HomeMy WebLinkAbout06/04/1985 TENTATIVE AGENDA
REGULAR SESSION SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA JUNE 4, 1985
Mayor Reinke presiding
1] Roll Call at 7 :00 P .M.
2] Recess for Board of Equalization and HRA Meetings
3] Convene as the Board of Equalization:
a] Summary Presentation of 1985 Assessed Valuations by Robert
Schmitt of Scott County Assessor' s Office
b] Questions by Board of Equalization Members
c] Review appeals of petitioner' s assessed value/market value
and equalization
11 Property Owners on Dean' s Lake
21 Duane A. Johnson' s Property
31 Steven Hentges Property
41 Harlan Hohenstein Property
5] Wayne ;Mertens Property
6] Clare Nickolay Property
7] Paul Plekkenpol Property
81 Property owned by Coiling, Engfer, Vohnoutka
91 Mark Pidde Property ia-J F R eot K u n I. °C 7-'`"
/3 '✓►'l tr..i2.a e. L i YI e. /�/, c k vn a .. N
10] Clifton, Ltd. Property -
e e Rc F�ss,`o nd-C r o �h
11] Others - audience
•��� U��ta� f! ealt-h
d] Adjourn Board of Equalization to
4] H.R.A. Meeting
5] Reconvene
6] Liaison Reports from Councilmembers
7] RECOGNITION BY CITY COUNCIL OF INTERESTED CITIZENS
8] Approval of Consent Business - (All items listed with an asterick
are considered to be routine by the City Council and will be
enacted by one motion. There will be no separate discussion
of these items unless a Councilmember so requests, in which
event the item will be removed from the consent agenda and
- considered in its normal sequence on the agenda. )
*9] Approval of the Minutes of May 21 , 1985
101 Communications :
a] Sandra S . Gardeoring, Chair, Met Council re : ineeting with local
officials
b] Robert Vierling re : sewer and water billing
11] Public Hearings:
a] 8:30 P.M. - Vacation of Alley Lying :Bast of Riverview Park between
Fourth and Fifth Avenues - Res. No. 2 +07
$) 9 :00 P .M. - Application for Taxicab License by Suburban Taxi Corp .
9309 Lyndale Ave. So. , Suite 109 , Bloomington
JO4U 4szuzwPV ,�4TO `uos.zapuV 'x uuor
oq u.znoCpV [9T
ar�2lLaa� S : ssauTsng zau40 [ST
40TJ4STC ssauzsng TuJ4uaO UT suoz40z,14saH 2?uz�>fzLd ` TGT 'ON 'PTO [a
•wwoO fPngS TU4uawuJGAO0 �quno0 44035 �?uzPJU2?G3 `90t7z 'ON ' OGE [P
MJA Xg pa4sanbaE
`squawasUg 3o uOT4uDuA .zo3 2?uTJuGH OTTgnd 2�uT44aS ` SOVF * ON •saE [O#
4aa.z4S swupv 30 4saM
• anV @ado>luuS 3o UOT4u3uA JOJ 2 uUTJUaH OT Tgnd 2UT44GS `VOVE *ON ' sa23 [g#
digs,zau4.z,cd 8 .zadnS TrPTwag �q UOTgUOTTddV
PuO9 SII 000`008` T$ 04 TUno.zddV '�,z_CuzwtTGJd 2?uTATO 686SZ *ON •saH [u
: saouUuTPJ O puU suozgnTosa'd [VT
fq,aadOJd xop.z4aouE 3o uoTgdTJOsaQ Puawv 04 4uawaaJ2�V [4
aOUPUTPJ O squang 4P gonpuoO �TJ@PJOSTa [x
AGUJo44V �4TO Aq Gqupdn -
,zaouadS off. a.aowTTZ ` . anV q4t 2?uoTV SUM-3O-4TOTE PUOE as>fnumTTW [M
Aau.zo4gV J�qz0 Aq aqupdn -
a.zowTTrq 04 4G5lJulq . anV q4t $uOTX A-eM-3o-41423TH PUOE as>jn-cMTTW [A
AauJO44V A4TO Aq @qupdn - puo8 Taa4S =,ITA 30 2�uzuad0 [n
J�4ZTT4n a�3UuTUJC .aa4-eM WJ04S [4
00'bGV ` 8$ 4uawAud TuT4JPd GATJG uUopu'euauS V-t86T [s
-JC uPOPuUuauS 04 58-230 wo.z3 ' GAV 144t - AUM-3o-4q2 1d 3O uOT TSTnboy [a
SZ ' L.Z6$ @SUGJOul JOJ S • ON JGPJO a2u-euO GATJC XXcd AaTT"en S-t86T [b
98 'tgt, `OTz$ 30 4unouiV uT sTTzg anO.zddV [d
s4sOO 40aCOJ d papun3un [o
paus.za4UM uzs-eg aado3feuS au4
JOJ uozsszwwoO Paus.za4UM V 2uzuszTqugsg 4uaw@GJ2�V SJGmOd allTO f [u
SJ040GJTG 3o PJUOg OWq JOJ suoz4-euzwoN S86T [w
2�uzPTTng UOTgUWJOJUI gsz.znoZ aoiawwoO 3o .zagweuO [T
GTqU4 UO owaw - sasuaoz7 .aonbTq fUTgU0TXO4UI S86T [>I
aTqu4 uo owaw - sasuaoz7 auzM S86T [ C
aTqu4 uo owaw - sasuaoz7 .aaag Z • £ S86T [T
aTgla4 uo owaw - sasuaoz7 do-4@S S86T [u
aTq,eq uo owaw - suMoa ) ,jnq,zaaueO qu ` • ouI suozssaouoO •uW req
sasuaoz7 jonbiq kepunS puu ` aT'PS 330 ' GT-eS UO .ao3 UOT4UOTTddV [f
uO.znuO • 4S Aq asuaozq .zaag Ajujodwas .ao3 uoTq*eoTTddV [3
2uzOuuuijGE jo3 4sanbeE Pa4zun-L3J4STfZ [a#
fuT4SGI Tana? aszON TTPH - G9C ' ON dnD [P#
wuJf OJd G2uZ4 zOlq awOH TedzOTunW [o
SGfJUu0 Pu-ewaQ 2uT4ufT7 PTaT3TT'eg [g
s43aCOJd (3IZ) �3uzO=uTZ 4uawazoul xe1, [,e
:33,e4S wo,a3 s4iodad [CT
ad,coS gaa.z4 S umo4uMoQ [q
: aa44zwwO3 UmO4uMOQ OOH PV
S86T ` TT .zagwagdaS APC OOI - 'W' d 00: 6 [L�
:uOzsszwwOO T_CT0JGwwOO TUTJ4snpul
: suozsszwwoO puU sp.z-COg [ET
-Z- a2?ud
S86T `t aunt
VGMHOV aAIZFIINHI
i
MEMO TO : Mayor and City Council
FROM: John K. Anderson , City Administrator
RE: Non-Agenda Informational Items
DATE : May 30 , 1985
1 . Wood Kidner of O ' Connor and Hannan , our bond consultant ,
is leaving at the end of the month to join Dougherty, Dawkins ,
Strand & Yost.
2 . Stu Fraser of Northern States Power stopped by to indicate
that Northern States Power will begin purchasing more coal
from the railroad . The Chicago Northwestern has two possible
routes that they might use one of which will take them
through Shakopee . NSP anticipates that two delivers per
week, ( two trips each way is four trains) , would be required
to supply some 550 , 000 tons per year to their Black Dog
Plant. Stu told us that he has already contacted the Racetrack
about this .
3 . Attached is a copy of the flyer that is being sent out
promoting the City clean-up campaign that Fulton Schleisman
has put together . The stuffer is going out in the utility
bill and Fulton appears to have everything in order for
the clean-up campaign for June 8- 15 . The bids for the
containers came in at $99 . 00 which was $ 1 . 00 below our
estimate so we still anticipate being able to provide 20
containers over the 7 days of the clean up campaigan .
The containers will be located between, the SPUC building
and the Police Department . Fulton has done a great job
on this project.
4 . Attached is a thank you letter from Dick Kinzel regarding
the City' s help in resolving their dike problem.
5 . Attached is a letter from Robert W. Bruce , President of
Peoples Savings and Loan.
6 . Attached is a computer printout from the Metropolitan Waste
Control Commission (MWCC) indicating how much CertainTeed
Corporation and Rahr Malting Company pay- in strength charges
for their sewage .
7 . The Mayor and I are tentatively planning to meet with Minnesota
Department of Transportation Commissioner Braun at 3 : 30
p. m. on June 12 , 1985 . Meeting with us will be representatives
from Scott County, Met Council , our legislative delegation
and Barton-Aschmann . The purpose of the meeting is to
make a final push to get Mn/DOT to include District 5 Engineer
Bill Crawforc ' s recommendations in Mn/DOT ' s next budget
which will be coming out July 1st. Bill Crawford has requested
$8 , 000 , 000 for bridge work downtown for 1988-89 . He has
also bumped the Trunk Highway 5 project in Eden Prairie
for the Highway 169 By-pass project. He proposes that we
begin that project at the east end and construct it to
County Road 83 beginning in 1989 . We will be asking Commis-
sioner Braun to schedule the two Shakopee projects in the
State ' s budget and if this is done we will be approaching
Council with the contract between the City and Mn/DOT to
begin pre-engineering work in July.
8 . Attached is the monthly calendar for the month of June.
9 . Attached is the building activity report for the month
ending April 30 , 1985 .
10. Attached are the minutes of the May 2 , 1985 meeting of
the Shakopee Coalition.
11 . Attached are the minutes of the May 14, 1985 meeting of
the City Hall Siting Committee. Please note that the second
sentence in paragraph six should read psychological not
physiological.
12. Attached are the minutes of the May 8 , 1985 meeting of
the Downtown Ad Hoc Committee .
13 . Attached are the minutes of the May 9 , 1985 meeting of
the Board of Adjustment and Appeals
14 . Attached are the minutes of the May 9 , 1985 meeting of
the Planning Commission.
15 . Attached is a copy of a letter Bo sent to Brad Larson,
Scott County Highway Engineer, re : County Road 21/Muhlenhardt
Road Turnback.
16 . Attached are the results of the questionnaires handed out
at the Hospitality Seminar. Please note that the downtown
area and the truck traffic on 101 were at the top of the
list of needed improvements.
17 . Attached is a memo from Gregg Voxland regarding Comptime.
-1;7fo
MINNESOTA
3
w Department of Energy
and Economic Development
Community Development Division 900 American Center
296-5005 150 East Kellogg Boulevard
St. Paul, Minnesota 55101
June 3, 1985
Honorable Eldon Reinke
Mayor
129 East First Avenue
Shakopee, MN 55379
Dear Mayor Reinke:
The Department of Energy and Economic Development has completed
its review of applications for the 1985 Minnesota Small Cities
Development Grant program. Because we have a limited amount of
grant funds available, we are not able to offer you a grant this
year.
Funds were sufficient to fund only 12 comprehensive applications
scoring 150 points or higher. Your application received a score
of 93. In all, we received 37 comprehensive applications.
We expect to make additional grant awards from 1986 funds in the
spring of 1986. Information about application procedures and
technical assistance workshops will be available late this
summer.
If you would like to discuss your application and ways to improve
it for next year's competition, please feel free to call one of
our community development representatives at (612) 296-2102.
Sincerely,
nC�
Robert F: Benner
Deputy Commissioner E
/pb
85 CDBG/6—CP
f' T
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER
FREE Trash Dumping—June 8 thru June 15, 1985
The City of Shakopee will provide a way to dispose of litter,trash,junk, furniture and ap-
pliances for 8 full days, June 8 - 15.
A chance to clean out your attics, basements and garages.
And, also, a good time to clean up back yards, streets and alleys.
The trash bins will be located near 4th Avenue and Gorman Street, between the Utility
Building and the Municipal Service Building. (See Map)
Please Observe The Following Rules: 11.ILI„
BL
1. City of Shakopee Residents/Business only.
2. No Liquids.
3. No Logs or Stumps, Brush o,k. cut in 6' le 11
( lengths). J
4. No Contractor Building Material Debris.
MUNICIPAL N
5E RvICE
BU I LDI N6
2
GOFMAN \
FIELD_ \\\l
If you have an inoperable vehicle on your property, now is the time to dispose of it.Call a
dealer in your yellow pages under "Automobile Parts & Supplies—Used& Rebuilt,"for
details.
If you have any questions about the Clean-up Program, call City Hall at 445-3650.
ANNOUNCING! City Of
Shakopee
The 1985 Curb and Gutter, Sidewalk
and Driveway Approach Replacement
Program. Clean— Up
Once a the City will ad- Campaign
O ain this earc g Y �
minister a concrete replacement pro-
gram for work in City tight-of-way. The
prices are reasonable, (slightly less
than last year!).
June 8 thru 15, 1985
For details and a free estimate, call
City Hall at 445-3650, ask for Fulton FREE!
Schleisman.
TRASH DISPOSAL
� 1521 MAY 2
Family Amusement PaRk
One Valleyfair Drive, Shakopee, MN 55379
(612) 445-7600
May 22, 1985
Mr. John Anderson
City of Shakopee
129 1st Ave. E.
Shakopee, MN 55379
Dear John,
I would like to thank you, Bo Spurrier and the City Council for the
support you gave to us in getting legislation passed that will enable us
to proceed with our capital programs here at Valleyfair.
I make a presentation next week to R.L. Munger, Jr. , our Chief
Executive Officer, on our planning strategies through 1989. We are asking
for capital expenditures of $7 million over this period. With this new
legislation I feel confident that most of our long range capital strategies
will be approved. This will not only help us, but will provide hundreds of
new seasonal jobs for the youth of Scott and Dakota counties.
Thanks again, John, I hope you will tell the members of council we
appreciate their support.
Si nce del w.
J'�/
Richard L. Kinzel
Vice President/General Manager
RLK:dw
xc: Mayor Eldon Reinke
Bo Spurrier
EOPLES
AVINGS
AND LOAN
085
MAY I.;
May 29, 1985 UTY Orr SHAK'. PE!-
John K. Anderson, City Administrator
City of Shakopee
129 E. First Avenue
Shakopee, Minnesota 55379-1376
Re: Closing of Peoples Savings Office
Dear Mr. Anderson: I
I was indeed pleased to receive a letter from your office indicating that
the Shakopee City Council was disappointed that we found it necessary to
close our Shakopee facility. During the seven years that we have been
located in your community, we believe our efforts have shown our good faith
in serving the residents of Shakopee. The fact that we moved our office
from the West Side Mall to a location on Marschall Road indicated our
endeavor to provide an office that would satisfy the cost benefit to us
of such a branch facility.
We have found that although many of our services received favorable
attention and were utilized by a goodly number of customers , the overall
operating costs were such that my Board did not consider it feasible to
continue. This step is not unusual in the Thrift Industry, as many
Associations are finding it necessary to close branch offices , not only
in Minnesota but also in many other states. We thought it best,after
making the decision to close,to further service the Shakopee community
from our Prior Lake Office t:hich is located advantageously in the same
County.
Therefore, should plans change and markets again meet our minimum
requirements, we would again seriously consider reopening an office in
Shakopee.
/.,Sinti i ly yours ,`!
Ro ert W. Bruce
President
RWB/ca
204 East Pearl * P.O. Box 406 * Owatonna, Minnesota 5.5060 * 507/451-3690
_01 CC �a 'go k�
METROPOLITAN WASTE CONTROL COMMISSION 05/15/85
350 METRO SQUARE BUILDING
ST PAULY MINNESOTA 55101
THE FOLLOWING COMPANIES IN SHAKOPEE WERE SUBJECT TO STRENGTH
CHARGES FOR THE FIRST QUARTER OF 1985 AND BILLED FOR THE AMOUNTS LISTED.
THE STRENGTH CHARGE BILL WAS CALCULATED BASED ON APPROVED 1985 STRENGTH
CHARGE RATES OF 7.2 CENTS PER POUND OF EXCESS SUSPENDED SOLIDS (SS) AND
3.6 CENTS PER POUND OF EXCESS CHEMICAL OXYGEN DEMAND (COD).
EXCESS EXCESS ACTUAL
BILLING VOLUME SS COD POUNDS POUNDS STRENGTH
COMPANY NAME PERIOD (MG) (MG/L) {MG/L) SS COD CHARGE
---------------------------------- ------- --------- ------ ------ ---------- ---------- --
CERTAINTEED CORP JAN-MAR 6.035 11:721 22x748 577:357 1!119x784 $811881.93
RAHR MALTING CO JAN-MAR 64.631 144 19666 0 628x500 $22x626.00
--------------
COMMUNITY TOTAL $104x507.93
P'¢EC E I V E D
MAY 1710
I
OTT QF SHAKOPE5
CITY OF SHAKOPEE
BUILDING ACTIVITY REPORT APRIL, 1985
PERMITS ISSUED
Yr. to Date Total Previous Year
6600 — 6647 Number Number Valuation Number Valuation
Mo. Ytd.
Single Fam-Sewered 5 12 900 ,034 2 11 6879200
Single Fam-Septic _ 1 102 ,000 1 3 271 ,000
Multiple Dwellings 3 5 481 ,600 4 6 400 , 500
(No.Units ) (YTD Units ) (6 ) ( 10) ( 8 ) ( 12 )
Dwelling Additions 5 7 26 ,010 12 20 1593353
Other 1 3 41 ,075 - - -
Comm. New Bldgs . - 4 1 939 781 - -
Comm. Bldg. Addns . 2 7 9 ,140,010 1 2 415 ,000
Industrial-Sewered - - -
Ind.-Sewered Addns . - - _ _ - -
Industrial-Septic - _ _ _ -
Ind.-Septic Addns . - _ _ _ _ _
Accessory/Garages 6 7 525668 8 11 573280
Signs & Fences 11 14 13 ,895 4 8 5,410
Fireplaces/Wood Stove 2 4 9 ,980 2 5 17 , 900
Grading Foundation - 1 11 ,000 - 1 3 35 , 500
Remodeling(Res . ) 1 5 36 ,050 6 18 81 ,800
Remodeling( Inst. ) - - - - - -
Remodeling( 0 M)or 7 14 1 , 395 , 701 3 19 298 , 299
TOTAL TAXABLE 46 89 143149 ,804 48 112 2 ,429 ,242
TOTAL INSTITUTIONAL _ _ - - -
GRAND TOTAL 46 89 145149 ,804 48 112 2 ,429 ,242
Mo. Ytd. Mo. Ytd.
Variances 3 5 1 3
Conditional Use 3 10 3 4
Re-Zoning 1 1 - 1
Moving 1 2 - -
Electric Permits 21 72 26 83
Plbg. & Hts . Permits 25 76 23 69
Razing Permits -
Resideniial _ _ 1 1
Commercial _ - 1
Total dwelling units in City after completion of all construction permitted
to date. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33761
Cora Hullander
Bldg Dept . Secretary
CITY OF SHAKOPEE
BUILDING PERMITS ISSUED IN APRIL, 1985
6365g Kraus-Anderson Racetrack $6 ,243 ,300
6600 Laurent Bldrs . 1234 Tyler j! House 60 ,000
6601 Gary Wendorff 447 Minnesota Stg. Bldg. 1 ,300
6602 David Schmitt G 1729 Pres' ential Ln House 76 ,697
6603 Carlson Hardware 810 E. 1st Sign
100
6604 Nordquist Sign 584 Marschall Sign 3 ,700
6605 Earl Wiesner 523 E. 7th Fence 15C
6606 Robert Waldridge 1074 Legion Fence 80C
6607 Angelrock Ent . 8522 T.H. 101 Alt . 600
6608 Joseph Link C , 160 W. 6 h Duplex 43 ,000
.►,., � .� e (1 unit)
6609 Joseph Link � p_4 .16 �•������-�� Dlplex unit) 43 ,000
4&&e " ,�
6610 Cancelled
6611 G .F. Juergens 287 Marschall Rd. alt . 10 ,000
6612 Dale Dahlke 821 Prairie ` Duplex 37 ,800
� 'e3lex 37 ,800
/sT Du(1 unit)
6613 Dale Dahlke 823 Prairie / (lpunit)
lex 58 ,000
6614 Laurent Bldrs
�'� T43llu7 Polk p
(1 unit)
6615 Laurent Bldrs 1239 Poik, v Duplex 58 ,000
.�j�t�Z �j ( 1 unit)
6616 Tradition Homes 1710 Presidtial House 62 ,000
r1k House 70 ,837
6617 Randy Bullock 1245 /
/G .� ? Y� �
6618 Gregory Keche y 417 E Shako e Aver House 125 ,000
6619 Gregory Kechely 417 E. Shakopee Ave Stg. Bldg. 43388
6620 David Christenson 1015 Eastview Bence 600
6621 Tim Monnens 1244 Tyler Fence 60C
6622 M & M Signs 1120 E. 1st Sign 45000
6623 Kevin Winter 1830 Marschall Rd. Fence 600
6624 Michael Richardson 8522 Hwy 101 Alt 200
6625 Dennis Trim 1086 Van Buren Addn. 13000
6626 Randall Sund 1528 E. 10th Fence 1OC:
6627 Michael Lovelettt 1006 Minnesota Fence 35C
6628 Harland Hohenstein 2693 Marschall Horse Barn 40 ,875
6629 Valley Fair Addn. 5 ,000
6630 John Klingelhutz 1416 Blue Heron Tr. Alt. 15 ,000
6631 Viereck Fireplace 926 Minnesota Fireplace 25000
6632 Gary Laurent 118 Fuller Alt. 5OC
6633 Stephan Stenzel 112 Lewis Alt. 105000
6634 Cancelled
6635 Paul Monnens 1204 Tyler Fence 55C
6636 Peter Sames 312 W. 1st Alt. 12 ,000
6637 Valley Fair Alt. 10 ;000
6638 Jack Pixley Sweeps 1087 Tyler Fireplace 1 ,480
6639 Haas & Haas 1007 Apgar Addn. 6 ,000
6640 Grant Cheney 625 Atwood Garage 5 , 760
6641 Jasper Homes 1012 Atwood Addn. 35500
6642 Vernon Dockendorf, Co. Rd. 17 & 42 Stg. Bldg. 27 ,500
6643 David Menden 904 S . Clay Stg. Bldg. 400
6644 Cancelled
6645 Jefferson Carp. 1158 Quincy Addn. 6 ,800
6646 Rod Robinson 914 W. 5th Addn. 3 , 360
6647 Michael Hentges 1042 Dakota Garage 95820
SHAKOPEE COALITION
May 2, 1985
Present: George Muenchow Shakopee Community Services
Deloris Gorman Shakopee Community Services
Don Hamilton VFW
Jim Streefland Lions Club
Pat Ploumen
Roman Schneider Senior Citizens
Ruth Schneider Senior Citizens
Jackie Kes Scott—Carver Economic Council
Bill Streff Shakopee Area Catholic School
Sr Jo Lambert St Francis Regiona'1 Medical Center
Kathy Lewis Shakopee Community Services
Kay Louis Scott County Extension
Chairperson Streefland called the meeting to order at 7:00a.m.
Jackie Kes gave a Food Shelf update. During the month of April, 128 families were
served and of those, 83 families were from Shakopee. The food collected through
Minnesota Food Share enables the Food Shelf to keep their supplies up. The Food
Shelf needs heavy duty shelving — a donation of which would be most welcomed — contact
Jackie at 448-2302. Jackie further stated that two strong persons (able to lift at
least 500 are needed to load supplies on trucks at St Francis Hospital from 7:00 to
8:30 a.m. approximately, on the first Saturday of each month. They may receive help
from the Jaycees. Jim Streefland stated that the Lions Club would help, if needed.
Discussion of the Food Shelf program followed.
Maxine Kruschke spoke to the Coalition about the Southern Valley Alliance for Battered
Women, a non—profit organization funded by foundation grants and donations. The
Alliance started with Maxine as part—time coordinator and was run out of her home for
over two years. Their first grant came from the American Lutheran Church in 1983.
The alliance is primarily an Information and Referral service for battered women.
It is not a 24—hour crisis line since there are not enough staff for that and due to
the location, there would be a toll for the majority of calls. In the summer of 1984
the Alliance- moved into its quarters at 124 West Main, Belle Plaine. When staff are not
there, the telephone has a recorded response. Services available are: 1) telephone
support, 2) self—help support group, 3) referral to other resources, 4) advocacy (a
five—week training program was just completed; currently all the advocates are working
and not avialable during the day, 5) transportation — to places like a safe home, human
services, Scott—Carver Economic Council, shelter, etc, 6) safe homes — there are 5 homes
available in Carver County, available to persons from Scott County (safe homes are simply
private homes who provide a temporary safe place for women and sometimes their children) .
Safe Homes are needed in Scott County. Training is provided with identity of the homes
known only to the Alliance) , 7) public education — speakers are available, call the
Alliance (873-4214). St Francis Hospital is planning a Crisis Unit with a 24—hour
crisis line, 72—hour hold; and other services. Plans are to open the Unit 6/01/85.
There was some discussion about coordinating the two programs and various services
offered. Maxine indicated that they have a variety of office needs: chairs, file
cabinet, slide projector, desk calculator, long table, postage scale, book shelves,
floor lamp. Any donations would be helpful. Discussion followed about battering,
statistics, trends, services, etc. Brochure from the Alliance will be sent out with
the minutes.
The next meeting will be Thursday, June 6, at Citizens State Bank, Coffee-6:30 a.m. ,
Meeting — 7:00 a.m.
Meeting adjourned at 8:00 a.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Patricia Ploumen
CITY HALL SITING COMMITTEE
Tuesday , May 14 , 1985
6 : 30 p.m.
City Hall Council Chambers
The meeting began at 6 : 35 p .m. with the van tour of the 12 remaining
sites . Present were Dave Czaja , Gloria Vierling , Dolores Lebens ,
Dave Rockne and John Anderson the recording secretary . Also
present was Terry Forbord representing the Downtown Committee .
The first site visited was the site at the southwest corner
of Shakopee Avenue and County Road 17 . The Committee then picked
up Chairman Leroux and viewed the remaining sites in the following
order : Eagle Creek Town Hall , Lenzmeier Farm, Northwest corner
of 4th Avenue and County Road 17 , 4th Avenue between SPUC and
Citizens State Bank, East side of Gorman , addition to Police
Station , East side of Public Works yard , West side of County
Road 17 North of Tom Thumb , the block South of the Post Office ,
the block West of St . Marks School , the old prison site , and
then Block 47 ( Philipps Funeral Home ) on the return to City
Hall. The Committee tour returned to City Hall at approximately
7 : 30 p .m.
Chairman Leroux convened the Committee and asked for action
on the minutes.
M/S/ P Vierling/Lebens moved to accept the minutes of the April
9 , 1985 and April 15 , 1985 meetings as mailed .
Chairman Leroux then reviewed agenda items 5 and 6 to obtain
Committee agreement on the weighting criteria given each of
the site evaluation criteria . This process resulted in the
following action : criteria b. was given a weight of 8 , criteria
d . was given a weight of 7 • 5 , criteria f. was given a weight
of 5 , criteria n. was given a weight of 5 and criteria u . was
given a weight of 4 . The other remaining criteria were unchanged .
Terry Forbord noted that the Committee had reviewed several
good sites earlier in the evening. However , speaking for the
Downtown Committee , he said the Committee feared that a siting
of a new City Hall outside of the downtown would send the wrong
physiological message to downtown merchants. He felt that the
merchants needed a strong positive signal that the City was
going to take part in the redevelopment activities downtown
by constructing a new City Hall downtown .
Gloria Vierling noted that many downtown business owners were
not reinvesting in their businesses or buildings and gave every
impression of being comfortable with the status quo . She did
note several exceptions such as Berens , Bill ' s Toggery , and
the Tole Bridge . Committee Members Leroux and Lebens agreed
with the statements made by Gloria Vierling . Mrs . Lebens also
noted that a handful of the downtown business owners had enough
money so they could make improvements if they wanted to, therefore
financial incentives probably wouldn ' t make a difference for
them.
The City Administrator noted that the Committee was probably
correct in its final weighting given to siting criteria u . (promixity
to the central business district ) given the functional role
a City Hall plays in overall downtown retail activity. But ,
the real dilemma was the negitive physiological impact the moving
of City Hall from downtown would have right now on the very
merchants the City Council is encouraging to make improvements
in their businesses. There was considerable discussion about
how various elements in the community perceived the importance
of keeping City Hall downtown .
M/S/P Vierling/Czaja moved that the Committee survey Shakopee
citizens through a utility stuffer and the newspaper on the
importance of keeping City Hall in the Shakopee CBD. The City
Administrator was instructed to include in the brief survey
comments about the handicapped accessable problem, comments
about the cost of a new City Hall , comments about traffic studies
done at City Hall and other relevant information in the survey .
It was also suggested that the newspaper do a brief story on
the Committee ' s activity and this particular issue .
Terry Forbord again reminded the Committee that the Downtown
Committee felt that there was a real potential to use the relocation
of City Hall as a blight removal tool downtown. There was discussion
about this item, and the Committee generally agreed that the
space required for a new downtown would work to remove several
buildings which could indeed be blighted .
The Committee agreed to meet again on May 28 , 1985 from 6 : 30
to 7:30 p.m. to review and evaluate using the revised criteria
8 remaining sites . Those sites were as follows : East side
of Gorman Street , Lenzmeier Farm, Southwest corner of Shakopee
Avenue and County Road 17 , West side of County Road 17 , East
of Public Works yard , block South of the Post Office, site West
of St. Marks School , and Block 47 (Philipps Block) .
The Committee thanked Terry Forbord for attending and for his
participation in the discussion.
M/S/P Czaja/Vierling moved to adjourn . Meeting adjourned at
8:55 p.m.
John K. Anderson
Recording Secretary
PROCEEDINGS OF THE
DOWNTOWN AD HOC COMMITTEE
SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA
May 8 , 1985
Chrm. Laurent called the meeting to order at 7 : 35 A. M . with
the following voting members present : Steve Clay, Jerry Wampach ,
Mike Sortum, Dan Steil , Joe Topic , Jim Stillman , Terry Forbord
and Peter Sames , with Tim Keane arriving later. Absent : Bill
Wermerskirchen Jr . , Don Martin and Dick Stoks. Also present:
Jeanne Andre , Community Development Director and John K. Anderson ,
City Administrator .
Stillman/Wampach moved to approve the agenda for the May 8 ,
1985 meeting as presented . Motion carried .
Wampach/ Stillman moved to approve the minutes of April 3 , 1985
as presented. Motion carried.
The Community Development Director reviewed her memo regarding
the resolution establishing the Ad Hoc Downtown Committee , noting
that the provision stating that members may be removed from
office upon two unexcused absences has not been enacted and
in addition the monthly meeting schedule has not been regularly
adopted and forwarded to the City Clerk.
The City Administrator arrived at 7 : 140 A. M.
Consensus of the committee was that an unexcused absence would
be if a member does not attend call in or inform someone that
they can not attend , and if they miss two , a note will be send
with the committees alternatives and request for a better attendance
record . Also , to continue providing information on meetings
to the City Clerk as the meeting dates are established.
Chairman Laurent noted after reviewing the resolution , that
the Committee has accomplished its purpose .
The Community Development Director then reviewed a memo from
the May 214 , 1983 meeting of the City Council which they referred
to the Downtown Committee for comments and recommendations .
The memo from the Police Chief and Director of Public Works
requested the extension of the winter parking restrictions in
the Central Business District ( CBD ) on a year round basis with
the exception of Sommerville north of 1st Avenue . This would
mean a 2: 00 A.M. to 6 : 00 A. M. parking ban in the CBD .
The City Administrator summarized by adding that it would help
convenience the City by making it easier for the Police Department
to identify suspicious vehicles and also help the street sweepers
conduct operations before traffic starts using the streets .
There have been no complaints of inconveniences due to the ban.
Page two
Downtown Minutes 5/8/85
Stillman/Forbord moved to accept the recommendation to extend
the 2: 00 A.M. to 6 : 00 A. M. winter parking restrictions in the
CBD on a year would basis , with the exception of Sommerville
North of 2nd Avenue. Motion carried.
Tim Keane arrived at 7 : 49 A.M.
The Community Development Director summarized her memo regarding
a Economic Development Program section of the Downtown Plan
which called for the provision of a local development corporation ,
financing and management to make the retail core work. She
noted Trevor Walsten , Jake Manahan and Paul Wermerskirchen have
shown an interest in revitalizing the local development corporation
( LDC ) . However they have discovered a flaw in the original
issue of stock and feel a security attorney is needed for clarif-
ication before they move forward. They are willing to volunteer
their own time to work on this issue , but expenses may be incurred
if outside attorneys are to be brought in.
The City Administrator left at 8 : 04 A.M.
Tim Keane advised the committee that the Industrial Commercial
Commission ( ICC ) will be having a round table discussion on
different cities development and redevelopment efforts with
the LDC being one of the alternatives to be considered . This
will be held May 14 , 11985 .
Discussion followed with Chrm. Laurent summarizing that there
is definitely a need for more direction in the Economic Development
area , but that this item should be continued to the next meeting
in order to receive a legal opinion of the LDC first and see
what the outcome of the round table discussion will be .
The Community Development Director also questioned how involved
the committee wanted to get with promotion.
Wilber Schroers , a downtown businessman, felt there was a definite
need for an information source. For example if you need information
on available space at a mall , they have someone there who can
give you direct answers and that is what he feels Shakopee needs
to encourage more business to the downtown area .
Discussion followed with consensus of the committee being that
the Downtown should definitely have its own organization for
promotion, but that they would table this item until after the
round table discussion.
The City Development Director then informed the committee of
the status of the Downtown Bridge/Junction Project. Three major
areas discussed at a meeting with MnDOT on April 8 , 1985 were :
1) the timetable for funding decisions and implementation of
this project ; 2 ) the nature of the cooperative agreement and
Page three
Downtown Minutes 5/ 8/85
3 ) the desire of MnDOT to include the alternative of one-way
couplets with First Avenue and a new right-of-way in the environ-
mental assessment worksheet (EAW) .
Regarding the timetable ; MnDOT stated that the federal decision
on eligibility of the bridge for funding is not a significant
factor because the bridge is clearly eligible . However , less
certain is whether State funding (which 20b is required ) , will
be available because the project does not meet the State bridge
replacement criteria. The MnDOT funding program report is generally
released in July . In the interim , Carl Hoffsteadt did agree
to work on the mechanics of the proposed cooperative agreement
so it would be drafted and ready to execute in July.
Discussion for including the First Avenue one-way couplet among
the alternatives to be considered in the EAW occurred with consensus
being reached that it is appropriate to include this alterntive
in the EAW, but assure that City concerns for the economic viability
are included in this analysis .
Terry Forbord commented that he thought no matter what occurs
with the bridge improvements that the committee should continue
with the streetscape pians.
Dan Steil agreed that we should take the next step and start
working on our next project because if we wait for MnDOT we ' re
not going to get anywhere .
Tim Keane mentioned that there are still a lot of unresolved
issues. Space for example ; feasibility of space needs , location
alternatives , who could be involved and what kind of funding
exists. And streetscape is another alternative . He also mentioned
that we should take advantage and capitalize on the tourism
of the approximately 1 .5 million people going through Shakopee
for the first time. The use of banners and pennants for example
would help to attract some .
Dan Steil left at 8 : 55 A. M.
Chairman Laurent suggested that at the next meeting the committee
should concentrate on what alternatives and direction to take
next.
Tim Keane suggested that each member think about what alternatives
the committee could take to try and capture the money resources
that will be driving through the CBD .
Jerry Wampach agreed , but felt that there was a great need for
parking space and that this should be put on the priority list .
Page four
Downtown Minutes - 5/8/85
Mike Sortum left at 9 : 01 A. M.
Tim Keane questioned the status of the Housing Alliance .
The Community Development Director informed him that they were
now waiting for the storm sewer project to be completed . She
will call to help encourage them and show them the City is still
interested in their project.
The Community Development Director informed the committee that
she should be hearing the results of the Small Cities Development
Grant by June 1st.
Chrm. Laurent stated the next meeting will be May 29th at 7 : 30
A. M.
Mr. Schroers expresed interest in an information center.
Chrm. Laurent said the Chamber was moving forward on that project.
Tim Keane expressed that there was a definite need for a consultant
and suggested we look into some alternatives before the next
meeting.
The Community Development Director will talk to some consultants
and outline some options.
Terry Forbord questioned the status of the location for the
new city hall. He feels there is a definite need for the committee
to take a stand on a Downtown location.
Forbord/Topic moved to make a recommendation to the City Hall
Siting Committee and the City Council, that the members of the
Downtown Committee would like them to reassess their weighing
procedures for locations because they would like to see a new
city hall located in the downtown area. Motion carried.
Terry Forbord will be put on the agenda list for the Downtown
Siting Committee Meetings.
Clay/Forbord moved to adjourn at 9 : 27 A.M. Motion carried .
Toni Warhol
Recording Secretary
%3
PROCEEDINGS OF THE
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS AND APPEALS
REGULAR SESSION SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA MAY 9, 1985
Chrm. Czaja called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m. with Comm. Schmitt,
Lane, VanMaldeghem and Pomerenke present. Comm. Rockne arrived later
and Comm. Stoltzman was absent. Also present were Judi Simac, City
Planner; John K. Anderson, City Admr. and Cncl. Lebens.
Lane/Pomerenke moved to approve the minutes of April 4, 1985 as kept.
Motion carried with VanMaldeghem abstaining because of her absence at
that meeting.
PUBLIC HEARING (CONT.) - BANKERS LIFE CO.
VanMaldeghem/Lane moved to open the public hearing regarding the request
by Bankers Life Co. to consider a variance from the minimum lot size
requirement in the I-1 District. Motion carried unanimously.
The City Planner said the City Council has rezoned the parcel and it is
now a legal non-conforming use. The variance request is just to clear
up the legal status of the parcel. She said this action requested is
similar to that taken in the case of Brooks Superette and the Shakopee
Car Wash, which had less than minimum lot size. She added the septic
system problems were a hardship to the property, although that would
apply whether the property was commercial or industrial. She said the
basic reason for Council's rezoning was the existence of a tenant.
Comm. Schmitt commented that he didn't realize that having a tenant was a
sufficient reason to rezone property, and didn't like the precedent that
sets. He said the commercial zoning was satisfactory for the owner and
satisfactory for the financial institution previously.
Comm. Rockne arrived and was seated at 7:35 p.m.
Comm. Schmitt added that on the plat approved the building was identified
as a building supply organization. The City Planner said there was manu-
facturing and production taking place there.
Chrm. Czaja asked for comments from the audience.
Walter Rockenstein, representing Bankers Life Co. , said the tenant is in
place and the building is occupied. He said when the building was first
constructed the company did manufacturing and was a building supply house.
The subsequent use was a liquidation firm, whose rent covered less than the
cost of operating, but was still unable to make the business go. In three
years there has not been a single applicant interested in using the build-
ing for retail purposes. The only applicant was for industrial use, which
is why they sought rezoning. He acknowledged the lease with Green Giant
is only for six months, which is their standard policy. At the end of the
_naKopee
May 9, 1985
Page 2
short term lease, they may sign a 2 to 3 year lease. If it appears in a
short time that Green Giant will not renew the lease, Bankers Life will
seek a new tenant or new owner in this zoning. He added the realtor was
familiar with the allowed uses under B-1, and was not able to find a
tenant or owner for B-1.
Chrm. Czaja asked if there were any other comments from the audience,
and there was no response.
VanMaldeghem/Pomerenke moved to close the public hearing. Motion carried
unanimously.
Pomerenke/Lane offered Variance Resolution No. 396 and moved its adoption.
Motion carried with Comm. Schmitt opposed and Comm. Rockne abstaining.
PUBLIC HEARING - GUST VARIANCE REQUEST
VanMaldeghem/Pomerenke moved to open the public hearing regarding the
request by Duane H. Gust for a variance from the one acre minimum lot
size requirement in the I-2 District in order to create a legal lot
split. Motion carried unanimously.
The City Planner said this application was submitted at the direction of
Planning Commission to clarify the determination of this lot.
Chrm. Czaja asked for comments from the audience, and there were none.
The City Planner advised that the other recourse against the property
owner who did not properly split his lot would be to charge him with a
violation of the code, which carries a misdemeanor punishment with a
maximum fine of $700.00.
Comm. Schmitt commented that in this case the applicant is the owner,
sales agent and was working in the industrial park where it is his res-
ponsibility to know the zoning rules in the area. He wants to prohibit
this type of action from taking place in the future. He also pointed
out that the minutes of April 4, 1985 state the builder was assured by
Scott County that the property was a legal parcel, but it should state
the builder assumed it was a legal parcel.
The City Planner responded that she would like to clarify the issue of
the illegal sale of parcels that haven't been split and bring it back
at a later meeting.
Lane/Rockne moved to close the public hearing. Motion carried unanimously.
VanMaldeghem/Pomerenke offered Variance Resolution No. 403 and moved its
adoption. Motion carried unanimously.
PUBLIC HEARING - LINK VARIANCE REQUEST
VanMaldeghem/Lane moved to open the public hearing regarding the request
by Clete Link to consider an 11' variance from the south lot line and an
8' variance from the west lot line to construct a four unit townhouse.
Motion carried unanimously.
s i"iciitiop e i:iv cici
May 9, 1985
Page 3
The Citv Planner said the main issue of the variance request is the
hardship factor. From the time the general site plan was approved until
now the distance separating the two buildings has changed from a require-
ment of 10' before to 20' now. Therefore, the applicant has asked for
additional variance to the south in order to accomodate the 20' separation.
Clete Link said it was his understanding when he made application for the
building permit that the buildings were to be 20 feet apart. The roof
porches over the step are 5 feet apart and the Building Inspector wants
10 feet between porch roofs because of combustible materials.
Discussion followed clarifying the exact variances needed.
Chrm. Czaja asked for comments from the audience.
Donald Paul, representing the Presbyterian Church, 1732 Marschall Road,
submitted a written response to the variance request. He said their main
concern is with the high density of the buildings. They have a lot of
overflow parking from the development now, and feel that with the addition
of another building the problem will only increase. They are very con-
cerned about small children from the development who use the church's
parking lot for playing and the question of the church's liability. They
wonder if the developer could be directed to put up a fence for some
separation of properties.
Fred Engfer, 960 Sibley Street, lives behind the development. He said he
wonders why the rules change all the time. The developer was given per-
mission to build on a certain space, and now it has to be changed because
an ordinance changes. Why not just let him build the way he intended to
build. Five or six additional feet on the corner will just make it worse.
That is a very busy corner and the safety factor concerns him.
The City Planner read from the report of the City Engineer regarding the
traffic patterns and safety factor of that intersection. Comm. Schmitt
said he walks by that corner 5 times a week and is aware of the driving
patterns there, but he doesn't think moving the building will solve that
problem. He said that parcel has been zoned R-4 for a great many years,
which the neighbors have known.
Fran Vohnoutka, 1431 East 10th, said his property adjoins this parcel and
he is concerned with the wall that was built and the safety factor. He
wants some type of legal paper that makes him immune from liability if
a child would get hurt on it. He was advised to ask his insurance carrier.
He asked about the property becoming tenant owned, which was indicated
when the building permit was given. He wondered about it being rented
out first.
Clete Link responded that the property will come back into Planning Com-
mission for subdivision as condominium units as soon as the next founda-
tion is in. He said the engineers and land surveyors don't want to sub-
divide until they can get an accurate zero lot line; after which they will
be sold off as individual units. That was the plan from the beginning,
and they are rented in the interim.
ShaKO et b0:ii,
May 9, 1985
Page 4
Chrm. Czaja asked if there were any other comments from the audience, and
there were none.
Schmitt/Rockne moved to close the hearing. Motion carried unanimously.
Schmitt/Pomerenke offered Variance Resolution No. 404, granting approval
of an 11 foot front yard variance from 10th Avenue and an eight foot front
yard variance from CR17, and moved its adoption. Motion carried unani-
mously.
Chrm. Czaja informed the audience of the 7 day appeal period.
PUBLIC HEARING - WIGGIN VARIANCE REQUEST
Lane/Schmitt moved to open the public hearing regarding the request by
David Wiggin to consider a 25' front yard and a 25' rear yard variance
for Lot 2, Block 2, and a 25' front yard and 10' side yard variance
for Lot 1, Block 2, Minnesota Valley 5th Addn in order to construct two
4-unit apartment buildings. Motion carried unanimously.
