL BUSINESS (B-3) .
Subd. 1. Purpose. This District is established to
recognize the unique character of the Central Business District
i n_�te�Cmc -f Z�ttr3..tl�t? her- it-`re,1.L-,-T p 2t.a_,n 2C�yL22..1:anZi,ramcn+ c
and circulation.
Subd. 2. Permitted Uses. Within the Central Business
District, no structure or land shall be used except for one or
more of the following uses:
A. All permitted uses in B-2.
B. Liquor store.
C . Public buildings.
D. Tavern.
E. Theaters.
F. Dwellings combined with a permitted use.
G. Armory, exhibition hall. <
H. Hospitals and clinics.
Ii Churches.
310- 1.
-M
s TT
i -4.
to �` •
�," m •
cb 4 Ci-
CD
i+ A� m • • • • , m • m • • u�
• • 1.♦L�,'. ,
l
I
I
cc
5
ORDINANCE NO. 150
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE AMENDING SHAKOPEE CITY CODE,
CHAPTER 11 ENTITLED "LAND USE REGULATIONS (ZONING)," SECTION 11.30
ENTITLED "COMMUNITY BUSINESS (B-2)."
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA, ORDAINS:
SECTION I: Shakopee City Code Section 11.30, Subd. 1 amended
Subd. 1 Purpose:
The community business district will allow local retail sales and
services along with office space opportunities to serve local population
demand and needs of nonhighway orientation.
SECTION II: Shakopee City Code Section 11.30, Subd. 5 amended
Subd. 5 Lot Area, Height, Lot Width and Yard Requirements.
B. Minimum lot area: one acre.
C. Front yard: the front yard set back for all principal structures
from planned right-of-way lines shall be 70 feet for principal and
intermediate arterials, 50 feet for minor arterials, 40 feet for
collectors, and 30 feet for all other streets.
Rear yard: 30 feet.
Side yard: 15 feet.
Lot width: 100 feet.
SECTION III: When in Force and Effect
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 then be in full force and effect.
Adopted in session of the City Council of the City of
Shakopee, Minnesota, held this day of , 1984.
Mayor of the City of Shakopee
ATTEST:
City Clerk
Prepared and approved as to form this day of , 1984.
City Attorney
r�
r
ORDINANCE NO. 151
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE AMENDING SHAKOPEE CITY CODE,
CHAPTER 11 ENTITLED "LAND USE REGULATIONS (ZONING)" BY REMOVING
CERTAIN LAND HEREIN FROM THE R-4 ZONE (MULTI FAMILY RESIDENTIAL) TO
THE B-2 ZONE (COMMUNITY BUSINESS), FROM THE B-2 ZONE TO THE R-4 ZONE,
FROM THE R-4 ZONE TO THE I-1 ZONE (HEAVY INDUSTRY), AND FROM THE R-4
AND THE B-2 ZONES TO THE I-1 ZONE.
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA, ORDAINS:
SECTION I: Shakopee City Code Section 11.21 amended
All that part of the SE 1/4 of Section 6, Township 115 North, Range
22 West, Scott County, Minnesota, which lies North of the North
boundary of the Chicago-Minneapolis and St. Paul Railroad and lying
South of the centerline of County State Aid Road No. 16 and lying
East of the centerline of County State Aid Road No. 17 and lying West
of the following described line: Commencing at the intersection of
the centerline of County State Aid Road No. 16 and New County State
Aid Road No. 17 in said SE 1/4; thence along said centerline of
County State Aid Road No. 16 on an assumed bearing of S 590 41' 00" E
a distance of 331.55 feet to the point of beginning of the line to be
described; thence S 120 43' 47" W 288.56 feet; thence S 300 35' W a
distance of 172 feet more or less to the northerly boundary of the
Chicago-Minneapolis & St. Paul Railroad and there terminating, be and
the same hereby is removed from R-4 zone and placed in B-2 zone.
That part of the E 5/8 of the N 1/2 of the SE 1/4, Sec. 6, T 115, R
22, Scott County, Minnesota, beginning at the SW corner of said E
5/8; thence North along the West line thereof a distance of 250 feet,
thence S 890 42' 30" E, parallel with the south line of said E 5/8 of
the N 1/2 of the SE 1/4, a distance of 503 feet to an existing fence;
thence South a distance of 250 feet to the South line of E 5/8 of the
N 1/2 of SE 1/4; thence N 890 42' 30" W, along said line, a distance
of 503 feet to the point of beginning, be and the same hereby is
removed from R-4 zone and placed in B-2 zone.
Property ID 427-906-018-0 2.45 ac.
The East 321 feet of the North 333 feet of the West three quarters of
the Northwest quarter of Section 6, Township 115, Range 22, be and
the same hereby is removed from B-2 zone and placed in R-4 zone.
Property ID #27-906-028-0
6-115-22 50.0 ac. E. 5/8 of N 1/2 of SE 1/4, be and the same hereby
is removed from B-2 zone and placed in R-4 zone.
Property ID #27-905-017-0
5-115-22 42.41 ac. NW 1/4 of SW 1/4 Ex. 7.7 and 4.32 and ex. 4.07
ac. and N 22 ac. of SW 1/4 of SW 1/4 Ex E 2 rods, be and the same
hereby is removed from B-2 zone and placed in the R-4 zone.
Property ID 427-905-018
5-115-22 4.07 ac.
N. 499.7' of NW 1/4 of SW 1/4 Ex. E 975' , be and the same hereby is
removed from B-2 zone and placed in R-4 zone.
Property ID #27-905-020
5-115-22 7.7 ac.
7.70 acres in NW 1/4 of SW 1/4, be and the same hereby is removed
from B-2 zone and placed in R-4 zone.
Property ID #27-905-019
5-115-22 4.32 ac.
S. 200' of N 699.70' of E 975' NW 1/4 of SW 1/4
Ex. 33' thereof, be and the same hereby is removed from B-2 zone and
placed in R-4 zone.
Property ID #27-905-023
5-115-22 41 ac.
SE 1/4 of SW 1/4 Ex. N. 2 Rods, E. 2 Rods, SW 1/4
SW 1/4 Ex. N. 2 Rods, E 4 Rods NE 1/4
SW 1/4 and N 2 Rods E 4 Rods SE 1/4 SW 1/4, be and the same hereby is
removed from R-4 zone and placed in I-1 zone.
Property ID 427-905-022-0
5-115-22 21 NE 1/4 SW 1/4 Ex. E 4 Rods,
N 2 Rods Ex. E 4 Rods of SE 1/4 SW 1/4
Ex. W 639.85 of E. 705.85, be and the same hereby is removed from R-4
and B-2 zones and placed in I-1 zone.
