Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
06/10/1986
TENTATIVE AGENDA ADJ.REG.SESSION SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA JUNE 10, 1986 Mayor Reinke presiding 1 ] Roll Call at 7 : 00 P.M. 2 ] Recess for Board of Review 3 ] Convene as Board of Review a] John and Lorraine Ries ( 3 parcels) tabled 6/3 b] Dean Shaner - tabled 6/3 c] Shakopee Valley Motel d] e] 4 ] Adjourn Board of Review to Tuesday, June 17 , 1986 at 7 : 00 P.M. 5] Re-convene 6 ] RECOGNITION BY CITY COUNCIL OF INTERESTED CITIZENS 71 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. ) *81 Approval of the Minutes of May 20 , 1986 and May 27 , 1986 9 ] Communications: a] Larry Moonen re: dirtbike traffic b] 101 8: 00 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING - Appeal by Edward R. Colmer, Lakeville, Minnesota from Planning Commission denial of a conditional use permit to operate a commercial recreation use for amusement helicopter ride business, upon property East of Valleyfair on State Highway 101 111 Boards and Commissions: Planning Commission a] Metropolitan Development and Investment Framework - Memo coming b] Comprehensive Sewer Plan Amendment c] Amending City Code to Allow Mobile Homes in Ag District - Informational 12] Reports from Staff: [Council will take a 10 minute break around 9 : 00 P.M. ] a] Eagle Creek Junction lst Add' n. - tabled 6/3/86 b] Renewal of Non-Intoxicating Malt Liquor Licenses Bring c] Renewal of Set-Up Licenses Memos d] Renewal of Intoxicating Liquor Licenses From e] Renewal of Wine Licenses June 3rd 1O4PI4sTUTuIpfj A4T3 UOszapUV •N UgOf *N*d 00 :L 4P 986T ' LT aunt 'APpsans 04 UanOCpV [ ST 1 � TEUOT4PuaO;U , - bUTTTTS A4TTT4n abPUT zEZE Q o •S UT uo��oC. 7 q TPUOTgPu1IO;UI - bUT�fapd UMOgUMOQ [P :ssauTsng 19g40 [ tT U074PTOOSSV ;aTTag *qday @Ila aadoxEus aqq ;o SMp7-Ag aqq buTnozddv ' OL8T 'ON • Sag buTpuaur'll '6LSZ -ON •sag [P,� : saoupuTpao pup suo74nTosag [ 8T buTuoo OwGN - aogoaaTQ quawdoTanaQ A4Tununuoo P bUTaTg [ui buTOUPUTa quawaaoul XPI, zo it asn s , 99doxPT4s buTnTonu2 sanssl WPIbOaa PUP AOTToa [T It SaoT;;O A4To ;O UoT4EOOTag [x It „s99AOTdwa Aapaoduias„ sp buTJ;p4S TpuOT4TPPV [ C „ AOTToa buTpun3 UOT4P4TTTgPg9,d gaaags [T sOW9W aaTTIPg buTzg - 4GT4no axP7 s ,UPaQ 13 abPUTPIG AaTTPA aaddn [u quawaaabV saadOTanaQ - uOTgTppV 4ST ung xo3 [b,,, TPuOT4PWIo;ul - squawaaabV saadOTanaQ ;o dn-mOTTO3 PUP buTPaOOag [; 3o-, DON D. MARTIN SCOTT COUNTY ASSESSOR COURT HOUSE 112 SHAKOPEE, MN 55379-1381 (612) -445-7750 , Ext . 115 MEMORANDUM: Date : June 10, 1986 To: 1986 Board of Review From: Scott County Assessor ' s Office Property Owner : John & Lorraine Ries Property Address : 441 W. lst Ave. P I D# : 27 001 090 0 1 . Type & Description of Property : This is a commercial building used by Total Rental. It was built in 1960 and is constructed of concrete block. The basement measures 20, x 50' or 15%o of the total building area. The 6680 square feet with 1688 square feet of this area finished and used as the retail portion and 4992 square feet used for the storage area. The property currently has no municiple water and sewer connected to it. It uses its own well and septic tank. The building is in fair condition. 2 . Deck or Patio: 3. Garage Description : 4. Other : 5. Total Structural Value : $ 97,200 6. Lot Size : 319240 square feet . Lot Value : $69,800 8. Total Estimated Market Value of Property: $ 167,000 9. Other Information on Assessment After rechecking this parcel, I would recommend a reduction in the building value due to the amount of area that is not finished, the poor location of the rest- rooms (in the basement , and the limited use the property could be put to because of the lack of municiple water and sewer at this time. I would also recomend a reduction in the lot value due to the same reason. 1�, Recommended values: Land $ 649-000 Building $ 869900 Total $ 150,900 .3 c�- DON D. MARTIN SCOTT COUNTY ASSESSOR COURT HOUSE 112 SHAKOPEE, MPJ 55379-1381 ( 612)-445-7750 , Ext . 115 MEMORANDUM: Date : June 10, 1986 To: 1956 Board of Review From: Scott County Assessor ' s Office Property Owner : John & Lorraine Ries Property Address: 403 W. lst Ave. PI D# : 27 001 091 0 1 . Type &t Description of Property : This property is used for commercial purposes. The businesses which are located here, are Bryan Rock, Champion Auto, 1st Avenue Cleaners, and Precision Metal Fabricators. There is no basement under the building. The building was constructed in 1966 with an addition in 1969. The construction is concrete block, flat roof, concrete floor with tile covering. The interior is finished with panelling, suspended ceilings, and tile floors. The building is totally rented. It is in good condition. 2. Deck or Patio: 3 . Garage Description : 36 x 36 concrete, used by Precision Metal Fabricators. 4 . Other : 5 . Total Structural Value : $ 174,600 6 . Lot Size : 179040 square feet. 7. Lot Value : $ 389000 8. Total Estimated Market Value of Property: $ 212,600 9 . Other Information on Assessment After rechecking this parcel I believe the original value is not excessive and would recommend no change for the 1986 assessment. Mrs. Ries was informed of my decision and is in agreement with it. l� DON D. MARTIN Nd SCOTT COUNTY ASSESSOR COURT HOUSE 112 SHAKOPEE, MN 55379-1331 ( 612) -445-7750 , Ext . 115 MEMORANDUM: Date : June 109 1986 To: 1986 Board of Review From: Scott County Assessor' s Office Proper t Owner : John & Lorraine Ries Property Address: 220 W. 3rd Ave. PID#: 27 001 336 C 1 . Type & Description of Property: This is John and Lorraine's homestead. The property has been described in the previous memo from June 3rd. 2. Deck or Patio : Yes. . Garage De sc r• i p t i on : 20' x 22' attached 4 . Other : 5. Total Structural Value : $ 86,400 4, Lot Size - 90' x1421 ? . Lot Val ue : $ 199100 8. Total Estimated Market Value of Property: $ 105,500 9 . Other Information on Assessment After rechecking my cal- culations on this property, I believe them to correct. I would recommend no change in value for the 1986 assessment. I informed Mrs. Ries of this decision on June 6th and she accepted my estimate. DON D. MARTIN SCOTT COUNTY ASSESSOR COURT HOUSE 112 li e SHAKOPEE, MN.55379-1381 (612)-445-7750, Ext.115 Deputy: LEROY ARNOLDI To: 1986 Shakopee Board of Review Date: June 10, 1986 From: Robert N. Schmitt Subject: Shakopee Valley Motel increase in assessed valuation. PID# 27 100 001 0 27 100 002 0 27 100 003 0 27 100 004 0 Enclosed is a letter which I wrote to Jean Andre on September 249 1985• This letter states what the 1985 Estiamted Market Values for the above parcels was at that time. On November 15, 1985 we received an increase in market value on commercial property in Shakopee which was ordered from the State of Minnesota. The increase was 15% across-the-board. The results of this increase are as follows: After Increase Parcel Original EMV Original Ass'd EMV Ass'd 27 100 001 0 $611,300 $2539859 $703,000 $2939290 27 100 002 0 $ 759100 $ 30,040 $ 759100 $ 309040 27 100 003 0 $ 509100 $ 20,040 $ 50,100 $ 20,040 27 100 004 0 $1551700 $ 62,280 $155,700 $ 62,280 Totals $8927200 $366,219 $9837900 $405,650 I hope this answers any questions which you may have had. l An Equal Opportunity Employer DON D. MARTIN SCOTT COUNTY ASSESSOR COURT HOUSE 112 SHAKOPEE, MN.56379.1381 (617p44&7750, Ext.lis Deputy: LEROY ARNOM September 24, 1985 Jean Andre City of Shakopee 129 E. 1st Ave. Shakopee, MN. 55379 Jean, The current market value and assessed values for the Shakopee Valley Motel are as follows: 27 100 001 0 Motel Site 1985 EMV $ 611000 = Assessed Value of $2539859 27 100 002 0 Vacant Land 1985 EMV $ 759100 = Assessed Value of $ 30,040 27 100 003 0 Vacant Land 1985 EMV $ 509100 = Assessed Value of $ 20,040 27 100 004 0 Vacant Land 1985 EMV $ 155,300 = Assessed Value of $ 62,280 Totals X92,200 $366t219 The above figures do not include fiscal disparities and therefore the assessed values may not be totally accurate for taxes payable in 1986. Robert N. Schmitt Scott County Assessor's Office An Equal Opportunity Employer ..,�,-,. Ti. r..` .fin r7r--,, �.