Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
05/06/1986
MEMO TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: John K. Anderson, City Administrator RE: Non-Agenda Informational Items DATE: May 1 , 1986 1. The 1985 annual report of the Lower Minnesota River Watershed District is on file. Please contact Judy Cox if you wish to review it. 2 . The AMM Revenue Committee met April 30th for the first time to renew its work on Fiscal Disparities. When Repre- sentative Bill Schriber ' s Fiscal Disparities Bill died in the 1986 Legislative Session the AMM made a commitment to work on the bill between sessions. I will keep you posted regarding the progress of the committee meetings. 3 . Marilyn Hagerman from the Renaissance Festival has been appointed Chairperson of the Chamber of Commerce Tourism Subcommittee that will be responsible for Shakopee ' s booth on July 5th at St. Paul' s Taste of Minnesota Program. Barry and Judy Cox will serving on that subcommittee represent- ing the City of Shakopee. 4. The City of Shakopee agreed to the League of Minnesota Cities (LMC) Municipal Amicus Program if approximately 750 of the League members participated. On April 30th I talked with Don Slater who said that 113 of the League ' s 771 members had originally agreed to the program with roughly 25 more trickling in after the deadline. This is less than the 75% participation that the City asked for. The members agreeing to the program represent % of the total annual dues paid to LMC. I will not propose that Shakopee participates unless City Councilmembers wish to change our original 75% participation requirement. Please contact me if you would like to change our position. 5 . Attached is the calendar for the month of May. 6 . Attached is a notice that Barry Stock received regarding the HRA' s ruling on Thomas and Susan Johnson' s 4th and Minnesota project loan. Jack Coller has written a response to Michael Gallagher and we will bring this before the HRA if necessary. 7 . Councilman Leroux asked about the possibility of installing rubberized railroad crossings on County Road 17 . The attached memorandum from Ken Ashfeld updates the status on this request. 8 . Attached is a status report on charitable gambling licenses in Shakopee from the City Clerk. 9. Attached is a Government Training Service (GTS) flyer on programming for local elected officials. Please take the time to look it over and mail it in. 10 . Attached is a letter Ken Ashfeld sent to Bill Crawford asking for a Mn/DOT review of possible traffic manaaement improvement for the intersection of Holmes Street ana Hignway Al . 11. Attached is a copy of the "Wasteline" newsletter from the Metropolitan Council. Please note the circled item which indicates that Shakopee ' s recycling program is right on target. 12. Attached is the Ehlers and Associates, Inc. newsletter. 13 . Attached is the Scott County Transportation Coalition flyer being circulated by the Coalition. 14. Attached is a copy of the Suburban Rate Authority ( SRA) recommended 1987 budget. Note that the 1987 membership assessment will be $350 per vote. Council can compare that with the 1984 , 1985 and 1985 membership assessments. 15 . Attached is a letter from Richard P. Braun, Commissioner of the Minnesota Department of Transportation (Mn/DOT) responding to the Mayor ' s letter regarding highway funding. 16. Attached is a letter from Dick Kinzel, Vice President/General Manager of Valleyfair, acknowledging in writing their indem- nification of the City of Shakopee. 17. Attached are the minutes of the April 9 , 1986 meeting of the Downtown Ad Hoc Committee. 18 . Attached are the minutes of the April 22 , 1986 meeting of the CBD Alternative Evaluation Committee. These minutes are included because the task force is in the final stages of selecting the bridge alignment alternatives for the downtown highway improvements. 19. Attached are the minutes of the April 3 , 1986 meeting of the Board of Adjustments and Appeals . 20. Attached are the minutes of the April 3 , 1986 meeting of the Planning Commission. 21. Attached is a memo from Barry Stock regarding access to Dial-A-Ride vehicles. 22. Attached is the 2nd draft of the proposed developers agreement between the City and Pow-Bell Construction Company for the Merchants Hotel grant rehab project. Jerry Wampach has been Council ' s liaison. We would like to have this on the May 20th agenda so call me if you have questions. 23 . Attached are the agendas for the May 8 , 1986 meetings of the Board of Adjust and Appeals and Planning Commission. 24 . Attached is a memo from Marilyn Remer regarding Valleyfair Good Any Day Discount Tickets. Councilmembers are welcome to use these tickets also. 25 . Valleyfair has paid their annual service agreement fee of $9 , 240 . JKA/jms MAY 1986 SUNDAY MONDAY TUESDAY WEDNESDAY THURSDAY FRIDAY SATUR.I)AY 1 2 3 I 4 Public 5 City 6 7 Planning 8 9 10 Utilities Council Commission 4 : 30 p.m. 7 : 00 p.m. 7 : 30 p.m. i 11 12 13 ICC 14 Energy & 15 16 17 5 : 00 p.m. Transportatio 7 : 30 p.m. 18 Comm. Serv. 19 City 20 21 Planning 22 23 24 7 : 30 p.m. Council Commission Fire Dept. 8 : 00 P.M. 7 : 30 p.m. 8 : 00 p.m. (School Board Election) 25 MEMORIAL 26 City 27 28 29 30 31 DAY Council City Hall 7 : 00 p.m. Closed �f STATE OF MINNESOTA OFFICE OF THE aTTURNF.Y GIINEHAI. ADDRESS REPLY TO: 102 CAPITOL BUILDING HUBERT H. HUMPHREY, III ST. PAUL 53155 ST. PAUL,NIN 55155 ATTORNEY GENERAL TELEPHONE:(612)2%-61% April 23 , 1986 Mr . Barry A. Stock Acting Director Shakopee Housing & Redevelopment Authority City of Shakopee 129 East First Avenue Shakopee , MN 55379-1376 Re: Thomas and Susan Johnson 408 Minnesota Street Shakopee, MN 55379 Dear Mr . Stock: Enclosed herewith is a copy of a letter to this office from the above-named individuals registering a complaint about the interpretation of a promissory note given to the Housing and Redevelopment Authority in connection with the purchase of certain property. We would appreciate receiving whatever comments you may be in a position to make concerning this complaint. You may wish to consult with the city attorney in connection with your response. Thank you for your cooperation. Very truly yours MICHAEL R. GALLAG ER Special Assistant Attorney General MRG: jd Enc. cc: Thomas and Susan Johnson AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER r a � i } o '��-- i i I / alp lC i --------------- { i - - , 7 MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator FROM: Ken Ashfeld, City Enginee ~ SUBJECT: Railroad Crossing on County State Aid Highway 17 DATE: April 18, 1986 This is in response to inquiries regarding the condition of the track crossing on CSAH 17 and the possibility of a rubberized crossing. In speaking with the County about it, they are aware of the problem and are planning on intermediate solutions as soon as possible. I say intermediate because funds have been applied for to install a rubberized crossing through the Federal Railroad Crossing Program. Mn/DOT administers this program, monitoring the fund distri- bution. All cities and counties complete a monitoring report on crossing conditions to Mn/DOT annually for all crossings in their Jurisdiction. All crossings are prioritized for cros- sing repair. Certain traffic volumes must be met to Justify a rubberized crossing and CSAH 17 would certainly qualify. As I understand, the program administration follows the following path: 1. Based on priority or condition, the railroad, Mn/DOT, or local Jurisdiction initiates project. 2. Project is verified for priority and qualification for type of repair and funding. 3. Mn/DOT executes agreement with railroad to complete � work (all grade crossing work is done by the railroad) . � 4. Mn/DOT executes agreement with local Jurisdiction for cost sharing, with the feds paying 90% and the local Juris- diction paying 10%. 5. Work is completed and payments made. As I previously indicated, Brad Larson has applied for a rubber crossing and feels that it will be funded soon. He does not feel that it is in the interest of the County or City to expend funds, other than reactive maintenance, to expediate the work at this point. Ka/pmp 3 MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator FROM: Judith S. Cox, City Clerk " RE: Status Report on Gambling Licenses In Shakopee DATE: April 21, 1986 This memo is in response to your question about what has happened in Shakopee since the State law was amended and gambling licenses are now issued by the State Gambling Board. Shakopee chose to adopt no regulations more restrictive than those that are set forth by the State with one exception, and that is to limit gambling to fraternal, religious, veterans or other non-profit organizations, which carry on their activities in and are located and based in the City of Shakopee. Prior to enactment of the current State law, Shakopee issued gambling licenses to the Shakopee VFW and to the American Legion. To date the State Gambling Board has issued gambling licenses to the following: The VFW, American Legion, Knights of Columbus, Lions, Eagles, and the Shak-O-Valley Amateur Hockey, Inc. Current regulations have no restrictions on the rent that one can charge for gambling activities on their premises i.e. : licenses located at the Backstretch and Pullman. However, new legislation, effective June 1 , 1986 , will limit expenses to 40% of receipts less taxes. We are beginning to see bars expressing a need to get involved in having gambling in order to be competitive. JSC/jms GOVERNMENT TRAINING SERVICE April , 1986 TO: Minnesota Local Elected Officials FR: Helene Johnson, Executive Director, Government Training Service We at GTS are exploring the idea of a special Summer Institute for Local Elected Officials and would very much appreciate your input. Could you take just a few minutes to indicate your suggestions on content, format and timing? We anticipate working with Brian Lee, a professional seminar leader who has served as a City Alderman for the City of Calgary and is currently a Member of the Leaislative Assembly for Alberta. He conducted several programs for local and state elected officials in Minnesota in January which were enthusiastically received, but covered too much in too short a time! A summer program would allow more time in a relaxed setting. The development of a special manual on Serving Your Constituents is also a possibility. POSSIBLE TOPICS Below are possible components of the Institute. Please indicate your level of interest in having these topics included within the Institute. Very Somewhat Interested Interested Interested Interested Serving Your Constituents While Saving Your Sanity • How to Remember Names • Communicating Effectively with Constituents by Phone and Letter (including re- sponding to complaints) • Handling Public Speaking Ran-dpvi s lb it i v�.eaS (IFi c=i greetings to speeches) • How to Lobby and be Lobbied • Tools of the Elected Offi- cial : Humor, Persuasion, Appearance Media Relations Creative Problem-Solving for Results Balancing Two Careers Formulating Positions on Policy Issues Other (please specify) Suite 202, Minnesota Building • 46 East Fourth Street • St. Paul, Minnesota 55101 • 6121222-7409 (Over) Please rank the following options in order of preference. Use #1 to indicate your first choice, #2 to indicate your second choice, etc. FORMAT One full day Evening program plus full day Two full days with informal activities on evening of Day 1 Informal evening get-together on Day 1, full program plus free evening on Day 2, morning program on Day 3 Other (please specify) DATES DAYS July (1st 2 weeks) Monday and/or Tuesday July (2nd 2 weeks) Wednesday and/or Thursday Augimt OSt 2 wPekCl Thursday and/or Friday August (2nd 2 weeks) Weekend Other LOCATION Resort setting (Brainerd;) Twin Cities St. Cloud ❑ Please put my name on the mailing list to receive information about pur- chasing a manual focusing on Serving Your Constituents. ❑ Please put my name on the mailing list to receive information about the Summer Institute when and if scheduled, Name: Title- Affiliation City, County, School District, Township): Address- Daytime Phone: Please return to the Government Training Service by May 5, 1986. CITY OF SHAKOP EE INCORPORATED 1870 v 129 EAST FIRST AVENUE, SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA 55379.1376 (612) 445-3650 ,f April cc, 1986 Bill Crawford District Engineer Mr,/DOT 2055 No. Lilac Drive Golden Valley, MN .5.1542E RE: TH 169/101 Interim Intersection Improvements Dear Bill : There has been much enthusiasm generated by the point partnership of the City of Shakopee and Mn/D0T to realign TH 101, TH 169 and rehabilitation of the TH 169 river crossing to 4 lanes. It is the goal of the City to advance this project as much as Possible but realistically, it appears several years will pass before the improvements are completed. Knciwirig that the "wheels of progress" are in motion for permanent solutions to the traffic congestion at the TH 169/101 inter- section, perhaps low cost i nt eri m solutions could be considered. The following are various suggestions that have been talked about, some of which have been discussed under different condi- tions and may be looked at differently based upon the current project path. 1. West Bound 101 /1E9 to SOLith Bound Holmes Street Turniri❑ Movements. This turning movement usually results in a breakdown Of the inside west bound 101 lane during peak periods. If this movement could be restricted during certain peak periods, capacity would be iri- creased. C• South BOund 169 to East Bound 101 Turning Movements. Currently, there is one lane for this movement, one lane for south bound Holmes Street and a free right turn for west bound TH 169. This turning movement is critical during p. M. peak, par-ticularly when C. R. 18 is closed. With minor pavement striping and sionage, the south bound Holmes Street lane could be used as a thrU lane and Optional left turn lane. I suspect that with double left movements, parking would need T he eart o,f progress Valley TH IE9/101 Intersection April 22, 198E Page c to be restricted for some distance along 1st Avenue on the south side. Parking is at a premium downtown, therefore, parking restrictions need to be looked at carefully. 3. Additional Lane on TH 169 Brid e. Westwood Engineering completed a study of the TH 1E9/101 intersection geo- metrics and TH US bridge geometries, of which . I be- lieve you have a copy. Since that study, the entire mini-bypass concept and bridge work is being looked at in a somewhat different light. There is a portion of that study that is still of interest that may pro- vide interim solutions to inadequate bridge capacity. A 2 lane design (2 southbound and 1 northbound) was discussed in that study whereby eliminating the inplace walkways from the deck and providing for three - 10 foot lanes. The proposal called for the walkway to be relocated below the deck (excerpts of the report are attached) . Two questions come to mind: 1. Can three lanes be provided on the existing deck geometrically and structurally, and ; L. Can the walkway be eliminated entirely during the forth coming design and implementation period of the permanent improvements? If the existing structure can handle the additional loading, the overall capacity of the bridge may increase with 3 lanes although the individual lane capacity would decrease. The single north bound would be the disadvantaged component. I would also, think that the elimination of the walkway must be considered temporary only. The preceeding are various suggestions that perhaps your staff could consider. These items, Evill, are for the most part con- sidering traffic capacity issues. Other issues should be con- sidered also, those being user safety. I thank you for your time and the time of your staff for con- sidering these suggestions. Sincerely, Ken Ashf d City Engineer KA/pmp INTERSECT Bulk Rate U.S.Postage PAID Minneapolis,Minn. �O `•0 Permit No.2312 MR. JOHN ANDERSON ADMINISTRATOR CITY OF SHAKOPEE WASTELINE `' we 129 1ST AV E ^y�'WIN ctT�ti�r . . . the shape of things in solid waste SHAKOPEE MN 55379 300 Metro Square Building, April 1986 Saint Paul, Minnesota 55101 Issue No. 11 612/291.6464 Editor: Joan Steinmann COUNCIL URGES FOCUS ON MARKETABLE RECYCLABLES together with other agencies, such as the State Planning Agency, to find ways to expand the region's markets for As everyone involved in regional recycling efforts has recyclables. learned the hard way, prices for many recyclables--always One possibility is increasing business and industry use of unstable--have hit an all-time low. This means recycling recycled and recyclable materials in product packaging programs can't operate under the financial arrangements ears ago: some recyclables bring in so and marketing, the report says. The Council will also that worked a few Y g Y g study "Mitermediate process ng a6lities," where little money that recycling contractors can't make enough--between their contract fees and their income recyclables coule be cleaned and further separated after from marketing recyclables--to turn a profit. And even collection. These could improve the quality of recyclables marketed, and allow recycling programs to pool materials recyclables with stronger, more stable markets may not and benefit from cooperative marketing. bring ip-enough money to make up the differences sidential recycling programs should concentrate on It's undeniable that recycling programs have had hard ollecting glass, aluminum and newspaper--materials with times recently. But getting a good understanding of strong local markets, according to a new Metropolitan market conditions and tailoring collection accordingly Council report, the Solid Waste Market Identification and could help struggling programs survive. And recycling will Expansion Report. Also, recycling of high-grade office make more and more economic sense as landfill dumping aper and corrugated cardboard from commercial and charges spiral upwards and costly public trash processing industrial sources should increase, says the report. plants--charging similarly high fees--open for business. Corrugated and office paper have strong, expandable To get a copy of the Solid Waste Market Identification markets, and businesses generate large quantitfes of these and Expansion Report, call the Council's regional data recyclables. center at 291-6464. Focusing recycling efforts on these materials--for the present--would mean that some types of materials would HOW LANDFILL SURCHARGE FUNDS ARE SPENT not be recycled, but it would help programs stay financially viable, while ensuring that the recyclables Twin Since 1985, haulers have paid a surcharge of 90 cents for Cities Area citizens conscientiously separate from their every cubic yard of trash they drop at Twin Cities Area trash are actually processed and used. In the meantime, landfills. What happens to this money? For every 90 cents, the Council can work to improve the weak markets for 25 cents goes to the Metropolitan Landfill Abatement materials such as tin cans and waste motor oil. fund, to be used to encourage and support activities that The report, which describes local markets for various divert trash from landfills. recyciabies and recommends ways to stabilize and expand The fund is administered by the Metropolitan Council, those markets, provides further directives for some which distributes the money through various grant, loan materials with stronger markets. Although there is a stable and reimbursement programs. The state legislature area market for newspaper, it can only bear a small established the abatement fund and broadly indicated amount of paper "contaminated" by materials like how it should be spent. The following summarizes how magazines and colored supplements. So collection should the Council is using it. focus as much as possible on "clean" newspaper, says the report. Metro Council Awards $137,500 to Help Manage And although there is a strong market for glass, Recycling Efforts transportation distances make recycling glass from the eastern part of the region discouragingly expensive. Six area recycling programs and businesses have received Improved method of transporting glass that keep costs second-phase management assistance grants from the down should be found, says the report. For example, Metropolitan Council. The grants will allow these groups recycling programs could cooperate to transport their to obtain hands-on help from management consultants of glass together. their own choice. The purpose of the grants is to help tackle management problems associated with the The Council will continue to watch local market curb-side pickup services they provide. conditions and provide direction for recycling programs about which materials to collect. The Council will work Continued The awards are based on preliminary assessments of the Grant and Loan Priorities Developed programs and businesses by consultants, paid for by the small first-phase grants. Before second-phase grants were Council solid waste staff have developed proposed awarded, consultants also submitted work programs and priorities for distributing grants and loans to public and statements about how their work will assist the recycling private groups for landfill abatement activities. The programs and businesses. priorities identify the types of activities and projects that are most important to fund. Council staff discussed the Consultant activities will include identifying sources of priorities with city and county representatives, recyclers funds, developing marketing and management pians and and the public at a series of meetings, and are now financial accounting systems, and analyzing alternative preparing the priorities for Council review and putting ways of running recycling programs--contracting separately together general guidelines for awarding the grants and for collection and marketing of recyclables, or establishing loans. centralized facilities for processing recyclables. The first abatement grants and loans may be made in July. The following programs and businesses received grants Some categories of funding are: grants for demonstration ranging from $22,500 to $24,000: Beemnann Services, Inver projects such as regional intermediate processing facilities Grove Heights; city of St. Paul; Frank's Recycling, Salvage for recyclables and regional yard waste composting and Hauling, Golden Valley; Minneapolis Education and facilities; grants for research and development of Recycling Center, Minneapolis; Ramsey County; and abatement techniques such as using paper products in Recycling Unlimited, St. Paul. The Council denied U.S. construction or food processing plant waste in making Recyco, Minneapolis, a management assistance grant. The animal feed; grants for efforts to educate the public about city of Minneapolis withdrew its request for a grant. landfill abatement issues and solutions; and loans for starting up new recycling programs, for example. Cons�!Iting work paid for through the grants '.must be finished by the end of May. LANDFILLS LINE UP ON STATE SUPERFUND PRIORITY Communities Reimbursed for Recycling on Per-Household LIST Basis As of April, all eight of the Twin Cities Area's active solid In January and February, the Council distributed the first waste landfills will be on the Minnesota Pollution Control "household rebates" for cities and towns that recycle. Agency's superfund cleanup list, thanks to each having Some 42 Twin Cities Area communities received payments released or threatening to release hazardous substances totaling $251,000 for their 1985 recycling and. related into groundwater. activities. The list is used to determine which cities in Minnesota Its an ongoing program that will reimburse communities should be targeted for expenditure of state or federal as much as 50 cents per household for their recycling superfund money. The money may be used to clean up expenses. This pays them back for some of what they sites responsible parties can't or won't, and may be spend providing services like curb-side pickup or drop-off recovered from them later. sites for recyclables, office paper recycling, yard waste composting and public education about solid waste issues. A CORRECTION More Payments to Be Made on a Tonnage Basis The Oak Grove and Waste Disposal Engineering landfills, both in Anoka County, were among those mentioned in Cities and towns may also apply between April 1 and the December Wasteline as having contaminated nearby April 21 to receive $4 for every ton of recyclables private wells. The Minnesota Pollution Control Agency collected from residential sources within their boundaries (MPCA) has informed the Wasteline that no contamination and recycled from January through March. -onnage" has been detected in residential wells near the Waste payments will be made again in November, and thereafter Disposal Engineering site. Also, although sampling last on a twice-yearly basis. summer detected low levels of contamination in three welis near the Oak Grove landfill, resampling faiied to Communities may include tonnages collected by private detect any contaminants in those well, said the MPCA. and volunteer groups in their applications, but must The agency continues to monitor private wells near the provide adequate documentation. Such groups should site. contact cities and towns in which they collect recyclables to discuss tonnage payment procedures. For copies of the tonnage payment guidelines and documentation forms, call Council abatement grant and loan assistant Sunny Emerson at 291-6499. EHLERS AND ASSOCIATES, INC. FINANCIAL SPECIALISTS =IRST NATIONAL-SOD LINE CONCOURSE 507 MARQUETTE AVE. MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 55402 339-8291 (AREA CODE 612) VOLUME 32, NUMBER 2 FILE: Financial Specialists: Ehlers and Associates, Inc. Please distribute to governing body members April, 1986 HOUSE TAX REFORM ACT DELAYED Some curbs on "essential purpose" (governmental) tax-exempt bonds proposed in the U.S. House of Representatives Tax Bill, H.R. 3838 have been delayed until September 1, 1986, by leaders of the House Ways and Means Committee, the Senate Finance Committee and the U.S. Treasury. The delayed date applies to all tax-exempt bonds issued under current law except bonds issued for industrial development, Section 501-c-3 organization, student loans, mortgage subsidy, other private consumer loans, bonds issued to fund pensions, payments by private parties for the use of bond financed property, or bonds that would be industrial development bonds if such payments were used to pay debt service. The proposed curbs which will be delayed are: - Defining bonds for certain public improvements as non-essential and therefore subject to unified per capita volume limits. - New arbitrage limits and rebates except for advance refunding bonds (cannot include issuance costs in calculating true interest costs). - Requirements that 5% of the proceeds be expended within 30 days and that all proceeds be spent within six months. - Arbitrage information reporting. - Making interest on certain bonds, subject to a minimum tax. - Restrictions on advance refunding bonds issued before 1986 except for a limit on the temporary period to 30 days and except for the method of determining true interest cost. SENATE TAX REFORM PROPOSAL The recent Tax Reform proposal by Senate Finance Committee Chairman Packwood would have subjected all municipal bond holders to an alternative minimum income tax. Packwood justifies his proposal on the basis of fairness in restructuring the federal income tax system. This proposal is unfair since all taxpayers will pay increased borrowing costs and unconstitutional since the Constitution establishes independent states united through an independent federal government. This proposal has been unanimously defeated in the Senate Finance Committee. M TAX REFORM ACT RECOMMENDATIONS It is important that you as local municipal officials continue to contact your elected federal representatives to ensure tax reform will not adversely restrict your local governments ability to issue tax-exempt financing. Minnesota Senator Durenberger's proposal 5.2166 appears to be the best proposal available. One point is certain, no one knows the final form tax reform will take. We recommend that you finalize your borrowing plans for 1986 and move to secure that financing immediately. Municipal rates currently are as low as they have been in the last seven or eight years. We at Ehlers and Associates, Inc. are prepared to assist you in securing cost effective long term financial solutions that have helped Ehlers and Associates, Inc. build better communities for more than 31 years. WISCONSIN OFFICE Ehlers and Associates, Inc. is proud to announce the opening of our new Wisconsin office, which will be headed by Seegar Swanson, Jr., Chairman of the Board and includes Account Executive, Marilyn Gulke. The office is located at: 20700 West Watertown Road Waukesha, Wisconsin 53186 Phone: 414-785-1520 The office will allow us to serve our clients in central and eastern Wisconsin. Very truly yours, YF AND ASSOCIATES, INC. . Apfelb 0 Director-Senior yi¢P,President S U M M A R Y O F A R E A B 0 N D S A L E S Bond Net Buyer Municipality Date Type of Bonds Mount Maturity Rate Index Rating Iowa Waverly 02/04/86 G.O. Bonds 2,200M 1987-1998 7.201 7.86% A-1 Lisbon 02/10/86 G.O. Street improvement Bonds 66M 1986-1995 9.091 7.73% NR Michigan Rockford Public Schools 02/19/86 G.O. School Building 8 Site Bonds 4,500M 1989-2006 7.341 7.62% A/A. Minnesota Paynesville 02/03/86 G.O. Waste Disposal Refunding Bonds 675M 1987-1993 8.33% 7.86% NR Prior Lake 02/03/85 G.O. Improvement Bonds 3,450M 1987-2006 7.64% 7.86% Baa-1 Becker County 02/04/86 G.O. Solid Waste Bonds 160M 1988-1997 7.24% 7.86% NR I.S.D. #284 (Wayzata) 02/04/86 G.O. lax Ant. Certs. of Indebt. 4,095M 1987 6.11% 7.86% NR I.S.D. #504 (Slayton) 02/10/86 G.O. Tax Ant. Certs. of Indebt. 690M 1987 6.27% 7.73% NR I.S.D. #735 (Winthrop) 02/10/86 G.O. Tax Ant. Certs. of Indebt. 51514 1987 6.441 7.73% NR I.S.D. #271 02/11/86 G.O. Tax Ant. Certs. Of Indebt. 3,600M 1987 5.74% 7.73% MIG-1 (Bloomington) !.S.D. #894 02/11/86 G.O. School Building Bonds 39514 1989-1998 6.96% 7.73% A (Granite Falls) Breckenridge 02/12/86 G.O. Tax Ant. Certs. of Indebt. 500M 1987 5.90% 7.13% NR :.S.D. #829 (Waseca) 02/12/86 G.O. Tax Ant. Certs. of Indebt. 1,040M 1987 5.90% 7.13% NR I.S.D. #31 (Bemidji) 02/18/86 G.O. lax Ant. Certs. of Indebt. 1,800M 1987 5.81% 7.621 NR :.S.D. #650 (Franklin) 02/18/86 G.O. lax Ant. Certs. of Indebt. 230M 1987 5.99% 7.62% NR -S.D. #732 (Gaylord) 02/18/86 G.O. Tax Ant. Certs. of Indebt. 460M 1987 5.85% 7.62% NR :.S.D. #279 (Osseo) 02/18/86 G.O. School Building Bonds 7,735M 1988-1998 6.60% 7.62% A-1/A. :.S.D. #535 (Rochester) 02/18/86 G.O. lax Ant. Certs. of Indebt. 3,800M 1987 5.30% 7.62% MIG-1 ?ochester 02/16/86 G.O. Improvement Bonds 6,500M 1986-1995 6.06% 7.62% Aaa :.S.D. #564 02/19/86 G.O. lax Ant. Certs. of Indebt. 