"SEG. 1UN'Ii: 'Uen'zn-f orce-adu ffteC L.
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 then be in full force and effect.
Adopted in session of the City Council of the City of
ShAknnp,e—FJJpuesnta held phis _ day of _ 1984._
Mayor of the City of Shakopee
ATTFS-T�*___
City Clerk
Prepared and approved as to form this day of , 1984.
City Attorney
' j,
Law Offices of
KRASS, MEYER & 'W/ALSTEN
Ntm
Chartered .�� .� V
Suite 300
S"hNip R. Krass Paraingais
Marschall Road (3usiness Center „E3a v, uar Susan M.Brown
xr. K.. p
ari Scuin rtarscnali"Hoar') "` Barbara J Hadscro:n
P.0 Box 216 'Trevor R.Walsl en
Shakopee, Minnesota 55379 September 25, 1984
(612)445-5080
Ms. Judi Simac
Shakopee City Planner
129 East First Avenue
Shakopee, MN 55379
Re: Plat of Century Plaza Square 2nd Addition
Dear Judi:
You have proposed to me substantially the following situation: It is
my understanding that the property proposed to be included in the above
referenced plat is currently zoned B-2. Within that zone the minimum lot size
is five acres and presently that property could be utilized in five acre
parcels. It is my understanding that the owner desires to intensify the use
to parcels of approximately one acre and has therefore requested that the City
amend the minimum lot size in the B-2 zone from five acres to one acre.
You have informed me that the County and City Engineer both agree
that should this use be intensified in the manner proposed, in order to assure
safe entry and exist to and from the proposed lots, turn lanes should be
installed. The question you have posed to me is whether or not the City would
be within its rights to require the dedication of approximately ten feet
adjacent to presently dedicated County Road 17 to provide such turn lanes, as
a condition of the plat.
I have previously advised the City in an extensive memorandum that
public dedications reasonably necessary for the service of land to be platted
may in fact be .required. I have informed the City that what may not be
required as part of a plat dedication is excess property needed to service
adjacent or surrounding property, ie trunk facilities.
In my opinion the dedication being requested by the Planning
Commission and the City staff is primarily to service the property being
platted and to assure safe ingress and egress thereto. Considering the
landowner's request to amend the zoning ordinance to provide for a more
intensive use of the property in question, I believe the dedication of the
additional ten feet on each side of County Road 17 is a legitimate request of
the City and may be made a prerequisite to the platting. Should you have any
further questions, please do not hesitate to contact me.
Yours v�ry�" �y,
WiLSTEN CHARTERED
s
PRK:m j
MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator
FROM: Judi Simac, City Planner
RF: Application for Preliminary and Final Approval
of Century Plaza 2nd Addition
DATE: September 21, 1984
Introduction:
At their September 20, 1984 meeting, the Planning
Commission approved a motion to recommend to the City Council
that the preliminary and final plat application for Century
Plaza Square 2nd Addn. be approved subject to conditions .
(See attached case report for considerations of the plat ) .
Background:
The recommended conditions of approval are as follows :
1. Approval of a Title Opinion by the City Attorney.
2. Park dedication to be made in cash at time of building permit
issuance.
3. The zoning issues must be resolved prior to the recording of
the final plat.
4 . The final plat drawing must comply with subdivision regulations,
ie. signature block, etc.
5. Execution of a recordable Developer' s Agreement which provides
for:
a. The construction of a ten foot sidewalk on the east side
of CSAR 17 be waived to the construction of a five foot
sidewalk in accordance with existing commercial sidewalk
sizes in the area. (Approved variance on the plat )
b. The developer to pay for the installation of an eight
inch suture water main in -Gorman Avenue from VYfii Yl
to the west property line of the plat; with the under-
standing that the SPUC will pay for the cost of over-
sizing to a twelve inch line.
C. The dedication of an additional ten feet on both sides
of centerline along CSAR 17 to provide for a total of
100 feet of right-of-way.
d. The dedication of an additional 17 feet of right-of-way
where the plat abuts CSAH 16 ; the northeast corner of
the intersection of CSAR 17 and CSAR 16.
e. The construction of auxilliary lanes in CSAH 17. Should
they be determined necessary for County Entrance Permits.
f . The removal of the existing two curb cuts along CSAH 17.
g. The construction of a sanitary sewer to serve Lots 2, 3,
4 , Block 1 .
h. The submittal of a final drainage report and con-
struction of drainage facilities for each lot in
Block 2 and for lots 1, 2, 3 in Block 1.
i . The developer to petition for the improvement of
Gorman Avenue and waive the right to appeal the
proposed assessment.
j . The developer shall agree to the City Engineer's
method of .apportioning the installments remaining
unpaid against said proposed plat and that the
developer waives his right to appealing the appor-.
tionment.
In regard to condition 5c. , the Planning Commission has
directed staff to contact legal counsel to obtain an opinion
on the authority and right to demand dedication of the additional
ten feet of R-O-W or whether the City and/or County should pay
for it. Staff expects to have this opinion for the September 25th
meeting.
*Action Requested:
Motion to approve the preliminary plat of Century Plaza
Square 2nd Addition and offer Resolution # 2308 , A Resolution
approving the Final Plat of Century Plaza Square 2nd Addition
and move for its adoption.
* Resolution to be on table in final form.
s G
MEMO TO: Shakopee Planning Commission
FROM: Judi Simac , City Planner
DATE: September 19 , 1984
ITEM: Application for Preliminary and Final Plat Approval -
Century Square 2nd Addition (Revised 9-17-84)
APPLICANT: Cletus J. Link
LOCATION: East and West side of County Road 17 , South of 4th
Avenue and North of County Road 16
ZONING : B-2 Community Business
LAND USE: Vacant ( Proposed convenience store on B 1 L 5 )
APPLICABLE REGULATIONS : Section 12 , Subdivision Regulations
FINDINGS REQUIRED: Section 12 .03 , Subd. 3 ; Section 12 .04
Considerations:
1. The total area of the plat is 15 . 58 acres .
2. The existing zoning is B-2 (Community Business ) which
requires a minimum lot size of five acres . The plat pro-
poses twelve lots , all of which are one acre or more in
size. The applicant has requested a rezoning to B-1
(Highway Business ) in order to plat the land as proposed
and meet existing code requirements . The Planning Commission
has considered recommending that the minimum lot size in
the B-2 district be reduced from five acres to one acre , in
which case a rezoning of the property would not be necessary.
Irregardless of the method, the plat cannot be approved
until a change is made in the existing zoning regulations .