-rm n(}-0/. IT- -,7 _ V ,_Ai, p�� , ...D Tom:, __l , _ ._Y _ 'N_ ._ ADJ.REG.SESSION P?TNN7190T-A MAY 20, 1986 "Mayor Reinke called the meeting to order at 8:00 p.m. with Cncl. T,eroux, Colligan, Vierling, Lebens and •lampach present. Also present were John K. 4nderson, city Administrator; Judith .8. ^.cx, City Clerk; Barry Stock, Administrative Aide; ,Judi ^imac, City Planner; '_den tshfeld, ^ity ngineer; and .TUlius n. ^oller, T-C, 7ity Attorney. Vierling/Leroax moved to recess for the Housing and Redevelopment Authority meeting. motion carried unanimously. Leroux/Colligan moved to reconvene at 8:30 p.m. Motion carried unanimously. Liaison reports were given by councilmembers. Discussion ensued on whether or not the city should consider purchasing the House of Hoy which is currently condemned and is on the historical register. 7Tierling/Leroux moved to take the subject of the House of Hoy to the Downtown Committee for discussion. Motion carried unanimously. Mayor Reinke recognized the audience and asked if anyone wished to speak on anything that was not on the agenda. Colligan/Vierling moved to approve the minutes of May 6, 1986. Roll Call: Ayes: .Unanimous Noes: T?one Motion carried Leroux/Vierling moved to receive the letter from League of Minnesota Cities and direct staff to prepare a letter signed by the Mayor to be sent to our Federal legislators, regarding Proposed Department of Labor Regulations on the Application of the Fair Labor Standards Act. Motion carried unanimously. Colligan/Vierling moved to open public hearing on an Amendment to the Modified Housing and Redevelopment Plan relating to Minn. River Valley Housing and Redevelopment Project No. 1, Amending the Financing Plans for Tax Increment Districts 2-5, the establishment of Tax Increment District No. 6 and approval of a Financing Plan for TID No. 6. Motion carried unanimously. Mr. Stock explained that this is the project that was discussed earlier this evening at the H.R.A. meeting. (The Redevelopment Project No. 1 is being expanded to include a new Tax Increment District No. 6, Shakopee Valley Square. ) At the HRA meeting Mr. Stock explained the issues which are related to this project that should be of interest to the City ^ouncilt Fiscal Disparities - Will be paid out of the tax increment district. Security - two letters of credit will be required by the developer. One for X10,000 which has already been supplied and another for "50,000 prior to the Council's authorization of the sale of bonds. Timing of Payments - No dollars will be forwarded to the developer until the project is 1000/8 complete. Debt Service Plan - The project will be assessed as 500/6 complete on January 1 , 1987 and 100o complete on January 1 , 1988. This will be a $500,000 bond sale. iako;e8 !_ay c0, 1986 Pale -L- Planning ';o=ission Action - on '.g ay 8, 1986 the Planning ",ommission's findings revealed that the Shakopee ''alley Square Tax Increment Project is in conformance w lth the ^ity's .Comprehensive Plan. r•om,ments from "aunty and :,chool District - Bch body has stated that they have no objections to the tax increment program. ;ayor Reinke asked if there was anyone from the audience who wished to address this issue. There was no reponse. T,eroux/;dampach moved to close the public hearing. Motion carried unanimously. T,eroux/Vierling moved to offer Resolution X2553, A Resolution Relating to the Amendment by the Housing and Redevelopment Authority in and for the City of Shakopee of 717odified Housing and Redevelopment Plan relating to Minnesota River Valley Rousing and Redevelopment Project io. 1 , the Amendment of the Tax Increment Financing Plans relating to Tax Increment Districts IJo. 2 through 1110. 5 to Reflect Increased Project Costs within Minnesota River Valley Housing and Redevelopment Project No. 1 , the Establishment of Tax Increment District No. 6, Located within Minnesota River Palley Housing and Redevelopment Project No. 1 and the Adoption and Approval by the City of Shakopee of the Proposed Tax Increment financing Plan for Tax Increment District No. 6 and move for its adoption. Roll Call: Ayes: Cncl. Wampach, Leroux, Colligan, Vierling and Mayor Reinke Noes: Cncl. Lebens Resolution passes. Leroux/Lebens moved to direct staff to inventory present procedures with regards to future, potential assessments and pending assessments. motion carried unanimously. Barry Stock gave an update to the Council on the Petition for Diagonal Parking at 205 S. Lewis Street as requested by Michael Luce. Mr. Luce contends that the situation in front of the Berens building is no different than his request. The Job Service is creating a significant amount of traffic and short term parking needs. Lebens/Leroux moved to deny Mr. Luce's request for a conditional use permit for diagonal parking on the east side of Lewis Street, north of the Lewis Street entrance to the library and south of Second Avenue. Motion carried unanimously. Discussion ensued on Appeal of decision by Board of Adjustment and Appeals: Super_America Sign Variance. Discussion as to whether or not the continuous striping around the corners of the canopies constitutes a part of the sign, SuperAmerica contends that it is purely architectural and not signage. Wampach/Lebens moved to offer Variance Resolution No. CC-445 and moved for its approval. Motion fails with Cncl. Wampach and Lebens approved. Discussion ensued on an Amendment to the Comprehensive Sewer Plan which provides sanitary sewer to a 5.5 acre parcel east of County Road 83 and north of 12th Avenue. The proposed amendment would expand the Metropolitan Urban Service Area ("NSA) line to include a 5.5 acre parcel upon which the Canterbury Square strip center is under construction. r akopec ^it,,7 ; ay 20, 1996 'age -3- ,,olligan/Vierling moved to table the hmendment to the ::"omprehensive Sewer Plan which provides sanitary sewer to a 5.5 acre parcel east of County Road 83 and north of 12th Avenue until Mayor Reinke has a chance to talk to the developer personally on this issue. Motion carried unanimously. Leroux/Colligan offered Ordinance No. 194 Fourth Series, An Ordinance of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota, amending the Shakopee City Code, Chapter 12 entitled "Subdivision Regulations (Platting) by changing certain requirements for Homeowner's Associations; And by adopting by reference, Shakopee City Code Chapter 1 and Section 12.99 which, among other things, contain penalty provisions, and move for its adoption. Motion carried unanimously. Leroux/colligan offered Resolution No. 25350 a Resolution Setting Forth City Policy with Respect to Homeowner's Associations Required by Shakopee City Code Section 12.11 , Subd. 1 (7). and move for its adoption. IMotion carried unanimously. Leroux/Colligan moved to receive and file the memo from LeRoy Mouser, uilding Official, regarding the variance request of Mr. Larry Johnson requesting relief from the egress window requirement. Notion carried unanimously. The City Administrator reviewed the items for temporary adjustments on the Highway 101 Traffic Signals, Crosswalks, etc. 1 . Increase traffic enforcement by shifting police priorities. 2. Work with Shakopee Public Utilities and IM/DOT to improve signal mairit en anc e. 3. Institute twice a year pedestrian crosswalk painting on three intersections downtown. 4. Review the need for stop bars and additional signing on the crosswalks. 4 5. Assure that the signing that instructs pedestrians to use the nedestrian activated button is in good working order and inform !he public community about the need to use the pedestrian activated buttons. 6. Formally request the Highway patrol provide more traffic enforce- ment inside the Shakopee corporate limits along Highway 101 and 169. 7. ?nvestigate lower dial-a-ride return trip costs for senior citizens who make arrangements 24 hours in advance. The consensus was to have staff keep working on Highway 101 traffiCLsignals and crosswalks improvements and keep in touch with the petitioners. Incl. Lebens asked to be excused at 9:40 P.m- Leroux/Vierling moved for a 10 minute recess at 10:00 p.m. .Motion carried unanimously. Colligan/Vierling moved to reconvene at 10:10 p.m. Motion carried unanimously. The city -_�Ingineer reviewed the complaints received from Ifs. Robert Vierling concerning the condition of the Block 50 alley. 1�r. Vierling is requesting a rebate of his assessment or to completely redo the alley. The four alterna- tives open to the City are: --hakopee "ity ';ouncil raJr 2n' 1986 Page -4- 1 Completely reconstruct the alley with an inverted crown obtaining all necessary easements to remove adjacent paved drive approaches to properly meet now design grades at an a-)-proximate cost of 4,r. 500. 