The City Planner explained there is a precedent of giving a 25' front
yard variance on Polk Street. She went over the various considerations
of the request and recommended approval of the variances.
David Wiggin said he sat down with the City Planner and moved the build-
ings around quite a bit to make it look nice, but there isn't a lot of
room. He believes this is the best arrangement. He explained how the
building on Lot 1 could be sited without a variance by putting the park-
ing out front, but he thinks it looks better with the parking in the
back which gives it better symmetry with the surrounding area.
Chrm. Czaja asked for comments from the audience.
The City Planner pointed out the letters received in the mail from Sandra
McNellis and Shirley Dahl, both speaking against the increased density
of apartment buildings and suggesting duplexes or triplexes instead.
Comm. Schmitt recommended entering these letters into the record.
The City Planner clarified the amount of separation needed between the
drive-ways. '
Schmitt/Pomerenke moved to close the public hearing. Motion carried
unanimously.
Schmitt/Pomerenke offered Variance Resolution No. 405 granting approval
of a 25 foot front yard variance and a 5 foot side yard variance for
Lot 1, Block 2 and a 25 foot front yard variance and a 15 foot rear yard
variance for Lot 2, Block 2, Minnesota Valley 5th Add'n, and moved its
adoption. Motion carried unanimously.
Chrm. Czaja explained the 7 day appeal period.
Snaxopee, BOAR
May 9, 1985
Page 5
INFORMATIONAL - BULK DETERMINATION
Lane/Rockne moved to approve the following definition of bulk:
Any alteration of a building or structure that
would increase the exterior size of the structure
would be one that would increase bulk.
Motion carried with VanMaldeghem abstaining.
OTHER BUSINESS - SIGNAGE
The City Planner asked for a determination relative to the sign ordi-
nance based on a request for a neon advertising sign which would be
free-standing. Her interpretation is this does not fit the sign ordi-
nance, and she would like direction to determine if the Commissioners
want to have the sign ordinance amended to allow this type of a sign
in the business and industrial zones.
Discussion followed relating to how this proposed sign is different
from the one on the First National Bank. The City Planner read the
language regarding public informational signage.
Consensus was to bring this item back at the June meeting with more
background information.
The City Planner said the contractor for the racetrack brought in a set
of plans regarding the proposed internal directional signage for the
racetrack. She is asking for an interpretation as to whether or not
the Commissioners want to regulate internal directional signage.
Consensus was when the sign is in or near the right-of-way directing
traffic off the streets, it can be regulated, but internal traffic
control and informational signage need not be controlled. Comm. Schmitt
asked the Planner to come back with some over-all suggestions for treat-
ing these signage requests administratively.
Lane/Schmitt moved to adjourn. Motion carried unanimously. Meeting
adjourned at 8:40 p.m.
Judi Simac
City Planner
Diane S. Beuch
Recording Secretary
lq
PROCEEDINGS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
REGULAR SESSION SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA MAY 9, 1985
Chrm. Czaja called the meeting to order at 8:40 p.m. with Comm. Lane,
VanMaldeghem, Schmitt, Rockne and Pomerenke present. Comm. Stoltzman
arrived later. Also present were Judi Simac, City Planner; John K.
Anderson, City Admr. and Cncl. Lebens.
Lane/VanMaldeghem moved that the March 14, 1985 minutes be approved with
the following language added at the end of the Bed and Breakfast public
hearing: "Stoltzman/VanMaldeghem moved to close the public hearing.
Motion carried unanimously." Motion carried with Comm. Schmitt abstain-
ing because of his absence and Comm. Pomerenke abstaining because he
wasn't a member yet.
Lane/Rockne moved to approve the minutes of April 4, 1985 with the fol-
lowing additions:
Page 2, Bankers Life: A comment was made that the sewer
would have to be repaired regardless of which zoning was
applied to the building. Also that rezoning would cause
the parcel to require a variance due to the size of the
property.
Page 3, Veterinary Clinic, second to last paragraph: Mr.
Ebert assumed the property was a legal parcel with a legal
description. (instead of Mr. Ebert was assured. . .)
Page 6, Ackerberg, second to last paragraph: The issue was
raised questioning the 300 foot drainway bordering their
property.
Motion carried with VanMaldeghem abstaining because of her absence and
Pomerenke abstaining because he was not yet a member.
Lane/Rockne moved to approve the minutes of April 9, 1985 with the cor-
rection on page 4, last paragraph, which should be 100 mile radius in-
stead of 10 mile radius. Motion carried unanimously.
PUBLIC HEARING - (CONT.) SCOTT COUNTY LUMBER CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
VanMaldeghem/Schmitt moved to continue the public hearing regarding the
request by Scott County Lumber Co. and Bert Noterman for a conditional
use permit to remove sand and gravel aggregate upon property located
at SE 14 of Sec. 17, NE 14 of NW 4 of Sec. 16, W. 2 of Sec. 16, CR83.
Motion carried unanimously.
The City Planner said she just received some additional information and
the application is considered complete and a public hearing has been set
for May 16, 1985. That night is set aside for the petition of the de-
veloper and comments from the public. Following that hearing staff will
prepare a report or investigate any new concerns and continue the hear-
ing until June 6, at which time Planning Commission action will be required.
Plannin Commission
May 9, 1985
Page 2
Discussion ensued regarding attendance at that meeting, and consensus was
to set the meeting for 8:00 p.m. in order to have a quorum.
Discussion also ensued regarding the differences between this application
and the similar one submitted in 1981. The City Planner said she would
send out copies of the minutes from those other hearings, but she feels
this is a new application and should be viewed on its own criteria.
Chrm. Czaja asked if there were any comments from the audience, and there
were none.
VanMaldeghem/Rockne moved to continue the public hearing to May 16, 1985
at 8:00 p.m. , at a proper location to be determined by staff. Motion
carried unanimously.
PUBLIC HEARING - PRELIMINARY PLAT OF NOTERMANN'S 2ND ADDITION
Pomerenke/Lane moved to open the public hearing regarding the Preliminary
Plat of Notermann's 2nd Addition. Motion carried unanimously.
The City Planner said the preliminary plat proposes three developable R-3
lots and two outlots. She questions the future of the outlots, especially
as one does not abut a public street. She went over the other questions
that arose from staff in its review of the present information.
The City Planner showed an alternative arrangement of the addition. Dis-
cussion ensued regarding its various aspects. Chrm. Czaja commented that
these proposed engineering concepts should not be dealt with by Planning
Commission at this time.
Mr. Notermann stated he has had the property for 25 years and he would
like to sell it. However, he didn't think it was worth doing all these
extra changes for an additional two lots, as he has to think of the finan-
cial feasibility of the project. He wants to sell some R-4 lots with
apartment buildings, but he doesn't like all these obstacles in his path.
He questioned the engineer's knowledge about the fill, as those materials
were put in many years ago. The front does not have the kind of fill the
engineer is talking about. He doesn't think he should have to excavate
all these materials. He would rather give the property away than develop
it the way the City is proposing.
Chrm. Czaja asked for comments from the audience.
Mr. Noterman added the property drains naturally, so there shouldn't be
any need for storm sewer. He said he platted Outlots A and B so in the
future he can develop them. He explained his plans for a utility ease-
ment to 4th Street in the future. He said he can't afford to develop all
these lots at one time.
Schmitt/Lane moved to continue this public hearing to June 6, 1985 in
order to resolve the issues mentioned in the staff report. Motion carried
unanimously.
Shakopee Planning Commission
May 9,1985
Page 3
PUBLIC HEARING - MINNESOTA RACETRACK, INC. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
Lane/Schmitt moved to open the public hearing regarding the request by
Minnesota Racetrack, Inc. for a conditional use permit to install two
fiberglass fuel tanks upon the property known as Canterbury Downs Race-
track site. Motion carried unanimously.
The City Planner went over the considerations of the request and
recommended approval.
Mr. John Gockel, representing the racetrack, stated the tanks are for
use of vehicles for on site maintenance and operation of the facility.
Chrm. Czaja asked if there were any comments from the audience, and there
was no response.
Rockne/VanMaldeghem moved to close the hearing. Motion carried unanimously.
VanMaldeghem/Rockne offered Conditional Use Permit No. 406, allowing the
installation of two fuel tanks at Canterbury Downs, and moved its adop-
tion. Motion carried unanimously.
PUBLIC HEARING - ANGELROCK ENTERPRISES CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
Schmitt/Pomerenke moved to open the public hearing regarding the request
by Angelrock Enterprises for a conditional use permit to operate an open
sales lot upon the property located at 8522 East Hwy. 101. Motion carried
unanimously.
The City Planner went over the considerations and recommended approval
with conditions. She said the applicant has been operating his business
within the MGM building.
Jim Kerwin, 1276 Wilson Street, St. Paul, said he is owner and he has no
problem with any of the conditions. He said the only surprise to him
was the prohibition of food sales outdoors. He would think anything sold
outdoors would be from a food wagon under normal permits from the Health
Dept.
The City Planner added that the applicant should petition the City for
the placement of signs along the frontage road for no parking, at the
applicant's expense.
Mr. Kerwin said the hours of operation would be Friday, Saturday and Sun-
day. They are trying to get a Farmers Market going, and that might be
other than week-ends. But it would always be during daylight hours. Mr.
Kerwin said he is depending very much on Ray Reynolds, who ran the flea
market at the Mann-France Drive-in site, which has closed. Mr. Reynolds
opened and ran that market for 9 years, and he is counting on that exper-
tise for the outside operation. He added they can also use the parking
between the MGM and 1 & 44 buildings. They will also be selling inter-
nally in the Stagecoach building as soon as that is vacated. He will
Snai,opee Planning ommission
May 9, 1985
Page 4
have someone level the dirt behind the MGM to provide parking there. He
believes there is enough parking space between the old city and the
Stagecoach for the next few months. If necessary, he will hire people
to control the parking internally. He said it is sand, but good, solid
ground. The City Planner added the City Engineer is not requiring the
parking lot be paved.
Comm. VanMaldeghem commented that she has seen some flea markets that
have been eyesores, and she wants to be sure that is prevented, especially
as it is a main route to the Racetrack. She is also concerned that there
is adequate supervision to prohibit kids and alcohol use.
The City Admr. suggested a reviewal after a short time, with the option
of requiring screening from Hwy. 101.
Comm. Stoltzman arrived and took his seat at 9:35 p.m.
VanMaldeghem/Lane moved to close the public hearing. Motion carried
unanimously.
Schmitt/VanMaldeghem offered Conditional Use Permit Resolution No. 407,
allowing an open sales lot at 8522 East Hwy. 101, and moved its adoption
subject to the following conditions:
1. Applicant be required to petition the City for the placement
of signs prohibiting parking along CR89 and the frontage road.
2. All parking areas in use be graded, adequately marked and
given adequate dust control, with grass parking areas to be
approved by the City Engineer.
3. No sale of prepared food stuff be allowed without proper
health inspection and license.
4. Sale of farm produce is permitted.
5. A review be conducted within 120 days.
6. Planning Commission reserves the right to require screening
if necessary.
7. Refuse must be contained within trash dumpsters with regular,
adequate pick-ups scheduled.
8. The out buildings of the Stagecoach will be roped off with no
access permitted.
9. To be operated during day light hours only, from sunrise to
sunset.
Motion carried with Comm. Stoltzman abstaining.
Schmitt/VanMaldeghem moved for a five minute recess at 9:40 p.m. Motion
carried unanimously.
Lane/Stoltzman moved to re-convene at 9:47 p.m. Motion carried unanimously.
PUBLIC HEARING (CONT.) - WILLIAMSON CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
Stoltzman/Pomerenke moved to open the public hearing regarding the request
by Murray Williamson for a conditional use permit to construct a hotel
upon property located at the intersection of CR17 and CR16. Motion
carried unanimously.
iaKcpee Pianninb �om..:ission
May 9, 1985
Page 5
The City Planner said the developer has revised his proposed hotel to
have only 66 units. She pointed out the other changes made and went
over the considerations. She stated staff recommends approval with
conditions. She said the County Engineer reviewed the plat and approved
it with only one entrance and exit. In the future the developer plans
another entrance off CR16, across property owned by someone else.
Buzz Jonason said Mr. Williamson was not able to make this meeting tonight
and he was representing him. He showed a picture with an artist's
rendition of the hotel unit, except it shows three stories, and the
proposed hotel would have only two stories. He said they do have a
master plan to coordinate the whole piece of property along CR17, so
they are planning continuity for the entire 7z acres.
Discussion followed regarding accomodation for trailers and larger
recreational vehicle parking. Mr. Jonason said there is extra square
footage which would allow the parking of a few over-sized vehicles, and
they plan to expand to Lot 3 in a year and they will allow for that
parking at that time.
Comm. Schmitt asked for some more definite commitment of the developer
as a part of the final issuance of the permit. He pointed out that
architectural drawings can change. Comm. Pomerenke was concerned
that the landscaping be completed before the Certificate of Occupancy
is issued.
Mr. Jonason added that they will have meeting facilities and will try to
promote some winter activities and community participation. He said
they feel they did a lot of research up front and this is a very prudent
business project. He said their study showed this corner was one of
the best spots for a hotel. They have an application in for Industrial
Revenue Bonds, but they are prepared to go with the project either way.
He said it is a franchise operation, and they have another hotel in
Bemidji which they have operated for about 5 years. He said this will
be a good hotel with amenities in the middle range. They are hoping for
a January 1st opening.
Chrm. Czaja asked if there were any comments from the audience.
Steve Granowski, 2641 11th Avenue North, said this is to be a pre-fab
hotel, assembled in Owatonna. He is concerned with the application for
a revenue bonds, as there are several discrepancies. He asked if the
applicant is still asking for 2 million dollars after he has down-sized
the hotel.
The City Admr. responded that the application for revenue bonds is before
the City Council, which will take action of May 21, 1985, and the Plan-
ning Commission has nothing to do with it.
Mr. Granowski said the building would be like the one in Eden Prairie.
He said he is concerned about using Industrial Revenue Bonds to finance
an organinzation based in South Dakota. Mr. Jonason said there would be
a small company in Minnesota, and it is a Minnesota manufacturing company.
Mr. Granowski said he is representing the Twin Cities Carpenter Council.
Shakopee Planning Commission
May 9, 1985
Page 6
Clete Link said he doesn' t believe any public body should weigh any
project based on whether or not a project is union or not--that is
strictly personal preference. Mr. Jonason said they will build the
hotel however stipulated by the City, and are prepared to submit a
spec sheet or whatever is necessary.
The City Planner reminded the Commissioners that to make a determina-
tion of conditional use they are looking at the land use of the parcel.
Schmitt/VanMaldeghem moved to close the public hearing. Motion carried
unanimously.
Schmitt/Pomerenke offered Conditional Use Permit Resolution No. 399,
and moved its adoption subject to the following conditions:
1. No building permit shall be issued until the Final
Plat of Century Plaza Square 3rd Addition is recorded.
2. The applicant shall submit a revised site plan which is
prepared in accordance with code requirements and reflects
the reduction in units and the addition of a swimming pool.
3. Submittal of a drainage report to be approved by the City
Engineer.
4. All landscaping shall be completed prior to the issuance
of a Certificate of Occupancy or a .Performance Bond given
in lieu of landscape completion. A landscape plan, to be
approved by the City Planner, shall be submitted with the
Building Permit application.
5. All exterior lighting is to be directed on the parking area
and away from adjacent CR17. A lighting plan, to be ap-
proved by the City Planner, must be submitted with the Build-
ing Permit application.
6. The applicant must obtain an Entrance Permit from the County
Engineer.
7. This Conditional Use Permit is based on the preliminary
building drawings and artist's rendering of the structure
as presented by applicant' s representative. Any changes
should be brought before the Planning Commission.
Motion carried unanimously.
Chrm. Czaja informed the audience of the 7 day appeal period.
DISCUSSION - FINAL PLAT OF CENTURY PLAZA 3RD ADDITION
The City Planner said the Final Plat does incorporate the conditions
mandated in the Preliminary Plat approval. She went over the considera-
tions, and recommended approval with conditions.
Comm. Lane questioned the City joining in on the signing off of the plat
for its easement. The City Planner said the City required the right of
way and received a deed, and therefore this was the recommended method
of dealing with the property according to the City Attorney.
A discussion followed regarding the excavation plan for the lots. The
City Engineer discussed it futher, and stated he was comfortable with
what had been submitted at this point. He said there was a drainage plan
submitted for the construction of CR17, and no trunk or lateral facilities
are required for these lots. The City Admr. suggested just referencing
the drainage and storm sewer plans from the original submittal. They
do not require the Final Plat to detail these services that are alreadv in.
Shakopee Planning Commission
May 92 1985
Page /
Cncl. Lebens left the meeting at 11:00 p.m.
The City Engineer was directed to get copies of the missing drainage
information and reference them in this Final Plat and state his accep-
tance of them.
Schmitt/Rockne moved to continue this hearing to May 16, 1985 pending
receipt of additional drainage plans. Motion carried with Comm.
Stoltzman opposed because he thinks the requirement is irrelevent.
DISCUSSION - FINAL PLAT DELLA'S 1ST ADDITION
The City Planner went over the considerations and recommended approval
of the Final Plat of Della's lst Add'n, with conditions. She said the
legal opinion from the City Attorney indicated this was the proper way
to deal with the property which is partially abstract and partially
torrens.
Chrm. Czaja asked for comments from the audience, and there were none.
Pomerenke/Stoltzman moved to recommend to City Council final plat ap-
proval of Della's First Addition, subject to the following conditions:
1- 1 Approval of a Title Opinion by the City Attorney
2, A variance is hereby granted from the requirement
to provide twenty feet of screening where Austin Circle
abuts Lots 16 and 17 , Block 5 , JEJ Addition for the
reason that the variance shall not be detrimental
to the public safety , health or welfare or injurious
to other property in the neighborhood . .
Execution of a Developers Agreement for the construction
of the required improvements :
a , Street lighting to be installed in accordance
with the requirements of the SPUC Utilities Manager.
p, Water system to be installed in accordance with
the reouirements of the SPUC Utilities Manager.
r.. . Sanitary Sewer and Storm Water System to be installed
in accordance with the requirements of the City
Design Criteria and Standard Specifications.
11. Street and street signs shall be constructed
in accordance with the requirements of the City
Design Criteria and Standard Specifications .
The developer shall provide all street signs ,
including a sign or signs which does not permit
parking on either side of Austin Circle .
e, The developer shall agree to the City Engineer ' s
method of apportioning the installments remaining
unpaid against the plat and that the developer
waives his right to appealing the apportionment .
Snakupee Plannino commission
May 9, 1985
Page 8
f. Outlots B and C shall be deeded to the City of
Shakopee in fulfillment of the park dedication
requirement . No further park dedication fee
will be required .
g . No building permit shall be issued for Outlot
A until it is replatted .
r. Retaining walls shall be used where necessary ,
as determined by the City Engineer , to maintain
the slope of the lot ( or lots ) in conformance
With the slope requirements as defined by ordinance .
4 . The developer shall provide a recordable agreement
stating that not more than one lot shall be developed
for a twin home .
Motion carried unanimously.
DISCUSSION - FINAL PLAT OF HAUER'S 3RD ADDITION
The City Planner said that various required items were not submitted, and
therefore she recommends denial of the Final Plat until receipt of those
items.
Chrm. Czaja asked for comments from the audience.
Gene Hauer said he thought the City had everything it needed. He under-
stood that if it went to a Chapter 429 project the City would order
everything it needed.
The City Engineer further explained how Mr. Hauer's engineer mistakenly
thought the City was taking care of the detailed plans and specifications.
He said that although the City would undertake the project under the
Chapter 429 policies, it still requires the developer to supply the plans
and specifications as detailed in the subdivision ordinance.
Schmitt/Rockne moved to continue the hearing until the necessary documents
are submitted and approved. Motion carried unanimously.
DISCUSSION - FINAL PLAT OF FOX RUN 1ST ADDITION
t'tie'Cify Planner said Fred Corrigan and John Biwer are looking for direc-
tion for their final platting. The main issue is the development of the
cul-de-sac to serve the two lots.
Mr. Corrigan said the problem is that the City Council gave approval for
the road alignment which proposed 11 lots, but only approved 2 lots.
They have private access and do not need the cul-de-sac now.
VanMaldeghem/Pomerenke moved to recommend the developer be directed to
prepare a final plat which meets all code requirements and creates two
lots with a dedicated cul-de-sac to serve the lots. The developer is not
required to construct the cul-de-sac until such time as it is petitioned
by the lot owners. Motion carried unanimously.
Shakopee Planning Commission
May 9, 1985
Page 9
PROPOSED STORM SEWER POLICY PRESENTATION
The City Engineer said he would like to have a recommendation from Plan-
ning Commission regarding the proposed storm sewer policy before the
public hearing set for May 28, 1985. Discussion followed about the late
hour and trying to schedule another meeting.
Schmitt/Pomerenke moved to direct the City Engineer to send his handout
regarding the proposed storm sewer policy to the Commissioners, have
the Commissioners attend the public hearing on May 28th to hear the
presentation and make a recommendation on June 6, 1985. Motion carried
unanimously.
INFORMATIONAL ITEMS
A few miscellaneous items were mentioned for information only.
Schmitt/Pomerenke moved to direct staff to draft a memo on behalf of the
Planning Commission that the City storage facility south of the Public
Works building is not in conformance with the ordinance regarding ex-
terior storage adjacent to residential neighborhoods. Motion carried
unanimously.
Schmitt/Rockne moved to direct staff to work with the Public Works
and SPUC to review the new ordinance regarding plantings and bring those
two buildings into conformance. Motion carried unanimously.
DISCUSSION - ROCK SPRING ADDITION
Lou Mertz, on behalf of Rock Spring, said that when they got a permit to
add onto their building they were told they were a conditional use, which
he did not know before. He is wondering why they have to go through the
conditional use permit process in order to get a liquor license, when
they are not doing anything new--they already have a liquor license. He
is wondering if they can get a temporary liquor permit during the time
it takes to process the hearing.
The City Planner clarified that the Rock Spring applied for a building
permit for an addition, which is a conditional use in a B-1 zone. She
said the hearing will be on the June 6, 1985 agenda. Without issuance
of the building permit, they have gone ahead and dug and poured footings,
giving the City a letter absolving the City of responsibility if they
don't get approval.
Mr. Mertz suggested he could get letters from everyone within 350 feet
stating they have seen the plans and don't object. Chrm. Czaja replied
that this policy is State dictated and if it isn't followed, it is illegal.
OTHER BUSINESS
Schmitt/Stoltzman moved to direct staff to enforce the conditions of the
permit granted the Koehnen property, as it relates to the fence. Motion
carried unanimously.
Shakopee Pianning commission
May 9,1985
Page 10
VanMaldeghem/Pomerenke moved to adjourn. Motion carried unanimously.
Meeting adjourned at 12:00 midnight.
Judi Simac
City Planner
Diane S. Beuch
Recording Secretary
I
i
f
15
C S TY _ OF SHAKOI=>H�
INCORPORATED 1870
* ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT
129 E. 1st Avenue - Shakopee, Minnesota 55379-1376 (612) 445-3650
May ,23, 1985
Egad Larson, County Highway Engineer
Scott County Highway Department
Court House A106
428 South Holmes
Shakopee, MN 55379
RE: County Road 21/Muhlenhardt Road Turnback
Dear Brad :
I have drafted this letter pursuant to our meeting on October
11, 1984, when James Karkanen and I met you and your superinten-
dent, Joe Kane, to discuss the work necessary for the turnback
of Muhlenhardt Road.
I will premise this by reiterating the City' s objective to
work with the County to eliminate duplication of City and County
services. This objective is spelled out in the attached copy
of the City' s Goals and Objectives, where an action item for
this states that the City will work with the County Engineer
to effect the turnback of some of the 100 miles of County Road
that duplicates existing service by the County. I have attached
a copy of that Section.
When we discussed the turnback of Muhlenhardt Road on October
11, 1984, I viewed it more in the context of a road temporarily
maintained by the County. It was to be maintained until perman-
ent facilities were constructed east of Muhlenhardt Road.
These facilities connect County Road 89 with County Road 42.
In the context of that discussion, it is difficult to consider
this roadway a conventional turnback.
I have since learned that in every sense it is a turnback.
The road is the remnant of a trade that occurred, November
9, 1977. where the City traded 1. 13 miles of the McKenna Road,
formerly County Road 21 for' . 73 miles of Muhlenhardt Road.
In that trade the City picked up the maintenance responsibility
for an additional . 40 miles of unimproved rural gravel roadway.
Now the County is in effect turning back the balance of the
Turnbacks
May 2'3, 1985
Fane 2
McKenna Read or an additional . 73 miles of roadway. This brings
the total County Road 21 turnback to 1. 13 miles.
Except for repairing some of the erosion damage caused by ambi-
tious road maintenance there is very little else being cone
to improve Muhlenhardt Road before its turnback. If the Shako-
pee experience with Muhlenhardt Road sets the pattern and prece-
dence for the turnbacks in the rest of the County we will be
satisfied with the work you have agreed to undertake on Muhlen-
hardt Road. On the other hand, if the County makes a future
commitment to do more than make routine repairs of the existing
surface before turning back other roads in the County, I say
Shakopee is being treated unfairly and deserves additional
consideration.
As far as the improvements made to Muhlenhardt Road, the improv-
ements are primarily routine maintenance improvements, which
by no means solve the future maintenance problems the City
will have with this roadway. The improvements you agreed to
make do mean that the City will have no extraordinary main-
tenance in the next two or three years.
The items are as follows :
1. The binder and fines have been washed out into the
road ditches along County Road 16. This material will
be removed and the ditches will be restored by reseeding
the ditch area.
2. The roadside ditches along Muhlenhardt Road, north
of Swiggum' s Driveway will be paved or riprapped.
3. Five (5) inches of Class 5 will be placed between
Swiggum' s Drive and McGuires Circle, then three inches
of Class 5 will be placed on the roadway south of McGuires
Circle.
4. The shoulder south of Swiggum' s Driveway will be re-
sodded.
5. Stable, erosion-resistant turnouts will be constructed
south of Sw i g g um' s Driveway to remove surface water flow
from the roadway.
6. The sediment in the flow check structures on the east
side of the road will be cleaned out .
r
Turnbacks
May 1'385,
Pane
I realize this letter- covers much mor-re than our discussion
and it adds the City' s philosophy. The City wants the County
to be aware that we expect to see the County pursue other turn-
backs during the next calendar year and we expect the County
to treat those turnbacks as they have treated the County Read
21 t ur-nback.
Should you have any questions regarding this matter or if you
need any formal motion by the Shakopee City Council please
let me know.
,S.ncere l y,
H. R. Sr3u ier
City Engi eer
HRS/pmp
CTYRi)c1
cc: Mayor and City Council
John K. Anderson
James Karkanen
/t
Housing & Redevelopment. Authority
7 .0 ,SUBGOAL - Have a housing and Redevelopment plan that provides and
promotes the creation of needed housing units for Shakopee ' s
growing population.
7 . 1 SUBGOAL - An indepth look and attention by the HRA
Department for improved community service to housing
developments.
7 . 11 Objective - Could the City provide more types of
housing?
Action - Staff should renew contacts with potential
residential developers and show then the community.
Action - Staff should take the County HRA rehab
program referral calls and list them for follow-up
purposes to insure Shakopee residents benefit from
the program. Staff should also check the percentage
of rehab loans to insure that Shakopee gets a fair
percentage .
Action - HRA staff needs to put together a program
that can be used to build moderate income housing
units on the vacant lots around the City using T . I .F .
without relying on Mn HFA mortgages .
7 . 12 Objective - Encourage development of areas with
unique problems such as Section 6 , north of County
Road 16 now served with utilities , Robert Pit , etc .
Action - Normal development incentives are probably
not sufficient to encourage development on certain
properties. Certain property may need the
assistance of T. I .F. , revenue bonds , mortgage
revenue notes , etc . That would tip the balance in
favor of development . Such a program would not be
limited to one location .
Intergovernmental Relations
8 .0 GOAL - It shall be the goal of the City of Shakopee to work
constructively on relationships with other governmental
agencies that have taxing and regulatory impact on the City ' s
citizens.
8. 1 SUBGOAL - The City should seek to better understand ,
coordinate and integrate it ' s services with Scott County to
better serve it ' s citizens and insure citizens are not taxed
for duplicate services.
8. 11 Objective - Citizens should be informed about the
level of Police Department activities/workload that
is related to Scott County court scheduling problem.
Acton - This should be addressed collectively by the
Mayors and Administrators ' groups inScott County and
possibly Dakota County with all jurisdictions
addressing the court system problem as a unit .
-14-
8 . 13 Objective - The City should actively continue it ' s
efforts to convince Scott County to study alternate
forms of government.
Action - This effort should come thru the Scott County
Mayors and Administrators Group.
8 . 14 Objective - The City should continue to work with the `
County to eliminate all duplication of City and
County services -such as overlapping police/sheriff
department services .
Action - Continue current discussions of this type
thru the Mayors and Administrators Group and other
groups.
Action - Scott County has at least 100 miles of County
Road that should be turned back to the Cities and
Townships . Work on with County Engineer .
8. 15 Objective - The Scott County mill rate is relatively
high compared to the mill rate in the six other
metropolitan counties. This negatively impacts
Shakopee and should be investigated to determine what
the possible causes are e.g . costly county services ,
fiscal disparities , etc.
Action - Pursue thru Scott County Mayors and
Administrator Group.
8 .2 SUBGOAL - The City should seek to keep it ' s relationship
with SPUC in good shape to insure maximum cooperation and
coordination .
8.21 Objective - We have two separate governments in
Shakopee that set policy affecting citizens , the City
and SPDC. The City and SPUC should review together
their relationship as it affects the citizens they
deal with on a daily basis .
Action - Hold a joint meeting to review goals and
objectives in May 184 .
8 .3 ,SUBGOAL - The City of Shakopee should respond to State and
regional policies , regulation and taxes that affect
Shakopee 's citizens.
8 .31 Objective - What role or level of involvement should
City staff play in monitoring Met Council , MWCC ,
MPCA , etc . ?
Action - Council ' s specific response for the City
Engineer was approximately 4 hours per month by
serving on a committee that deals with one of these
agencies .
Action - Follow the highway jurisdictional study now
being undertaken by the Legislature .
-1 5-
SPECIAL SECTION PROPOSAL TO MEET OUR NEW MEMBERS - - - &
SHAKOPEE
At the April Board of Director's meeting This month we are happy to welcome the
a motion was made and seconded to endorse following as Chamber members.
the efforts of the Minnesota Real Estate
Journal to sell advertising for a septi rate Jim & Lucy's
newspaper supplement focusing exclusively Lucy Rein
on Shakopee in their June issue. 201 W 1st Ave. 445-9959
The size of the Special Section will be
determined by the amount of support from Albright, Noterman, Blanchar & Elliott
the city itself. 50% of the Section will be Tony Noterman, Rep.
news and information about Shakopee and 50% 1100 E 4th Ave. Suite 200 445-3844
will be advertising solicited from the bus-
iness community. If 8 pages of advertising Ideal Learning
is obtained, the Shakopee Section will be 16 Gary Volding, Jay Willemsen
pages, etc. 327 Marschall Road 445-2690
The Deadline for supplying news and inform-
ation and for advertising is Friday, May 10, Shakopee Cab Co.
1985 at 5 p.m. Duane Flick
Page 1 will be a photo of the riverfront or 1921 W 115th St. 445-9609
of downtown Shakopee with the words 'SHAKOPEE
MARKET FOCUS! Inside will be feature stories, Bluff Creek Inn -Bed & Breakfast
sidebars and graphs on: Marg Bush
1. development opportunities 1116 Bluff Creek Drive 445-2735
2. the existing market
3. population Creative River Tours
4. the labor force Greg Anderson, John Constantine
5. taxes Box 151 445-7491
6. local wages * *****
7. transportation
8THOUGHTS ABOUT THE COMMUNITY - -
. listing of major industries ,,
9. maps of industrial parks
10. availability of commercial land, and At the Hospitality Seminar a sheet was j
11. retail opportunities. handed out for participants to fill out on j
which they could express how they feel
In addition, the Shakopee Special Section about the community and express their wishes
will focus on: about improvements that are needed.
1. what incentives, if any, the city offers It is difficult to give a report on the
developers questionnaire, however, all the attractions,
2. an outline of the city's master plan the parks, Minn. Valley Trail, the cities !
for development historical aspect, schools, the river, Lake
3. the city's priorities O'Dowd, sports programs and the swimming
4. lists of recent developments in the city pool were some of the assets mentioned.
5. housing, land and building costs The downtown area and the truck traffic
6. maps of the city, and i on 101 were top of the list for improvements.
7. a directory of the local government } Also listed were the need for another good
and civic individuals & groups s, ?s +` restaurant (not fast food), more use of
the Chamber of Commerce, ICC, Mayor, the river, new bridge, new shops, flowers
City Administratior, etc. plus lots of in the parks, information center, melody.-.ma
photos. ? theatre, new city hall, welcome signs, i
Ad rates for the Shakopee Special Section j lower taxes and the renovation of unsightly
are $450 for a full page ad and as low as buildings coming in to town from the north
$125 for an eighth of a page and the long trains blocking traffic. I
This Section will be distributed in allQthetime
nk the 39 individuals who took j
4,500 copies of the MREJ. Readers include o fill out the questionnaires.
developers, contractors, investors, real
estate brokers, bankers, accountants,attorneysbankers, accountants, appraisers, insurance
professionals, syndicators, property managers •0
& leasing executives.
COMMUNITY HOSPITALITY SEMINAR Shakopee, Minn. Held April 16, 1985
SUMMARY
( ) denotes number of same answers
1. YOUR COMMUNITY TODAY:
A. List of cultural, historical, scenic or recreational advantages families like
best about community.
Murphy's Landing (1)
Memorial Park, other parks, pool, etc. (13)
Fishing & hunting close by (3)
Minnesota Valley Trail (2)
Raceway Park (5)
Valleyfair (20)
Minnesota River Bluffs (3)
Historical Aspect (3)
Renaissance (10)
Minnesota River(8)
Murphy's Landing (21)
Lake O'Dowd (2)
People (1)
Canterbury Downs (2)
Location (2)
Indian Heritage (2)
Park & Rec Program (3)
Clean City (2)
Good Schools (1)
Buble (1)
Scenic (2)
Little Six (2)
B. Three or more of the most important attractions for visitors to the community.
Renaissance (22)
Murphy's Landing (9)
KOA Campground (1)
Valley Fair (32)
Canterbury Downs(20)
Zoo (1)
Raceway Park (8)
Richard's Pub (2)
Little Six Bingo Palace (4)
Tahpah Park (1)
Motels (1)
County Seat (1)
Chanhassen Dinner Theatre (1)
O'Dowd's Lake (1)
Friendliness (1)
Location (1)
Parks (2)
Historic homes (1)
Restaurants (1)
Softball Tournaments (1)
Page
C. Three things liked least about community.
Parking (4)
Traffic (17)
Unattractive Downtown area (18)
Signs showing floodwater on #/169 (1)
Lack of information on community events (1.)
Truck traffic (5)
Dirty lakes (1)
Poor roads, streets and bridges (6)
Sewage Plant (1)
Traffic lights (1)
Narrow thinking of members of City government (1)
Too many fast food restaurants-need another good one (1)
Unfavorable Publicity (1)
Small town "clique" atmosphere (1)
Council has attitude of hiring & purchasing local only (1)
Long RR trains (3)
Lack of parking space (1)
Poorly maintained homes (2)
Vacant Lot across from bank (1)
Dips in street (1)
Pettiness (1)
High taxes (1)
No good shopping for ladies apparel (1)
Dirty river (1)
Entrances to the City (3)
II. YOUR COMMUNITY TOMORROW:
A. Priority of improvements you would like to see accomplished in the community
for personal use and satisfaction.
Better roads (9)
Available City Maps (1)
Handicap Parking Downtown (1)
Entrance signs & direction signs (2)
Second birdge (5)
Movie Theatre (2)
More restaurants (5)
More Hotels/motels (3)
Winter activities (1)
Move RR building for use as information center (1)
Plant more flowers downtown and in parks (3)
Tourist Information center (2)
More traffic lights (3)
Change speed limit on streets (2)
Develope parks-walking paths & biking paths to Lake O'Down & Memorial Park (6)
Downtown Restoration (9)
Clean up back of buildings No. side of lst Ave. (2)
Development of river (6)
More sewer & water for housing (1)
More shops - gifts - crafts (1)
Better streets (2)
Pursue highway by-pass (6)
Remove truck traffic from 1st Ave. (1)
Too many restaurants (1)
Ice arena (1)
New City Hall (1 )
Promotion of Shakopee (1)
B. From the viewpoint of attracting and serving visitors, what steps should be
taken in the community?
Plant flowers in parks (3)
Downtown revitalization (8)
Shakopee ICC Day (1)
Visitation of a farm by urban dwellers (1)
Showboat on the river (1)
Booklet of activities & attractions (brochures, etc. ) (3)
Better location of Chamber of Commerce (1)
More publicity (4)
Clean up junk (4)
More programs like this (1)
More variety of restaurants (5)
Better roads & streets (5)
Clean up No. side of lst AVe. (1)
Full time Chamber PR person with staff (1)
New shops (1)
Information center (4)
Melodrama Theatre (1)
Indian cultural center at Murphy's Landing (1)
Direction signs (3)
, More Motels (2)
Meetings like this for waitresses (1)
List of churches (1)
Improve bridge (1)
Improve access to river (1)
Campground (1)
Community enthusiasm (1)
Bus tours (1)
More direction by elected officials (1)
Taxes levied by use of attractions (1)
C. OTHER COMMENTS
"Loved Jane Preston as a speaker. Enjoyed Dick's presentation and history"
"Our tourism business must not depend upon pure information and education about a sub-
ject. In order that the business or subject is a success, it must be primarily
related to gift shops, specialty shops and craft shops. I'm referring to the
Williamsburg, Virgina area where even though the motif, education, and information
about the history of the area was initially given by a foundation (Rockerfuller)
it is having a difficult economic time because the business community on the
free enterprise system is not keeping the tourist happy by providing enough shops."
"Shakopee is no longer a small, rural community-Let us wake up and work to keep
some of the 2,500, 000 tourists here, in Shakopee, and not just visiting the
track, Valleyfair, etc. and then losing their restaurant, retail and motel
business to Burnsville, Bloomington, etc. "
"If first impression as you drive down lst isn't improved people will keep on
driving-to Burnsville or an area that appears more appealing. "
"History of Shakopee by Mertz is not that useful. Bill Anderson's presentation
should have been earlier in the program."
"Citizen participation as volunteers is outstanding but still can improve. "
"I love it here."
Page 4
"Has changed in last 20 years. People more friendly."
"I really feel that the road system should be updated to accomodate all these
attractions. I feel that the revenue to improve the roads should come through
the tourist not through just local taxes. "
17
TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator
FROM: Gregg Voxland, Finance Director
RE: Comptime ( Informational )
DATE: May 30, 1985
The United States Supreme Court has made a ruling effective
February 1985 regarding the Fair Labor Standards Act. The most
important issue coming from the ruling that affects the City
of Shakopee is that compensatory time is now illegal.
The employees and the City desire to use comptime and the
union agreements provide for it but it can not be legally used.
City staff, as most cities have done, has waited for awhile
to see if any more developments occured before taking action.
However, there appears to nothing happening in the near future
and therefore staff will be taking steps to eliminate comptime
accumulation and provide for the elimination of comptime balances
before the end of the year.
What must occur now is that if an employee who is covered
by the act works more than 40 hours per week, that employee
must be ga:Lqitime and one half for anything over 40 hours.
There are provisions for a schedule different than a 40 hour
week and Chief Brownell is working on setting up such a schedule
for the police officers. Management or executive employees
are exempt from the overtime payment requirement.
DON D. MARTIN
SCOTT COUNTY ASSESSOR
or COURT HOUSE 112
SHAKOPEE, MN.55379-1381 (612)445-7750, Ext.115
Deputy:
LEROY ARNOLDI
May 29, 1985
ASSESSOR'S REPORT ON THE 1985 ASSESSMENT FOR
THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE
The 1985 assessment for Shakopee began in August of 1984 and was completed
in May of 1985. During this time 347 building permits were checked and 94
partial completions from the 1984 assessment were also rechecked. Of the
347 building permits issued, about 70 were for residential homes or twin-
homes. Field work was carried out by myself as well as all the computations
used for calculating the eventual value.
The 25% reassessment invloved the following areas: All parcels in unplatted
portions of the city (section land), the plats of G & 01 Koeper's, Scenic Heights
2nd, Scenic Heights 4th, Registered Land Surveys 6, 47 and 99, Eaglewood lst,
2nd, and 3r., Deerview Acres, JEJ lst and 2nd, Zoschke's Replat, Timber Trails,
Horizon Heights 1st, Patch 1st, Clifton's 1st9 Valley Park 5th and 6th, Hillside
Estates, Prairie View 3rd, Minn. Valley 3rd, Hall's lst, Strobel's lst, Century
Plaza Square lst, Valley Mall lst, Wiggen's lst, Ziegler's lst, Macey 2nd, Halo
2nd, Link's 2nd, Minn. Valley 4th, Howe 1st, Superior Supply lst, Hauer's 2nd,
Link's 4th, and Prahm-Coll lst Addition.
During the completion of the 25% reassessment I discovered errors on 115 par-
cels. Aziloung these errors, which were the result of assessments prior to
when the County was contracted to do the assessment for Shakopee, 56 were errors
in measurements of buildings, 29 were errors in the number of buildings on a
parcel, and 30 errors of other types ie: story heights, extras listed that were
never constructed, etc. These errors have now been corrected and did result in
an overall increase in value for the majority of the parcels involved.
Robert N. Schmitt
Scott County Assessor's Office
An Equal Opportunity Employer
STATE OF
(:C--))LTJ
" DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES
Box 32 , CENTENNIAL OF I:E BUILDING ST. PAUL 'MtlN[SO1A 55155
DNR INFORMATION
(612) 296-6 15 7 FILE NO,
May 19, 1983
Eldon R. Reinke, Playor
129 E. First Ave.
Shakopee, MN 55379-1376
Dear Mayor Reinke:
DEANS LAKE (70-74) N.O.H.W. INVESTIGATION
As per Shakopee City Council Resolution No. 2107 dated February, 1983,
the Division of Waters has completed a Natural Ordinary High Water (N.O.H.W.)
investigation of Deans Lake, Scott County. Our investigation has determined
the N.O.H.W, of Deans Lake to be 748.6 feet.
Vertical control for the investigation was established from M.H.D. B.M.
"7005-F 1971" and all elevations are National Geodetic Vertical Datum
(N.G.V.D. ) , 1929.
Sincerely,
DIVISION OF WATERS
Kenneth D. Reed, Supervisor
Hydrographic Unit
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER
DON D. MARTIN
SCO I T COUNTY ASSESSOR
y COURT HOUSE 112
;t
SHAKOPEE, MN. 55379-1381 (612445-7750, Ext.115
I�".0 T0: 1985 Shakopee Board of review
Deputy:
LEROY ARNOLDI
FROM: Robert 11% Schmitt
SUBJECT: property owners on Dean's LakF
DATE: June 4, 1985
Attached is a petitionsigned by individuals who own property adjacent to
Dean's Lake. These individuals are concerned about the lake level of the
lake, which has risen anually since the opening of the Prior Lake outlet.
Their legally owned property and the amount of property which can actually
be used, are not the same due to the lake water which continues to flood
this area. A method of valuation for this type of situation will be discussed.