3 . Although the developer has applied for preliminary and
final approval , the submitted plat is identified as pre-
liminary only. To comply with the subdivision code a
signature block should appear on the final .
4. The adjacent land uses are : North - vacant B-1 and
developed (apartments ) R-4, East - undeveloped B-2, South -
developed (apartments and non-conforming business use) R-4,
West - partially developed (non-conforming uses ) B-2 .
5 . Ten foot utility and drainage easements are shown.
6 . Ten foot sidewalks are required on both sides of an
arterial road (County Road 17 ) . An existing sidewalk is
located on the west side of County Road 17 .
7 . Cash payment to the park fund should be made in lieu of
land dedication.
8. The Fire Chief , Police Chief and Community Services Director
all recommend approval of the plat .
9. The Shakopee Public Utilities Commission has indicated that
they desire an agreement between SPUC and the developer
to provide for a future watermain in Gorman Street. They
would like to incorporate in the developers agreement that
the developer will pay for an eight inch pipe from County
Road 17 to the west property line of the plat; but then to
actually install a twelve inch pipe with SPUC paying the
oversizing cost.
10. The Scott County Engineer has made the following recommenda-
tions :
a. An additional ten feet of property on both sides of
the centerline along CSAR 17 be dedicated to provide
for a total of one hundred feet right-of-way.
b► Where the plat abuts CSAH 16 an additional seventeen
feet of aright-of-way is requested.
Page -2-
c . The need for and geometries of auxilliary lanes to
be determined upon application for County Entrance
Permits.
d. The present alignment of the CSAH 17/CSAR 16 - Gorman
intersection is acceptable to the County. However,
should Gorman Avenue be vacated or realigned to the
north, additional right-of-way should be secured for
realignment to the south of CSAR 16 intersecting with
CSAR 17 . (Corner lot occupied by Brooks Superette) .
11 . The City Engineer has made the following recommendations :
a . A dedication of at least ten feet of right-of-way
should be made along both sides of CSAR 17 in order to
accommodate future curb setback if such setback is
required by the Scott County Engineer.
b. Curb cuts should be limited in Block 1 . The two
existing curb cuts on CSAR 17 should be removed.
There should be no more than one curb cut between
Lots 2 and 3 , Block 1 and one curb cut between Lots
4 and 5, Block 1 . In Block 2 the lot line between
Lots 1 and 2 should match the lot line between Lots
2 and 3 in Block 1 . In Block 2 the lot line between
Lots 3 and 4 should match the lot line between Lots
4 and 5 in Block 1 . Then driveway cuts should be
limited to the lot line between Lots 1 and 2 and the
lot line between Lots 3 and 4, and the lot line
between Lots 5 and 6 .
c . An eight inch sanitary sewer line must be extended
across CSAH 17 to provide sanitary sewer service to
Lots 2 , 3 , 4, Block 1 .
d. The drainage report has been reviewed . The developer
is working on necessary revisions . A final drainage
report is required for each lot in Block 2 and a final
drainage report for lots 1 , 2 , and 3 in Block 1 will
have to be supplied prior to issuance of a building
permit.
e . The developer should petition for the improvement of
Gorman Avenue and waive the right to appeal the pro-
posed assessment .
f. The developer should agree to the requirement to in-
stall turn lanes for Lots 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 if recommended by
the Scott County Engineer as part of driveway permit
approval .
12 . The Finance Department indicates a total of $25 ,199 . 93 in
special assessments are due on this plat.
Recommendation:
Should the Planning Commission choose to recommend preliminary
and final approval of the plat to the City Council , the following
conditions of approval are recommended:
1 . Approval of a Title Opinion by the City Attorney.
2 . Park Dedication to be made in cash at the time of building
permit issuance.
3 . The zoning issues must be resolved prior to the recording
of tie final plat,
4: The f isigi pidt dfAwing must comply with subdivision
is it iesins it., signature block, etc .
Page -3-
5. Execution of a recordable Developer' s Agreement which
provides for:
a. The construction of a ten foot sidewalk on the east
side of CSAR 17 .
b. The developer to pay for the installation of an eight
inch future watermain in Gorman Avenue from CSAR 17
to the west property line of the plat; with the under-
standing that the SPDC will pay for the cost of
oversizing to a twelve inch line .
c . The dedication of an additional ten feet on both sides
of centerline along CSAR 17 to provide for a total of
100 feet of right-of-way.
d. The dedication of an additional 17 feet of right-o£-way
where the plat abuts CSAR 16 .
e. The construction of auxilliary lanes in CSAR 17 should
they be determined necessary for County Entrance
�t�Yr►atc� .
f. The removal of the existing two curb cuts along CSAR
17 .
g. The construction of an eight inch sanitary sewer line
across CSAH 17 to provide sanitary sewer service to
lots 2 , 3 , 4, Block 1 .
h. The submittal of a final drainage report and con-
struction of drainage facilities for each lot in
Block 2 and for lots 1 , 2 , 3 in Block 1 .
i . The developer to petition for the improvement of
Gorman Avenue and waive the right to appeal the pro-
posed assessment .
3. The developer shall agiee to the City Er.gireer' s
method of apportioning the installments remaining
unpaid against said proposed plat and that the
developer waives his right to appealing the apportion-
ment .
Action Requested:
Recommendation to the City Council .
JS:cah
5V
MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator
FROM: Judi Simac, City Planner
RE: Planning Commission Membership
DATE: September 21, 1984
Introduction:
Due to the resignation of Joe Perusich there is again a vacancy
on the Planning Commission.
With the continued increase in cases and discussion items which
the Planning Commission must consider each month, I believe
that it is imperative that the vacancy be filled as soon as
possible. Therefore, it is my desire that the City Council con-
sider the following alternatives:
Alternatives:
1. Direct staff to advertise for applications for the vacant
seat.
2. Choose to appoint one of the two citizens nominated last
month for the vacant seat.
3. Take no action.
Recommendation:
Staff recommends alternative number one along with an active
recruitment process taken on by Councilmembers.
Action Requested:
Motion to direct staff to advertise for applicants for the
vacant seat on the Planning Commission.
JS:cah
(--X-rV CIF' '-a3HAKQ1=>aa
INCORPORATED 1870
ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT
129 E. 1st Avenue - Shakopee, Minnesota 55379-1376 (612) 445-3650
FEASIBILITY REPORT
1984 CURB AND BUTTER,
SIDEWALK AND DRIVEWAY APRON
REPLACEMENT PROGRAM
-Wt:rj3L--1'L -1Vri-�FCtJqEVa)q1 liru.