2. Provide minimal "skin" patching to assist with drainage, sea; coat and back slope the 7ierling property to meet grades at an approximate cost of *500- 3. Rebat-6,Mr. 'Iierling's assessment as requested in his letter. 4. Do Nothing. Colligantdampach moved to contract out to a private contractor on a bid basis to the specifications of the City and have the money taken out of contingency. Roll Call: Ayes: Colligan, 14ampach Noes: Payor Reinke, Leroux, Vierling Motion fails. Leroux/Vierling moved to provide minimal "skin" patching to assist with drainage, seal coat and back slope the Vierling property to meet grades at an approximate cost of 11500.00. This work could be completed with the 1986 Pavement Preservation Project. Roll Call: Ves: Mayor Reinke, Leroux, Vierling Noes: Colligan, 'rJampach Motion carried. Leroux Vierling moved to authorize staff to purchase 12 oz Gold Medal Pop Machine with money to come from unallocated fund balance from Midland Products Company of Minneapolis, for the swimming pool. Roll Call: ayes: Unanimous Noes: None Motion carried Colligan/Leroux moved to have staff arrange a lease agreement with Taylor Sales Inc. with the option included of purchase in 1987 of a Slush Machine for the swimming pool. Roll Call: Ayes: TJnanimous Noes: None 'lotion carried. Discussion ensued on the subject of sanitary sewer lateral improvements to the Eagle Creek Junction plat. Mr. Gary Laurent has requested the City provide lateral crossings of Eagle Creek Boulevard (4 crossings in total but only one at this time to P_,a.gle Creek Junction) since the Trunk is on the north side of the road and the properties are on the south side of the road and do not have equal lateral access. Questions arose as to the litigation costs of this project. The two alternatives to consider are (1 ) to rebate the existing assessment balance equally or (2) not to rebate and construct hese four crossings to get some rough equity and availability of sewers for lateral hookups for both sides of the road. Gary Laurent addressed the ; Council and stated that he thought there was an understanding with the staff that they would get equal access and equal benefit for equal payment. Leroux/Vierling moved to direct the sanitary sewer lateral improvements back to staff for further clarification regarding the dollar figures. motion carried unanimously. ,i:aopee Heil - %lay 20, 19 6 Page ->- L ^olligan/7,eroux offered Resolution �Io. 2556, k Resolution Accepting Bid on -olmes Street Basin Storm Sewer Laterals Project No. 1986-1 , and move its adoption. 'T 'lotion carried Roll ^all: Ayes: Unanimous .Noes: one rThe "it,y I:gineer, Ken r�shfeld, addressed the .ouncil on the 7olmes Street Storm :Sewer Lateral Project. There are specific areas on theproject which the proposed location of a catch basin doEs not corresp. existing location of curb or edge of roadway. T,eroux/trierling moved that the storm sewer catch basins for the Holmes Street Storm Sewer Lateral Project 1986-1 be located in the manner that would properly align them with future construction. roil call: Ayes; Unanimous Noes: None Motion carried Colligan/irierling moved to approve the application and grant a Taxicab License to Suburban Taxi Corporation, 9614 Humboldt Avenue South, Bloomington, L1. 55431 Roll ;'all: Ayes: Unanimous Noes: None Motion carried ^,olligan/Leroux moved to direct the City gi.neer to prepare a change order to the supplemental agreement for the 1985-2 Eaglewood Project as recommended to implement Alternative 2 of the Feasibility Report for Roadway Improvements to Deerview Acres dated April, 1986 - complete any and all pavement structural problems and drainage problems and provide a seal coat over the street systems to a) maintain existing qualities and b) to provide a continuous surface appearance. Motion carried unanimously. Leroux/Colligan moved to direct the City Engineer to include roadways within Deerview Acres in the 1986 Seal Coat Pavement Preservation Program. Motion carried unanimously. Colligan/vierling moved to approve bills in amount of 8218,843.07. Roll Call: Ayes: Unanimous Noes: None Motion carried. Colligan/Vierling moved to direct staff to prepare the proper ordinance to provide that a liquor licensee need not obtain a separate beer license. Roll Call: Ayes: Unanimous Noes: None Motion carried. Colligan/Vierling moved to approve terminating the probationary status of ` Kenneth Ashfeld and replace with permanent status. Roll Call: Ayes: Unanimous Noes: None Motion carried Colligan/Vierling moved to appoint David L. Nelson a full time police officer as recommended by the Shakopee Police Civil Service Commission. Roll Call: Ayes: Unanimous Noes: None Iiotion carried. Discussion ensued on Establishing a Policy for Reimbursement of Council Members for City Litigation Costs. It was suggested that in order for any councilmembers to receive a per diem, it would have to be by council authorization. The proper resolution will be prepared for Council consideration. Leroux/Vierling offered Ordinance No. 193, An Ordinance .of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota, Amending Shakopee City Code Chapter 5ti.tled T•iquor, Beer and Laine Licensing and Regulations by Repealing Sub paragraph A of Subd 1 of Sec 5.09 and by Adopting a New Sub Paragraph A-Lof Subd 1 of Sec 5.09 and Adopting by Reference Shakopee City Code Chapter 1 and Sec 5.99, and move its adoption. Potion carried unanimously. ':a.v 20, l9 6 7:3.L e —6— ^olligan�Vierling offered Resolution iso.- 2554, a Resolution of appreciation to ^,teven "lay, and move its adoption. oll -all: .1 res: unanimous Woes: Ione ; otion carried. ^,olligan/Vierling offered Resolution No. 2555, a Resolution r'-strictin; Parking on 4th :'Averse Between Fillmore Street and Scott ",treet to Parallel ^,nly, and moved its adoption. Roll ^,all: Ayes: Unanimous Aloes: done Motion carried. 7,'ierling/Co11igan offered Resolution No. 2558, -4 Resolution Calling Public Hearing on the Proposed .amendment of the Redevelopment Plan Relating to Miiinesota River 'Talley Housing and Redevelopment Project " o. 1 ; The ?'.xpansion of said Redevelopment Project Area; and the Proposed .'amendment of the Tax Increment Financing Plans for Tax Increment Financing Districts No. 2 'Through _llo. 6, and move for its adoption. Motion carried unanimously. 7ierling/Leroux moved to waive the 30 day waiting period for a gambling license from •innesota Charitable Gambling Control Board for Shakopee Youth Baseball-Softball association at 911 East First avenue. Motion carried unanimously. Beroux/Colligan moved to appoint the City Clerk acting City Administrator for the dates of IIay 28 and 29, 1986. Motion carried unanimously. Leroux/Vierling moved to adjourn to May 27, 1986, at 7:00 p.m. Motion carried unanimously. .Meeting adjourned at 11 :45 p.m. Judith S. Cox City Clerk Carol T. Schultz Recording Secretary OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL SESSION SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA MAY 27 , 1986 Mayor Reinke called the meeting to order at 7 : 05 p.m. with Cncl. Lebens , Leroux, Vierling, Colligan and Wampach present. Also present were Ken Ashfeld, City Engineer; Judith S. Cox, Acting City Administrator; and Julius A. Coller II , City Attorney. Colligan/Lebens moved to open public hearing on Proposed improvement of Street Rehabilitation within Timber Trails Addition. Motion carried unanimously. The City Engineer explained to the audience that the roadways in Timber Trails Addition were constructed in 1976 and due to inadequate pavement cross-section and a weakening of the roadway subgrade the road is failing. The three alternatives available are ( 1) to rehabilitate the roadways in the Timber Trails Addition, and put a bituminous overlay over the entire project area, ( 2 ) continue maintenance procedures that have been done in the past few years, ( 3 ) do nothing. The estimated total cost of the project is $144 ,265 . 68 . The City' s policy_ for funding for rehabilitation in roadways is 25% of the cost is to be assessed and the 75% of the cost is to be a city wide cost on the general levy tax, of that 25% the City will grant a credit for public improvement if the roadway does not last its expected lifetime which for a roadway is 20 years. There are 45 assessible lots and each lot would be assessed $641. 