1,500M 1967 6.10% 7.62% NR (Thief River Falls) S.D. #270 (Hopkins) 02/20/86 G.O. lax Ant. Certs. of Indebt. 6,050M 1987 5.87% 7.62% NR S.D. #417 (Tracy) 02/24/86 G.O. Tax Ant. Certs. of Indebt. 770M 1987 5.87% 7.44% NR .S.D. #1 (Minneapolis) 02/25/86 G.O. Tax Ant. Certs. of Indebt. 31,500M 1987 5.32% 7.44% MIG-1 :.5.0. #881 02/26/86 G.O. Tax Ant. Certs. of Indebt. 460M 1987 5.801 7.44% NR (Maple Lake) .arlstad 02/26/86 G.O. Temporary Hospital Bonds 1,060M 1988 6.20% 7.44% NR .S.D. #761 (Owatonna) 02/21/86 G.O. Tax Ant. Certs. of Indebt. 2,000M 1987 5.95% 7.44% NR .S.D. #16 02/27/86 G.O. lax Ant. Certs. Of Indebt. 2,905M 1987 5.85% 7.44% NR (Spring Lake Park) isconsin aunakee Community 02/10/86 G.O. School Building Bonds 1,900M 1987-2001 7,68% 7.73% A School District aukesha County 02/20/86 G.O. Promissory Notes 4,400M 1986-1992 6.22% 7.62% Aa-1 *evens Point 02/21/86 G.O. Refunding Bonds 10,700M 1986-2002 7.16% 7.62% Aa Guth Dakota wade School District 02/11/86 G.O. Capital Outlay Certificates 750M 1988-1990 7.25% 7.73% NR ormillien School Dist. 02/24/86 G.O. Capital Outlay Certificates 740M 1988-1996 8.181 7.44% NR i Scotto n Cuty MEMBERS OF THE COALITION: PRIMARY PROJECTS: Transportation Scott County Board j A. Accelerate Construction at Hwy 0 I of Commissioners 169 and TH 101/ Co a Wo n I Citiesof: B. Maintain funding and schedule Belle Plaine of the TH 101 Bypass. I Elko N I Jordan C. Obtain funding for the Bloom- New Market ington Ferry Bridge. pO I New Prague I Prior Lake a••) I ¢ x Savage N G 1 Shakopee O U N I Townships: � ¢ I Belle Plaine Blakeley 0 O U) I Helena 4-) Cedar Lake 0 4-) Credi of 0 O 04 Jackson � *. 0 U cz M I Louisville 0 � O in I New Market r O U tn1 St. Lawrence 1-i \ ? Sand Creek I O I Spring Lake" Bloomifigton Fe Bridge ~ cC U to Chambers of Commerce: . O E t+ f. f�l Prior Lake O O O I Savage P © J 4- O 4+ Shakopee s.� i' Sha"Pee Bypass bt l r — r C fi O cA i Industrial Commissions: 3 +- F' M Shakopee t $ ,.O a--' X 4 i Prior Lake (z U) •r-I -1-� I -a" - 0 C: X I Attractions: O OI i O �1 � Of,..i O U W i Canterbury Downs N O cz U Race Track 4-) 4-' O 1 Murphy's Landing N N p I Little Six Bingo i - ! i U LL I Renaissance Festival r,. r' Valleyfair Family > C4-)� O I Amusement Park ( w 10 O ez O I Ex-officio Members: O ,0 j Minnesota Department of 0 4JI Transportation U N I Hennepin County Highway Department > N j Metropolitan Council Cz -141 ! Future Highway System E 4Z 0 Mark Stramwall, Chairman Cz N ) I Brandt Richardson, Alternate - 937-6100 O U) U I Fred Corrigan, Vice-Chairman - 937-7709 U) 10 U U M N I Brian Norris, Treasurer - 4I5-8200 u aQ) E E x I N -i cz O 'O ai I 4/86 BUILDING ROADS TO THE FUTURE Scott County Transportation Coalition ' P.O. BOX 153 SHAKOPEE,MN 55379 ° n O C D what is the Scott County Transportation Coalition? Recreation: What is it accomplishing: - There are 3.1 million visitors to this = I� An organization representing local government, area on a seasonal basis. Each to Since its inception in the fall of 1985 the industry, recreation attractions, businesses spends about $72 per person per day, Coalition has: m and local citizens who seek the betterment of contributing $80 million to the local s highways to, from and through Scott County. economy and $240 million to the statewide economy. Mat with the Transportation Committee of It is composed of an Overall committee y• the House of Representatives, who, in z O representing each segment of the community and - The 6 major attractions. Valleyfair, response to our invitation, came to rl an Executive Committee that plan and execute Canterbury Downs, Renaissance Festival, Shakopee to view our local transportation 17 the work of the Coalition. Murphy's Landing, Little Six Bingo and problems. n Raceway Park have an estimated payroll of _ H O over $15 million. Also invited and met with the ilhat are they doing? Transportation Committee of the Minnesota U H - Scott County hosts the centerpiece of the Senate in Shakopee. -0 tb Seeking ways to: Minnesota Valley Wildlife Refuge which - The Chairperson and staff members of the k 00 ` 1 1. Accelerate construction at Highway 169 runs from Ft. Snelling to Mankato. Metropolitan Council, in response to our O and TH 101; 2. Maintain funding and schedule of the 101 Commuters: invitation, have come to Shakopee. C-n Z m cny C Sought funding for the Bloomington Perry W Bypass; - In periods of high water in the Minnesota Bridge in meetings with the Minnesota 3. Obtain funding for the Bloomington Ferry River Valley there are inadequate river delegation to Congress both at their Cn - crossings west of Burnsville, therefore CA a Bridge. 8 local offices and in Washington, D.C. potentially isolating [ens of thousands of _ Why is the Coalition needed? people per day. Consulted with representatives of Doth .J M Minnesota Department of Transportation cD Cn Since 1950 numerous studies and active public The area has made a commitment: - and the Hennepin County Highway staff. Oro j - The Cit p p Hired lobbyists at both the Minnesota concern have identified the need for a major y of Shakopee has spent $2.7 H crossing of the Minnesota River between million in the past two years in Legislature and in Washington. a Shakopee and I-35W. anticipation of the additonal improvements dhat are the future plans of the Coalition? "9 being made. H Road improvements are necessary for industry, - Scott County has spent over $900,000 in The Coalition plans to continue to most with grain, trucking, tourism and commuters. the past two years to improve the County elected officials and other governmental staff Z roads to coordinate with the anticipated to maintain or accelerate funding for f7 Commerce: State improvements. transportation j y. In northern Scott County there are more - Additionally, the City of Shakopee has p projects in Scott Count O a than 25 major businesses. committed $1.9 million for design of TH What can I do to help? The agricultural industry in Scott County 101. H is vital to the state-wide economy. This If you are a business person, you can make a F-{ is a major grain terminal for the entire How is the Coalition financed? tax deductible contribution to help support (D 5-state area. the Coalition work. Individuals can request z The Minnesota River Port at Savage is the Work of the Coalition is financed by a $25,000 information and let their concerns be known to largest inland grain terminal in the grant from Scott County, $10,500 from Shakopee elected officials. United States. and $5,500 from Prior Lake to be supplemented St. Francis Regional Medical Center by contributions from other local governments, employs over 500 people and is the only recreational attractions, businesses, industry full service emergency medical facility and individuals. servicing Scott and Carver Counties. LeFevere Lefler Rennedv O'Brien R Drawz A Professional 'mm iation 2000 First Bank Place West MEMORANDUM Minneapolis Minnesota 55402 Telephone (612)333-0543 TO: SRA Executive Committee Telecopier (612)333-0540 FROM: Counsel Clayton L. LeFevere Herbert P. Lefler DATE: April 17 , 1986 J. Dennis O'Brien John E. Dravvz David J. Kennedy SUBJ: 1987 Budget Revisited John B. Dean Glenn E. Purdue Richard J. Schieffer Charles L. LeFevere Attached is a redraft of the ' 87 budget, using our Herbert P. Lefler III position at the end of March as a starting point. James J. Thomson,Jr. Thomas R. Galt Dayle Nolan Please review it and if you wish to make any changes , Brian F. Rice please let me or Grad know b the middle of n xt John G. Kressel Y Y Lorraine S. Clugg If possible, I would like to send out the M' n to t James M. Strommen Friday, April 25. Ronald H. Batty 'A� �+ William P. Jordan / /, Susan Dickel Minsberg In addition to being enclosed with the �/Mlnutes, the Kurt J. Erickson budget will be sent to each City Manager. William R. Skallerud Rodney D. Anderson Corrine A. Heine John R. McDonald, Jr. David D. Beaudoin April 16, 1986 r Proposed 1987 Suburban Rate Authority Budget 1 1986 Assets: Cash and Investments (3/31/86) $ 80,310 Receivables (Assessments) 18,820 Interest Income 2,400 Less Adjustment (uncollected assessments) (5,000) TOTAL $ 96,530 Anticipated 1986 Expenses: 1985 NSP Electric Case $ 29 , 900 SRA Uniform Electric Franchise 2 ,500 Intrastate Access Charge (NW Bell) 1, 910 MPUC Legislation 2 ,450 General (Fees and Disbursements) 11 ,600 Contribution to Municipal Pumping Rate Case 7 , 500 ' MWCC, Miscellaneous 6 , 000 TOTAL $ 61 , 950 Anticipated Year-End Position $ 34 ,580 1987 Assets: Carryover $ 34 , 580 Membership Assessment (@ $350/vote) * 54 , 950 TOTAL $ 89 , 530 Expenses: General Matters - Fees $ 13 , 000 General Matters - Disbursements 3 ,600 1987 NSP Electric Rate Case (Fall 1987) 10, 000 1987 Northwestern Bell (Tier System) 10 , 000 MPUC Legislation 1 ,500 MWCC, Other Projects 10 , 000 Gas Utility Rate Cases 10 ,000 Contingency Fund 4 ,430 $ (62 ,530) Reserve: 27 ,000 *1984 Assessment was $245 .40 per vote 1985 Assessment was $368 . 10 per vote 1986 Assessment was $200 . 00 per vote l� ONESO Minnesota v� do Department of Transportation F, o� Transportation Building F Q St. Paul, Minnesota 55155 " OF T IfRk 0 - Office of Commissioner (612) 296-3000 April 14, 1986 Honorable Eldon Reinke Mayor of Shakopee 129 East First Ave. Shakopee, MN 55379 Dear Mayor Reinke: Thank you for your letter of April 9, 1986 expressing your strong desire to keep the Shakopee Bypass project in the 1987 Consultant Service Budget. From the subject of your letter it is assumed that you are referring to the Main Street bypass and the TH 169 bridge over the Minnesota River. This is the project which we have committed to prepare final plans for the bridge replacement and the roadway rerouting of traffic in the downtown area. (See attachment.) I have checked with our office of Consultant Engineering Services about this project. Your information is correct about our consultant budget restraints. They are in the process of reviewing the 1987 consultant service schedule to determine their ability to meet the consultant design needs. They are aware of the proposed letting schedule for the subject work. They have been advised to keep this proposed work high on the list of prioritory scheduling. I do not have total control of our destiny as available revenue for highway work is subject to legislative action. We will, however, do the best we can to keep this consultant work on schedule. Again, thank you for expressing your concerns. I will make sure you are kept aware of the results of the 1987 consultant services review that should be completed within the next six weeks. Mr. Crawford, our District 5 Engineer, and his staff will be glad to keep you appraised of this and any additional information about the project you may desire. Sincerely, Richard P. Braun Commissioner An Equal Opportunity Employer low l� �y A, �D Family Amusement PaRk One Valleyfair Drive, Shakopee, MN 55379 (612) 445-7600 April 14, 1986 Mr. John Anderson City of Shakopee 129 E. 1st Ave. Shakopee, MN 55379 Dear Mr. Anderson, Per City of Shakopee Ordinance No. 86, paragraph E, this letter acknowledges in writing to indemnify and hold harmless the City of Shakopee, its elected and appointed officials, employees and agents, against all claims, causes of action, litigation or expenses of any kind relating in any manner to the operation of Valleyfair during its 1986 operating season. If there should be any question concerning this matter, please advise. ry tru y rs, ichard L. Kinzel Vice President/General Manager RLK:dw xc: L. Houser 17 DOWNTOWN AD HOC COMMITTEE Shakopee, Minnesota April 9, 1986 Chrm. Laurent called the meeting to order at 7 : 35 a.m. with the following members present: Terry Forbord, Gary Laurent, Don Martin, Mike Sortum, Dan Steil, Jim Stillman, Bill Wermerskirchen and Tim Keane. Absent: Steve Clay, Joe Topic and Pete Sames. Also present: Jerry Wampach, Liaison; Jeanne Andre, Community Development Director; John K. Anderson, City Administrator; Ken Ashfeld, City Engineer; Lou VanHout, Public Utilities Supt. and Barry Stock, Administrative Aide. Dan Steil/Terry Forbord moved to approve the agenda after adding e. Housing Alliance, f. Tax Increment Financing Policy under #5 and Shakopee Showcase under #7. Motion carried. A number of Downtown Committee members attended a meeting with the Shakopee Public Utilities. Lou VanHout volunteered to do some additional work to determine if he could find a more efficient and less costly type of fixture. Since $40 , 000 in free street lighting is given to the City each year Lou is very concerned about the adequacy, efficiency and maintenance costs of the system. He recommended that the main lighting come from 30 foot poles with lower fixtures being added for a decorative effect. Whatever fixtures are installed in this project he would like a commitment from the city that the rest of the area will be the same type and he would like to see the lights on First Ave. undisturbed. Dan Steil left at 8 : 20 a.m. Other specific recommendations from Lou VanHout were: Either do both sides of the street or skip it completely. If new lights are put on a block, then lighting should extend at least one fixture across the road intersection. Second Ave. should be lighted to full light levels. The light levels should be at least the following: Roadway, entire length 2. 2 footcandles, Roadway, non-intersection, 2 . 1 footcandles; Roadway, intersection 2. 8 footcandles; Walkways, 0. 9 footcandles. Set efficiency levels a 455 (or possibly allow 582 ) rated watts per footcandle per block. Use contemporary decorative fixtures if streetscape is contemporary because they are more efficient. Analyze parking lot lighting. A total of $7 , 600 will be saved by not having to replace fixtures on First Ave. The Utilities Supt. recommends eighty-two ( 82) 30 ft. poles with 250 W high pressure sodium lamps plus 100 decorative lamps for the streetscape area. He also recommended if conduit is installed the downtown area be undergrounded. The decorative lights would not substantially increase the cost of light downtown. Ken Ashfeld showed the committee the five remaining alternative plans for T.H. 101/169 Bridge junction. Another meeting of this Siting Committee will be held in a couple weeks. The Downtown Committee would like to see the western access extended farther out whichever alternative is chosen. Jim Stillman & Mike Sortum left at 8 : 45 a.m. The Committee discussed whether or not to try to complete streetscape on the parking lot this summer or leave it until next year. Terry Forbord/Tim Keane moved to proceed deligently and as quickly as possible and see if we can move any of the timetables. Ayes: Tim Keane, Bill Wermerskirchen, Terry Forbord, Gary Laurent Nayes: Don Martin Barry Stock, who will be staffing the Downtown Committee, was introduced. Gary Laurent thanked Jeanne Andre, for her guidance and all the time she put in on the Committee projects. The next Downtown Committee meeting will be held April 30th at $:,30 a.m. Jeanne suggested the Committee ask the Council to have a public meeting such as was held in the past to get the publics opinion of the Downtown Committees decisions. Barry Stock agreed to man a booth at the Shakopee Showcase April 28th which would represent the downtown, transportation and recycling programs. Terry Forbord/Tim Keane moved to adjourn at 9 : 00 a.m. Motion carried. Darlene Schesso Recording Secretary MINUTES CBD ALTERNATIVE EVALUATION COMMITTEE APRIL 22, 1986 8:00 A. M. Committee members Jerry Wampach, Terry Forbord, Ken Ashfeld, Carl Hof fst edt , Steve Alderson, Barry Stock, and Brad Larson were present. Also present was Evan Green of Mn/DOT, Bruce Warzala, Deanne Wenger, and Dan Luttenegger of Barton-Aschman Associates. Forbord/Wampach moved to accept the minutes of the March 71 1986 meeting. All were in favor. Barton-Aschman presented and reviewed a draft of the "Alterna- tives Review and Selection Process" and the preliminary Environ- mental Assessment of Shakopee Bypass. A lengthy discussion ensued regarding air quality, noise impacts, and effects on 4 ( f) and 6 (f) lands. Dan Luttenegger presented a summary matrix comparing Alternatives 6, 7A, 12, 13, and 14 to the var- ious ar- i_ us environmental assessment criteria. The comments received from U. S. Fish and Wildlife were discussed. It was noted that Mr. Ed Crozier of U. S. Fish R Wildlife was invited to this meeting. Bruce Warzala relayed comments of the Federal Highway Admini- stration to the Committee. FHWA' s basic comments regarding economics was that they could not fund more than 4 lanes ..f bridge. Alternative 6 was discussed and Carl Hof fst edt indicated t hat the traffic assignments of this alternative was considered good by FHWA. The FHWA opinion was perhaps not taking into account affects on CBD. Bart on-Aschman was directed to discuss with FHWA the impacts on the CBD by Alternative 6. Stock/Alderson moved to drop Alternative 6 if FHWA concurs on problems with the CBD. All were in favo=r except Hoffstedt was opposed. ' Alternative 12 was discussed relative to its impacts on 4 (f) and 6 (f) land and noise. Stock/Hof f st edt moved to drop Alterna- tive 1terna- tive 1 All were in favor. Alternative 14 was discussed relative to cost and effects on 4 ( f) and 6 (f) lands. It was decided to carry this alternative through for further information. Meeting adjourned at 10:00 A. M. KA/pmp MINUTES �1-S 0,7 l BOARD OF A,'1797'77,TTS AND APPALS REGULAR =SIOT; SuAKI)P�, MIN .\T7,SOT4 APRIL 3, 1986 Chairman Czaja called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m. with Commissioners Lane, Pomerenke, vanMaldeghem and Schmitt present, Commissioner Rockne arrived at 7:35 P.M. Also present were Judi Simac, .City Planner and John -Anderson, City Administrator. Also present was Cncl. Lebens. Chairman Czaja welcomed Gene Foudray to the Planning Commission. The City Planner gave a review of SuperAmerica's variance which the City Council r-eferred back to the Planning Commission on April 1 , 1986. It was the consensus of the Planning Commission and also SuperAmerica that it not be placed on the agenda until next Planning Commission meeting due to the shortness of time allowed to look at SuperAmerica's new signage_ proposal. Schmitt/vanMaldeghem moved to approve agenda as written. Motion carried unanimously. Lane/vanmaldeghem moved to approve the minutes of March 6, 1986, with an amendment that after each public hearing it be incorporated in the minutes that Chairman Czaja asked if anyone else from the audience wished to speak in regards to the subject. Motion carried unanimously. Schmitt/Pomerenke moved to adjourn meeting at 7:45 p.m. Motion carried unanimously. PROCEEDIN'7S OF THF, PLA??"7,IN43 COIF ISSTO REGULAR SESSION SHAKOP77], MINNESOTA APRIL 3, 1986 Chairman Czaja called the meeting to order at 7:45 p.m. with Commissioners Lane, Pomerenke, Schmitt, VanMaldeghem and Rockne present. Also present were Cncl. Lebens, Judi Simac, City Planner, John Anderson, City Administrator. Schmitt/VanMaldeghem moved to approve the agenda with one addition being the continuation of the preliminary and final plod of the Meridin Addition, also under item 10b, Informational the speed study that the Planning Commission requested, 10c Next months agenda, 10d Auto storage general discussion, 10e Shenandoah Drive information. Motion carried unanimously. Lane/VanMaldeghem moved to approve the minutes with an amendment that after each public hearing it be incorporated in the minutes that audience was asked if they wished to speak in regards to the subject. Motion carried unanimously. Schmitt/7anMaldeghem moved to open the public hearing to consider an amendment to the Planned Unit Development of Shakopee Valley Square 1st Addition, a replat of Halo 2nd Addition and a 28 acre parcel lying north. Motion carried unanimously. The City Planner reviewed the proposal of Wally Bakken and the need to have Bluff Avenue as a private access instead of public. It was the consensus that Bluff Avenue remain as a public street if the City expects to retain public access to the park parcel. Chairman Czaja asked if there was anyone from the audience who wished to speak on this subject. Wally Bakken, developer addressed the commission and stated he sees no problem at all with the conditions. Lane/VanMaldeghem moved to close public hearing. Motion carried unanimously. Lane/Schmitt moved to recommend to the City Council final plat approval of amended P.U.D. Shakopee Valley Square 1st Addition, subject to the following conditions: 1 . Approval of a Title Opinion by the City Attorney. 2. Vacation of drainage and utility easements which were dedicated in Halo 2nd Addition. 3. Submitta:l:of a preliminary plat at the same scale of the final plat, which shows all existing utilities. 4. The City Engineer must receive and approve final plans and specifications for all public facilities including, but not limited to road, sanitary sewer system, storm sewer and grading. 5. The developer shall provide a recordable agreement which provides for the development of Lots 1 and 2, Block 1 as per the submitted site plans reviewed by the Planning Commission on January 9 testimony as well as April 3 site plans, and that any amendments to the plans be brought to the Planning Commission and City Council, prior to issuance of Building Permits. ,3nacopee Pianning 'ommission April 3, 1986 Page -2- 6. Execution of a Developer's Agreement for the construction of the required improvements: a) A sidewalk to be reconstructed along the north side of 71 101 in accordance with ;the Design Criteria and Standard Specifications of the City of Shakopee. b) Water and electric to be installed in accordance with the requirements of the SPUC Utilities Manager. c) The developer shall agree to the City T�ngineer's method of apportioning the installments remaining unpaid against the plat and that the developer waives his right to appealing the apportionment. d) Tnstallation of fire hydrants in accordance with the requirements of the Fire Chief and City Pngineer. e) Sanitary Sewer and storm water system to be installed in accordance with the Design Criteria and standard specifications of the City of Shakopee. f) A recordable document which provides the rules and regulations of the Shakopee Valley Square Campground shall be mah a part of the Developers Agreement to ensure that the operator of the campground has the authority to remove any occupants or equipment within twenty-four hours after the river stage reaches a point of two feet below the lowest sanitary sewer. g) Park dedication fee of V5,267.00 to be paid for the entire plat. 7. Review of the final landscape plans, by Commissioner Pomerenke acting as liaison of the Planning Commission. 8. Pedestrian walkways be developed in-a north and south orientation off of and away from Marschall Road. Motion carried unanimously. Van.Maldeghem/Pomerenke moved to open the public hearing to consider a Conditional Use Permit to conduct a home occupation which consists of metal fabrication and engine repair within an existing accessory building upon the property located at 3693 Marschall Road. : otion carried unanimously. The City Planner reviewed the proposal by Roger Bauer stating that the business will be called Bauer Fabrication and if it is successful one other employee may be added. Roger Bauer addressed the Commission stating it is a hobby they have of repairing small engines and welding, the welding will all be done inside the building whic : is all steel lined with fire alarms inside and out.Don McKush a neighbor to the south expressed his concern over having a welding operation within 90 feet of his home. The Chairman asked if there was anyone from audience who wished to address this subject. 'There was no reply. Snake-pee Planning ^ommission April 3, 1986 Page -3- L VanMaldeghem/Lane moved to close public hearing. Motion carried unanimously. Lane/Rockne moved to offer Conditional Use Permit Resolution No. 447 and move for its adoption subject to the following conditions: 1 . Business hours will be limited to 3:00 p.m. to 8:00 p.m. weekdays and 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. Saturdays. No business on Sundays. 2. All parking must be on—site. Only one piece of equipment or transporta— tion vehicle, a waiting repair, may be stored outdoors at any one time. 3. Home occupation must comply with the noise ordinance regulations. 4. Signage shall be limited to one sign, two square feet in size, with name and address of property owner only. 5. natural screening be constructed along the south boundary in accordance :with Sec 1105 Subdivision 3D9. 6. Subject Conditional Use Permit be subject to a.review at the end of six months and annually thereafter for a period of 3 years. Motion carried unanimously. Rockne/VanMaldeghem moved to open the public hearing to aonsider a Conditional Use Permit for an underground diesel tank and outdoor storage upon the property located South of 13th Avenue and West of CR 89. Motion carried unanimously. Discussion ensued on the construction of a truck maintenance facility and the question of whose power line easement that is involved. Buzz Ehlers, Farmington, the contractor, stated he can put the building anywhere off the easement. The owner stated that he has no junk on his property they were vehicles and farm equipment he used, but that they were stored while not in use. Chairman asked if there was anyone else from audience who wished to address this issue. There was no response. VanMaldeghem/Pomerenke moved to close public hearing. Motion carried unanimously. VanMaldeghem/Schmitt moved to offer Conditional UsePermit No. 448 and move for its adoption subject to the following conditions: 1 . The west and south elevations of the building must have the wood exterior. 2. Approval of the underground storage tanks by the State Fire Marshall. 3. County trance Permit for drive access. 4. All junk storage removed from property before issuance of a building permit. 5. Submittal of a detailed parking plan with building permit application. 6. Landscaping and screening in accordance with Chapter 11 , Section 1160 Subdivision 3 be submitted and approved by the planner before the building permit is issued. -hakopee ?larnino ^,cm*nission -^pril 3, i986 Page -4- 7. Be subject to an annual review for a period of 3 years. 8. The underground fuel tank must not be located in a utility easement. Motion carried unanimously. VanMaldeghem/Schmitt moved for a 5 minute recess at 8.50 p.m. Motion carried unanimously. VanMaldeghem/Schmitt moved to open public hearing to consider a Conditional Use Permit to allow bulk storage in underground petroleum storage tanks for agricultural accessory use upon the property located at 3374 S. Marschall Road. Motion carried unanimously. The City Planner gave a review of the request of Robert Novotny to have bulgy- storage in underground petroleum s,orage tanks. He was cited by the building inspector 1-1/2 years ago for installing underground fuel tanks in the R-1 zoning district without the necessary permits. This case has been in the courts and it has now been determined that Mr. Novotny would get an official ruling from a body of the city as to whether to allow this or not. The City Planner asked that a determination be made as to whether or not a conditional use permit can be applied for and if it could then act upon the permit application. Discussion ensued as to whether a conditional use permit can be applied in R1 or Ag and if it cannot then there would be no basis for a public hearing. It was the consensus of the Commission that since all the members did not receive the correspondence from the applicant that this request be tabled until the next regularly scheduled meeting. Schmitt/Lane moved to table this item until next regularly scheduled meeting. Motion fails._ The City Attorney was present to give his legal opinion. He stated that Section 9, Subdivision 9 clearly relates to above ground tanks only. VanMaldeghem/Pomerenke moved to close the public hearing. Motion carried unanimously. Lane/VanMaldeghem moved that underground fuel storage is not permitted in F.1 residential district in that it is not listed in the code. Motion carried unanimously. Rockne/Schmitt moved that the Conditional Use Permit should not be considered.: because it is inappropriate to the determination of the code at this time. Motion carried unanimously. Schmitt/Rockne moved to continue the preliminary and final plat of Meridian to the June 1986 regularly scheduled meeting. Motion carried unanimously. Shakopee Piar-ning ZU April 3, 1936 Page -5- The City Planner reviewed the concept plans as presented by Fred Hoisington .roup at the "March 20th public hearing and gave an update to the commission on the status of the study. It was decided by the commission that there would be a public hearing held on April 24 to consider the racetrack land use concept as prepared by Fred Hoisington. Meeting results of staff and NmDCT on the feasibility of moving the interchange at CR 83 were discussed. Discussion ensued on the 1987-1991 Capital Improvement Program. Schmitt/VanMaldeghem moved to recommend to City Council amending items 11 and 12 of the Capital Improvement Program to the 87 year. Motion carried unanimously. Schmitt/Pomerenke moved to ask Council to accelerate the final completion of items 67 and 73 of the Capital Improvement Program. Motion carried unanimously. Schmitt/VanMaldeghem moved that the project be incorporated into the Capital Improvement Program and that it provides for the additional- opening of residential development along and west of VIP sanitary sewer. Motion carried unanimously. The City Planner gave an update as to what the owner of the auto auction has decided as far as auto storage. Discussion ensued on Shenandoah Drive street lights. Comm. Lane suggested that the commission get a synopsis on the joint meeting and what took place regarding the rezoning issue, Lane/Pomerenke moved to adjourn at 10:29 p.m. Motion carried unanimously. Judi Simac City Planner Cdsol Schultz Recording Secretary MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator FROM: Barry A. Stock, Administrative Aide RE: Access to Dial-A-Ride Vehicles DATE: May 1, 1986 To insure access to the Dial-A-Ride program by Shakopee ' s senior citizens the following policies have been implemented. 1. Each Dial-A-Ride vehicle carries a step stool which is placed out by the van pool driver to assist senior citizens in boarding the vehicles . 2 . Dial-A-Ride drivers will continue to educate all riders on how to board the vehicles in a safe manner. 