An Equal Opportunity Employer
�-Zj
�L
FO;., LOWEREC T4,;'17,� /
We t�e u�d�rsi�n�d of Deay � Lake Are� zn �h�kDpep, herrnb- ;;pp|y fro� t�e r�du[tiDn
rgT�l gctete dup to tnp loss nf Vc�;;blr, laod [Aued
Deans Lake rea[hin� Bnd maini01,)5 ie repuPst
re�s���sed
r�th� a
for u�abl� l�Dd r than �ct� l
N�m� Address Ph�n� n�. l�nd
-70
----------------_-_-----------------------_-----_---_----------------------------_-
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------_-_---_------------------_------__--------__-_--------_--__---------
-_-------_-----------_----------------------_---_------------_---------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
esc a =fig
4% _
M EMO
T
985 Shal�Ot]cc Rnarc� of �Aj'-t�•., .
FROM: Scott County Assessor's office Laobe-r-4- Schmitt
;SUBIECi: Duane A. Johnson's Property
DAT • June I, QstS
Location: 324 E. Shakopee Ave. Parcel No. 27 002 053 0
lir. Johnson owns a home located on Lot 20 and the east 401 of Lot l9, Block '8
G & 0 Addition to Shakopee. The lot is 90' x 150' . The home is a 12 story
rouse built in 1875• The house is 1068 square feet on the ground floor and
612 square feet on the 2nd story. The garage is detached and is 16' Y 261 ,
built in 1960. The home also has an extra kitchen and full bath which are
for an unrented portion of the house which used to be used as an apartment.
The home has a partial basement of about 60� and two porches.
The 1985 assessment places the value of the property as- follows:
Land $18200
Bldgs. _ $45700
Total $63900 "
The previous value was $50800 total
the property. The increase is mainly:
due to a change in the rates used for residential structures in Shakopee. This
home was rechecked by myself on Sept. 6T 198'-+•
PARCEL NO.
DWELLING Year built
X sq.ft.
story height
no.rooms ,
no.baths
no.bedrooms #
basement percent
basement fin,
fireplace
walkout
beck --�---
central air
brick trim
porch
GARAGE X
--dole,
r:.'s: Avenue, Shakopee, Mi:a=ota9
fie• t
M EMO
-�: 1985 Shakopee Board cf Revie v:
..Rom Robert Sc'rmitt, Scott County Assessor'•s Office
j$jEC—L. Stevan Hentoes Property
;A June 4, 1985
Location: 2461 Hauer Trail
PID: 27 908 042 0
Mr. Hentges owns a home located south of Eagle Creek Blvd. adjacent to Hauer's
Addition. The home was built in 1961 and has a square footage of 1775. The
attached garage is 21 x 22 with an addition added to the garage in 1980 of 12 x 30.
The house is a rambler with 4, 12 baths, 2 fireplaces, central air, brick trim,
a 16 x 16 deck, and a 7 x 23 slab along side the addition to the garage. The
home is graded as a 62 or slightly above average. The lot is .70 acres.
The 1985 valuation is: Land $16100
-Bldgs. $77900
Total $94000
The main reason for the increase on this property was the discovery of an. error in
the measurements of the house. This correction resulted in an increase in the num—
ber of square feet for this home of 209. Also, a central air conditioner was valued
this year for the first time. A deck was also omitted from the previous assessments
until this year. These facts along with the increase in square footage rates, were
the main cause for the increase in value for this property. The previous value had
been $79700 for this property.
PARCEL NO.
®WELLING Year built :iy 3L
%tory Witht -
Ro: roof"§ - t
no, bath§ {
Rd: b@droomi - -
bac@m@At R@re@nt --
bai vont fin: -_ -
lir@plat@
walkout
dock
t:@Riral airporch
-
brick trim
.t ow
Lot 1149 —X --
GARAGE X - s.
attach@d Y@i / no
OBSERVED CON®ITIQNi
ece
DON D. MARTIN
SCOTT COUNTY ASSESSOR
COURT HOUSE 112
SHAKOPEE, MN. 55379-1381 (612)-445-7750, Ext. 115
""EIMO TO: 987 jt rCpe� 30 a.w of
Deputy:
LEROY ARNOLDI
FROM: Pobei Sc""itt
STjWECT: Harlan Hohensteir, Property.-
DATE: Jure 4., 1985
Location: 2587 i,?arschall Road
PID Number: 27 919 012 0 & 27 919 012 1
(New Home) (Old Home)
Mr. Hohenstein has property which is farmed and used as a residence. The land
consists of 20.00 acres.
The buildings consist of two homes, one built in 1977 and the other built about
1900. There are also numerous outbuildings located on the farm which are used
by the agricultural operation.
The main increase in the property's value for the 1985 assessment is due to the
value used on the older home. This home has been remodeled in recent years and
is lived in by fir. Hohenstein's son and daughter—in —law.
The home contains of 966 sq. ft. and is 1 and 1 3/4 story. It has a full basement,
3 bedrooms, kitchen, bath, living room. The interior is plastered, carpeted, and
has a new furnace. The exterior has a new roof and the siding has been repaired and
painted. 1984 Value for older home: Land $8000 1985 Value for older home:
Bldgs. $15000 Land $8000
Total $23000 Bldgs. $42400
Total $50400
PARCEL NO.
DWELLING year built rl:)Y
X sq. ft.
story height _ I
no. rooms 1�
no. baths _
no. bedrooms y
basement percent
basement fin.
fireplace
walkout
deck
central air
brick trim
porch
Lot Size X
GARAGE X
attached yes no cL'e�se.y } !AIFw +``r'
OBSERVED CONDITION:
exc.
DON D. MARTIN
SCOTT COUNTY ASSESSOR
COURT HOUSE 112
SHAKOPEE, MN. 55379-1381 (612)-445-7750, Ext. 115
P MO TO: 1985 Shakopee Boar of ne-, e
Deputy:
LEROY ARNOLDI FROM: Robert N. Schmitt
SUBJECT: Wayne Mertens Property
DATE: June LV, 1985
Location: 1065 Merrifield
FID Number: 27 052 021 0
Lot 11 Block 3 JEJ Addn.
Mr. Mertens property is a 1 story home which was built in 1977• It has 1288 sq. ft.
with an attached garage of 22' x 261 . The home has approximately 900 square feet
of finished area in the basement. There are three bathrooms, 3/49 1 3/47 1 fire—
place, central air conditioning, some brick trim, and a 10' x 12' deck.
The lot is 85' x 145' -
1984
45' e1984 Value 1985 Value
Land $17100 Land $17100
Bldgs. $57800 Bldgs. $67200
Total $74900 Total $84300
The main reason for the valuation increase was the assessment of the finished base—
ment and one of the 3/4 baths, along with the smaller increase due to a change in
rates.
--- PARCEL NO.
DWELLING year built
X sq.it,
story height
no.rooms
no.baths
no.bedrooms -
basement percent
basement fin.
fireplace
r.'
walkout �^S'
deck - .. - •:.>'+
central air
brick trim -
f. v4ia.a.'l-"ted 'cK
porch
GARAGE - X
attached yes no - -
01100-2455
DON D. MARTIN
SCOTT COUNTY ASSESSOR
1k COURT HOUSE 112
SHAKOPEE, MN. 55379-1381 (612)-445-7750, Ext.115
__. P rMO T0: 7 oszF Sr_alsIIne�- 'RC)2r^ f 'R6�vie:
Deputy:
LEROY ARNOLDI
FROM:
SUBJECT: C.1 are nt;rk v ProAerty
DATE: May 29 1985
Location: 335 S. Holmes
PID Number: 27 001 350 0
Mrs. Nickolay's home was built in 1895. It is a 2 story brick home of 786 sq. ft.
The home has a full basement which is not finished. Extras include 1 3/4 baths
and 2 fireplaces. The garage is detached cnd was built in 1965. The size of the
garage is 24' x 241 .
The lot is 60 x 120.
The 1984 valuation on this property was: Land $10800
Bldgs. $31300
Total $42100
The 1985 valuation for this property is: Land $10800
Bldgs. $47500
Total $58300
The reason for the increase in this property's valuation was due to an excessive
amount of depreciation being used during prior assessments. The property, in
my opinion would def initly sell for mare than the $58300 which we currently have
for the value. I feel that this was one of the more excessive errors in valuation
which I have found in Shakopee.
F (r, " _ PARCEL NO.
DWELLING year built h(:7 K.
X sq. It
story height
no. rooms
no. baths
no. bedrooms
basement percent
basement fin. -
fireplace
walkout
deck
central air
brick trim
porch f
Lot Size X
GARAGE X
attached yes no r/
OBSERVED CONDITION:
exc.
good
fair
poor
DON D. MARTIN
SCOTT COUNTY ASSESSOR
COURT HOUSE 112
r— .�.�'�-
SHAKOPEE, MN. 55379-1381 (612.445-7750, Ext. 115
i SMO T0: 1985 Shakopee Board of Review
Deputy:
LEROY ARNOLDI FROM: Robert N. Schmitt
SUBJECT: Paul Plekkenpol Property
DATE: June 4 1985
Location: 3509 Marschall Road
PTD Number: 27 932 005 0
Mr. Plekkenpol's property consists of 3.75 acres of land and a home which was
constructed in 1970.
The house is a 1 story rambler with stucco exterior. The house has 1222 sq. ft t
1 3/4 baths, 600 sq. ft. of the basement is finished, 2 fireplaces, central air—
condit ioningt a 12' x 14' deck. The property also has 3 utility buildings which
are valued at$3000 total. There are also two garages with this parcel? 1 attached
of 25' x 26' and 1 detached of 24' x 30' which is in fair condition.
The 1984 value for this property was: Land $25300
Bldgs. $58200
Total $83500
The 1985 value for this property is: Land $25300
Bldgs. $66000
Total $91300
The main reason for the increase in value was omission of detached garage, finished
basement added, deck added, and an increase in rates used for existing improvements.
_ y y PARCEL NO. - ~
DWELLING year built ,4
X sq. ft.
story height \ r - - T
no. rooms
no. baths
J
no. bedrooms _
basement percent
basement fin.
fireplace
walkout
deck ,
central air
brick trim
porch
Lot Size -X
-
GARAGE X
attached yes no -
OBSERVED CONDITION:
exc.
good
fair
poor
DON D. MARTIN
SCOTT COUNTY ASSESSOR
COURT HOUSE 112
SHAKOPEE, MN. 55379-1381 (612)-445-7750, Ext.115
TOMO TO: 1985 Shakopee Board of Revie:•:
Deputy:
LEROY ARNOLDI
FROM: Robert N. Schmitt
Property owned oy
SUBJECT: Colling, Engfer, Vohnoutka
DATE: June 4 1985
Locations: 952 Sibley(Colling), 960 Sibley(Engfer), 1431 E. 10th(Vohnoutka
PID Numbers: 27 027 001 0 27 027 002 0 27 027 003 0
The above named property owners have homes at the addresses listed above.
The plat where their homes are located is Scenic Heights 1st Addtion Lots 1 — 3
Block 1.
Their concern is directed at the impact that the 4—Plexes which were recently
constructed by Clete Link, will have on the value of their respective property.
The 4-Plexes basically block the afternoon sun from the rear exposure of Mr.
Colling and Mr. Engfer's homes and the garage from one of the 4—Plexes is very
near to the side of Mr. Vohnoutka's garage.
My personal opinion is that the proximity of these multi—family units may have
an affect on the resale price of the homes mentioned, but what that affect will
be is impossible to estimate at this time.
The owners would appreciate some discussion on this problem by the City Board
and will be present for the discussion.
ar.
4~iSi..ti
An Equal Opportunity Employer
DON D. MARTIN
SCOTT COUNTY ASSESSOR
COURT HOUSE 112
y SHAKOPEE, MN. 55379-1381 (612)-445.7750, Ext. 115
:0 TO: 1985 Sh aroQee 3oard e ? lP
Deputy:
LEROY ARNOLDI FROM: Robert :' Schmitt
SUBJECT: Mark Pidde Property
DATE: June L., 1985
Location: 751 S. Shumway
PID Number: 27 007 008 0
Lot 4 Block 2
Doyles & Pieper's Addition
Mr. Pidde's home was built in 1953 with an addition added in 1981. The original
home had 720 sq. ft. and the addition added 480 sq. ft. for a total area of 1200
sq. ft. The house is a 1 story home with a full basement.
A garage was built in 1972 which is detached and measures 22' x 241 .
The home was completely remodeled in 1981 with new sitting, new roof, new windows,
and the addition being added to the home.
The lot is 62 x 162.
The 1984 value was: Land $13300
Bldgs. $44500 This value was for a partially completed
Total $57800 addition (90%o) as well as the original 'rouse.
The 1985 value is: Land $13300
Bldgs. $51700
Tot al $65000
PARCEL NO.
DWELLING Year built
X sq. ft.
story height
no. rooms
no. baths
no. bedrooms
basement percent f
basement fin.
fireplace
walkout
deck
central air
brick trim -
porch
Lot Sfze x --
GARAGE x
attached Yes no
OBSER'ED CONDITION:
C. / 0
DON D. MARTIN
4- SCOTT COUNTY ASSESSOR
COURT HOUSE 112
SHAKOPEE, MN. 55379-1381 (612)-445-7750, Ext.115
rEMO TO:-1985 Shakopee Board of Revi.ei%,
Deputy:
LEROY ARNOLDI FROM: Robert, N. Schmitt
SUBJECT: Clifton, Ltd.
DATE: May 31, 1955
Location: 400 Block of Dakota Street
PID Number: 27 080 001 0
This parcel is a 66 unit Low-Income housing development located in the City of
Shakopee.
This property was involved in a tax court decision in 1984 which set the values
to be used for this property's estimated market value for the assessment years
of 1982 thru 1985. The amounts were agreed upon and the stipulation accepted
by Cliftonq Ltd. and signed by Mr. Benjamin Smith, Attorney for the claimant.
A copy of the stipulation is attached to this memo and the value used for the
1985 Assessment is listed on this stipulation.
The 1985 Assessment for this property places the estimated market value at
$17234,800. This is the value noted in the agreement and as such I would
recomment no cahnge be made.
An Equal Opportunity Employer
LAPP. LAZAR, LAURIE Sc SMITH
CHARTERED
BENJAMIN J.SMITH ATTORNEYS AT LAW 1800 FIRST B
ANR PLACE WEST
OERALD T. LAUR7E
120 SOL'Tti SIXTH STREET
RAYMOND M.LAZAR
M'ILLIAM s.LAPP MINTNTEAPOLIS. MINNESOTA 35402
DAVLIJ A.LIH RA TELEPHONE(912)338-5815
TAANA AH RAM 90N
CHRISTINE N.HOWARD
JOHN M. OENDLBR '
DGUOLAS J. SHIBLL April 30, 1985
JOHN R.STOE HNBR
R1G8ARD 7.TBOM SON
ORB OORY D.PUSOH
Local Board of Review
City of Shakopee
129 1 Ave. E.
Shakopee , MN 55379
Re : Clifton , Ltd .
551 Dakota Street
PID No. 27-08001-0
Dear Chairr)erson:
Our firm represents the above-referenced claimant with regard
to the January 2, 1985 assessment of the above-referenced
property.
Pursuant to Minn . Stat . 9§271. 01 subd. 5 and 278 . 01 subd. 1,
we are mailing this letter to you on behalf of the claimant as an
appearance by written communication before this Board to appeal
the assessment of the property. We do not intend to make a per-
sonal appearance.
Please direct all further communications regarding this
matter to me. Thank you .
Sincer y
enj n J. ith
BJS :ea
83-384
R. KATHLEEN MORRIS
SCOTT COUNTY ATTORNEY
COURT HOUSE 206
SHAKOPEE, MN. 55379-1380 (612)-445-7750. Ext.240
Assistants:
MIRIAM JEANNE WOLF
PAMELA ANN MCCABE
RICHARD S.VIRNIG
R.GEHLTUCKER
PATRICIA M. BUSS
NANCY C. PLATTO
PEGGY A. FLAIG August 23, 1984
JUDITH EMMINGS
DOUGLAS L.JOHNSON
Mr. Benjamin J. Smith
Attorney at Law
1800 First Bank Place West
120 South Sixth Street
Minneapolis, Minnesota 55402
RE: Clifton, Ltd.
VS.
State of Minnesota
and County of Scott
Dear Mr. Smith,
Enclosed is the settlement stipulation relative to the above-entitled
matter. Respndent's offer to reduce the valuation of the subject property
is made pursuant to the provisions of Minnesota Section 278.05, Subd. 5.
The offer is made in writing in the form of an offer, Acceptence and
Stipulation for Judgment pursuant to our agreement.
Please review the stipulation and contact me if you have any questions.
I will have judgment entered by the Court upon return of the executed
document to my office. Thank you.
Sincrerely,
R. KATHLEEN MORRIS
SCOTT COUNTY ATTORNEY
R. Kathleen Morris
Pamela A. McCabe
Assistant Scott County Attorney
PAM:dlk
Enclosure
CC: Bob Schmidt
An Eoual Or>nnrtunity Emr)Mvpr
STATE OF MINNESOTA a'� C S O ap 1G TAX COURT
COUNTY OF SCOTT FIRST JUDICIAL DIS7MICT
-------------------------------------------------------
RE: PETITION FOR DETERMINATION OF
OBJECTIONS TO REAL ESTATE TAXES
PAYABLE IN THE YEAR 1983 and 1984
OR COuR�T
----------------------------------- LER CpUNTY, MINN.
SCOTT
CO C1' �D
Clifton, Ltd. , OCT 11984
Petitioner,
VS. JUDGMENT
Court File Nos. b3 04111"
State of Minnesota
and 84-05142
and County of Scott,
Respondents.
----------------------------------------------------
Pursuant to the Stipulation of the parties for the entry of Judgment in the
above-entitled cause and in compliance with the applicable provisions of Mi=. Stat.
278.05 and 278.07, it is hereby ordered and adjudged that:
1. The parcel(s) of real estate in Scott County, Minnesota, here involved are
as shown on Offer, Acceptance and Stipulation of Judgment, attached hereto and
lincorporated by reference.
2. The market value, the assessed value, and the general property taxes payable
_n 1983 and 1984, and the amount of said taxes to be paid with respect to said parcels
_re hereby adjusted respectively as shown on Offer, Acceptance, and Stipula--on for
udgment hereto attached.
Dated this_�?-& day of 1 C,o"Y 1984 at Shakopee, Minnesota
c
ppr FOR THE COURT:
i
i
u6ge of District Court Gregiery M. Ess
Clerk of District Court
6091084E(.. 5 )
STATE OF MINNESOTA DISTRICT COURT
COUNTY OF SCOTT TAX COURT
FIRST JUDICIAL DISTRICT
------------------------------------
Clifton, Ltd. , )
Petitioner , ) OFFER, ACCEPTANCE,
AND STIPULATION
VS . ) FOR JUDGMENT
State of Minnesota ) Court File Nos .
and County of Scott, ) 83-04964 and
84-05142
Respondent. )
------------------------------------
WHEREAS , R. Kathleen Morris , Scott County Attorney, as attorney
for the State in the above-entitled matter , upon the recommendation
of the Scott County Assessor ' s Office, and pursuant to discussions
with Petitioner ' s attorney, hereby offers to reduce, as stated
below, the estimated market valuation for the years 1982 and 1983 ,
with taxes payable in 1983 and 1984 , of the land and improvements
in the City of Shakopee, County of' Scott, and State of Minnesota
described as set forth in the Petition herein from an estimated
market value of $1, 955 , 000 to an estimated market value of
$1, 080 , 000 for taxes payable in 1983 and 1984; and
WHEREAS , it is further agreed that the estima-ce2i -ma-eKxeL --d ��
for the year 1984 , with taxes payable in 1985 will remain at
$1 , 080 , 000 and that the estimated market value _for_the_year ,1985
-1-
will be_ $1 , 234_, 800;__and
WHEREAS the undersigned petitioner hereby accept the offer
of said R. Kathleen Morris as Scott County Attorney asnd attorney
for the State all as provided in Minnesota Statutes 8278 . 05 .
NOW THEREFORE, it is stipulated and agreed as follows :
1. That the estimated market value of the real property
described in the petition herein as Minnesota Tax Parcel No.
27-080-001-0 , and described as 551 Dakota Street, City of
Shakopee, Scott County, Minnesota, shall be $1, 080 , 000 , for the
taxes assessed for the years 1982, 1983 , and 1984 , and payable in
1983 , 1984 , and 1985 .
2. Based upon the foregoing, that the real property taxes on
the subject property, payable in the calendar years 1983 and 1984 ,
shall be recomputed by the Scott County Auditor and any resulting
refund for taxes paid in 1983 and 1984 , together with interest as
provided by law, computed from the original dates of payment to
the date of refund, will be forwarded to the Petitioner as provided
by law.
3 . That judgment may be entered in this proceeding upon this
Stipulation by the Clerk of the above-named Court, without further
hearing, without further notice to either party, without any Order
of the Court, and without costs to either party.
4 . That this Stipulation is a full, final and complete
settlement with respect to all matters of real property tax
assessments affecting the lands and improvement thereon described
-2-
I
as set forth in the petition herein for the assessment years of
1982 , 1983 , 1984 and 1985 .
COUNT OF SCOTT
Dated: LD /
J-�Eal--,ho en Morris
cot ' unty Attorney
Cott County Courthouse
428 South Holmes Street
Shakopee, MN 55379
(612 ) 445-7750 , Ext. 240
CLIFTON, LTD.
Dated: AAf
B jam J. ith
Attorney a Law
1800 First Bank Place West
120 South 6th Street
Minneapolis , MN 55402
(612 ) 338-5815
-3-
LAPP, LAZAR, LAURIE Sc SMITH
CHARTERED
BENJAMIN J.SMITH ATTOItNE''S AT LAW 1800 FIRST BANK PLACE WEST
120 SOUTH SIXTH STREET
OERALD T.LAURIE
RAYMOND M.LAZAR MINNEAPOLIS,MINNESOTA 55402
WILLIAM S.LADY -
TELEPHONE(612)338-5815
DAVID A.LIBRA -
FRANX ABRAMSON
GH RISTINE N.EOWARD
JOHN M.OENDLER April 30, 1985
DOU CLAS J.SWELL
JOHN R.STOEBNER -
RICHARD T.THOMSON
ORE CORY D.PVSGH
Local Board of Review
City of Shakopee
129 1 Ave. E.
Shakopee , MN 55379
Re: Clifton , Ltd .
551 Dakota Street
PID No. 27-08001-0
Dear Chairperson:
Our firm represents the above-referenced claimant with regard
to the January 2, 1985 assessment of the above-referenced
property.
Pursuant to Minn . Stat. 9§271. 01 subd. 5 and 278 .01 subd. 1,
we are mailing this letter to you on behalf of the claimant as an
appearance by written communication before this Board to appeal
the assessment of the property. We do not intend to make a per-
sonal appearance.
Please direct all further communications regarding this
matter to me. Thank you .
Anj
y
n J. ith
BJS :ea
83-384
DON D. MARTIN
SCOTT COUNTY ASSESSOR
COURT HOUSE 112
SHAKOPEE, MN. 55379-1381 (612}-445-7750, Ext. 115
is MO TO: 1985 Sha<opee Bcard of Re,,,—ie.
Deputy:
LEROY ARNOLDI
FROM: Robert �. Schmitt
SUBJECT: Gg , Smith's Property
DATE: June 4, 1985
Location: 1926 Co. Rd. 14
PID Number: 27 050 001 0
Lot 1 Block 1
Eaglewood Addition
Mr. Smith's property was part of the 1985 25% reassessment and the value for
this parcel increased from $102,800 in 1984 to $116,300 for 1985.
The home is a split—Level of 1365 sq. ft. The garage is attached and is 24' x 241 .
The basement is 70% finished. There are 12 and 3/4 baths, 2 fireplaces, a walkout,
central air, a deck of 562 sq. ft., a screened porch of I" sq. ft..
The lot is 7.30 acres in size.
The 1984 value on this property was Land $31900
Bldgs.$709900
Total $102,800
The 1985 value for this property is: Land $31900
Bldgs.$84400
Total $116,300
In addition to the increase due to rate changes for this property, also added for
the 1985 assessment were the finished basement, extra baths, and an additional fire—
place.
DWELLING year built 1, ", - PARCEL NO. �' c_ -� -
X sq.lt. _
story height
i -f
no.rooms j
no.baths - Y
r
no.bedrooms �
basement percent '
basement fin.
fireplace
walkout
deck
central air
brick trim
DON D. MARTIN
SCOTT COUNTY ASSESSOR
COURT HOUSE 112
4
SHAKOPEE, MN. 55379-1381 (612)-445-7750, Ext. 115
,1EM0 i0: 1985 Shaxotiee Boar of Review.
Deputy:
LEROY ARNOLDI
FROM: Robert Iy• Schmitt
SUBJECT: Fred Kuhlmann Property
DATE: June 41 1985
Location: 1359 Co. Rd. 72
PID Number: 27 931 003 1
Mr. Kuhlmann's property consists of a lot which has 2.50 acres of land and a
home which was built in 1977. The home is a 1 story house of 1268 sq. ft.,
1 3/4 baths, a deck of 8 x 12, an attached garage that is 22' x 221 , two de-
tached garages which measure 14 x 22 and 22 x 22. The 14 x 22 garage is in
fair condition with stucco exterior. The 22 x 22 garage was moved in and is
roughly 50 years old.
The main increase on this property for the 1985 assessment was the inclusion of
the two detached garages as part of the real estate value. They had not been
assessed prior to this year. The value on the 14 x 22 garage is $1955 and the
value on the 22 x 22 garage is $2541.
The 1984 value for this property was: Land $23000
Bldgs.$55400
Total $78400
The 1985 value for this property is: Land $23000
Bldgs.$59300
Total $82300
An old f6-1t ry house .which had been assessed in prior years was removed from the
assessment rolls for the 1985 assessment. It had a value of $800.
^ PARCEL NO.
DWELLING Year built V
x sqit.
story height
no. rooms -
no. baths _
no. bedrooms
basement percent
basement fin.
fireplace
walkout
deck
central air 1
brick trim t
porch
Lot Size X
GARAGE x
attached Yes no
Marceline Hickman
210 East Shako-nee Ave .
Shako-ee , MN 55374
June 2 , 1985
Shako:;ee Board of Review
129 East First Ave .
Shakopee MN 55379
RE : NOTICE OF ASSESSMENT on parcel 27-002036-0
The above described property is vacant land which happens
to lie adjacent to my residential homestead . It consists of
2 so-called "lots" situated at right angles to each other.
One is 40 feet wide and the other 55 feet wide - neither
of which qualify as a building lot within the existing code
of the City.
Said property is already under a,-peal with the Tax Court
on last year ' s assessment , and I was in fact quite shocked
to receive still another increase this year as I have a
letter from the Assessor indicating that he was agreeable
to a reduction in last year' s assessment!
Sincerely ,
Marceline Hickman
Tel . 4.4.5 3824
June 4, 1985
Shakopee Board of Equalization
Shakopee City Hall
129 lst Avenue East
Shakopee, MN 55379
Re: Valuation of Shakopee Professional Group,
Lot 5 and Lot 4, except the north 10 feet of Block 1,
Furrie's Addition, Tax Parcel Number 27-068-004-0
1985 Assessor's Market Value $778,500.00
Dear Ladies and Gentlemen:
Please accept this letter as our protest with and disagreement of the
valuation placed on our property by the Scott County Assessors office on
behalf of the City of Shakopee. In view of the lack of completion of our
building we believe that such valuation is totally unjustified. Thank you.
Yours very truly,
Zlta n Furrie, Partner,
Shakopee Professional Group
327 South Marschall Road
Shakopee, MN 55379
:eg
3G lS'
June 4, 1985
Shakopee Board of Equalization
Shakopee City Hall
129 lst Avenue East
Shakopee, MN 55379
Re: Valuation of Valley Health Properties,
Lot 3 and the North 10 feet of Lot 4, Block 1,
Furrie's Addition, Tax Parcel Number 27-068003-0
1985 Assessor's Market Value $435,900.00
Dear Ladies and Gentlemen:
Please accept this letter as our protest with and disagreement of the
valuation placed on our property by the Scott County Assessors office on
behalf of the City of Shakopee. In view of the lack of completion of our
building we believe that such valuation is totally unjustified. Thank you.
Yours very truly,
ZlKan Furrie, Partner,
Valley Health Properties
327 South Marschall Road
Shakopee, MN 55379
:eg
Lj X O jam• rm� l--b� i./ A. ` t
129 El= First Avenue; Shakopee. Minnesota 55379 .
a•
`rc-:�� ►
MEMO
198c Shakopee B
T0oas; ,` pe�riePT
: .
FROM: Scott County Assessor's Office
SUBJECT. Elaine Morris Property
DATE: June 4. 1 8
Location: 2017 Nortonrive.
PTD Number: 27 051
005 D
ed in the plat of Deerview Acres. She has a
Ms. Morris's property is locat
lot with an area of 2.20 acres and a home built in 1977.
'
The house is a split-entry home with 1419 sq. ft. The attached garage is 22 x 28•
approximately 1108 sq. ft. with an excellent -
There is a finished basement with app a walk-
finish. The baths consist of a 3/49 full, and 3/4• There is 1 fireplace,
out, central-air, some exteriro brick trims and a 10•x 12 deck. The house is class-
ified as above average.
The 1984 value for this property was: Land $19600
Bldgs-$70800
Total $90400
The 19$5 value for this property is: Land $19600
Bldgs.$80700
Total $100300
The main increase was for the change in rates, plus the correct valuation for the
finished basement.
-- PARCEL N0.
DWELLING year built
X sq.ft.
story height -
no.rooms
no.baths p
Y
no.bedrooms .►t'
basement percent 7
basement fin.
fireplace
walkout
deck „
central air
brick trim
porch
GARAGE } X '
ter'
•(
First AvatuG Shakopee. Lfinnesota S„5379 -
�•
1985 ShakoiDee Board of Review
• Scott Count Assessor's Office
FROM:
NBWE Ca�h NcNearneFuneral Home
DATE: rune
Location: 333 S. Lewis
PID Number: 27 001 360 0 & 27 .001 360 1
ee. The
This property is the location of one of two funeral homes in Shakopee.The 1st
structure is a 2 story home l built in 1910 with an addition in 1949•
The .
floor is used as the funeral home and the 2nd floor for an apartment
.
property has 2461 sq. ft. on the main floor with 1325 sq. ft. on the apart—
ment level.
- dated this year concerning the rates used for the value
The property was up
and the increase in market value was the result-
The 1984 value was: Land $11600
- Bldgs. $64600
Total $76200
The 1985 value is: Land $11600 `
Bldgs. $82800
Total $94400
PARCEL NO.
DWELLING year built a I 'Kd
X sq. ft.
story height
no. rooms
no. baths
no. bedrooms
basement percent
basement fin.
fireplace
walkout
deck
central air
brick trim -- - - i
porch --------
r
Lot Size X
GARAGE X
attached yes no --
OBSERVED CONDITION:
exc. t
good 3/
fair
poor
DATE yOLU
1 Y V x X-X " v -A. 4-6 =A
,`�sl tttrC�.
``i an~'• 129 Fist First AveauG ee
Shakop .
Minnesota 53379
•:" MEMO
19 ^ Boar of Review
TO ,
FROM: Scott County Assessor's Office
BJE .T. Steven Nluhlenhardt Property
SUI
DATA
Jun L3 1985
Location: 7556 Eagle Creek Blvd.
PID Number: 27 91-+ 012 1
Mr. Muhlenhardt has a homeer
me ieSrambs 22 Xe
located on 3.00 acres of land. The ho
•
. built in 1975 which has 1248 sq. ft. The garage is attached and meas
h 600 sq.
ft. finished at a medium grade,
Extras include a finished loasement wit
a walkout, a 10 x 16 deck and a 6 x 26 open porch.
Also included on this property
is a pole shed of 40, x 80 which was being built in 1983 but not finished until this
past year. The home is graded as average.
The 1984 value for this property was: Land $23900
Bldgs.$62400 —
Total $86300
The 1985Land $23800
value for this property is Bldg. $67900
Total $91700
the
ole
The main reason for the increase in value was 4 assessmentoand f100% completed
T o complete for the 19$4
which was assessed as 4� p
for the 1985 assessment. The value for had thenother
or timphe ro84mansessment• property .
this year remained the same as they
r•A` � �. 1. �. � �• >� I.1 �`� .7:� �./' i. Li �:rt
��` '�. ,en''• 129 East First Avenue~ Shakopee. Minnesota 55379
= F
MEMO
TO: 198 Shako e Board of Review
FROM: Scott County Assessor's Office
SUBIFCT. Elmer H jyprsen Property
DATE: June 4 1985
Location: 8455 Eagle Creek Blvd.
PID Number: 27 913 062 0
Mr. Halversen's property is located on Eagle Creek Blvd. in section 13
of the City of Shakopee. The home is a 1- story house which was built
in 1903. The house is 1015 sq. ft. and is in fair condition. The garage
is detached and has 630 sq. ft. There is central air and an enclosed porch
and deck on the house. Outbuildings include a barn with a swimming pool on
the enterior, storage sheds, a chiken coop, and a horse shed.
The' home is classified as average and most of the outbuildings are in poor
condition.
The 1984 valuation was: Land
$Bldgs. �9�
Total $70400 _
The 1985 valuation is: Land $24500
Bldgs.$50200
Total $74700
The main reason for the increase was a change in the value of the home from
$31000 to $35500 due to the rate changes and observed depreciation of the
structure.
r 1: PARCEL NO. ,. 1•�- J -�
�n.nx
DWELLING year built
X sq. ft. -
{ /?
story height t'
no. rooms �
no. baths
no. bedrooms
basement percent -
basement fin.
fireplace -�
walkout
deck
central air
brick trim
porch
Lot Size t
GARAGE
1 X
attached yes no
OBSERVED CONDITION:
exc.
129 Fist First Avenue, Shakopee. 1linnesota 55379
7
MEMO
TO: 1985 Shakopee Board of Review
FROM: Scott County Assessor's Office
SUBJECT: Stephen Strehlow Property
DATA June 4, 1985
Location: 3059 Hauer Trail
PID Number: 27 908 055 0
Mr. Strehlow home is a 1 story home of 2238 sq. ft. built in 1966. The house
has 2 kitchens, 12 baths, a walkout, central—air, some brick trim, an open porch
• area, a 14 x 14 patio, and a 18 x 36 in—ground pool. The home is classified as
above average (62) . The garage is attached and measures 26 x 22.
The increase in valuation for 1985 was due to the rate increase and the regrading
of this property from an average grade home to an above average grade home.
The lot is .60 acres. Land $16100
The 1984 value was:
Bldgs. $104400
Total $120500
The 1985 value_is: Land $16100
Bldgs. $109900
Total $126000
PARCEL NO. -'7�^ '
DWELLING year built >f(.I K
X sq. ft.
story height
no. rooms
no. baths
no. bedrooms
basement percent
basement fin.
fireplace
walkout
deck
central air
brick trim
M
porch x s
Lot Size X •n-=.-s �e
GARAGE - X `r,°�'o#•+waw,
attached yes no
OBSERVED CONDITION:
exc.
good
fair
poor
GRADE - -_-----
el i",•r,,
Firs
129 East F=t Avenue; Shakopee. Minnesota 55379
,�r::rll• ►i,�
MEMO
TO: 1985 Shakopee Board of R view
FROM: Scott County Assessor's Office
S,UBIF=. Daniel Barber Property
DAPS June L. �985
Location: 536 E. 8th Ave. -
PID Number: 27 906 102 0
Barber's property is a 1 3/4 story
house which was built in 1952. The
.home has a ground floor area of 1033 sq.
ft. The basement is 50% f inished
ft. ) The home
which is valued. as an inexspensive grade of finih ($3.00/sq.
has 1 3/4 baths7 brick trim, a 9 x 7 deck, and a patio along side the garage.
The garage was built ,in 1965 and is 14 x 22•
The 1984 value was: Land $14400 .
Bldgs.$46600
Total $61000
The 1985 value _is: Land $14400
Bldg. $56600
Total $71000
The increase is due to a change in the story height from 12 to 1 3/4 storys.
A full length dormer which was added to thehome valued or thein the early first'time asdwasvthe
been assessed. The finished basement bath in previous years.
3/4 hath which had been valued as a 2
PARCEL NO. —�------—
DWELLING year built
X sq. ft._—
story height
no. rooms
t
no. baths
no. bedrooms
basement percent
basement fin.
fireplace
walkout
deck
central air
i
brick trim �
porch ------
Lot Size X
GARAGE X
attached yes no
OBSERVED CONDITION:
exc.
good
fair
E
poor
T )c Ur
•�` fen 129 EastFirst Avenue; Shakopee. M1=escta 55379
TO:
1985 Shakope Board ^f RPtriPW
FROM:: Scott Count Assessor's Office
SZJB.T Warner True Value Hardware
DATA Tung
Location: E. Hwy. 101
PID Number: 27 906 052 0
This property is a' commercial property used for lumber storage and office
dings
facilities by Warner True Value. The property consists of six builincluding an office building, lumber storage, trackage, a loading dock,
etc.
The valuation which is now used, has been the value useValuence he l9$2
assessment and was agreed upon at that time by Warner True
The 1984 value was: Land $2089000
Bldgs.$761,000 — -
Total $969,000
The 1985 value is: Land $2089000Bldgs.$7619000
Total $9699000
PARCEL NO.
DWELLING year built
-X-
no-
no-reomS
na. baths-
no.bedreems
basement percent
basement fin'. -
fireplace-
walkout
deck
centcaL,aif
briek Af"
Imp
Lot Size X
GlcRALE X
attached yes no
OBSERVED CONDITION: Y
exc
good
fair
poor n
JrrE FILL f"oR ADD. GRADE
l c ;ccv
JOHN MURRAY & ASSOCIATES, LTD. w
ATTORNEYS AT LAw JOIN 11
SUITE 620,CONWED TOWER
TOWN SQUARE e ^ y�,,..,T '.�-•
SAINT PAUL, MINNESOTA 551011 ;
TELEPHONE:AC-612-227-8820
May 30, 1985
Local Board of Review
City of Shakopee
City Hall
129 First Avenue East
Shakopee, Minnesota 55379
Re: 1570 East Highway 101
P .I.D. No. 27-90652-0
Dear Sir or Madam:
Our firm represents the taxpayer claimant with regard to the January
2, 1985 assessment of the above-referenced property in which the
taxpayer has an interest.
The above-referenced property is the subject of a petition that has
been filed and of record in district court and/or tax court respectively
on or before May 15, 1985. The same objections, protests, and/or
appeals regarding said property in said Petition for Review of Real Estate
Tax Assessment apply fully here and are hereby incorporated by reference
as regards the 1985 taxes payable in 1986.
Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes § 271.01, Subd. 5 and § 278.01, Subd.
1, this letter will serve as timely appearance before this Board of Review
on behalf of the claimant by written communication by counsel to object
to, protest, and/or appeal the assessment of the property. In this
appearance, the Board of Review is hereby advised that the claimant
asserts that this property is overvalued, and is unfairly, unequally and
arbitrarily assessed.
The Board of Review is further advised of the taxpayer's position that
(i) Minnesota Statutes § 271.01, Subd. 5 and § 278.01, Subd. 1 require
only an appearance before the county board of equalization (as
distinguished from the local board of review) ; (ii) this appearance is
made to protect claimant's right to petition the court for review of its
real estate taxes; (iii) this notification/appearance requirement is
unconstitutional, unenforceable and inapplicable.
JOHN MURRAY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
Local Board of Review
City of Shakopee
Page Two
May 30, 1985
Please direct all further communications concerning the taxpayer,
Warner True Value Hardware, Inc. , and/or regarding this matter to this
office as its counsel.
Yours very truly,
9A, 6� IVM� n
J hn A. Murray
ttorney for Taxpayer
JAM/rh
STATEMENT OF APPEARANCE BY WRITTEN COMMUNICATION
Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, sections 271.01 (subd. 5) and 278.01 (subd. 1) ,
the undersigned, Rahr Malting Company, hereby appears by written communication
before the Local Board of Review of Shakopee, Minnesota, and states that:
(1) The undersigned has an interest in certain real property
(the "Property") located in the City of Shakopee, County
of Scott, State of Minnesota, which is identified by
property identification number 27-001115-0.
(2) For purposes of real estate taxes payable during 1986, the
Property has been assessed unequally, discriminatorily and
in violation of law to the extent that the estimated
market value assigned to the Property does not reflect the
fact that germinating houses, kilning houses and related
equipment are exempt from taxation.
(3) Petitioner hereby appeals the assessment referred to above
and requests that the value on which the assessment is
based be reduced to reflect the fact that germinating
houses, kilning houses and related equipment are exempt
from taxation.
Date: May , 1985.
RAHR MALTING COMPANY
By: —
Its:
TENTIVE AGENDA
Housing Authority in and for the City of Shakopee,
Minnesota
Regular Session June 4, 1985
Chairperson Vierling presiding
1. Roll Call at 8:00 P.M.
2. Approval of minutes of April 16, 1985.
3. Agreement to amend descriptions of race track option property.
4. Resolution No. 85-22, A Resolution Amending the October 28, 1980,
Cooperative Agreement with the Scott County Housing and Redevelopment
Authority.
a. Report
b. Bill
5. Review of Rental Rehabilitation Grant Program.
6. Other Business
7. Ad"ourn
PROCEEDINGS OF THE HOUSING A\'D REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
ADJ. REG. SESSION SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA APRIL 16, 1985
Chrm. Vierling called the meeting to order at 7:05 p.m. with Comm. Wampach,
Lebens and Colligan present. Comm. Leroux arrived later. Also present were
John K. Anderson, City Admr. and Jeanne Andre, HRA Director.
Lebens/Wampach moved to approve the minutes of April 2, 1985 as kept. Motion
carried unanimously. -
The HRA Director gave an update of the Minnesota Housing Finance Agency rental
rehabilitation program, to be administered jointly with Scott County HRA.
Comm. Leroux arrived and took his seat at 7:06 p.m.
The HRA Director gave some background regarding the cooperative agreement
with Scott County HRA to provide certain functions in consideration of a set
fee paid by Shakopee HRA. Scott County HRA has recently increased their fees,
and therefore action is necessary by Shakopee HRA.
Comm. Leroux remarked that this was a 61% increase, which is more than 10% per
year, much higher than the inflation rate for the last five years. The HRA
Director suggested she could request a detailed analysis of the increase.
Colligan/Leroux moved to direct staff to contact the Scott County HRA to re-
quest a detailed analysis of the increase in fees for the cooperative agreement,
and also direct staff to figure out a more reasonable fee based on the infla-
tion rate for the last five years. Motion carried unanimously.
Discussion followed regarding the correct signatures for disbursements of
bond fund papers, considering the change in the position of Chair of HRA.
Leroux/Wampach moved to authorize disbursement of proceeds to pay costs of
issuance of Tax Increment Revenue Refunding Bonds in the amount of $4,200,000,
as follows:
O'Connor & Hannan $ 1,575.54
O'Connor & Hannan 24,415.33
Holmes & Graven 15,000.00
Springsted Incorporated 3,839.00
Springsted Incorporated 3,140.00
First Trust Saint Paul 3,861.25
K.F. Merrill Company 10,895.50
K.F. Merrill Company 1,999.00
Shakopee HRA 285.05
City of Shakopee 5,921.79
with the authorization to be corrected to reflect the present officers of HRA.
Roll Call: Ayes; Wampach, Vierling, Colligan, Leroux
Noes; Lebens
Motion carried.
Leroux/Wampach moved to authorize disbursement of proceeds to pav costs of
issuance of Tax Increment Revenue Refunding Bonds in the amount of S3,14O,0OO,
as follows:
Springsted Incorporated $ 1, 704.00
Norwest Bank - Mpls. 10 000.00
City of Shakopee 2,407.22
City of Shakopee HRA 592. 73
with the authorization to be corrected to reflect the present officers of HRA.
Roll Call: Ayes; Vierling, Colligan, Leroux, Wampach
Noes; Lebens
Motion carried.
The HRA Director asked that anyone interested in attending the NAHRO conference
at East Grand Forks May 22-24, 1985 contact her for reservations.
Lebens/Wampach moved to adjourn. Motion carried unanimously. Meeting adjourned
at 7:21 p.m.
Jeanne Andre HRA Director Diane S. Beuch, Recording Secretary
i-r rl 3
MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator
FROM: Judith S. Cox, City Clerk
Jeanne Andre, HRA Executive Director
RE: Agreement to Amend Legal Descriptions Regarding Minnesota
Racetrack "Option Property"
DATE: May 15 , 1985
INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND:
The roadways constructed on the Racetrack site were not
constructed totally within the roadway easements as described in
various documents filed with respect to the Racetrack financing.