18 . Cncl. Leroux asked if it would be feasible to drain the roadbed to which the City Engineer replied that it would not be feasible because of the very silty clays present. Phil Johnson, real estate broker, representing Shakopee Investments , asked who constructed the road originally and if it would be the same contractor and if there is any liability on the part of the contractor. The City Engineer replied that now it will have to be by public bid and whoever is the low bidder will get the job. There is no liability on the part of the original contractor. The assessed $641. 18 will be assessed over a period of 10 years which would amount to approx- imately $100 per year, per lot. Dan O' Connell, owner of one of the unplatted lots asked why there is no credit proposed for these unplatted lots. The City Engineer replied that when the feasibility study was done they looked at the property as it lies right now and there is no credit proposed. When the road was originally constructed only lots within the subdivision paid for the road. Mr. O' Connell explained that they gave one-half of the land for the road on that side. Mr. O' Connell also questioned whether or not the parcel could accommodate six lots. Dennis Lang, Lot 1, Block 4 , asked if the property northwest of the roadway is being assessed. The City Engineer answered that they were being assessed for Outlot A, the same assessment as everyone else. Shakopee City Council May 27 , 1986 _ Page -2- Discussion ensued on how long the roadway will be bonded or guaranteed and if there would be a possibility of having it guaranteed more than 1 year to which the answer was there would probably be no bidders because there are some factors which may occur that the contractors would have no control over. Sue Anderson, 1457 Woodduck Trail expressed concern over the fact that fire trucks and school buses will not be ableto use this road. The City Engineer responded that after the improvements are made the only restrictions would be possibly _ in the spring for some vehicles. Valdimir Sokolov, 1424 Woodduck Trail, asked what was being bought essentially with this $144 , 265 . 18 . Braun Engineering did the testing, they are experts in analyzing soils and construction materials and they made the recommendations of what should be done . to provide for a 7 ton roadway. Fred Smith, 1463 Lakeview Drive, asked how the assessments on his storm sewer related to this assessment. The Engineer answered that there is no correlation at all between this project and the storm sewer assessment. Peter Shutrop, questioned the laying of a bituminous overlay over the road if you don' t have a good base. Mayor Reinke asked if there was anyone from the audience who wished to address this issue. There was no reply. Colligan/Wampach moved to close the public hearing. Motion carried unanimously. Leroux/Wampach offered Resolution #2561, A Resolution Ordering an Improvement and the Preparation of Plans and Specifications for Timber Trails Road Improvements Project No. 1986-5 and moved for its adoption. Roll Call: Ayes: Unanimous Noes : None Motion carried. Mayor Reinke stated that since the Resolution #2561 has passed, a set of specifications will be put out for bid. At the time the project is completed there will be another hearing on the actual assessment. The hearing will be held as soon as possible so it can be put on the assessment rolls before the October 15 deadline date. Colligan/Wampach moved for a 10 minute recess. Motion carried unanimously. Colligan/Leroux moved to reconvene at 8 : 20 p.m. Motion carried unanimously. Leroux/Lebens moved to open public hearing on Proposed Improvement of Roadways serving platted property in the Montecito Heights lst and 2nd Additions. Motion carried unanimously. Shakopee City Council May 27 , 1986 Page -3- The City Engineer addressed the audience stating that a feasibility report done addresses two specific improvements on this roadway ( 1) structural improvements and ( 2 ) drainage improvements. The original plans for the subdivision called for future curb and gutter which would improve the drainage and its impact on the structure capabil- ities of the road. There are three alternatives ( 1 ) to rehabilitate the roadway in Montecito Heights 1st and 2nd Addition by bituminous overlay or to rehabilitate the roadway in the Montecito Heights 1st and 2nd Addition by the addition of curb and gutter and bituminous overlay, ( 2 ) continue maintenance of the roadway ( 3 ) do nothing. The total estimated cost of this project not taking into account the curb and gutter is $18 , 339 . 41. 250 of this cost is assessed to the property owners with a 5% credit per year for roadways that do not last their full expected lifetime. The assessment costs for 1st Addition will be $282 . 14 which includes lot 2 , block 2 of the 2nd Addition. The assessment costs for the 2nd Addition will be $352 . 68 per lot. The estimate for the total boulevard restoration with curb and gutter will be $37 , 090 . 97 . The assessment costs per lot for Addition 1 will be $570 . 63 and 2nd Addition will be $713 . 29 . DuWayne Erickson, 1771 Montecito Drive stated that he felt they did not need those improvements on the road and would rather see city gas come out. Ted Bodeen, 1783 Montecito Drive, asked what the projection is of future city sewer coming out to the Addition. The City Engineer explained that this area is outside the metro area: service are and it would be some time. Gene Erkenbrack, 1767 Montecito Drive, stated that there is no need for curb and gutter out there and thereis only one small spot that is broken up. The City Engineer explained that the street is cracking in the lst Addition and if something isn' t done it will continue to break up. The consensus of the audience was that there was no need for curb and gutter or rehabilitation of the roadway structure. If it was the wishes of the Council, the City Engineer explained that for less dollars we could do maintenance above and beyond what is expected to be done on a normal street pavement preservation program which would be to replace the cracked blacktop and remove 342 square yards and replace it with bituminous patching and then seal coat. Discussion ensued on the need to have water studies done on the wells in that Addition. There are several contaminated wells with nitrate in the water. Leroux/Wampach moved to close the public hearing. Motion carried unanimously. Leroux/Vierling moved that the City progress with maintenance of the roads in Montecito Heights beyond what is expected on a normal street Shakopee City Council May 27 , 1986 Page -4- pavement preservation program as outlined by the City Engineer. Roll Call: Ayes: Unanimous Noes : None Motion Carried Leroux/Wampach�moved that staff look into the well situation in Montecito Heights, Deans Lake and along County Road 16 to see whether or not city water is going to be required in that area. Motion carried unanimously. Leroux/Vierling moved to retain the City' s Civil Engineery Consultant, Orr-Schelen-Mayeron & Associates, Inc. to provide construction staking on the 1986-1 Holmes Street Basin Lateral Project based on their 1986 fee schedule. Roll Call: Ayes: Cncl. Leroux, Colligan, Vierling, Wampach and Mayor Reinke Noes : Cncl. Lebens Motion carried. Vierling/Leroux moved to approve the application and grant a Taxicab License to Town Taxi Co. , Inc. 2812 University Avenue SE. , Minneapolis , MN. 55414 . Roll Call: Ayes: Unanimous Noes : None Motion carried. Vierling/Leroux offered Resolution #2560 , A Resolution Amending Resolution #2540 Adopting Special Assessments for 1984-4 Shenandoah Dr. Roadway Construction and move for its adoption. Roll Call: Ayes: Unanimous Noes : None Motion carried. Vierling/Leroux offered Resolution #2548 , A Resolution Establishing a Policy for Reimbursement of Council Members for City Litigation Costs and move its adoption. Roll Call: Ayues: Unanimous Noes : None Motion carried. Vierling/Leroux offered Resolution #2563 , A Resolution Requesting That the Minnesota Highway Patrol Traffic Division Actively Enforce Safe Speed Limits on Trunk Highway 101 in the City of Shakopee and move its adoption. Roll Call: Ayes: Unanimous Noes: None Motion carried. Vierling/Leroux offered Resolution #2564 , Authorizing the Granting of a License as described in memo from Julius A. Coller, II , City Attorney, dated May 20 , 1986 , and move its adoption. Roll Call: Ayes : Unanimous Noes: None Motion carried. Discussion ensued on the 1986 City Wide Clean-up: 64 roll-offs at $130 . 