3 . Drivers are instructed to inform all riders that they should fasten their seat belt. 4 . To make boarding easier, grab bars have been installed in each vehicle. If you have any questions, please feel free to call me. BAS/jms �CIZI LAW OFFICES KRASS & MONROE CHARTERED ~ Phillip R. Krass Marschall Road Business Center Dennis L. Monroe 327 Marschall Road Barry K. Meyer P.O. Box 216Shakopee, Minnesota 55379 Trevor R. Walsten Telephone 445.5080 Elizabeth B. McLaughlin Livery Building Bryan Wm. Huber 218 Pine Street Susan L. Estill P.O. Box 316 Chaska, Minnesota 55318 Diane M. Carlson April 30, 1986 Telephone 448.7666 Mr. Stanley J. Weinberger Jr. Attorney at Law 921 First Street North P. 0. Box 966 St. Cloud, MN 56302 Re: POW-BELL Construction Corporation - Merchants Hotel Rehabilitation Your File No. 10807 Our File No. 1-1373-189 Dear Mr. Weinberger: Enclosed please find a second draft of the redevelopment contract between the City of Shakopee and your client POW-BEL Construction Corporation. This is not intended to be a final draft but submitted to you for your review and comment. By copy of this letter I am also submitting this draft to the City of Shakopee for review by staff. Thank you. Very truly yours , KRASS & MONROE CHARTERED Phillip R. Krass PRK:mj Enclosure cc: John Anderson 4-30-36 DRAFT CONTRACT FOR PRIVATE DEVELOPMENT By and Between THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA And POW-BEL CONSTRUCTION CORPORATION Z � TABLE OF CONTENTS Page PREAMBLE 1 ARTICLE I Definitions Section I.I. Definitions 1 ARTICLE II Representations and Warranties Section 2.1. Representations by the City 2 Section 2.2. Representations and Warranties by the Developer 3 ARTICLE III Construction of Minimum Improvements Section 3.1. Construction of Minimum Improvements 4 Section 3.2. Commencement and Completion of Construction 4 Section 3.3. Certificate of Completion 4 ARTICLE IV Prohibitions Against Assignment and Transfer Section 4.1 . Prohibition Against Transfer of Minimum 5 Improvements Section 4.2. Prohibition Against Transfer of Ownership 5 Interests Section 4.3. Approvals 5 ARTICLE V Events of Default Section 5. 1. Events of Default Defined 6 Section 5.2. Remedies on Default 6 Section 5.3. No Remedy Exclusive 7 Section 5.4. No Additional Waiver Implied by One Waiver 7 ARTICLE VI Public Assistance Section 6.1. Loans 7 Section 6.2. Security 8 Section 6.3. Prepayment 8 Sectoin 6.4. Limitation on Recourse 8 Section 6.5. Assignment 8 ARTICLE VII Termination of Agreement Section 7.1. Termination of Agreement 8 Section 7.2. Effect of Termination 8 ARTICLE VIII Additional Provisions Section 8.1 . Conflict of Interests; City Representatives Not Individually Liable 8 Section 8.2. Provisions Not Merged With Deed 9 Section 8.3. Titles of Articles and Sections 9 Section 8.4. Notices and Demands 9 Section 8.5. Counterparts 9 Section 8.6. Modification 9 TESTIMONIUM 9 SIGNATURES 9 a � � CONTRACT FOR PRIVATE DEVELOPMENT THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into on or as of the day of , 1986, by and between the CITY OF SHAKOPEE, a public body cor- porate and politic (hereinafter referred to as the "City") , established pursuant to Laws of Minnesota, and POW-BEL CONSTRUCTION CORPORATION, a Minnesota business corporation with its principal place of business in the City of Edina, State of Minnesota (hereinafter referred to as the "Developer") . WHEREAS: 1 . The City is a municipal corporation located in Scott County, Minnesota, having the authority pursuant to Minnesota Statutes to assist deve- lopment for the purpose of improving the general welfare of the City. 2. In furtherance of improving the general welfare, the City has undertaken a program for providing impetus to development resulting in the pre- paration and submission to the State of Minnesota, an application for grant funds under the Small Cities Economic Development Program. 3. A major objective of the Grant Application is to stimulate the commercial development of the area by providing, assistance in support of pri- vate rehabilitation of the Merchants Hotel, a structure currently on the historic register. 4. The City believes that the rehabilitation of the Merchants Hotel pursuant to this Agreement, and fulfillment generally of this Agreement, are in the vital and best interests of the City and the health, safety, morals, and welfare of its residents, and in accord with the public purposes and provisions of the applicable State and local laws: NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the premises and the mutual obliga- tions of the parties hereto, each of them does hereby covenant and agree with the other as follows: ARTICLE I Definitions Section 1.1. Definitions. In this Agreement, unless a different meaning clearly appears from the context: "Agreement" means this Agreement, as the same may be from time to time modified, amended, or supplemented. "Certificate of Completion" means the certification provided to Developer. "City" means the CITY OF SHAKOPEE, Minnesota. "Rehabilitation Plan" means the Rehabilitation Plan and Improvement list to the City Community Development Block Grant Application. -1- "County" means the County of Scott. "Developer" means POW-BEL CONSTRUCTION CORPORATION, its successors and assigns. "Development Property" means the property located in the City and more specifically described in Exhibit A attached hereto. "Event of Default" means an action by the Developer listed in Article V of this Agreement. "Holder" means the owner of a Mortgage. "Maturity Date" means a date fifteen (15) years from the date in which the loans described in Article VI are made or such earlier date as the Developer prepays said loans. "Minimum Improvements" means the property and building known as the Merchants Hotel which Developer shall acquire, rehabilitate, and manage as a multi-use facility. The facility shall consist of approximately 7,700 total square feet with 3,500 square feet to be leased as office space to the Scott-Carver Economic Council, Inc. , the area CAP agency. The facility shall also make available for single adult persons with low incomes, approximately eight (8) single resident occupancy units, totalling approximately 4,200 square feet. "Mortgage" means any mortgage made by the Developer which is secured, in whole or in part, with the Development Property. "Permitted Encumbrances" means the encumbrances listed in Exhibit B of this Agreement. "State" means the State of Minnesota. "Unavoidable Delays" means delays in the performance of obligations hereunder due to unforeseeable causes beyond the control of the City and/or the Developer and without the fault or negligence, of either party, including but not limited to, acts of God, acts of the public enemy, acts of the Federal Government, acts of the other party, fire, floods, epidemics, quarantine restrictions, strikes, freight embargoes, and unusually severe weather or delays of subcontractors due to such causes, and all other causes or events which are beyond Developer's or City's control. ARTICLE II Representations and Warranties Section 2.1. Representations by the City. The City makes the following representations as the basis for the undertaking on its part herein contained: (a) The City is a public body corporate and politic established and existing under the laws of the State. Under the laws of the State of Minnesota, the City has the power to enter into this Agreement and carry out its obliga- tions hereunder. -2- -r/ (b) The City is undertaking the development activities for the pur- pose of: 1 . Providing reasonable access to the services provided by Scott-Carver Economic Council, Inc. , the local CAP agency, for a minimum of fifteen (15) years at terms to be agreed upon between the Developer and Scott-Carver Economic Council, Inc. , and approved by the City. 2. Minimizing conflicts between Development Property and surrounding land uses. 3. Ensuring that the rehabilitation of the Minimum Improvement is designed in a manner that is functional, safe, and aesthetically pleasing, and correcting all negative findings of the City, Building Official relating to the present building. 4. Encouraging and assisting with the expansion of the City's existing capacity to meet the need of its residents. i 5. Effectively utilizing contemporary public finance techniques and to demonstrating that the City has an aggressive attitude toward future development. 6. To make the building in question usable and to provide an increased tax base within the City. (c) To finance the costs of the activities to be undertaken by the City pursuant to this Agreement, the City proposes to use the proceeds of a grant from the State of Minnesota obtained through the Minnesota Small Cities Economic Development Program. To the extent, if at all, to which there are unspent proceeds from the grant after the City has paid all costs required of it pursuant to this Agreement, the City will use such unspent proceeds as it, in its sole discretion, deems appropriate. In no event shall the City be obligated to provide funds to the Developer in excess of the proceeds of the grant referred to in this paragraph. (d) Neither the execution and delivery of this Agreement, the consum- mation of the transactions contemplated hereby, nor the fulfillment of or compliance with the terms and conditions of this Agreement is prevented, limited by, or conflicts with or results in a breach of the terms, conditions, or provi- sions of any evidences of indebtedness, agreement, or instrument of whatever nature to which the City is now a party or by which it is bound, or constitutes a default under any of the foregoing. Section 2.2. Representations and Warranties by the Developer. The Developer represents and warrants that: (a) The Developer is a valid corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of Minnesota and neither the execution and delivery of this Agreement, the consummation of the transactions contemplated hereby, nor the fulfillment of or compliance with the terms and conditions of this Agreement is prevented, limited by, or conflicts with or results in a breach of the terms, conditions, or provisions of any corporate restrictions , evidences of indebted- ness, agreement, or instrument of whatever nature to which the Developer is now -3- a party or by which it is bound, or constitutes a default under any of the foregoing. (b) The Developer will acquire, rehabilitate and maintain the Minimum Improvements in accordance with the terms of this Agreement and all local, state and federal laws and regulations (including, but not limited to, environmental, zoning, building code and public health laws and regulations) , except for variances necessary to rehabilitate the improvements contemplated in the Rehabilitation Plans as previously approved by the City. (c) The Developer will obtain all required permits, licenses and approvals, and will meet all requirements of all applicable local, state and federal laws and regulations which must be obtained or met before the Minimum Improvements may be .lawfully constructed. The Developer shall submit to the City for written approval plans prepared or approved by an architect licensed by the State of Minnesota. (d) The Developer agrees to execute an assessment agreement in a form approved by the City providing that upon completion of the project the Minimum Improvements shall have a value for tax purposes in the amount of $ Said assessment agreement shall proclude the Developer, or its successors, heirs or assigns, from petitioning, causing to be petitioned or allowing the peti- tioning or any legal action which would result in the reduction of that minimum valuation below the amount set forth herein. ARTICLE III Construction of Minimum Improvements Section 3.1. Construction of Minimum Improvements. The Developer agrees that it will construct the Minimum Improvements on the Development Property in accordance with the approved Rehabilitation Plan and at all times prior to the Maturity Date will operate and maintain, preserve and keep the Minimum Improvements or cause the Minimum Improvements to be maintained, pre- served and kept with the appurtenances and every part and parcel thereof, in good repair and condition. Section 3.2. Commencement and Completion of Construction. Subject to Unavoidable Delays, the Developer shall commence construction of the Minimum Improvements within thirty (30) days after receipt of the loan proceeds from the City as hereinafter provided or on such other date as the parties shall mutually agree. Subject to Unavoidable Delays, the Developer shall complete the construction of the Minimum Improvements within twelve (12) months from the date of commencement of the construction. All work with respect to the Minimum Improvements to be constructed or provided by the Developer on the Development Property shall be in conformity with the Rehabilitation Plan as submitted by the City to the State as part of its grant application. Section 3.3. Certificate of Completion. (a) Promptly after completion of the Minimum Improvements in accor- dance with those provisions of the Agreement relating solely to the obligations of the Developer to construct the Minimum Improvements (including the dates for beginning and completion thereof) , the City will furnish the Developer with a Certificate of Completion which shall be a conclusive determination of satisfac- -4- tion and termination of the agreements and covenants in the Agreement with respect to the obligations of the Developer, and its successors and assigns, to construct the Minimum Improvements and the dates for the beginning and comple- tion thereof. (b) The Certificate of Completion shall be in such form as will enable it to be recorded in the proper office for the recordation of deeds and other instruments pertaining to the Development Property. If the City shall refuse or fail to provide the Certificate of Completion in accordance with the provisions of this Section 3.3. of this Agreement, the City shall, within thirty (30) days after written request by the Developer, provide the Developer with a written statement, indicating in adequate detail in what respects the Developer has failed to complete the Minimum Improvements in accordance with the provisions of the Agreement, or is otherwise in default, and what measures or acts it will be necessary, in the opinion of the City, for the Developer to take or perform in order to obtain such certification. (c) The construction of the Minimum Improvements shall be deemed to be completed when such Minimum Improvements are substantially completed and the Developer has obtained and received from the City a Certificate of Occupancy. 'e ARTICLE IV Prohibitions Against Assignment and Transfer Section 4.1. Prohibition Against Transfer of Minimum Improvements. The Developer represents and agrees that, prior to the completion of the Minimum Improvements as certified by the City, and without the prior written approval of the City, it shall not transfer any legal or equitable interest it has in the Minimum Improvements. Section 4.2. Prohibition Against Transfer of Ownership Interests. The Developer represents and agrees that, prior to completion of the Minimum Improvements as certified by the City, and without the prior written approval of the City, (a) there shall be no voluntary transfer by any owner of the Developer of more than thirty (30%) percent of its, his or her ownership interest in the Developer; (b) nor shall any entity or person permit voluntarily any such transfer to be made, the exceptions being death, disability or bankruptcy of such entity or person; (c) nor shall there be or be suffered to be by any entity or person comprising the Developer any other similarly significant change in the ownership or in the relative distribution thereof, or with respect to the iden- tity of the parties in control of the Developer or the degree thereof, by any F, other method or means. Any such transfer of an ownership interest in the Developer as per- mitted by this section shall not, without the City's written consent, relieve the party transferring such interest from any of its obligations under this Agreement. Section 4.3. Approvals. Approvals required to be given by the City under this Article IV shall be granted only when the City is provided evidence by which it in its sole discretion reasonably concludes that the proposed transfer will not materially impair the ability of the Developer or the Developer's successor to perform its obligations under this Agreement. -5- ARTICLE V Events of Default Section 5.1. Events of Default Defined. The following shall be "Events of Default" under this Agreement and the term "Event of Default" shall mean, whenever it is used in this Agreement (unless the context otherwise provides) , any one or more of the following events: (a) Failure by the Developer to commence or complete construction of the Minimum Improvements pursuant to the terms, conditions and limitations of Article III of this Agreement. (b) Failure to make reasonable progress on the construction of the Minimum Improvements in accordance with the time table which Developer shall prepare and present to the City, for the City's review and approval. (c) Failure by the City to provide the public assistance pursuant to the terms, conditions, and limitations of Article VI of this Agreement. (d) Failure by either the Developer or the City to observe or perform any covenant, condition, obligation or agreement on its part to be observed or performed hereunder. (e) An assignment by the Developer for the benefit of its creditors , or an admission by the Developer in writing of its inability to pay its debts as they become due, or filing by the Developer a petition in bankruptcy, or an adjudication of bankruptcy or insolvency, or filing by the Developer a petition seeking any reorganization, dissolution, liquidation, arrangement, composition, readjustment or similar relief under any present or future bankruptcy or insolvency statute, law or regulation, or filing an answer by the Developer admitting to or not contesting the material allegations of a petition filed against it in such proceedings or a failure to have dismissed or vacated within sixty (60) days after its filing such a petition, or seeking or consenting to or acquiescing in the appointment of any trustee, receiver or liquidator of a material part of his properties, or within sixty (60) days after the appointment without the consent or acquiescence of him of a trustee, receiver or liquidator of any material part of its properties not having such appointment vacated. Section 5.2. Remedies on Default. Whenever any Event of Default referred to in Section 5.1. of this Agreement occurs , the non-defaulting party may take any one or more of the following actions after providing fifteen (15) days written notice to the defaulting party of the Event of Default: (a) Suspend its performance under the Agreement until it receives assurances, deemed by it to be adequate, that the defaulting party will cure its default and continue its performance under the Agreement. (b) Cancel and rescind the Agreement. (c) Take whatever action, including legal or administrative action, which may appear necessary or desirable to the non-defaulting party to collect any payments due under this Agreement, or to enforce performance and observance of any obligation, agreement, or covenant under this Agreement. -6- Section 5.3. No Remedy Exclusive. No remedy herein conferred upon or reserved to the non-defaulting party is intended to be exclusive of any other available remedy or remedies, but each and every such remedy shall be cumulative and shall be in addition to every other remedy given under this Agreement or now or hereafter existing at law or in equity or by statute. No delay or omission to exercise any right or power accruing upon any default shall impair any such right or power or shall be construed to be a waiver thereof, but any right and power may be exercised from time to time and as often as may be deeded expe- dient. In order to entitle the City or the Developer to exercise any remedy reserved to it, it shall not be necessary to give notice, other than such notice as may be required in this Article V. Section 5.4. No Additional Waiver Implied by One Waiver. In the event any agreement contained in this Agreement should be breached by either party and thereafter waived by the other party, such waiver shall be limited to the par- ticular breach so waived and shall not be deemed to waive any other concurrent, previous or subsequent breach hereunder. ARTICLE VI Public Assistance Section 6.1. Loans. The City agrees to apply to the State for a grant available under the Minnesota Small Cities Development Program. The City further agrees to lend to the Developer, and the Developer agrees to borrow from the City, upon the terms and conditions set forth below, the proceeds received from the grant or so much thereof as may be required to complete construction of the Minimum Improvements: (a) The sum of Two Hundred Thousand and no/100 ($200,000.00) Dollars shall be loaned to the Developer upon commencement of construction on the Minimum Improvements. The loan shall be amortized over a period of thirty (30) years bearing interest at the rate of two (2%) percent per annum. The first payment shall be due on the date thirty (30) days after receipt of the loan pro- ceeds by and on the same date of each month thereafter during the term of the loan. (b) The sum of One Hundred Fifty Thousand and no/100 ($150,000.00) Dollars shall be loaned to the Developer upon certification by Developer to the City that the proceeds of the loan described above have been disbursed to pay costs of construction. The loan shall be for a period of fifteen (15) years bearing no interest with the entire principal amount becoming due and payable at maturity. This loan shall be decreased should the actual costs of rehabili- tating the Minimum Improvements in accordance with the Rehabilitation Plan be less than the amount of said loans. (c) The loans referred to in paragraphs (a) and (b) of this Section 6.1. shall not be made until the Developer pays for the property upon which the Minimum Improvements are situated and obtains title thereto free and clear of any liens, and further invests One Hundred Thousand and no/100 ($100,000.00) Dollars of its own funds in this project. Prior to the disbursement of any funds from said loans, the Developer shall provide the City with a sworn construction statement setting forth the anticipated or bid costs for the reha- bilitation of the Minimum Improvements. Upon approval thereof by the City of said sworn construction statement, the City shall disburse the loan proceeds in -7- accordance with generally accepted banking principals upon written billings from the Developer indicating actual expenditures, and upon receipt of proper mecha- nic's lien waivers. Section 6.2. Security. As security for the loans by the City to Developer, and to induce the City to make said loans, the Developer agrees to execute and deliver, or cause to be executed and delivered, a mortgage on the Minimum Improvements, which mortgage shall remain in effect until all payments required to be made have been made. The Developer shall provide evidence of good marketable title satisfactory to the City. Section 6.3. Prepayment. The loans may be prepaid in whole or in part, on any date without premium or penalty and without prior approval of the City, but the Developer shall give notice of its intent to prepay either loan or loans to the City at least thirty (30) days in advance of the date on which such prepayment is to be made. Section 6.4. Limitation on Recourse. In the event of a default under the terms of the loans, any mortgage securing such loans or any other instrument or agreement relating to the loans provided for herein, the recourse of the City, its successors and assigns, for any and all such defaults shall be by judicial foreclosure or by the exercise of the City's power of sale or other remedies set forth in the mortgage, financing statements or other instruments relating to the loans and in no event shall the Developer, its partners, employees, agents or shareholders be personally liable for the payment of any deficiency established after judicial foreclosure or after a sale thereunder, provided, however, nothing contained in this paragraph shall be deemed to preju- dice the rights of the City not inconsistent with this paragraph. Section 6.5. Assignment. The Developer shall not assign its rights or obligations or any part therein in any mortgage or loan agreement executed pur- suant to this section without the prior written approval of the City. Approval may be denied only in the event the City reasonably determines that the ability of the City to obtain performance of its obligations under the mortgage or loan agreement will be materially impaired by the assignment. ARTICLE VII Termination of Agreement Section 7.1. Termination of Agreement. Either party to this Agreement may terminate this Agreement upon the giving of ten (10) days written notice to the other party in the event the City fails to obtain the grant funds described under Section VI of this Agreement. Section 7.2. Effect of Termination. If this Agreement is terminated pursuant to this Article VII, then this Agreement shall be null and void and of no effect, and no action, claim or demand may be made based on any term or pro- vision of this Agreement. ARTICLE VIII Additional Provisions Section 8.1. Conflict of Interests; City Representatives Not Individually Liable. No member, o icia , or emp oyee o t e Ulty shali nave -8- any personal interest, direct or indirect, in the Agreement, nor shall any such member, official, or employee participate in any decision relating to the Agreement which affects his personal interests or the interests of any cor- poration, partnership, or association in which he is directly or indirectly, interested. No member, official, or employee of the City shall be personally liable to the Developer, or any successor in interest, in the event of any default or breach by the City or for any amount which may become due to the Developer or successor or on any obligations under the terms of the Agreement. Section 8.2. Provisions Not Merged With Deed. None of the provisions of this Agreement are intended to or shall be merged by reason of any deed transferring any interest in the Developement Property and any such deed shall not be deemed to affect or impair the provisions and covenants of this Agreement until the Certificate of Completion has been issued. Section 8.3. Titles of Articles and Sections. Any titles of the several parts, Articles, Sections of this Agreement are inserted for convenience of reference only and shall be disregarded in construing or interpreting any of its provisions . Section 8.4. Notices and Demands. Except as otherwise expressly pro- vided in this Agreement, a notice, demand, or other communication under the Agreement be either party to the other shall be sufficiently given or delivered if it is dispatched by registered or certified mail, postage prepaid, return receipt requested, or delivered personally; and (a) in the case of the Developer, is addressed to or delivered per- sonally to the Developer at 4501 Garrison Lane, Edina, Minnesota; and (b) in the case of the City, is addressed to or delivered personally to the City at City Hall, 129 East First Avenue, Shakopee, Minnesota; or at such other address with respect to either such party as that party may, from time to time, designate in writing and forward to the other as provided in this Section. Section 8.5. Counterparts. This Agreement is executed in any number of counterparts, each of which shall constitute one and the same instrument. Section 8.6. Modification. This Agreement and the Exhibits hereto sets forth the entire understanding between the parties with respect to the sub- ject matter hereof, supersedes all existing agreements between them concerning such subject matter, and may be modified only by a written instrument duly exe- cuted by each party. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the City has caused this Agreement to be duly exe- cuted in its name and behalf and its seal to be hereunto duly affixed and the Developer has caused this Agreement to be duly executed on or as of the date first above written. CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA By: Mayor -9- Attest: City Clerk POW-BEL CONSTRUCTION CORPORATION By: Its By: Its STATE OF MINNESOTA) )ss. COUNTY OF SCOTT ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of , 1986, by and the Mayor and City Clerk respectively, in and for the City of Shakopee, Minnesota. Notary Public STATE OF MINNESOTA) )ss. COUNTY OF ) On this day of 1986, before me, a Notary Public within and for said County, personally appeared and , to me known, who, being each by me duly sworn, each did say that they are respectively the and the of POW-BEL CONSTRUCTION CORPORATION, the corporation named in the foregoing instrument, and that the seal affixed to said instrument is the corporate seal of said corporation, and that said instrument was signed and sealed on behalf of said corporation by authority of its Board of Directors and said and acknowledged said instrument to be the free act and deed of said corporation. Notary Public -10- TENTATIVE AGENDA BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT AND APPEALS Regular Session Shakopee, Minnesota May 8, 1986 Chairman Czaja Presiding: 1. Roll Call at 7 : 30 P.M. 2. Approval of Agenda 3 . Approval of April 3 , 1986 Minutes 4. 7 : 30 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING: To consider a variance from the minimum lot size of 20 acres to construct a office, shop and warehouse on the property located at County Road 89 and 13th Avenue. Applicant: Richard Carron Action: Variance Resolution #462 5. 7 : 45 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING: To consider a variance of 223 ' from the side yard setback to construct a pole barn for two horses and personal storage on the property located on 9326 Boiling Springs Lane. Applicant: Harold Wanous Action: Variance Resolution #461 6. 8 : 00 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING: To consider a variance from the side yard setback requirements in order to construct a pole barn for raising three horses on the property located West of Marschall Road, across from Trio Tree Nursery. Applicant: Wes Hukriede Action: Variance Resolution #458 7. 8 : 15 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING: To consider a variance to allow a hired hand to live in a trailer home on the farmstead upon the property located at 2088 Marschall Road. Applicant: Roy Marschall Action: Variance Resolution #463 8. Reconsideration of Super America Sign Appeal Action: Variance Resolution #445 9 . Other business 10. Adjournment Judi Simac City Planner CITY OF SHAKOPEE �3 TENTATIVE AGENDA PLANNING COMMISSION Regular Session Shakopee, Minnesota May 8, 1986 Chairman Czaja Presiding: 1. Roll Call at 7: 30 p.m. 2. Approval of Agenda 3 . Approval of April 3 , 1986 Minutes 4 . 