Rather than move the roads it has been agreed to by the parties
involved to correct the easement decriptions.
The attached agreement amends the descriptions of the roadway
easements.
Both Mr. Krass , Assistant City Attorney, and Mr. Spurrier , City
Engineer, have advised that this action is appropriate.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
City:
Authorize proper City officials to execute an agreement to amend
descriptions regarding Minnesota Racetrack "Option Property" .
HRA:
Authorize appropriate officials of the Shakopee Housing and
Redevelopment Authority to execute an agreement to amend descrip-
tions regarding Minnesota Racetrack "Option Property" .
O CONNOR & HANNAN
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
3800 1 D S TOWER SUITE 800
80 SOUTH EIGHTH STREET 1919 PENNSYLVANIA AVENUE,N.W.
WASHINGTON,D.C. 20006-3483
MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 55402-2254 (202)887-1400
SUITE 4700 ONE UNITED BAN. CENTER
(612) 341-3800 1700 LINCOLN STREET
TELEX 29-0584 DENVER,COLORADO 80203
TELECOPIER 612 341-3800 (256) (303)830-1700
-- `" VELAZOUEZ,21
WOOD KIDNER MADRID I,SPAIN
431-31-00
(612) 343-1299 April 30 1985
p / _ TELEX 23543
av:fJ
Mr. John Anderson
Ms. Jeanne Andre
City of Shakopee
129 East First Avenue
Shakopee, Minnesota 55379
Re: Agreement to Amend Legal Descriptions Regarding
Minnesota Racetrack "Option Property"
Dear John and Jeanne:
Please find enclosed herewith a copy of a proposed
agreement to amend the legal descriptions in the various
documents filed with respect to the Racetrack financing to
conform the easements described therein for roadways to the
location of the roadways as actually constructed. I also
enclose a letter from Leslie Gillette of Popham, Haik to
me explaining in greater detail the need for this agreement.
In addition, there are enclosed three details showing the
difference between the easements as presently granted and
the location of the roadways as actually constructed which
you may wish to have reviewed by Bo Spurrier. I have
reviewed the document and except for certain incorrect re-
ferences to the City and HRA documents which I have pointed
out to Leslie Gillette by separate letter I find it acceptable.
If you also find the document acceptable, please have the
enclosed signature pages executed and notarized by the appro-
priate persons and return them to me and I will forward them
back to Leslie Gillette. By copy of this letter I have also
provided the enclosed documentation to Rod Krass . Please do
not hesitate to call me if you have any questions or comments.
Veryltrrul yours,
W
Wood Kidner
WK/kt
cc: Mr. Rod Krass
Enclosure
POPHAM, HAIK, SCHNOBRICH, KAUFMAN 6 DOTY, LTD.
4344 IDS CENTER -
MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 55402
TELEPHONE AND TELECOPIER
612-333-4800
WAYNE G.POPHAM CLIFFORD M. GREENE JOHN C.CHILDS 2060 PETRO-LEWIS TOWER
ROGER W. SCHNOBRICH D. WILLIAM KAUFMAN DOUGLAS P. SEATON 717 SEVENTEENTH STREET
DENVER KAUFMAN MICHAEL O. FREEMAN THOMAS E.SANNER DENVER, COLORADO 80202
DAVID S. DOTY THOMAS C. D'AOUILA BRUCE B. Mc PHEETERS TELEPHONE AND TELECOPIER
ROBERT A.MINISH LARRY D. ESPEL GARY D. BLACKFORD 303-292-2660
ROLFE A.WORDEN JANIE S. MAYERON SCOTT E. RICHTER
G. MARC WHITEHEAD THOMAS J. BARRETT GREGORY L.WILMES
BRUCE D. WILLIS JAMES A. PAYNE ELIZABETH A.THOMPSON SUITE 802-2000 L STREET.N.W.
FREDERICK S. RICHARDS DAVID A.JONES TIMOTHY W. KUCK WASHINGTON, D. C. 20036
G. ROBERT JOHNSON LEE E.SHEEHY KEITH J. HALLELAND TELEPHONE AND TELECOPIER
GARY R. MACOMBER LESLIE GILLETTE THOMAS C.MIELENHAUSEN
202-887-5154
ROBERT S. BURK MICHAEL T. NILAN STEVEN. 1.LOWENTHAL
HUGH V. PLUNKETT,III ROBERT H. LYNN KATHLEEN A.BLATZ
FREDERICK C. BROWN ROBERT C. MOILANEN MICHAEL D.CHRISTENSON
THOMAS K. BERG STEVEN G. HEIKENS J. MICHAEL SCHWARTZ
BRUCE D. MALKERSON THOMAS F. NELSON LARAYE M.OSBORNE
_ JAMES R. STEILEN THOMAS J. RADIO
JAMES B. LOCKHART DAVID L.HASHMALL OF COUNSEL
ALLEN W. HINDERAKER KATHLEEN M. MARTIN FRED L.MORRISON
April 19, 1985
Mr . Wood Kidner
O' Connor & Hannan
3800 IDS Tower
80 South Eighth Street
Minneapolis, MN 55401
Re: Canterbury Downs
Our File No . 8046-001
Dear Wood:
As you may be aware, a survey of the racetrack property has
revealed that the roadways benefitting and burdening the property
which Valley Industrial Development Company II has a right to
repurchase have been constructed somewhat outside of the legal
descriptions of the roadways which appear in various deeds,
mortgages and other agreements concerning the racetrack property .
I am enclosing an agreement among the parties to those various
documents which would permit the amendment of the legal
description of the roadways to conform to those roadways as
constructed. The agreement has been reviewed by Jack Zachow of
North Star Title who has indicated that the agreement is
acceptable to North Star .
To assist you in your review of the agreement, I am
enclosing three details of the survey of the racetrack property
which show the changes in location of the easements . The legal
descriptions for the roadways as built were provided by the
Mr . good Kidner
April 19, 1985
Page 2
project surveyor and modified slightly as to form in conjunction
with Dick Peterson of Best & Flanagan .
I am enclosing ten signature pages for signature by the
appropriate officers of the Housing and Redevelopment Authority in
and for the City of Shakopee, Minnesota and the City of Shakopee .
If the agreement is acceptable to you, I would appreciate your
obtaining the notarized signatures of the officers of the HRA and
the City and returning all ten copies of the signature pages to
me. When I have assembled all of the signature pages, I will
forward a fully executed copy of the agreement to you. Thank you .
Very truly yours,
Leslie Gillette
LG:bjm
Enclosures
7536m
AGREEMENT
THIS AGREEMENT, dated as of the 22nd day of April , 1985,
by and between VALLEY INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT COMPANY II , a
Minnesota General Partnership ( "VIDCO II" ) , MINNESOTA RACETRACK,
INC . , a Minnesota corporation ( "MRI" ) , FIRST TRUST COMPANY OF
SAINT PAUL, a Minnesota corporation ( "First Trust" ) TWIN CITY
FEDERAL SAVINGS AND LOAN ASSOCIATION, a United States of America
corporation ( "Twin City Federal" ) , SECURITY PACIFIC NATIONAL BANK ,
a national banking association ( "Security Pacific" ) , THE HOUSING
AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY IN AND FOR THE CI^1Y OF SHAKOPEE
( "Authority" ) and THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE ( "City" ) .
W I T N E S S E T H :
WHEREAS, VIDCO II executed and delivered to MRI a
warranty deed dated January 15 , 1985 for real property in Scott
County, Minnesota, described in Exhibit A ( "Racetrack Property" )
attached hereto and incorporated 'herein by reference , whicn deed
was filed February 19, 1985 as Document No. 208392 in the office
of the Scott County Recorder and February 19, 1985 as Document No .
: 0565, files of the Registrar of Titles ( "Warranty Deed" ) ; and
WHEREAS, VIDCO II , as grantor in the Warranty Deed,
reserved to itself the right to repurchase from MRI a portion of
the Racetrack Property ( "Option Property" ) which Option Property
is subject to and together with certain easements , all as
descrided in ExniUit C of the Warranty Deed; and
WHEREAS, MRI and VIDCO II executed and delivered to First
Trust Company a mortgage and security agreement dated as of
October 15 , 1984 , filed as Scott County Recoraer Document No.
205968 and as Document No. 29863 , files of Scott County Registrar
of Titles ( "Trustee Mortgage' ) ; and
WHEREAS , First Trust agreed to execute and deliver to MRI
and VIDCO II a partial release of the Trustee Mortgage as to the
Option Property upon the terms and conditions described in
Section 3-5( 4 ) of the Trustee Mortgage; and
WHEREAS, MRI and VIDCO Il executed and delivered to Twin
City Federal and Security Pacific a mortgage and security
agreement dated as of October 15, 1984, filed as Scott County
Recorder Document No. 20597U and as Document No. 29865, files of
the Scott County Registrar of Titles ( 'Bank Mortgage" ) ; and
WHEREAS, Twin City Federal and Security Pacific agreed to
execute and deliver to MRI and VIDCO II a partial release of the
Bank Mortgage as to the Option Property upon the terms and
conditions described in- Section 3-5 of the Bank Mortgage; and
WHEREAS, MRI , the Authority, and the City entered into
that certain Amended Contract for Private Development, dated as of
June 12 , 1964 ( "Development Agreement' ) ; and
WHEREAS, the Development Agreement provides that the
Authority will release the Option Property upon request of MRI and
-2-
upon the terms and conditions described in Section 9 . 2(b} of the
Development Agreement ; and
WHEREAS, roadways have been constructed over the
Racetrack Property and the Option Property at locations slightly
different from the easements included in the description of the
Option Property in the Warranty Deed, Trustee 's Mortgage, Bank
Mortgage, and Development Agreement; and
WHEREAS, the parties wish to conform the legal
descriptions of the roadway easements upon and in favor of the
Option Property to the legal descriptions of the roadways as
actually constructed;
NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS AGREED AS FOLLOWS :
1 . The legal description of the Option Property as
contained in each of the Warranty Deed, Trustee ' s Mortgage, Bank
Mortgage, and Development Agreement, is hereby amended to read as
follows:
OPTION PROPERTY
That part of the Northwest Quarter of Section 9, Township 115,
Range 22, Scott County, Minnesota, excepting therefrom the
South 400 feet of the West lU0 feet of the South Half of the
Northwest Quarter lying south, southwesterly and southeasterly of
Line A, described below; and that part of the East Half of the
Northeast Quarter of Section 8, Township 115, Range 22 , Scott
County, Minnesota, lying northerly of the centerline of County
Road No. 16 ; lying south, southwesterly and southeasterly of
Line A, described below:
Line A: Commencing at the southeast corner of said Northwest
Quarter of Section 9; thence on an assumed bearing of
North 1 degree 10 minutes 22 seconds West along the east
line of said Northwest Quarter a distance of 730 . 00 feet
to the point of beginning of the line to be described;
thence South 88 degrees 49 minutes 38 seconds West a
-3-
distance of 2572 . 89 feet ; thence along a tangential curve
concave to the north, having a radius of 1 , 3t1 . U0 feet, a
central angle of 64 degrees 32 minutes UU seconds , an arc
length of 1 , 487 . 87 feet ; thence South 63 degrees 21
minutes 38 seconds West ( not tangent to said curve ) a
distance of 200 feet more or less to the West line of
said East Half of tree Northeast Quarter of said Section 8
and there terminating .
Together witn a nonexclusive easement for roadway purposes over
the following parcel :
That part of the Northwest Quarter of Section 9,
Township 115, Range 22, Scott County, Minnesota and that
part of the East Half of the Northeast Quarter of
Section 8, Township 115, Range 22, Scott Cuunty ,
Minnesota described as follows :
A strip of land 43 feet in width for the east 377
feet thereof and 39 . 00 feet in width for the
remainder thereof, the south line of wnich is
described as follows :
Commencing at the southeast corner of said Northwest
Quarter of Section 9 ; thence on an assumed bearing
of North 1 degree 10 minutes 22 seconds West along
the east line of said Northwest Quarter a distance
of 730 . 00 feet to the point of beginning of the line
to be described; thence South 88 degrees 49 minutes
38 seconds West a distance of 2572 . 89 feet; thence
along a tangential curve concave to the north,
having a radius of 1 , 321 . 00 feet, a central angle of
6 degrees 04 minutes 20 seconds, an arc length of
140 . 00 feet and there terminating .
Subject to a nonexclusive easement for roadway purposes in favor
of the grantor over the following parcel :
That part of the East Half of the Northeast Quarter of
Section 8, Townsnip 115 , Range 22, Scott County,
Minnesota described as follows:
A strip of land 40 . 00 feet in width the center line
of which is described as follows :
Commencing at the southeast corner of the Northwest
Quarter or Section 9, Townsnip 115, Range 22 , Scott
County, Minnesota; thence on an assumed bearing of
Nortn 1 degree IU minutes 22 seconds West along the
east line of said Northwest Quarter a distance of
-4-
730 . 00 feet ; thence South 88 degrees 49 minutes 38
seconds West a distance of 2572 . 89 feet ; thence
along a tangential curve concave to the north,
having a radius of 1 , 32.1 . UU feet ; a central angle of
4 degrees 37 minutes 43 seconds , an arc length of
1U6 . 72 feet to the point of Deginning of the
centerline to be described; thence south 1 degree 10
minutes 22 seconds East ( not tangent to said curve )
a distance of 195 . 46 feet ; thence along a tangential
curve concave to the west, having a radius of 300 . 00
feet , a central angle of 3U degrees 21 minutes 29
seconds, an arc lengtn of 158 . 95 feet; thence South
29 degrees 11 minutes 07 seconds West tangent to
said last described curve a distance of 399 . 26 feet
more or less to the centerline of County Road No. 16
and there terminating.
Subject to a nonexclusive easement for roadway purposes in favor
of the grantor over the following parcel :
That part or the Northwest Quarter of Section 9,
Townsnip 115, Range 22, Scott County, Minnesota described
as follows :
A strip of land one ( 1 ) foot in widtn described as
follows :
Commencing at the Southeast corner of said Northwest
Quarter of Section 9, Township 115, Range 22, Scott
County, Minnesota; thence on an assumed bearing of
North 1 degree 10 minutes 22 seconds West along the
East line of said Northwest Quarter a distance of
730 .00 feet to the point of beginning ; thence South
88 degrees 49 minutes 38 seconds West a distance of
350 . 75 feet; thence South 1 degree 10 minutes 22
seconds East a distance of 1 foot ; thence North 88
degrees 49 minutes 38 seconds East a distance of
J50. 75 feet to the East line of said Northwest. 1/4 ;
thence North 1 degree 10 minutes 22 seconds West
along said East line a distance of 1 foot to the
point of beginning .
2 . Except as expressly amended herein, the Warranty
Deed, Trustee ' s Mortgage, Banc Mortgage, HRA Mortgage and
Development Agreement are hereby ratified and confirmed.
-5-
Y~
,r 91 ON ae0a A1Nr
�4
•i
r r
r
r
r �
r
� r
i
r
� r
r
r i Oq'i12.1
r ,
� SG'E2L•1
/• ' i 00'0001•M
. ,62,IZ.Qf•Q
/ viva 3Aan3 3
r
r
I r
Es is .6
N0113nN1sNO3 ;vni3v a3a 9.1
LN3m3SV3 .vMavoa,o. , o000¢
Ez z os v
i vivo 3Aa03 3
•
: I . I
=I i a3Aa353M CNV 031NPis�J
3 St 1N373S13 +vMav011,01
N I • I ,
N ; ,
I I
1
I i
�1 I
I I
v 3Nn r-
9 sz
--}�M 3f sb
1'i^9 sY 1TMCVON.9a �a 3NIl M1n05
"`�"...l+�+v-w�e-a�----` �— r -` - . •--.�. .. --.'�n^r��..+�..qtr++ _ -
i
/ M 00•56-39 w
14 t
� ---7f1.fS--" • �
� a
N�
A O �
•
!y
I � O
N
m m O
� 1
/ N D
N
2
w
195410
� � MOI-p9•K 9t—� i
/ — 600.02
600.02 -
o
r ' r •
P w
w N I G w
y iw
616.9
� II �I• m I � �.\LT
c t I I OO jBF
•
^ tom— T i i! Tj• O � �1 j� .
4719 i
i s J� •w 'iii I
fn
r t. u 0 1II I
yy .`
S O
� m
CY rkD � = -� Dar or_ rr
O\ ¢ '� N ` • N 1 I Pte- uw �S 6
w �\ .: P • �\\\r �s I oo� •y � a I
\\ J
7!0.00
01.10.22 r
V i n M p y
W W
36 1
r_ M
o
Z1 D
rn 1 v
w 1 3E
D U I D
1 D
1 V)
Ln to
C-
CD m � r
o
A I
lD I
_ 1
I
1
I
1
1
o I
1
I
1
i
1
I G) Z
I m O
W I D
I Z -i
O � Or
O zZ
rn
1 I vp
I � rn
rnw
44' I m rn
.r 1 < O
i rn D
I v v
f
36' I D
I D
1
to
I
1
I
t
t
t
730.o0' - i n Z
I � O
N 19 10 2 2' W7
D =
r
co
0 L" CO
rr
rn
z om o
rna z v
D
_
in --4
No rn Z D Ln
D Z 0 0
O
rn to rn w
z
0
f -{
n 2 =
O N
= rn
4a
TO: Shakopee Housing and Redevelopment Authority (HRA)
FROM: Jeanne Andre, Executive Director
RE: Amendment to Cooperative Agreement with Scott County HRA
DATE: April 24 , 1985
Introduction-
At its April 16 , 1985 meeting the Shakopee HRA considered an
amendment to its 1980 Cooperative Agreement with the Scott County
HRA. The amendment requested called for an increase in the ad-
ministrative fee of $66. 50 for each Minnesota Housing Finance
Agency loan and grant administered by the Scott County HRA in
the City of Shakopee. The Shakopee Commissioners requested a
new fee amendment be negotiated which is more in line with the
change in the Consumer Price Index since the original agreement
was executed in 1980 .
Background:
The United States Bureau of Labor Statistics has developed
a Consumer Price Index that is specific to the Twin Cities
metropolitan area. Using the annual average increase for all
urban consumers in this area the percentage increases are as
follows :
Period 1980-84 1979-84
from to % increase increase increase
1979-1980 11. 30
1980-1981 12 . 30
1981-1982 10 . 00 28 . 2% 39 . 50
1982-1983 2 . 1%
1983-1984 3 . 8%
The increase from 1979-80 should have been included in the
original agreement. The Bureau of Labor Statistics does not
provide estimates, and therefore the increase from 1984 to 1985
will not be available until 1986 , when the actual figures are
known. Don Levins of the Scott County HRA requested that an in-
crease through 1985 be considered. If the HRA desires to honor
this request an estimated increase for 1985 needs to be included.
The current estimated inflation index for Mpls . /St. Paul from
Feb. 1984 to Feb. 1985 is 3 . 7%. The 28 . 2% increase from 1980-1984
would provide for a $30. 60 increase for a total fee of $139 . 10 .
An estimate for 1985 inflation is 3 . 7% which, would provide an
increase of $3 . 69 for a total fee of approximately $143 . 00 .
Page two
Memo - Agreement w/Scott County HRA
Alternatives•
1. Approve the increase of $66 . 50 as originally requested
by the Scott County HRA, for a $175 fee.
2 . Approve an increase of $43 , which cover approximately
the increase in the CPI from 1979 to 1984 , for a fee
of $151. 50 .
3 . Approve an increase of $31. 00 , which covers approximately
the increase in the CPI from 1980 to 1984 , for a fee of
$139. 50 .
4 . Approve an increase of $34 . 50 , which covers approximately
the increase in the CPI from 1980 to 1984 and an estimate
for the increase in 1985 for a fee of $143 . 00 .
5. Recommend some other increase.
Recommended Action:
Establish an increase of $31. 00 for a total fee of $139 . 50 ,
as provided for in the attached Resolution No. 85-22 .
tw
SCOTT COUNTY HOUSING 8, REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
16049 FRANKLIN TRAIL S.E. #104 ■ PRIOR LAKE, MINNESOTA 55372 ■ (612)447-8875
May 15, 1985 -
���
Ms. Jeanne Andre •N' -
City of Shakopee
129 East First Avenue
Shakopee, MN 55379
Dear Ms. Andre:
I have reviewed your letter dated April 16, 1985 regarding the Shakopee and
Scott County HRA Cooperation Agreement and the proposed administrative fee
increase for MHFA Home Improvement Loan and Grants.
At the Scott County HRA meeting of May 14th, the Cooperation Agreement fee
increase was discussed as described in your memo dated April 24th to the
Shakopee HRA. The consensus of the Scott County HRA was to request consideration
by the Shakopee HRA to approve a compromise administrative fee increase to
$150.00. This increase will greatly assist in recovery of the actual staff
cost as reflected in 1985 in serving Shakopee residents.
Thank you for your assistance in this matter. If you or the Shakopee HRA
desire further information, please call on me.
Sincerely,
Don ens
Executive Director
DL:spw
D MARJORIE HENDERSON,SHAKOPEE, DISTRICT III
WILLIAM CHARD, BELLE PLAINE, DISTRICT I
KEITH THORKELSON. PRIOR LAKE, DISTRICT IV
Q� SYLVESTER WACKER,SAVAGE,DISTRICT V
MARIETTA SHARKEY,JORDAN, DISTRICT II
Scott County 112t
EQUAL HOUSING
Equal Opportunitv Emnlr)-- OPPORTUNITY
RESOLUTION 85-22
A RESOLUTION AMENDING THE OCTOBER 28 1980
COOPERATION AGREEMENT WITH THE SCOTT COUNTY HOUSING
AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
WHEREAS , the Shakopee Housing and Redevelopment Authority (HRA)
has entered a cooperative agreement with the Scott County Housing
and Redevelopment Authority (HRA) for the mutual benefit of both
agencies ; and
WHEREAS , the Scott County HRA has requested an increase in
the fee it receives for each Shakopee home it serves under
Minnesota Housing Finance Agency (MHFA) loan and grant programs ;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the Shakopee Housing and
Redevelopment Authority that appropriate officials be authorized
to execute the attached amendment providing for a fee of $139 . 50
for each MHFA loan or grant administered by the Scott County HRA
under this agreement.
Adopted in session of the Shakopee Housing
and Redevelopment Authority of the City of Shakopee , Minnesota,
held this day of 1985 .
Chairperson
ATTEST:
Executive Director
Approved as to form this L!L
day of 1985
City Attorney
AMENDMENT TO COOPERATION AGREEMENT WITH THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE
This agreement , entered into as of the day of
1985 by and between Scott County Housing and Redevelopment Authority
and the Housing and Redevelopment Authority in and for the City of
Shakopee, amends the cooperation agreement entered into on October 28 ,
1980 .
This amendment shall be added to and become part of the original
cooperation agreement and the item amended shall be as follows:
Section C Responsibility of the Shakopee Housina and
Redevelopment Authority
For the programs administered by the Scott County HRA
as defined in Section B, the HRA in and for the City
of Shakopee agrees to pay the Scott County HRA the sum
of $139 . 50 for each MHFA home improvement loan or grant
administered for a Shakopee resident.
All other conditions of the cooperation agreement dated October 28 ,
1980 shall remain the same.
Shakopee Housing and Scott County Housing and
Redevelopment Authority Redevelopment Authority
Chairperson Chairperson
Secretary Secretary
Subscribed to and sworn before Subscribed to and sworn before
me this day of me this day of
Notary Public Notary Public
r
TO: Shakopee Housing and Redevelopment Authority
FROM: Jeanne Andre, Executive Director
RE: Payment for Services , Cooperative Agreement with
Scott County HRA
DATE: June 4 , 1985
Attached is a copy of a bill for services rendered by the
Scott County HRA under the existing cooperative agreement with
the Shakopee HRA. I have reviewed the bill and believe that
the outstanding amount due of $1 , 302 , is appropriate and pay-
ment should be authorized.
Requested Action:
Approve payment of $1 , 302 . 00 to the Scott County Housing
and Redevelopment Authority for administration of loan and grant
programs offered through the Minnesota Housing Finance Agency in
Shakopee between February of 1980 and January of 1985 .
tw
Q
Scott County
SCOTT COUNTY HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
16049 FRANKLIN TRAIL S.E. #104 ■ PRIOR LAKE, MINNESOTA 55372 ■ (612) 447-8875
INVOICE NO. 2
MHFA Rehabilitation Grants
709864
709840
711365
713227
712187
713078
713071
431472
MRVA T_nanc
536515
537018
530823
537091
541720
531169
541422
552167
555023
Total Due
108.50
Paid
Paid
Paid
Paid
108.50
Paid
108.50
$325.50
108.50
108.50
108.50
108.50
108.50
108.50
108.50
108.50
108.50
5976.50
$1,302.00
MARJORIE HENDERSON, SHAKOPEE, DISTRICT III
WILLIAM CHARD. BELLE PLAINE. DISTRICT I
KEITH THORKELSON. PRIOR LAKE. DISTRICT IV
SYLVESTER WACKER, SAVAGE. DISTRICT V
MARIETTA SHARKEY, JORDAN, DISTRICT II
12r
EQUAL HOUSING
(1PPt1PTIINITY
MINNESOTA HOUSING FINANCE AGENCY REHABI-ITATION LOAN
PROGRAM
PHASE II
AUGUST 31, 1977 - AUGUST 31, 1978
DISTRICT III'
GRAFT
FAMILY
NUMBER HEAD OF DATE
GRANT
NUMBER
STATUS
IN FAMILY HOUSEHOLD
AMOUNT
700879
F
2 M 12-22-76
$ 723.99
PHASE III
JANUARY 1977 - October 1980
DISTRICT III
708629
E
I M 7-26-79
$3,756.15
173661
E
7 M 6-14-79
$3,799.
708607
E
] F 7-26-78
$1,718.53
EMERGENCY LOAN PHASE III
MARCH 1980
DISTRICT III
709864
E
1 F 2-7-80
$1,252.02
PHASE IV
NOVEMBER 1979 - OCTOFER 1981
DISTRICT III
709840
E
M 7-1%-80
$2,254.80
711365
E
]. F 9-..-80
$4,219.
PHASE V
JULY 10, 1980 - AUGUST 31, 1981
DISTRICT III
'713227
E
2 M 4-16-81
$5,692.
.712187
E
1 F 10-23-80
S5,865.
"713078
E
2 M 1-8-81
51,307.50
�.. 713071
E
1 F 1-8-81
$5,765.
YEAR I
NOVEMBER 1, 1981 - JULY 31, 1983
DISTRICT III
No Households
Served
YEAR 11
SEPTEMBER 1, 1963 - SEPTEMBER 30, 1985
DISTRICT III
43147_'
F
6 M 1-11-85
$7,046.
PHASE IX
JANUARY 1, 1982 - JUNE 30, 1983
DISTRICT III
541720 $ 600. 3 4 11-2-82
541169 $2,500. 12 7 9-16-82
541422 $3,850. 12 8 10/15/82
PHASE X
JULY 11, 1963 - DECEMBER 31, 1963
DISTRICT III
No Households Served
MINNESOTA HOUSING FINANCE AGENCY HOME ENERGY LOAN PROGRAM
PHASE 1
OCTOBER 11, 1983 - JULY 31, 1984
DISTRICT III
552167 $3,700. 8.5 3 4-5-84
PHASE II
SEPTEMBER 4. 1984 - JULY 31, 1985
DISTRICT III
555023 $3,9-19. 9 5 11-19-84
MINNESOTA
HOUSING FINANCE: AGENCY HOME
IMPROVEMENT LOAN PROGKAM
PHASE V111
FEBRUARY
1, 1980 - JUNE
30, 1981
DISTRICT III
LOAN
AMOUN'1
Z INTEREST
TERM IN
CLOSING
NUMBER
RATI
YEARS
DATE
536515
$1,700.
5
4
3-24-81
537018
$5,500.
5
15
5-b-81
530823
$2,019.
6
3
4-10-80
537091
$2,000.
7
5
5-26-81
PHASE IX
JANUARY 1, 1982 - JUNE 30, 1983
DISTRICT III
541720 $ 600. 3 4 11-2-82
541169 $2,500. 12 7 9-16-82
541422 $3,850. 12 8 10/15/82
PHASE X
JULY 11, 1963 - DECEMBER 31, 1963
DISTRICT III
No Households Served
MINNESOTA HOUSING FINANCE AGENCY HOME ENERGY LOAN PROGRAM
PHASE 1
OCTOBER 11, 1983 - JULY 31, 1984
DISTRICT III
552167 $3,700. 8.5 3 4-5-84
PHASE II
SEPTEMBER 4. 1984 - JULY 31, 1985
DISTRICT III
555023 $3,9-19. 9 5 11-19-84
GRANT
NUMBER
5-8047
S-8005
5-8015
S-8007
S-8049
S-8004
S-8074
S-8008
S-8055
S-8030
S-8011
M-3-79-4
M-3-74-4
S-1-24-4
GRANT
NUMBER
5-8129
S-8148
S-8103
5-8159
S-8132
S-8140
S-8104
S-8160
5-8107
5-8130
5-8139
S-8114
PS -014
5-8030
1980 SCOTT COUNTY COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK. GRANT
AUGUST 1980 - OCTOBER 1983
1978 SCOTT COUNTY COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT
MARCH 1979 - JULY 1981
DISTRICT III
E 1 M 3-11-80 $5,000
F 4 M 3-20-80 $1,974
E 1 M 9-07-79 $3,343.80
SCOTT COUNTY 1981 COMMUNITY DEVELOP:-IENT BLOCK GRANT
MAY 26, 1981 - FEBRUARY 28, 1985
STANDARD IMPROVEMENTS
DISTRICT III
FAMILY
NUMBER IN
DISTRICT III
GRANT
FAMILY
NUMBER
IN HEAD OF
DATE
GRANT
STATUS
FAMILY
HOUSEHOLD
DATE
AMOUNT
F
5
M
5-12-82
$6,947.05
E
1
M
12-14-80
$6,011
E
1
F
8-11-81
$3,956
F
2
F
11-10-81
$2,737
E
1
F
2-25-82
$9,830.50
F
5
M
5-26-81
$6,705
F
3
F
3-09-82
$2,579
F
4
M
9-08-81
56,276.25
F
4
M
4-13-82
$9,564.25
F
3
F
2-2-83
$8,851
E
2
M
11-10-81
$6,041
1978 SCOTT COUNTY COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT
MARCH 1979 - JULY 1981
DISTRICT III
E 1 M 3-11-80 $5,000
F 4 M 3-20-80 $1,974
E 1 M 9-07-79 $3,343.80
SCOTT COUNTY 1981 COMMUNITY DEVELOP:-IENT BLOCK GRANT
MAY 26, 1981 - FEBRUARY 28, 1985
STANDARD IMPROVEMENTS
DISTRICT III
FAMILY
NUMBER IN
HEAD OF
GRANT
STATUS
FAMILY
HOUSEHOLD
DATE
AMOUNT
E
2
M
6-28-83
$9,989
E
2
M
6-12-84
$2,140
F
3
M
7-13-82
$5,422
F
6
M
12-11-84
$ 286.70
F
2
M
5-10-83
$1,520
F
3
F
6-14-84
$7,885
F
2
F
7-27-82
$8,467
E
1
F
7-24-84
$7,755
E
1
F
9-20-82
$1,297.50
F
3
F
10-11-83
$2,067
F
2
F
2-14-84
$9,969
F
3
F
10-15-82
$1,490
MAY 26, 1981 - JULY 6, 1984
PASSIVE SOLAR DEMONSTRATION PROGRAM
F 4 M 10-14-83 $3,800
F 3 F 2-02-83 $2,706.08
CA],
OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL
ADJ. REG. SESSION SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA MAY 21, 1985
Vice Chair Vierling called the meeting to order at 8:00 p.m. with Cncl.
Wampach, Leroux and Colligan present. Absent were Cncl. Lebens and Mayor
Reinke. Also present were John K. Anderson, City Admr.; Judith S. Cox,
City Clerk; Jeanne Andre, Community Development Director; Judi Simac,
City Planner and Julius A. Coller, II, City Attorney.
Liaison reports were given by Councilpersons.
Vice Chair Vierling asked if there was anyone present who wished to address
the Council on any item not on the agenda.
Betty Pink, supervisor of the Senior Program for Scott County, asked for
ideas and help to move two pianos for the seniors. Discussion followed.
Colligan/Leroux moved to direct staff to work with Ms. Pink to pick up
and deliver two pianos for the Senior Citizens Centers, and to use City
vehicles if necessary. Motion carried unanimously.
Leroux/Wampach moved to approve the mintues of April 30, 1985 as kept.
Motion carried unanimously.
Leroux/Wampach moved to approve the minutes of May 7, 1985 as kept.
Leroux/Wampach moved to amend the minutes on page 2, third paragraph, to
delete Colligan from the vote. Motion to amend carried unanimously.
Main motion as amended carried with Cncl. Colligan abstaining because of
his absence at that meeting.
The City Admr. asked that those wishing to attend the AMM Annual Meeting
contact him.
Colligan/Wampach moved to place on file the letter from the League of
Minnesota Cities, dated May 10, 1985, regarding nominations for LMC Board
of Directors. Motion carried unanimously.
Leroux/Wampach moved to send a letter of support for Jim Miller for Vice
President of the League of Minnesota Cities, and to place on file his
letter dated May 9, 1985. Motion carried unanimously.
Colligan/Leroux moved to place on file the letter from Peoples Savings
and Loan, dated May 14, 1985, regarding the closing of their Shakopee
office.
SnaKope. Lity _uuncii
May 21, 1985
Page 2
Leroux/Colligan moved to amend the motion to send a letter to Robert W.
Bruce, President of Peoples Savings and Loan, expressing the City Council's
dismay at the closing of their Shakopee office, and hoping that at some
time in the future they consider moving back to Shakopee. Motion to amend
carried unanimously.
Main motion as amended carried unanimously.
Leroux/Wampach moved to place on file the letter from David Horton Minis-
tries, dated May 14, 1985 regarding a tent revival. Motion carried
unanimously.
Cncl. Leroux asked about the necessity of requiring insurance for the re-
quested use of wine and strong beer at Lion's Park for a picnic. The Citv
Attorney said that he didn't feel it was necessary because the general
public was not invited and the group was not going to be selling liquor.
Leroux/Wampach offered Resolution No. 2402, A Resolution Granting the Pos-
session and Consumption of Strong Beer and Wine as Herein Limited, with
the proviso that an additional statement be made therein requiring public
liability insurance as is required for temporary liquor or beer sales or
possession.
Discussion followed regarding the necessity for insurance and the amount
and type of insurance, and what has been done with other similar groups in
the past.
Motion carried with Cncl. Colligan opposed.
Leroux/Wampach moved to re -open the public hearing regarding the applica-
tion for $2,000,000 IR Bonds from Bemidji Super 8 Partnership. Motion
carried unanimously.
Murray Williamson, representing Bemidji Super 8 Partnership, said their
application has been reduced from $2,000,000 to $1,800,000, as they have
reduced the number of units from 100 to 66 and increased the amenities such
as an indoor pool and sauna. They have plans for an expansion of 40 units
within a year or so. They have also enlarged the exercise room. They have
$40,000 equity in it.
Jim Bergman, Twin Cities Carpenters Union, said this was a reduction of 34%
in rooms, and he questioned the numbers in the application and the amount
allocated for labor. Mr. Williamson replied that the project is anticipated
to cost about $2,400,000 and they have applied for $1,800,000 in IRBs. Mr.
Bergman questioned whether the applicant has $400,000 in the project.
The City Admr. said the City Council discontinued a few years ago making
a detailed analysis of the applicant's finances, on the advise of its at-
torney. The City reviews the application to see what kind of tax base will
be brought in and what kind of jobs will be created. A bond counsel is
hired to render an opinion as to whether or not it is legal to issue the
bonds for the project. He added a new ordinance is being drafted which will
require 15% equity in a project, but that was not in effect when the appli-
cation was filed.
Shakopee City Council
May 21, 1985
Page 3
Mr. Bergman said the applicant stated he could build the project with or
without IRBs, and one of the criteria for IRBs is that there must be a
need for these bonds. He would suggest the City Council tell them to
build it without the IRBs. He said there are also several other motels
in the City, and another criteria of IRBs is that they don't affect
another on-going business. He said he doesn't object to the building
of the motel, just the -issuance of IRBs. The City Admr. answered these
concerns.
Wood Kidner, of O'Connor and Hannan, Bond Counsel, said the City Council
is making a finding that the project is occurring as a result of the IDB
financing, as a matter of law. The financial institution is interested
in the project because of the tax exempt status. They also believe the
IDB financing is not going to harm existing businesses. It is their in-
terpretation that to promote new development to fill a growing market
would not be in conflict with that requirement of the statute. He com-
mented that it is very difficult to put an exact value on competition, and
the applicant has undertaken a feasibility study that shows a need for
a motel. He added they have not made an independent analysis of the
amount of the equity.
Vice Chair Vierling asked if there were any other comments from the audience.
Mr. Bergman said he thinks there are questions that have not been answered,
and he would ask City Council to consider continuing this hearing until
next month.
Leroux/Wampach moved to close the public hearing. Motion carried unanimously.
Leroux/Wampach moved to direct staff to prepare a resolution for preliminary
approval for presentation at the June 4, 1985 City Council meeting. Motion
carried unanimously.
The City Planner said the City Attorney's opinion on the Winter's appeal,
is that the house on the property is not a farmstead, and in that light,
staff is recommending the conditional use permit be denied.
Leroux/Colligan moved to re -open the public hearing regarding the request
by Janet and Kevin Winter for a conditional use permit to convert a loft
to additional living space at 1830 Marschall Road. Motion carried unani-
mously.
Tracy Eichhorn Hicks, representing the Winters, said it is his interpreta-
tion that the house on the property is a farmstead. He said there is no
case history, and therefore there is room for dispute. A second dwelling
is allowed for a farmstead, but not allowed for a single family home. He
went over the background leading up to this hearing. He said the City
Council has some discretion. He said this house was originally a farmstead
unit, and he is asking City Council to look at what is best for the appli-
cant and the City and grant the conditional use permit.
Vice Chair Vierling asked for comments from the audience.
Shakopee City Council
May 21, 1985
Page 4
Dan Swanson, 1832 Marschall Road, asked if the permit is granted, does
that mean he can do the same? He has a house on one acre, and he could
re -do his old chicken coop to make it a residence. He asked about setting
precedence for any other similar situation and making a new code.
Mr. Hicks replied he thought that was absurd to argue that his home and
chicken coop could be a farmstead, and there were no similarities. The
Winters' property has the original house and barn on it. He is asking
the City Council to look at this as the historical background of the
farmstead.
Mr. Swanson responded that the past use of the building has nothing to do
with how it is used now. He asked the City Council to consider the written
statement he submitted at the last hearing against the granting of this
permit. He thinks allowing the employee to have the permit for the busi-
ness, instead of the homeowner, is stretching the provisions of the code.
He doesn't think things have been run in a professional manner by the
Winters. He is afraid a second dwelling could allow a second business
on the property. It could essentially mean he could be living in a house
next to a house for an employee and a factory, which is not what the land
is meant to be used for.
Cncl. Leroux said he would agree with the City Attorney. To him a farmstead
is a home that supports the operation of a farm. The allowance on a farm
of a second residence was to promote the family farm, with the additional
residence primarily to be for relatives to help with the farm. He thinks
of this as a residence in a rural setting, as opposed to a farmstead that
actually supports a farming operation. There is no farm on the 3 acres
owned by Winters, and therefore a second residence should not be allowed.
Vice Chair Vierling agreed with Cncl. Leroux and added that all the improve-
ments made by the Winters are commendable, but no basis for special con-
cessions. The allowance of a second residence was originally set up for
the family farm operation.
Cncl. Wampach thinks this is not fair because the Winters have put a lot
of money into the property and he wants to encourage people to move to the
area. Discussion continued.
Leroux/Wampach moved to close the public hearing. Motion carried unanimously.
Cncl. Colligan stated that as long as the living space was for the owner,
he would look favorably on it. He felt the operation could be controlled
by the permit.
The City Admr. briefly went over the background of the original request for
a home occupation, wherein the employee applied for the home occupation be-
cause the Winters didn't choose to live on the property before setting up
their business. They are renting the farmstead to the person who already
holds the home occupation permit. They are under no hardship for running
the business. The awkwardness exists because of the way they pursued the
home occupation. The City Planner confirmed the series of events that led
to this hearing.
Shakopee City Council
May 21, 1985
Page 5
Mr. Hicks pointed out that from the time the Winters' purchased the pro-
perty they intended to move out there. Additional work needed to be done
to the house before they could move out there.
Wampach/Leroux moved to approve Conditional Use Permit Resolution of the
City Council No. CC -401, and moved its adoption. Motion failed with Cncl.
Leroux and Vierling opposed.
Colligan/Leroux offered Resolution No. 2400, approving the Final Plat of
Della's First Addition, and moved its adoption. Motion carried unani-
mously.
Leroux/Colligan offered Resolution 2401, A Resolution Approving the Final
Plat of Century Plaza Square 3rd Addition, and moved its adoption. Motion
carried unanimously.
James Streefland, of Jerome Jaspers & Co., gave a review of the 1984 audit
and answered questions relative to it.
Leroux/Colligan moved to accept the 1984 Annual Financial Report as pre-
pared by Jerome Jaspers & Co. Motion carried unanimously.
Colligan/Wampach moved to adjust the Sanitary Sewer billing for Robert
Vierling from $35.74 to $7.68, effective with approximately May 1, 1985
bill.
Roll Call: Ayes; Unanimous Noes; None Motion carried.
Leroux/Wampach moved to authorize a refund of sewer service charges to
Elk River Concrete in the amount of $4,375.10.
Roll Call: Ayes; Unanimous Noes; None Motion carried.
Leroux/Wampach moved to approve the transfer of $40,855 from the General
Fund to the Community Services Fund for the City's annual contribution.
Motion carried unanimously.
The Community Develop. Dir. showed the Councilmembers samples of various
informational and publicity booklets published in the past for various
groups in Shakopee. She is attempting to coordinate the various interests
in developing a unified approach to marketing. She explained further her
idea for one informational folder containing various more specific booklets
to meet the various needs of tourists and newcomers to Shakopee. She asked
for comments about allowing advertising in the booklets. Considerable
discussion followed.
Leroux/Colligan moved to authorize the expenditure of up to $13,000 for
development and publication of a series of brochures about the City of
Shakopee, and that a directory of supporters be listed somewhere on the
booklet, to be determined by the Comm. Develop. Director.
Roll Call: Ayes; Unanimous Noes; None Motion carried.
The Comm. Develop. Dir. informed the Councilmembers of two changes in the
wording of the Trail License Agreement for the Minnesota Valley Trail, as
follows:
Shakopee City Council
May 21, 1985
Page 6
#4. The City shall not construct any buildings, structures, or
other improvements on the leased premises without the written consent
of the Commissioner of Natural Resources, except the City may undertake
construction improvements which would destroy the trail as long as the
City, at no expense to the DNR, provides for the continuity and recon-
struction of the trail.
X13. (This would be new, with the following to be renumbered) The
City shall approve plans and specifications for construction of a trail
and any future modifications of the trail.
Colligan/Leroux moved to authorize City officials to execute a Trail
Lease Agreement with the State of Minnesota Department of Natural Resources
which provides for the development of the Minnesota Valley Trail in
Shakopee, with the two changes made tonight. Motion carried unanimously.
Discussion ensued regarding the work overload situation in the Community
Development Department, especially in the planning area, and the various
incentives which could be offered for overtime work.
Leroux/Colligan moved to authorize additions to the Community Development
budget of $1,900 for professional services (for part-time, temporary
secretarial help) and $1,700 for permanent full-time overtime.
Roll Call: Ayes; Unanimous Noes; None Motion carried.
Wampach/Leroux moved to direct staff
the Community Development Department
cost not to exceed $1,900.
Roll Call: Ayes; Unanimous
to solicit professional services for
through a temporary service at a
Noes; None
Motion carried.
Leroux/Colligan moved to refer Ordinance No. 107 to the City Attorney for
modification to extend parking restrictions in the CBD on a year round
basis with the exception of Sommerville north of Second Avenue. Motion
carried unanimously.