00 versus 1985 City Wide Clean-up: 23 roll-offs at $99 . 00 each. It was the consensus of the Council to have staff get some more information and come up with more alternatives . Lebens/Vierling moved to adjourn. Motion carried unanimously. Meeting adjourned at 9 : 30 p.m. Judith S. Cox City Clerk Carol Schultz AoCnrriin� Ccnrc�ar�,� �., To: Chief of Police City Of Shakopee. ! — � Dear Sir, I wish to express my concern over the great increase of dirtbike traffic in Shakopee . These bikes are not street legal, driven on the streets by juveniles, and I believe violate the city noise ordinance . In the past months these motorcycles have been driven almost daily in the area of Van Puran St. from 11th to 12th and many times to the fields off 12th st leading out of the city proper. The times have varied from 7:00 A.M. to late L. evening. I believe it i.s difficult for your officers to apprehend them and I would suggest an ordinance change to barr all off road vehicles within the city for safety and noise reasons. Thank you , tarry Moonen. L LARRY MOONED 1698 12th Ave. Vilest SHAKOPEE, MN 55379 (612) 445-1395 MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator FROM: Judi Simac , City Planner RE: Appeal by Edward Colmer of decision of the Planning Commission - C.U. P. 0450 DATE: June 6 , 1986 introduction: At the May 22 , 1986 meeting the Planning Commission denied the request by Edward Colmer for a conditional use permit to operate an amusement helicopter ride business on property east of ValleyFair, north of T.H. 101. The decision has been appealed by the applicant. Background Please find attached the following information related to the application: 1. Minutes of the May 6th and May 22nd 2 . Staff reports to the Planning Commission 3 . Information provided by the applicant. Staff has received many letters from local residents in opposition to the granting of conditional use permits for helicopter services within the City limits. These letters are on file at City Hall for Council review and I expect many of the residents to attend the public hearing. Significant to the application is the fact that the U.S. Dept. of Fish and Wildlife has purchased from the developer of the Prairie House lst Addn. the property where the proposed 'helicopter business is proposed to operate. Therefore the application is invalid because the applicant no longer has the permission of the property owner to conduct the business. Action Reauested: Offer Conditional Use Permit Resolution of the City Council No. -CC 450 and move for its denial. tw 1_:a_ ie-s- .!eu 7,;/ c n I I, r X I, tD+IE: t i 3 a� I C)f + r -) -:-I t r e 7=1 e n fi S S re,Tlew and C ny r 7 ny a"I j eI 4 e r a _L v L, 4 'a Cre 0 _a US, Dn_ bus:*__,_s_- .i-,)on the ,)rc=r+y loco t(, -StOf 'M se-e— Lfrk on -:tate 7-4-1- 7' iner t tIt h.;e _1a- Zcd L-Late app_'i cant I s Lnt ent-,cn 45 to c-)nduct heliccpter rides for 4 :ton-Lhs (T:ay -,- fro-n 10:00 @.m. 15 - 73eptemlber 1:;) dail e:00 im. �__h-e operation Conzists of a par"I:-ing area. -ror 1C C s an d ,anLI-Drig -,,ad area. rhe proposed location ;s the 5o acre lradforo' I - W - - -L, property which has been platted as --lirairie -;c, L,L,torne,�r :70 . nnis Felix, atfor Edward Colmer, the applicant, of 210 liverviei-,, 14 rc--'e, Burnsville, stated that 3-rr. lolme-r hid pre-)_�red a fact demonstration to be included for the record. The applicant has been =111in'g, this service full ti-me for approximately 2 years and part time Prior to that. He has contacted , u -RLk and made an agreement with them regarding his route. Discussion ensued on the issue of the access off _ii,,-qwa.v 101 and the dust and noise that will be creating a nuisance to surroundinr-0 areas. The issue was raised by -o,-,=. Schmitt on - — the fencing around the -oarking area or landing area to protect the people from entering the landing pad area. The 7hairm--on- asked if there was an-one from the audience who wished to address this matter. There was no' response. Schm-*LI,t/'7anT7alde-hem moved to this hearing continue t 1-4- in _ to 1,1 ay 22, lc)86, and:"ask that the applicant supply `L-,he Commiss_4 on with a w.--*t ten Ylan I-� �L, t,-L '+h. a:ppro- 4-te drawi -3 coverfng the safet, standards to be estab-, ished on the -)arcel, trp;--�`rz- o "n f - o Safe" o—.a:---- fficer, fencing from a con-,rc�'! -PO—nt of vie---., and the reatLe LI o_` 'he 4 - ing to j---be le a', al,s- access S_`vuation be ch.ecked into to -find out i rivate drveway f a -2 ian be —,-ed, also a :?Old harmless clause be _4,'_corpxrate,,5 nto the aEree=ent-. 'lotion carried u:,ianI'mousjy. Sch—mitt/Pomerenke moved for a 5 minute recess. I-Totion carried unanimously. ,a-nT,,�!ald=;!rhm-n/?o.mere.-ik-e moved to open public hearing T004- -11 -_ * I. tion carried Jn a:-,4MOUS'jy. The 'Iity Planner reviewed what the applicant isjrecuesting. The applicant Proposes to operate a heliport on 2 acres of land -for 1 year. 3esides operating the amlasement, ride, the applicant canLI z-j-- intends to -i an occasional o LI _ air taxi service to _-,'-:L_nneapoljs. Proposed access to the site is from 7-Talley Industrial 31vd. 7-,o. 's;nen flying over the racetrack the ceiling is to be 750 feet. .. C=.- Schmitt raised a conce--m that the flight path proposed is in direct con-flict with t-Irle 7-oskovich -fligInt -p-th. �_T-ne amp 1; 714 _a__S, . = __ -1-chard C-t-ax-h-, cf rig '-'innesota, -has been in the helico-ter service `:r 8 years. ,_Ur jnLenv Z.S to provide Shakopee with air transportaticn by heii=ter u =Ovide recre_a .ional rides to t1ne public. �c CaIiF.0 t:.- '.r2et1nE tv order a+ 7'17 . 4d1 : -o=-_-_ Sion and .JC:::A� �.. y .oy�_'...• .. vv r�Sr�n„ WC C, .1."..�. .f GaYl �aaers-n, 1' =... _ - "j llo:^ . Z_ EL'ens '.:C ...+.!":',:1e8 of - .'D,,,il �� �3� 4Jcrc r7'•. �.. .i.S '�_t1 ! �� - - -oudray :roved to open public hearinG- to c;crosider a. �onditicnal "�•i' al:':e�;hem/ Ise 7'ermit to operate a commercial recreational use; for helicopter ride 'business u_Don the proDErty o^,cted .fast Of %alle;; "air "_^:asement �'ar:: on ^tate _:ighway 1,01. T'iotion carred unax:imously. he ^_ty =tanner reviewed tnc condi+4 onal use Permit Sta7-ng +;-at on "ay a, :aes the 0.:_-osicn approved a motion to continue tale �,_I iC h ring t0 ..;ay 22! '1786! in order for the applicant to provide additional informat-Lon on safet`�• Dennis .--lir., -_ttorney for -d „ol.:er, the a-pplic?,nit, addressed the "o:m::_4 st i on on safety Standards. 1--he aDplica_nt indicated that he will train the safety Officer himself and the safety officer wiil have radio contact with the helicopter pilot d zring all hours of the operation and will also have a Mend held two-w •yr radio tuned to the same frequency of the dying ^loud To,!er. io one will be allowed within 75, feet of the landing pad and the safety officer will do all the escorting to and from the parking lot. The parking lot will also be completelyr fenced. EM Crozier, T ana.ger of the i•innesota "alley ':'ildlife ?efuge addressed the Planning Commission on his concern of the impact of. the helicorter on the refuge in general and particularly on the creat Flue Heron and Egret Colony located just north of Blue lake. .area en^erSO==! ,0+�' J. pee, _air. an. of the -oard Of T''.i�^_^j�S and:n;- a'"=essed the .:.5_'%n t--...t Sj _S �'_'�'ing to 'ores t-_e 1'".^00s and with 7eliccn`er going over the s_e ewer-r or 10 m_.l...teS t would des troy eve:!7..--I-;, g t'r.n-. are tr,rir.n- to preserve� :'he7r i - �� 'C J ,'+C:•.:d 1?Ke t gC On reCOrd as be in!