7 : 30 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING: To consider a Conditional Use Permit to allow outdoor storage upon the property located at County Road 89 and 13th Avenue. Applicant: Richard Carron Action: Conditional Use Permit Resolution No. 459 5. 7 : 45 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING: To consider a Conditional Use Permit to allow two horses upon the property located at 9326 Boiling Springs Lane. Applicant: Harold Wanous Action: Conditional Use Permit Resolution No. 460 6 . 8 : 00 P.M. .PUBLIC HEARING: To consider a Conditional Use Permit to move-in a single family dwelling and allow three horses upon the property located West of Marschall Road, across from Trio Tree Nursery. Applicant: Wes Hukriede Action: Conditional Use Permit Resolution No. 457 7 . 8 : 15 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING: To consider a Conditional Use Permit to allow a trailer home on the farmstead located at 2088 Marschall Road. Applicant: Roy Marschall Action: Conditional Use Permit Resolution No. 456 8 . 8 : 30 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING: To consider a Conditional Use Permit to operate a commercial recreational use; for helicopter ride business upon the property located East of Valley Fair Amusement Park on State Highway 101. Applicant: Edward Colmer Action: Conditional Use Permit Resolution No. 450 9 . 8: 45 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING: To consider a Conditional Use Permit for a heliport for amusement ride business and to run occasional air taxi service upon the property located South of State Highway 101 across from Valleyfair Amusement Park. Applicant: Quest Air Service, Inc. Action: Conditional Use Permit Resolution No. 452 10 . 9: 00 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING: To consider a Conditional Use Permit to sell tip sheets in the parking lot on the property located at 1266 East First Avenue. (American Legion Post No. 2) . Applicant: Hartwell Eugene Fisher Action: Conditional Use Permit Resolution No. 451 11. 9 : 15 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING: To consider a Conditional Use Permit to permit retail sales in an I-2 zone, limited to 15% floor area upon the property located in the Valley Industrial Park. Applicant: OROS Thoroughbred Supply, Inc. Action: Conditional Use Permit Resolution No. 453 12 . 9 : 30 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING: To consider a Conditional Use Permit to allow a Diary Queen, Class II Restaurant upon the property located at 1147 County Road 83 . Applicant: Diary Queen Action: Conditional Use Permit Resolution No. 454 13 . 9: 45 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING: To consider a Conditional Use Permit to allow an open sales lot upon the property located East of CR 83 and South of 12th Avenue. Applicant: Roger Wacker Action: Conditional Use Permit Resolution No. 455 14. 10: 00 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING: To consider amending the Shakopee City Code, Section 12. 11 Subd. 1E, Homeowners Association Policy. Action: Recommendation to City Council 15. 10 : 15 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING: To consider a plan to expand the urban service area for land in the vicinity of County Road 83 and 12th Avenue. Action: Recommendation to City Council 16 . Discussion: Official Mapping of 13th Avenue Action: Motion to direct staff to proceed 17. Discussion: Shakopee Valley Motel Tax Increment Financing Action: Recommendation to City Council 18. Informational: a) Annual C.U.P. Review 1. Kreuser - #366 2. Hall - #367 b) Rules and Regulations of Planning Commission c) "Back to the Suburbs" d) Updated Plat Maps e) Next Meeting - May 22, 1986 *f) July meeting will be July 10 , 1986 19 . Other Business 20 . Adjournment Judi Simac City Planner CITY OF SHAKOPEE 675y Memo To: All City of Shakopee Employees r--- From: Marilyn M. Remer, Personnel Dept. Re: ValleyFair Good Any Day Discount Tickets L L v � Family Amusement PaMk Date: May 2, 1986 For the convenience of City of Shakopee employees, discount tickets for ValleyFair Amusement Park are being sold by the Personnel Dept. at City Hall . The tickets are good any day all season and can be purchased at any time. Tickets are $10.50 each, a savings of $1.45 per ticket. With these pre-sold tickets, employees can go directly to the entrance turnstiles. Towering 55 feet in the air, "Northern Lights" , is their newest ride with the IMAX Theater featuring "Behold Hawaii" this season. For tickets or more information, contact Marilyn. �C TENTATIVE AGENDA �.. REGULAR SESSION SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA MAY 6, 1986 Mayor Reinke presiding 1] Roll Call at 7 :00 P .M. 2] Recess for H.R.A. meeting 3] Reconvene 4] Liaison Reports from Councilmembers 5] RECOGNITION BY CITY COUNCIL OF INTERESTED CITIZENS 61 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. ) *71 Approval of Minutes of April 8 , 15 , and 16 , 1986 81 Communications : a] Lynda Valencour re : First Avenue Crossing Problems "The City Administrator is collecting information to respond by the May 20th Council meeting. " b] Steven Clay re : resignation from Downtown Ad Hoc Committee c] Richard Kinzel re : traffic pattern at Valleyfair d] R. J . Erickson, NSP re : Safety Watch e] Betty McNulty, Redwood Falls Chamber of Commerce re : Minnesota Inventors Congress f] Association of Metro Municipalities re : Recommendations of the Nominating Committee g] Sandra Gardebring, Met Council re : Comp Plan Amendment 91 Public Hearings: 7 : 30 P .M. Appeal by Robert Novotny from Planning Commission denial of a conditional use permit to allow bulk storage in underground petroleum storage tanks for agricultural accessory use at 3374 S . Marschall Road 10] Boards and Commissions: Planning Commission: ^ a] Consideration of Final Plat Recisions b] Racetrack District Concept #3 - to be provided Monday c] Metropolitan Development Investment Framework - Met Council - to be provided Monday 11] Reports from Staff: [Council will take a 10 minute break around 9 : 001PM] a] Enforcement of Two Hour Parking Limits Downtown b] Liquor License Dram Shop Insurance c] 1985 Audit Report by Jasper, Streefland & Company d] Applications for On Sale and Sunday Liquor Licenses by Scottland Hotels Inc . *e] Tennis Court Resurfacing TENTATIVE AGENDA May 6 , 1986 Page -2- 11] Reports from Staff continued: *f] Appointments to Housing Advisory and Appeals Board *g] Appointment to Shakopee Community Access Corporation Board *h] Larry A. Johnson - Variance Request i] Holmes Street Storm Sewer Lateral Project J ] TH-169 Bridge and Southerly Approach k] Eagle Creek Junction 1st Addition - Sanitary Sewer & watermain *1] Masseuse Registration - Susan Cieslowski *m] Municipality Accessibility Summary for the 1986 Federal Primary and General Elections *n] Hauer ' s 3rd Addition - Reduction of Letter of Credit o] Approve Bills in Amount of $693 , 352 . 21 *p] Request for Traffic Control in Alley Behind City Hall *q] Job Description For Receptionist/Typist r] Job Description for Planner I and Selection Time Table s] Additional Staffing as "Temporary Employees" t] Relocating of City Offices u] Policy and Program Issues Involving Shakopee ' s Use of Tax Increment Financing - to be provided Monday 12] Resolutions and Ordinances : *a] Res. No. 2546, Receiving Report and Setting Public Hearing on Improvements Within Timber Trails Add 'n. - 1986-5 *b] Res . No . 2547 , Receiving Report and Setting Public Hearing on Improvements Within Montecito Heights - 1986-6 c] Res. No . 2548 , Establishing A Policy for Reimbursement of Council Members for City Litigation Costs *d] Res. No . 2549 , Ordering Report for Sewer, Water & Street Improvements to Market St . South of 1st Avenue e] Res . No. 2545 , Appreciation to Roy Baker f] Ord. No . 184, Imposing A Moratorium On Development of Certain L, 131 Other Business : a] Storm Sewer Utility Policy b] Appointing City Clerk Acting Administrator from May 14-18 , 1986 C] d] e] 14] Recess - for Executive Session to discuss Silverhawk N.V. Assessment Appeal 151 Reconvene 16] Adjourn to Tuesday, May 20 , 1986 at 8 :00 P .M . John u , Anderson City ,--iministrator TENTATIVE AGENDA Housing and Redevelopment Authority in and for the City of Shakopee, Minnesota Adjourned Regular Session May 6 , 1986 Chairman Wampach presiding: 1. Roll call at 7: 00 p.m. 2 . Approval of minutes of April 8 and April 15, 1986 3 . Acquisition of Huber House - 210 S. Holmes Street 4. Shakopee Valley Square Tax-Increment - Verbal Update 5. Other Business 6. Adjourn to May 20, 1986 Barry A. Stock Administrative Aide PROCEEDINGS OF THE HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY REGULAR SESSION SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA APRIL 8, 1986 Chrm. Wampach called the meeting to order at 9: 15 p.m. with Cncl. Lebens, Colligan, Vierling, and Leroux present. Also present were John K. Anderson, City Administrator, Judith S. Cox, City Clerk, Jeanne Andre, HRA Director; Ken Ashfeld, City Engineer, and Julius A. Coller, II , City Attorney. Lebens/Vierling moved to approve the minutes of April 1, 1986. Motion carried unanimously. The City Attorney gave a report on his findings on the promissory notes and comments to Susan Johnson. In Jane VanMaldeghem deed it hinges upon the question of occupancy, this opinion is that ownership, but not occupancy is required. In the Johnson deed it is quite clear that they must own it for the full 5 years. Vierling/Leroux moved to table the discussion on the City Attorney' s findings of the promissory notes of Jane VanMaldeghem' s and Susan Johnson, until April 15, 1986 . Motion carried unanimously. Leroux/Vierling moved to adjourn to April 15, 1986 . Motion carried unanimously. Meeting adjourned at 9: 26 p.m. Jeanne Andre HRA Director Carol L. Schultz Recording Secretary a r -" -:� - T7 iT-., U JT�J� it�.i LT r_^ �5, 19`5 6 Chrm. Wampach called the meeting; to order at 7:01 p.m. with Comm. ',ebens, 'rierling, T,eroux, and Colligan present. Also present were John K. Anderson., City Admr.; ..Tudith S. Cox, City Clerk; Barry Stock, !administrative ,*ide, Ken Ishfeld, City -;�:gineer and Julius 'a. -oiler, TT, ',ity 'ttorney. The City Attorney gave his opinions on the Promissory lvote and ryiortgage given by June T. kJostrel,, ("'-'an Maldeghem), and Susan and Thomas :7ehnson in connection with the purchase of certain property in the Fourth and Minnesota 'Neighborhood Revitalization Project. Colligan/Vierling moved the opinion of the City Attorney, in regard to the property owned by Jane I. Wostrel (Van Maldeghem), stating that there is no residency requirement. All that is necessary to keep the agreement in good standing is to retain ownership for the full period of time and not convey any legal or equitable interest in the encumbered property within the 5 year period. Motion carried unanimously. f Vierling/Lebens moved the opinion of the City Attorney, in regard to the property owned by Susan and Thomas Johnson, stating that the Johnsons may not sell the property before the full 5 year period. If they do, they must repay to the City 207 of the original mortgage for each year their ownership falls short of the mandatory 5 year ownership requirement. Discussion ensued with Susan Johnson addressing the Council stating that none of this was explained to them when they bought their property and that it was unfair that they should be penalized for paying for the full year when they are just 2 months short. Cncl. Leroux stated the occupancy was not necessarily the requirement and that not everyone will be treated equally and at this point all the remaining promissory notes in this area should be written off. Motion carried with Cncl. Leroux opposed. Vierling/Teroux moved to table Resolution No. 86-1 amending the Modified Housing and Redevelopment Plan relating to the !,"innesota River '%alley Housing and Development Plan relating to the Minnesota River 'Talley Housing and Redevelopment Project No. 1 , and amending the Tax Increment Financing Plans relating to Tax _increment Districts No. 2 thragh 5 within the project area and the establishment of Tax increment financing District No. 6 within the project area and the Tax Tncrement ''inancing Plan relating thereto. Motion carried unanimously. Lerouxftierling moved to request City Council to set a public hegring for May 20, 1986 to hear comments on the Shakopee Valley Square Tax Increment Project. Motion carried unanimously. Discussion ensued on the Huber house on 2nd and Holmes. The City Administrator said that the purchase price had dropped. Cncl. Lebens stated that she does not feel that HRA or the City should be interested in investing in property of this kind. Cncl. Leroux stated that it might depend on the price and that the Downtown Committee should look into this matter. Leroux/Tierling moved that the house on 2nd and Holmes be referred to the Downtown Committee. Motion carried unanimously with '�ncl. Lebens opposed. rii 15, 1955 Rod Krass, .Asst. ^ity Attorney addressed the Shakopee ','alley Square Tax Tncrement ?project — Resolution No. 86-1 issue. 11he consensus of the Council was that the fiscal disparities should not be paid out of the community. Tn regards to timing of payments two options were discussed. The first option is to supply the money to the Bakken Group on the issuance of a certificate of completion for the entire project. The Bakken group would be assessed at 80%6, of the assessed value of the project in 1987 pay— able 1988 and 1W/u of the assessed value of the project in 1988 payable 1989. The second option would be to provide 50'> of the money to the Bakken group on .Tanuary 1 , 1987 or when the motel and restaurant are completed and the remaining 507/6 upon the issuance of the certificate of completion. The Bakken group would be assessed at 100'; of the assessed value of the project on January 1 , 1987 payable 1988. Tt was the consensus of the council that the dev-loper have their choice as to what option they wish to take. Colligan/Vierling moved to adjourn at 7;40 p.m. Notion carried unanimously. Barry Stock Administrative Aide Carol T . Schultz Recording Secretary �3 MEMO TO: Shakopee Housing and Redevelopment Authority FROM: Barry A. Stock, Administrative Aide RE: Acquisition of Huber House - 210 S. Holmes St. DATE: April 30 , 1986 INTRODUCTION: Ms. Winnie Blewett, executor of Laura Huber ' s estate has approached the City to determine if we are interested in acquiring the residence at 210 S. Holmes St. On April 15 , 1986 the City Council referred this issue back to the Downtown Committee for their review. BACKGROUND: Researching this issue, I have discovered that two party' s are interested in purchasing the home from Ms. Blewett. The first individual is considering the operation of a beauty salon on the first level and an apartment on the second level. The second party is considering the operation of a tea room. Ms. Blewett would like to offer the City first consideration of this property. A selling price of approximately $48 , 000 has been discussed. Staff has approached the owners of Eastmans Drug to ascertain if they would be interested in the property for expansion purposes. They have replied in the negative. Because of the size of this parcel, it is unlikely that a free standing business would be interested in the lot, assuming demolition of the existing structure. A parking lot is another alternative for this parcel. If this alternative is pursued further, our City Engineer estimates that an additional 10-15 parking stalls could be created for the downtown area. In review of this issue, the Downtown Committee expressed interest in removing the structure in question from the downtown area. Consensus seemed to indicate that the Dresent structure was not compatible with the goals of the downtown plan. Addition- ally, it was felt that even with extensive rehabilitation of the structure, it would not fit into the overall scheme for downtown redevelopment. The possibility of removing the building and creating additional parking in the downtown area excited the downtown committee and the consensus was that the City Council or HRA should pursue this opportunity (the Committee didn' t vote because they didn' t have a quorum) . Several alternatives exist for the City in removing the present structure. Alternative #1 - The City could purchase the home and move it to one of the vacant lots we own in town. ( ie. 4th & Fillmore. ) The estimated cost for acquisition, relocation and resale would be approximately $98 , 000 . (See attachment #1. ) The City could then sell the home at its new location for approximately $50, 000 . Approximate net cost of this alternative - $48 , 000 . Alternative #2 - The City could purchase the home and offer it for sale to anyone who is willing to move the house. Acquisition cost would be approximately $48 , 000 with an estimated resale value to a potential mover of approximately $3 , 000 . Approximate net cost of this alternative - $45 , 000 . Alternative #3 - The City could purchase the home and demolish it. Acquisition cost - approximately $48 , 000 . Demolition Cost - approximately $2 , 000 . Approximate net cost of this alternative - $50 , 000 . In all three of the aforementioned alternatives the City does pick up a 60 ft. x 120 ft. lot (7 ,200 sq. ft. ) . At today' s market value for commercial property ( $5 . 25 sq. ft. ) this lot is worth approximately $37 , 800 . With this in mind I have calculated the net loss to the City in dollar values. Alternative #1 - $37 , 800 - $48 , 000 = $10 , 200 Lot Market Value Net Cost Net Loss Alternative #2 - $37 , 800 - $45 , 000 = $ 7 , 200 Lot Market Value Net Cost Net Loss Alternative #3 - $37 , 800 - $50 , 000 = $12, 200 Lot Market Value Net Cost Net Loss Our City Engineer ' s cost estimate to pave this area as a parking lot is approximately $15 , 000 . Paving obviously would not have to take place immediately. Currently money is available in the HRA reserve fund to pursue acquisition of this property. However, before we could proceed with acquisition, an appraisal of the property would have to be conducted. The actual dollar amount expended from the HRA fund would be approximately $48 , 000 in alternative #1, $45 , 000 in alternative #2 and $50 , 000 in alternative #3 . Ms . Blewett is anxious to sell the property and would appreciate timelines on the part of the City in regard to this issue. A map indicating the location of Ms. Blewett ' s property is shown in attachment #2 for your convenience. ALTERNATIVES. 1. Purchase the home at 210 S. Holmes, move it to a city owned lot and offer it for sale. 2 . Purchase the home at 210 S. Holmes and receive bids from individuals interested in moving the structure. 3 . Purchase the home at 210 S. Holmes and demolish it. 4 . Respectfully inform Ms. Blewett that the City is not interested in the acquisition of the property at 210 S. Holmes . STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends alternative #2. ACTION REQUESTED: Move to order an appraisal of the property at 210 S. Holmes at a cost not to exceed $500 and inform Ms. Blewett that the City is interested in the acquisition of the property with the thought in mind of selling the structure to a potential mover. Attachment tw Attachment #1 Estimated Costs That May Be Incurred In the Acquisition, Relocation and Resale of the Property at 210 S. Holmes 1. Acquisition Costs - $48 , 000 2 . Moving Costs - $ 4 , 000 3 . Foundation Costs - $ 5 ,000 4 . Excavation Costs - $ 500 - $3000 5 . Sewer and Water Hook-up - $ 3 , 000 6 . Appraisal Costs - $ 500 7 . Electrical Hook-up Costs - $ 1, 500 * 8 . Lot - $18 , 000 9 . Misc. (repairs,etc. ) - $ 5 , 000 10 . Realtor Fees - $ 3 , 500 11. Points - $ 1,500 12. Legal Fees - $ 2, 000 13 . City Admin. - $ 3 , 000 ( including inspections ) Total Project Costs $95 , 500 - $98 , 000 Estimate Resale Value of Relocated Home. $50 , 000 Note: All costs are in-house estimates. *While the City owns property for relocation of the structure in question, the property does have a market value and should therefore be included in the cost analysis . Attachment #2 y'_ J J J r 3 � = o - - w P � r • Qom., t o E N N � ' 7 r� i 0 J O MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, Cit FROM: Barry A. Stock, Admin. Aide nistrator RE: Request for Satisfaction of Mortgage DATE: May 1, 1986 - Susan Johnson Introduction: Ms . Susan Johnson has formally requested that the City Of Shakopee release the promissory 2 , Block 3 , Macey Second Additionote on her property (Lot to pay the Outstanding balance ) • Ms- Johnson is willing requesting that she can resolve, Cit on her note ( $1 , 980. 00) and is Y place this money in an escrow account until through the courts, City was unfair in their determinationheto dencontent reletent le that the note prior to its term or repayment thereof. that of her Background- On April 15, 1986 the Shakopee Housing Authority (HRA) determined that Ms. Johnson' Snd Redevelopment would not be released until satisfaction of the amount 1due roccurred Promor rcome completionaint with of the Attorney Y e term of the eneral ss•Officeoninasregardttoed the HRA' s interpretation of the as it relates to her property (See attachment promissory note Attorney' s response to the Attorney Generals in) Oar City quir in attachment #2. Y ppears We have not established escrow accounts in the past when claims have been made against the Cit Attorney fail to see the need tY• Staff and the City o set u the outstanding balance on Ms. Johnsonsannote. account for of the amount due, the City can satisfy Ms. JohnsonUsomoPtgaget Then, if Ms. Johnson wishes to to her complaint and the Cit proceed with a judicial remedy would be bound to comply withiStf and to be in the wrong, we amount of the claim, should the court s�ruleofinhMscoJohnsonhs on favor, can be paid by the HRA without the need of an escrow account. Staff also feels that precedent could be set in terms of r individuals requesting the establishment of escrow whenever they are not happy about paying a fee or a fine accounts Alternatives : 1. Deny Ms. Johnson' s request to set u to hold the outstanding balance of her p an escrow account promissory note. 2• Set up an escrow account standing balance of Ms. Jthrough the City to hold the out- ohnson' s promissory note. 3 . Set up an escrow account through a real estate agent to hold the outstanding balance of Ms . Johnson ' s promissory note. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends alternative #l. Action Reguested- Move to deny Ms. Johnson' s request to set up an escrow account to hold the outstanding balance of her promissory note. Attachments tw Attachment #1 'TATE OF MINNESOTA OFFIC}. OF TEIF %AI j(,IZ\'};l" �P:\};t2-\I. .ADDRESS REPLYTO: 102 CAPITOL BUILDING HUBERT H. HUMPHREY, III ST. I'• l-'L 57,155 ST. PAUL, MN ;5155 ATTORNEY GENER.AI TELEPHONE: (612)296-6196 April 23 , 1986 Mr . Barry A. Stock Acting Director Shakopee Housing & Redevelopment Authority City of Shakopee _ .. 129 East First Avenue Shakopee , MN 55379-1376 Re: Thomas and Susan Johnson 408 Minnesota Street Shakopee, MN 55379 Dear Mr . Stock: Enclosed herewith is a copy of a letter to this office from the above-named individuals registering a complaint about the interpretation of a promissory note given to the Housing and Redevelopment Authority in connection with the purchase of certain property. We would appreciate receiving whatever comments you may be in a position to make concerning this complaint. You may wish to consult with the city attorney in connection with your response. Thank you for your cooperation. Very truly yours MICHAEL R. GALLAtER Special Assistan Attorney General MRG: jd Enc . cc : Thomas and Susan Johnson AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER = _ i o� - -- Attachment #2 cJuLIus A. COLLER, II JULIUS A.COLLER ATTORNEY AT I.AAV 612-445-12- 1859-1940 2441B59-1940 2 11 WEST FIRST AVENUE SHAROPEE. MINNESOTA 553Z9 April 28, 1986 Mr. Michael R. Gallagher Special Assistant Attorney General State of Minnesota lug Capitol Building St. Paul, MN. 55155 Dear Mr. Gallagher: In re: Thomas and Susan Johnson - Shakopee Housing & Redevelopment Authority Mr. Barry A. Stock, the acting director of the Shakopee Housing & Redevelop- ment Authority of Shakopee, handed me your letter and the attached letter to you from Tom and Sue Johnson for reply. In going over the Johnson's letter I note that they remark that if there is a change in the intent for one person that the note should be dropped in their case. What she is referring to is Jane Wostrel. There is no change in intent. The mortgage and note in the Wostrel and Johnson is the same as far as the question in point. The fact situation differs. In the Wostrel instance,some time after signing the note and mortgage and receiving the conveyance to the property she married,and subsequently, moved to the home of her husband, but, she retained title to the property for the full life of the mortgage, namely, five years. Whereas, the Johnsons disposed of the property before the five year period was up and that accounts for the decision in the Johnson case to be different than the decision in the Wostrel case. Both matters were referred to me and I gave a written memo of each to the Shakopee City Council and I enclose a copy of each of them. As you will see there was no covenant for residency, only ownership. If I can be of any further assistance please contact me. Kindest personal regards. Very truly yours, Julius A. Coller, II Shakopee City Attorney JAC/nh Enc. A - -�1 - i i JULIUS A. COLLER, 11 JULIUS A.COLLER ATTORNEY AT LAW 612-445.1244 859.1940 2 11 WEST F I R 5 T A V E N U E SHAKOPEE. MINNESOTA S83Z9 MEMO To: Shakopee City Council From: Julius A. Coller, II, City Attorney In re: HRA 4th & Minnesota Revitalization Project Date; April 10, 1986 INTRODUCTION The Council has inquired if the Promissory Note and Mortgage given by Susan and Thomas Johnson for Lot 3, Block 3, Macey Second Addition requires continued owner- ship during the life of the mortgage in order to escape repayment. BACKGROUND The first agreement entered into between the City and the purchaser in each instance is a purchase agreement. It is silent as to any residence require- ment. All that the purchase agreement provides is that if the property is sold within 5 years of the date of the purchase, it will be subject to a lien payable to the Shakopee Housing and Redevelopment Authority for the value of the lot. The next step in the transaction was the delivery of the deed of conveyance and the making and signing by the grantee in said deed of a mortgage and a promissory note running to the Housing and Redevelopment Authority in and for the City of Shakopee. These documents supercede the Purchase Agreement and form the agreement between the City and the purchaser. The mortgage provides that the owner will pay to the City the amount of the mortgage according to the terms of the promissory note of even date and when the payment is made and all agreements in the mortgage are kept and performed the mortgage will be null and void and it is to be released. There is a special clause typed in the mortgage as distinguished from the Printed matter of the document which provides that "no part of the mortgage need be repaid unless and �ntil the mortgagor conveys any legal or equitable interest in the encumber/property. Moreover, each year on the anniversary date of the mortgage, the principal balance shall be reduced by 20% automatically without any payment by the mortgagor so that 5 years from the date of t ,is mort- gage providing the mortgagor has not conveyed any legal or equitable title in the encumbered property, there shall be remaining no amount due and owing under the mortgage and the mortgage shall be released by the mortgagee." Continued ownership is a requirement. OPINION In my opinion the Johnsons may not sell the property before the full five year period. If they do, they must repay to the City 20% of the original mortgage for each year their ownership falls short of the mandatory five year ownership requirement. cTULIUS A. COLLER, Il IBs JU LI A.CoATTORNEY AT LAW 59-194t)o 612-445-j2- 211 WEST F 1 R 5 T AVENUE SHAROPEE, MINNESOTA 553Z9 To: Shakopee City Council MEMO From: Julius A. Coller, II, City Attorney In re: HRA 4th & Minnesota Revitalization Project Date: April 9, 1986 INTRODUCTION Council has inquired if the Promissory Note and Mortgage given by Jane I. Wostrel on December 17, .1980 in connection with the purchase of certain property in the Fourth and Minnesota Neighborhood Revitalization Project requires continuous residency on the property by the mortgagor during the life of the mortgage. BACKGROUND The first agreement entered into between the City and the purchaser in each instance is a purchase agreement. It is silent as to any residence require- ment. All that the purchase agreement provides is that if the property is sold within 5 years of the date of the purchase, it will be subject to a lien payable to the Shakopee Housing and Redevelopment Authority for the value of the lot. The next step in the transaction was the delivery of the deed of conveyance and the making and signing by the grantee in said deed of a mortgage and a promissory note running to the Housing and Redevelopment Authority in and for the City of Shakopee. These documents supercede the Purchase Agreement and form the agreement between the City and the purchaser. The mortgage provides that the owner will pay to the City the amount of the mortgage according to the terms of the promissory note of even date and when the payment is made and all agreements in the mortgage are kept andperformed the mortgage will be null and void and it is to be released. There is a special clause typed in the mortgage as distinguished from the Printed matter of the document which provides that "no nam' t' need be repaid unless and until the mortgagoreo ne mortgage or euita interest in the encumbered property. Moeover, ceachyyearyonegal the anniversarye date of a1 the mortgage, the princi without the p balance shall be reduced by 20% automatically y payment by the mortgagor so that 5 years f _ gage providing the mortgagor has not conveyed any legal ortequitableftitls inthe encumbered property, there shall be re.. ining no amount due and owing under the mortgage and the mortgage shall be released by the Mortgagee." Continued ownership is all that is required. Residency is not mentioned anywhere in the mortgage. The only reference to residency anywhere is in the not h Provides in part that "This note shall terminate at the end of 5 years of such residency. " All this says is that the note shall in any event terminate at the end of 5 years of "such residency". But nowhere in either ,..