Wampach/Leroux moved to authorize staff to hire a part-time Code Enforce-
ment Officer for 1985, to be funded from Continugency Fund at a cost not
to exceed $3,000.00.
Roll Call: Ayes; Unanimous Noes; None Motion carried.
Wampach/Leroux moved to authorize the painting of the pool buildings for
the estimated cost of $1,050.00, and purchase an awning or shade screen for
the concession window at an estimated cost of $500.00, and direct Financing
to make the money available from the General Fund Contingencies.
Roll Call: Ayes; Unanimous Noes; None Motion carried.
Leroux/Colligan moved to authorize payment of Semi -Final Estimate No. 5 to
T b S Excavating, Inc. in the amount of $3,654.61, for Tahpah Park sewer & water.
Roll Call: Ayes; Unanimous Noes; None Motion carried.
Leroux/Wampach moved to direct staff to request proposals for the appraisal
of Parcel No. 7 in the TH101 Bypass Right -of -Way. Motion carried unanimously.
Colligan/Leroux moved to authorize proper City officials to execute Change
Order No. 2, increasing the Contract amount of $3,298.00, with no change
in the completion date, for TH101 Intersection Improvements 84-8.
Roll Call: Ayes; Unanimous Noes; None kotion carried.
Shakopee City Council
May 21, 1985
Page 7
Wampach/Colligan moved to authorize proper City officials to execute
Change Order No. 5 for Shenandoah Drive Street Construction (84-4) increasing
the contract amount by $2,920.00 to $246,892.30.
Roll Call: Ayes; Unanimous Noes; None Motion carried.
Leroux/Wampach moved to authorize payment of Partial Estimate No. 4 for
Shenandoah Drive Street Construction (84-4) in the amount of $36,586.30 to
Buesing Brothers Trucking, Inc.
Roll Call: Ayes; Unanimous Noes; None Motion carried.
Leroux/Wampach moved to direct staff to contact our Senator and Represen-
tative to urge their support for the Senate provisions on Industrial Re-
venue Bonds. Motion carried unanimously.
Colligan/Leroux moved that the bills in the amount of $326,174.03 be
allowed and ordered paid.
Roll Call: Ayes; Unanimous Noes; None Motion carried.
The City Attorney recommended waiting to discuss the Dram Shop Law until
after the modifications passed by the Legislature, have been signed by the
Governor.
Colligan/Leroux moved to authorize the purchase of 2,000 copies of the
Real Estate Journals Special June Focus section of Shakopee at a cost of
$500.00.
Roll Call: Ayes; Unanimous Noes; None Motion carried.
Wampach/Colligan moved to direct staff to prepare an ordinance adopting
the State law regulating charitable gambling by reference as well as al-
ternatives 2 and 10 which limit gambling to organizations which have been
in existence within the City of Shakopee for at least three years and have
30 active members and permit gambling in liquor establishments only when
the establishment holds a club liquor license.
The City Admr. said this would maintain the status quo for charitable
gambling. Discussion followed regarding this preventing another group
like the Fire Dept. or the Lions from raising money within a lia_uor establish-
ment. Cncl. Leroux said his only objection would be to outside organizations.
Wampach/Leroux moved to amend the motion to omit 410, limiting gambling in
liquor establishments to establishments holding a club liquor license. Motion
to amend carried unanimously.
Main motion as amended carried unanimously.
Colligan/Leroux moved to approve payment of Partial Estimate No. 3 in the
amount of $71,937.65 to C.S. McCrossan Construction, Inc., P.O. Box 247,
Osseo, Minn. 55369 for 84-8 Hwy 101 intersections.
Roll Call: Ayes; Unanimous Noes; None Motion carried.
Leroux/Colligan offered Resolution No. 2399, A Resolution Accepting Bid
on the 1985 Curb and Gutter Sidewalk and Driveway Apron Replacement Pro-
gram, Project No. 1985-3.
Roll Call: Ayes; Unanimous Noes; None Motion carried.
Shakopee City Council
May 21, 1985
Page 8
Leroux/Wampach offered Resolution No. 2397, A Resolution Authorizing Dis-
patch and Use of City Equipment and Services by City Administrator in
Emergency Situations, and moved its adoption. Motion carried unanimously.
Discussion ensued and consensus was to work with the Chamber of Commerce
on a logo for tourism signs, as long as they would end up with only one
main logo, which could have different inserts for the various departments,
if desired.
The City Admr. informed Councilmembers of the Planning Commission's direc-
tion to the City to conform with the screening requirements for City
buildings. He will work on it and come back with results.
Leroux/Wampach offered Ordinance No. 169, Fourth Series, An Ordinance of
the City of Shakopee Amending Shakopee City Code, Chapter 5 Entitled
"Liquor, Beer and Wine Licensing and Regulation" by Repealing Subd. 14 of
Section 5.01 and by enacting a new Subd. 14, Section 5.01 and by Adopting
by Reference Shakopee City Code Chapter 1 and Section 5.99, which Among
Other Things Contain Penalty Provisions, and moved its adoption. Motion
carried unanimously.
Colligan/Leroux offered Resolution No. 2403, A Resolution Imposing a 20 Day
Suspension on the Liquor License of R. Hanover, Inc., dba Richard Pub,
and moved its adoption. Motion carried unanimously.
Leroux/Wampach moved to direct proper City officials to execute Change
Order No. 3 for the TH101 Intersection Improvement Contract for signing
and striping for Valley Park Drive and 12th Avenue and Shenandoah Drive
at a cost of $13,323.81.
Roll Call: Ayes; Unanimous Noes; None Motion carried.
The City Engineer explained the change in insurance coverage he is request-
ing to appear on the street opening permit forms pursuant to statutory limits.
New forms have to be printed with the correction.
Leroux/Colligan offered Ordinance No. 170, An Ordinance of the City of
Shakopee City Code Chpater 7 Entitled "Streets and Sidewalks Generally"
by Repealing paragraph B, Subd. 3 of Sec. 7.07 and Enacting a New Para-
graph B, Subd. 3, Sec. 7.07 changing Insurance Coverage as Herein Setout
and by Adopting by Reference Shakopee City Code Chapter 1 and Section 7.99,
Which Among Other Things Contain Penalty Provisions, and moved its adoption.
Motion carried unanimously.
Leroux/Wampach moved to adjourn to May 28th, 1985 at 7:30 p.m. at the
Shakopee Senior High School. Motion carried unanimously. Meeting adjourned
at 11:33 p.m.
Judith S. Cox
City Clerk
Diane S. Beuch
Recording Secretary
.
May 24, 1985 K8et/000htanCounui|
�r' ' ~ 330 yletro Souae Buiiding
Seventh and Rooert5treet
S. Pau|' Minnesota 55101
TO: Metropolitan Area iOCal-OffiCidls ~ Teiephone(G12)291'6359
A year ago we held a series of meetings with local officials around the region
to hear your concerns about the Metropolitan Council. This year I would like
to once again meet with you to discuss the Council's priorities for I986 and
the impact that has on the budget. These regional meetings, which have been
held Since 1976, are also an excellent opportunity to hear any concerns you
may have about Council -related issues.My
-
plan is to hold one meeting for each County plus a separate meeting for the
Cities of St. Paul and MinneapDlis. We'll meet for a dutch treat breakfast at
7:30 a.m. The Scott County meeting will be On Thursday, June 20 at the L k ^
Restaurant, Hi h 13 in Prior
During the year we were able to get the new Regional Transit Board, which was
created by the 1984 Legislature, up and running. We've also made some inroads
in redefining how the region manages its solid waste. Our program is currently
in the Legislature and we'll have more information on that by the time we meet'
For 1986 the Council has Set six issues as priorities for 1980. These include:
1\ An analysis Of whether changes in funding have hurt the ability Of local
governments to deliver public services.
2\ Enlarging the Council's role as a regional data center,
3\ Improving the region's long-term Care system for elderly and handicapped
people.
4\ Recovering resources from trash instead of burying it in landfills.
5\ Improving the Council's metropolitan COm0i5siOU "Oversight".
6\ Studying the region's long-range needs for public transit.
I look forward to Seeing you at the breakfast meetings and getting your
reaction to these priorities. Please R.S.V.P. Rosemarie Johnson at 20I -539I.
We've also invited legislators and members of the regional commissions
(Metropolitan Waste Control Commission, Regional Transit Board and Metropolitan
Parks and 0p8O Space Commission).
ncerely
Sandra S. Garing
Chair
cc: Clerks, City & County Administrators, School Superintendents & Board
Chairs, City Council & Town Board Members
riobert Vierling MAY
221 E. 4th Avenue
Shakopee , IY.n . 55379 CITY U- F
Shakopee City Council
Greg Voxland
129 E. First Avenue
Shakopee, ' n . 55379 !,'ay 29, 19°5
Dear City Council and Greg Vox land;
In reply to your letter of May 22, 1985, I will try
again to explain and to clear up this matter once and for
all.
First of all, I have already paid you one month of
S & 6 at 4-635.74• I certainly don't intend to pay you more
than :7.63 per month from thereon; that, you'll have to
straighten out with the council.
In the years 83 and 84, you overcharged me on the 3 &
�v- You had charged me X11.55 per month, when it should have
been X7.68 as you have said. That is a difference of X2.37
per month, which, for 11 months, should give me a credit of
$31.57.
You have stated in a previous letter that no one was
told that they were overcharging me on my S & which in
fact I complained everytime I paid my bill. It's not my
fault if your city employees did not advise you of the mat-
ter. If you will remember, you tried to put the blame for
this on me by saying and I quote, "the city employees did
not inform me that they fixed -your meter, so you should have
told me". I didn't '>now I was on the city payroll and if I
am, then I'd like my wages from 84 on. Giving me a stupid
answer as to why the billing was not changed doesn't affect
this matter in the least. It's your can; you carry it!
You still have'.not answered me as to whom in the City
Office is a certified meter person. zany stupe can just read
the meter.
The City of �ha.kopee has already stolen 01200.00 from
me on an alley tarring job that a six year old could have
done better on, which will be in Court very soon, because
the City Engineer promised to have a meeting on this, and
he's lying through his teeth again. The City of Shakopee
also tried to steal ,+300.00 from me on the homes storm
drain project which I forced them to correct. I also had
to prop up my electric lines for years with a 2 x 4; in
other words, what I'm trying to tell you is that I'm just
plain sick of the stinking Administration in Sh�_ropee.
Ro rt _, IT
Irib
CITY OF SHAKOPEE
INCORPORATED 1870
129 E. First Ave. - Shakopee, Minnesota 55379-1376 (612) 445-3650
Mr. Bob Vierling
221 East 4th Ave.
Shakopee, MN 55379
Dear Mr. Vierling;
May 3C, 1985
The following information is provided in response to your
letter dated May 29, 1985.
1 . ) You have paid $35.714 for the April 1 sewer billing.
The May 1 bill was unpaid when you brought your complaint to
me. Council did adjust your bill and the adjust is effective
with the May 1 bill. Therefore, your June 1 bill should show
$7.68 past due for May and the current amount of $7.68 for the
June 1 billing.
2.) Council has already considered your request for a refund
for prior billings and did not grant a refund.
3.) Your visit early this month was the first notice I
had of your complaint. The Secretary of the Utility Commission
related to me that she had no knowledge of your complaint prior
to this. The men that repaired your meter are employees of
the Utility Commission and I have no contact with them. Furthermore,
L-ne Utilities Commission is maintaining that the meter reading
for last winter when the repair was made is correct and therefore
there was no reason for the repair men to even consider reporting
it for the purpose of changing the biiiing. In our experience,
when a citizen feels that there is an error on their bill they
report it right away, not several months later.-
4
atera
4 . )_ The Utilities staff has informed me that both men in
the water department have had instruction in meter repair and
have licenses.
5.) The last items in your letter relate to other subjects
that I have no dealing with an therefore will not comment on
them.
Sincerely,
Gregg Voxland
Finance Director
L' 17 1 c7'r > �7 i _ _ _
ro_
MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator
FROM: Judith S. Cox, City Clerk
RE: Vacation of Alley Lying East of Riverview
Park between 4th and 5th Avenues
DATE: May 31, 1985
Introduction:
A public hearing has been set for June 4th at 8:30 P.M., or
thereafter, to consider the vacation of the alley in Block 8
of Koepers Addition, petitioned for by abutting property owner
Shakopee Realty Inc.
Background:
The property owner proposes to replat the block and desires that
the alley be vacated to allow additional developable property.
In order for the alley to be useful in a new plat, it needs to
be vacated free of retaining any easements. Upon checking with
the City Engineer, SPUC Manager, Minnegasco and the telephone
company, it appears there is no need to retain a utility
easement within this alley.
Alternatives:
1. Vacate alley -
2. Do not vacate alley
3. Vacate alley retaining easements
Recommendation:
Alternative number 1.
Recommended Action:
Offer Resolution Number 2407, A Resolution Vacating the Public
Alley in Block 8, According to the Plat of Koepers Addition
to the City of Shakopee.
JSC:cah
RESOLUTION NO. 2407
A RESOLUTION VACATING THE PUBLIC ALLEY IN BLOCK 8,
ACCORDING TO THE PLAT OF KOEPERS ADDITION TO THE
CITY OF SHAKOPEE
WHEREAS, the alley in Block 8, Koepers Addition was platted
and dedicated to the public use; and
WHEREAS, it has been made to appear to the Council that it
would be to the best interests of the general public to vacate
said alley; 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 of the
alley hereinafter described is in the public interest and
serves no further public need as an alley.
2. That the alley in Block 8, according to the plat of
Koepers Addition to the City of Shakopee, Scott County,
Minnesota, is hereby vacated.
3. After the adoption of the Resolution, the City Clerk
shall file certified copies hereof with the County Auditor
and County Recorder of Scott County.
Adopted in session of the
City of Shakopee, Minnesota, held this
1985. —
ATTEST:
City Clerk
Approved as to form this
day of , 1985.
ty Attorney
City Council of the
day of ,
Mayor of -the City of S a opee
IV
0 N
IF -
cf;
' 1- 5r�-�- �-1 ,4�
I U
MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator
FROM: Judith S. Cox, City Clerk
RE: Application for Taxicab License by
Suburban Taxi Corporation
DATE: May 31, 1985
Introduction:
The City has received an application from Suburban Taxi Corp.
to operate 15 vehicles within the City of Shakopee.
Background:
The police report on the applicant is attached.
The certificate of insurance is not in order at this time. If
it is in order Tuesday evening, Council may act on the applica-
tion after the public hearing. If it is not in order, the
application should be tabled after the publichearing is held.
Alternatives:
1. Approve application, if in order.
2. Deny application.
Recommendation:
Alternative No. 1.
Recommended Action:
Approve the application and grant a Taxicab License to Suburban
Taxi Corporation, 9309 Lyndale Avenue South, Suite #109,
Bloomington, Minnesota 55420, beginning June 5, 1985.
JSC:cah
City of Shakopee
POLICE DEPARTMENT
476 South Gorman Street
SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA 55379
Tel. 445-6666
TO: Mayor, Council Members
FROM: Tom Brownell
RE: Taxi License Application
DATE: May 31, 1985
INTRODUCTION
Suburban Taxi, Inc., has applied to the City of Shakopee for
a taxi license application for a business know as Green & White
Suburban Taxi, 9309 Lyndale Avenue South, Bloomington.
BACKGROUND
Applicant information identifies the licensee to be; Green &
White Suburban Taxi. An appropriate investigation was conducted
by the Shakopee Police Department. No information was developed
which would indicate the denial of a license would be appropriate.
RECOMMENDATION
Based solely on the facts provided during the course of the police
investigation, and not having knowledge of other factors which
may be considered, I recommend issuing a taxi license to Green &
White Suburban Taxi, Inc.
t: PPT ICAT-10F, FG i s :I i;A
1 . Apr' icsnt sy`-..ROT (�ORP041 a.i .�- -�
_
2. Addres sYNQh4..LC_,5o ,
3. 'If corporation, attach -a list of officers. addresbe.s al:d b�rthal�es.
GARY A . I OUPNSEL> CPQEsWENr) 3ot.155e sRK t -)R. B,,jqNsui,.L.� mro+ 6sr 7
4. Give c;�perience iii the trans porati.on of ca.ssenger l
r
L�.='inancl st tu: , including -he anounLs of all unpLid :udg'lents i3.st.
^4 ,
40
the applicant and the nature of the tran,act!.on or act:: giving rise: to
said judgments.
6. Give any faces whi:h you belie -ire: tend to prove that publ _c ccnver_i.er;ce
and necessity require the granting of licerse.
T� ery is ia�l '� 'tNTF.bl1$Ypj
��1
-F'Qm �ib�'C � 5 -fo �'� �t'��%c ��ey �iL•_(S,)e_�_S1�hl� �._� l.�ee f -
Give the color schcme or insignia Lc, be ui:ed to designate the vehicle
or vehicles to be operated.
%cer,l "kite �.Q(;s)BCAN_ -d� e # - �_l[1 �► e Ti2��-i cJ �tS
8. Location of proposed depots and terminals Catd4er_
9. For each car proposed to be operated upon the streets of Shakopee as c
taxicab, }"'.lease COMPlEti- (attach add44
itiOnal sheets, if necessary):
LICENSE N0. SEIMAJ. N0. YEAS, HAKE REGISTERED 01,111ER
'.0. Gorman) puliil,- l.car r i.E'ci G.'itii Gi? sa2.
persoLal injury to one a(:rsc.r:,=�Q�rBQD____ p"r>:;:.a in, :,,;, .r cre
i ro c: r dma e t
•-��Q00 F F � "g acr.
11.. Utxlt_'r IIlIIIliClp317.t1 c : 1L v'Cii: h vUu are i]CGlieii_ 5-0;-r .&K.Q G_.1��i,dJ
12. Have you ever bc.en re used a taxi-rab !kens("? Nb
Wi-,y ?
:. Please attach a. rate sched lt. An%: z::creh`:c s it beub FCL
_,
to approval by the. City Council.
114. Please include with application, the following fees:
A?pl cLtion lee: $5.00
Annual Taxicab License Fee: $250.00
Annual Fee Per Vehicle: $15.00
T UNDERSTAND WT FALSIFICAT10N OF ANY ITE11 Otd n is :':PPLICATIOin IS SI;FF CI1?h T
REASON UPON Y'BICH TO BASE A DENIAIL OF SAID LICENSE: OR tT!'r.V,Tt e"'Ii?'v' —HEREOF.
�
DaF V/ _ 9�J� Sigrature� /f,�r�iJT
THE Sriid.:OPEE POLICE DEPART :�.E1,T WILIL CAUSE At; 11iVEST-ICA:i'�11,1 Gi: Er�%r .'�P?'� TCAj3T
DESIRING1 A TAXICAB LICENSE WTiilii Tri;; CITY iF S}I�KOPEE.
SUBURBAN TASI HATES
.754First 1/11•MILE
.IO Each additional 1/LL
$12.00 PerHr-Waiting Time
Dept.. of Consumer Services
GO WITH GREEN & WHITE !
it --
C )'e 0
5y
5-6
675
5s
34
7
75.
�Z
'o
"3
3
�GENGE �
v. r. A).
yR
pw4c,
E `
NC?--
NL.'414-AF 17yG/7
MO
Oa5fv C
606 �MA1U�
LGP— I
tmc8P8 i FICit46-fY17
lggl
t R,G
00'*� t��v'1►�`'J
- 41
C W µ(o
Tifj/Z D9A 184Gc12
�� 79
MARA;/�tu�vaonl
1 qg7 G HEV, /,1,094 01 v,4.06bA�
/JyG-�q7 ,Z�IAt-�9l,_SGu7lo47
NF15- 7v I 11j`+ pl-y. .5400(6kJAim
��✓I.I
NSM -!y7
Itigz FOR 0 �cott-�4lcxu�o�eR
ry aU • a97
! Cf BtFOWFgftp a Rrcv P+7-
�f G SDa 'VZ 139 !qo! 'Rv ScmTr WttL � R
W SP 5s ,� FACiP33
1)(,qu7u1,P.C1$3 1177 KEN Arrt-s"UlQ
1 y yY $11 ° b NIP
SRT-3to Iini35l-tgl<59/0 �6�
- S (2y Eg3 (�1 7q Gf�'�v 11 ick
FLF - z�2 1 L 35�- 9
KZ'�
TI'(ne. 026 3 I
G 1phI (o 4.5
Q J.2Zv I tv S�hmc tkc
NNV- X50 RW 7q F1757FZ.
N hjc�,'f�`
IV Y,'(- / 73 ,?G1�rrG 9Z ed
May 29, 1985
Paul W. Wermerskirchen
Chairman - ICC
731 Pierce
Shakopee, Mn 55379
Honorable Councilpersons
City of Shakopee
129 First Avenue East
Shakopee, Mn 55379
Dear Counci I persons :
At our May 22nd meeting of the Industrial Commercial Day subcommittee, it
was the concensus of opinion of the Commissioners to communicate, by letter,
our feelings relating to our recent request for funds to plan, prepare,
organize and manage the special day of September 11, 1985 for the City of
Shakopee.
Let's address the budget first:
Invitations $ 325.00
Promotion 750.00 eliminated $750.00*
We decided we could promote and sell this program by news feature
articles, by the real estate journal, etc; thus dropping the amount
from the budget.
Brochures
2,050.00
This item is promoting and selling Shakopee all year - not just one day!
Exhibits - Maps 1,000.00
Food -Beverage (400) 3,200.00 reduced by $800.00-
Reduced from 8.00 per person to 6.00 - cut back on hospitality
Tours 150.00
Vid:o Program 4,500.00 (used by city all year)
11,975.00
Less reductions "1,550.00
$ 10,425.00
-2 -
We submit this budget request with knowledge that we as ICC members have
performed the tasks charged to us by ycu and selling this program and/or
selling the community is the responsibility of all of us. We cannot rest on
our laurels because the racetrack was promoted. We must continue to be
progressive in selling this community, and if that attitude does not permeate
through all of us, we will regress downhill. We have to prepare for
complementary businesses of the future.
It was the concensus of the ICC Commissioners to:
-Not solicit funds from the Chamber of Commerce or businesses
because they are overburdened with requests already and the
ICC is an arm of City government; thus, the responsibility lies
with the City.
-As evidenced by 'notes' of our May 14, 1985 meeting with
Economic Development D?rectors from competing cities, their
budgets are far in excess of our $6,000.00 budget every two
years.
-Again, we must change our attitude - our city staff cannot be
expected to keep up nor can we expect our ICC members to have
the time for total promotion.
Keep in mind that if the tax base of industry and commercial properties
were taken from this community, it would leave a tremendous burden on the
residential sector.
There is apparently some lack of communication between the Council and this
Commission. I am proud of the time spent by its members - not only meeting at
least six times already for the Industrial -Commercial Day, but promoting or
-3 -
assisting with the following:
1. Brain -storming session of May 14 to ready the city
for development.
2. Promoting chamber objectives
3. Studying the possibilities of attracting housing development
4. Encouragement of First -Time Home Buyers Financing
5. Assisting, where needed, Downtown Ad -Hoc Committee
6. Initiated the computer program of listing properties,
ownership, zoning, etc.
7. Indicated concern at city hall for our present industry
and commerce by visitations
8. Promotions of Realtors Day
9. Promoting Industrial -Commercial Day
10. Setting up brochures
11. Acting as a sounding board for city staff and council for
modifying, limiting, amending, and restricting such issues as:
a. New methods of funding storm drainage
b. Proposed Downtown Design standards
C. Acting as a vehicle for review of downtown increased
assessed valuations.
d. Update on Bridge & By-pass
e. Proposed Performance Standards amendments
f. Zoning, sign and subdivision ordinances
Would you place us on the agenda for June 4, 1985 to consider the budget for
Shakopee Industrial Commercial Day.
-4 -
Hopefully, as in the past, your wisdom will be visionary, and we sincerely
appreciate your concern.
Sincerely,
/�
t.(J .
Paul W. Wermerskirchen
Chairman -
ICC
cc: John Anderson
Anthony Berens
Steve Clay
Jane DuBois
Al Furrie
T i m Keane
Jake Manahan
Jim O'Neill
PW/cd
MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator
FROM: Jeanne Andre, Community Development Director
RE: Downtown Streetscape
DATE: May 31, 1985
Introduction:
The Downtown Committee has recently determined that there is
a need to move forward on the downtown streetscape project
while -the bridge/junction project is awaiting scheduling
by the Minnesota Department of Transportation (MnDOT).
Background:
The Downtown Committee has toured a number of communities to
observe implemented streetscape projects and better determine
what type of streetscape should be undertaken in Shakopee.
As a result of this tour and information from other communities
with streetscape project areas, the Downtown Committee has
reaffirmed its position on two major issues related to street-
scaping in Shakopee: 1) desire to have an old-time theme (such
as in Wayzata, and 2) need to get high quality elements initial-
ly to avoid the need for costly ongoing maintenance.
As the City is now in a position of waiting for some action on
the bridge/junction improvements, the Committee would like to
push forward on a project not immediately affected by the
bridge/highway that will provide some action toward implementing
the downtown plan. The streetscape is seen as a good project
to meet the criteria, which also helps to put forth a more
positive image of the City for the increased traffic which
will be going through town.
There is a perceived need to get a start on the streetscape to
turn around the image of downtown Shakopee, and that this turn
around is necessary to bring in major projects which will create
downtown tax -increment districts. For this reason the Committee
is supporting use of tax -increment available from the racetrack
to provide the 75% City match necessary to implement the street-_
scape (combined with 25% assessments to benefited property).
The Committee also believes the process should begin at this
time, and therefore adopted the following motion:
Clay/Stillman moved to request from City Council
the approval for allocating tax -increment funds
from the racetrack to hire Westwood Planning and
Engineering, or selecting another firm, for land-
scape, street materials and design elements and to
complete the design and engineering for the parking
lot between Holmes and Lewis south of Second Avenue.
Roll Call Vote: Yes: Clay, Forbord, Laurent, Martin,
Stillman, Topic and Wermerskirchen. No: Wampach
Anderson/Andre
Downtown Streetscape
May 31, 1985
Page -2-
The parking lot is seen as a needed project which can be
implemented quickly based on data now available with the
exception of the selection of streetscape elements. To move
forward in an expeditious manner the Committee would like to
continue working with Westwood Planning and Engineering, which
has a landscape architect on staff.
City staff have reviewed the Downtown Committee's preference
and have come up with these additional recommendations:
1) To build the parking lot, design of Second Avenue
should also be established for the whole downtown,
and construction of Second Avenue adjacent to the
parking lot should also be bid with the parking
lot project.
2) Although it would be desirable to include street-
scape of Lewis Street with the Second Avenue project,
this probably should not be done until the bridge/
junction locational study is completed.
3) The City Engineer believes that an effective down-
town project will require close coordination
between the landscape/streetscape and the street,
water and sewer components of the project, and
therefore it is best to keep all of these elements
together under one consulting contract.
If Downtown Committee or Council members have additional con-
cerns or comments on these recommendations, please contact
the City Engineer or Director of Community Development prior
to the meeting.
Alternatives:
1. Do not move forward with streetscape now and do not
allocate funds from the racetrack tax -increment to
downtown streetscape.
2. Allocate racetrack tax -increment funds to downtown
streetscape and proceed to request a proposal for
services from Westwood Planning and Engineering.
3. Allocate racetrack tax -increment funds to downtown
streetscape and proceed to advertise major or minor
request for proposals.
4. Allocate racetrack tax -increment funds to downtown
streetscape but delay proceeding with streetscape
planning and design at this time.
Anderson/Andre
Downtown Streetscape
May 31, 1985
Page -3-
Recommended Action:
Alternative Number 2.
Requested Action:
Direct staff to include $3 million of available tax -increment
funds for the purpose of providing the City match for downtown
streetscape projects in a revised financial plan for the race-
track tax -increment district, and request a proposal for
services from Westwood Planning and Engineering to undertake
selection of downtown streetscape elements, and design of an
initial project including Second Avenue and the parking lot
between Lewis and Holmes Streets.
JA:cah
13�%
MEMO TO: Mayor and Council
FROM: John K. Anderson, City Administrator
RE: Tax Increment Financing (TIF) Projects
DATE: May 15, 1985
INTRODUCTION
The City of Shakopee has received a significant amount of TIF
for municipal projects from the K -Mart project. There are still
proceeds from the K -Mart TIF project that have not been earmarked
for specific projects. In addition, initial computer runs estimating
the TIF proceeds from the racetrack project indicate a significant
amount of money available for needed nunicipal projects for this
tax increment district. The proceeds from the racetrack TIF will be
available for an eight year priod beginning in 1987 which means the
City should decide upon the needed nunicipal projects it wishes to
undertake in 1986 at the very latest.
POTENTIAL PROJECTS
The City Department heads, at their last regular staff meeting,
listed four major projects that needed additional revenue support.
Those projects were as follows:
PROJECTS
1. Downtown Streetscape
2. 169/101 Junction and 101 Bypass
(local contribution)
3. Storm Sewer Construction
4. Street Reconstruction
PRELIMINARY COST ESTIMATE
$3,000,000
$2,000,000
$4,200,000
75% x $5-7,000,000*
*The City share, 750 of the cost, has been discussed previously by
Council as coming ad valorem levies for these projects.
City Council should discuss the four projects listed above and
any additions presented at Tuesday's meeting with the intent of
establishing a definitive list of major municipal projects to receive
assistance from tax increment financing. The purpose for establishing
a definitive list is to prevent the over committment of tax increment
monies to major municipal projects during the next several years.
Council can also approach this whole subject by establishing a
policy that would set parameters for the uses of tax increment proceeds.
Such a policy would probably fail to anticipate all future needs for
tax increment, but would have the effect of preventing staff and/or
Council making tax increment financing the City's "sugar daddy" for
solving all tough project financing issues.
ALTERNATIVES
1. Arrive at a definitive list of projects to be programmed
by the City's fiscal consultant to insure that we use our TIF proceeds
wisely and do not exceed our present TIF capabilities.
Page 2
2. Discuss a broadly based TIF policy that sets priorities for
the kinds of projects TIF proceeds can be used for.
3. Do nothing.
RECOMMENDATION
At the very minimum, City Council needs to respond to Alternative
No. 1 within the next few months so that we can effecively have out
fiscal consultant schedule the use of tax increment proceeds. At the
present time all discussions have focused on using TIF for storm sewer
(this includes the upper valley) and local contributions to highway.
ACTION REQUESTED
1. Establish a definitive list of projects to be programmed for
financing with tax increment funds, including at a minimum $4.200,000
for the storm sewer construction policy/plan and $2,000,000 for local
contributions to highway projects.
2. Direct staff and fiscal consultants to provide Council with
TIF programming alternatives for these projects in June.
dbs
June 3, 1985
TO: MEMBERS OF THE SHAKOPEE CITY COUNCIL & UTILITY COMMISSION.
FROM: JIM STILLMAN, OR BEHALF OF THE COMMUNITY SERVICES BASEBALL
PROGRAMS.
One of the motivating reasons for moving the baseball light towers
was the need for some evening baseball games to releave the pressure
of practicing and actual scheduled games for:
4 Babe Ruth Teams (13-15 yrs. old)
1 Mickey Mantle Team (15 yrs. old)
1 American Legion (16-19 yrs. old)
1 City -Class "B" State Amateur Team
2 Over 35 yrs. old teams.
The only team that can generate money for lights are the 4 older
teams which therefor, may use lights sometime thru out the summer.
The new baseball lights were purchased with the goal of better
lighting along with reducing power consumed and a lower demand.
The old incandeyJent lamps drew about 190 kw.
The new metal halide lamps draw under_7U__kw.
Sometime in the past, the electrical rate was set at 7(,% per kw
hour, which is simular to the commercial service rate (load below
15 kw). We would recommend that this rate be continued.
New
When we were purchasing the new equipment for the new lighting, we
did include a timer control that prevents the lights from being
turned on before 9:00 PM.
This causes baseball games this spring to be called for 30 to 40
minutes as being to dark to play ball befor the lights would come
on. As I understand it, the 9:00 PM criteria was set to avoid any
possible peak demand liability to the Utility Commission and
consequently to the city.
N�
President - Joe Schleper 445.3251
Secretary - George Muenchow 445-2844
Treasurer - Bob Techam 445-6029
Shakopee Community Services
129 East Levee Drive, Shakopee, MN 55379 445-2742
With the cooperation of the Utility Commission, I examined
all the demand charts (15 minute intervals) for May, June, July,
and August 1984. The summary sheet enclosed verifies that
absolutely no liability was created by 1984 baseball lights
and that the closest liability was July 12, 1984 when there
was a surplus of 843 kw available at 7:00 PM and the old
light system was at 190 kw.
The obvious reason for the excess kw is the industrial load
from the "Blue Lake" transformer which is creating the peak
loads between 9:00 AM and 5:00 PM.
Demand charges are the result of the highest 15 minutes
of the billing period (approximately one month).
This study assures me, and I conclude all of you, that the
baseball lights can not cause a liability of a peak demand
to the Utility Commission and for the betterment of all citizens
playing or enjoying baseball, we request that the baseball light's
timer be extablished at 7:00 PM which will allow the baseball
lights to be turned on at the appropriate time of darkness.
The billing and collecting for this electrical energy will
continue to be controlled by the community service office which
controls the scheduling of the field's use.
W W N N N N N N N N 'N.. N N
N O O tp 00 v C+ I A ""
►i
Qc�
I
I'
i
n
' I° Nt'
o a � o
a � �•
1
to
� I
N.
t
I
I1
I
I I
1— t._
--. _-- i
— i
:
i
4–—-- – — --.Ilk
_ 1
NS NI
-
i
_
qC
� 1
NK
I
!
Q3 �`
1
111
_ I r
r � t t
I I 1 r
fI ` 1
41y
W W N N N N N N N N 'N.. N N
N O O tp 00 v C+ I A ""
►i
Qc�
MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administra
FROM: H. R. Spurrier, City Engineer
RE: Intersection Lighting for Offsi�e Rac,track Roadways
DATE: June 3, 1985
Introduction
Attached is a letter from Dave Warzala, Barton-Aschman, recommending
lighting at intersections on roads that are the principal access
to Canterbury Downs.
Background
City staff asked the consultant to investigate the advisability
of lighting installations for the offsite roadways because the
roadways are in an undeveloped area and visability was perceived
to be a problem.
The consultant returned the attached recommendation which includes
approximately $22,200 as the attached cost summary indicates
we have estimated $250,000 for street lighting offsite. This
part of the street lighting proposed herein is only intersection
lighting while the other recommendation provided street lights
all along the route.
It is my recommendation that City Council authorize the expenditure
of $22,200 for street lighting for intersection lightings at
major intersections on the approach to Canterbury Downs.
Action Requested
A motion to authorize proper City officials to apply for service
and to authorize the installation of street lighting at County
Road 83 and State Trunk Highway 101, Shenandoah Drive and State
Trunk Highway 101, Fourth Avenue and Shenandoah Drive, County
Road 83 and 12th Avenue, and Valley Park Drive and 12th Avenue
for a cost of $22,200.
HRS/ jms
Barton-Aschman Associates, Inc.
1610 South Sixth Street Minneapolis, Minnesota ;.5454
May 14, 1985
P-12- 332-0421
PL z
CL,
*14Y II��
L
;3
err r ,
Mr. H.R. Spurrier
City of Shakopee
129 East First Avenue
Shakopee, Minnesota 55379 rn
Re: Intersection lighting at key access points to Canterbury Downs
Dear Mr. Spurrier:
Barton-Aschman Associates, Inc. hereby recommends that the City of Shakopee authorize
its Utilities Commission and others to install lighting at the following intersections:
Power Company
Intersection Jurisdiction
1. C. R. 83 and S.T.H. 1011
2. Shenandoah Drive andl
S.T.H. 101
3. 4th Avenue and Shenandoah
Drive
4. C.R. 83 and 12th Avenue
5. Valley Park Drive and
12th Avenue
TOTAL COST
Installation Est.
By Cost
NSP Service -NSP
Poles -Contractor
SPUC Service-SPUC
Poles -Contractor
SPUC SPUC
SPUC
SPUC
1 Requires MnDOT permit and breakaway provisions
SPUC
SPUC
No Chg.
$2,800
2,100
2,800
4,900
4,700
4,900
$22,200
I
3 e'
Barton-Aschman Associates, Inc.
Mr. H.R. Spurrier
May 14, 1985
Page 2
Lighting of the above listed intersections is needed to provide additional safety during
nighttime departures of Canterbury Downs. Intersections selected for lighting were
evaluated based on the anticipated total number of traffic movements and requirements
for manual traffic control.
Intersection lighting design is proposed as two wood poles located in opposing corners (far
side of intersection) with 40 foot luminaire mounting height along S.T.H. 101 and 30 foot
mounting height, at all other locations. Light source would be 20OW high pressure sodium.
If you have any questions regarding this matter, please call.
E
arza12
ociate
DBW:kro
SHAKOPEE RACETRACK
_ _
1,1,'51 `' !`11'11-ir;i'FPrinted:iO3-jun-85Jr i l I E IMPROVEMENTS
Project Estimated Cost or Contingency ictal Cost Difference
i. Valley Park Drive and Cost in EIS Revised Estimate Encumbered
12th "venue i4 7) S920,000.00 rl ib9'- -
... Trunk Highway 1111 ii,i.LU.UI! $7`72,774.45 .55.v5 $r4�.49i7.11i S77,509.90
Intersections (1,2,:,9) 005,000.10 S359,604.43 $ 5.105.72S394,713.15_$310,2S6.05
Shenandoah Drive :v) $255,000.00 $271,37S.00 ($9.81X'.100) 1261 , 70.00 ($16,37S.00)
4, County Road SJ
Widening (6) 1105,000.00 S174,616.05 $4.366.15 S170,905.00 S6,015.00
�
5. 4th Avenue, Co.Rd.
Racetrack Entrance (6) $274,000,110 $249,091.00 .240119,00 $274,000.00 $0.00
6. Right of Way Cost for
4th Avenue x•45,000.00 $45.000.00
7. Railroad Crossing Cost $245,924.00 051024.00) x240,000.00 0240,000.00)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Total Construction CostS2,3 9,000,00 S2,11E,590.7: SIIS,367.52 $2,236,950.25 S137,433.75
6. Engineering, Legal and
Contingency (Lost $33111000.00 smol000.00 S' �,litj�i.liij $0.00
9. Right of Way Costs for
Shinandoan brive $150,000.00 $150,000.00 $150.0110.110 $0.00
- ----------------------------------------------------------------------
TDTAL AUTHORIZED COSTS S2,S79,000.00 $'2,658.591. . 3.118,:67.52 S2, 7+0,458.25 ;157,433.75
11.4th Avenue. Racetrack
Entrance - Shenandoah
!!.Additional Right -of -Way
4th Avenue
12.Additional Technical
Services - 4th Avenue
13.Possibie Signalization
of i H 101 and Co. Rd. 83,
14.Additional Right of Way
Shenandoah Drive S42,100.00 $42.100,00 042,100.00)
iS.Street Lighting 32=..0i1,11Z2501000 00
0250 000 00)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
, ,000.00 $3,33S,057.73 S149,749.52 #&Q', St1i ..:J (S573,415.25)
S200,000.00 Z22,013.00 $222,013.00 022201..00)
j
$40,000.00 _ $40,000,00 040, 100. 00)
' i1:.
5931687.1111 S9,369.00 $103,056.00 0103,056.00)
GRAND TOTAL
NOTES:
1. increased Cost of Fourth Avenue is due to payement failure noted in Braun Engineering
Company tests and is due to the reouired realignment of the vertical profile.
_. rossid e signaiization of TH 101 and Cg.Rd. 83 is included because there is a potential
that this may meet Warrants by 12/31/85.
3. Bids were almost half of the estimated cost because two signaiization projects did not
meet Warrant=.
4. Additional slope easement Was required for the construction of Shenandoah Drive.
5. Revenues to offset the costs above are listed below:
RevenueAmount
(a) Bond Sale $2.445.'25.00
(b) K Mart TIF District 311,000.00
(c) Mn DOT Grant S60.585.00
(d) Minnesota Racetrack Inc. for
Shenandoah south of 4th -Ave. sex, 000.00
(e) Municipal State Aid $225,000.00
(f) immediate 5peciai Assessment $239.000,00
(g) Additional lir $119.998.00
TOTAL REVENUE -- , 07 , 80S, iii,,
TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator
FROM: Jeanne Andre, Community Development Director
RE: Municipal Home Mortgage Program
DATE: May 31, 1985
The City has for two years unsuccessfully sought to receive
authorization from the state to issue $10 million in bonds for
single family mortgages for first-time home buyers who meet
certain income criteria. The total amount of authorization
available under that program has been allocated. However the
Minnesota Housing Finance Agency (MHFA) has determined that
it would share a portion of its own allocation with municipalities
under another program called the Municipal Home Mortgage Program.
The City Council must determine whether it should seek mortgage
allocation under this program.
Background•
A maximum of $20 million will be available under this program,
with a maximum of $2 million available to each Community. There
will be a complicated selection process which awards 60% of
the funds to proposals which meet extra criteria and thereby
receive bonus points. The remaining 400/'0 will be awarded by
lottery to left -overs from the first category and all other
general applicants. The City must decide if it wants to apply
now, as applications are due no later than June 20th. Selection
will be made in July, and mortgages issued under this program
must be closed by July of 1986.
The bonus points are available for proposals which 1) increase
energy conservation requirements; 2) target at least 30% to
a special geographic area; 3) help especially low-income households
with: a) cash assistance, b) lower cost homes or c) relaxing
certain zoning or subdivision requirements to lower housing
costs; or 4) use for housing with significantly less land per
dwelling unit than average.
Staff reviewed the possible bonus point alternatives and
how the City might proceed to participate. It was judged that
if the City is going to expend the resources to apply, it is
worthwhile to include bonus point criteria to enhance the chance
of selection. Of the possible options for bonus points staff
selected two options that seemed most likely to be able to implement
on short notice, 1) increased energy conservation and 2) geographic
targeting. Developers were then contacted to determine their
interest in participating in the program with these program
components. Due to the limited amount of funds available, only
those developers who expressed an interest in the last application
for mortgage allotment were contacted. If Council desires broader
solicitation of builders, this is still possible. However requests
for more than the available funding have been put forth by those
builders who have responded.
Of the builders contacted, the following companies have
expressed an interest in participating in a program with increased
energy conservation requirements:
1)
Jim
Syckman
2)
Gary
Laurent
3)
Jim
Allen
4)
Rich
Logeais
5)
Tom
Kearney
6)
Klass
Van Zee
Those interested in participating have an interest in receiving
at least $1,500,000 and up to $3,750,000 if available. Therefore
it is clear there is interest in the full $2 million available
to the City if it choses to participate.
These builders have suggested a variety of ways to enhance
the energy requirements including:
1) use of energy trusses and increase ceiling insulation
2) use of 2 x 6 walls and increase wall insulation
3) air vapor wrap of rim joist area for improved air
infiltration ratio.
4) use of triple glazed, casement windows
5) installation of higher efficiency air conditioner
and furnaces
6) avoiding windows on north side of units
7) use of smaller patio doors
The City could possibly allow builders to utilize separate energy
packages, but to improve the City's application it is recommended
that a single energy _package be put together and subscribed
to by all participating builders.
The staff also contacted the. Housing Alliance to see if
they would like to apply these funds to roll-over housing for
senior citizens who plan to purchase units in the downtown rede-
velopment target geographic area. They were interested, but
did not feel they could react to the time frame necessary for
this program and do not wish to participate at this time.
If the City is to proceed it must make a number of decisions
related to participation of builders and lenders in the program
as follows:
1. Allocate funds to builders along one of the following
lines:
a) allocate to all builders equally
b) allocate to all builders equally who have participated
in previous proposals and have expressed an interest
in participating in this proposal by June 4,
1985.
c) allocate to builders who have participated in
previous proposals at a percentage level equivalent
to previous participation.
,3
C�
d) allocate to builders who are Shakopee residents
first and then to outside builders as funds are
available.
e) allocate based on the volume of permits. issued
for construction in Shakopee in the past 12 months.
2. Select lenders to participate:
a) allow builders to use whatever lender they choose
to involve.
b) allow builders to use whatever lender they choose
as long as that lender has experience with MHFA
mortgage programs.
c) select one lender to administer all of the Shakopee
funds.