- CLppoSed to the e__ca7ct _'de C::Si='_eSS. :i iyi?'7 CZala cSKBd if there was anyone e_'Se from audience who wished to address this issue. mere was no response. ='C1 drajT/"a_�1T`_c1Geg^2 moved to close the Dubl=o he_=_fn_�=. ..a._ried unanimously. schmitt -2oudray moved favorable approval of conditional use permit ='450 subject + _r rOl lconditions:' LLb�_ t Lo U-ae � 01.'x._0 1. ''he ap_Dlicant shall have an insurance certificate on file, annua_ renewal Of . iat certificate be on __:e --i or to co=letion of any annual reviews. a-. a ,n C—E_� 4! LO wla or-I as a c tf-c- A -,e on .rtes jor Po a'! rm-_re o-,i a: ar e a s c, L= - andinor other iaO j l t1r which maiT de, --' cp _nthe - recreational _-ea .with 7o-mi. 1-7-oudrKr approved...ct_4 _n denied the 4 d t i o i a I moved o tc�ne�n rublic herring to -d e r a '',oz-1 f:;r aI i por' amus ement r- a e Ine S S F= 0 =71 0 C C F-S 1C— ai taxi service u-jcn the property _orated South. of _7tate 7-4,7h-,-,ay 10.1 across fro- -.'alley 7-air Park. � _-tion ca-_-ried unanimousl-,.. -n ,-)n on the procedure: tar:, th-,s applicant addressed the �omm is s s:fete. program, that they developed. 7-Ine issues addressed were: -afety in the .4-ir G. S'a_-F'e`U-y on the GTro-mrid 0-1-0-and SU-0-Dort -neo-Ole • Land the Aircraft Preboard=g InsTrUCTIOns • `oar"Ling thle aircra-'t D. Debcarding th-e- aircraft eac'l-. re G. The Shelter and 7=ne 7 7 -nslramce issue o` _`uel_4_-_•g was rals=;, by C and -red Co:."._l. _,;ane aZlsw_ Oy 7 fuei a truck wh stat,g that tne aircraft ied on si-.e and are done so ich L-las _-Fuel tanLks riZ-Int On it. :rhe applicant is plan_i-ngon did r-4n:r an area armroxi_2 te or 5 Inc-nes deep, about 30 ft by 7)OC ft-, cove-redS with pl-aStic liner and cr-ashed rock 7a-1- on top of that so if there were any Spills, would be contained Within that area. 7 -roz4er, 74sh and ',�!ildlile Ser%-,ice, stated that the i.-m-pact of this operation . d C L -- - - would be less harm.-"Ul to the 3--eat glue 7Feron and �fret Colony but did state anortherly4 1 t concern about the _`7, patte--n-a. Dhe a=l_4c2z-',t stated that they would "r-Ne h.a:ppjy to omit this nort'n-erl-y route. Robert ChLef' o_-17' _'i Ing .",loud St ted th-at t _M�r are now t1le prOreSS ith -^p? art Of djscuss;,-jg P ree.�Lnt spe y i rn rg =x I= al t itud es and routes Of -ehe m-e t1ney wa-,I d be o-_erat ing at and __5-..en radic - -ecuenc. 16 MEMO TO: Shakopee Planning Commission FROM: Judi Simac, City Planner DATE: May 1, 1986 APPLICANT: Edward Colmer LOCATION: 58 acres east of ValleyFair ( Prairie House Addn. ) ZONING: B-1 Highway Business LAND USE: Vacant APPLICABLE REGULATIONS: Section 11. 04 , Subd. 6 ; Section 11. 29 , Subd. M FINDINGS REQUIRED: Section 11. 04 , Subd. 6A SURROUNDING LAND USES: North - Mn River Valley East - Ag - Residence South - T.H. 101 West - ValleyFair PROPOSAL: The applicant is requesting a conditional use permit to operate a commercial recreational use (helicopter rides ) in the B-1 District. CONSIDERATIONS: 1. The applicant proposes to conduct helicopter rides for four months (May 15th - September 15 ) , daily, 10 a.m. to 8 : OO p.m. Two employees include a pilot and safety officer/ ticket seller. 2 . The proposed location is the 58 acre Bradford property which has been platted as Prairie House Addn. The plat has not yet been filed due to the r-o-w acquisition process. Access to this property from T.H. 101 was a major issue in the platting process and it obviously has not been resolved. 3 . The applicant charges $10 . 00/person for a five minute ride. He has secured a $600 , 000 insurance policy from Associated Underwriter Service. The City Clerk recommends a certificate cf insurance be placed on file with the City. The applicant has submitted a letter of approval from the FAA/dying Cloud Tower to operate in this vicinity. A similar letter from the Metropolitan Airport Commission is on file. 4. The operation consists of a parking area for 10 cars & landing pad area ( 75 ft. diameter) . The applicant proposes a 32 sq. ft. sign. There are no restroom facilities on the site. 5 . The Fire Chief requires that information on fuel storage be provided, if approved. Recommendation: Staff recommends denial of the Conditional Use Permit for the following reasons: 1. The establishment of the conditional use will impede the normal development of vacant property in the vicinity. 2 . Adequate access to the site is not being provided. 3 . Adequate measures have not been taken to ensure that dust and noise will not constitute a nuisance. 4 . The use will cause traffic hazard and congestion. S . Existing uses nearby (MN. Valley Trail, Valleyfair, Kopp residence ) will be adversely affected by noise and dust created by the use. Action Recruested: Motion to deny Conditional Use Permit Resolution #450 . Attachments tw l � MEMO TO: Shakopee Planning Commission FROM: Judi Simac, City Planner RE: C.U.P. #450 - Edward Colmer helicoper ride business DATE: May 19 , 1986 Background: At the May 8 , 1986 meeting the Commission approved a motion to continue the public hearing on conditional use permit no. 450 to May 22nd in order for the applicant to provide additional information on safety. The Planning Commission requested Mr. Colmer to submit a written plan which indicates 1) safety standards 2 ) training of the safety persons , 3 ) the fenced area and 4 ) the proposed treatment of the parking area. Staff has not yet received this information. However additional information on this application is available: 1. With the owner ' s permission (Kopp) the applicant may use the driveway for access . 2 . Ed Crozier of the Dept. of Fish and Wildlife has indicated that the helicopters may harm the wildlife in the trail area. The altitude of the helicopters may interfere with the flgiht patterns of the blue herons which nest near to the site. 3 . The City Attorney will respond to the liability of the City by the meeting date. Action Reauested: Motion to deny C.U.P. Res. =;450. i I in � �, o .z p I o � 03 j� o I CP T Ln C, 7 x In t O r A n x : e I 1 APFIROAC,j L c 3LN• I �I m o I i I I 1 T o NOTE: FLOODWAY AND FLOOD FRINGE DISTRICTS ARE DESIGNATED ON MAPS ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK, Cry OF SHAKOPEE. AG S ti B1 - ` 12- B I 2_61 \ -- R 1 S LINA AG For Office Use 0r1`v� 1 Date Filed: Hearing Date: Appl. Fee: Receipt No. : Resolution No. : CITY OF SHAKOPEE Application for CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT BASIC INFORMATION Ape l i cant : E DW PS Pb R. CO LM CR Phone : (61;z) q&9-3q91 Address : PO, Roy, (041 LAKEVILLF- MIN,vESOTA SSO` 4 Property Owner : CU)RTIS M. 6RAAFORD -Phone :( /Q) 587--a7�0 Address IUORT'fl FRANkL]Al STREET, 14UTC#1,VS0n1 MINA/ESOTA 55350 Consultant : — Phone : Address : Existing Use of Property : VACAMT - Property Present p Acreage : Jog ACRES Zoning: t7- � Location of Proposed CExr+�arf SEE Conditional Use Permit : �}?TACNEd r!E6AL QEScR/PT/oil Conditional Use Being Requested : GIVE NELI COP7 R RIDES To THE CEJ ER A 1- PU PSL I C he`d Parcel Restrictions : NO YES If so, attach. I .D. No- : 27- Has the Applicant previously sought to plat , rezone, lot split , obtain a variance or Conditional Use Permit on the subject site or any part of it : N05,� YES What was Requested : When : SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS A. Completed Application Form B . Filing Fee : (Home Occupation) $150. 00 (All Others) Qfy (Over) rb uC . Complete legal description . SEE AT7-ACHED SUE6r (eXNIEIT V/D. Deed Restrictions , if necessary. E. A site plan , to include : ^1 . Loca_tri on and dimensions---of--Lot , building, driveways and of_f_-street parking spaces • SEa A'rr�k� SP6CT ( 14i6,r "e") Distance between building and front , side and rear lot lines ; principal and accessory buildings , principal and accessory buildings on adjacent lots . — Location of y easement , underground utilities , septic tanks , tile fields , water wells , etc . sEE P�T,act+rp St+�c�fxM,,sir �6"� F. Any additional information as requested by the City Planner including , but not limited to , the following : >K. Existing grades and buildings within 100 feet of the site . �.. Location of all buildings , heights ar_d square focta---s __--3 . Curb cuts , dparkin s aces , walks and curbing. p 46 Off-street loading areas . SEE ATrat.Ae3 jst r (�cNl[�r "e"� E AT AC.1c') Drainage Flan and finished grades . S`� 6 . AType of business , 'proposed number- of employees by shift Proposed floor plan with use indicated and building elevations . Sanitary sewer and water plan. ? Lighting plan showing the lighting of parking area, walks , security lighting and driveway entrance light . 