TO: City Council
City of Shakopee, Minnesota
FROM: H. R. Spurr -ie -r-, City Engineer,
DATE: September 25, 1984
I attach signed waivers of heal-ing and assessment appeal for
the proposed work described in the attachment to the waiver.
That attachment constitutes an estimate o-,� the proposed work
and based on the fact that waive --s have been received for all
of the work, all of the construction proposed under this prog-
r-am, is hereby recommended tc, be fens ible.
ny
2
11"NIMP-1
HRS/pmp
Attachments
i
CITY OF SHAKOPEE
HEARING AND APPEAL WAIVER
for
CHAPTER 429 IMPROVEMENTS
The undersigned property owner(s) hereby certifies that (he) i
(she) (they) (is) (are) the owner(s) of the property described
as Parcel No. 27-906122-0
6 115 22 .9547 P/0 W lA of E 3A of W 2/3 of SWk NEk
& Lot #5 Bet. N Line of R of W of St P & S C RR & S Line
of 1st St E Shakopee
and is empowered to waive their rights as indicated below.
The undersigned property owner(s) understands that the assessment
will be the actual cost of the improvement including technical
services plus 15 percent for processing and administration for
a total assessment not to exceed $ 3,991.51 as specified in
payment Option No. 2 on the Cost Ta u ation - Final.
The undersigned property owner(s) hereby waives their right to
a public hearing prior to Council ordering the improvements and
also waives their right to a public hearing prior to the levying
of the assessments related to said improvements and further
waives all rights to appeal said assessments which shall be
assessed pursuant to Minnesota Statutes Chapter 429, as a result
of the installation of:
Sidewalk Constructed at Parcel No. 27-906122-0 and in N� of
CNW Railroad R.O.W. located South of above mentioned parcel..
In the event the assessment is paid prior to October 15, 1984,
the assessment shall be reduced by fifteen percent (157x).
Dated this fi/ day of , 1984.
BI GER KING CORPORATION
Attest
STATE OF FLORIDA
COUNTY OF DADE
-BEFORE ME,, the undersigned authority,.persona-ly appeared
i 2LC,'2Ic il and
to ifie well known an nown—to me to -5 -6 -7 -the individuals descrIDed
in and who executed the foregoing instrument as Vice President
and Assistant Secretary of BURGER KING CORPORATION, a Florida
corporation, and severally acknowledged to and before me that
they executed such instrument as such Vice President and Assistant
Secretary respectively of said corporation and that the seal
affixed to the foregoing instrument is the corporate seal of said
corporation, and that it was affixed to said instrument by due
and regular corporate authority, and that said instrument is the
free act and deed of said corporation.
CW TNESS my hand and official seal this C. day of
19
(SEAL) c:
of ry u c
`iy Commission Expires: /,7;::)
6 c,3
C2TY C7_F 'Z;HAK_®1z"HE._
INCORPORATED 1870
ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT
129 E. 1st Avenue - Shakopee, Minnesota 55379-1376 (612) 445-3650
September 25, 1984
lakopee, Minnesota, 1984
D the City Council of Shakopee, Minnes:,ota
DBanci 1members y
the Registered Eng-_raeer- in ch.Z�--ge, A hereby certify that
ie following improvements to 12 ;parcels described a;nd noted
-s the attached assessment ;-:�e l 1 , have been corop l et ed in accord-
-tce with , the Plans and Spe01f .cat':o;riv approved by :C,:: -unci I
.o March 8j 1984, and that th•s a�s:ro3 of tt e z:�e_est ems?` the work
er a 1 l of the pre�j ect s is ? G, 128. 73,, as i t Earn i wed ft_e� each
-OJect a ld totaled ev,r: he ai�z.et-s�,3`,;e +
further specify that- ths?-.e v,iet�e n from t -hs Plants
-,d Spe04 1.j ciat ion .
I hereby certify that this plan, specification, or report
was prepared by me or under my direct supervision
and that I _am a Aly Registered Professional
Engineerder thew of the State of Minnesota.
/ k
Date
tS/prap
�tGachrnants
istration No. 13689
Sl
T
CS
HF
At
SUBTOTAL: $ O —
ESTIMATED TOTAL -CONSTRUCTION
10% -CONSTRUCTION CONTINGENCY C(�ravt wow�c X95 go
ESTIMATED GRAND TOTAL -CONSTRUCTION 3 Z 3.gD
10 TECHNICAL SERVICES 3 2-! . �al
ESTIMATED TOTAL -OPTION NO. 1 $ 357I /S'
15% -IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT COST _ 5
I
ESTIMATED TOTAL -OPTION NO. 2 $
CITY OF SHAKOPEE
1984 CURB & GUTTER SIDEWALK
AND
DRIVEWAY APPROACH REPLACEMENT PROGRAM
COST TABULATION -rya
PROPERTY OWNER_/
ADDRESS l-�Gt✓ce` �D�Z/ �-• J
---- - —PHONE �L55
TYPE QUANTITY
UNIT PRICE TOTAL
Curb & Gutter
0-50 L.F.
50 L.F.
Mountable
$ 6.50
$ 5.60
_
B-618
6.60
5.60
B-624
8.00
8.00
Vertical Curb
6.00
6.00
Removal (all types)--+-
1.00
_
1.00
SUBTOTAL: $ —0—
Sidewalk & Driveway
0-200 S.F.
200 S.F.
4" Sidewalk
$ 1.65
/530
6" Sidewalk
2.50
2.30
_
6" Driveway Apron
2.50
2.30
8" Reinforced Concrete
Driveway
3.25
3.00
10" Reinforced Concrete _
Driveway
3.85
3.85
Existing Concrete Removal
2.25/S.Y.
2.25/S.Y.--
,
SUBTOTAL: $ /530400
Restoration
Class 5
$ 8.50/Ton
Sod et7�,
3.00/S.Y.,
ao
2341 Bituminous Patching;
40.00/Ton
SUBTOTAL: $
Other Items
Subgrade Excavation
$ 5.00/C.Y.
Pit Run Base Material -
6.00/C.Y.
Concrete Sawing
-- -�
(6" Depth)
3.00/L.F.