� the :-:cte or the - 2 - Shakopee City Council In re: HRA 4th & Minnesota Revitalization Project April 9, 1986 mortgage is there any requirement of continued residency to keep the agreement viable. OPINION In my opinion there is no residency requirement. All that is necessary to keep the agreement in good standing is to retain ownership for the full period of time and not convey any legal or equitable interest in the encumbered property within the 5 year period. OFFI^IAL PROCF7DITGS OF THE CTmY COUNCIL ADJ. REGULAR SESSION SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA APRIL 8, 1986 Vice Mayor Wampach called the meeting, to order at 7:00 p.m. with Cncl. Colligan, Lebens, Leroux and Vierling present. Mayor Reinke arrived at 7:15 p.m. Also present were John K. Anderson, City Admr. ; Jeanne Andre, Community Development Director, Kenneth Ashfeld, City Engineer, .,Talius A. Coller, II, City Attorney and Judith S. Cox, City Clerk. Vice Mayor Wampach asked if there was anyone present who wished to address the Council on any item not on the agenda and there was no response. Leroux/Vierling moved to open the public hearing on the Improvement of Fourth Avenue Between Fillmore and Scott Street. Motion carried unanimously. The City Engineer gave the report on the project and assessment policy, and provided audience with handouts relating to the 4th Avenue reconstruction as proposed from Fillmore to Scott Streets. He stated that the sanitary sewer system main was identified as also needing replacement. Cost of this system replacement is proposed to be funded by the sanitary sewer fund and will not be assessed to the homeowners. He reviewed the proposed reconstruction elements that consist of the following: 1 . New concrete curb and gutter. 2. New concrete sidewalk. 3. A 9 ton bituminous pavement providing for two lanes (1 in each direction) and parking lanes on both sides. 4. Storm water catch basins (constructed in conjunction with the Holmes Street Lateral Project). Estimated cost of project is 8368,325.76. Cncl. Lebens asked that when approaching Scott-Street if there was going to be a storm sewer put in. There has been a problem at St. Francis Hospital and also as you come down 4th Street. The City Engineer replied that the storm sewer running down 4th street to Scott will be connected at that point to the roof leader drains at the hospital. Cncl. Leroux asked if the 25,000 sq ft of sidewalk was for both sides. City Engineer replied that it was proposed for both sides of the street with the exception of the area of the Courthouse and are currently talking with the County Engineer on this matter. Discussion ensued on the parking lot between the Courthouse and the hospital. There is no handicapped access. Mayor Reinke suggested that it should be discussed between the Hospital and the County at the time of construction that they bring their parking lot up to handicapped standards. Frank Schneider, 127 4th Avenue asked about widening the sidewalk on both sides of street between fuller and holmes.. The City Engineer replied that if the sidewalk needs to be replaced then the sidewalk may be put just a few more feet closer to the street which would give the property owners additional relief. Shakopee 'it-�- Council April 8, 1986 Page -2- Pam Pint, 220 r'. 4th, asked if this project would affect her sewer which comes off of Fuller and goes down to 3rd St. The City Engineer replied that she would not be affected because they will be replacing the sewer main on 4th. Robert Vierling asked if Holmes down from 4th Avenue was a state aid project. The City PMgineer replied that Holmes is a municipal state aid and 4th is county state aid. The nounty is in the process of adopting a participation Policy of which the City will-be working under on 4th Avenue. Richard Nead Sr., 303 F. 4th Avenue, asked if this project was a definite go-through and if it is approved if it would be started right away. The City Engineer replied that after receiving bids in June they hope to get started as soon as possible. The project is estimated to take until fall to complete. Tom Philipp asked if this project would be similar to the Holmes Street Improvement. The City Engineer responded yes, except it hasn't yet been determined what watermain improvements might be needed. He also explained that sidewalk replacement will be made on a case by case basis as well as consideration of the grade. A new policy, yet to be made, will have to address credit for new sidewalks. Jeff Cronin, 338 S. Lewis St. , asked if the city would be going around to each individual property owner and tell them what should be replaced or done regarding driveway apron and give an estimated cost to each homeowner. The City Engineer replied that the city would talk to each homeowner and determine what their needs are. Lebens/Leroux moved to close the public hearing. Motion carried unanimously. Leroux/Colligan offered Resolution No. 2534, A Resolution Ordering an Improvement and the Preparation of Plans and Specifications for Fourth Avenue Reconstruction from Fillmore Street to Scott Street, Project No. 1986-3, and moved its adoption. Roll Call: Ayes; Unanimous Noes: None Motion carried Leroux/Vierling moved for a 10-minute recess at 8:10 p.m. ""otion carried unanimously. Wampach/Vierling moved to reconvene at 8:20 p.m. Motion carried unanimously. John Manahan, member of the Industrial Commercial Commission, addressed the Council on behalf of Al Furrie, President, who could not be present. Present were members of the ICC, Jane DuBois, Anthony Berens and a new member Don Koopmann; and from the Star Cities Tast Force the Vice President of the Chamber of Commerce, Linnea Stromberg/Wise was also present. John Manahan briefly outlined the background of the Industrial Commercial Commission (IC^). A Star Cities Task Force Committee was formed and has been meeting extensively over the past few months preparing a set of and objectives to present to the Cit goals appli for technical assistance from the State to develop anonee T , the andCity five yeareeconomic development plan. The goals and objectives listed according to the fund Priority are: Shakopee City Council April 8, 1986 Page -3- 1 . Transportation problem in Scott county 2. Downtown redevelopment 3. Residential development (which is probably onnsidered to be the most important). Discussion ensued on the lack of buildable lots available in Shakopee as compared to Savage, Prior Lake and Chaska. There is a great need for residential development in Shakopee. Discussion also ensued on the reorganiza- tion of the ICC. It is recommended that the ICC be expanded from six to twelve members; two of each would be on each of six sub-committees: Tourism, Transportation, Downtown, plus three new committees to be established: New Development, Business Retention and Financial Development. Leroux/Vierling moved to adopt as the City of Shakopee's five-year economic development plan the goals and objectives as presented by the ICC, (Doc.. No. CC-113. Motion carried unanimously. It was the consensus of the Council that review of !CIC organization plan and the review of staff recommendations on staffing for economic development be reviewed at the City Council meeting on April 15, 1986. Leroux/Vierling moved to recess for HRA meeting at 9:15 p.m. Motion carried unanimously. Colligan/Vierling moved to reconvene City Council at 9:26 p.m. Motion carried unanimously. Vierling/wampach moved to approve billsin amount of $189,954.49. Motion carried unanimously. The City Administrator reviewed what the Planning Commission recommendations were for amendments to the proposed Capital Improvement Program 1986-91. Cncl. Lebens asked why No. 13, Housing Alliance Project-Acq. , was still on the Capital Improvement Program. Discussion ensued as to the high project estimate on this project as originally proposed for Block 32. The City Administrator indicated that the Housing Alliance was seeking a new site for a possible project. Leroux/Colligan moved the 6-year Capital Improvement plan incorporating the recommendations of the Planning Commission with #2 as a footnote to the CIP. 1 . In regard to -467 Prior Lake overflow and #73 Deans Lake Outlet Control, the Planning Commission would like the City to push the Watershed District to officially complete the Prior Lake outflow construction and to incorporate with that, the construction of the Deans Lake Outlet Control. 2. The Planning Commission supports the construction of V.I.P. sewer west of county road 17 which will provide for additional land avail- able for single family residential development. Motion carried with Cncl. Lebens opposed. Shakopee City Council April 8, 1986 Page -4- Wampach/Leroux moved to approve the summary of Ordinance No. 194 and proceed with publication. An Ordinance of the City Of Shakopee Amending Shakopee City Code Chapter 15 entitled "The City of Shakopee Cable Communications Ordinance" by deleting certain language and adding additional language to reflect the result of negotiations between Zylstra-United Cable Television Company and the City of Shakopee as a result of economic difficulties experienced by the City of Shakopee Cable Communications System. Motion carried unanimously. Vierling/Leroux moved that the petition received tonight to apply for a conditional use permit to allow diagonal parking at 205 South Lewis, be referred to the Downtown Committee. Motion carried unanimously. Cncl. Leroux stated that the City Hall Siting Committee met last night and passed a motion recommending to the City Council for the Council's consideration next Tuesday night, April 15, the hiring of Borman and Associates as archetects for siting and design of City Hall. Leroux/Irierling moved to adjourn until Tuesday, April 15 at 7:00 p.m. Motion carried unanimously. Meeting adjourned at 9:50 p.m. Judith S. Cox City Clerk Carol L. Schultz Recording Secretary April 15, 1986 Page -3- ?,eroux[-Iampach moved that the ^.ity participate in any manner they can in Project Lifesaver which is a promotional program to increase public aware- ness regarding traffic accidents on Memorial weekend. Motion carried unanimously. T,eroux/irierling moved to accept the letter of resignation with regrets and direct that a resolution of appreciation be prepared for _Mr. Roy Baker, Electrical Inspector. Motion carried unanimously. Leroux/vierling moved to order the Second Avenue parking lot landscaping project at a cost not to exceed "32,890 and authorize the appropriate city officials to enter into an agreement with Westwood Planning and li,rigineering for the provision consulting services as they relate to the landscaping improvements and the Second Ave. Parking Lot at a cost not to exceed "3,947• Project costs to be paid from the tax increment financing district. No contracts are to be let until Council reviews plan specifications and elevations. Roll Call: .Ayes: Cncl. Leroux, Colligan, Vierling, Wampach and Mayor Reinke Noes: Cncl. Lebens Motion carried Leroux/Wampach moved that, the proposed driveway access for lots 8 and 9, Block 7 and Outlot A, Eagle Bluff 2nd Addition be approved subject to the condition that the developer provide a recordable agreement which grants an easement for public access to the lots. Mayor Reinke asked if anyone from the audience. wished to address this subject, there was no reply. Motion carried unanimously. Leroux/Wampach moved to accept the recommendation of the Planning Commission that the City Council review the amended planned unit development plat 'of Shakopee Valley Square 1st and the recommended conditions of approval in conjunction with the review of the Tax Increment Financing proposal for the project. It is recommended that the final plat resolution not be adopted until the T.I.F. has been approved, the sale of the bonds has occurred and all conditions of plat approval have been met by the developer. The recommended conditions of approval are as follows: 1 . Approval of a Title Opinion by the City Attorney. 2. Vacation of drainage and utility easements which were dedicated in the Halo 2nd Addition. 3. Submittal of a preliminary plat the same scale of the final plat, which shows all existing utilities. 4. The City Engineer must receive and approve final plans and specifications for all public facilities including, but not limited to roads, sanitary sewer system, storm sewer and grading. 5. The developer shall provide,a recordable agreement which provides for the development of Lots 1 and 2, flock 1 as per the submitted site plans reviewed by the Planning commission on Apri1:3, 1986, which provides for the log construction of the buildings, aad that any amendments to the plans be brought to the Planning commission and city Council, prior to issuance of a building permit. . takop e e .,Y "Gun C i ?'aye -4- 6. :'Xecution of a Developer's Agreement for the construction-of the required improvements: al I sidewalk to be constructed along the north side of the T.T . 101 in accordance with the Design Criteria and Standard specifications of the City of Shakopee. b) ,,mater and electric to be installed in accordance with the requirements of the SnTC ?Ttilities T a.nager. c) The developer shall agree to the ?ity 1�hgineer's method of apportioning the installments remaining unpaid against the plat and that the developer waives his right to appealing the apportionment. d) Tnstallation of fire hydrants in accordance with the requirements of the Fire Chief and City R�ngineer. e) Sanitary Sewer and storm water system to be instmlled in accordance with the Design Criteria and Standard Specifications of the City of Shakopee. f) A recordable document which provides the rules and regulations of the Shakopee valley Square Campground shall be made a part of the Developers agreement to ensure that the operator of the campground has the authority to remove any occupants or equip- ment within twenty-four hours after the river stage reaches a point of two feet below the lowest sanitary sewer. g) Park,-dedication fee of ;5,267 to be paid for the entire plat. 7. Review of the final landscape-.-.plans by a designee acting as liaison of the Planning Commission. S. Pedestrian walkways be designed and developed in a Yorth-South configuration off of and away from Marschall Road. Motion carried unanimously. Vierling/Colligzn moved to direct staff to place the final plat resolution for Shakopee Malley Square 1st Addition on the City Council agenda when the conditions of approval have been met by the developer and the T.T.F. has been resolved. Motion carried unanimously. Leroux/Vierling offered Resolution No. 2543, A Resolution Calling Public Hearing on the Proposed Amendment of the Redevelopment Plan Relating to Minnesota River Valley Housing and Redevelopment Project No. 1; The Proposed Amendment of the Tax Increment Financing Plans for Tax Increment Financing Districts No. 2 Through No. 5; The Proposed Establishment of Tax Increment Financing District No. 6 and Adoption of the Tax Increment Financing Plan Therefor, and moved its adoption. Motion carried unanimously. Leroux/Vierling moved to authorize the appropriate City officials to execute an agreement with The Bakken Group, as drafted by Rod Krass, Asst. City Attorney which will provide reimbursement to the City for costs creating the tax increment district. Motion carried with Cncl. Lebens opposed. a< Pe 1' -c,::7-JL- cage -j- ^:7e '.itvT '-Ilanner gave a review of the the etropolitan Develcpment and ?.•.vestment ?ramework: ,southwest Communities 7ommittee (T DI "). 7,he subcommittee of approximately 13 commu_nities was formed to look closely at the „,)T1s, and plan an approach to respond to the policies proposed in the document. `,Tie subcommittee includes Scott County, Carver County, ^.hanhassen, `'den Prairie and "iakopee. Colligan�Tebens moved to adopt the draft Position Statement of the Southwest "ommunities Committee. (CC Doc. No. 115) Roll ^all: Aves: Unanimous Toes: one "lotion carried ^olligan/Leroux moved to authorize the use of ;; 2,000 from the Council -;obby fund to contribute to the lobby effort of the Southwest Communities Committee to amend the proposed oil a11: oyes: nanimous :does: ??one ",lotion carried Leroux/Arierling mored to accept the recommendation of the Racetrack Con- sultant Committee re: Concept Plan ='3 Racetrack District, ,and Use Plan, with consideration being given to a change in that interchange of 83 and the bypass. The ,ity Administrator suggested to the Council that they look strongly as to whether they want to continue to have mobile home parks and campgrounds developed that closely to the racetrack. Motion carried unanimously. Discussion ensued regarding the request by Scottland Companies for a sewer service connection to the existing sanitary lateral in C.R. 83. Council discussed City policy which requires the extension of the lateral across the full frontage of the property or the owner's agreement to accept future assessments. Leroux';ierling moved that the Scottland Companies be advised as to the city policy regarding sewer connections and extensions of laterals as regards to their recuest for sewer service at Canterbury Scuare. i°.otion carried unar_imousl;r. Leroux/wampach moved to not apply for any T 4'!!CO=d�T C'�iR grants. Motion carried unanimously. Discussion continued regarding the Scottland Companies request for a sewer service connection. The City Planner requested the Council to consider a separate motion on the Scottland Companies request in particular. The City Planner stated that the staff interpretation of the MUSA line is north of the subject property and that this property is not within the urban service area. Tim Keane, Scottland Companies, informed the Council that the conditional use permit and building permit for Canterbury Square were based upon a disposal system. The consulting engineer had found that the lateral was proximate to the NW corner of the parcel. He stated that they are not requesting an extension of the sewer line, just a service connection. He also stated that they were not aware of the Council policy, if they had, they would not have made the request, now knowing that there is no need to continue. alCo- -1Y Aril 15, Page -6- Discussion continued in regard to the force main which is serving the western side of C.R. 83, the plan amendments currently be considered by the Met Council, and the Met Council determination as to whether the request requires a plan amendment. Mr. Keane stated that he respects the Council decision to not make the determination request from Met Council at this time. Cncl. Leroux added that if the property is not considered to be in the MUSA area than there should be no connection. T;eroux/Vierling moved to submit to the T•ietropolitan Council a 1956 Sewer Service Plan Amendment to open moratorium area 11 and the west half of area 10 in accord with management of sewer flow between 1981-95 as proposed in the 1991 Shakopee Comprehensive Plan as approved by the <ietropolitan Council. The amendment maintains moratorium area 15 for a future plan amendment. Roll Call: Ayes: Unanimous Noes: None 'Motion carried Leroux/Vierling moved to noiminate Don McNeil and Bill Rarrison to the Shakopee Community •access Corporation Board of Directors for three year_ terms expiring January 31 , 1989. Roll Call: Ayes: Unanimous Noes: None Motion carried Leroux/Vierling moved to nominate Gene Juergens, Dale Dahlke, Randy Laurent, Larry Link and Robert Jasper to the housing Advisory and Appeals Board. Roll Call: Ayes: Unanimous Noes: None Motion carried Leroux/Vierling moved to direct staff to communicate the downtown area parking regulations to merchants and commuters by means of the Chamber news letter, and Valley News prior to commencing enforecement. Roll Call: Ayes: Unanimous Noes: None Motion carried Leroux/Vierling moved to approve the plans and specifications for the Holmes Street Storm Sewer T,ateral Project: 1986-1 Project. _Motion carried unanimously. Colligan/%'ampach moved to direct the City Clerk to prepare and cause to be inserted in the official paper and the "Construction Bulletin" an advertisement for bids upon the making of such improvement under such approved plans and specifications. The advertisement shall be published for 21 days, shall specify the work to be done, shall state that the bids will be received by the City Clerk until 10:00 a.m. on 'r;ay 16, 1986, at which time they will be publicly opened in the Council 7hambers of the City Hall by the ^,ity Clerk and 7.]ngineer, will then be tabulated, and wil"' be considered by the Council on May 20, 1956 in the Coancil Chambers. 2-'otion carried unanimously. '.Tierlino/Leroux moved to authorize the appropriate City officials to enter into agreement with Barton-Aschman Associates, Inc., the City's Transportation Consultant for work related to T.H. 101 improvements at County Road 83 and Shenandoah Drive not to exceed . 17,950.00. Roil Call: Ayes: Cncl. Leroux, Vierling, Colligan, Wampach and Mayor Reinke Noes: Cncl. Lebens Motion carried ,eroax/!Tierling moved to authorize the appropriate City officials to execute a contract extension agreement with ^rr-Schelen TMayeron & Associates, Inc. in an amount not to exceed "10,000.00 for the official mappir_g of 13th Avenue. Roll Pall: _5,yes: inanimous 'goes: None T�.otion carried T,eroux/7Tierling moved to hire T_�Ir. .Tohn Delacey to fill the vacant '�hgineer4ng ^ech _�_ pnsition with 6 months service credit at a monthly wage of • 1 ,639°.00. - c^•^_- .._ ^eS: `0=18 ity "'au^c;i I�.�opee 1 ,y =4 w F q U e T -7- �I "olligan/'IYampach moved to approve the payment of bills in the amount of ,229,867.20. Holl ,.,awl: eyes.• !)nanimous TJoes: Hone Notion carried Leroux-Tierling moved to direct staff to advise the County Auditor that the City of Shakopee supports the ideas, of entering into a five—year lease with American Information Systems for a 315 mote Counter (Scanner) in time for the .1986 general election and direct staff to prepare the proper resolution amending the 1986 budget. Roll !'all: Ayes: Unanimous ..oes: 'one Potion carried Leroux/77ierling move to authorize appropriate City officials to contact one or two Community Development professionals to assist in the screening of community Development Director candidates and to contract with Personnel .Decisions, Inc., for supplementary testing of up to five candidates for the position. of Community Development Director at a cost of 11,250.00 per candidate. Roll Call: Ayes: Unanimous _Noes: None Motion carried Leroux/Vierling moved to authorize the appropriate city officials to enter into an agreement with Boarman Architects, Inc. at a maximum cost of "15,000 for Phase I of the siting of a new City Hall. Said Phase I services to be those outlined in the RFP. Motion carried Roll call: Ayes: Unanimous Noes: Mone T;eroux/Lebens moved to authorize the appropriate City officials to enter into a contract with John Wagner for electrical inspection services for the City of Shakopee from April 14, 1986 to December 31 , 1986. Roll „all: Ayes: Unanimous Noes: None Motion carried 1,eroux/`Iierling moved to adopt Resolution No. 2542, a Resolution Ordering the preparation of a Report on an ?mprovement t:o 13th Avenue between County Road 89 and East Shakopee City Limits. Motion carried Roll Call: .Ayes: Unanimous Noes: None Leroux/vierling offered Resolution No. 2540, a Resolution of Appreciation to Lauren Sorenson, and move its :adoption. Motion carried unanimously. L•ebens/Lero'ax_ moved to adjourn until _-_pri 1 16, 1986 at 7:00 p.m. MOM en carried unanimously. i•`eeting adjourned at 11 :00 p.m. Judith S. Cox City Clerk Carol L. Schultz Recording Secretary r TT^1T.T A T Tenn-�r�i:+�,1 nT, iTiT nT,('1ST l'1n?'1"t"TT, R'.GULA ? Ste`SI^T,; a ayrnp? � "_I'i v S^mn :�PRTL. 15, 1986 Mayor Reinke called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. with Cncl. Leroux, Colligan, Wampach, Lebens and Vierling present. Also present were John K. Anderson, City Administrator; Judith S. Cox, City Clerk; Ken Ashfeld, City �hgineer; -Barry .Stock, Administrative Aide; Rod Krass, Asst. City Attorney and Julius A. Coller, IT, City Attorney. T,eroux/Vierling moved to recess for the Housing and Redevelopment Authority meeting. Motion carried unanimously. Lebens/Trierling moved to reconvene at 7:40 P.m. Motion carried unanimously. Mayor Reinke read the Policy of Non-Discrimination on the Basis of Handicapped Status. Mayor Reinke asked the audience if there was anyone who wis:ied to address anything which was not on the agenda. There was no reply. Vierling/Colligan moved to approve the minutes of March 20, 1986. Motion t carried with Cncl. T_ebens abstaining. Ilampach/Vierling moved to approve the minutes of March 25, 1986. Motion carried with Cncl. Leroux, and Lebens abstaining. T,eroux/vierling moved to approve the minutes of April 1 , 1986. Roll Call: Ayes: Unanimous Noes: None Motion carried. Colligan/vierling offered Resolution No. 2544, A Resolution Amending the Supplemental Indenture of Trust Dated as of October 15, 1984 for $26,000,000 Sports Facility Revenue Bonds, Series 1984-A(2) , and moved its adoption. Roll Call: Ayes: Wampach, Leroux, Colligan, Vierling and Mayor Reinke Noes: Cncl. Lebens Motion carried Colligan/Vierling offered Resolution No. 2541, A Resolution of Appreciation to Dawn Schwingler, and move its adoption. Motion carried unanimously. Discussion ensued on the Petition from Residents regarding Highway 101 Traffic Signals, Crosswalks 7nforcement. Lynda Valencour, Manager of Levee Drive Senior Citizen Apartments, addressed the issue of the six steps needed to improve pedestrian safety crossing First Avenue. 1 . Traffic Law j forcement 2. Signals that work 3. Add signals and/or four-way stop signs to pace the traffic 4. Need of temporary adjustments made for immediate resolutions 5. The bigger plans of re-routing 6. Escrowed money for a walk bridge for senior citizens that could be used in a way that could benefit everyone in a more conservative and beneficial way. 15, 1996 Page -2- Cncl. Wampach brought up the issue that red lig-hts can be put on top of the traffic signals to warn people that the !;-,-,ht is out of order with a telephone number to be called to report it. Lynda 77alencour stated that there is a need for proper maintenance and regular maintenance on these street lights. 'dampach/TTierling moved to direct appropriate City officials to take action to provide temporary safety improvements for pedestrians crossing 3?ighway 101' as outlined in No. 4 of John Anderson's memo dated April 11 , 1986 and that a follow up be provided to ^ouricil within 30 days. (Doc. No. CC-114) Motion carried unanimously. Leroux/ITling moved to amend the motion to include those items brought up by Lynda Valencou r and the 2ouncil this evening. Motion carried unanimously. Larry Dillehay, Project Director for ,=st & Whinney 'Costing and Staffing Study reviewed the study analysis and their approach to the project. The three objectives were: 1 . Determine cost of services 2. Determine staff requirements 3. Report findings of management audit The approach was to get everyone involved that they could and to pay particular attention to what department heads said. They found: 1 . Good department management 2. Low ratio of indirect to direct services (147 vs. the normal 257) 3. Seasonal staffing needs 4. Good quality of products 5. Racetrack will continue to impact use of city resources 7ebens/Vierli.ng moved fcr a 15 minute recess at 9:00 p.m. Notion carried unanimously. Lebens/waznpach moved to reconvene at 9:15 p.m. motion carried unanimously. The City Attorney gave a brief review of the Request from Liquor Licensees re: Dram Shop Insurance. They are now asking that the dram shop insurance required by Shakopee be changed to conform to minimum State requirments of $50,000/$100,000 versus $100,000/$300,000 which the City now requires. The City Attorney stated that the reason for this insurance is for the protection of the public not protection of the businessman. Wampach/dierling moved that Metropolitan municipalities be surveyed to learn what dram shop insurance other communities are requiring. Motion carried unanimously. 7 OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL ADJ.REG.SESSION SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA APRIL 16, 1986 Mayor Reinke called the meeting to order with Cncl. Leroux, Lebens, Vierling, Colligan and Wampach present. Also present was John K. Anderson, City Administrator and Rod Krass, Assistant City Attorney. Wampach/Vierling moved to recess for an Executive Session regarding Scott County Lumber Company litigation. Colligan/Wampach moved to reconvene from Executive Session to City Council at 8:45 p.m. Motion carried unanimously. Discussion ensued on City Administrator's Staffing Recommendations. Essentially what is needed right now is one policeman and a Community Development Director. Also discussed was the possibility of making hiring recommendations on the balance of positions listed in the Administrator's report. It was the consensus that a temporary city employee be hired as building inspector as workload demands. It was the consensus that the hiring of a receptionist/typist would help take some of the workload off the other three secretaries. It would be a totally new full-time slot. The City Administrator was directed to prepare a job description for the next meeting. Discussion ensued on the hiring on a part-time, temporary reserve officer. It was suggested to look into the hiring of some retirees or new licensed officers who weren't yet working as full-time officers. What was recommended for public works and engineering was to try to find some seasonal help that would be more than just summer employees. Discussion ensued on the hiring of an entry-level Planner as a new person in the Community Development Department. It was the consensus that the hiring of a new Planner I be held off until the hiring of a Community Development Director is completed, and go with the advertisement of Community Development Director, only, at this time. Discussion ensued on the relocating of city offices within City Hall. General configuration was that Finance go upstairs, City Clerk, City Administrator, Mayor and secretary relocate where Finance is, Building Inspection stay in front where it is, Community Development expand into the Administration area and that Engineering stay where it is. Discussion ensued on the removal of leadman and foreman from Teamsters Union Local 4320 - Public Works. The general consensus was that the Council would like the City Administrator to talk to the Foreman before a motion is passed on his loss of vacation time or other possible union benefits. Leroux/Wampach moved to table the amendment to the City of Shakopee's 1985-86 Union Contract with Teamsters Local No. 320 - Public Works removing all references to the leadman and foreman from that contract. Motion carried unanimously. Vierling/Lebens moved to appoint Judi Simac as Acting Community Development Director. Motion carried unanimously. Shakopee City Council April 16, 1986 Page -2- Vierling/Lebens moved to adjourn to May 6, 1986. Motion carried unanimously. Meeting adjourned at 10:15 p.m. Carol Schultz Recording Secretary Judith S. Cox City Clerk 200 LEVEE DRIVE - SHAKOPEE-,, MINNESOTA 55379 MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF SHAKOPEE 129 EAST FIRST AVENUE SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA 55379 DEAR MAYOR AND COUNCIL YEbIBRRS, I HAVE ENCLOSED COPIES OF THE DISCUSSION TO FIRST AVENUE CROSSING PROBLEMS THAT I WAS ADDRESSED BY MEMO FROM JOHN ANDERSON AND THEN DISCUSSED AT THE CITY COUNCIL MEETING APRIL 15, 1986, AT 7:00 P.M. . T NA_1 r 7WrTQ FT1 jTRF�F. R!1 THAT TTS RF T�TGAT nj()T Rz' L1 �ntn�tiJT�TrCA 0 15 DA0RT �� AS TO TEE NEEDS AND WANTS OF FIRST AVENUE BY THE CITIZENS OF SHAKOPEE. IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS TO THE CONTENTS PLEASE FEEL FREE TO CONTACT ME AT 445-7498 (HOME) OR 445-2001 (WORK). THANK YOU. SINCER/EL)Y, LYIMk VALENCOUR 4/16/86 i j p RE: FIRST AVENUE, (HWY. 101, 169) , SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA TRAFFIC CONDITIONS, RESPONCE TO MEMO RECEIVED FROM JOHN ANDERSON, CITY ADMINISTRATOR INTRODUCTION; REGARDING THE MEMO RECEIVED FROM JOHN ANDERSON, CITY ADMINISTRATOR IN CONCERN WITH THE FIRST AVENUE PETITION, AND THAT WAS DISCUSSED AT THE CITY COUNCIL MEETING, APRIL 15, 1986. (ALL MATERIAL ATTACHED, INCLUDING, MEMO, I;ESPONCE TO MEMO) PETITIONS, AND LETTERS). MEMO HAS BEEN BROKEN UP INTO AN ALPHABETICAL ORDER TO RESPOND. A. MEMO: TOM BROWNELL HAS INDICATED THAT THE STATE PATROL HAS SEVEN TROOP- ERS TO PROVIDE 24 HOUR SERVICE IN A TWO COUNTY AREA. SHAKOPEE HAS RECEIVED MORE SERVICE THAN ANY OTHER COMMUNITY FROM THE STATE HIGHWAY PATROL. RESPOND: THIS IS NOT ENOUGH PATROLS, WE FEEL VERY SORRY FOR THE OTHER COM_ .