54. Landscape plan with schedule of plantings and proposed screening. I>T-- Refuse area . - - / 3 Existing trees of 6 inches in diameter or more. - - G . Certified frnm Abstract firm - names and addresses of property owners within 350 feet of the exterior property lines of the subject property. �3EE ATr Xc &-Z SST The above items shall be submitted -unless clearly not applicable and of no value in evaluating the desirability of the proposed use. FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS WILL RESULT IN RETURN OF YOUR APPLICATION FOR COMPLIANCE. Submitted this day of 19 lVorE: ��77�G1}ED ��✓�L S��'t'S rR01% Ti41G Xo,.4bwA.j GSE' ' Applicant ' s Signature �} US QePAATT,Mfiws OF Anis PaA-rAT p - FgUeAAj_ A/�VIATWN AbM1NIST1LATxs1J Cr-ISA) C - M f:W4ING �OvO Co NTIL6►-TOWEAa IIIITIOPGLtTA/J A10.GolT Cprrr��sslaK ropert Owner s gnatur NOTE: Please be advised that pursuant to Shakopee City Code , Section 11 . 04 , subd . 6C-12 , an approved Conditional Use Permit must be utilized within a one year time period from date of approval or it becomes null and void . "Any misrepresentation or incorrect information of a material eATITLE INSURANCE COMPANY OF MINNESOTA March 21, 1986 Title Insurance Company of Minnesota, does hereby certify that: According to the records in the Office of the County Treasurer, Scott County, Minnesota the following is a list of owners within 350 feet of the following described property: Land described in Exhibit "A" attached hereto. Hennepin County Park Reserve District Wifred Kopp 3800 County Road 24 5981 Highway 101 Maple Plain, Minnesota 55359 Shakopee, Minnesota 55379 Metropolitan Sewer Board Curtis M. Bradford Central Office 126 N. Franklin Capitol Square Building Hutchinson, Minnesota 55350 St. Paul,. Minnesota 55145 Dated this 21st day of March, 1986 � � . ath eaveck-Sand Authorized Sign tory KLS/kls SCOTT AND CARVER COUNTIES DIVISION 112 WEST THIRD AVENUE / SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA 55379 / (612)445-3196 1� ATITLE INSURANCE COMPANY OF MINNESOTA The Easterly 200 feet of the Southerly 200 feet of the following: All that part of the Northeast Quarter and the Southeast Quarter, Section 3, Township 115, Range 22 described as follows: Beginning at the Northwest corner. of the Southwest Quarter of the Northeast Quarter of said Section; thence South 79° 32' east, 1682.20 feet; thence south 11° 20' east, 439.48 feet; thence south 78° 40' west, 200 feet; thence South 11° 20' east, 934.26 feet, more or less, to a point on a line which is 50 feet north of the north right of way line of Minn. Trunk Highway 101; thence north 88° 59' 41" west, along a line parallel with and 50 feet north of said right of way line, 130.27 feet; thence south 19° 55' east, 53.53 feet, more or less, to the northerly right of way line of said Minn. Trunk Highway 101; thence westerly, along the said northerly right of way line of said highway, 1664.71 feet, more or less, to the 1/16th line (north-south centerline of said Section 3) ; thence north 00° 48' east, on the north-south centerline of said section, 1493.68 feet, more or less, to the point of beginning. Except all that part of the South 53.53 feet of the Easterly .130.27 feet lying within the Easterly 200 feet of the Southerly 200 feet. EXHIBIT "A" PAGE 1 OF 1 SCOTT AND CARVER COUNTIES DIVISION 112 WEST THIRD AVENUE / SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA 55379 / (612)445-3196 � co o dW i w o v LL lL Q .. i J I I I h4DvqWV S 4 t 2 I ( v Q d o - -- w I Lo � � Q 0o I � 1 I W a 2 �x I f N : v_+ a I Z 1 N I , i OC � I I Expa/r C PAGE ( of l} PAGE r c 4PPLICATIOA/ Io R C&A)61T/QNA L U $ E PER M 17 • (p� A, Tpe OF $USrNE55 ; GIVING NEL(cpPTE12 R/DES T THE GENERAL PUBUC. • �, PKOR�sE� N�mQ�rz ©F EmPLOYE✓✓S emptoye:Es — A PI LOr AND SAFETY O FFICr-P TICKET SELLER C, S�+►FT ; l SI+1FT — In .00 A.M. To 2-.00 P.M. (MAxlmuM) DArLY — 7 fJAYS PER UIEEk y MONTHS — MAY 15 ISI " lD U.S.Department of Transportation Federal Aviation Administration FLYING CLOUD TOWER 10110 Flying Cloud Dr. Eden Prairie, MN 55344 March 26 , 1986 Valley Helicopters Services Inc. P.O. Box 641 Lakeville, MN 55044 Dear Mr. Colmer; Your_ preliminary plans to conduct air rides in the vicinity of Valleyfair and the race track during May 15-September 15, 1986 appear to be compatible with normal traffic operating at the Flying Cloud Airport. A Letter of Agreement outlining, procedures and radio communications will be drafted to designate responsibilities and procedures. I will begin this as soon as You let me know that your plans and various permits have been obtained and finalized. Thanks for your discussion on March 24 , 1986 of your anticipated operations. We are looking forward to working with you this summer. Sincerely, r Robert'vJ. Pali, y Mana.ger, Flyi g Cloud Tower �xulglr A iva 50 Years of Air Trac Control Excellence 0 Rtd R-4-C INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT WOI_D-CHAMBERLAIN FIELD • ST. PAUL. MINNESOTA 55111 OFFICE OF AIRPORT DIRECTOR Public Passenger Terminal Bldg. Phone(612)726-1717 March 31, 1986 Mr. Edward R. Colmer Valley Helicopters, Inc. P. 0. Box 641 Lakeville, MN 55044 Dear Mr. Colmer, As we discussed on the phone , the Metropolitan Airports Com- mission (MAC) see ' s no problems with your providing helicopter rides and operating in an area adjacent to Valley Fair Amuse- ment Park. This consent is conditioned upon your working with the FAA Tower Chief at Flying Cloud Airport to insure that your operation does not conflict with airspace around Flying Cloud Airport. I know you have already met with Bob Palmby, the tower chief, and worked out an agreement as there is no conflict for which I thank you and ask that you continue to work with him in the future. I also understand you will write me a letter requesting use of Flying Cloud or Airlake Airports if you decide to use one of those airports in the future. Good luck with your endeavor, fly safe and let me know of any problems or questions so we can clear them up. Sinc rely, �I'I1 Tim C 11 'ster Asst. to the Airport Director TC/mz Owned ind Operated by the Minneapolis-Saint Paul Metropolitan Airports Commission fi it MEMO TO: Shakopee Plannin ` FROM: Judi Simac g Commission DATE: May 1 City Planner APPLICANT; Y � 1986 Edward Colmer LOCATION: 58 acres east ZONING: of Va1leyFair (Prairie House Addn. ) LAND USE: VacantB-1Business APPLICABLE REGULATIONS: Section 11. 04 , Subd. 6; FINDINGS REQUIRED: SectioSe1tion 11. 29, Subd. M SURROUNDING LAND USES: Subd. 6A North - Mn River Valley East - Ag - Residence South - T. H. 101 PROPOSAL: The a West - Va1leyFair applicant is requestin to operate a commercial g a conditional use rides) in the B-1 recreational Permit CONSIDERATIONS: District, use (helicopter 1. Proposes The applicant pro our months Y P to conduct helicopter rides for 8 : 00 (Ma 15th - September 15) , daily, P•m- Two employees include a pilot and safet10 a.m. to officer/ ticket seller. 2- e The proposed location which has been is the 58 acre Bradford has not Platted as Prairie House Addn, property yet been filed due to the r- The plat Access to this propertyo-w acquisition in the platin from T.H. 101 was Process- --in process and it obviouslya major issue 3 . The a has not been resolved. � applicant charges He has $10. 00/person for a five minute rid e. secured a $600, 000 insurance Underwriter Service. Policy from Associated Of insurance e The City Clerk recommends a certificate t has submitted Placed on file with the Cit i Cloud Tower e operate letter of approval from theeFAA/Flyapplicang from the MetropoitanAirport sCovicinit Flying Y• A similar letter Commission is on file. 4 • The operation consists landing pad area ( 75 ft. °f a Parking area for 10 cars & a 32 sq. ft. sign. ThereTe`er) . The applicant es the site. are no restroom facilitieson The Fire Chief requires that be provided, if a information on approved. fuel storage 'scommendation- Staff recommends denial of the Conditional Use Permit for ne following reasons : The establishment of the nditi normal development of vacantonal use will impede the property in the vicinity. 2 . Adequate access to the site is not being provided. 3 . Adequate measures have not been taken to ensure that dust and noise will not constitute a nuisance . 4 . The use will cause traffic hazard and congestion. 