SUBTOTAL: $ O —
ESTIMATED TOTAL -CONSTRUCTION
10% -CONSTRUCTION CONTINGENCY C(�ravt wow�c X95 go
ESTIMATED GRAND TOTAL -CONSTRUCTION 3 Z 3.gD
10 TECHNICAL SERVICES 3 2-! . �al
ESTIMATED TOTAL -OPTION NO. 1 $ 357I /S'
15% -IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT COST _ 5
I
ESTIMATED TOTAL -OPTION NO. 2 $
RESOLUTION NO. 2310
A RESOLUTION ADOPTING ASSESSMENTS FOR THE
1984 CURB, GUTTER, SIDEWALK AND DRIVEWAY APRON
REPLACEMENT PROGRAM 1984-2
WHEREAS, contracts have heretofore been let for curb, gut-
ter, sidewalk and driveway apron replacement for parcels owned
by the following parties:
Richard A. Allex & Sarah
Burger King Corporation
Howard Hentges & Joanne
Roger D. & Deanne J. Hill
McDonalds Corporation
McDonalds Corporation
Edmund Mosser & Bridget
Robert G. Nelson ET AL
Rose M. Ricklick
Leland Scheller & Barbara
Daniel G. Steil & Mary M.
Charles Wagener & Lavonne
and
WHEREAS, the total of all the contract prices for such
improvments is $12,750.02 and the expenses incurred or to be
incurred in making said improvements amounts to $3,378.75 so
that the total cost of the improvements would be $16,128.73
and of this $16,128.73 the State will pay $0.0 as its share
of the costs and the City will pay $0.0 as its share of the
costs.
WHEREAS, property owners have waived their right to a public
hearing prior to the levying of the assessments related to said
improvements as well as all rights to appeal said assessments
which shall be assessed pursuant to MSA 429.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA:
1. That the total cost of such improvements to be specially
assessed is hereby declared to be $16,128.73.
2. That such proposed assessment, together with any amend-
ments thereof, a copy of which is attached hereto and
made a part hereof, is hereby accepted and shall consti-
tute the special assessment against the lands named
herein and each tract therein included is hereby found
to be benefitted by the proposed improvements in the
amount of the assessments levied against it.
6 C' -
3. Such assessments shall be payable in equal annual instal-
lments extending over a period of ten years, the first
installment to be payable on or before the first Monday
in January, 1985 and shall bear interest at the rate
of 9.00 percent per annum 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,
1985 and to each subsequent installment when due shall
be added the interest for one year on all unpaid install-
ments.
4. Any assessments paid on or before October 15, 1984 shall
be reduced by an amount equal to the administrative
services for the improvement district cost.
5. 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 proper-
ty, with interest accrued to the date of payment, to
t_h-at no interest shall be
charged if the entire assessment is paid within 30 days
from the adoption of this resolution; and he may there-
after 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.
6. The Clerk shall file the assessment rolls pertaining
to this assessment in her office and shall certify annu-
ally to the County Auditor on or before October 10th
of each year the total amount of installments and inter-
est which are to become due in the following year on
the assessment on each parcel of land included in the
assessment roll.
Adopted in session of ther City Council of the
City of Shakopee, Minnesota held this day of
1984.
Mayor of the City of Shakopee
ATTEST:
City Clerk
Approved as to form this
day of , 1984.
City Attorney
1984 ASSESSMENTS FOR SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT 84_2
CURB, BUTTER, SIDEWALK, DRIVEWAY APRON APPROACH PROGRAM
CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA
OWNER DESCRIPTION I IMPROVEMENT ; COST �_- `ASSESSMENT
Richard A. Allex & Sara T. INi/2
of Lots 1 & 2 ;Driveway Aaror
-onstruction
$
29.8
$ 163.65
727 Holmes Street !Block
100, City of Shakopee
harles 'da_ener & Lavonne
Ar'n. Svc.
} Cor,str^uctior;
34.28
123 W. 5th Aver _e
Shakopee, MN 55379
27-001-740-0 !
$ 61.8.3 I
S':,a+ogee, '^N `?1927-0T1-456-0
,
1
Burger King Corp.
6 115 22.9547 P/O W 1A of E 3A
5idewalk
i Construction
$3,155.75
$3,991.51
P.O. Sox 520783 lof
W 2/3 of SW 1/4 N£ 1/4 L. 15
i Adran. Svc.
$
836.16 I
FL
27-906-122-0
I
I
Howard Hentges & Joanne
Lot 2, Block 3
Curb and
; Construction;
$
i445.5@ �
$ 563.68
1044 S. Madison
'Jackson View Addn.
Drive Apron
! Admir. Svc.
$
118.08
Shakopee, MN 55379
I27-024-021-d�
Roger D. & Deanne J. Hili
lLot 9, Block 86 -
C!'rb & Butter
Construction
$
182.22 I
526 W. 6th
iCity of Shakopee
Adnan. Svc.
$
48.26-
± $ 230.48
Shakopee, MN 55379
27-001-671-0
McDonalds Corporatiot1
!
�LDt 1, Block 1
aleewall
1
onstructirjn
$
4ZE.45
; 514.1
$ ,5
"ne ':McDonalds Plaza
Furries 1st Addn.
Admin.. Svc,
$
107.70
Oak Brook, IL 60521°
127-068-001-0
r
McDonalds Corporation 16115
22 .0512 P/O W 2/3 SW 1/4
Sidewalk
1 ronstructior,
$3 253.80
X862.25
!
!
l 34,116.05
r.C. Box E6207
INE 1/4
i A.r:;in. Svc,
$
Chicago, 1'- 60666
�' M �� B 'dget
Edmund !o-.er & r;uget
8 to 10 ex. S. 71' Z -f Said
� L �
Drive Aron
�'
1 �.
Constructic-n
$
, 5
273.0.,
+
! $ 3.44. 42
404 E. 7th Street
� t 7 S
!Lots Bock 10.x, 'ley o, �skopee
"drl in. Svc.
$
7'--'.35
Snakopee, MN 55379
;27-001-770-0
!
�
Robert G. Nelson ET A'
Shakopee
ILot i & W 1/2 of E. Shakopee
Curb & Gutter
Cnnstr,;cti"n
$,006.50
�
3565 N. Lexington, St. 132
it P/O Ailey
�& Sidewalk
AcF;iY,. Svc.
$
796.72
St. Paul, MN 55112
127-004-157-'0
!
Rose +. Ricklick
!N 711 of L?t 4 & 5, 31:_"ck 80
ICS<rb & Gutte;^
; - t r;
v:.ns r .c.._r.
$
, c
70.. Q
$ 887.90
,6 ^o•; r'
6c oJ,;me. ai.le
'S 1/2 of Alie Ad,,,oining
, Y 3
!D; ive Apror ,g
s
I Aernlyl. Svc.
$
186.?e
Snakopee, MN 553379
127-001-608-0
(Sidewalk
_=land Scheller & Barbara
i-ot 2 Block 3
'
'Curb & Gutter
�or:strE.tct i=gin
$
898.47
$' < 76.55
213 �. 3rc Avenue
.E. Shakopee
or r q.