3. Select energy conservation package
a) allow each builder to present own package
b) work with builders to select one package to which
all would adhere.
Prepare an application for submission to the mortgage program
providing equal allocations to all builders who have participated
in previous proposals and have expressed an interest in participating
in this proposal by June 14, 1985. Work with these builders
to develop a single energy conservation package to which they
all will adhere and a core of participating lenders who have
experience with MHFA mortgage programs, as part of the proposal.
Direct appropriate City officials to submit a proposal
to receive up to $2 million in mortgage allocation funds from
the Minnesota Housing Finance Agency under the Municipal Home
Mortgage Program, providing equal allocations to all builders
who have participated in previous proposals and have expressed
an interest in this proposal by June 4, 1985. Direct staff
to work with these builders to develop a single energy conservation
package to which they all will adhere and a core of participating
lenders who have experience with MHFA mortgage programs, as
part of the proposal.
JA/tw
MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator
FROM: Judi Simac, City Planner /3
RE: C.U.P. No. 367 - Hall Noise Level Testing
DATE: May 21, 1985
Background:
At their May 7, 1985 meeting the City Council determined
that the Hall's could continue to operate under their existing
conditional use permit. The Council also directed the Police
Department to conduct a noise level test from the adjacent
southerly property line. Attached please find the police report
which indicates the level at 54-55 dBA. This reading, according
to the Noise Ordinance, is acceptable for residential areas
during both day and night hours.
A site inspection was made to look into exterior storage
of materials on the lot. While the lot is not completely clear
of exterior storage, the exterior storage evident at the time
of inspection does not appear to be beyond the common exterior
storage of other households in this neighborhood and does not
appear to be business related.
Staff Recommendation:
Staff recommends that no further action be taken regarding
the conditional use permit.
Action Reauested:
Motion to accept the results of the noise level test taken
at 1768 Boiling Springs Lane and allow CC -367 to remain in effect.
Attachment
tw
I REC- D BY ?7 tX -
SHAKOPEE POLICE D, ARTMENT INITIAL COMPLAINT REPC LDAY ; S I M; T IwI T F
MESS KEI CONTROL NUMBER (OC 4 CONT AGENCY NCIC IDENT ICAG�
7 0 0 4 1 0 0 /
L NRR DATE RFPORTED (RPD, TIME RPD ITRPI LOCATION GRID NBR (LGN
0 2 /
PLACE C�OM�MWTED $PLC
/Tib % i 7 / I //I l .//�✓-:�'./}�b i � /I,�i ./. � L ' (yr�:1/��1 11-! ( I
O L NRR HRD SQUAD OR BADGE a(SHN/, TIME ASID (TAS TIME APR ITAR TIME CLR (TCU HAD Cooes
T D / / Y r �L / I ` . t / r / �� "� / P . Pnone
R Radio
L NBR
F47/
5/
ISN
O '1
UOC
/
UCS UCS CODES
/ Pendmp J CLRD/Arresl. Jv th AOec
C - Eac.fCLRD A CLRD(Arrest Ad um ssll (AovI .
U Untounaed - Juv G GOA(
T- Omer
-
A Alarm
Person
�fIi"���
0 2
V visual
M. Ma(I
Reported BY.
%
` ' �q� �li=��
i
T Otner
Atltlress.
Pnone Nbr
Complamant.
Address
Pnone Nbr:
Incloent Description.
OFFICERISOUAD ASSIGNED.
SUPERVISOR APPROVED. ADDT-L REPORTS: [D
__ ENTERED C.J.R.S. ❑
MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator �3
FROM: Barry A. Stock, Administrative Intern
RE: Zylstra-United Request for Refinancing
DATE: May 30, 1985
Zylstra-United Cable Television Company has requested the City
of Shakopee's approval to assign its assets to Mellon Bank of
Pittsburgh, PA.
On May 22, 1985 Mr. Jim Clark, United Cable Central Division
Manager contacted City staff to inform Shakopee that Zylstra-United
Cable Television was going to refinance our cable system. At
this time Mr. Clark requested the City of Shakopee's approval
of a proposed refinancing plan. Under Section 14.02 of the
Cable Communications Franchise Ordinance, staff informed Mr. Clark
that a written request was necessary before the City could take
any action. Mr. Clark was also advised of the City's right
to reply in writing within 30 days of such request indicating
approval of said request or the determination that a public
hearing is necessary due to the potential adverse affect on
the Company's subscribers.
Given these conditions Mr. Clark arrived in Shakopee on May
24, 1985 to personally hand deliver their formal request for
the approval of Zylstra-United's refinancing plan. (See attachment
No. 1) At this time Mr. Clark explained the reasoning behind
the proposed refinancing. He stated that the refinancing plan
was one component of a five point business plan that was developed
by United Cable Company when they assumed management responsibility.
To date three of their goals have been achieved, one has been
opposed by the City (consolidation of cable studios) and the
fifth is pending approval this evening (refinancing).
Because of the poor cash flow within our cable system and the
large amount of outstanding debts, Mr. Clark stressed the urgency
of the City's approval. He has repeatedly stated to me that,
"approval of their request is necessary for the survival and
revival of the cable system". To give the Council a better under-
standing of Zylstra-United's request, Mr. Clark has drafted
a memo which explains the Company's position and proposal.
(See attachment No. 2)
Because of the timing of Zylstra-United's request the Cable
Communications Advisory Commission has not met to consider this
issue and therefore has made no recommendation. However, staff
has contacted the Chairman of the Commission, Mr. Bill Anderson,
to ascertain if a special meeting of the Cable Commission would
be appropriate. Mr. Anderson felt that the issue was "cut and
dry in favor of the Company's request" and that a meeting of
the Commission would simply delay a positive City response.
It appears that if the City denies approval of the Cable Company's
refinancing plan two outcomes are likely. First, we probably
will not see any dollars to fund capital cable projects such
as the institutional network, character generators and public
access. Second, the chance for the total failure of our system
would increase significantly.
Alternatives
1. Deny approval of Zylstra-United's request to refinance
the Shakopee cable system.
2. Grant approval of Zylstra-United's request to refinance
the Shakopee cable system ( pledging of assets to Mellon
Bank of Pittsburgh, PA).
3. Schedule a public hearing before the Shakopee Cable Communi-
cations Advisory Commission to consider Zylstra-United's
request for refinancing.
Staff Recommendation
Staff recommends alternative No. 2.
Move to approve Zylstra-United's request to refinance the Shakopee
Cable System (pledging of assets to Mellon Bank of Pittsburgh,
PA).
BAS/ jms
Attachment Number 1
zylstra united
cable television co.
IP
City of Shakopee
129 IST Avenue East
Shakopee, Minnesota 55379
ATTN: Barry Stock
Dear Barry:
As you are aware, United Cable as managing partner is refinancing
the Zylstr—United Chaska/Shakopee Cable Television System. The
financial survival ( and revival) of the system depend on this
refinancing through Mellon Bank of Pittsburg, Pa. Mellon, as a
condition of the loan, is requiring the system to pledge its assets
as security.
Accordingly, per Section 14.02 A.1 of our Shakopee forehand agreement,
Zylstra—United requests city approval to assign its assets to Mellon
Bank of Pittsburg, Pa.
Your prompt approval per Section 14.02 A.2 would be appreciated.
Sincerely,
James R. Clark
Acting General Manager
JRC/klh
137 E. 1 st Avenue 9 Shakopee, Minnesota 55379 • P.O. Box 315 9 (612) 445-6152
7�united
central
May 28, 1985
City of Shakopee
129 East First Avenue
Shakopee, MN 55379-1376
Dear Sirs:
Attachment Number 2
cable television corporation
division office
In reference to our May 24, 1985 request to pledge the assets of Zylstra-
United's Cable Television System to Mellon Bank of Pittsburg, Pa, please
consider the following:
BACKGROUND:
Zylstra-United (ZU) is a limited partnership owned by General Partners
Zylstra Communications (1%) and United Cable (1%), and 98% by private
limited partners. Because of ZU's distressing performance, representatives
from the three owners agreed to change managing partners. Effective
January, 1985, United Cable assumed management responsibility. At that
time, John Suranyi was appointed System Manager and a five point business
plan with the objective of achieving positive cash flow was developed.
The plan is as follows:
GOAL
1. Improve customer service
and technical quality.
2. Secure Shakopee rate increase
equalizing rates.
3. Consolidate offices.
4. Consolidate studios.
5. Refinance Zylstra-United.
(312) 931-1140 525 Tollgate Road, Suite D
STATUS
Improvement noted by both
cities.
Increase effective 4/85.
Combined 5/85.
Consolidation opposed.
Cost reduction under consideration
in Chaska.
Cleared through Bank and United.
Requires City approval.
0 Mona Loa Office Park 0 Elgin, Illinois 60120
J-/
CHASKA/SHAKOPEE CASH FLOW OVERVIEW (12/84 audited only):
Revenues
Less: Operating Expenses
Net Operating Income
Less: Interest
Less: Capital Expenditures
Cash Flow
12/84
6/85
12/85
581000
65,000
72,000
459000
43,000
421000
13,000
227000
30,000
27,000
25,000
26,000
5,000
0
41000
(19,000)
(3,000)
0
Cash Flow is our objective. ZU must start paying its own bills to be an
ongoing business concern. Then we can possibly embark on other capital
intensive projects such as institutional loops, character generator systems,
data transmission, etc...
REFINANCING PIAN:
ZU's build was financed by limited partnership funds and a $2.0 million
unsecured line of credit with Norwest Bank of Minneapolis, MN. The system
currently owes trade creditors, including original build contractors,
approximately $400,000 aging six to twelve months past due. Only our
refinancing plan has kept these creditors from forcing the system into
bankruptcy in which case, everybody loses, especially our subscribers.
The plan is to increase our line of credit from $2.0 million to $2.5 million
dollars. Of the additional $500,000, $400,000 would be used to pay off
creditors and $100,000 would be used to subsidize operations in 1985 until
cash flow is achieved.
United Cable, as managing partner approached Norwest with the plan in
January, 1985 and they declined. United approached Mellon Bank, United's
lead lender, in February, 1985 and they agreed providing the General Partners
would "make well" (guarantee) $750,000 of the loan and the system's assets
be pledged. In March and April, 1985 we tried ever means to get Zylstra
to guarantee their half, or $375,000. They refused. Finally United Cable
agreed in May to assume all $750,000 "make well". As the paperwork developed,
Mellon noted City approval was required to "assign" system assets. I was
advised of this May 21, 1985 and flew to Minneapolis three days later. While
City administrators were supportive of the plan and optimistic, both indicated
council approval would be required.
RECOMMENDATION:
Per the formal letter dated May 24, 1985, we requestrp ompt approval for
the following reasons:
1. Without an injection of funds the business will fail and cable services
will be disrupted, if not ceased.
2. From the City's point of view, if the system were to fail now, Chaska/
Shakopee would still be dealing with a bank (Norwest) as lead creditor
or "trustee". Allowing Mellon to secure the loans only helps their
position relative to unsecured creditors in the unlikely event of a
future failure
2
3. The business plan is dependent upon refinancing.
4. Funds for good projects (access, I -loops, etc...) will be available this
summer.
Thank you for your consideration. We are optimistic concerning this plan
and our future relationship with the City and people of Chaska/Shakopee.
Your prompt approval will help ensure quality present and future cable
communications services will be provided.
Sincerely,
i/Q1LLA \L_
s R. Clark
Acting General Manager
Zylstra-United Cable Television
JRC:jd
3
MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator
FROM: Judith S. Cox, City Clerk
RE: Application for Temporary Beer License by
St. Mark's Church
DATE: May 31, 1985
Introduction and Background:
Application has been received from St. Mark's Church for a
temporary beer license on church property for July 27th and
July 28th.
The application is in order.
Alternatives:
1.- Approve application.
2. Deny application.
Recommendation:
Alternative number 1.
Recommended Action:
Approve the application and °rant a temporary 3.2 beer license
to St. Mark's Catholic Church, 3rd and Scott Street for July
27th and July 28th, 1985.
JSC:cah
Memo To: John Anderson, Shakopee City Administrator
From: George Muenchow, Community Services Director
Subject: Chamber Of Commerce Tourist Information Building
Introduction
The Shakopee Chamber Of Commerce, through its Tourism Committee, is requesting
permission to place a temporary structure in Memorial Park for the purpose of
guiding tourists stopping for information pertaining to area attractions.
Background
The building in question is a wooden structure approximately 10'x14' that is
easily moved on a skid. It currently is placed at the western entrance of
Murphy's Landing and apparently has been designated as surplus property by
them. At one time it served as an entrance booth for them. The building would
fit in if placed in Memorial Park. It does need some cosmetic work such as
staining, repair of some shingles etc. It would be located in the general
vicinity of the rest room facility in Memorial Park. Appropriate signing and
perhaps a telephone would be needed.
This whole project is dependent upon the securing of adequate staffing personnel
of which every effort is being made to secure the same.
Alternatives
1. Grant permission as requested.
2. Deny request.
Recommendation
Grant permission to the Shakopee Chamber Of Commerce to locate a temporary
Tourist Information Building in Memorial Park.
Action
Move to grant permission to the Shakopee Chamber Of Commerce to locate and operate
a temporary Tourist Information Building in Memorial Park including the installation
of a telephone and electrical service, if deemed necessary.
SHAKOPEE AREA
P.O. BOX NO. 203 J SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA 55379 (612) 445-1660
May 20, 1985
Shakopee City Council
129 East First Avenue
Shakopee, MN. 55379
Gentlemen:
The Shakopee Chamber is requesting your approval to locate a
temporary tourism building in Memorial Park.
Subject to your approval and our obtaining State funding,
this building will be staffed by personnel during the
summer tourism season.
The building that is proposed is easily moved and could
be relocated should the need develop.
Thank you for your consideration of this request.
Sincerely,
Frank Reid
Chamber Tourism Committee
S \�v `.. 4' .•
illi �
MAY
1111
CITYILL: r .
league of minnesota cities
May 10, 1985
TO: IAll Members (c/o Mayors, Managers, Clerks)
SUBJECT: 1985 Nominations for LMC Board of Directors
Each year at this time, members of the LMC Nominating Committee meet to
consider candidates for election to the LMC Board of Directors. I would like
to encourage you to participate in that selection process at the very outset
by requesting your advice in suggesting candidates to be considered for
nomination. The Nominating Committee will recommend four nominees to the
Board this year. Those nominations will be announced at the 1985 LMC Annual
Meeting, scheduled during the LMC Annual Conference in June. The date of the
LMC Annual Meeting is Thursday., June 1.3. The meeting will take place at the
Radisson in St. Paul, MN.
The Board positions that expire June,, 1985 are four 3 -year term memberships.
The committee will also consider nominees to fill any Board vacancies that may
occur. The committee will also recommend nominations for LMC Officers.
Officers of the League of Minnesota Cities are elected annually by the
membership at the LMC Annual Meeting. Mayor Mary Anderson of Golden Valley
currently serves as LMC President; Susan Edel, Council. Member of Winona is
Vice President.
Guidelines followed by the Nominating Committee are enclosed with this letter,
along with a listing of current members of the LMC Board of Directors and
Officers. The guidelines have been developed over the years as.a result of
the deliberations of previous Nominating Committees.
President Anderson has completed her appointment -s to the nominating committee
and they are listed below. The first meeting of the Nominating Committee will
be late May. A second meeting will be held at the LMC Annual Conference. It
would be helpful to have your comments and advice as soon as possible. In _
order to assist in that process, I suggest that you call a member of the
nominating committee or me. If you are aware of an official of a LMC member
city who you view as a strong candidate for nomination, please provide his/her
name and a brief resume of qualifications. That information may be sent to
the League Office, attention: Helen Schendel. This communication may be as
formal as you prefer. The LMC Nominating Committee will conduct interviews
with each candidate on June 12th, during the LMC Annual Conference.
(OVER)
80 university avenue east, st. paul, minnesota 551 D 1 CE= 1 21 227-51=00
Page 2
1985 Nominations LMC Board of Directors
The nominating committee's goal is to assure that every qualified candidate is
considered. Even if the city official you nominate is not aware of your
suggestion, you may certainly put the individual's name forward for
consideration. The Nominating Committee, as a regular part of procedure, will
confirm with that person whether to present his/her name to the Annual
Conference.
On behalf of the 1985 LMC Nominating Committee, I want to thank you for your
assistance and assure you that all suggestions will be seriously considered.
Sincerely,
Helen Schendel
Associate Director
Enclosure
AS:ss
NOMINATING COMMITTEE
Millie MacLeod, Councilmember, Moorhead, Chair
Kathy O'Brien, Councilmember, Minneapolis
Mayor Marvin Anderson, Breckenridge
Carol Schroden, City Administrator, St. Charles
John Anderson, City Manager, Shakopee
Rosemary Given—Amble, Councilmember, Bemidji
Jim Brimeyer, City Manager, St. Louis Park
Dean Massett, City Administrator, Red Wing
U I LLE
league of minnesota cities
GUIDELINES
1. Geographic and Population Size Representation
There has been a conscious effort to see that different parts of the
state are represented on the Board, as well as the different sizes of
cities that are among the League's constituency.
2. Twin Cities Area/Outstate Balance
While there are no specific seats on the Board reserved for Twin Cities
area or outstate members, it has been a consistent practice to maintain a
rough balance of Board members from these areas.
3. Elected/Appointed Balance
Traditionally both elected and appointed municipal officials have
participated in all aspects of the League's activities, including
membership in the Board of Directors. Although no specific number of
seats on the Board are reserved for elected as distinct from appointed
Wfficials, it has been a consistent practice to have a majority of the
Board composed of elected officials. Furthermore, there has been some
effort to provide an opportunity for a variety of appointed officials
(e.g., clerks, city managers, attorneys, assessors, etc.) to serve on the
Board.
4. Rotation of Membership
In view of the fact that the League has more than 750 member cities any
individual who serves a full term on the Board is not normally considered
for another Board term. However, persons with Board experience are often
considered as potential officers.
(OVER)
OO university avenue east, S-
L'. paul, minnesota 55 1 01 [B 1 21 227-5o0O
BOARD OF DIRECTORS AND
OFFICERS OF THE LEAGUE 1984-85
Terms of Office
President: Mary Anderson, Mayor, Golden Valley
Elected by membership, June 1984 term expires, June 1985
Vice President: Susan Edel, Councilmember, Winona
Elected by membership, June 1984 term expires, June 1985
Directors: Bill Bassett, City Manager, Mankato
Elected by membership, June 1982 term expires, June 1985
Betty Bell, City Clerk, Coon Rapids
Elected by membership, June 1982 term expires, June 1985
Richard Johnson, City Clerk, Brainerd
Elected by membership, June 1982 term expires, June 1985
Chuck Hazama, Mayor, Rochester
Elected by membership, June 1984 term expires, June 1985
(Note: Chuck has had two one year terms)
Patricia Borniwell, City Clerk -Treasurer -Admin., Dassel
Elected by membership, June 1983 term expires, June 1986
James Miller, City Manager, Minnetonka
Elected by membership, June 1983 term expires, June 1986
Kathy O'Brien, Councilmember, Minneapolis
Elected by membership, June 1983 term expires, June 1986
Elizabeth Witt, Councilmember, Mendota Heights
Elected by membership, June 1983 term expires, June 1986
Kelly Ferber, Mayor, Fergus Falls
Elected by membership, June 1984 term expires, June 1987
Bob Benke, Councilmember, New Brighton
Elected by membership, June 1984 term expires, June 1987
Connie Morrison, Mayor, Burnsville
Elected by membership, June 1984 term expires, June 1987
Duane Knutson, Mayor, Fertile
Elected by membership, June 1984 term expires, June 1987
Ex Officio: Ron Backes, Councilmember, St. Louis Park
President, Assn. of Metropolitan Municipalities
June 1984, term expires, June 1985
LMC Past President: Robert Anderson, Mayor, International Falls
Term expires, June 1985
HS: ss
MEMO TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: John K. Anderson, City Administrator
RE: Joint Power Agreement Establishing a Watershed
Commission for the Shakopee Basin Watershed
DATE: May 31, 1985
Introduction
The City Engineer and I have been meeting with Scott County
officials, Prior Lake officials, and Jackson and Louisville
Township officials to put together an acceptable agreement for
execution prior to July 1, 1985.
The townships have agreed to the proposed agreement and will
probably want one final meeting before voting on it because
it contains language agreed upon at our last meeting, May 29,
1985, that they have not yet seen in print.
We would like Council approval prior to the next meeting with
the townships. If any final changes are required we can make
amendments at Council's 6/18/85 meeting.
Alternatives
1. Approve the proposed agreement as drafted.
2. Make amendments and direct staff to present them to the
other parties to the agreement.
Recommendation
I recommend alternative No. 1. The agreement is structured
so that it takes all four members to impose some cost on one
another, but allows any one jurisdiction to undertake a project
by paying for all project expenses for a project that will not
ultimately effect the other members.
Action Requested
Authorize the appropriate City officials to execute a Joint
Power Agreement Establishing a Watershed Commission for the
Shakopee Basin Watershed with the City of Prior Lake, Louisville
Township and Jackson Township.
JKA/jms
FINAL DRAFT
JOINT POWER AGREEMENT
ESTABLISHING A WATERSHED COMMISSION
FOR THE SHAKOPEE BASIN WATERSHED
The parties to this agreement are cities and townships
which have land that drain surface water in to the Minnesota
River. This agreement is made pursuant to the authority conferred
upon the parties by Minnesota Statutes 1982 471.59 and 473.875,
et. s-ec.
1. Name. The parties hereby create and establish the
Shakopee Basin Water Management Commission.
2. General Purpose. The purpose of this agreement is
to provide an organization to preserve and use the natural water
storage and retention of the Shakopee Basin watershed to (a)
reduce to the greatest practical extent capital expenditures
necessary to control excessive volumes and rates of runoff,
(b) preserve water quality, (c) prevent flooding and erosion
from surface flows, (d) study ground water recharge, (e) coop-
erate in protecting and enhancing fish and wildlife habitat
and water recreational facilities, (f) secure the other benefits
associated with the proper management of surface water, (g)
to exercise the authority of a watershed district under section
112.65 to accept the transfer of drainage systems in the watershed,
to repair, improve, and maintain the transferred drainage systems,
and to construct all new drainage systems and improvements of
existing drainage systems in the watershed, provided that projects
may be carried out under the powers granted in chapter 106,
112, or 473 and that proceedings of the board with respect to
the systems must be in conformance with the watershed plan adopted
under section 473.878; and (h) carry out all the duties and
responsibilities outlined in Minn. Statutes 473.875 through
473.883, to the extent authorized in this agreement.
Subdivision 1. "Commission" means the organization created
by this agreement in full name of which is Shakopee Basin Watershed
Management Commission." It shall be a public agency of its
members.
Subdivision 2. "Board" means the board of commissioners
of the Commission.
Subdivision 3. "Council" means the governing body of a
governmental unit which is a member of this Commission.
!3 �
Subdivision 4. "Governmental unit" means any township
or city which is a member of this Commission.
Subdivision 5. "Member" means a governmental unit which
enters into this agreement.
Subdivision 6. "Shakopee Basin Watershed" or "watershed"
means the area contained within a line drawn around the extremities
of all terrain whose surface drainage is tributary to this area
and within the mapped areas delineated on the map filed with
the Water Resources Board pursuant to Minn. Statutes 473.87,
Subd. 2.
4. Membership. The membership of the Commission shall
consist of the following governmental units:
Jackson Township
Louisville Township
City of Shakopee
City of Prior Lake
No change in governmental boundaries, structure, organizational
status or character shall affect the eligibility of.any governmental
unit listed to be represented on the Commission, so long as
such governmental unit continues to exist as a separate political
entity.
5. Advisors. The following shall be requested to appoint
a nonvoting advisory member to the Commission:
Scott County
Scott County Soil and Water
Conservation District
The County and District shall not contribute funds for the operation
of the Water Management Organization (WMO), except as provided
in Minn. Statute 473.883, but may provide technical services.
2
Subdivision 4. "Governmental unit" means any township
or city which is a member of this Commission.
Subdivision 5. "Member" means a governmental unit which
enters into this agreement.
Subdivision 6. "Shakopee Basin Watershed" or "watershed"
means the area contained within a line drawn around the extremities
of all terrain whose surface drainage is tributary to this area
and within the mapped areas delineated on the map filed with
the Water Resources Board pursuant to Minn. Statutes 473.87,
Subd. 2.
4. Membership. The membership of the Commission shall
consist of the following governmental units:
Jackson Township
Louisville Township
City of Shakopee
City of Prior Lake
No change in governmental boundaries, structure, organizational
status or character shall affect the eligibility of any governmental
unit listed to be represented on the Commission, so long as
such governmental unit continues to exist as a separate political
entity.
5. Advisors. The following shall be requested to appoint
a nonvoting advisory member to the Commission:
Scott County
Scott County Soil and Water
Conservation District
The County and District shall not contribute funds for the operation
of the Water Management Organization (WMO), except as provided
in Minn. Statute 473.883, but may provide technical services.
2
f
6. Board cf Commissioners.
Subdivision 1. the governing body of the Commission shall
be its Board, which shall consist of four (4) members, one from
each governmental unit. The Board shall consist of one (1)
commissioner appointed by Jackson Township, one (1) commissioner
appointed by Louisville Township, one (1) commissioner appointed
by the City of Shakopee, and one (1) commissioner appointed
by the City of Prior Lake. Vacancies in office shall be filled
for the remainder of the term by the governing bodies who appointed
or had the right to appoint the commissioner. The members shall
meet upon ten (10) days' notice at a time and place selected
by the Board.
Subdivision 2. The four (4) commissioners shall be appointed
for a term to coincide with the formation of the initial Board,
expiring upon adoption of the Plan. The term of each commissioner
shall be ( ) years and until their successors are selected and
qualify, and shall commence on January 1, except that the terms
of the commissioners first appointed shall commence from the
date of their appointment and shall terminate as follows:
A. One commissioner appointed by the City of Shakopee
whose term shall expire December 31, 19--
B.
9_.
B. One commissioner appointed by the Jackson Township
Board whose term shall expire December 31, 19
C. One commissioner appointed by the Louisville Township
Board shall be for a term expiring December 31, 19_.
D. One commissioner appointed by the City of Prior Lake
shall be for a term expiring December 31, 19_.
Subdivision 3. A commissioner may be removed from the
Board prior to the expiration of his or her term, by the Member
governmental unit replacing the commissioner who had been appointed.
Subdivision 4. Commissioners shall serve without compensation
from the Commission, but this shall not prevent a governmental
unit from providing compensation for a commissioner for serving
on the Board.
Subdivision 5. At the first meeting of the Board each
year the Board shall elect from its commissioners a chair, a
vice chair, a secretary, a treasurer and such other officers
as it deems necessary to conduct its meetings and affairs.
At the organizational meeting or as soon thereafter as it may
be reasonably done, the Commission shall adopt rules and regulations
governing its meetings. Such rules and regulations may be amended
from time to time at either a regular or a special meeting of
the Commission provided that at least ten (10) days' prior notice
of the proposed amendment has been furnished to each person
to whom notice of the Board meetings is required to be sent.
A majority vote of all eligible votes of the then existing members
of the commission shall be sufficient to adopt any proposed
amendment to such rules and regulations.
7. Powers and Duties of the Commission.
Subdivision 1. The Commission, acting by its Board of
Commissioners:
(a) Shall prepare a watershed management plan meeting
the requirements of Minn. Statute 473.878;
(b) The plan as developed by the Watershed Commission
shall include and address those items as listed in section
2 under General Purpose. Each Member within the watershed
organization shall approve said plan prior to its adoption
prior to drafting an implementation plan.
Subdivision 2. The Commission may, with unanimous approval
of the Board, employ such persons as it deems necessary to accomplish
its duties and powers.
Subdivision 3. The Commission may contract for space and
for material and supplies to carry on its activities either
with a Member or elsewhere.
Subdivision 4. The Commission may acquire necessary personal
property to carry out its powers and its duties.
Subdivision 5. The Commission may make necessary surveys
or use other reliable surveys and data to prepare and submit
a plan.
Subdivision 6. The Commission shall cooperate with the
Minnesota Water Resources Board and other Minnesota and Federal
agencies concerned with water problems for obtaining information
to prepare and submit a plan.
Subdivision 7. The Commission when authorized by the plan
may -contract for or purchase such insurance as the Board deems
necessary for the protection of the Commission.
Subdivision 8. The commission may enter upon lands within
or without the watershed when necessary to make surveys and
investigations to accomplish the purposes of the Commission.
This does not preempt the property owners rights to assert a
claim for damages where interference with the use of the land
takes place.
I
.Subdivision 9. The Commission shall upon request provide
any member governmental unit with technical data, or any other
information which the Commission has knowledge of, which will
assist the governmental unit in preparing land use classifications
or local water management plans within the watershed.
Subdivision 10. The Commission may collect money subject
to the provisions of this agreement, from its Members and from
any other source approved by a majority of its Board. No money
shall be collected or authorized for the cost of a capital improve-
ment unless such capital improvement is approved by the Town
Board or City Council of each of the members of the Commission
in such manner as.they shall determine. Once such improvement
is approved by the Town Board or City Council of each member,
payment shall then be made according to M.S. 1473.883.
Subdivision 11. The Commission may, with unanimous approval
of the Board, make contracts, incur expenses and make expenditures
necessary and incidental to the effectuation of its purposes
and powers, with regard to formulating the plan except as limited
by this agreement.
Subdivision 12. The Commission shall cause to be made
an annual.audit of the books and accounts of the commission
and shall make and file a report to its Members at least once
each year including the following information:
(a) The financial condition of the commission;
(b) The status of plan; and
(c) The business transacted by the Commission and other
matters which affect the interests of the commission.
Copies of the report shall be transmitted to the clerk
of each member governmental unit.
Subdivision 13. The Commission's books, reports and records
shall be available for, and open to, inspection by its members
at all reasonable times.
Subdivision 114. The Commission may recommend changes in
this agreement to'its Members. Any changes must be accepted
and approved by all the Members.
Subdivision 15. Should the Commission decline to undertake
any of its powers hereinbefore set forth in this Paragraph 7,
any individual Member of this Commission, at its sole cost and
expense, may undertake any project this Commission has declined
to undertake, provided said project does not adversely affect
the other Members of this Commission.
8. Finances.
Subdivision 1. The Commission funds may be expended by
the Board in accordance with this agreement in a manner determined
by the Board. The Board shall designate one or more national
or state bank or trust companies authorized to receive deposits
of public monies to act as depositories for the Commission funds. In
no event shall there be a disbursement of Commission funds without
the signature of a least two Board members, one of whom shall
be the treasurer. The treasurer shall be required to file with
the secretary of the Board a bond in the sum of at least $10,000.00
or such higher amount as shall be determined by the Board.
The commission shall pay the premium on said bond.
Subdivision 2. General Administration; contents. Each
Member agrees to contribute each year to a general fund, said
fund to be used for general administration purposes including,
but not limited to: salaries, rent, supplies, development of
an overall plan, insurance, bonds. The funds may also be used
for normal maintenance of the facilities, but any extraordinary
maintenance or repair expense shall be treated as an improvement
cost and processed in accordance with Subdivision 3 of this
paragraph. The annual contribution by each Member shall be
based fifty percent (50p) on the assessed valuation of all property
within the watershed and fifty percent(50%) on the basis of
the total area of each Member within the boundaries of the watershed
each year to the total area in the watershed. In no event shall
any assessment require a contribution by a local unit of government
in any calendar year to exceed one—half of a mill on each dollar
of assessed valuation of its territory within the watershed.
The township governmental unit at the annual meeting shall make
a levy not to exceed the amount assessed.
Subdivision 3. On or before January 1st of each year,
the Board shall prepare a proposed general administrative budget
for the ensuing year and decide upon the total amount necessary
for the general fund. On or before January 5th of each year,
the secretary of the Board shall certify the proposed budget
to the Clerk of each Member governmental unit, together with
a statement of the proportion of the proposed budget to be provided
by each Member. Each Member agrees it will review the proposed
budget. The Board shall, upon notice from any Member received
prior to February 1st, hear objections to the proposed budget,
and may upon notice to all Members and after a hearing, modify
or amend the proposed budget, and then, on or before March 1st
the secretary of the Board shall give notice to the Members
of any and all modifications or amendments to the proposed budget.
Each Member then agrees to act on the proposed budget with any
revisions or amendments by March 31st, and said determination
shall be conclusive.
R
13
Subdivision 4. The Fiscal Year for the Commission shall
be April 1st to March 31st.
9. Duration.
Subdivision 1. Each member agrees to be bound by the terms
of this agreement until January 1, 2000, and it may be continued
thereafter upon the agreement of all the parties.
Subdivision 2. This agreement may be terminated prior
to January 1, 2000 by the written agreement of 3/4 of the members.
Subdivision 3. In addition to the manner provided in Subdi-
vision 2 for termination, any member may petition the Board
to dissolve the agreement. Upon 30 days' notice in writing
the the clerk of each Member governmental unit, the Board shall
hold a nearing and upon a favorable vote by 3/4 of all eligible
votes of then existing Board members, the Board shall by resolution
recommend that the commission be dissolved.
10. Dissolution
Upon dissolution of the Commission, all property of the
Commission shall be sold and the proceeds thereof, together
with monies on hand, shall be distributed to the eligible members
of the Commission. Such distribution of Commission assets shall
be made in proportion to the total contribution to the Commission
required by the last annual budget.
11. Effective Date.
This agreement shall be in full force and effect when all
delineated designated governmental units.within the watershed
in paragraph four of this agreement, file a certified copy of
a resolution approving this agreement and upon the execution
of this agreement by all the parties.. All Members need not
sign the same copy. The resolution and signed agreement shall
be filed with the ( ) who shall notify all Members in writing
of its effective date and set a date for the Board's first meeting.
The first meeting shall take place at the (
within 60 days after the effective date. Prior to the effective
date of this agreement, any signatory may rescind their approval.
Unless all 4 potential Members have signed this agreement by
July 1, 1985, it shall be null and void.
7
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned governmental units,
by action of their governing bodies, have caused this agreement
to be executed in accordance with the authority of Minn.
Stat. 471.59.
CITY OF PRIOR LAKE
BY
ITS
AND
ITS
CITY OF SHAKOPEE
BY
ITS
AND
ITS
TOWNSHIP OF LOUISVILLE
BY
ITS CHAIRMAN
BY
ITS CLERK
TOWNSHIP OF JACKSON
BY
ITS CHAIRMAN
BY
ITS CLERK
STATE OF MINNESOTA)
)ss
COUNTY OF SCOTT )
%3--A�
On this day of 10 , the foregoing
Amendment of Joint Powers Agreement was acknowledged before
me by and
and , the
City of
a municipal corporation, eonebehalfyofosaidecorporationakopee,
Notary Public
STATE OF MINNESOTA)
)ss
COUNTY OF SCOTT )
On this day of , 19 , the foregoing
Amendment of Joint Powers Agreement was acknowledged before
me by and , the
and , respectively, of the City of Prior Lake,
a municipal corporation, on behalf of said corporation.
Notary Public
STATE OF MINNESOTA)
)ss
COUNTY OF SCOTT )
On this day of , 19 , the foregoing
Amendment of Joint Powers Agreement was acknowledged before
me by and , the
and , respectively, of the Township of Louisville,
a municipal corporation, on behalf of said corporation.
Notary Public
STATE OF MINNESOTA)
)ss
COUNTY OF SCOTT )
On this day of , 19 , the foregoing
Amendment of Joint Powers Agreement was acknowledged before
me by and , the
and , respectively, of the Township of Jackson,
a municipal corporation, on behalf of said corporation.
Notary Public
TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator
FROM: Gregg Voxland, Finance Director
RE: Unfunded Project Costs (Audit Follow-up)
DATE: May 30, 1985
The management letter for the 1984 audit has recommended eliminating
the deficit in the Other Improvements Fund. This deficit is
from three old projects. One is Market Street which did involve some
work. Also involved are Fifth Avenue and Thirteenth Avenue which
had engineering work done on them. Total costs for all three
projects are $21,034.75.
The costs of these projects are listed in the Budget each year,
so that there is a record of them and they are not lost. Carrying
these projects on the books the way we are is not the proper
way to account for them because we are not taking any action
to assess the costs. Also, it does not show readers of the
Financial Report (Moody's) that the City is dealing with the
problem of the fund deficit.
The Capita] Improvement Fund was set up to handle this
type of situation. Using this fund to finance the costs already
incurred does not change the ability of the City to recover
those costs in the future. The Auditor had some concern that
the General Fund should pay for these projects because the costs
were incurred before the Capital Improvement Fund was established.
However, % do not mhmry tho gome t#Mnorn And fo@1 thgt th@ PTF
A goprowrim t@ um to tRk Egg@:
Alternatives
o.
2. Transfer from General Fund.
3. Transfer from Capital Improvement Fund.
Recommonkstioni
Alternative number 3.
Move to authorize the transfer of $21,034.75 from the Capital
Improvement Fund to the Other Improvements Fund in order to
eliminate the deficit in the latter fund which is a result of
old projects.
UI
Y
Y
Y
Y
fl)N
•--
1,1
U
f
U
U
ULi
R
a
#
#
S
to a
M
1
C
! a
M
-
N
rJ a
C)
�
M
L
N
a
^
r
N
1...
N
^
�
1 !'
1-1
_
•
N
i
I
n ^ ^
fJ
^
N
N
1
N
n
M
r
M
N
♦..,
�..
N .
Y
M
ti
M1
v-
M
tL`
N
t^
N
N
N N.
N
n.l
NTi
M
M
M
M
M
It
1
J
M
N
N
N
N
N
It
ItU
C
N
J
a
a
rr c z'
_
[,�.
-
til .E Y.
lJ
W
Z
•il
S..
V1
v
R
W
i.
.r v
J
J
Q'
r7
_ a-
J
4.
2
W 7 �'
RLL
d
LL.
_
;1••
�"
tl
..a
r
fl
�•-.
73
tJ 1xJ�
til
N
H
l.i
O!
Q
Q..
K
i
N
In
a
10 LL U -
>Y LL ti.U
.r -
7D
U
z:
c
Y x .,
7
y
:t..
O
,;
..,
W
U LJ L.11
--
i
U
to
c
Yr
a
T
o
�.
/„
~
n F t-
to
N.
LL;
-
p
�•
_CAQ;
D
Le
W
Lj
Vl Vl
C:1
Q
q
U
U
M-
f
L.J.
LL
j
f
•
#
#
#
#
41,
M rl)
C n
N. N
' %Q
i
•
to to
M M
M M
r` N
�7'r�
TO"
? d
M P-1
~
N N
♦�
4 Q
�- r
NfV
7
w.
F
tit
IPI
n \ \
\
\
T
•''
1 N N
N
N
N
N
N
T
T
2 IJ
\
n r- J1 to
to
WN
r
n
to
n
v
CJ a T
• x
In
^
✓'
N
1.1
^
n
n
n
n
7
1:1
s:
to
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
2
Y
Y
O
U
V
U
•1
U
N
U
U
v
U
.v
U
il
.v v
U
U
f
t
7
In
r
n cn
C^
to
k
f
k
•
r
i
•
tai
•
h•r
k
:.J
k
i
IA.W
tj
tr
nd �d
O
r•..
F- _
J
eN
r-•
�
U i
J
IH
'.J
J
2
J.
tl't-
x
CL
J
7
a
1-r
LL. _
4.
O
CL
J
L t
LJ
CL
ar
•I
r1
m
�
a:
1..,
0.
y
•
L
V
V
O
K �Y
il.
rL
cc
L:
Y--
t,�
rH
V
W
d
H
W
U
F
Y
r..r.
•
,C
d
r2-.
.n Ln.
U
^
�
'•J
9 2
O
-
r.r
2
:
X
!S
0:
J
0.
J
rr
S
c>
ro
lal
0
1.1
t,r
rn co
r''
/"
n
•
n
U
t7
in
..
O
N
et
lar
Y
a..
►.,
�
:-.
J J
?
cr
L.
N
a•.
1
1-
J
J
1, r
M
n.
M
M
-
J
(1)
M
LL
J
J
H
� M
n.
N -
M1
N
N
r
M
41
••.
N
N
M M
A h
C2 O
O
'O �C
.p �o
.n, .Q
In r: rn
M
In IP'
lI'r to
l
N N -
N N
M
N
MM
NN.
N N
NN
alO
ti
�J
M N
F
O
O
O
C�
n
N N
N
M
M
N
r -i
M
N
N
N
M
M M
C7
J
S
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
1
J J
U
1
1
1
1
1
1
!
!
1
1
! f
1.1
^
n
n
n
n
7
N
vi
r=
2
O
•1
N
N
w
.v
fI CII
.v v
U
U
In
r
n cn
c�
to
'.,J
r
tai
W -
h•r
:.J
=
IaJ
IA.W
tr
nd �d
O
r•..
F- _
J
eN
r-•
�
U i
J
IH
'.J
J
2
J.
tl't-
x
CL
J
7
a
1-r
LL. _
4.
O
CL
J
L t
LJ
CL
ar
a
r1
m
�
a:
1..,
0.
y
•
L
V
V
O
K �Y
rL
cc
L:
Y--
t,�
rH
V
W
d
H
W
U
F
Y
r..r.
•
,C
d
r2-.
.n Ln.
U
^
�
'•J
C7
O
-
r.r
2
:
X
!S
0:
J
0.
J
rr
S
c>
ro
lal
0
1.1
t,r
rn co
r''
/"
n
•
n
U
t7
in
..
O
N
et
lar
Y
a..
►.,
�
:-.
J J
?
cr
L.
N
J
1-
Q
!
1, r
7
n.
O
(1)
!-
LL
d
J
H
F 1-
n.
41
M M
A h
C2 O
O
'O �C
.p �o
.n, .Q
In r: rn
CO M,
In IP'
lI'r to
l
N N -
N N
1f� N�
N
MM
NN.
N N
NN
alO
ti
�J
M N
r •�
N it
C�
N N
1.1
^
n
n
n
n
•1
N
N
w
.v
.v v
r
In
r
n cn
LL �
r
Y
r
U i
,T
♦ rn
w J
•
a ,�
* J T
1..
vl
•
. •i
k y
•�
a .�
• 1
Ln
�.
.`
y
•
L
V
r
N
y Y to
4a U X
i
(J
Y � #
• Y #
{
a000rNNN
M
(V C�
r M M J 0
c
f ! ! 1 ^
1 S
.i
r J r r
•j
O
'x700rN NN
M
N O
.- M M J'0
W iJ L; oil i.i :.l
N
V)
to
o(�oono
0
0 0
H H M H H
C,
T r]
M M M M M M
M
M M
0.
11
p
MC)
C) C7 r_ r_ O C7
("1
J
9O
tL.
� H
� rn
N r/> o' K N Q [.) N K K
J W W
J � O W J
L+ t:)
J J
CL 0 d. J a J f..,. 4..
a U_ a H o
Q, tL Oti
> > aa, 0 0
N p ~ V) R' cC
G9 it !.! rq 1•.t J N
CL
u m -a
W
f7 'J O L-•( IJ W
3 0 I a
I. f •. I a .l n M U( I •�D
O' 2 W
J J W 2 2
L -t O '. n
O .S W n- (r27_
O 3 J I r( Gj H N
`t J rn Z Z OC ti KS
LA 4C
! ` e -1 U' 0! 3: q
lJ
t
J J V, N' ['; r:, N Ini In In (7. 0`, n !'s- m a) C) In (7 O:
^. M N) 0" P Q'
Q- U (7 47 N i .O ♦O ti lv N N P- 0: h
w CIO J �t M M- r In M P 0, N O ♦' r N N v
f 1
u+ r n u, (n
J
N
J.
c
n
v
C)
[n
N (nN (n (,1 t/J
T
U
=
u
(
Lti
W iJ L; oil i.i :.l
N
V)
to
! n
H H M H H
J J J J J J
IL.
0.
11
p
MC)
(.—
("1
13,
» 0 0 0 0
u
U
J
t
a
!
CL
\ cj
N N .V (NJ N N
N
N
�.
a
D:
Q
cn
(T
;T
1.;.