•:UNITIES. B. MEMO: TOM HAS ALSO INDICATED THAT REQUESTS FOR SERVICE FROM HIS DEPART- MENT IN THE DOWNTOWN AREA ARE EXCEEDING THE DEPARTMENT'S RESOURCES. THE RE- QUEST WOULD REQUIRE ONE FULL TIME PATROL POSITION TO BE ASSIGNED TO THE AR- EA. RESPOND: THIS WOULD REQUIRE ONE FULL TIME POSITION. YET, THIS IS NEEDED. IF, THE STATE HIGHWAY PATROL DOES NOT WANT THIS RESPONSIBILITY, THAN THEY SHOULD GIVE IT TO THE CITY POLICE, WITH REIMBURSEMENT OF ANOTHER POLICE CAR AND OFFICER TO OUR CITY. ALSO, THERE SEEMS TO BE A REAL PROBLEM OF NO ONE KNOWING WHO IS IN CHARGE, OR RESPONSIBLE FOR THIS AREA. THIS IS BECAUSE THERE ARE TOO MANY DEPART- MENTS INVOLVED. IF THE STATE PATROLS DECIDE TO PATROL IT, THEN THE STATE HIGHWAY MAINTENANCE SHOULD TAKE CARE OF ALL MAINTENANCE. IF THE SHAKOPEE POLICE DEPARTMENT TAKES ON THE PATROL OF FIRST AVENUE, THEN THE CITY ROAD MAINTENACE SHOULD DO THE MAINTENANCE. C. MEMO: HAVING A POLICE OFFICER ASSIST PEDESTRIANS CROSS THE STREET. RESPOND: THIS WOULD ONLY TAVE CARE OF ONE CORNER/CROSSING, WHEN IT IS NEED- ED THROUGHOUT FIRST AVENUE. THIS WOULD FALL INTO THE CATEGORY OF THE WALK BRIDGE THAT WAS PROMISSED TME SENIOR CITIZENS. AND THIS IS NOT JUST A SENIOR CITIZENS PROBLEM. AND THE SENIOR CITIZEN WOULD LIKE SOMME HIND THAT WOULD BENEFIT TEE-IR FAMILIES AS WELL AS THEMSELVES, AND TO HELP KEEP OUR BUSINESSES IN SHAKOPEE FOR THE SUR- VIVAL OF THEIR CITY. PAGE 1 OF L; PAGES D. MEMO: TOM NOTED THAT SHOULD THEY PROVIDE THIS SERVICE, THAT THE CITY WOULD BE HELD LIABLE FOR AN ACCIDENT. RESPOND: AT THIS TIME, AND FOR DECADES NOW, THE CITY AND THE; STATE OFF- ICIALS ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE HAZARDS, AND NEGLECT OF FIRST AVENUE. E. MEMO: • * ATTACHED INDICATIONS OF.MAINTENANCE PERFORMED ON SIGNALS BY SHAKOPEE. PUBLIC UTILITIES; ALSO SUGGESTION FOR PALC MEN'T' OF A RED FIASH- ING LIGHT ON TOP OF SIGNAL TO ALERT "LIGHT BURNT OUT". RESPOND: NO ATTACHED MAIN'T'ENANCE INDICATION WAS ATTACHED TO THIS IMMI M0 FOR PUBLIC VIEWING. PLACEMENT OF RED FLASHING LIGHT SHOULD BE INVESTIGATED AS TO THE COST. THIS SAME SERVICE COULD BE PROVIDED BY THE OFFICER PATROLING THE DOWN- TOWN AREA IN THE FOLLOWING MANNER; AS THE PATROL ENTERS THIS AREA, AS FIRST AGENDA OF THE DAY, THEY CAN CHECK THE LIGHTS IMMEDIATELY, AND RE- PORT ANY FAILURES BY RADIO. PREVENTIVE MAINTENANCE SHOULD BE DONE. (SEE ATTACHED EXPLANATION). r F. MEMO: IMPROVED CROSS WALK PAINTING IS SUGGESTED, TWICE A YEAR FOR THE CROSSINGS ON WEST END OF FIRST AVENUE ON EXISTING SIGNAL CORNERS, AND ONCE ON ALL• OTHER CROSSINGS. RESPOND: ALL CROSSINGS NEED PAINT TWICE A YEAR. G. MEMO: KEN ASFELD (CITY ENGINEER), 'AND MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF TRANS- PORTAION, WILL NOT CONSIDER 1+-WAY STOP SIGNS. RESPOND: THE CITIZENS OF SHAKOPEE ONLY SUGGESTED THIS ALTERNATIVE, ONLY BECAUSE WE GET A "RUN-A-ROUND" ABOUT SIGNAL LIGHTS. WE FELT THAT THIS IS LESS COSTLY, AND SOMETHING THAT CAN BE DONE EASIER AND FASTER. WE ARE NOT IN PREFERENCE TO THE STOP SIGNS BY ANY MEANS. H. DEMO: LIGHTS ON FULLER AND FIRST WOULD CAUSE TRAFFIC STACKING AS ON LEWIS AND FIRST. RESPOND: SIGPLAL LIGHTS DO NOT CAUSE TRAFFIC STACKING. CONGESTION DOES, OR UNTIMELY SIGNALS (SIGNALS THAT ARE IMPROPERLY TIMED). SNELLING AVENUE IN SOUTH MINNEAPOLIS IS THE IDENTICAL STREET TO OUR FIRST AVENUE. WE SHOULD INQUIRE AS TO HOW THEY HAVE TIMED THEIR SIGNALS, AS THEY HAVE NO STACKING PROBLEMS, 24+- SECONDS FOR WALK LIGHT, SIGNAL LIGHTS EVERY TWO BLOCKS, AND MORE SEMI TRUCKS THAN OUR FIRST AVENUE. (ALSO, IF YOU DRIVE 30-35 mph. (35 IS SPEED LIMIT) A VEHICLE WILL MAKE EACH LIGHT, IF IT GOES OVER 35mph., THE VEHICLE WILL MISS EVERY LIGHT). PAGE 2 OF 4 PAGES CLI I. ISMO: THE CITY POLICE FEEL THAT THEY COULD SHIFT POLICE PRIORITIES. RESPOND: SHIFTING POLICE PRIORITIES IS SAYING THAT IS BETTER TO BE KILLED ON WAY RATHER THAN ANOTHER. OUR POLICE. ARE VERY BUSY AND OVER WORKED AS IT IS. Wt- WOULD NEED ANOTHER OFFICER AND CAR THAT WOULD BE REIMBURSED BY THE STATE. J. MEMO: COUNCIL CAN INVESTIGATE. LOWERING RATES OF DIAL-A-RIDE FOR SENIOR CITIZENS. RESPOND: CROSSING FIRST AVENUE IS NOT JUST SENIOR CITIZENS PROBLEMS: : : ::: . TENANTS LIVING AT 200 LEVEE DRIVE APARTMENTS ARE SENIOR CITIZENS, DISABLED, OR HANDICAPPED, AND LEVEE DRIVE APARTMENTS IS A SUBSIDIZED PROGRAM FOR VERY IOW AND LOW INCOMES. WE HAVE 66 UNITS, 60 VERY LOW, AND 6LOW INCOvES. THEY CAN NOT AFFORD NOR WOULD THEY IF THEY COULD, TO SPEND p1.50 TO X2.00 ROUND TRIP TO CROSS A STREET THAT THEY HAVE TO GO OUT THEIR BACK DOOR FOR. THIS SUGGESTION IS INCOriSIDERATE, IRRESPONSIBLE, AND CAN ONLY BECOMING FROM A PERSON WITH NO REAL GRIP ON REALITY OF LIFE OR A PERSON WITH A REAL ATTITUDE PROBLEM/HANG-UPS ON THE ELDERLY. PLEASE LET IT BE KNOWN THAT THIS SAND' PERSON MADE THE FOLLOWING REMARK ON A TELEPHONE CONVERSATION, ASKING LYNDA VALENCOUR TO CROSS THE CROSSING OF LEWIS STREET TO TIME THE LIGHT, JOHN ANDERSON; " I WOULD LIKE YOU TO GO WITH ME TO THE LEWIS CROSSING, IN ORDER TO DETERMINE THE LENGTH OF TIME THAT IS NEEDED." LYNDA VALENCOUR; " CAN I BRING A TENANT?" JOHN ANDERSON; " CAN I TRUST YOU TO BRING ONE THAT CAN WALK?" THESE REMARKS MAKE US VERY NERVOUS WHEN COMING FROM A CITY OFFICIAL THAT IS SUPPOSE TO BE WATCHING OUT FOR OUR WELL-BEING AND WELL-FARE. K. MEMO:-` TM SENIOR CITIZENS ARE CONCERNED WITH THE REROUTING OF TRAFFIC, AND THE BUILDING OF A OVER/UNDER PASS FOR A WALK-WAY THAT HAD BEEN PROMISS- ED THEM. RESPOND: YES, THEY ARE. THE REROUTING OF TRAFFIC SomiDS MARVELOUS. WHO IS GOING TO USE THIS EXPENSIVE REROUTING IF IT IS GOING TO TAKE LONGER TO GET TO THEIR DESTINATION? AND A WALK-WAY FOR THE SENIOR CITIZENS ACROSS FIRST AVENUE SOUNDS WONDERFUL, AND THEY DEFINATELY DO DESERVE THIS IN THE MINDS OF TF.EIR FRIENDS AND FAMILY. BUT THEY DO NOT WANT IT. THE COST WOULD BE OUT- RAGIOUS, AS THE ONLY SOLUTION TO OPE IS TO PUT AN ELEVATOR ON EACH SIDE, CAN YOU IM4AGINE THE COST OF UPKEEP ALSO? ANY OTTER SOLUTION WOULD BE ADDED DISTANCE TO RA�,IPS AND STAIRS THAT WOULD MAKE IT UNUSABLE FOR THE SENIOR, AND p, IF IT WERE UNDER GROUND, THEN WE WOULD HAVE PROBLEMS OF ROBBERY AND ETCETRA"- CRIMES. THIS WOULD NOT BE USED. THE SENIOR CITIZEN WOULD APPRECIATE SEEING THE ESCROWED MONEY GO FOR SAFE CROSSINGS THAT WOULD BENEFIT ALL OF FIRST AVE. PAGE 3 OF 4 PAGES L. 2•!EMO: THE CITY COUNCIL AND THE SENIOR CITIZENS COULD DISCUSS WHERE TO USE D THE ESCROWED MONEY. RESPOND: WE HAVE STATED OUR DESIRES FOR THIS ESCROW MONEY, WE WOULD LIKE TO HAVE IT PUT IN TO SIGNAL LIGHT'S THROUGHOUT FIRST AVENUE. WHERE IS THIS ESCROWED MONEY? AND HOW MUCH IS THERE WITH THE INTEREST IT HAS RECEIVED? M. MEMO: USE OF THE PEDESTRIAN ACTIVATED WALK SIGNAL BUTTON. RESPOND: THE SENIORS DO NOT HAVE A PROBLEM OF PUSHING THIS BUTTON, (UNLESS: IT IS NOT WORKING , NOR GETTING ACCROSS BEFORE THE LIGHT TURNS RED. WHAT THEY ARE HAVING A PROBLEM WITH, AS EVERY CITIZEN/PEDESTRIAN OF ANY AGE, IS THAT ONCE THE PEDESTRIAN IS OUT IN THE INTERSECTION, AND THE WALK SIGNAL TURD TO DON'T WALK (AND MANY TIMES ON "WALK''), THE TRAFFIC BEGINS "CHOMPING-AT-THE-BIT", AND THEY START TURNING, EITHER IN FRONT OR IN BACK OF YOU, HITTING YOUR LEGS, HANDS, PACKAGES AND ETC. THIS IS THE PROBLEM. N. MEMO: CONCERN OF HOW TO PUSH THE WALK BUTTON ON THE SIGNAL LIGHT IS RESOLVED. RESPOND: THIS IS NOT THE CONCERN, THE _CONCERN HAS NOT BEEN RESOLVED, REFER TO M. 0. MEMO: I RECOMMEND THAT WE ACTIVELY FOLLOW UP ON THE ITEMS LISTED. UNDER N). 4 ABOVE AND THAT STAFF BE INSTRUCTED TO REPORT BACK TO CITY COUNCIL ON THE PROGRESS BEING MADE ON THESE ITEMS WITH IN 30 LAYS.. DIRECT THE APPROPRIATE CITY-OFFICIALS TO TAKE ACTION TO PROVIDE TEMPORARY SAFETY INPROVEMENTS FOR PEDESTRIANS CROSSING HIGHWAY 101 AS OUTLINED IN NO. 4 IN JOHN ANDERSON'S MEMO OF APRIL 11, 1986 AND THAT A FOLLOW UP BE PROVIDED TO COUNCIL WITH IN 30 DAYS. - RESPOND: WE, THE CITIZENS OF SHAKOPEE HAVE BEEN TOLD TO TAKE ALL OUR NEEDS OF FIRST AVENUE, AND STICK THEM IN OUR EAR, AND THAT THE APPROPRIATE CITY OFFICIALS WILL TAE THIRTY DAYS TO DO THIS. THIS PORTION OF THE MEMO HAS COINCIDENTLY COME UNDER THE CORRECT ALPHABETICAL ORDER, THAT BEING "0", ALSO MEANING ZERO. NOTE: LYNDA VALENCOUR WAS TELEPHONED BY JOHN ANDERSON'S SECRETARY TO INVITE HER TO TIE CITY COUNCIL, AT WHICH TI.ME THEY WOULD DISCUSS THIS MEMO, DATE OF INVI- TATION, APRIL 14, 1986, DATE OF FETING FOR DISCUSSION, APRIL 15, 1986. AT THIS ti TIME I WAS ABLE TO STOP BY FOR A COPY OF THE EMO. C.C. MAYOR OF SHAKOPEE AND CITY COUNCIL SHAKOPEE VALLEY NEWS PAPER, FOR PUBLIC VIEWING L NDA VALENCOUR PAGE 4 OF 4 PAGES Re : �x aA, ion o-F Fmver) ,Uvc M a., n "Le- n o-n ce on Stna.� L hfs 9 9 ��aoo hours es�imcc� ed .burning ASO days S % mon qhs 624/ � to tA&=d.4 C� i i �cL e l o.F a P a,g �roblerns �xJs � � n on Signal L. �P9h�5 �® T! a✓C�CiLi r �k` Sc�l ons & r-) 0,bo ve p ro b ) E-M,-5 s � ICZLZ.QQJ J - � e I � e o f Aaw CLAY'S PRINTING SERVICE Third&Fourth Generation Printers Mr. Gary Laurent Chairman Downtown Ad Hoc Redevelopment Committee Dear Gary, Please accept this letter of resignation to the committee. The time constraints of business, what with my father's retirement are such that I see no other "egress" that to resign. As it is, I have not been able to devote much time for meetings, much less study of the materials. Hopefully, by the time I am able to devote more energy to the committee, it will no longer be in existence having met all of its goals. If not maybe I may be able to come back on the committee in a year or two. Best of Luck, and Patience. Steven Clay Informational : I After the resignation of Mr. Clay there still remains 10 members r on the committee �,,,hich consists of 9-20 members. There is no need i to recruit a replacement, at this time . Barry h., LO Family Amusement Pai* One Valleyfair Drive, Shakopee, MN 55379 (612) 445-7600 April 25, 1986 _\ Mr. John Anderson City of Shakopee 129 E. 1st Avenue Shakopee, MN 55379 Dear Mr. Anderson: This is a follow up on our conversation on Thursday, April 24, 1986 concerning the safest and most practical way for traffic to enter and exit Valleyfair in lieu of the new frontage road leading to the Prairie House addition. In the feasibility report issued by Mr. Ashfeld, we feel that the traffic pattern as described by figure 7 would best serve all concerns. The westerly extension of the frontage road would extend to the westerly end of our present parking lot. This "T" pattern would solve most of our concerns: the eight foot drop in elevation before entering the Prairie House addition. The merging of traffic from west Highway 101 into the Prairie House property would be much slower, consequently much safer. This pattern would also solve our concern of cars avoiding our parking fee. Another concern that the city has had is the present service road and campground entrance off of Highway 101. This might be the time to look at this problem and have an extension of the study to address it. Thanks again for taking the time to hear our concerns. Ver lryour's , l ichard L. Kin el Vice President/General Manager RLK:dw .1W Northern States Power Company h5p Minnetonka Division 5505 County Road 19 P.O. Box 10 Excelsior, Minnesota 55331 Telephone (612) 474-8881 April 14, 1986 Cite c Shakopee Mayor: Walt Harbeck 129 1st Ave. Shakopee, 'EQ 553,'9 Dear Mayor Harbeck: Northern States Power Company is please to announce that the NSP "Safety Watch" program will soon be implemented in your community which we serve. We are supporting the local police effort in crime prevention, and we have received support of the Minnesota- Crime Prevention Officers' Association. Since our employees are working almost daily in your community, they can easily participate in the Safety Watch program. In the next several weeks we will be training our employees in the "Safety Watch" program, and communicate about our new program to the schools, newspapers and our customers. Our goal is to be operational with our new program by May 15, 1986. If you have any questions about the NSP Minnetonka Division "Safety Watch" program please contact Norbert Gestach, Safety Coordinator 474-8881 or myself. Sincerely, R. J. Erickson General Manager Minnetonka Division Encl. NSP Safety Watch Northern States Power Company Safety Watch Fact Sheet--External Distribution What is the official name of NSP' s . new community safety program? Safety Watch. NSP has borrowed this trademarked name with permission from KPL Gas Service , Kansas Cit; . Other participating utilities have called their programs Crime Watch (New Jersey Power and Light, Ohio Edison) , Eyes and Ears (Detroit Edison) and Radio Watch (Delmarva) . NSP choose Safety Watch because it suggests watching out for others ' safety. What is the purpose of the program? Safety Watch has two purposes : One, it identifies NSP-identified vehicles as a "safe haven" for young children and senior citizens (or anyone , really) in distress . Our employees will be trained to help by using their two-way radios torelaythe problem to NSP dispatchers , who , in turn will contact local police or fire officials. Second, our employees will be extra "eyes and ears" for their local- authorities, reporting any unusual events. Many NSP employees do this already. So. why the formal program? By formalizing, and naming, a community service many NSP employees already perform, the public will become aware that NSP employees can assist in an emergency. When will NSP implement the program? By May 15 NSP will complete the new signage on marked vehicles , inform children in grades K-3 and their teachers and principals , inform all employees and the news media, and train crews and dispatchers. Phase Two will begin immediately thereafter, when NSP will direct publicity at senior citizens and build on customer awareness with a June bill insert. How is the program being implemented internally? Because Safety Watch is a community program, dependent upon NSP ' s relations with an individual community' s schools and police department, NSP' s divisions will administer the program with staff support from, at least initially, the Electric Utility (specifically from Pam Fricke, 330-6525 , and Bill Delaney , 330-7641) . All divisions have been advised to inform by mid-April all the police departments in their area about Safety Watch and to invite their participation in our training program. Ideally, NSP would like at least one police officer at each training session to answer any questions employees might have . Depending upon the division and the interest of the police department, they might work on a joint news release , media event, future educational programs--the choice is theirs . So far , what is police reaction to the program? Without exception, Bloomington , Burnsville , Plymouth, Minneapolis and St. Paul police departments want NSP to participate in such a program. In addition , the president of the Minnesota Crime Prevention Officers ' Association , an officer with the Mankato Police Department, has been very supportive of NSP ' s program. Officer Reasner will publicize NSP ' s Safetv Watch program to his association ' s membership. In promoting Safety Watch, NSP will use the National Crime Prevention Council ' s trademarked character McGruff, "America ' s number one crime fighting dog. " Many metro- area police departments already use McGruff in their safety programs for young children. How does NSP plan to use McGruff? NSP will use McGruff (in a white hardhat) along with the SafetN7 Watch name on: oPressure-sensitive vehicle decals , which will appear on the compartment doors on each side of white (not orange) NSP trucks and vans . oA 24 " x 32" coloring poster for K-3 classrooms. cStickers for the K-3 students upon completion of the poster. oA brochure to be inserted in June customer bills and also used as a handout. dwood fall/ area r chamber ofcommerce 140 EAST BRIDGE STREET 507 637.2828 REDWOOD FALLS, MINNESOTA 56283 "larch 7, 1986 The Honorable Eldon Reinke, Mavor City of Shakopee City Hall 129 E 1st Ave Shakopee MN 55379 Dear Mayor Reinke: We are blitzing the State with information on the 1986 Minnesota Inventors Congress (MIC) and a new feature of the Congress, a "How To Do It Workshop" for inventors and small manufacturers. I am writing to ask for ,your help in publicizing both in your communities. Enclosed is information on all of the events. The workshop was developed as a response to a need. We discovered that many inventors and smaller manufacturers did not know how to get from the idea stage of a new product to the production and marketing stage. The process is essentially the same for both. The basics, from the invention idea to producing and marketing of the product, will be covered at the workshop. We would appreciate your help in: 1. Extending an invitation to your local manufacturers to attend the Congress and the Workshop. 2. Encouraging your local inventors to attend both events. 3. Distributing the brochures. I am writing to vou this early so that your people can plan to attend and to prepare their products and inventions for exhibit at the Congress. The theme for the 1986 Minnesota Inventors Congress is "New Dimensions in Inventions". We offer manufacturers and inventors an added dimension in developing their new products and ideas through the Congress and the Workshop. Let me Know the number of brochures that vou can use, 507-637-2828. I hope to see you at the Congress. If you have never attended one it will be well worth your while. Thank you for your help! ely, �I �t L Betty L. N]cN lty Director of Economic Development NOMINATING COMMITTEE REPORT FOR 1986 TO : AMM Member City Officials FROM: Ron Backes, Nominating Committee Chairperson RE : RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE NOMINATING COMMITTEE Pursuant to AMM By-Laws , Article IX, Section 3 , A Nominating Committee was appointed on March 6 , 1986 and the Committee is recommending the below listed persons for your consideration at the May 21st. Annual Meeting. Additional candidates may be nominated by any voting ` delegate from the floor at the Annual Meeting. FOR PRESIDENT : Robert Thistle , Manager, Coon Rapids and current AMM Vice-President FOR VICE-PRESIDENT : Neil Peterson, Councilmember, Bloomington, and present Board Director FOR BOARD DIRECTORS : TWO YEAR TERMS (Eight to be elected ) Mark Bernhardson, Administrative, Orono Nancy Enright , Councilmember, Lakeville Walt Fehst , Manager , Robbinsdale (Incumbent ) Ed Fitzpatrick, Councilmember, Fridley ( Incumbent ) Kevin Frazell, Administrator, Mendota Heights ( Incumbent ) Carol Johnson, Councilmember , Minneapolis James Lacina , Administrator , Woodbury ( Incumbent ) Gerald Marshall, Councilmember , Brooklyn Park ( Incumbent ) ONE YEAR TERM ( one to be elected ) Larry Bakken, Coucilmember, Golden Valley ( over ) BOARD MEMBERS WHOSE TERMS DO NOT EXPIRE UNTIL MAY 1987 : Mentor ( Duke ) Addicks, Jr. , Legislative Liaison , Minneapolis Gary Bastian, Councilmember , Maplewood Robert Benke , Mayor , New Brighton Eldon Reinke , Mayor , Shakopee William Saed , Mayor, Inver Grove Heights Leslie Turner, Councilmember , Edina ta' reerW ..n.n n , :.. egislative Liaise.;, St . pawl 1986 AMM NOMINATING COMMITTEE MEMBERS : Mr. Ronald Backes , Chair Ms. Diane Lynch Councilmember St. Paul City Council Liaison 3620 Independence Ave. , So. # 103 706 City Hall St. Louis Park , MN . 55426 St. Paul , MN . 55101 546-4461 298-4231 Mayor Mary Anderson 3030 Scott Ave . , No. Mr. Mark McNeill Golden Valley, MN . 55422 City Administrator 588-8578 12305 Quentin Ave . So. Savage , MN . 55378 Mayor Robert J . Benke 890-1045 679 Continental Drive New Brighton, MN. 55112 Mayor Bill Saed 779-1201 8150 Barbara Ave. Inver Grove Heights, MN. 55077 Ms. Susan Green 638-7471 Councilmember 326-114th. Ave . NW Coon Rapids, MN . 55433 755-2251 Mr. Mark Lenz City Administrator 600 Stillwater Road Mahtomedi , MN. 55115 426-3344 o�ita� •c0 ,yF �ly�N CITI�~P April 28, 1986 Judi Simac City of Shakopee 129 E. First Av. Shakopee, MN 55379-1376 RE: City of Shakopee Comprehensive Plan Amendment Review F Urban Sanitary Sewer Service Area Metropolitan Council District 14 Metropolitan Council Referral No. 12159-2 Dear Ms. Simac: The Metropolitan Council staff has reviewed Shakopee's proposed comprehensive plan amendment received by the Council on April 17, 1986. With staff input, I have determined that the proposed amendment has no potential impact upon any of the metropolitan system plans. Beyond an initial determination of no potential impact, the Council has 60 days from receipt of a proposed amendment to review and comment upon the apparent consistency of the proposed amendment with other adopted chapters of the Metropolitan Development Guide. Council staff has also completed this review and has found no inconsistencies. Enclosed is a copy of the Council's comments as they will appear on the Council's consent list for noncontroversial items. The city may place the amendment into effect at any time. Formal action by the Council will take place on May 8, 1986, completing review of the amendment. If you have any questions, please contact Paul Baltzersen, Council staff, at 291-6321 , who is the principal reviewer for this amendment. Sincerely, c Sandra S. Gardebring Chair SSG:ms Enclosure cc: Raymond J. Joachim, Metropolitan Council District No. 14 John Rutford, Metropolitan Council Staff Paul Baltzersen, Metropolitan Council Staff An Equal Opportunity Employer For Metropolitan Council Meeting I•lay 8, 1986 SHAKOPEE - Comprehensive Plan Amcrldment, Urban Sanitary Sewer Service Area, Fila No. 12159-2, District 14. The City of Shakopee is proposing to provide sewer service to two areas previously under a moratorium, Area 11 and one-half of Area 10, both located south and east of the downtown area. The service is in accord with management of sewer flow between 1981-85 as proposed in the 1981 Shakopee Comprehensive Plan. The city has managed sewer flows and has an adequate margin within the city's 1990 allocated capacity to service the additional area. In addition, the city has reduced industrial flows. The area will relieve a shortage of land for residential development. The amendment is in conformity with metropolitan system plans, consistent with other chapters of the Metropolitan Development Guide and compatible with the plans of adjacent communities. CONSEN PHDEV2 c MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator FROM: Judi Simac, City Planner RE: Appeal by Robert Novotny of Planning Commission decision on Conditional Use Permit request DATE: May 2 , 1986 Introduction• Robert Novotny has requested a Conditional Use Permit to install underground fuel storage tanks on his property at 3374 Marschall Road. After holding a public hearing on the request, the Planning Commission determined that underground fuel storage is not a permitted or conditional use in a R-1 zoning district. Additionally the Planning Commission approved a motion to not consider the conditional use permit application for the reason that to do so would be an inappropriate interpretation of the code. Mr. Novotny has appealed the decision of the Planning Commission to the City Council. Background: For information, please refer to the attached memo to the Planning Commission dated March 25 , 1986 and the minutes from the April 3 , 1986 Planning Commission meeting. The City Attorney attended the April 3 , 1986 meeting and opined that Section 11. 60 , Subd. 9 Bulk Storage ( liquid) clearly relates to above ground tanks only. Mr Novotny has submitted a letter to City Council regarding options for addressing the storage tanks which are presently in the ground. The letter is attached. Action Requested: Offer a motion which determines that underground fuel storage is not a permitted or conditional use in the R-1 zoning district and move for its adoption. Offer a motion which determines that based upon existing City Code consideration of the conditional use permit would be an inappropriate interpretation of the code, and move for its adoption. Attachments MEMO TO: Shakopee Planning Commission FROM: Judi Simac, City Planner DATE: March 25 , 1986 APPLICANT: Robert Novotny LOCATION: 3374 Marschall Road (SE 1/4 Section 30) ZONING: R-1 Rural Residential LAND USE: Single Family Home/Agricultural APPLICABLE REGULATIONS: Section 11. 60 , Subd. 9 FINDINGS REQUIRED: Section 11. 04, Subd. 6 SURROUNDING LAND USES: Farmsteads, Agricultural, Single Family Homes PUBLIC UTILITIES: Sanitary Sewer, Storm Sewer, Water Not Available PROPOSAL: The applicant is requesting a conditional use permit for bulk storage of petroleum in underground storage tanks. CONSIDERATIONS: 1. In May 1984 the applicant was cited by the building inspector for installing underground fuel tanks in the R-1 zoning district without the necessary permits. The City Planner informed the applicant that there was, and are not presently, any provisions for under ground fuel tanks in the R-1 District. 2 . The case has been dragging through the courts for the past 1 1/2 years and has come to the point where a decision by the Planning Commission is necessary. The applicant ' s attorney believes that the following language from the code allows for a conditional use permit for the underground fuel tanks: Section 11. 60 , Subd. 9 . Bulk Storage (Liquid) . All uses associated with the bulk storage of oil, gasoline, liquid fertiliizer, chemicals, and similar liquids shall require a conditional use permit in order that the governing body may have assurance that fire, explosion, or water or soil contamination hazards are not present (that would be detrimental to the public health, safety, and general welfare) . All existing above ground liquid storage tanks having a capacity in excess of ten thousand ( 10 , 000) gallons shall secure a conditional use permit within twenty-four ( 24 ) months following enactment of this Chapter. The Council may require the development of diking around said tanks. Diking shall be suitably sealed, and shall hold a leakage capacity equal to one hundred fifteen percent ( 1150) of the tank capacity. Any existing storage tank that, in the opinion of the governing body, constitutes a hazard to the public safety shall discon- tinue operations within five ( 5 ) years following enactment of this Chapter. 3 . The staff interpretation of the language is that above round fuel tanks may be installed with a conditional use permit, with diking if required. 4 . In February 1986 the City Council approved a motion "that based upon State Building, Pollution Control and Fire Prevention Codes , both the Building Official and Council agree that there will continue to be no placement of underground fuel storage tanks in the Ag and R-1 Districts. " This motion was based upon information contained in the attached staff memos which were prepared for City Council. 5 . The existing tanks consist of one 4 foot diameter steel tank for gasoline and one 4 foot diameter steel tank for diesel fuel. The tanks must be fitted with cathodic pro- tection. The use of the tanks , as stated in the application, if for an agricultural accessory use. Recommendation: Staff recommends that the conditional use permit be denied for the reasons that underground fuel storage tanks are not permitted in the R-1 zoning district and that placement of such tanks would be detrimental to the public health, safety and general welfare. Action Requested: Offer Conditional Use Permit No. 449 and move for its denial. Attachment tw i � s i' - , I I . _ ih 'Ie o 1 , f - � l it \ II I .r SUBJECT TO FINAL INSPECTION ,: 11 AND ANY CHANGES NOTED. Yl p CONTACT LOCAL FIRE AUTHORITY ' PRIOR TO PROJECT START. I MINNESOTA STATE FIRE MARSHAL j By: I Date: t. I - ---- - - -- - _ - - -� MATCH LINE _ _ ...�._. t. ..„.a• , i i , --+-- i ii {�� { I i i I • +i ' 3 i ,::• f. 1 t 20 i t � f •--- _.._.� � �, � ,< :. _ �U mss: a2 _ _.. } .. _ _ --- Wf'f NOT ACP"SA '� .�..:sYV �.CSA+' "`„� /• .�'.if� � I { - ..._ t ,u r i -- -- ..... ; _; cf o' 'to ° '�i t.4 U) I to to f-t, rf c+ o fu o o Cq v' N v' q' ' N N C3 C o 0 0 o ro o N1v -� N .i N ro :3 ro o o y �' t3' o c7 y of m m :+ >✓ U c+ r+ o ro o c1- o :oj 11 04 Ev t1 o ro to ' �' o m m c+ rF ro 1 ' m o : ti , cf' F� U S7 If 1I m ,s Co- cf m [� H 13, t� `ry d c+ I-, VI li L], N a !' m \ F'• IV N. C) �' 1'. n. cl cD F• o o �t '.3' F'. N F' Qt O fj l ro c1 tj to ro ro to I ' C) 1'• .1 cl- r1- o 0-'d c+- cf .'3 F' m 1' t/7 f'• -J(Iq ct !-' m f� :3 U to (D \. r3, 1,• EV O 13, tf cl 0'1 cf- �' ,3' J E P. O • a J H c1 -t- m F,- p. O. A, C4- C-4. C.\ (7 C» o. .3 I: (D ".1 • \, m to J O O '.3 N o 131 In O (� O m m o N N- c) (: to -y Cn Url \.a L-I p, I t y cl I y (n cl- f (r) Cq N v' ,J O 1 c+ ') ,J :f 7 1•' T r> u 1 ii p { P 1D o 11 ) Ev c I 1-' �•; iD 'd to q, ►� ;3" o m F-+• m ,7 (!q F-' F-' m (pU� m 1 j cam• F,• F� �' ,1 F,• R, • !1 U) cl. o m (D 'd N (D o N (n m Ell y _n ,1 g P. I-, m -� ro to c r F� N m \ d o c+ m I J o o' a n N ° o 'd N to c:\ P.\ ro o 0 \O tD CL Co- rJ 1-,(r) 'CI o' 11� F-'• 14 c+ P. 0 m Ul 'd P. F'• (U O tl to I� H to W J U7 C7 o r+ (3 0 t3' U 1), i 1 O U N• C) m ro rt- cf F' F o p m to I-h ro o O o (v O.14 E, u H 1,' r), (n i� P. cD t3 G � 0; 0 1 P.C4 c+- 1i o• o t)' r+ c+ o ,t N o to 1' EJ ro y << ro U1, p p' o 'd o ►1 rl va o :s H 'ti EJ m o H C F) 'd 1-' to y N Fy w c1 Iv to :f +� p to y a1 N m l,• t-, N• N n. (D (D ,S td m �: c1 EJ m In s; N c+ p' Fi ct Iv I 1� p, n• N 1J p� ► rF '- cr ;y (11 n, FF . y CL . 