Drive ,. r r'
Adrr,:r,. Svc,
?
238.08
,"'
Shakopee, MN 55379
;27-004-t�15-0
Sidewalk
!
jan1e1 U. 5:@li 6 i9dt'y .t.
?53 'Minnesota Street
_U� 1.7 a w, W'Q!�� ". .— I•.-•- - _••_.
25' of 19, Wermersklrcher s Addr! ;
+ lons—truCtio
Amin. Svc.
`� b4.m
$ '_6.96
Shakopee, MN 55379
127-008-046-0
harles 'da_ener & Lavonne
E 1/2 of Lot 2 & W 45' of Lot 3 ;Drive Apron
} Cor,str^uctior;
$ 233.34 $ 295.17
123 W. 5th Aver _e
Block 62, City of Shakopee 1
; Qdrin, Svc.
$ 61.8.3 I
S':,a+ogee, '^N `?1927-0T1-456-0
,
-OTA;.
I
; i._;r.structio;,
$12,154.e2 I
I
' acrrin. Svc.
' _ 378.7
, 1
i
MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator
FROM: Jeanne Andre, Community Development Director
RE: Huber Park Trail Restrooms - Sidewalk
DATE: September 21, 1984
Introduction:
The City has undertaken the construction of the Huber Park Trail
Restrooms with the financial cooperation of the Lower Minnesota
Watershed District. The building is nearing completion and is
ready for the final exterior details.
Background:
The City is building this structure with a 50% match from the
Watershed District, up to a maximum of $30,000 grant. The
restroom cost is to be approximately $47,000 after the last
change order, which deducted approximately $2,000 for deleting
the sidewalk and bituminous work. LeRoy Houser is in charge
of the building construction and indicated he thinks there may
be a slight increase in the cost for add-ons that have come up
during construction.
With the last deduct from the contract it was determined
the City would take quotes for the landscaping and have
Siehndel Construction undertake the sidewalk -and- patching
is city-wide sidewalk program. Siehndel is only in
riodically, and since he's here now I would like the
to officially approve his involvement in this project
time.
ached estimate and drawing provide details on the projected
pproximately $400) and location of the work. Quotes have
been secured for the landscaping, but I anticipate the
ed project will cost approximately $50,000, with $25,000
paid by the City from the Park Reserve Fund.
:ed Action:
ze Siehndel Construction to undertake sidewalk construc-
:urb modification and bituminous patching related to the
'ark Restroom facility under the city-wide sidewalk
!mens program, at a cost not to exceed $450 from the
serve Fund.
lent
that
work
under i
town pe
Council
at this
The att
cost (a
not yet
complet
to be r,
Request
Authori
tion, c
Huber F
replace
Park Re
JA:cah
Attachn
r j 1
1 s
I PROPOSED RESTROOM
I�
Ik
� 1
th.
it t
1 Y
Owe ct•a-r�^'+.. �ull7C'{�
�v rn .57�c
Memo To: John K. Anderson, City Administrator
From: Gregg M. Voxland, Finance Director
Re: Budget Update
Date: September 21, 1984
Additional data for Council consideration of the General Fund and the
affect on initial contingency is:
A. Initial contingency 0
$185,000
(36,000)
Police position filled
0
(70,000)
No Track ticket fee
Reserve for salaries(30
000
$ 50,000
B. Alternatives for building up contingencyp
Police HVAC bought in '84 instead of 185
$30,000
Additional Cuts
P.W. Garage doors
11,000
50% Council lobbyist
5,000
Street supplies
4,000
Street surface mat
4,000
Street fuel
2,000
56 000
$106,000
Footnotes:
1. Police Position: Anticipated retirement may occur anytime during the
year or not in '8�, or Council may fill the position
if a vacancy occurs.
2. Track Ticket Fee: Anticipated worst case if City receives no fee. City
has received commitment of support from Racetrack
(attached). There is a problem in that under the law
the City has to prove incurred expenses because of
track before Racing Commission approves fee to City.
City Administrator will discuss various strategies
for securing the admission fee at the worksession.
3. Police HVAC: Purchase of unit moved from 85 to 84 because of
revenue from sale of track IDB of $50,000 and
extraordinary building permit income. This may cut
down on operating costs starting late 1984.
4. Contingency: Contingency in the range of 80,000 to 100,000 is
probably reasonable for the City at this point in
time. Not cutting the P.W. garage doors should help
reduce operating costs and still leave $95,000 in
contingency.
C. 101 Service Rd: Project costs are in excess $65,000. City
Engineering fees are about $10,000 and were recorded
in 1984, therefore will be reversed back into the
1984 General Fund. This leaves about $55,000 to be
funded. Sources appear to be General Fund or
Capital Improvement Fund. A report is due from
Engineering.
D. Sewer Fund: Additional information coming 9/25/84.
E. Cable Access Corp: Bring memo to discuss request for 50% of franchise fee.
F. Other issues
GVM:mmr
==� Minnesota Racetrack, Inco
SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA
RE IED
SEP 19 1984
September 17, 1984
CITY OF SHAKOPEE
Mayor Eldon Reinke
129 E. First Ave.
Shakopee, MN 55379
RE: Admissions Tax
Dear Mayor Reinke:
This letter will confirm our prior statements to the City of
Shakopee that Minnesota Racetrack, Inc. will support the City
of Shakopee's future request to the Minnesota Racing Commis-
sion for an admissions tax of not more than ten cents per paid
patron pursuant to Minnesota Statutes Section 240.15, Subd. 1.
I recommend that your staff coordinate such a request with our
staff.
If you have any questions, please call Bruce D. Malkerson.
Very tr yours,
rooks Fields Jr.
President
/sb
cc: Members of the City Council
John Anderson
41TA 1' k-, A M04*VOIA ORATION DEDICATED TO THE MINNESOTA HORSE RACING INDUSTRY.
g24 V,,A*y thdUsbial 8duj�Werd §64ih / Shak(,jPPe; Mfnheshta 55379 0 )612) 445-3644 acgw.
Memo To: John K. Anderson, City Administrator
From: Gregg M. Voxland, Finance Director
Re: Budget Information
Date: September 21, 1984
Attached is additional 1985 Budget material as follows:
1. Comparison of property tax levy categories -
8 3/ 84 compared to 84/85
2. City Budget Resolution
A. Tax Levy
B. Debt Service Levy Cancellation
C. Consenting to HRA Levy
3. HRA Resolutions
A. Levying Taxes
B. Adopting Budget
Note: The Resolution adopting the City budget is not included due
to the early stage of budget discussions.