O
4i W W I.( 4: Ij
M
ac:
f\1
x='axsz
M
~
est
IJ W. IJ W .,J. W
Y
0..
J
J
N
1 J
J J
n
n
Z 2'
\
\
\
rr
r
J
r
r r
t'J
l.: W L; W L: 1.iI,1
a"
Q
Y
0H
I— N H H 4.
Irl
N
J
WN (nN
3 3s
U
Q
c
#
#
#
#
c.or r�( c•0
�o
0o
titi
M P
J1
O O
J J
r
M M
.p ♦O
tL.
� H
� rn
N r/> o' K N Q [.) N K K
J W W
J � O W J
L+ t:)
J J
CL 0 d. J a J f..,. 4..
a U_ a H o
Q, tL Oti
> > aa, 0 0
N p ~ V) R' cC
G9 it !.! rq 1•.t J N
CL
u m -a
W
f7 'J O L-•( IJ W
3 0 I a
I. f •. I a .l n M U( I •�D
O' 2 W
J J W 2 2
L -t O '. n
O .S W n- (r27_
O 3 J I r( Gj H N
`t J rn Z Z OC ti KS
LA 4C
! ` e -1 U' 0! 3: q
lJ
t
J J V, N' ['; r:, N Ini In In (7. 0`, n !'s- m a) C) In (7 O:
^. M N) 0" P Q'
Q- U (7 47 N i .O ♦O ti lv N N P- 0: h
w CIO J �t M M- r In M P 0, N O ♦' r N N v
f 1
u+ r n u, (n
,r
N
S
r
! n
r
J
O
r .-•
MC)
(.—
("1
13,
0
o
1
►
t
a
!
\
\ cj
N N .V (NJ N N
N
N
�.
a
a
(T
;T
T
a rw
J
f\1
N
M
N
N
1
J
J
J
J
N
1 J
J J
n
n
\
\
\
\
rr
r
J
r
r r
t'J
tL.
� H
� rn
N r/> o' K N Q [.) N K K
J W W
J � O W J
L+ t:)
J J
CL 0 d. J a J f..,. 4..
a U_ a H o
Q, tL Oti
> > aa, 0 0
N p ~ V) R' cC
G9 it !.! rq 1•.t J N
CL
u m -a
W
f7 'J O L-•( IJ W
3 0 I a
I. f •. I a .l n M U( I •�D
O' 2 W
J J W 2 2
L -t O '. n
O .S W n- (r27_
O 3 J I r( Gj H N
`t J rn Z Z OC ti KS
LA 4C
! ` e -1 U' 0! 3: q
lJ
t
J J V, N' ['; r:, N Ini In In (7. 0`, n !'s- m a) C) In (7 O:
^. M N) 0" P Q'
Q- U (7 47 N i .O ♦O ti lv N N P- 0: h
w CIO J �t M M- r In M P 0, N O ♦' r N N v
f 1
u+ r n u, (n
,r
XY
13,
a
o
?\
'a
\
\ cj
N N .V (NJ N N
N
N
�.
a
a
(T
;T
T
a rw
(T
�j
N
~
N
f\i
[V
/V N
N N
n
n
\
\
\
\
\
n (n
n n
c_-
rl
V N N 1 'V N
Y V
v
N
Vl n .'♦ '.1 V`. n
# V1
r
MI
# :V
N
N
N
N
N
v
J
^J v
Y
r
r r
r♦ r
(x
K) O O N tT
s
W
M NNP N
_
Q'
N N N M N
Y
J J J J
U
R rt Q 4
1.1
1...
S
Or7)
^. O O
`-
N
c
rvr.r
o_
c7�tin,
f1 0 J
4. Ll 11. U. .?
i
K) O O N tT
C1
M NNP N
�
N N N M N
U')
00
ON
cd
�G
U
�O
M
co
Lr\
\,O
M
01\
�
u\
\,o
O
-�
-q
\O
Nm
N
00
OO
O
O�
Ln
O
O
O
O
N
-�
00
rn N
O\
O
O
[-
CO
-i
O
O
O
0
rl
L
CO
�
0�
(Y
Lr\
CO
O�
Lr\
L
N
rM-I
O
L
00
N
O
-1
Lr
M
O
O
U�
M
O
Lr\
r4
M
O
a0
O�
T
L
O\
O\
z
M
O
L
O
co
U-
O\
O
oco
,
M
r
Lr\
\10
[�
c
O\
O
r-4.
N
M
r�
rI
r1 r -I
rl
1•+
0
0
7
cd
E
+�
0
✓
o
S-,
w
w
coa -r-i
Q
::5O
f�
ul
O
U
Co
U
Cd
c?d
U
k
w
CO
08
E-+
as
c
N
+)
w
3
4D
M
;2!!:
x
m
w
4-).:.
3
O
Z
U)
�
z
�,,
0
N
4b0
N
H
Lr\
-4
•-3
N
O
Q
F-+
s°'.
�
cd
N
�,
Ei
N
Cd
+)
UO
W
a
Cd
rl
-
+�
2
+)
U)O
N
w
CH
O
E
U
Cd
N
�
Ei
N
Cd
-N
m
-
+)
Z
+3
N
ri
�
, j
>>
r -i
-r-i
Cd
Gti
E
Q
Q)
z,
c0�
0
,
x
x
H
w
a
w
i
0
m
•r -I
3
E1
N
O
�
4-)
U
Z
CH
O
cd
U
a
w
c
•°
•N
U
N
W
,Q
O
h
b
r -i
O
3
U
w
0
r I
O
O
OO
OOO
rF ON N
OO
O
u
--
z
M
O
L
O
co
U-
O\
O
oco
,
M
r
Lr\
\10
[�
c
O\
O
r-4.
N
M
r�
rI
r1 r -I
rl
r-{
O
L
L
L
O
LLr\
LLr\
H
Lr\
Lr\
H
Lr\
H
Lr\
H
Lr\
H
U\
r -I
Lr\
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
H
CxJ
rO i
rl
r -I
r I
r I
-i
i rl r
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
U\
L
Lr\
L
u\
L
u\
L
u\
L
L \
L
u\
L
r i
-i
r -i
r -i
H
H
rl
r I
r i
ri
r I
H
H
rl
r i
rl
H
H
rl
r-♦
co
L
O
O
O O
O
+C'
:5O
v
N
E
E
cd
N
4-D
U]
u1
ul
qjs
O
S,0
�'
U
ot3
¢
U
N
E
N
E
N
E
N
o
,C
+) U
U
CH
N
N
Fi
U
>
u]
(1)
o
U)�
U
H
N
cd
H
H
W
U
(�
A
w
Q
a
M
a
r=4
+J
,
a
¢.
H
�
cc
08
a�
U)a
�
c
�
E
•r-+
-4
•,+
•�
• 4
r4
CH
�
FE -I
H
FE -1
E-1
H a
O
U _
N
E
N
E
N-
E
N
E
E
N
E
N
E
N
E
N
3
N
z
U
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
X.
CO
U
U
Q
U
L
a1
O\
OM
\,D
\,O
O�
O U-
cU 0 0
O
O
N
O
O
L
Lr\
Lr\
O
O
O
O
•
Lr\
O
�
O
0
00
00
L
L
r -i
O
Lr\
O
co
L
D\
L
0
r4
L Lr\ Lr\
Lr\ Lr\
O1
O
CO
L
O
rH
O\
N
00
Lr\
\
Lr
d\
O\
L
a
OM\
N
Lr\
O
M
co
O
O
N
(-)
(n
L
M
M
�o
r I
M
rl
ri
N
L
O
�,O
-4-
�
N
m
N
M
L
O\
ri
rI
M
O\
L
O\
r --I
{{j -
L
U
U O
r I
O
O
OO
OOO
rF ON N
OO
O
u
--
M
OO
O O
,--i ON N
{
Lr\
u\
r
rI
r1r
O
rI
ri
H
r�
rI
r1 r -I
rl
r-{
O
O
O
O
O
O
OrO
OO
Or0
OrO
OOrr
OO OrI
Sa
N
N
M M M
C6 C6
r�
H
H
HO
rO i
rO I
rOl
i
rl
i rl r
ii
N
O
r-4
O
OO
O O
r I
r -i
rl
r i
-i
r -i
r -i
H
H
CC)
cc
co
co
Oo
00
coCC)
co
L
O
O
O O
r i
r I
r -i
r -i
u\
O O
rF ON N
N
N
M
u
--
M
Lr\
O O
,--i ON N
U Lf\
Lr\
u\
Lr\
M
O o
r -i r -i rj
6
O
N
ON
O\
C\
r-{
r -I N
O O O
�+
M
r -I
r I
r i
N
r -i r -i
O\ O\ O\
Lf\
u\
u\
M
M M M
J
OC) !
L
L
M
rl
� 0p
i rl r
N
N
O
--I- -t,
O 0t
-1 O O O O O O O O O O u\ r -I -q rH
O O O O O O O O O O -A H �O �
� O O O O O O O O O O ,4 r4 H r1
� O O O O O O O O O O u\ , H r-� H
O O O O O O O O O O rH r -I \,O -�
i N L N L r4 r4 M O r-4 O O r -i r -I
M N N N M N N N N Lr\ D\ O\ r -i M
\ O\ O\ D\ C\ O\ O\ O\ 01 O\ \ M M U\ O\
00
x
ro
E
v
x
0
N ri ul\ O O OII LI-
U-\ �o ON u'\ r -I o
O\ -z' M \10 to 0p
tl-
0
u�\,o V\ \,D M SIN
O CY1O rI ONO��
b
�
w
�
w
�
w �x
> N
m
cid x
a r -A
~
F
G
v 3 >1
Eo -41
0aXtima
12�I
I I
I I I I
z
✓
-1 M
t-
(S.
0r-iN-4-t—co
INCORPORATED 1870
* ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT *
129 E. 1st Avenue - Shakopee, Minnesota 55375-1376 (612) 445-3650
r �
MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Adm i r!d t _ 't \
FROM: H. R. Spurrier, City Engineer-
SUBJECT:
ngineer-SUBJECT:
Valley Fear k Dr- i ve and 12th Avenue,
Improvement No. 1984-5
INTRODUCTION:
Attached is Change Order No. 5 far the above referenced project.
BACKGROUND:
This Change Order is required in order formalize a Change Order
approved by the City Engineer and the City Administrator, which
permitted the elimination of potential right-of-way acquisition
along Valley Park Drive and provided fin the adjustment of
a gate valve and hydrant affected by the proposed project.
It is recommended that City Council approve Change Order No. 5,
increasing the contract amount by $927.25, and leaving the
completion date unchanged.
ACTION REQUESTED:
A motion to authorize proper City officials to execute Change
Order No. 5 for Valley Park Drive and 12th Avenue, Improvement
No. 1984-5, increasing the contract amount by $927.25.
HRS/pmp
MEMC05
Change Order No.:
Date: January 9 1985
Original Contract Amount
CHANGE ORDER
Project Name: Valley Park Drive S 12th Avenue
Contract No.: 1984-5
Change Order(s) No. 1 thru No. 4
Total Funds Encumbered Prior to Change Order
$ 755. 156.50
$ 16. 890.70
$ 772.047.20
Description of Work to be (Added/Deleted):
I. Removal of fill material placed along the west side of Valley Park Drive between
Valley Industrial Boulevard South and Valley Industrial Boulevard North, in
accordance with the attached extra work request.
2. Extra extension of one nate valve at $175.00 and one hydrant at $285.00.
The above described work shall be incorporated in the Contract, referenced above,
under the same conditions specified in the original Contract as amended unless
otherwise specified herein. Any work not so specified shall be performed in accordance
with the Standard Specifications adopted by the City of Shakopee, Minnesota.
The amount of the Contract shall be (increased/XPXXdXYd4 by $ 927 25
The number of calendar days for completion shall be (increased/decreased) by -0-
Original Contract Amount
$
755,156.50
Change Order(s) No. 1 thru 5
$
17,817.95__
Total Funds Encumbered
$
772.974.45
Completion Date: June 28. 1985
The undersigned Contractor hereby agrees to perform
the work specified in this Change Order in accordance
with the specifications, conditions and prices
specified herein. REVIEWED:
Contraction,: Shakopee Public Utilities Commission
Title:
Me nag�r Dat
Date: �_� �7 _�-�
By:
Mayor
City Administrator
City Clerk
ate
Date
Date
Date
Approved as to form.this day of
City Attorney
19
f—
CITY CD F_ H,Ai�OPaE
....
.... -- _.. _...
INCORPORATED 1870
ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT }
129 E. 1st Avenue - Shakopee, Lnnesota 55379-1376 (612) 445-3650
MEMO TO: John K_ Anderson, City Administ'\ra ,, }^%
FROM: H. R. Spurrier, City Engineer �,\
SUBJECT: Fourth Avenue County Road 83 to", n doah Drive
DATE: May 31, 1985
INTRODUCTION:
The City of Shakopee has two alternative methods of acquiring
right-of-way for Fourth Avenue between County Road 83 and Shen-
andoah Drive.
BACKGROUND:
The City of Shakopee may use the awards specified in the acqui-
sition of Shenandoah Drive or the City may commission new ap-
praisals and offer the revised amount_
Based on the condemnation experience for Shenandoah Drive,
a coed eranat i on commission established for Fourth Avenue would
no doubt reach a settlement equal or greater to the amount
established for Shenandoah Dr-ive right-of-way.
Several property owners have to this point agreed to receive,
as full compensation, the amount established by the co ridemnat i on
commission on Shenandoah Drive. This eliminates any potential-
need
otentialneed for new appraisals.
The alternative to this action would be to commission new ap-
praisals and start the process all over. This action would
increase administrative costs.
If the City commissioned new appraisals, Municipal State Aid
could be used to fund the acquisition. These funds were not
needed as the attached cost summary indicates. The bond sale
and additional Tax Increment Financing were the revenue sources
proposed for funding right-of-way costs for Fourth Avenue.
Fourth Avenue
May 31, 1985
Rage 8
It is recommended that City staff be authonized to offer the
settlement amount established by the cc,nd emnat i on commission
for Shenandoah Drive, for right-of-way on F:_-urth Avenue between
County Rc.ad 83- and Shenandoah Drive.
ACTION REQUESTED:
A motion to authoi-ize City staff t --c- offer the sett'_eriertt am unt
established by the condemnation commission for right -cif -way
on Shenandoah Drive, for right -c -f -way along Fourth Avenue be-
tween County Road 83-3 and Shenandoah Drive.
HRS/amp
COMDEN
i3 t-'
10.4th Avenue, Racetrack
Entrance - Shenandoah
!!.Additional Right -of -Way
4th Avenue
12.Addltional Technical
Services - 4th Avenue
13.Possible Signalization
of TH 101 and Co.Rd. 63
14.Additionai Right of Way
Shenandoah Drive
15.Street Lighting
GRAND TOTAL
$200,000.00 122,013.00 5222 ,013.00 (S222,013.00)
$40,000.00
$401000.00 ($40,000.00)
153,660.00 $53,660.00 (353,600.00)
30.667.00 39,369.00 3101056.00 010,056.00)
02,100.00 $42,100.00 (342,100.00)
S250,000.00 S250,000.00 0250,000.00)
-------------------------- +• ----------------------------------------_-----
$2,S79,000.00 3S,UJi.7: 49,749.5 $ ,40 ,SO 25 057 ,415.25)
NOTES:
1. increased Cost of Fourth Avenue is due
SHAKOPEE RACETRACK
noted in Braun Engineering
Company tests and is due to the required realignment
of the vertical
profile.
2. Possible Signalizatlon of TH 101 and Co.Rd.
E3 is included
COST SUMMARY
that this may meet warranty by 12;31:65.
Printed:
3i -stay -65
3. Bids were almost half or the estimated
cost because two signaiization
projects did not meet
warrents.
OFFSITE IMPROVEMENTS
4. Additional slope easement was required
for the construction
Project
5. Revenues to offset the costs above are
Estimated
Cost or
Contingency
Total Cost
Difference
(a) Bond Sale
$2,445,325.00
Cost in EIS
Revised Estimate
Encumbered
$60,565.00
1.
Valley Park Drive
and
Shenandoah south of 4th Ave.
$66,ti io. 0
'
e) �IUnlClpal State Aid
$225,000.00
12th Avenue (4,7)
(f) immediate Special Assessment
$920,000.00
$772,974.45
$69,515.65
$642,490.10
$77,509.90
_.
Trunk Highway 101
Intersections (1,2
,3,9)
$705,000.00
$359,604.43
335,106.72
3394,713.15
$310,266.65
3.
Shenandoah Drive (5
)
$255,000.00
:£571,376.00
($9,606.00)
$2611770.00
($16,376.00)
4.
County Road 63
Wideninq (6)
$105j000.00
$174 JIS .65
$4,366.15
x'176,965.00
$61015.00
5.
4th Avenue, Co.Rd.
63-
Racetrack ntrance
(6)
$274j000.00
$249,091.00
$24,909.00
$274,000.00
$0.00
6.
Right of Way Cost
for
4th Avenue
$45,000.00
$45,000.00
7.
-
Railroad Crossing
Cost
----------------------------------------------------------------------
$245,924.00
(351924.00)
$2411000.00
($240,000.00)
Total Construction
Cost$2,:39,000.00
32,116,590.7:
3116,367.52
$2.236,556.25
3137,43:..75
6.
Engineering, Legal
and
Contingency Cost
$390,000.00
$3901000.00
$3901000.00
$0.00
9.
Right of Way Costs
for
Shenandoah Drive
$1501000.00
$150,000.00
$150,000.00
$0.00
TOTAL AUTHORIZED COSTS
$21679,000.00
32,056,590.73
3116,367.52
$217761956.25
$137,40.75
10.4th Avenue, Racetrack
Entrance - Shenandoah
!!.Additional Right -of -Way
4th Avenue
12.Addltional Technical
Services - 4th Avenue
13.Possible Signalization
of TH 101 and Co.Rd. 63
14.Additionai Right of Way
Shenandoah Drive
15.Street Lighting
GRAND TOTAL
$200,000.00 122,013.00 5222 ,013.00 (S222,013.00)
$40,000.00
$401000.00 ($40,000.00)
153,660.00 $53,660.00 (353,600.00)
30.667.00 39,369.00 3101056.00 010,056.00)
02,100.00 $42,100.00 (342,100.00)
S250,000.00 S250,000.00 0250,000.00)
-------------------------- +• ----------------------------------------_-----
$2,S79,000.00 3S,UJi.7: 49,749.5 $ ,40 ,SO 25 057 ,415.25)
NOTES:
1. increased Cost of Fourth Avenue is due
to pavement failure
noted in Braun Engineering
Company tests and is due to the required realignment
of the vertical
profile.
2. Possible Signalizatlon of TH 101 and Co.Rd.
E3 is included
because there is a potential
that this may meet warranty by 12;31:65.
3. Bids were almost half or the estimated
cost because two signaiization
projects did not meet
warrents.
4. Additional slope easement was required
for the construction
of Shenandoah Drive.
5. Revenues to offset the costs above are
listed below:
Revenue
Amount
(a) Bond Sale
$2,445,325.00
(b) K Mart TIF District
43101000.00
(c) MnDOT brant
$60,565.00
(d) Minnesota Racetrack Inc. for
Shenandoah south of 4th Ave.
$66,ti io. 0
'
e) �IUnlClpal State Aid
$225,000.00
(f) immediate Special Assessment
$239,000.00
(g) Additional TIF
$119,696.00
TOTAL REVENUE
----------------
335 467, SOS. ;iii
OF' :E;HA K4i= T�
INCORPORATED 1870
ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT
129 E. 1st Avenue -Shakopee, ninnesota 55379-1376 (612) 445-3650
MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator
FROM: Fulton Schleisman, Engineering Inspector
SUBJECT: Shenandoah Drive Street Construction
DATE: May 31, 1985
INTRODUCTION:
Partial Estimate Voucher No. 5 for the above referenced project
requires Council approval.
BACKGROUND:
Only sod, seed, and miscellaneous repair work remain to be
accomplished on this project.
Change Orders and authorized additions to the contract auanti—
ties, will increase the final project cost to appnoximately
$2`71.300.00. or a 14 percent increase over the original contract
amount.
ACTION REQUESTED:
A motion to authorize payment of Partial Estimate No. 5 f or
Shenandoah Drive Street Construction. in the amount of
$12-1,834.50, to Buesing Brothers Trucking, Inc.
i�
Approvd for Submittal
H. R. Sprr i er, ' t y Eng i neer
FSJpmp
MEMESTS
Contract Ivo. 1984-4 Partial Estimate Voucher To, _5 P=eriod Ending. May 31, 1905
TO: Contractor Buesing Brothers Trucking, Inc.
Addrecs 2285 Daniels Street Lona Lake, NII 55356
Project Description Shenandoah Drive Street Construction
1. Original Contract Amount
2. Change Order No. 1 Thru No. 5
3. Total rands Encumbered
Value of Work Completed It 263 878.40
5. 51 Percent Retainage
4 13 193. 92
E. Previous Payments $ 237.849.98
7. Deductions or Charges $
B. Total It 251, 043. 90
Payment Due (Line 4 - Eine 8)
237, 972. 30
8, 920. 00
1 246, 892. 30
Value of Work Remaining
It — 7.500 00
Percent Compiete
q7a
-------------
12 834. 50
CERTIFICATE Or PAY IENT
(IQ 1
We) agree that the quantity and value of wort: shown herein is a fair
estimate of the work comp eyed to date.
CONTRACTOR:
3Y.
- 1L`.:
3AlE:
-?PROVED - .TTY OF SHAKOPEE
Engineer -----------------
Daae
i vy Ad _sura cr
Dane
PROJECT: SHENANDOAH DRIVE -STIMATE NO.
PERIOD ENDING: May L. 1985 CONTRACTOR: BUESING BROS. TRUCKING, INC SHEET NO. i
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Item
i
I
I Unit
i Contract
i Current
----------------
Per-TodC
-------------------
I Total
to Date i
No.
I Contract Item
I Unit
I Price
1 Quantity I
Amount
1 Quantity I
Amount
I Quantity I
Amount
----------1------------------------------I------I----------i----------I---------------i----------i---------------I----------I---
2101.511
(Clear and Grub Roadways
I
H .S.
I
1$1,1500.00
I
I 1.00 1
I I
$7,500.00
1 0,00 I
I I
$0.00
1 1.00
I I
I
2104.501
(Remove Barbed Wire Fence
I
IL.F.
I
1 $1.00
I
1 260.00 1
I 1
$260.00 1
I
0.00 1
I
$0.00
1 260.00 i
I 1
$260.00 1
I
2105.501
(Common Excavation
I
1C -Y-
i
1 $2.15
1 25700.00 1
$55,255.00 1
0.00 1
$0.00
1 27100.00 1
$58,265.00 1
2105.503
I
(Rock Excavation
I
I
1C -Y-
I
1 $15.00 1
I I
100.00 1
I
$1,500.00 1
I
0.00 1
I
$0.00 1
I
839.00 1
i
$12,585.00 1
I
2105.535
i
(Salvage Topsoil
I
I
1C.Y.
1
I I
1 $0.95 1
I I
I
19000.00 1
I
I
$18,050.00 1
i
I
0.00 1
I
I
$0.00 1
i
I
17137.00 1
I
I
$16,280.15 1
I
2211.501
I
(Aggregate Base,
I
I I
I
I
I
I
I
1
(Class 5 (100% Crushed)
I
ITon
i
1 $5.45 1
I I
5750.00 1
I
$31,337.50 1
I
0.00 1
i
$0.00 1
i
7365.00 1
I
$40,139.25 1
I
2221.501
I
lAggregate Shouldering,
I
I
I I
I I
I
I
I
I
i
I
I
I
i
I
I
I
(Class 1
I
ITon
i
1 $6.00 1
I I
1200.00 1
I
$7,200.00 1
I
765.00 1
I
$4,590.00 1
I
765.00 1
I
$4,590.00 1
I
2331.504
I
(Bituminous Material
I
I
I I
I I
1
I
I
I
I
1
I
I
I
I
1
I
Ifor Mixture
I
ITon
I
1 $190.00 i
87.00 1
$161530.00 1
0.00 1
$0.00 1
99.90 1
$184981.00 1
2331.510
(Binder Course Mixture
I
ITon
I
1 $10.90 1
I i
1932.00 1
I
$21,058.80 1
I
0.00 1
i
$0.00 1
I
2220.00 1
i
$24,198.00 1
341.504
i
!Bituminous Material
l
I I
I i
i
I
i
i
I
I
Ifor Mixture
I
ITon 1
I I
$200.00 1
I
118.00 1
I
$23,600.00 1
I
0.00 1
I
$0.00 1
!
112.00 1
I
$22,400.00 1
I
341.508
i
(Wearing Course
I I
I I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
IMixture (Modified)
I
ITon 1
I I
$11.00 1
I
19332.00 1
I
$21,252.00 1
I
0.00 1
I
$0.00 1
I
1834.00 1
I
$20,174.00 1
I
:501.511
I
112" CM Pipe Culvert
I
I I
IL.F.- 1
I i
I
$15.00 1
I
I
67.00 1
i
1
$1,005.00 1
I
I
0.00 1
I
I
$0.60 1
i
I
67.00 1
1
I
$19005.00 1
1
:501.511
I
118" CM Pipe Culvert
I I
IL.F. 1
I
$17.00 1
I
157.00 1
I
$2,669.00 1
i
0.00 1
I
$0.00 1
i
195.00 1
I
$3,315.00 1
501.515
I
112" CM Pipe Aprons
I
I I
lEa, 1
I i
I
$85.00 1
I
I
2.00 1
I
I
$170.00 1
I
I
0.00 1
I
i
$0.00 1
I
I
2.00 1
I
I
$170.00 1
I
j01.515
--------
I
118" CM Pipe Aprons
------------------------------I------I----------I----------1---------------1----------1---------------I----------
I
i I
IEa. 1
I I
I
$100.00 1
I
i
4.00 1
I
►
$400.00 1
I
I
0.00 1
I
$0.00 1
i
6.00 1
1---------------
1
$600.00 1
�
DROJECT:
SHENANDOAH DRIVE
$3.50
71222.00
$2,492.00
Change Order No. 2
ESTIMATE NC.
PERIOD ENDING: May 31, 1985
Ballroom Water Service
L.S.
$980.00
CONTRACTOR:
buesin_ Bros.
Trucking, Inc
SHEET NO. 2
12" Gate Valve
L.S.
$850.00
L.S.
$850.00
Change Order No. 4
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Item
I
I
I Unit
`--
I Contract
-----------------------------------------------
I Current
Period 1
Total
to Date
No.
I Contract Item
I
1 nit
I
I Price
I
i QuantityI
I I
Amount
I QuantityI
Amount I
Quantity 1
Amount
----------
06.511
------------------------------
(Reconstruct Mannoles
I
------
IL.F.
I
----------
I sll@.00
I
----------
1 13.60 1
i I
---------------
61,496.00
I----------i---------------I
1 0.00 1
I I
----------
$0.00 I
i
I
16.60 1
I
---------------
$1,496.0e
2575.501
I
lRoadsioe Seeding
I
I I
(Acres 1
I I
$200.00
I I
1 3.60 1
I i
I
$720.00 1
I
I
0.00 I
I
I
$0.00 1
I
1
0.00 1
I
$0.00
2575.502
I
(Seed Mixture No. 5
I
I i
ILhs. 1
I I
I
$3.00 1
I
I
180.00 1
I
I
$540.00 1
I
I
0.00 1
I
i
$0.00 1
I
I
0.00 1
I
$0.00
!
2575.505
I
ISodding
I
IS.Y. 1
I I
$1.25 1
I
2222.00 I
I
$2,777.50 1
i
0.00 1
I
$0.00 1
I
0.00 1
I
$0.00
i
2575.511
I
(Mulch Material, Type 1
I
i I
ITon 1
I i
I
$140.00 1
I
I
7.20 1
I
I
$1,008.00 1
I
I
0.00 1
I
I
$0.00 1
I
I
-0.00 1
I
I
$0.00 1
1
2575.519
I
(Disc Anchoring
I
I I
(Acres 1
1 I
I
$100.00 13.60
I
I
1
I
I
$360.00 1
►
I
0.00 1
I
I
$0.00 1
I
I
0.00 1
I
i
$0.00 1
I
2575.531
I
(Commercial Fertilizer
I I
I
I
I
1
(Analysis 10-20-30
I
ITon I
I I
$350.00 1
I
0.81 1
I
$283.50 1
I
0.00 1
I
I
$0.00 1
I
I
0.00 1
I
I
$0..00 I
I
504.603
I
!Relocate 12" Watermain
I
I I
IL.F. 1
i I
I
$23.00 1
i
1000.00 1
I
$23,000.00 1
I
0.00 I
I
$0.00 1
I
1000.00 1
I
$23,000.00 I
I
I I��
I
TOTAL ~ 1
$237,972.30 1
TOTALM 1
$4,590.00 1
TOTAL �I
$254,958.40-i
Change Order No.
Hauling Boulders
C Y.
$3.50
71222.00
$2,492.00
Change Order No. 2
Ballroom Water Service
L.S.
$980.00
L.S.
$980.00
Change Order No. 3
12" Gate Valve
L.S.
$850.00
L.S.
$850.00
Change Order No. 4
Haul Limerock Offsite
C.Y.
$2.00
839.00
$1,678.00
Change Order No. 5
Fourth Avenue Intersection
L.S.
$2,200.00
L.S.
$2,200.00
Bituminous Tack Coat
Gal.
$1.00
720.00
$720.00
GRAND TOTAL
$263,878.40
CITY CD F- 25;H-AKOPEE
INCORPORATED 1870
* ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT *
129 E. 1st Avenue - Shakopee, Xinnesota 55379-1376 (612) 445-3650
MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Admi
FROM: H. R. Spurrier, City Enginee
SUBJECT: Storm Water Drainage Utilit
DATE: May 31, 1985
INTRODUCTION:
The City Council of the City of Shakopee held a public hearing
on whether to create a storm water drainage utility.
BACKGROUND:
The public hearing was held to inform the public about a storm
water drainage utility and to receive comment and recommendation
from citizens regarding the potential establishment of the
utility.
The hearing was attended by approximately 60 citizens and the
public raised six policy issues that should be addressed by -
City policy related to the storm water drainage utility. They
are as follows:
1. The City should specify how deferred User Fees will
be carried forward from existing property owners to new
property owners.
8. An appeal process should be specified in the ordinance
which would give the citizens the right to a hearing before
City Council, for any dispute regarding storm sewer utility
fees.
3. Street reconstruction should be coordinated with storm
sewer work. The City should advise the public if there
are any hidden street reconstruction costs included in
the storm sewer work.
4. City policy should specify whether maintenance costs
would be funded by the storm water drainage utility, and
if they are, which maintenance costs would be included.
Storm Water Drainage Utility
May 31, 1985
P a a e
5. The City should make available a comparison of User
Fees versus property tax costs for representative property.
G. City policy should specify whether, the City is planning
to receive a return on its equity in the storm sewer sy-
stem, as the City now receives for its equity in the elec-
t r i c system and in the water system.
City staff is investigating the alternatives available to advise
prospective property owners of potential or existing deferred
User Fees on undeveloped property. These alter -natives will
be distributed June 4, 198419 or at a later Council meeting
if necessary.
It is the intention of City staff to use the City of Roseville
ordinance as a model for the storm water drainage utility ordin-
ance that Shakopee would use if a storm drainage utility is
adopted. That ordinance has no appeal of staff decisions re-
garding the calculation of storm water drainage fees. Such
provision will be contained in the ordinance proposed for Shako-
pee.
At this point the street rehabilitation program has not been
coordinated with the storm sewer work, except that no rehabili-
tation has been undertaken on streets where storm sewer projects
are anticipated. This co-ordination is expected to continue.
The City must evaluate whether these two improvements must
be undertaken together, before a decision is made to merge
both of these projects. The decision to combine street rehabil-
itation and storm sewer work will be a policy decision that
City Council would make. For the purpose of establishing a
utility, staff should know whether this issue must be resolved
before the utility is farmed or whether it must be resolved
before any storm sewer projects are undertaken.
The City has not specified what costs ought to be included
and paid for by a storm water drainage fund. There are several
activities that would qualify as drainage related work func-
tions. They include street sweeping, storm sewer rehabilita-
t i on, catch basin cleaning, d itch maintenance, and any of her
activity related to the maintenance of drainage facilities.
At this point, there is no list of activities that could be
included, but given the fact that the City may lose funding
for equipment that performs these work tasks, it may be neces-
sary to use this special fund as a source of funding for this
equipment.
Storm Water Drainage Utility
May 31, 1985
Page 3
A comparison of User Fees versus property taxes for the City
matching cost has been prepared and is available to the general
public upon request.
Several property owners expressed a concern that the City would
or could expect a return on its equity investment in the exist-
ing storm sewer system, as the City naw does for the electric
system and the water system. City Council should be on record,
specifying its preference on this issue.
By addressing the preceding issues and finding no adverse prob-
lems, the City would be in a position to adopt an ordinance
that creates a storm water drainage utility.
Attached is a copy of the ordinance that has been adopted by
the City of Roseville. In addition to that, is a copy of the
City policy that relates to the credits for the storm water
drainage utility fees established in Roseville. As stated
above, there are some policy revisions that would be made to
the Roseville policy in order to customize the program to Shako-
pee' s needs.
In the event there are other issues that should be addressed
in the policy statement, those issues should be included now.
It is recommended that an ordinance creating a storm water
drainage utility be accompanied by the resolution that speci-
fies the City policy for storm water drainage utility.
ACTION REQUESTED:
In order to create a storm water drainage utility, pursuant
to Mn Statues Section 444.075, the City must resolve the policy
issues specified above and take the following action.
A. A motion t o :
1. Direct Staff to investigate alternatives for advising
future or new property owners that a pot-ent i a 1 storm water
drainage User Fee exists.
2. Direct staff to include ars appeals process which names
the City Council as the final appeal of storm water drain-
age user fees in the ordinance that creates the utility.
3. Direct staff to prepare recommendations for programming
and combining the street rehabilitation program and the
storm water drainage program.
Storm Water Drainage Utility
May 31, 1985
Page 4
4. Direct staff to prepare a list of recommended main-
tenance functions that should be funded by the storm water
drainage utility.
5. Direct staff to include a statement in the storm water
drainage policy resolution that specifies that the City
shall not collect any "return on the equity investment"
in the drainage system that now exists for the water and
electric syst ern.
B. A motion to direct staff to prepare a storm water drainage
utility policy resolution incorporating the recommendation
of City Council.
C. A motion directing staff to prepare an ordinance estab-
lishing storm water drainage utility in accordance with the
recommendations of City Council.
HRS/ pmp
SWDU
0
CIT' OF ROsEvILLE
NO. -,
M v
r,
* * *
AN ORDINANCE ADDING CHAPTER 74 TO THE CITY CODE O
CITY OF ROSEVILLE ESTABLISHING A STORM WZATER DRAINAGE UTILITY.
The C=t
ordain: 11 Council of the City of Roseville does herebv
I.
The City Code of the City of Roseville is amended by adding
a new Chapter 74, to read as follows:
74. STORM WATER DRAINAGE UTILITY
74.010. Storm Water Drainage Util;ty
�Established. The _
municipal storm sewer system shall Deoneratea as a public
utility pursuant to 14inn. Stat. Section 444.075 from which
revenues will be derived subject to the provisions of this
Chapter and Minnesota statutes. The storm water drainage
utility will be part of the public works department and under
the administration of the public works director.
74.020. Definitions.
(1) Residential ec_uivalent factor, (REF) - One (1) REQ'
=s ae_inea as the ratio oc the average volume of
+
runcff generated by one (1) acre or a given lane
use to the average volume of runoff generated by
one (1) acre of typical single family residential
land, during a standard one (1) year ra; :fa'! even'-.
74.030. Storm Tiater Drainage -ees. Stora: water drainage
fees for aarcels oc ianc sr.a__ ze aetermined by multiplying
'1e REF =or a parcel's land use by the parcel's acreage and
then multiplying the resulting product by the stcrm water
drainage rate. The RZF values for various land uses are as
follows:
CLASS IF_C,TION 11.,.nND USES
1
Cemeteries Qo_i r courses s�s
0,23
2
Parks with Par::ing facilities
0.7
3
Single family and dudes
resident=al
1.00
4
Public and Private schools,
co:; ty center
1.2�
S
Mu i-4 far_ v reside^_ c,
churc.^.es and cover men tal
bu__d_ngs
2
x
�0
A-15
6 Commercial, industrial,
warehouse 5.00
7 Inproved vacant as assigned
For the purpose of calculating storm water drainage fees, all
developed one family and d;:alex parcels shall be consideree to
have an acreage of 'one-third (1/3) acre. %n c_ s7p,c..1 wC_7(,, C,1r4 erg
roaC_ 3w« oe ri3.00 ?.. pe, AT,r- .icy ` .
74.040. Credits.' The Council may adopt policies recommended
by the public worrs director, by resolution, for acjustmer.t of
the storm water drainage fee for parcels based upon hydrologic
data to be supplied by property.owners, which data demonstrates
a hydrologic response substantially different from the standards.
Such adjustments of storm water drainage fees shall not be made
retroactively.
74.050. Exemptions. The -following land uses are exemct from
storm water arainage fees.
(a) Public Rights of way.
(b) Vacant, unimproved land with ground cover.
74.060.- Payment of Fee. Statements for storm warmer drainage
fee shall be computee every three (3) months and invoiced by the
finance department for each account on or about the fifth
day of the month following the quarter. Such statement shallbedue on or before the last day of the month in which the statement
is mailed. Any prepayment or overpayment of ch arces shall be re-
tained by the City and applied against subsequent quarterly fees.
74.070.. Recalculation of Fee. Tf property
responsible for paying - a _roper,y owner or person
F _ -he s-orm water drainage fee auestiors
the correctness o_ an invoice for s •-
ugh cZa_ge, such person may
have the determination -of the cnarce recom=u_zed by written request
to the public works director made wi n twelve (12) mont_:s
mailing of the invoice in q of
uestion by the City.
74.080. Penalty fcr Late Payment. Each quarerly billing for
storm water drair,ace fees not pa_d when due Shall incur
charge of (l00 ten percent %) ox a penalty
� .the amount past due.
74.090. Certificaticn of Mast Due Fees or. ^'axes . An
due storm water cra_naae fees ,n _ y past
due on October 1 of any year may beycer-" ed toythe days -asst
for colied -ion wit' i yam_ �--ie,. to ..ne County Auditor
n real estate taxes it the following year Mur_
SUan^ t0 Ill. Stat. Sec
-ior, 444.075, $ubC4%-JsioP. 3. n addtion,
the sra_� a,so have�the right to bring a civil action or to
tame ogler legal remedies to celled= un pais; fates.
�I.
This Ordnance shall be in full force _ _ _
_ce a-nc effect _rom and alter
its passage and p;:blication.
A-16
F=SE"D by the City CoL::cil of the City or Roseville this _...
t:m_77s_.
t•lan a q e r
A-17
..ayor
CITY POLICY
T TT LE,
Credits and/or adjustments of municipal storm water drainage fees.
BACKGROUND
The municipal storm water drainage utility utilizes a fee structure
based on the anticipated relative contribution of storm drainage
runoff volumes to the storm water drainage system. A parcels contri-
bution.is determined by that parcels size and its land use, under the
principal that more intensively developed land uses typically have a
larger percentage of impervious surface and contribute a much Great-
er volume of water and/qr sediment/nutrient loadings to the system.
.It is recognized that some parcels, due either to their unique topo-
graphic, vegetative, geologic and .other characteristics, or
the exi
tance and maintenance of on-site storm drainage control, detention, or
retention facilities have a hvdrolocic and sediment/nutrient loadinc
response substantially different from that of similarly sized parcels
of the same land use.
To provide for an equitable assessment of storm drainage fees, based
on reasonably expected contribution of flows and sediment/nutrients,
PZ-ovisions need to be made to permit adjustments or credits to the
storm drainage fees for those parcels with unique or unusual charac-
teristics.
POLICY STATEMENT
The basis of the City of Roseville's storm water drainage fees is the
anticipated relative contribution of storm water volu
mes and sediment/
nutrient loadings to the storm drainage system from a civen parcel.
Where unique or unusual conditions exJst where the actual contribu-
tions of water volume and sediment/nutrient loadings from a civen
parcel are substantially different form those anticipated by the storm
drainage fee structure, the public worts director or h;s _ o
adjust or credit the _ - desicrat_ may
J �h_ storm dra�rage fee for said parcel to an appro-
priate level in accordance with the guidelines specified herein.
PROCEDURE STATE-
.: -ENT -
(1) Property Owner to Provide Detailed�o_;,,a-ion
It is the responsibjl4- of the prc- `
presort to the public wor:,:s�directcr perty owner or his agent to
orr.Js designate, sufficient in-
for^ation concerning a parcels hydrelocic characteristics to per^it
an accurate assessmen� Of the conditic.n-S that exist. characteristics
1rifGr:le-
tion may include, but is not __...-ted to: y
A. Site Plan showinglocations of all buildin-s and other
development relative to lct ' o
--nes.
B. The total lot area and area of immervious surfaces.
C. Site topography or contours of si-c-
r - cient detail to ascer-
ta-n _low directions, rates and volumes.
D. Size, details ane /cr volumet c
ri cnaracterjstjcs of any
drainage co::trc_ faci_=t_es.
A-18
s ul
rates cap, ,:lateons specifying outflow vclumes and
for various rainfall ever.ts.
(2 ) AC- ;:st e^t5 1-7
here here Parcel RL'n0" IS Slan�f, -art, %, ?�; c - ,_e,
Fro -1 Land use Starcarc re_
Where the unit runoff generated b
assigned amount for }na� . � 1 - � Y a parcel differs from the
�and use se ca,.agory by more than 20
1., may adjust the parcels storm water r t''`
dance with the following procedure: c -a_; nage __ ee in accor-
a. Calculation of unit runoff for the parcel shall be deter-
mined by the methods outlined in the Soil Conservation
Service Technical Release No. 55, utilizing a 2"
rainftal
all amount and antecedant moisture condition I!.
b. If calculated unit runoff is shown to differ from the
assigned amount for that land use catagory by20%or
more, the number of assigned PWU's for that aarcel shall
be adjusted by multiplying by the ratio of the calculated
unit runoff to the standard unit runoff.
C. A parcels storm water drainage fee shall be subject to
increases as well as decreases by this procedure.
d. Because single famil,: and duplex fees are not based upon
actual parcel acreage, no adjustments for unit runoff -dif-
ferences will be made for those land uses.
(3) Procedure for Calcualtion of Credits for Wet Ponds
A parcel may be credited for up to fifess
storm water drainage fee for ;� y (500) percent of the
ons_�e measures which are owned and
maintained by the applicant which effectively reduce the outflow of
sediment/nutrients from the site. Credit percentage anal
1 be based
on one-half of the actual percentage of sediment removai efficiency,
as determined by the fcllowing procedure, rounded to the nearest 5%;
except that no credit will be given for sediment removal efficiencies
cf less than 20
A. Calculation Of Crec,ts for wet Ponds
a. Determine total site acreace and percent of site _:.a1
has an improved or i„aervious surface.
b. Calculate the annual depth of runoff f
ecuation: rom the following
Dr P( ;5 _m+'.'5)-5.234 (.25-1675
. ).597
_yr
Where Dr = annual depth cf runoff in inches.
Im perCa^.t Cf site •-V1Cus area, a PreSS-z:-_' as a Cec_•.,=1 .
P annual depth of precipitation = 29 inches.
c. Calculate annual vol,:.me of runoff in
vannual - s'te acreage x Dr/ 12 �.
Determnine _fond ca ;aci`v below outle_-
elevat—i on in ac -re -fee --
Calculate
c- Calculate CaDaC1-_' 1..=low ra-Jo (C:R) , where.
C=R acncing �cazacity /
annual
Rea. sec_.^..e-: reMoval efficiency __c:1.
_C pw_ny^ gr ^ ;.
A-19
It
Y
� 6C
W
6-
7C
W
W
6C
J
O SO
M
W
Ct
�0
W !0
D
W 20
N
10
0.07 0.1 0.2 0.6 1.0 2.0 7.0 IO
BRUNETS TRAP EFFICIENCY CURVE
g. Credit = % sediment renmval efficienc_v,i2stor.n drainage fee.