11 U 1-,. 1,. c+- r+ N /� P. Imo. _i 1D G Fj tR1 c+ EJ o 1 < n I-' o U' (n cn P. N N � � to I +i m H P. ' cl U 'd rl N c+'d E'+ 01 p, cf -'07 x1 P. r+ g E1 O cv ra O p N• t' c1- [L 't1 cF rl .3 In Id UD to 1f \►i N o 0 0 0 N N, o 0 1-i m H N F'• P. 1v o N � r+ G G m =1 ,. c F b m v cf• m l 1) N• cf- o y a 1--' O (D (D`F :3 t)• G n to 1-' '3' O l m • cf- a ;.1 m r+ Ilt ro 1-' m ro i N 11 P) m ' o :3. to p G sj pI I . (� (n cF :3' cf- cl- V. to :3 to F- v' c+ w t1. N e, N N• t1 I� cF f) E t+ (D ,t' Il) cF t+• t-, N m P. (Dr; to F'- t1 'd (D N 1-' O O I.A. H .� 0 Ilt F' c+ 1 1 t3' 11 O Y• CL c F to to E o I--' O y r 1 tD m ,1 O 1--' cF P. m c1-'d p7 !] c+• p :i t3 r+ c+ 1 O u• ro c+ p t3, •< o to tc7 t3' G 'd rf- F1) 0 Wp� H o P. N 'd N � F; J' Pj 1'. m n I✓ m v''d o 0' E c+(.'(t o " 0 o v' m ro m 1-' c l- ro r), c F1 1-' 11 0'1 ice• m N I J Eu N r+ t3' O 1-' :1 0 �. '.3 Ul N s: ro �' 1'• (rl O to I r+ y d P. P. 1J ,3 c t :3 O' m m cf- ro t-' to P. ro D. cf- P. 11 (o F-' to c,. m o ro P. (D (D 1-h �' O to N''g � to t h m I, to c; ro pt m H " n. to o' N ro ti 0 H m N to C F'• g o 0 (3 {{' c+ v' v' b" n ro o 0 to 11 ri o to p :1 m H tD H m tf {3 ti, m ;t' EJ to m to I P. P. O Cn ti + tt� r) m to F pt o n. ,3 to I'• ,3 t1 N N m cf p, m N- r+ tD p- o F• c+ c� N c l 1-j 1-' c 1- to U c+ rl m11 to 'd c+`< m to .'1 O .(3 m H o to c-1 1-1• N 'tJ P.Id m c+ to to to r, p, ,d (A 1-' � '� O 1-' t-' p' p, � i+ O 1-' 1i m N r pt (D 0q :3' y tb 01 N to p. ro I. ro F ' N C'1 iy P. rJ (n 1 r 1 �i (.tq to E m cD m t6 I f • .f cf- to to t-' tr N (Fj ty m 93, • O m E!• 4, F� cD cf- cf- O F' N N• cf I-' f3• lU tp p, 1-1 m a r�7 c/ I-, 1: 1-'• 1-f m o O '(1 m N N U 1 }� `,3 p in O 'd I�• r+ O .'3 'd to t� to CL ,7 t0 a cf 0 G cr- r! O l--1 ,'t> to +-', ccf. m ro No` to 0 O (0 O r- c+ O P. 0, It (m O o If t ' ' y o t1) 11 :r c43t-4) fJ• N D (F tlF to O 1✓ r+ ❑. r/- cl t 1 o n, rl Ifi IV 1� t1 (A (DN pt rt- 'i3' ct- .� p' to :3, m O �i c+- ct- m I f o 1-'• O Ul t1, 13' N C70- m h, m I (D m 1 h :3, to t]' U. O t-' c4- to in a m m r+ . m 11 c-: UI O •• `< o f m t)' m p. f f ,1 lu a' W rl- 1-,• y y :>; c1- • 'cf H o V) m 1 fu .1 U to (111 1L . 11 m G 0' l 1) cf 1' a (FI co �� 11 U t3 O ►-1) N O I-' m m O 0 F! .J 11 O E: Cn F1 cf `C F,. p, O • t) O V O 'd .3 P. 11:1 to P. p, n, r3. t) F1 tlt m c+ O c+ � N- m N Iu G (') R, 0, • • + ' ro 'd ro m cf = .s m N ! �' o t3' cf lv taf co (n o t m ca *c) t v. F 11 o K' 0 r+ to m N F- 0 tL cf ct- .d t1 pt pt o ,d c F to (n to fu C+ o to H' -c4 n o ti << to I r+ rt- rl- m 1'• r1• to I o m 3 ,3' O O O N �1) N•1,' c+ N 1 z I f O o N 0. m o :1 � to r+ C r+ (A f; c+ f' O cf- p' i) �1 ti ,I ct. >✓ rn3 11 to o +-1 t-' ° 'J to m to c+ 0 0 0 ; S t-,) •)' to t 1 1-' m t-' I-. Fi cF p, c+•c< IJ p, O n t-•j cf- P c 1. o '-; n, m 1--' m N 'IC 0' b N to +'• V • to o O cf- (lI t3, ) to r+ c+ 0' P. 7r N cf O' :3, c+ O 6 (D C) :3 to 1 r 1- (1 'd O t3' 0' m M O (o m :1 � I. 11 cf :1 IL 1 ;7' F-' O F1) m m c+ f. G o. 1 In P. P. In 1 pt c< .'1 t3 t1 t3' 1-' :�' ct- to t t-' m 0 1,• F, to c+- p, m a In :3' 4 N tm t3, t3 a, m H m , • 0 t 7, . April 28, 1986 Shakopee City Council 129 East First Avenue Shakopee, Mn. 55379 ATTENTION: John Anderson RE: Meeting with John Anderson, Robert and Catherine Novotny on April 24, 1986. Discussions with Judi Simac, Robert Novotny and John Anderson in a previous meeting was alsocovered. PURPOSE: To discuss present conditional use permit application for underground gasoline and diesel storage tanks or acceptable options. OPTIONS DISCUSSED: 1. Leave tanks as installed at present. 2. Provide annual or semi-annual pressure check readings to City of Shakopee inspection authorities. 3. Remove underground storage tanks, if and when the property is sold. This stipulation would be filed with the Scott County Recorder and recorded with other property data. This would insure removal of the tanks and the safety of the new property owners. 4. If the presently installed storage tanks are not allowed, the pending conditional use permit application and fees paid would meet requirements for any subsequent conditional use permit applications needed with no additional fees. If the annual or semi-annual pressure checks would provide greater assurance of the safety of these tanks, I agree to supply this data to the appropriate inspection authoritity, at my expense. I believe that correctly installed underground fuel storage tanks, which meet environmental and state requirement,4, provide a higher degree of safety and less pollution than the above ground storage tanks. I have met, and in some instances, exceededthe needed requirements, for the installation of the tanks on my property. I believe this would super my statements. r There are other underground fuel storage tanks in the city of Shakopee. I know the precautions I have taken to provide the necessary protection. Ideally, the area bulk storage fuel distributors should notify the city of these existing tanks, both above and underground, when any deliveries are made. Perhaps it would be necessary to check the past year's deliveries for this information. At present, the city of Shakopee has little available information regarding the existence of these tanks. Unless complaints are received, it appears these tanks and the property owners are undisturbed. Shakopee City Council Page 2 The present ordinances relating to these tanks are confusing and contradictory. There appears to be few city employees who are knowledgeable and familiar with the proper installation and maintenance of such tanks. In attempting to arrive at a mutually agreeable solution to the present dilemma, this became evident. We know these tanks are being installed within the city and county. Property owners who are installing thse tanks have not been informed of the city ordinances relating to these tanks. In some instances, real estate brokers and agents are not relating the correct regulations. Perhaps these individuals should also be informed. This current situation has been costl„v in lost time from work, added expense from soil testin€ and other related costs. I would be happy to supply these cost break downs to the city, if required. It is my hope the Council members would adress ar*, questions regarding this to me. I will respond to any inquiry raised, for I believe I have met all requirements. Sincerely, Robert G. Novotny 3374 S. Marschall Road Shakopee, n. 55379 Telephone; "5-2000 MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator FROM: Judi Simac, City Planners RE: Final plat recisions DATE: May 2 , 1986 Introduction• The City Code, Section 12. 03 , Subd. 4F states that the City Council may rescind the approval of a final plat if the plat is not filed within 180 days after approval. At this time there are four plats which have had the approval time expire. Background: The plats are: Eagle Creek Junction lst Addn. Canterbury Park lst Addn. Fox Run lst Addn. Canterbury Apartments lst Addn. The developers of the plats have all been contacted and informed of the Council discussion regarding recision of approval. Each one has also explained to staff where the plat is in regard to the filing process. All are working out the final details of the Developer ' s Agreement or awaiting receipt of the Title Opinion. Recommendation: Staff recommends that final plat approval for the four plats be extended for 45 days. Action Reauested: Offer a motion to extend the final plat approval of the following plats for forty-five days or until June 20 , 1986: Eagle Creek Junction lst Addn. Canterbury Park lst Addn. Fox Run lst Addn. Canterbury Apartments lst Addn. MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator FROM: Judi Simac, City Planner RE: Racetrack District Concept Plan #3 DATE: May 5 , 1986 Introduction: on April 24 , 1986 the Planning Commission held a public hearing on the proposed Racetrack District Concept Plan #3 . After closing the public hearing, the Planning Commission approved a motion to recommend to the City Council approval of Concept Plan #3 as presented by the study committee. In addition the Planning Commission recommended: 1. All property in the study area that is south of 4th Avenue, east of CSAH 17 , north of CSAH 16 and west of CR 83 be required to develop according to planned unit development (PUD) ordinance. 2 . The Parrott property, currently zoned I-1 Light Industrial, be placed in the Racetrack District (both parcels) . Attached are the unapproved minutes of the public hearing. Background- Several issues were raised at the public hearing which should be brought to the attention of the City Council: 1. Transportation Systems Questions were raised regarding the design change of the intersection at CR 83 and the By-Pass. Additional R-O-W will be required in the northeast corner of the interchange. The MnDOT must officially approve the geometries of the interchange. Although the plan has been presented to the County Board, with generally favorable reaction, the County Engineer has belatedly raised questions on traffic flow, volume and the use of Secretariat Drive as a major through street. Mr. Larson feels that the study is proceeding too quickly and that transporation systems are not being adequately addressed. 2 . Use of P.U.D. Ordinance The racetrack study committee has continually supported the concept of P.U.D. for land development in the Racetrack District. The draft ordinance will be discussed at their May 5th meeting. The Planning Commission recommended the use Of P.U.D. for a land area beyond the racetrack district. If all of the land area were undeveloped this could probably work, however there is an existing mix of developed and undeveloped property and land owners are unsure as to how they are affected. Most presume that they could develop under the existing zoning without further development reviews . At this time staff recommends that Council not put this additional restric- tion on the property outside of the RTD. However further discussion of an overlay P.U.D. zoning district should not be ruled out for the future. 3 . Parrott Property The Parrott property is presently zoned I-1 and not shown within the Racetrack District. The Concept Plan places the property in the Mixed Residential Use District. Existing light industrial uses along CSAR 16 are all affected by the concept plan, whether they' re in the RTD or MR. As Council has previously stated, all zoning map lines should follow property lines as best as possible. The Council will have to determine whether they are comfortable creating some non-conforming uses with the plan or if they want to address each property and zone it to a district most compatible with the present use. Attached is the property boundary map from the Needs Statement. 4 . Koskovich Property Representatives . of Mr. and Mrs. Koskovich have submitted a letter to City Council for consideration. (See attached) . They request the Council to: A. Assure them that commercial recreation will remain a use in the light industrial district. B. Amend the RTD to include 10 acres in the Southwest corner of their property. C. Reject the Planning Commission recommendation to create a P.U.D. requirement which will affect their property. 5 . Other Property Owner ' s Comments: a. Knights of Columbus - would like to be in a zoning district which would allow them to expand. b. Scottland, Inc. - Request their B-1 land not be included in the RTD. C. Danny' s Construction - agree they should be in the RTD but are concerned about opportunity to expand the business. Recommendation: Staff recommends that the City Council accept the recommen- dations of the Planning Commission regarding Racetrack District Concept Plan #3 . It is also recommended that before the City Council officially adopts the plan, the MnDOT should officially review and approve the revised interchange at County Road 83 and the By-Pass . In the meantime, the Racetrack Study Committee will work on the draft language for the ordinance. A public hearing, to be conducted by the Planning Commission, will be held on May 22nd to hear comments on the proposed amendments . Action Requested: 1. Motion to accept the Planning Commission recommendations on the Racetrack District Concept Plan #3 , and move for its adoption. 2. Offer Resolution No. 2550 A Resolution Authorizing the submittal of Racetrack District Concept Plan #3 to the Minnesota Dept. of Transportation for review and approval of the revised interchange at CR 83 and the By-Pass. Attachments tw ^'T ir. S7- .iC� �:P�'. _:� ^rT n.,; _��T.., L4, 1.`Jj'?6 Chairman (^zaja called the meeting to order at 7:35 p.m. with "ommissioners T,ane, Pomerenke, VanMaldeghem, Rockne and 7oudray present. Commissioner Cchmitt arrived at 7:45 p.in . Also present were ,Tudi Simac, .^ity Planner and John Anderson, City Administrator. Rockne/':-,an"v^aldeghem moved to approve the agenda as published. motion carried unanimously. +TanMaldeghem/Pomerenke moved to open the public hearing to consider a. plan which establishes a Racetrack Development District for land use in the vicinity of C-.nterbury Downs. ':'lotion carried unanimously. Fred Hoisington, City Consultant for the racetrack development area, reviewed the background of what has been done .and the kinds of changes that have taken place as a result of the racetrack. he ultimate goal is to try and establish a reasonable relationship between uses that are already there and uses that are yet to come. The study area that is being looked at is bounded on the a south by County Road 16, on the west by County Road 17, on the north by Hwy 101 and on the east by Valley Park Drive. Most all the land in the center is currently zoned light industrial. The future by—pass will be constructed south of the racetrack and will have an interchange at county road 83 which will carry 25,000 vehicles per day. Two alternative plans have been developed: 1 . To keep things the wain they are right now. 2. To move the interchange at County Road 83 over to County Road 16, this would r.e3rerse the traffic patterns as it exists today. Irlhen it was suggested to move interchange at County Road 83 to 16 Pill DOT was concerned because it would disrupt the funding for the by—pass, as a result a plan had to be developed by blending the two plans and come up with a 'Land use scheme that reflected the second alternative and a circula— tion system that did not reflect such a great chanID ge as to have funding delayed. Plan No. 3 has now been developed by blending the two alternatives. Concept Plan 3 attempts to create a racetrack district which will include all the racetrack itself and expands the racetrack district on the future Shenandoah Drive around the south end of the track and up to County Road 83. This plan would change the land north of the racetrack to light industrial in :;lace of the heavy industrial currently zoned, all light industrial on both sides of Shenandoah Drive would remain the same, all heavy industrial that is north of 4th would remain the same, the areas along 4th avenue and south of 4th avenue currently zoned multi—family and industrial would become multi—family and area south of parkway would be mixed residential. e I I P7`7`7", pril 24, 198 6 rage -2- The traffic flow as it now stands is Shenandoah Drive carries about 25;4 of all cars coming to the racetrack today which is now gate 4, gate 3 carries 5/,, gate 2..carries 25;'u and gate 1 carries 45`;'x. In the future about 75 to W.4 of traffic will be coming in from the southwest as opposed to the 45; to 501; now coming in. Commissioner Schmitt asked how much work had been done in defining these boundaries relative to property lines. Mr. Hoisington replied that an ordinance is now in the process of being developed which will define a precise boundary that deals with property lines. Commission Foudray asked what effect the plan would have on the operations of the KC 'Hall. Mr. Hoisington replied that the KC Hall is not incompatible to this area and that they are acceptable uses for this area. Don Parrott, Eagle Creek Blvd. , raised the question as to why put more residential along 16., he would like to see his land stay zoned the same as it is now which is light industrial or commercial he does not want his land rezoned to multi-family. Carl Lindstrand, Bloomington, stated that there is quite a bit of rock in that area along 16 and to put single family homes in there the cost would be prohibited. Multi family would be more economical than single family homes. Mr. O'Brien, owner of Danny's Construction asked how this rezoning would affect his property. The City Planner said that it could be considered a light industrial as light industrial is allowed within the racetrack district. Commission Schmitt stated that he strongly favors a PUD (Planned Unit Development) concept within this entire zone which allows a different set of rules and flexibility than what we presently have today to deal with. Tim :Manning, Shakopee, asked 'now the intermixing of these particular uses within the racetrack area could be controlled. Mr. 'Hoisington replied that each proposal that comes to the city will be looked at on a case by case basis. Peter Beck, on behalf of Joe oskovich, asked why Joe's property should be excluded from the racetrack district. Discussion ensued on moving the lire placement to the other side of the trees, the light industrial zoning restriction is what is their concern now. Commissioner pockne stated that it is not only the tree line but also there is a °rade change.: Splitting the property half and half might also be a solution. '_prig 24, 192-` -Dag- e -3- c ,� ['oadray/Rockne moved for a 15-minute recess. "otion carried unanimously. Chairman Cza.ja called the meeting back to order at 9:15 p.m. Tim Keen, 91cottland companies, 5244 valley industrial Blvd. thanked the 2ommittee and staff for their efforts in identifying the issues of concern. Pe also addressed a few concerns that Scottland COMpany has on this race- track district zoning, one being actual district boundaries in regards to the property known as Canterbury Park 2nd ,Addition presently zoned B1 . cottland Company asks that presently zoned B1 property remain zoned at B1 and not be down zoned. Discussion ensued on permitted uses within a B1 zone, and such uses being horse auction, horse racing, commercial recreation, printing publishing facilities for the track itself and parking and appropriate signage where necessary. VanMaldeghem/Schmitt moved to close the public hearing. Motion carried unanimously. Schmitt/Pomerenke moved to recommend favorable adoption by the City Council that the concept plan 43 as presented to us by the study committee be accepted. Discussion ensued on the light industrial zone just north of the racetrack, south of 4th Avenue and west of County Road 83 that stands out. Commissioner Schmitt strongly supports the PUD concept for the entire area of Concept Plan 3 study area which is county road 17 on the west, county road 83 on the north, and county 16 on the south but nothing to the east of county road 83, nothing to the west of 17 and nothing to the south of 16. Foudray/Schmitt amended the motion that all property units south of 4th Street, north of County Road 16, East of 17, and West of 83 per concept plan 43 be put into the PUD action. Main motion carried with Comm. Pomerenke opposed. Amendment to the motion carried unanimously. ',anMaldeghem/Sc'nmitt moved that the Parrott property currently zoned light industrial remain in the racetrack district, and that the Parrott property not be divided. Motion carried unanimously. Schmitt/'TaxiMaldeghem moved that the current Shakopee Zoning Ordinance Chapter 11 definition within the ordinance referring to. class 1 and class 2 restaurants be amended and appropriate ordinance references under zoning be amended to bring them into conformance with the city's current definitions for restaurants with liquor licenses and that they be put into separate definitions that are more appropriate. notion carried unanimously. Foudray/.Schmitt moved to adjourn the meeting at 10:22 p.m. Motion carried unanimously. May 2, 1986 Shakopee City Council Shakopee City Hall Shakopee , Minnesota Re : Proposed Race Track District Plan t Dear Council Members : This letter is written on behalf of our clients Joe and Muriel Koskovich, owners of 80 acres of land in the southwest quadrant of the intersection of Fourth Avenue and County Road 83 . We ask that the City Council consider the requests in this letter at its May 6 meeting when it reviews the proposed Race Track District Land Use Plan ( the RTD Plan) . The proposed Race Track Ordinance ( the RTD Ordinance ) is of great interest to Joe and Muriel Koskovich. They have been following the City' s studies and reports with respect to the race track area for the past two years. Mr, and Mrs . Koskovich have supported the preparation of the race track district land use study. This letter is written to express their interest and recommendations about the RTD Plan and the proposed ordinances which would implement it . The City' s consultant recommends that the City approve the RTD Plan prior to preparing various amendments to the City zoning code which will implement the Plan. Zoning code amendments currently contemplated include the preparation of a new RTD Ordinance , a new PUD ordinance and possible revisions to other portions of the zoning code including those dealing with the light industrial district. It is very difficult for land owners such as Mr. and Mrs . Koskovich to know whether to support the RTD Plan without knowing what uses will be allowed in the race track district zone and without any definite information or assurances as to what will be allowed on their property if it is downzoned to light industrial . The RTD Plan recommends that the entire Koskovich property be excluded from the Race Track District and downzoned from its existing heavy industrial to light industrial uses . The Koskovich land is the only property in the City which directly abutts both the race track and major roadways but is excluded from the Race Track District . The rationale is that the trees (planted by Joe Koskovich years ago) along Shakopee City Council May 2 , 1986 Page 2 the southern boundary of the Koskovich property are a good buffer for the protection of the race track ; and that the industrial users to the north of the Koskovich property must be protected against uses which might adversely affect their properties . These suggestions seem unfair to Mr. and Mrs . Koskovich, particularly in light of the fact that Joe planted the trees on the south edge of his property to improve the appearance of his property and for better soil conservation management , and that Joe and Muriel Koskovich owned their property for years before the surrounding industrial and race track development occurred . Furthermore, Joe and Muriel strongly disagree with the consultants conclusion that the industrial users make their property undesirable for human habitation or commercial use . They have lived next to these industrial uses since they were developed and have not found them to be as offensive as the consultant suggests . Commercial recreation uses are permissible in the City' s heavy and light industrial districts . If the Koskovich property is rezoned from heavy industrial to light industrial , commercial recreational uses should continue to be permitted on their property. However, commercial recreation type uses will usually support some additional limited and related commercial type development. Joe and Muriel request that a small portion of their property be zoned to permit that possibility. Therefore , they request the Council to: 1 . Assure them that commercial recreation uses , as now defined and interpreted by the City , will continue to be uses in the light industrial district that is proposed for their property. 2. Modify the RTD Plan to include in the Race Track District approximately ten acres in the southwest corner of the Koskovich property. ( See attached map. ) This property is furthest removed from the industrial uses to the north and in fact is further from heavy industrial uses than some portions of the proposed Race Track District. It would be a portion of their property on which commercial uses related to commercial recreational uses could be developed . 3. Reject the Planning Commission' s recommendation that the light industrial portion of the Koskovich property be subject to a new PUD overlay zoning requirement . The PUD approval process is not being imposed on any other industrial land in the City and we believe it is arbitrary and unreasonable to subject only the .T LI N DG RE , 1-TIL). A i l .-\V Shakopee City Council May 2 , 1986 Page 3 Koskovich property to the potential costs involved . Certainly the Council can understand the effect that this added requirement would have on the marketability of the Koskovich land for light industrial uses when competing with other industrial land in the City not subject to this requirement. We believe that the three requests above are reasonable . Mr. and Mrs . Koskovich have chosen not to oppose the Race Track District study even though it excludes their property from the Race Track District. They prefer to work with the City and request your action on the three requests set forth above . We will be present at the meeting on May 6 to discuss these issues further and answer any questions . Sincerely,, Robert L. Hoffman Peter K. Beck , for LARKIN, HOFFMAN, DALY & LINDGREN, Ltd . vm PKB:AH5 0 —��`.� I� `:fir.- — - - ----``,_ -_---=_ . — ' - -- - -::::,: '�•, NT j�,..,-:.µa�H� Yom• � - 5KJ 1"EEL i 7NuUD�K►�K � . cofLe " YC � uEPi ie VIKIIJLi 4L I, T \ L°twflp li✓uZMEIER GEMZTr tom( ! ° WRO►Y�KI. �I Hory.s p F( EMouT- BJOI�KLU►1D kl r\ IIID. pEVE PYIEu ° I�oSK�VIG 1WIU arT LIUK iup5Tr�ud .,.. C<T►1( - vku /' FeLE v heIDL GNRIhTVkN ... HCIUSE n ' �bHIN 1P .. LEUZMgIE(L .,... ,. _.__ - .........°.^t�, ,., t.Ld f� GJSM y T ,. LOL�P'IAf 1 PRAKI-X HOLL ~� lmallPLr✓ � f.4►xfE�t✓uRY G+�W D� RuwEti ..� ov�UeRS� ......... v.iu. vu ��. 6(HfIzT.E(Z ., a. a 7 o. 1 10T Z 1 MuL lfa, y� Nva NlCS �u °�O j iScatTLi.uD -- OWNER LAND COMMITMENTS 14 NOISNGTDN GROUP INC. RACETRACK DISTRICT UDY BRAUER a AssoaaTE4.LTD. LAND—USE ST LI LI - MF ..... c Time MF r Rl �� HI a HSC P MR ! Yl ire• r - j o.. `� 4yti L�T� �• IV Plawvalbn 1 ~s•, Ad / RID H O �' I i. L. O { xn _L Y: Meld RealdenHal Icwr..,—1 is ue.,ro..elwe...,♦p••a,.nl.l � �`\^ ,�yn. IkWglH�Ul�Q;� /yam/Il%Il%I/O/ /G.�//ia/////a/�//ai//aiaioa� M mil ufll-Fay caxsc t38F8It1 - Convenlenca 8 Mghway Ser•.k:a CommercWl - Racetrack Dlatrkt __ ------ tm I �'� CONCEPT PLAN 3 w _ - Heavy Induatrlel , scI HSC ° - Ughl Industrial - Pork - I �llWlWil1W 1( 1 xowx0rox oaouY Ixc RACETRACK D14T�11Ci x anauen a•asoal7ea 170. LAND-US(fTVbT oP toed-Pihh. .... ..e �ti�..� Resolution No. 2550 A Resolution Authorizing the Submittal of Racetrack District Concept Plan #3 to the Minnesota Department of Transportation for Official Review and Approval of the revised interchange at County 83 and the T.H. 101 By-Pass WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Shakopee, on December 17 , 1985 authorized the hiring of Hoisington Group Inc. , to conduct a land use study of the area surrounding the Canterbury Downs Racetrack, the purpose of said study to determine whether a racetrack development district should be established, and; WHEREAS, A Racetrack District Land Use Study Needs Statement was prepared by Hoisington Group Inc, which contains initial findings and conclusions , a statement of planning objectives , an assessment of commercial land demand to 1995 , a list of uses which would be compatible with the racetrack and supportive of the industrial park, and an existing conditions narrative, and; WHEREAS, on March 20 , 1986 the City Council and the Planning Commisison held a joint public hearing to receive comments on two proposed land use concept plans ( Concept Plan #1 and Concept Plan #2) , and; WHEREAS, on March 25 , 1986 the two concept plans were presented to the Scott County Board for review and comment and; WHEREAS, on April 24th 1986 the Planning Commission conducted a public hearing to receive comments on the Racetrack District Concept Plan #3 , which proposes a Racetrack District development zone and a revision to the planned interchange at County Road 83 and the future T.H. 101 By-Pass. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED BY THE City Council of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota that Racetrack District Concept Plan #3 be submitted to the Minnesota Department of Transporation for official review and approval of the revised interchange at County Road 83 and the future T.H. 101 By-Pass. Adopted in session of the City Council of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota, held this day of 1986 . Mayor of the City of Shakopee ATTEST: City Clerk Approved as to form this day of 1986 . City Attorney RE III \\\ , ,['_ ��D• LI LI <<., HI .,w MF - .w. C � MF . -Tree Pres rvatlGn i - HI do I :•�� I�eYv.-,�i+ w.tt�.:.� .�9 n.��i �" � �..:::..Tree �^ �• ��_ � ' � I-ISC % MR — �.3 •� `(P ; �.... io pm 7� RTD HI N , G J.' MC KEY: o•m.nwv c...— .. MR • iitiiirit�r -////l///l/l//tel/l//l//////l//l//l/./1/ - Mixed Residential Icw.r.r,i.ro to un•,Tawnnouu.,Ap.remnbl 1 �J wF. - Mufti-Family cense � I -_- nnnsmt - Convenience&Highway Service Commercial Rro _ Racetrack Dlstrk t NI _ CONCEPT PLAN 3 Heavy - , ,• SC HSC I u - Light Industrial RACETRACK E •c i + 1 I NOMNOTON GROUP INC. v .c • Park . �. I fiiWllilfllil f[ DISTRICT .. .._,_ wno• .w ,_, N eneuen a ssocuTTs Im LAND-LIS S U Y P �f• 'f n Z �N`iM"gK` �a':° -j.-_ a\I' _ r � _ '•t,[y' • • ...1 1 1 t 1 � - _ y s � --•--_-.. �-._, r-' 1-•;� -.i«_.__-�--- J.�r�"��'S 121 I !.. �.,• .. 111 :� v K.: .�. Yf nr .C.J✓. v.y. r. �.' �'6/ /1. ... ..'.