GVM:mmr
9/17/84
Tax Levy Comparison
General Fund
Specials
Judgements
Matching Funds
Shade Tree
Pensions
Ind. & Comm.
Iax'Abatements
Total
TOTAL General
Debt Service
74 Imp
77-b Imp
77-c Imp
Public Serv.
GO Judgement
81 Imp
TOTAL
TOTAL levy
----------------
Total Levy
83184
1022807
13382
30709
22858
9639
17868
-171 O-5
111561
1134368
17336
70980
25172
106470
52717
272675
1407043
--------------------
1982/1983
1981/1982
1980/1981
1979/1980
1978/1979
84/85 Difference
1075646 52839
17366
3984
28890
-1819
24000
1142
106995
-9639
24122
6254
3491
-13614
97869
-13692
1173515 39147
6467
-10869
70236
-744
26500
1328
106995
525
-52717
299
299
210497
-62178
1384012
-23031
-----------------------
1268043
1277373
1059006
926616
782618
RESOLUTION NO. 2306
A RESOLUTION APPROVING 1984 TAX LEVY, COLLECTIBLE IN 1985
BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE, COUNTY OF SCOTT,
MINNESOTA, that the following sums of money be levied for the current year,
collectible in 1985, upon the taxable property in City of Shakopee, for the
following purposes:
GENERAL FUND LEVY $1,075,646
SPECIAL LEVIES:
Judgements $ 17,366
Matching Funds 28,890
Shade Tree 24,000
Ind. & Comm. Dev. 24,122
Tax Abatements 3,491
TOTAL SPECIAL LEVY $ 97,869
TOTAL GENERAL FUND $1,173,515
DEBT SERVICE:
'74 Imp. 6,467
'77-B Imp. 70,236
'77-C Imp. 26,500
Public Service Building 106,995
'81 Imp. 299
TOTAL DEBT SERVICE $ 210,497
TOTAL CITY LEVY $1.384.012
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the City Clerk is hereby instructed to transmit a
certified copy of this resolution to the County Auditor of Scott County, Minnesota.
Adopted in session of the City Council of the City of Shakopee,
Minnesota, held this day of , 1984.
Mayor of the City of Shakopee
ATTEST:
City Clerk
Approved as to form this
day of _W.______..-___ , 1984
RESOLUTION NO. 2305
A RESOLULTION DIRECTING THE COUNTY AUDITOR NOT TO LEVY
A TAX FOR DEBT SERVICE FOR SELECTED BOND ISSUES
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Shakopee has issued G.O. Improvement
Bonds of 1975, G.O. Improvement Bonds of 1976, and G.O. Improvement Bonds of 1980;
and
WHEREAS, the tax levy for 1984 collectible in 1985, as set at the time of the
bond sales is $405.00, $9,143.00, $55,736.00; and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Shakopee has determined to have
sufficient funds on hand to cancel these tax levies; and
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE,
MINNESOTA, that the County Auditor of Scott County is hereby directed not to levy a
tax in the amount of $405.00 collectible in 1984 for G.O. Improvement Bonds of 1975,
and not to levy a tax in the amount of $9,143.00 collectible in 1984 for the G.o.
Improvement Bonds of 1976, and not to levy a tax in the amount of $55,736.00
collectible in 1984 for the G.O. Improvement Bonds of 1980.
Adopted in session of the City Council of the City of Shakopee,
Minnesota held this day of , 1984.
Mayor of the City of Shakopee
ATTEST:
City Clerk
Approved as to form this
day of , 1984.
City Attorney
RESOLUTION NO. 2304
A RESOLUTION CONSENTING TO THE LEVY OF A SPECIAL
TAX BY THE HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY IN AND
FOR THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE
WHEREAS, the Housing and Redevelopment Authority in and for the City of
Shakopee was created pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 462.411 et. seq., as
amended, and
WHEREAS, Minnesota Statutes 1965, Section 462.545 designates all the
territory within the area of operation of the authority as taxing districts for the
purpose of levying and collecting a special benefit tax, and
WHEREAS, Section 462.545 states that the special levy shall not exceed 10 cents
on each $100 of taxable valuation in the area of operation, and
WHEREAS, Section 462.545 states that the governing body of the municipality
must give its consent to such a tax levy.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE,
MINNESOTA, that the City Council consents to and joins in a special tax levy of
$23,000 by the Housing and Redevelopment Authority in and for the City of Shakopee
for taxes payable in 1985.
Adopted in session of the City Council of the City of Shakopee,
Minnesota, held this day of 1984.
Mayor of the City of Shakopee
ATTEST:
City Clerk
Approved as to form this
day of , 1984,
City Attorney
RESOLUTION NO. 84-12
A RESOLUTION REQUESTING THE SHAKOPEE CITY COUNCIL
TO CONSENT TO THE LEVY OF A SPECIAL TAX BY THE
HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY IN AND FOR
THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE
WHEREAS, the Housing and Redevelopment Authority in and for the City of
Shakopee was created pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 462.411 et. seq.,
as amended, and
. WHEREAS, Minnesota Statutes 1965, Section 462.545 designates all the
territory within the area of operation of the authority as a taxing district
for the purpose of levying and collecting a special benefit tax, and
WHEREAS, Section 462.545 states that the special levy shall not exceed 10
cents on each $100 of taxable valuation in the area of operation, and
WHEREAS, Section 462.545 states that the governing body of the
municipality must give its consent to such a tax levy.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA that the Housing and Redevelopment
Authority hereby requests the City Council of the City of Shakopee to consent
to the special tax levy of $23,000 payable 1985 by the Housing and
Redevelopment Authority in and for the City of Shakopee.
Adopted in session of the Shakopee housing and Redevelopment
Authority of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota, held this day of
, 1984.
Chairman
ATTEST:
Executive Director
Approved as to form this _
day of , 1984
City Attorney
RESOLUTION NO. 84-11
A RESOLUTION ADOPTING A GENERAL FUND
BUDGET FOR 1985
WHEREAS, the By -Laws of the Housing and Redevelopment Authority in and
for the City of Shakopee provides that a budget be prepared on an annual
basis.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the attached General Fund Budget be
approved for 1985 with total appropriation in the amount of $24,545.00.
Adopted in session of the Housing and Redevelopment
Authority in and for the City of Shakopee, Minnesota, held this day
of , 1984.
Chairman of the Housing Authority
ATTEST:
Executive Director
Secretary
Approved as to form this
day of , 1984.
City Attorney
N
Iu
1 fes-
r,r
4r1
zll
v I
i In
ZT,
of
ori
t
5� Cui .