(4) Credits for Storm t•later Detenti ^
o..
A parcel may be credited for up to 250 of
.he stor
aae fee for onsite measures which lim water drair.-
mit storm water outflow rates
from the site in accordance with the following procedure:
a. 2.0% credit for -arc -' � ,
-s wi:ich i,'21t teak Outf_G'+: rates during
a 5 -year rainfall event to predeve1cpment rates.
b. Additional 150- credit for parcels Which _i:ait teak out -clow rates during a 100 -year rainfall event to cYedeveloprent
-
(Based on the rational method of -uncff hanalysis. Predevelcc-
ment cond4tlon shall be considered to have a rational "C" value
Of 0.2. Time of concentration shall be no shorter ;
tran 30 r.l_n. )
c. No detention credits will be given for Parcels which do not
limit 5 -year evert outflow rates to predeve lopment levels.
(5) Cred_-s Shown in a (3) 4
n" ( ) -move be ve
(6) Periodic=nscecticn and Credit Ac�Lstme-:-s.
Public Works Director reserves the
r s � i
all storm drainage cont- hies togas to 4, periodically
control facie
ing Properly. ?f su-n a s,.? Le^, due to ; �.. c that they are Cpera t-
reason - per -maintenance or other
reason, fa_,s;re ce-4n or cleanse storm water rL'noff in an effective
she dctor r,1av el_mina _
credits to an a_D "O_t"�aLe IeVO� teTC_ rec',_ce water quality or detention
C'bie to at^_V - . Cr^„ rin}' SL'CIl fa0_1_ ty. shall, no be _
mor._ for s- dra_ :ace fee adjus _e1_
`^s following any -e, _ ac eT tments fcr a nericd c_ 12
be made retroactive1Y. - ��stm "t' refit adjustments sha11 no-
^_he issuance of any burl
t ties ti•; _n land
per it, Or other action which chances or in_
water �raiaa e.._sL S ,:se .1.1 be cause f j stm ..t
ae fees to an a-=rcp__ate neve, an ac e- o- storm
AUTHOR:_,,
—=
Section No. ,Y of the Pose . e
A-20
PUBLIC i'IGR1:S PRCCEDURE
STORM DRAINACE CREDITS
March 27, 1984
BACFGRCJ
In January of 1984, the Roseville Council adopted a storm drainage utility, together
with city policy allowing for adjustments or credits to storm drainage fees. The
following procedure shall be used to calculate these credits to assure consistant
application to all situ ations.
CREDITS
A. LAND USE INTE\SIT:' CREDITS
1. Criteria: h'hen unit runoff generated by a parcel differs from the assigned
amount by more than7'20-, parcel drainage fee is to be adjusted to reflect
actual runoff.
2. Required information by applicant:
a) Complete site pl.an.
b) Site area and percentage of "improved" surface.
3. Calculate Procedure:
a) Calculate unit ranoff by SCSS method; using actual percent improved
surface, 2" rainfall, Soil Group "B", Anticedent %Ioist =e Condition II.
b) Compare with "Standard" Unit Runoff.
Land Use "Standard" 2" Runoff
Single family .2411
Cemeteries & golf courses .09"
Developed parks .18"
Schools & community centers ..30 11
Multiple $ churches .56"
Co.'nmercial/industrial 1.24"
C) If calculated unit runoff differs from standard by 200 or more, ad -
Just parCelS REU value by ratl0 of. actual unit runoff to standard
unit runoff.
4. Exceptions:
a) No adjustments to single family parcels, as their fees do not depend
on iot size or intensity.
b) For parcels with drainage easements, reduce parcel size to non-ease-
nent area, then calculate unit runoff.
B. Rate of Discharge Credits
1. Criteria-- When peak runoff from site is limited to pre -development levels
by on-site facilities owned and maintained by, property owner, up to 25o
reduction in drainage fee can be granted.
2. Required information by applicant:
a) Complete site plan.
b) Area of site draining to each outlet point.
c) a improved surface draining to each outlet point.
d) Specific details about ou-let `acility(s).
e) Calculation of peak outflow rate for 5-vea- and 100 -year design rain
-
fa' using modifiecmethod with -c Of 30
=ir.. or more.
A-21
C
a) Dividesite into areas which crain to ea c.. cr _::a^e outlet.
b) Select design: rainfall.
c) i_
Route rainfall through pond using r„odiec rational r etnod.
.i F 7
choose tc at least SO min., and use "C" Value :ren Rossml tiers
Equation Graph. Determine peak Outflow rate by su = ng all areas.
d) Check other rainfall events to determine "worst" case.
e) Calculate pre -development rates For parcel using"C"=
ing no on-site retention. y _0 and assum-
ing
f) If peak 5 -year outflow less than predevelopment--10% credit.
If peak 100-year
credit.
less than predevel
credit. opment--additional 150
4. Exceptions, Special Cases.
a)
b)
C)
Off-site water drains to outlet --owner has right to drain this ,Fater
through his site without detention. Grant credits if he protiides
sufficient control for his portion of the total flow. (This will
require applicant to proviae
parcel). information about watershed beyond his
Outlet facility owned by city or others --No Credits.(See Criteria B-1)
Shared Ponding Situation: All ponds have an outlet. If outlet is
on another's land, no credits (as in b) above), except if the pond
level is normally below outlet, (requires historic documentation). In
this case-,73—no overflow occurs in a 5 -year evert, parcel gets 100.
credit. If no overflow occurs in 100 -year event, additional 150. credi-
Water Quality Credits
I. Criteria: When a parcel provides on-site treatment facilities which function
to improve the quality of runoff exiting the site, up to 50o of
fee may be credited depending of treatment effectiveness. the drainage
2. Required information by applicant:
a) h''nen treatment facility is a "wet"P ond.
(1) Area of site draining to pond and percent impervious.
(2) Volume Of pond below outlet elevation.
b) V,`hen treatment facilityl
not a pond, applicant to f::rnisli sufficient
doc,mentation to ascertain the effectiveness of the facility in removing
suspended solids.
�. Calculation procedure for wet ponds:
a) Divide site .into areas draining to each outlet or facility.
b) Calculate the average annual runoff for each area using
the following equations: 9_
Dr=P(•'S lm -5.254
where D -=annual runo" death
P=annual rainfall _ 29 inches
Ia,=; improved, expressed
as a decimal.
C) Calculate annual runoff volume (V annual _ Dr
x area acreage.
d) Calculate or verify pond volume in acre -fee:+
e) Calculate, a below outlet elevation.
, pac�ty-inflo�,' 'ration a- .,
(CI,.)
CIR=pond volume1V
annual
X Read sediment removal efficiency r
rom 5r.ne's Tr2_o ' F_=iciency Cu -.,.,-
(See policy). .
A-22
g) Calculate total site efficiency by proportioning t^e efficiency of
each area, and adding together.
h) Calculate credit:
Credit=site efficiency/2 x RGU value x current rate.
.4. Exceptions and special cases.
a) Off-site water drains to treatment area --
Ignore effects of off-site water in calculating pond efficiency'.
b) Parcel shares ponding facility.
If parcel has water normally ponded on site, calculate vol'LLne of
pond on that site below outfall. Then calculate credit per normal
proceaure.
D. Other Credits
Where, in the opinion of the staff, the above procedures do not result in an appro-
priate storm drainage charge, the Public Works Director has the authority to make
adjustments consistant with the intent of the storm drainage utilit},.
AU711DRITY
Drainage, Chapter 74, Storm hater Drainage Utility, adopted. January, 1984.
City Policy, Cre�its and/Or adlllS''^entS to mu-ic_ira! Stem 1•'3 ^" + Inc -F
adopted January, 1984. �-
A-23
MEMO TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: John K. Anderson, City Administrator
RE: Disorderly Conduct at Events Ordinance
DATE: May 31, 1985
I
Bruce Malkerson forwarded the attached copy of a Bloomington
ordinance regulating "disorderly conduct at events" to Rod Krass.
Tom Brownell and I have looked at the Bloomington ordinance
and we decided to bring it to City Council's attention.
Background
The City has not had a significant amount of experience with
disorderly crowds at public events. The City of Bloomington
has and they passed the attached ordinance. Tom Brownell felt
that an ordinance similar Bloomington's might be useful for
Valleyfair and possibly Richard's Pub. In addition, City staff
has discussed the need for some kind of ordinance that would
allow the City to regulate tailgating.
Alternatives
1. Continue with the City ordinances now in effect and make
no changes until the need is apparent. This would avoid
Council having to spend time developing an ordinance that
might not fit the circumstances three or six months from
now.
2. Draft an ordinance similar to the Bloomington ordinance
that would give the City the tools to deal with a problem
should it arise after the opening of the Track. City staff
could contact Bloomington and discuss the enforcement of
their ordinance and/or contact the League of Minnesota
of Cities for sample ordinances from other communities.
Having an ordinance in place that would address potential
problems when the Track opens might provide the Police
Department and City Council with the tools to set the tone
of activity the City will permit at the Racetrack beginning
with day one.
Staff recommends alternative No. 2 for the reasons discussed
above. If Council concurs with this recommendation we will
also discuss tailgating with the City of Bloomington to make
sure that this ordinance handles tailgating as well.
RITOMM'!
Pass a motion directing the appropriate City staff to draft
an ordinance regulating disorderly conduct at public events
based upon Bloomington ordinance Section 12.07.
JKA/jms
(g) Aid, abet, allow, permit, or participate in the commission of any of Liie
3 !`
i.cts prohibited in paragraphs (1) through (7) of this subsection.
(b) prostitution prohibited. Prostitution is hereby prohibited and " yone doing any
' be guilty of a tnisdemeauor.
of the acts set forth in subsection (a) of this section shall
Ord. No. 66-72, 12-19-66)
(Code, 1958 S 174.03; Added by
SEC. 12.07• DISORDERLY CONDUCT AT EVENTS.
(a) Purpose. The purpose of this section is to describe certain conduct at events
onduct ncontrary tnb
r
erin anwhich ato the
which gaespectatorhoreparticipant and bfound to be acnuisance
at n event
coming
public welfare of the City of Bloomington.
(b) Definition. Event means a theater performance or show, athletic contest or
to which the general public is
other entertainment or amusement, ,or a public gathering
admitted.
(c) Conduct prohibited. The doing of any of the following acts without authority of
disorderly conduct and unlawful:
law by any person or persons is hereby declared to be
indecent language so as to be audible and offen-
(1) Using profane, vulgar or
sive.
(2) Appearing at an event in an intoxicated condition.
in tending to reasonably arouse
(3) Engaging in brawling or fighting or conduct
alarm, anger or resentment in others.
throwing any object, thing or article onto a stage, playing
or
(4) Intentionally
an event is conducted, which may be likely to endanger any person
field or area where
property or interfere with the orderly play or conduct of the event.
a stage, playingor area where an
lY g
(5) Intentionally running or going onto
event is conducted.
where signs have been posted by the management or an
(6) Smoking in an area
official of the City prohibiting smoking and indicating who posted the sign.
a marked exit, or taking or
(7) Obstructing an aisle, blocking properly
obstructing the seat of another.
refusing to leave an event when directed to do so by the manage-
(8) Failing or
ment of the event or an authorized representative.
a charge is made without having paid
(9) Gaining entrance to an event for which
the of the person in charge of the event or his
such charge and without permission
authorized representative.
(d) Conduct at Metropolitan Sports Area.
any of the following acts within the
(1) Parking Lot The doing of
Area lot without authority of law by any person or persons is
Metropolitan Sports parking
hereby declared to be disorderly conduct and unlawful:
creates a risk of bodily harm to any
(A) Engaging in any conduct which
other person or damage or property.
Engaging or participating in the playing of any organized sports act-
Facilities
(B)
specific written permission of the Metropolitan Sports
ivity without
Commission.(C) Engaging in the striking, kicking, or throwing of objects by or bet-
limited baseballs,
rea lot including, but not
ween persons occupying said sports a such
basketballs, tennis balls, or any other such projectile
footballs, frisbees, soccer balls,
other than a receptacle
which may be thrown, struck, or kicked.
in any
(D) Building or maintaining a fire place
which raises the fire off the ground.
fire and thereafter failing to extinguish the fire
(E) Starting or using a
when it is no longer used.
It shall be unlawful to sell or offer for sale any ticket for
(2) Sports Area -
article of clothing, food, beverage, or any other moveable property on any pro-
Facilities Commission unless
any event,
perty owned, operated, or leased by the Metropolitan Sports
Sports Facilities Commission or its lessee.
No.
authorized by the Metropolitan 69-89, 11-10-69; Ord.
by 012x4
-46,08x8-77; Ord. No. 78-71, -?8)
77-31, 5916-7717Ord4;Noad77
SEC. 12.08. UNAUTHORIZED ENTRANCE UPON SCHOOL PREMISES.
r..
Definition'The word ,Aas used in shall apply to public
(a) nnotated 120.051ande130�n
schools as definedby Minnesota Statutes
(b) Conduct prohibited. No person or persons who are requested to depart from the
the particular school or the
premises of a school upon demand of the person in charge of
the District shall refuse to do so.
Superintendent of the Schools of
1958 S 174.05; Added by Ord. No. 69-57, 7-14-69)
(Code,
147
MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator
FROM: Judith S. Cox, City Clerk—
RE: Preliminary Approval of $1,800,000 IR Bonds for
Bemidji Super 8 Partnership
DATE: May 31, 1985
Introduction and Background
On May 21st Council directed staff to prepare a resolution giving
preliminary approval to the application of Bemidji Super 8
Partnership for $1,800,000 IR Bonds.
Alternatives
1. Adopt Resolution No. 2389.
2. Do not adopt Resolution No. 2398.
Recommended Action
Offer Resolution No. 2398, A Resolution Giving Preliminary Approval
to a Project Under the Minnesota Municipal Industrial Development
Act, Referring the Proposal to the Minnesota Department of Energy
and Economic Development for Approval and Authorizing Preparation
of Necessary Documents, and move its adoption.
JSC/jms
0
SUPER 8 MOTEL
1815 �PauQ Bunyan CDniue c.A1-qV- • Bemidji. �.,Mwiesota 56601
(218) 751-8481
May 23, 1985
John Anderson
City Administrator
City of Shakopee
129 East 1st Avenue
Shakopee, MN 55379
Dear Mr. Anderson:
AUM9 T. qWfiam
9eeemQ q)ONEW
I would like to express my appreciation for the cooperation and
assitance being received from you and your staff relative to our
Super 8 IDB application.
I am also sensitive to the concerns presented by prospective trades
as they relate to the project construction.
Super 8 Building Inc., our general contractor has advised me they
will be subcontracting the project in the local area.
They have assured me that they will contract with any contractor or
company which gives the best combination of quality, workmanship,
service, timing, cooperation between trades and price, without
descrimination against either union or non union shops. They
have also advised me that the project will not be a "manufactured"
facility. All construction and workmanship will be on site and of
the highest quality.
Relative to the cost estimates included in our IDB application, I
can only say they were the best estimates available at the time of
application.
Estimated wage rates, which appeared to be of some concern, are
projected to include worker compensation, insurance costs, taxes,
fringes and other cost factors associated with wages.
Once again it is our desire to complete a first class facility in a
timely fashion which will be a positive factor in the community
while competing with the bordering communities for lodging
business.
(-A mewo's 9wo Pe000cmy �Codgtng
once again we appreciate the concerns and the cooperation extended
by you and your staff and the member of the council.
Sincerely,
Murra'y W�liaM-Son
MW/ti
(�w
RESOLUTION NO. z�8
RESOLUTION GIVING PRELIMINARY APPROVAL TO A
PROJECT UNDER THE MINNESOTA MUNICIPAL INDUS-
TRIAL DEVELOPMENT ACT, REFERRING THE PROPOSAL
TO THE MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY AND
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT FOR APPROVAL AND AUTHO-
RIZING PREPARATION OF NECESSARY DOCUMENTS.
BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council (the "Council") of
the City of Shakopee, Minnesota (the "City"), as follows:
1. It is hereby found,. determined and declared as
follows:
1.1. The welfare of the State of Minnesota (the
"State") requires active promotion, attraction, encour-
agement and development of economically sound industry
and commerce through governmental acts to prevent, so
far as possible, emergence of blighted lands and areas
of chronic unemployment, and it is the policy of the
State to facilitate and encourage action by local gov-
ernment units to prevent the economic deterioration of
such areas to the point where the process can be re-
versed only by total redevelopment through the use of
local, state and federal funds derived from taxation,
with the attendant necessity of relocating displaced
persons and of duplicating public services in other
areas.
1.2. Technological change has caused a shift to a
significant degree in the area of opportunity for edu-
cated youth to processing, transporting, marketing,
service and other industries, and unless existing and
related industries are retained and new industries are
developed to use the available resources of the City, a
large part of the existing investment of the community
and of the State as a whole in educational and public
service facilities will be lost, and the movement of
talented, educated personnel of mature age to areas
where their services may be effectively used and com-
pensated and the lessening attraction of persons and
businesses from other areas for purposes of industry,
commerce and tourism will deprive the City and the State
of the economic and human resources needed as a base for
providing governmental services and facilities for the
remaining population.
1.3. The increase in the amount and cost of govern-
mental services recuires the need for more intensive
development and use of land to provide an adequate tax
base to finance these costs.
1.4. Bemidji Super 8 Partnership, a Minnesota gen-
eral partnership (the "Company"), has advised the Coun-
cil that it desires to undertake a project which con-
sists of the acquisition, construction and installation
of an approximately 66 unit Super 8 motel (the "Proj-
ect"), to be located on the northeast corner of the
intersection of County Road 17 and County Road 16 in the
City.
1.5. The existence of the Project in the City will
contribute to more intensive development and use of
land, thereby increasing the tax base and employment
opportunities in the City.
1.6. The City has been advised by the Company and
on that basis hereby finds that conventional, commercial
financing to pay the capital cost of the Project is
available at such costs of borrowing that the Project
would not be economically feasible and would not be
undertaken but for the availability of industrial devel-
opment bond financing therefor.
1.7. This Council has been advised by Capital De-
velopments, Inc. of the financial feasability of the
Project, as so undertaken with the assistance of the
City, or of its intention to purchase commercial or
industrial revenue obligations of the City to finance
the Project.
1.8. The City is authorized by Minnesota Statutes,
Chapter 474, to issue its revenue bonds, notes or other
obligations to finance the cost, in whole or in part, of
the acquisition, construction, reconstruction, improve-
ment, betterment or extension of capital projects con-
sisting of properties used and useful in connection with
a revenue producing enterprise, including the Project,
and the issuance of such obligations by the City would
be a substantial inducement to the Company to construct
its facility in the City.
1.9. The City has been advised by O'Connor &
Hannan, Minneapolis, Minnesota, who shall act as bond
counsel to the City with respect to the Project, that
the Project constitutes a "project" within the meaning
of Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 474.
2. On the basis of information given the City to date,
it appears that it would be in the best interest of the City
to issue its obligations (the "Bonds") under the provisions
of Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 474, to finance the Project
in an amount presently estimated not to exceed $1,800,000.
- 2 -
14 CL -
3. The Project and the related financing thereof by
the City are hereby given preliminary approval, and the
issuance of the Bonds for such purpose and in such estimated
amount is hereby approved, subject to approval of the Proj-
ect by the Minnesota Department of Energy and Economic De-
velopment (the "Department") and to the mutual agreement of
the Council, the Company and the initial purchasers -of the
Bonds as to the details and provision for payment of the
Bonas. In all events, it is understood, however, that the
Bonds shall not constitute a debt of the City or a charge,
lien or encumbrance, legal or equitable, upon any property
of the City except its interest in the Project, and each of
the Bonds when, as and if issued shall recite - in substance
that it is payable solely from the revenues received from
the Project and property pledged to the payment thereof.
4. In accordance with Minnesota Statutes, Section
474.01, Subdivision 7a, the Mayor is hereby authorized and
directed to submit the proposal for the Project to the De-
partment for approval. The Mayor and other officers, em-
ployees and agents of the City are hereby authorized to
provide the Department with any preliminary information
needed for this purpose and are further authorized to initi-
ate and assist in the preparation of such documents as may
be appropriate to the Project and the financing thereof.
S. The adoption of this resolution by the Council does
not constitute a guarantee or a firm commitment that the
City will issue the Bonds as requested by the Company. The
City retains the right in its sole discretion to withdraw
from participation and accordingly not issue the Bonds
should the City determine that it is in the best interest of
the City not to do so or should the parties to the transac-
tion be unable to reach agreement on the terms thereof.
Adopted by the Shakopee City Council on
1985.
ATTEST: -
City Clerk
Mayor of the City of Shakopee
Approved as to form this Al
day of i985.
City Attorney �--r
- 3 -
Clerk's Certificate
I, the undersigned, being the duly qualified and acting
Clerk of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota, hereby certify
that I have carefully compared the attached and foregoing
resolution with the original thereof on file in my office
and further certify that the same is a full, true and com-
plete transcript therefrom, insofar as the same relates to
the preliminary approval of a commercial or industrial de-
velopment project and the financing thereof for Bemidji
Super 8 Partnership, a Minnesota general partnership.
I certify that Councilmember introduced
said resolution, Councilmember moved its
adoption, which motion was duly seconded by Councilmember
, and upon roll call, the "Ayes," "Abstains"
and "Nays" were as follows:
AYES ABSTAINS NAYS
Whereupon the resolution was declared duly passed and
adopted.
I further certify that said resolution was duly adopted
by the Shakopee City Council at a duly called and regularly
held regular or special meeting thereof.
WITNESS my hand officially as such Clerk and the cor-
porate seal of the City this day of , 1985.
City Clerk
Shakopee, Minnesota
(SEAL)
MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator 1y tJ
FROM: Judith S. Cox, City Clerk Cl /
RE: Request for Vacation of Shakopee Avenue West of
Adams Street
DATE: May 23, 1985
Introduction and Backaround:
The City has received a request for the vacation of Shakopee
Avenue lying West of Adams Street one-half block of the alley.
The petition has been signed by the two abutting property
owners. With the development of the property to the East, it
is apparent that Shakopee Avenue will not be extended to the
East. An earlier request was denied because of the uncertainty
of the development of State property to the East.
Alternatives•
1. Deny request.
2. Set public hearing on request.
RPnnmmene9At i nn -
Alternative No. 2.
Action Requested:
Offer Resolution No. 2404, A Resolution Initiating the Vacation
of Part of Shakopee Avenue As Herein Described, Lying West of
Adams Street, and move its adoption.
JSC/jms
RESOLUTION N0, 2404
A RESOLUTION INITIATING THE VACATION OF PART OF
SHAKOPEE AVENUE AS HEREIN DESCRIBED,
LYING WEST OF ADAMS STREET
WHEREAS, A PETITION has been received by abutting property
owners requesting the vacation of that part of Shakopee Avenue
described as follows:
That part of Shakopee Avenue lying West of Adams Street
between Lot 6, Block 1 and Lot 1, Block 3, as depicted
in the plat of Notermann Addition according to the replat
of Notermann Addition, Scott County, Minnesota.
WHEREAS, it has been made to appear to the Shakopee City
Council that the said street serves no public use or interest;
and
WHEREAS, a public hearing must be had before such action
can be taken and two weeks published and posted notice thereof
must be given.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA, That a hearing be held in the Council
Chambers of vacating that part of Shakopee Avenue described
as follows:
That part of Shakopee Avenue lying West of Adams Street
between Lot 6, Block 1 and Lot 1, Block 3, as depicted
in the plat of Notermann Addition according to the replat
of Notermann Addition, Scott County, Minnesota.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that two weeks' published notice
be given by publication in the SHAKOPEE VALLEY NEWS and posted
notice be given by two weeks' posting a copy of such notice
on the bulletin board in the main floor of the Shakopee County
Court House, on the bulletin board in the Shakopee City Hall
and on the bulletin board in the Shakopee Public Utilities Building.
of
of
Adopted in
the City of
Shakopee,
1985.
session of the City Council
Minnesota, held this day
Mayor of the City of Shakopee
ATTEST:
City Clerk
Approved as to.form this
day of , 1985.
City Attorney
MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator J �C_
FROM: Judith S. Cox, City Clerk(:
RE: Request by V.F.W. for Vacation of Easements
DATE: May 23, 1985
Introduction and Back round
The Shakopee V.F.W. has acquired Lots 2, 3 and 4, Block 1 within
Furrie's 2nd Addition and plans to construct a new structure for
their activities. There are ten foot drainage and utility ease-
ments around the perimeter of the lots, which is standard plat-
ting procedure.
In order to develop the property as proposed by the V.F.W., it
is necessary that the easements be vacated.
Alternatives
1. Set public hearing on request.
2. Deny request.
Recommendation
Alternative No. 1.
Action Requested
Offer Resolution No. 2405, A Resolution Initiating the Vacation
of Drainage and Utility EAsements Within the Plat of Furrie's
2nd Addition as Described Herein, and move its adoption.
JSC/jms
A RESOLUTION INITIATING THE VACATION OF DRAINAGE AND
UTILITY EASEMENTS WITHIN THE PLAT OF
FURRIE'S 2ND ADDITION AS DESCRIBED HEREIN
WHEREAS, there exists a ten foot drainage and utility easement
along the westerly 10 feet of Lots 2 and 3 and along the easterly
10 feet of Lots 3 and 4 all within Block 1 of Furrie's 2nd Addition;
and
WHEREAS, one party has purchased the said three lots and
proposes to develop them as a single lot; and
WHEREAS, it has been made to appear to the Shakopee City
Council that the said easements described above serve no public
use or interest; and
WHEREAS, a public hearing must be had before such action
can be taken and two weeks published and posted notice thereof
must be given.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA that a hearing be held in the Council
Chambers on the 2nd day of July, 1985 at 8:15 p.m., or thereafter,
on the matter of vacating the drainage and utility easement
described as follows:
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that -two weeks published notice
be given by publication in the Shakopee Valley News and posted
notice be given by two weeks posting a copy of such notice on
the bulletin board in the Shakopee City Hall and on the bulletin
board in the Shakopee Public Utilities Building and on the bulletin
board in the main floor of the Scott County Courthouse.
Adopted in _
the City of Shakopee,
day of
ATTEST:
City Clerk
Shakopee,
, 1985.
Approved as to form this
day of , 1985.
City Attorney
session of the City Council of
Minnesota held this
Mayor of the City of Shakopee
MEMO TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: John K. Anderson, City Administrator
RE: Scott County Governmental Study Commission
DATE: May 31, 1985
The City Council is aware that the Scott County Governmental
Study Commission has been meeting since the beginning of 1985.
The Commission has spent all of its initial meetings taking
testimony from Scott County officials, but plans to begin taking
testimony in the various cities around the County. The Mayor
and I have attended the Scott County Mayors and Administrators
Meetings which have focused on what type of testimony cities
might give.
Councilmembers who have read articles in the local newspaper
regarding the testimony before the Commission by Scott County
officials are aware of the types of topics being discussed.
The focus has been on the various types of county government
permitted under state law, and how various county elected officials
feel each of those governmental forms would work in Scott County.
It is anticipated that the Commission will be seeking comments
from both citizens and other local units of government as they
move their meeting around the County. In anticipation of testifying
before the Commission the Scott County Mayors and Administrators
Group felt that each city in Scott County should seriously consider
passing a resolution that would state the position of that city.
In addition, the Mayors and Administrators Group felt that Scott
County cities could have the largest impact if their recommendations
to the Commission were similar.
Council should consider the various alternatives the Study Commission
will have before them and then consider passing a resolution
supporting one form or another. Because the County Manager
Plan more closely parallels the organizational structure most
Scott County cities have the Mayors and Administrators Group
have drafted a sample resolution for each community to consider
(resolution attached).
Alternatives
1. Approve the proposed draft resolution, The intent
of the Mayors and Administrator Group is to provide a draft
that might guide each City Council, not one that would
be copied by each City Council.
2. Discuss and add or delete items to the draft resolution
to appropriately reflect the individual thinking of each
community. This is the approach that the Scott County
Mayors and Administrators Group anticipated would be taken
by most cities. It allows each community to reflect their
unique concerns when drafting a resolution.
3. Take no formal position at the City Council level supporting
any of the alternative forms of county government. Council
might wish to consider this approach if it feels it is
inappropriate to make recommendations to the Study Commission.
This approach would be contrary to the approach members
cities of the Scott County Mayors and Administrators Group
have used during the last three and one half years as issues
have been presented to the Scott County Board. Moreover,
it is the desire of the Study Commission to find out precisely
how citizens and other governmental units in Scott County
feel about the alternative forms of county government.
If all the local units are silent on the issue the Commission
will not have the assistance it desires in arriving at
a recommendation that would truly reflect the needs and
concerns of the County, its citizens and local governmental
units.
I recommend alternative No. 2 for the reasons listed above.
It was the consensus of those attending the last two Mayors
and Administrators Group meetings that cities should take a
position (not necessarily precisely the one in the draft resolution)
and designate a spokesman to represent the community at the
Study Commission's hearing in each respective community. The
Study Commission's hearing in Shakopee is tentatively scheduled
for 7:30 p.m. on August 7, 1985.
Action Requested
1. Discuss the proposed draft resolution and make changes
where appropriate.
2. Direct the appropriate City staff to draft a formal resolution
for City Council action at its June 18, 1985 meeting estab-
lishing a formal recommendation regarding the form of county
government the Shakopee City Council wishes to recommend
to the Scott County Governmental Study Commission.
JKAl jms
DRAFT RESOLUTION
WHEREAS, tax payers expect and deserve government that is efficient, as well as
responsive to their needs; and
WHEREAS, improved productivity resulting from the most efficient governmental form
can result in a reduction in taxes necessary to support that level of governemnt;
and
WHEREAS, The Scott County Governmental Study Commission under the Statutory
provision outlined in Sections 315A.01 - .i3 is charged w th studying and analv_z_na
the existing form of County government; and
WHEREAS, the Scott County Governmental Study Commission encourages public discussion
and input into their decision making process.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF
MINNESOTA, that:
1. The ,ity supports the work of the Study Commission
in aialyzing the existing form of Scott County
Government.
2. The :
om:DvttvF »n o : t1 n-.^.�7Cf�tn trap �.
c<e o. c� fD � ? c ^ R w a =; n: _ � a R m < ., H o R ^.�
2� mRmcD co
m 7 m a v
� m .a � m
�oaFn w��ayw^ '<�`� a�^mow Eo O;
0 y�of_ x=0, a nm
fes
tD
efaB^' f4g
R� eneE�Ec�eo"
aao �.-+- •i�.mta�,�� oto a c�nw�Dyceve � -
mE: cR
ndoo t<e� A' � to0 �o~C0CL� `N
e°cot9c eom��w`g
c7 sE3 °a'a'' N
° e vf°m�'a eDeowa� wen ti � .:
o` A ,� -, � ,0 8 r. a o o � in m qo• ., � �, � tri t a to w � �,
wog a •a`CL
co C,
^&aetinEno ?�c �a ab a
x., nr'i nm aR�o�.
vg �e ea wenaa�a O` -
m ti fn t mn eD y of a n g C o
4 �
cm�Co�I - <o o
c_eg ^aA ^�c= nePn mprc nnt�°�°„R� ceatn�
�p,a=; a°c�.c�aot cn°`�n c=; C3 �D"'E�
w° -'tones wRm o.emd.8 a' m��m� sic -A O
_ o
aa -to aja �c�ot$ maR re Rxt`St eta
R a aCL Z
°Deis ao� �^a�xa a��oS�aen _� �■
..
a^a ,eDi^c oS�o �RptocS�a r ;a� �•
» a+�b r
rR.,o.< apr aWno.ao cecD�oa���r",D0. cow K
n
•: Gin m o o »� c ^tf°noao. .. 5g S "
oaE on ..ee�. mio agoth Saoaw
m
'-'m to a
R
m.: enFan 8aa. �060
a►tfn »c n a rnt o> n mt v nt
om���v eRo�°c�,�••fDeeRo°tRo9 ccRe�aaw��D�°'c,��am
taDe.f°,
a o..3�cnDON�nn�t/� 3<ri0�m�^'Cpi Y/ �■
p`am m rn o o- mm m f° m ee m
m ^+ a a fe fn' m n
a� rr o
n a3S O
fDgayo M=cot�ca�cc^vn marptcSaocR<,"g��
4+° to 'a ^;cS 3t a SR�`o4°`s:R
�n < �o O
cnta0 0.mvopto c�a� r'me co06
EDilco�ma^
t-,St.<O&n A,m., anon Ra^.
o to -,o naoc a�S o ,CD 0 Cs a nm
3waa•`9+ eae,etnoRaSS::e '�ae..tn°°ate°�F�'�
ats `� R ;; p `°�-. n ocmtnn-mmEa,.`�'
^t�°af°a ,•„���mt'ico� �D�cnaaoQ�na'`��,-+<„
RtcDN3tn
a wowa.�.Rpaan° mRtnp
t( 7 -f to cm 4 `� /D N f1 oo 6 "! A W v' Rte
110, a �� '00-
a y S R v cc,
m»
::wo 7mS oRcoR `'attDi°11 '+
O H O n a � a n• t 'c7 � p' vCi O'er ff IDD o f -
• tD ` �, C wQY
❑ n R a
•�+a m �' a tD w� N �.a �=•� fe N a �'t a O R.�^^t�
a� yb" oay oo cc»oa o axvte4
t .o.. ,oma » cD G D < m O R O n enn ...
ID E
5 6 y n e o= .mt N 6 to 7 0 .�
C•snoo pp -
w '+tD a. Ran c o rn m cD a� m
tRDo w£m�1.1,G_ 070 �woDa `<El toaD aR(Da
p9 w e ^' E F n zT� o A
ooc nay-mct''°° 3�aa aR aopp iiI
c� a2 n o ono a F-0 M < afD
ootf9n waaon�-~io ^Aac--1 a� o0-
yt�DONp�� c
Pr CD
"n Q�ot-'D^c rn
mono w�t
£ xRo CID m
� a a
osoo C
� 7 t
0o^0C G --
Oo 0 6 p
ao 'e ...amen
C
c m
va
m
to
_. 40
CL
C�
Mm^�R�tn c S�ctya `cnaon�m b tasty to
Gtie p (y 6C o°� 6�.� o Gm�O^C
o as m_ 7 0 - w r, o =? X F
l Y�
MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator
FROM: Judith S. Cox, City Clerk
RE: Ordinance No. 171, Extending Parking Restrictions in
the Central Business District
DATE: May 30, 1985
Introduction and Background
On May 21st, Council directed preparation of an ordinance to extend
parking restrictions in the central business district on a year
round basis with the exception of Sommerville north of Second
Avenue. The attached ordinance does so.
Alternatives
1. Adopt ordinance as drafted.
2. Amend ordinance as drafted.
3. Do not adopt ordinance as drafted.
Recommendation
Offer Ordinance No. 171, An Ordinance of the City of Shakopee,
Minnesota, amending Shakopee City Code Chapter 9 entitled
"Parking Regulations" by Repealing Subd 3 of Section III of
Ordinance No. 107 Enacting a new Subd 3 of Section III of
Ordinance No. 107 and by adopting by reference Shakopee City
Code Chapter 1 and Section 9.99, and move its adoption.
JSC/jms
ORDINANCE NO. 171
Fourth Series
An Ordinance of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota, amending Shakopee City
Code Chapter 9 entitled "Parking Regulations" by Repealing Subd 3 of
Section III of Ordinance No. 107 Enacting a new Subd 3 of Section III
of Ordinance No. 107 and by adopting by reference Shakopee City Code
Chapter 1 and Section 9.99
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA ORDAINS:
SECTION I: Repeal
Subd 3 of Section III of Ordinance No. 107 is hereby repealed.
SECTION II: Parking hours in the central business district
There shall be no parking on the following streets in the central business district
between 2:00 A.M. and 6:00 A.M, to -wit:
Second Avenue, First Avenue and Levee Drive between Sommerville and Fuller
Street and Lewis Street, Holmes Street and Fuller Street between Second
Avenue and Levee Drive
SECTION III: Penalty Provisions Adopted
Shakopee City Code Chapter 1 entitled "General Provisions and Definitions applicable
to the entire City Code including penalty for violations" and Section 9.99 entitled
"Violations a Misdemeanor or Petty Misdemeanor" are hereby adopted in their entirety
by reference as though repeated verbatim herein.
SECTION IV: When in Force
This ordinance shall be published once in the official newspaper of the City of
Shakopee and shall be in full force and effect on and after the date of said publication.
Adopted in
session of the City Council of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota
held this day of _ , 1985.
ATTEST:
City Clerk
Prepared and approved as to form
this 29th day of May, 1985.
City Attorney
Mayor of the City of Shakopee
MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administra
FROM: H. R. Spurrier, City Engineer
RE: Intersection Lighting for Offsi�e Rac,track Roadways
DATE: June 3, 1985
I r.
Attached is a letter from Dave Warzala, Barton-Aschman, recommending
lighting at intersections on roads that are the principal access
to Canterbury Downs.
Background
City staff asked the consultant to investigate the advisability
of lighting installations for the offsite roadways because the
roadways are in an undeveloped area and visibility was perceived
to be a problem.
The consultant returned the attached recommendation which includes
approximately $22,200 as the attached cost summary indicates
we have estimated $250,000 for street lighting offsite. This
part of the street lighting proposed herein is only intersection
lighting while the other recommendation provided street lights
all along the route.
It is my recommendation that City Council authorize the expenditure
of $22,200 for street lighting for intersection lightings at
major intersections on the approach to Canterbury Downs.
Action Requested
A motion to authorize proper City officials to apply for service
and to authorize the installation of street lighting at County
Road 83 and State Trunk Highway 101, Shenandoah Drive and State
Trunk Highway 101, Fourth Avenue and Shenandoah Drive, County
Road 83 and 12th Avenue, and Valley Park Drive and 12th Avenue
for a cost of $22,200.
HRS/ jms
Barton-Aschman Associates, Inc.
1610 South Sixth Street Minneapoiis, Minnesota 55454 F12-332-0421
May 14, 1985
6=i1 01r77YI5 _3
�9�r _
Mr. H.R. SpurrierNo4
City of Shakopee
129 East First Avenue
Shakopee, Minnesota 55379 y rn
Re: Intersection lighting at key access points to Canterbury Downs
Dear Mr. Spurrier:
Barton-Aschman Associates, Inc. hereby recommends that the City of Shakopee authorize
its Utilities Commission and others to install lighting at the following intersections:
Power Company Installation Est.
Intersection Jurisdiction By Cost
1. C.R. 83 and S.T.H. 1011
2. Shenandoah Drive andl
S.T.H. 101
3. 4th Avenue and Shenandoah
Drive
4. C.R. 83 and 12th Avenue
5. Valley Park Drive and
12th Avenue
TOTAL COST
NSP Service -NSP
Poles -Contractor
SPUC Service -SPDC
Poles -Contractor
SPUC SPUC,
SPUC
SPUC
1 Requires MnDOT permit and breakaway provisions
SPUC
SPUC
No Chg.
$2.800
2,100
2.800
4,900
4,700
4,900
$22,200
Barton-Aschman Associates, Inc.
Mr. H.R. Spurrier
May 14, 1985
Page 2
Lighting of the above listed intersections is needed to provide additional safety during
nighttime departures of Canterbury Downs. Intersections selected for lighting were
evaluated based on the anticipated total number of traffic movements and requirements
for manual traffic control.
Intersection lighting design is proposed as two wood poles located in opposing corners (far
side of intersection) with 40 foot luminaire mounting height along S.T.H. 101 and 30 foot
mounting height, at all other locations. Light source would be 20OW high pressure sodium.
If you have any questions regarding this matter, please call.
ncerely,
�—t
David B. Warzala
Senior Associate
DBW:kro
SHAKOPEE _RA['E i R ACi::
CL: I bUMMAn'i F'rinzeC: i.i'-uuin-85
0FFSI TE 1MPR0VEMEN: T5
Project Estimated Cost or Contingency iG-Lr:l Lost Difference
Cost In EIS Revised Estimate tncumt'er ed
1. Vailev Fark Drive and
I
.ThAvenue l �) $9�U,CjCiCi,Ul% $77.,974.45 4bT.5 J.t5 $842.49'%.10 $;7,JCiq,9u
_.
Tru nir Highway 101
InterSeCIlOns$.705}000 .00* Z' 57,bi_%4.43. 1 5.1i_%8. $x:94. -i . i`i '310.2'8c.85
S.:
JnenanoGah Dr1V8 t51 $•iJS,I%l%l%.'J l% 3n%1 ':u.11:% /.b!%C.L%l%) Gl, i�i.(tl% 1G,ti 8.l%l%)
4. County road 6
Wideninq (o) $185,C%ii%,C0 $i74,✓16.85 $4, 06.1:, $i78.9FsJ.C1Ci sa,Ci15.00
J. 4th Avenue, Co. Rd.-
Racetrack Entrance 16) $Z74, % %0.00 $.24Q,091.00 .44,90-00 $�74,000.00 $0.00
r,. Ri cht of Way Cost f or
4th i venue
$45,000.00
:t45. dill, i_i !
7. Railroad Crossing
Cost
----------------------------------
$2'45,9_4.1%l%
($5,9?4.C%!%)
!'24 (iCiii, iL%
($240-1060.00)
Construction
-�g
Cost$, 9,000.00
$"i18,59C%.7.
-----------------------------------
$Ii8, ,57.5
$ `6 956.
$1`7,4"::.75
8. Engineering, Legal
and
Contingency Cost
$3901600.40
$179i%,000.uCi
$'9C".00i;,,C%0
$.i .00
9. Right of i'ay Costs
for
Shenandoah Drive
$.50,000.00
------------------------------------------------
$i.,t%,GCJC%.i.%i;
$•150.000.00
------_-----_-_----------
$C%.0%C%
_ _
Iu�1HL HUIt1U111GEU ul'C:
7
$�.v:9.vUU.-V
Ci: C^
$2,6566 5YU.ly
_118, C'.:-
C,`Gii.::cf.
*i ii,4, ,=t
10.4th Avenue. Racetraci
Entrance - Shenandoah Z2,00.Cj00.l%'.% $22.01.''.Cii% $ .vi .i%.1 iii .l%t%'!
li.Additional Right -of -Way
1^4th Avenue - _ $4J,i1�%U.lifi $40,000.00 ($40',000.00)
I -Additional Technical
bery'iCes - 4th Avenue $53,680.00 s5Z,680.00 l$J.3',600.00
i r`ossibie Signai!Zation
o. TH 101 anG Co.Rc. 8J #'IRbtfi.Vv 4- Z 1 .00 10Z, 05b. 0 ($10z,056.00)
i4.Ad0itional Right of Way T
Shenandoah Drive $4 ,ii%ii,('tti $4"`.1 0.i%':% i$4?.1'•.%C%.00)
iJ.Street Lightin25
g $0,1000.00 $2251_ 010`0.00 (2251.000.001
GRAND TOTAL :r.7, , 870, ikW � �it�---'---` V, UCi $:49','4 :. J� $x .487 E07. 2J t$57:. 415. �5 )
ii0 T ES:
i. Increased Cost of Fourth Avenue is due to pavement failure noted in Braun Encineering
Compan{{ tests and 1= due to the reouire0 realignment of the ver.ticai profile.
�. i`Gssi0le ❑ipnciization of TH 10 and Co. Fid. G -J is inc1Ude0because there Is a potential
that this may meet warrants by i2;�i;BJ.
.. vids were aimost Tial? .of the estlRiated cost because two signaiization projects did not
meet warrants.
4. Additional slope easement Was required for the Construction of Shenandoah Drive.
J. Re'v'enues to offset the costs above are listed below:
Revenue Amount
(a) fond Sale $2.445.`25.00
(6) K Hart 'IIF District .C10; 0�0.�,00
iC) MnDUT Grant $60.585.00
.(d) Minnesota RacetraCi:: Inc. for
Shenandoah ;Guth of 44-h Ave. ZBS.00,0.00
(e) Municipal State Fiid $«5,i_%U:i.00
{f) immediate 5peciai „i
Assessment $2 9C%Ci.VV
:g) H0ditlonal TIF 3+11CtpC�G.0.o
TOTAL RtL�t"(�iUE-----�--� -- �--
$Z,46 ,8 6.00