�J•}�°.i FF _ - M #/0 C . MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator FROM: Judi Simac, City Planner RE: Metropolitan Development and Investment Framework(MDIF) DATE: May 5 , 1986 Introduction• The Metropolitan Council has distributed a revised draft of the MDIF which supposedly represents a reorganization and fine tuning of the draft circulated in October 1985 . Met Council indicates that the revised draft is based upon comments received in 17 public meetings and numerous letters from local governments, agencies and organizations. The public hearing on this document is scheduled for Thursday, May 15 , 1986 from 3 : 00 to 5 : 00 P.M. and 7 : 00 to 9 : 00 P.M. at Met Council in St. Paul. We have recently been informed that two more public hearing dates are being scheduled and that the official "close" of the hearing will be July 15 , 1986 . Attached is a summary of the draft MDIF, prepared by the Metropolitan Council. Any Council member who wishes to receive a copy of the complete document should contact me. Background: The purpose of this memo is to point out the issues in the MDIF which affect Shakopee and to update the City Council on the lobbying effort of the Southwest Area Planner ' s Committee. A. Draft MDIF 1. Forecasts: One of the most obvious changes in the draft is the increase in the population, household and employment forecasts for Shakopee. Household Population Employment 1980 1990 2000 1980 1990 2000 1980 1990 2000 _st Draft 10-85 3226 4110 4600 9941 12, 100 13 , 100 5000 8000 9000 nd Draft 3226 4300 4900 9941 12 ,500 13 , 900 5000 8000 10 , 000 4-86 Most communities had an increase in the forecasts. Although our projections are reasonable, at issue is the methodology for determining the numbers and how they will be used. Forecasts should be developed to show ranges (rather than a single number for each community) to allow for substantial growth which can be triggered by a developer ' s decision, the location of a regional facility or the market. In addition, the Southwest Planner ' s group is taking the position that forecasts should be developed at a sub-regional service area level. Systems such as sewers and transportation are closely tied to development, with many communities dependent on one treatment facility or highway corridor. Subregional forecasts would place less emphasis on the numbers for an individual community and focus on the service area of a given system. 2 . Status as a Freestanding Growth Center The document designates Shakopee to continue to be a free standing growth center. The distinctions of a F.G.C. is that it is physically separated from the larger urban area by undeveloped land, it has an employment base that provides work for the local population and offers a full range of services for a variety of urban land uses. Policy statement #14 states that the Met Council will support residential, commercial and industrial development in F.G. C. , however because they are a microcosm of the Metropolitan Area, investments in the metro systems serving the F.G. C. will be made on the same basis used for investments in the fully developed and developing areas. This policy has raised the question, Does the City desire to remain a freestanding growth center? Lobbyists for the Scott County Transportation Coalition believe that funding for the 18 Bridge is affected by the F.G.C. classification. They believe that there is no longer any undeveloped area between Shakopee and the communities across the river and that because we share the Blue Lake Treatment facility we are not a separate microcosm. The City Council has been requested by the Coalition to respond to the question on remaining a F.G. C. 3 . Investment Priorities The philosophy of the MDIF is that the next twenty years will be a period of slow growth and aging of the baby boom. The goal is to manage resources and promote efficient, orderly growth. A priority system has been developed for the investment of funds in the four systems: airports, parks, sewers and transpor- tation. Highest priority is redevelopment in the developed area, with a concentration on economic devel- opment. Lowest priority is residential development. The investment priorities will affect Shakopee signifi- cantly for transportation, because maintenance and D ci replacement of existing investments overrides new projects. Additionally Met Council plays a role in highway planning (although MnDOT constructs and maintains) and Capital Improvment planning. 4 . Regional Business Concentrations The document has established Regional Business Concen- trations which are areas that are good locational choices for businesses and industries that don' t want to be in the metro area, but still want regional highway access, transit potential, railroad trackage and employment base. The criteria for Regional Business concentrations are employment of 10 , 000 or more, or retail sales of 100 million or more. The City Council may want to look further into this designation and it ' s advantages. The Policy on Regional Business Concentrations provides support of continued growth and increased densities and investment priority second only to Metro centers for maintenance of metropolitan systems. B. Southwest Area Planner' s Committee The group is revising the position statement as it relates to the new draft. We are addressing equity of the investment priority system, the flexibility of capital improvement programs for regional infrastructure, the forecast system and the Regional Business Concentration areas. Because there was not full agreement on the use of Brauer and Nowlin for the lobby effort, we have interviewed and selected John Boland, a former Metropolitan Council Chair. Mr. Boland is also involved with the lobby effort for the 18 Bridge, but the group felt there was no conflict of interest in representing us. We will be focusing on 3 or 4 major policies which need changed or further clarification in the documents. Boland feels we have a good change, because unlike the north or east communities, we are very organized and directed. One of our achievements thus far was getting the extension on the public hearing dates. The final position statement will be brought back to City Council for review. Action Requested: Discussion of the MDIF, particularly the freestanding growth center and regional business concentration issues. Direct staff to prepare comments to be presented at the public hearing on behalf of the City of Shakopee. Attachment tw MX TROPOLITAN COUNCIL Suite 300, Metro Square Building, St. Paul, Minnesota 55101 SUMMARY METROPOLITAN DEVELOPMENT AND INVESTMENT FRAMEWORK The Metropolitan Development and Investment Framework establishes an overall policy for supporting development with major regional facilities, like sewers and highways, and sets a general direction for future development patterns in the Metropolitan Area. It establishes priorities for investments in regional facilities and procedures for achieving the framework's goals. The framework replaces two other development guide chapters--the Metropolitan Development Framework, adopted in 1975, and the Metropolitan Investment Framework, adopted in 1977. The development framework focused on guiding growth into a compact development pattern to make it more economical to provide services like sewers and transit. The investment framework focused on monitoring the fiscal status of regional agencies to help carry out the development framework policies. The Metropolitan. Development and Investment Framework represents a shift from focusing on population growth and providing new regional facilities to carefully managing regional resources--governmental revenue and regional facilities. The Metropolitan Area is not expected to grow as fast as in the past, largely because of changing population patterns. The region's large post- World War II "baby-boom" generation, born between 1947 and 1966, triggered a very large demand for jobs, housing, goods and services. But the subsequent generation is much smaller, and that means less of a demand for regional facilities, such as sewers and highways, to serve new residential development. Regional facilities will remain important, however, to keep economic centers in the region vital and growing. Maintenance of such facilities is important because many of them are getting old and will require increased repair and replacement. As a result, the framework places the highest investment priority on maintaining and replacing facilities already in place, first to support economic development and second, to serve residential development. The framework places a lower priority on constructing new regional facilities, but new facilities supporting economic development will be emphasized over those serving residential development. Like the 1975 development framework, the Metropolitan Development and Investment Framework divides the region into a metropolitan urban service area and a rural service area. Improvements in the regional systems for sewers, transportation, parks and airports would be made to meet the needs of people living in the urban service area. Central sewers would not be extended into the rural service area; highway projects would not open new land to development; fixed-route transit would not be available in the rural area. A major goal for the rural service area is to preserve agriculture because the best long-term use for much of the region's land is agriculture. Within the metropolitan urban service area are the following geographic policy areas: The metro centers are basically the Minneapolis and St. Paul downtown areas. The regional business concentrations are areas that have a large employment base, such as office complexes, or produce a large sales volume, such as regional shopping centers. These two geographic policy areas have the highest priority for regional facility investments. The fully developed area is the built-up, centrally located portion of the region, including the central cities of Minneapolis and St. Paul and many adjacent suburbs. The developing area is the part of the region lying within the metropolitan urban service area that is planned for new development to the year 2000. The freestanding growth centers are the urban centers located in the rural portion of the region. They are similar to communities within the urban service area in that they have a full range of services and are thus able to accommodate a full range of land uses. The rural service area includes the following geographic policy areas: The commercial agricultural area consists of land certified eligible for designation as agricultural preserves by local governments under the Metropolitan Agricultural Preserves Act. The general rural use area is the area outside the urban service area that contains a wide variety of land uses, including farms, residential development and facilities that mainly serve urban residents, like regional parks and mining sites. The rural centers are small cities that used to serve primarily as retail and transportation centers for surrounding agricultural areas but now are home to many residents who work in the urban area and the location for many industries with few ties to agriculture. The framework also includes procedures governing the Council's decision-making for regional investments and development proposals submitted to it for review. The five-step process involves 1) determining whether there is a regional need for the investment or facility, 2) determining the regional benefits from the project, 3) ranking the investments according to priorities established by the framework for different geographic policy areas, 4) developing a financing plan and 5) reviewing economic and fiscal impacts. The Council will also consider several factors in its decisions about regional facility investments--equity, efficiency, use of external funds, use of public financing mechanisms and use of public revenue sources. The framework calls for the Council to prepare a metro investment review report that examines how well its decisions on individual proposals reflect its overall regional priorities. The Council will forward the report to the state legislature. The Council will also produce a fiscal profile report that examines the expenditures, revenues and debt of various levels of government in the Metropolitan Area. In addition, the Council will develop a series of indicators to enable it to determine the soundness of the region's fiscal health. The framework establishes guidelines that provide direction to the Council's systems for developing the more detailed policies and programs contained the individual system plans--for example, sewers, highways, parks, airports and solid waste. It also sets up a procedure, known as the metro governance process, for carrying out the guidelines through the actions of the regional commissions, including the Regional Transit Board and the Metropolitan Waste Control Commission. The metro governance process also identifies the responsibilities of the Council and the regional agencies. The Council's relationship with local government is the subject of a third set of procedures. These procedures focus on how to resolve issues that result from changes in a local government's expectations about its own growth. The procedures deal with: - Updating the Council's plans for regional systems in response to new census data; - Making changes in the metropolitan urban service area boundary; - The Council's review of major amendments to local comprehensive plans; - Resolving conflicts in between a local community's comprehensive plan and its zoning ordinances; - Sharing information about a community's planning process with other governmental units; and - Sharing the cost of providing regional facilities with local governments. To support the framework, the Council intends to do several things. It will establish a monitoring program to help determine whether its decisions and those of other regional agencies and local governments are working toward framework goals. The Council will also compile information about the need for maintaining regional facilities and how those needs may reduce funds available for expanding those facilities. Another area the Council will explore is the potential for alternative sources of funding for regional facilities. They could include new metropolitan-wide sources, local-government contributions, private sources or a combination of these sources. In addition, the Council will further study the concept of regional business concentrations, including the criteria for defining them, and consider whether growth should be directed within the concentrations--for example, in clusters or along highways. The Council will clarify what comprehensive plan amendments and supporting information communities must submit to the Council for review. It will also expand the framework to provide directions to the Council's human services programs based on major trends affecting the region, including the growing need for job retraining, the persistence of poverty and the slowdown in growth. April 1986 Publication No. 640-86-049 r r MEMO TO: City Council FROM: Mayor Eldon Reinke RE: Enforcement of Two Hour Parking Limits Downtown DATE: April 29 , 1986 Introduction The Mayor contacted me on April 29th and ask that I place memo on the agenda for him regarding the above mentioned subject. The Mayor has been contacted by LaVina Busacker representing the senior citizens who indicated that the two hour limit will cause problems with current senior citizen programming at First National Bank and the Senior Citizen Highrise. Background ' The Council approved the attached memorandum at its last Council meeting. The Mayor has requested that Council examine its directive to the Police Department to enforce the two hour limit based upon the concerns expressed by senior citizens. The Mayor and Tom Brownell both indicate that there may be other factors to consider once additional people become aware of our plan for strict enforcement. Summary Discuss the attachment memorandum regarding enforcement of the two hour parking limit downtown to determine precisely what level of enforcement Council desires. JKA/jms r TO: MAYOR, COUNCIL MEMBERS :'ROM: TOM BROWNELL, CH-7,-,,r OF POLICE RE: DOWNTOWN PARKING DATE: APRIL 6 , 1986 INTRODUCTION Council request for parking lo-_ enforcement in downtown area. BACKGROUND Persons using parking lots - downtown business people (owners/employees) , business customers, Commuters , and DSCnS ll � ?" ing in apartments 1n r business district. Present Parking Availibility: Hotel lot, 2nd & Lewis - 2 hour , 8 . 00 - 6 . 00 _ a .m .m. 2nd Ave. & Fuller St. - 2 hour , 8 : 00 a.m. - 6 : 00 n.m. Bube= Building - 2 hour , 8 : 00 . - 6 . 0 0 Rear `of City Hall - 2 4 hour _ Rear of Bramb_lla ' s - 24 hour A_1 loos have pe=- park_ng -cc -o n reside-:s . Ile rec' _a:_Cns Bila _ire C_^. ' -v ✓arking exceed-ng 2 ho::_s are mile :wc) .C's c ie _.,^_ ^_S_de C = _=sA,Ve-nu e. to CC :..__�. _� r.'la CC'v,"�O'v'^ area to me_-chants and Commutee=s by means of rile Chamber news le mer, and Valley News =ricr zo cc=enc_ng en fcr,erne � //0- Sibyl IfOGOSSIT 2nd and Lewis Street • Shakopee, Minnesota 55379 (612) 445-3735 To cf- C., kj A c Ar z) 4 m, r c---a Ar lark ( / h C : Jr y, /0c, r�",vr� d tJ 02- nK Iav C'j r4 Cl C r i~ G( !01 / r� Q ado ca f f O U 'A d 7— W C/ / IiL r a� /V u �✓ c'sig D /U ay c� r r a r r 7 / r e aP J v /� `r i^ GC U✓t <Z;Pb)- d4 a r/t+ a ✓e ct d1 Cl l' r v (p r a r U n o2 r Q v C 1 e 1 G I^ r -A Cs:.✓ A o� �^ � r 1�� Cy fit J' l'� � C /j f o �`!^ � �, C a �t c../a / � h cx r� �� rvt o'✓� T� ,, r < < C' v" , a .- f / r A w a r v c° y j at r U ,,i /L .✓ e �7 1 y i .s T c p-JA r/ Arm r ( �J �f� f (� J`/ a I r t' `1 / t� /� cf C c.2 V O 7'c C` CA/ i J J 1ej` I.II-K/r t ! a` L, /'d r,✓.i o f r t4 c v f Ae a✓ jj U rt V r vi / r a+ ,/� Gir/"Gt' ! atC� f�y r ✓ T 7� i C v J :�v K tt ✓ �Z r °c.� / c� r C- ovc /! l c✓ r e- C T G !/ exA. /> rr /' if r r4 �u 7� oZ .mss/ t Q f J d de S r f r< d •fC ) o f r a .c a tJ r rr tJ J C y Sibyl IrOGGIAT �i 2nd and Lewis Street • Shakopee. Minnesota 55379 (612) 445-3735 �v DC t, /J v / /QP/ ��/ I�O � f C, •'`��r.I rf' �. � C . f �9c.c 1� r c u vv` v V C/ C if J .�G r� i /^ O� t` L�f M ( / 6-1 [ o G :i i G^/ fI ✓ l f� ��c J f c{ � R ✓`r a/f d u 7c j T �r ✓ c A J r"r c( e, r r i J c r, h,a vin G+ I" i �, / f C: A G' i✓ J G f� r /51 vu S ✓ S t.r Cf ✓` <,� u f`/` �i '^ v"l �v rs +��� d �e f v/ c/ � MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator FROM: Judith S. Cox, City Clerk RE: Liquor License Dram Shop Insurance DATE: April 25 , 1986 Introduction In response to a petition received by Council on April 15th, Council directed staff to contact some metropolitan municipalities to learn what amount of dram shop insurance they require for liquor licenses. Background A petition has been received by the Council, signed by four on sale or club liquor licensees , asking Council to reduce the dram shop insurance requirements from $100, 000 per person/$300 , 000 per incident to the minimum set by state law - $50, 000 per person/ $100 , 000 per incident. Shakopee has required the $100/$300 coverage since 1977 . Twenty-two municipalities were contacted to learn what amount of coverage they require, see attached. Of the twenty-two contacted eight require more than the minimum and fourteen municipalities said that some licensees chose to carry additional insurance - either by carrying a larger base policy, or by carrying an additional umbrella policy. It is interesting to know that the three companies writing dram shop insurance in Minnesota no longer offer an umbrella policy and the maximum base policy available is $500 , 000/person and $500, 000/incident. It is also interesting to know that the state pool will only insure a licensee for the minimum established by state law, 550/$100, unless a municipality requires more. The state pool is available only to those establishments which can not get insurance. Considerations As we all know, insurance premiums have sky rocketed within the last couple of years, for all kinds of coverages, in addition to dram shop insurance. The City' s premiums have more than doubled, in some cases. The $100/$300 insurance required in 1977 will not provide the same amount of goods and services today as it did in 1977 . The increased cost for insurance is forcing businesses to close. The City of Minnetonka has dropped from 21 licenses to 14 licenses in recent years. There is also a moral issue to be considered. If someone is killed or injured because of the consumption of alcohol provided by a liquor licensee in violation of the law, should not the injured party or family be compensated for loss of income and/or doctor bills not to mention physical and emotional anquish? If someone has a lot of wealth, he protects himself with a lot of insurance, i.e. : an umbrella policy. If someone does not have a lot of wealth and is willing to carry a minimum amount of insurance, he may have to sell some of his assets to pay for damages not covered by insurance. If his assets are inadequate, the injured party is also a loser . Shouldn' t an injured party be provided a reasonable amount of protection whether the responsible party is wealthy or not? Maybe the question is how many bills will $50 , 000/person and $100 , 000/incident cover and is this reasonable? This is a tough issue. I believe it would be tougher if the consideration was to raise the insurance rather than to lower it. Alternatives 1. Lower City dram shop requirements to 50/100. 2 . Retain City dram shop requirements of 100/300. 3 . Raise City dram shop requirements. 4 . Table for further information. Recommended Action Discuss and direct staff to prepare proper ordinance, if a change is desired. JSC-/jms k r 4 Dram Shop Insurance Required by Municipalities Issuing Liquor Licenses Shakopee requires dram shop insurance in the amount of $100,000 per person and $300 , 000 per incident. State law minimum requirement is $50, 000/person and $100, 000/incident. City Requirement Licensees Obtain Additional Insurance Chanhassen 100/300 No, except dinner theater and maybe 1 other licensee with larger exposure Eden Prairie 50/100 Yes, some Bloomington 100/300 No Chaska 50/100 Yes , many carry 100/300 Burnsville 50/100 No Plymouth 50/100 Yes, some carry 300/500 Eagan 50/100 No Apple Valley 250/500 Yes, umbrella Brooklyn Park 50/100 Yes, 250/500 or umbrella Crystal 50/100 Yes, some do Golden Valley 50/100 Yes Hopkins 50/100 Yes, almost all do Inver Grove 50/100 Yes , most carry umbrella Heights �. Lakeville 50/100 Yes, a higher lease policy or an umbrella policy Mendota Heights 250/500 None issued Minneapolis 50/100 Yes, 1, 000,000 umbrella Minnetonka 100/200 Yes, 1/2 $300 , 000 1/2 $1, 000 , 000 umbrella New Hope 250/500 No - on sale Yes - off sale $1, 000 , 000 umbrella Prior Lake 50/100 Yes, some St. Louis Park 100/300 Yes , some do St. Paul 50/100 ? Wayzata 100/300 Yes , 500/500 I� Shakopee , Minnesota 55379 February 14 , 1986 Mayor Eldon A. Reinke and Council Members City of Shakopee 129 First Avenue Shakopee, Mn. 55379 RE: Dram Shop Insurance Gentlemen: The undersigned are the owners or managers of liquor estab- lisments in the City of Shakopee . We now respectfully request and petition that the Shakopee City Ordinance relative to Dram Shop insurance be changed to conform to that statewide law in that the insurance required shall be $50 , 000/$100 , 000 and not as now required for this city, $100 , 000/ $300 , 000 . It should be noted that the Metro Area law is $50, 000/$100 , 000; why should we bear a burden greater than our competitors, and a costly burden it is! We therefore petition that the Shakopee City Ordinance be amended to read Dram Shop insurance for liquor establishments is required to be $50 , 000/$100 , 000 . Thank you for your consideration. Respectfully submitted by: Al"o"I 41 Mathew Branch Agency Muse Ten Center 230 Tenth Avenue South Minneapolis, MN 55415 February 13 , 1986 Mr. Dewey Colich The Pullman Club, Inc . 124 West First Avenue Shakopee, MN 55379 SUBJECT: INSURANCE Dear Dewey: With regard to our conversations about your insurance premiums , I would like to inform you that General Liability rates are the highest rates that we are having to contend with in the current insurance market. Therefore , if we were able to reduce your limits to the statutory limits required by the State of 50 , 000/100 , 000 , we should be able to lower your annual premium by approximately $10,000 per year . Since ly, ana Kraemer 4/4/86 rates RE: DRAM SHOP/LIQUOR LIABILITY INSURANCE CARRIER: TRANSCONTINENTAL INSURANCE CO. LIMITS OF LIABILITY RATES PER $100 OF LIQUOR RECEIPTS $50/100/10/100,000 $300,000 Aggregate $ 2.00 $100,000 Combined Single Limit $300,000 Aggregate $ 3.29 $300,000 Combined Single Limit $ 4.89 $300,000 Aggregate . $500,000 Combined Single Limit $ 6.99 $500,000 Aggregate EXAMPLE: COMPANY: TRANSCONTINENTAL INSURANCE CO. LI"SITS OF LIABILITY ANNUAL DEPOSIT PREMIUM $500/500/500/500,000 $7689.00 $300/300/300/300,000 $5379.00 5100/100/100/100,000 $3619.00 S 50/100/$10/50/100,000 (Minimum Statutory) $2200.00 - Deposit Premium Based on Total Estimated Liquor Sales of $110,000 MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator FROM: Judith S. Cox, City Clerk RE: Applications for On Sale and Sunday Liquor Licenses by Scottland Hotels Inc. DATE: May 2 , 1986 Introduction The City has received applications from Scottland Hotels Inc. for On Sale and Sunday Liquor Licenses at 1244 Canterbury Road. Background Although construction of the hotel/restaurant has not been completed, nor has a certificate of occupancy been issued, the applicant is requesting consideration of the licenses at this time. The attached memo from the City Attorney explains how the applications can be handled since approval can not be granted until the building is complete and necessary insurance and surety bond are in order. (The applicant was not required to file the insurance policy and bond at this time because the license can not be approved until the construction is complete. ) This is a non-binding procedure and is simply a concept approval. The City Code does not provide for the reservation of a license. If this were the last available license and Scottland Hotels Inc. received concept approval , and if a second application were received which met all requirements, Council would have no grounds for denying the second application. The application is for a license to cover: "The areas and buildings included, commonly referred to as the hallways , the restaurant (two floors ) and meeting rooms, the enclosed court- yard between the restaurant portion of the building and the hotel portion of the building, and atrium, all of which are located in Scott County as follows: Lot 1 and Lot 2 , Block 2 , Canterbury Park 2nd Addition. " There are three Class C liquor licenses available for a hotel/ motel restaurant/lounge facility. The property is zoned appropriately and the facility meets the requirements of the City Code relating to square footage and minimum investment. Alternatives 1. Deny application. Although the application is not in order and denial is within Council ' s rights, this would not give the applicant any indication as to Council ' s concept approval. 2. Approve applications . Approval would be disregarding City Code requirements. 3 . Table application after proposing to Council a non-binding informal vote , per City Attorney' s recommendation. This will provide the applicant with a concept approval which he can take to his financing people. This procedure, if not improved, could present an undesireable situation in the future if one applicant received concept approval and a second applicant had an application in order and only one license was left. 4 . Direct staff to research the legality of amending the code to allow reservation of licenses under certain conditions ( ie. construction completion by a pre agreed upon date) . Because there are three liquor licenses available and only one building permit issued for a hotel/restaurant to date there is no need to hold up taking the recommended action on the current application. However, a better- way to handle liquor license applications for unconstructed facilities should be explored and set in place before additional applications are received. Recommendation Alternative 3 , per City Attorney' s memo, attached, and alternative 4 . Action Recommended 1. Move to propose to Council for a non-binding informal vote that if all of the required inspections were completed and all certificates properly made showing full code compliance and the necessary insurance and bonds filed, would the Council grant ScottlandHotels, Inc.n 1244 Canterbury Road, On Sale and Sunday Liquor Licenses? � e 2 . Table the applications of Scottland Hotels, Inc. , 1244 Canterbury Road for On Sale and Sunday Liquor Licenses. 3 . Direct staff to research the legality of amending the City Code to allow reservation of liquor licenses under certain conditions. JSC/jms JULIUS A. COLLIER, II JULIUS A COLLER ATTORNEY AT LAW 612-445-1244 18 59-1940 2 1 1 W E S T F I R 5 T AV E N U E SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA 55379 } Memo To: Judy Cox, City Clerk From: Julius A. Coller, II, City Attorney Date: April 30, 1986 In re: Liquor License Application Background Scottland Hotels, Inc. has made application for regular and Sunday On-Sale Liquor License effective July 1, 1986. The proposed locale has not been finished and of course not inspected by the Building Official, the Fire Marshall and the Electrical Inspector to attest to the fact that the intended locale is in full compliance with all of the Code provisions. 1 The applicant stresses the importance of affirmative action by the City Council in order that it may safely continue with its construction and with its financing development. You ask - "What action can the Council take at this time to assure the applicant it will get the required license later this year?" Answer - Obviously Council cannot grant the applicant a license at this time. None of the above listed inspections have been made and the City Code mandates that there must be a certificate of occupancy and of Code compliance in effect before the license can be issued (Shakopee City Code Sec. 5.02 Subd 3 B-1 & 2) and for obvious reasons the Council cannot safely at the present stage of devel- opment grant a license for future delivery because the applicant is not now entitled thereto. Suggested Action Council may at this time take one or more of the following steps if it so chooses. 1. Reject the application. This would not be helpful to anyone. 2. Lay the application on the table. Again this would not be helpful to the applicant. 3. Propose the following proposition to the Council for a non-binding informal vote: "If all of the required inspections were completed and all certificates properly made showing full code compliance and the necessary insurance and bonds filed, would the Council grant the applicant the requested license at this meeting?" If the vote is favorable the Council could then lay the application on the table for future binding action, taking care that the application is kept alive at future meetings until time for formal action. 4. Amend the Code by removing the above requirements. While this is a possibility, I would seriously suggest that this not be considered. City of Shakopee POLICE DEPARTMENT 476 South Gorman Street SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA 55379 Tel. 445-6666 TO: Mayor, Council Members FROM: Tom Brownell RE: Liquor License Application DATE: May 1 , 1986 INTRODUCTION Scottland Hotels, Inc. has applied to the City of Shakopee for a liquor license application for a business known as Canterbury Inn Hotel and Restaurant, 1244 Canterbury Road, Shakopee, MN. BACKGROUND Applicant information identifies the licensee to be; Scottland Hotels , Inc . 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 soley 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 liquor license to Scottland Hotels, Inc . n