UL,
It
71 1:
ul
v U# ,. r
TO: Mayor Eldon Reinke
and Councilman John Leroux
RE: Racetrack IDB Negotiations
DATED: September 21, 1984
Dear Eldon and John:
This memo will help you keep in mind the discussion we had last
Tuesday relative to the negotiations you are going to have involving the
Racetrack TDB's.
First of all, keep in mind what we have already negotiated. The
$3,000,000 note and mortgage which originally was going to be a 10 year note
with interest and payments commencing one year after the track opens, will now
bear interest commencing the date we transfer the funds to the Racetrack
(probably late November, 1984). Moreover, that note will balloon five years
from the date of initial transfer, approximately November, 1989. We did
indicate that we would have some flexibility about when interest payments
would be made during the construction period and that matter has not been
resolved. We anticipate the value of this negotiated change to be in the
range of $450,000 to $500,000 additional interest, as well as whatever value
you place upon receiving the $3,000,000 approximately 6-1/2 years early. By
the way, I am assuming that it is the Council's intention to utilize both
interest and principal from this note for activities and projects other than
the repayment of the Racetrack Tax Increment Bonds and I have instructed our
fiscal consultant and underwriter to structure those bonds on the assumption
that no payments from this note will be available to help pay those bonds. If
my assumption is incorrect, please let me know.
Secondly, we have already negotiated a t50,000 up front payment to
the City to cover administrative costs. This will be a general fund
contribution. Additionally, the Racetrack has agreed to pay all of our
consulting and legal costs relative to the issuance of these bonds.
Additionally, we are entitled to one-eighth of a point on the bonds
from their inception until they are paid off. Bob Poucher estimates that
payment over the term of the bonds to be approximately $900,000 with credit
given to that payment for the $50,000 up front fee.
The above items have already been negotiated and agreed to and should
be considered untouchable by e�n your negotiations.
We have informed the Racetrack people that we intend to discuss with
them the present arrangements with respect to assessed valuation. Our
agreement with them presently provided for an assessor's market value on the
Racetrack of $41,245,000. That figure was arrived at prior to the Racetrack
announcing they would construct an additional $2,000,000 of taxable permanent
summer stalls. Keep in mind that the $2,000,000 is a construction cost and
-1-
would ordinarily translate into about $1,500,000 assessor's market value due
to the present sales ratios being used by the Scott County Assessor. That
fact may not be understood by the Racetrack people and, consequently, it is my
recommendation that you take the negotiating posture that the $2,000,000
additional value is simply a given and that number in and of itself must be
added to the $41,245,000 figure irrespective of any other changes. Moreover,
it is my recommendation that we insist upon another $2,000,000 assessor's
market valuation in return for not receiving the arbitrage from Series B which
was initially promised to us by the Racetrack attorneys after they consulted
with their bond attorneys. We are estimating that each $1,000,000 of
assessor's market valuation will create 35,000 of increment in the Racetrack
District, and approximately $50,000 of increment if placed on the portion of
the Racetrack facility located within the K -Mart Tax Increment District,
generally the area where the horse barns are being constructed. The Racetrack
people have not yet understood that a portion of their facility is located
within the K -Mart District and, therefore, escapes fiscal disparities
contribution. I think it is important that we do not yet reveal that
information to them.
The Racetrack people will argue to you that they do not wish to
increase the valuation since the additional taxes will be going 31% to fiscal
disparities contribution and only 69'o to help repay the bonds. My advise is
you simply tell them that you understand that problem and will see if we can
work around that fiscal disparities contribution and come up with a solution
so that all of their payment goes directly to us. Remind them that the
payment of taxes is, of course, a direct deduction for income tax purposes.
As I informed you Tuesday, Jim Caserly called me Tuesday afternoon
and informed me that it appears that the Racetrack Tax Increment Bond (the
bond needed to provide the $6,000,000 to the Racetrack people) is so loaded
with interest costs that we will have to issue $8,350,000 worth of bonds to be
able to make that contribution. The debt service will be approximately
$1,600,000, slightly greater than we anticipated and, consequently, that is
another reason their assessor's market valuation should be increased and they
should pay slightly more taxes than they were anticipating. Please keep in
mind that repayment of the bonds in accordance with the schedule arrived at by
Miller and Schroeder requires a total of $33,000,000 assessor's valuation on
that portion of the Racetrack located within the Racetrack Tax Increment
District, and $11,000,000 located within the portion of the Racetrack facility
located in the K -Mart District. Consequently, we must have $44,000,000 total
valuation just to meet our schedule. In accordance with my recommendations,
we would be receiving another $1,245,000 which we would be place entirely in �,tS
the K -Mart section of the Racetrack. What I am telling you is that we must `
have an additional $2,750,000 of valuation over and above the present amount/ -7Z# ,�►�sr�
just to pay for the bonds. Please keep that in mind when you discuss the
matter with the Racetrack people. I think our highest priority in these
negotiations must be the obtaining of the additional $4,000,000 in valuation.
As we discussed on Tuesday, it is also possible for the City to
negotiate one-half a point on the life of the Series B bonds after the
issuance costs have been paid (assume about 2-1/2 points issuance costs on the
$44,000,000, or about $1,100,000). This is going to be hard to negotiate
because if we receive the half a point, the Racetrack will not receive the
unlimited arbitrage for the holding period. (Even with this unlimited
arbitrage scenario, the issuance costs would have to be paid first to make
-2-
sure the bands are susceptible of being redeemed after three years without any
costs to the bond holder.) Consequently, this is something you can negotiate
for but is not vital. At a minimum, however, we should receive the one-eighth
of a point on the second issue which Bob Poucher estimates would be about
$1,200,000 over the life of the bond, less the $25,000 up front payment they
have agreed to with respect to the issuance of Series B. That $25,000 should
not be negotiable and we should receive that now. Keep in mind that our
experts are at this point speculating that it is going to be very difficult
for the Racetrack people to call down a Series B and actually utilize the
proceeds for expansion in the short time period they must comply with under
Federal Regulations. Therefore, it is vital that we do not place our eggs in
the Series B issue. The increased valuation is much more important than
trying to obtain a half point on a bond issue which may never materialize.
Please emphasize to the Racetrack principals the absolute necessity
of concluding these negotiations quickly since some of the items, most
particularily the valuation question, could affect the structuring of the bond
issue. Therefore, if they want their money on time we have to be able to
proceed with structuring that issue and we need to firm up the mutual
commitments of both parties. Emphasize the fact that the delay has been on
their side as we have waited for them to attempt to straighten out the letter
of credit problems they have.
Good luck to the both of you.
Very trey ybkrs,
MEY & WALSTEN CHARTERED
U�
3 R. Krass