5 . Existing uses nearby (MN. Valley Trail, Valleyfair, Kopp residence) will be adversely affected by noise and dust created by the use. Action Requested: Motion to deny Conditional Use Permit Resolution #450 . Attachments tw i I I I D D m rg I s V rN co N UN x O _ a p v � a cp - A ppt off{ p , 1 z jr 1 I l o 1 _ CM WPIP'- I v � � rc NOTE: FLOODWAY AND FLOOD FRINGE DISTRICTS ARE DESIGNATED ON MAPS ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK. CITY OF SHAKOPEE. AG -� B 1 AG f - B 1 y z j2_ B 11 1 LINE AG FACTS RELATI','G TO 1� CC`r`ITIONAL USE P7RM17 ?ESOLLTTIOY ``450 APPLICANTS Edward R. Colmer, dba Valley Helicopters, Inc. MFh`0 T 0 1 Shakopee Planning Commission LOC A"'I0Y1 53 acres Fast of Valleyfair (Prairie :souse Addn.) ZO- INGs B-1 Highway Business LAIC USES Vacant PROPCSALs Edward R. Colmer is recuesting a Conditional Use Permit to operate commercial helicopter tours. LT*'l P 11C0YSI7?ERA1.'IONS" 2 . I do NOT intend to use the "construction access" from State Highway 101. Mr. Bradford, the property owner, will put a frontage road across the south side of his 58 acres. See Exhibit "H" , a self-explanatory letter from Fred Kopp, granting me access from his property next door to the East. Adeeuate access to the site IS being provided. 3. I will place on file with the City of Shakopee a certificate demonstrating liability insurance in an amount not less than $6009000.00. Enclosed please find Exhibit "r" , a letter of operation agreement which has been signed by both the FAA Flying Cloud Tower Manager and myself. Enclosed please find Exhibit "G" , a map of the proposed helicopter tour, as requested by the Flying Cloud Tower Manager. The proposed tour route has accepted by the Tower Manager. 4. Valley Helicopters, Inc. will contract with Satellite Industries to provide two portable restrooms, one for MEN, and one for WOMEN. Satellite was chosen because they will come to the site to pump and clean them on a regular basis, thereby, keeping them odor free. There Will be restroom facilities on the site. 5. There will be NO fuel stored on the property. The helicopter will be fueled from my fuel truck. The truck will be removed from the site each night after closing. UNDER "REC OM'sE�'?�ATI CN"s 1. All property available to developing in the close vicinity of the site is owned by Mr. Bradford. As the property owner, he signed my Conditional Use Permit, thereby showing his non-concern for any impedence of the normal development of the vacant praperty in the vicinity. Mr. Bradford told me that any development of his property will net commence before September 15, 1936, the date my tour business will be finished . No other property is being developed closer than one-half mile from the permit site. Cont'd. on Page 2 Page 2 This has already been addressed in 17"DER "C( NSI7ERAT1. 'S" , item 7. ')ust Controls Mr. Colmer will Iay a black dirtbase with cultured sod on ton in a 75' R 75' take—ofd' and landing dad to insure that there will be "0 dust -b_owing around the area. The remainder of my leased land is grassy field sod . '"no only dirt is a.,pr)ximately one—quarter of a mile North of the site. I will be from 2LOI—2501 above this field and YOT flying even close to it. Refer to Exhibit "H11 about dust concern. Yoise Controls Noise is measured by how close you are to the source. The two items which affect noise are source and distance. The "rule of thumb" about r.^ise is ' if you double the distance from the source, you reduce the noise by ore—half' . FreGuq-^y of noise is very noticible. Higher frecuency ncices, such as the whire of a jet ergine, are more irritating to the human ear than a low frer,,:ency noise, such as the hum of a helicopter ergine. Decibels, the meas-.irement of roise, does n:t always reflect this pre erly. At any rate, the helicopter that would be used at this site will be muffled. to about cre—half the noise level of the dozens of 13—wheeler semi trucks that n_ass this site every hour on State righway 101. See Exhibit "I" about helicopter noise levels and the comparisons to different objects, The helicopter that I will be using here will be equipped with a 1461 FAA a^proved muffler system-costing !29200.00,. I was installed by a FAA licenced Airframe and Powerplant (A & P) mechanic to abate over 90% of the ergine exhaust noise. See Exhibit "J", page 1 and 2 of noise levels with the 1461 muffler system. Also refer to Exhibit "H" about noise concern. My giving helicopter tours at this site will cause absolutely NO more conjestion on State Highway 1: 1 . In fact, I feel that my business could possible relieve the traffic conjestion. There is a 101 blacktop plus a 4' gravel shoulder added to the already double lane. This 14' is plenty wide enough to pull off to make a right turn into the Kopp driveway. Any cars turning should not restrict the normal flow of traffic, thereby causing neither a traffic hazard nor a conjestion.. When in operation, any traffic conjestion is caused by Raceway Park, Valleyfair, Canterbury Towns, and Murphy' s Landing, NOT by my helicopter business being there. On the north side of Valleyfair' s big blacktop parking lot is a big gravel lot used for overflow and camper parking. This dirt lot is the dust maker in the area , not the helicopter. Valleyfair does not seem to be too concerned about this dust, and also, I will be one—half mile away from Valleyfair. George Munchow, Director of Shakopee Parks and Recreation, told me that the Minnesota Valley Trail is nor.—existant behind Valleyfair and the Kopp property as of right now. It is impossible for this Trail to be adversely affected by dust and noise. Again, refer to Exhibit "H" , about Kopp' s opinion about d ;st ar_d noise. ' / / �7XN1RIT t 1L) FLYING CLOUD ? /VALLEY HIjOOpTER SERVICE, INC. LETTER OF AGREEMENT n EFFECTIVE 141 A 7 1 S — d EPT ► j 19 SUBJECT: VALLEY HMICOPI'ER SERVICES, INC OPERATIONS 1. PURPOSE: This agreement establishes procedures for Valley Helicopter Services Inc. for operations under Visual Flight Rules (VFR) within the Flying Cloud Airport Traffic Area (ATA) . 2. SCOPE: The procedures and responsibilities contained herein are for the operation of Valley Helicopter Services in the Flying Cloud ATA, specifically in the vicinity of Valleyfaix and Canterbury Downs. 3. RESPONSIBILITIES: Unless otherwise authorized by Flying Cloud Tower, Valley Helicopter Service shall conduct operations in accordance with the following procedures. 4. PROCEDURES: a. Valley Helicoptexs Services, Inc. shall: (1) Monitor -the Flying Cloud ATIS (124.9) to determine the appropriate tower frequency in use. 4-41'. (2) Monitor the appropriate tower frequency prior to liftoff from the Valley Helicopter Services pad, and remain on tower frequency throughout all operations. *,, (3) Conduct all operations at an altitude not to exceed 300_ AGL and in an area southeast, south and southwest of the pad. In no case, will operations north of the t3inr*-_sota River be conducted without specific clearance from the tower. A map, not to scale, depicting the area for normal operations is attached. Cgr"• "PreA w&L 8t CA"40 VA �6ycvl W �+AcYi wIrN /i 6c C"L l , Robert J. P i� by, E.R. Colmer, manager, Flying Cloud ower Owner, Valley Helicopter Servioe,Inc. in J_y ,cd > a ° _ � _ '��. �� � .., :. -sem ,''� ,.Q .r ,• CV 110 pa W6J LO Ski.fj..y.`F 7 -w�#""' 'Y► Q .,+�`����:- .� � Y _ ,A �� � •.7 2 � V Q w �TQJ v1 q VYr '^oa X00 ! "' NT J. ' v yes ce W 6ft ZZ 041 SIC Ire-,. S ' LZ j l� May 7, 1986 Tc: ^ity of Shakopee pianr.ing Com-nission I , Fred Kopp, grant cermissicn to Edward R . Colmer, dba Valley Helicopters, Tnc., to use my driveway to access the Bradford property, for the purpose of giving helicopter tours in the vicinity. I have taken into consideration both the noise and the dust thrat may occur from this operation. As far as the noise is concerned, I have a natural tree line buffer zone between the Bradford property and mine; and as far as the dust is concerned, I know that a sod take—off and larziing pad will be laid by Valley Helicopters, Inc.to eliminate the dust problem. I have talked to Mr. Colmer about all the phases of giving helicopter rides immediately adjacent to my property, and I have absolutely no objections with this operation whatsoever. This letter should cover any discrepancies concerning the noise and dust problems and the access to the Bradford property via by driveway off State Fighway 101, and should give my full consent for this type of operation. If you have any questions regarding this matter that you would like to talk to me about, you may contact me by telephone either during your May 8, 1986 meeting, or anytime thereafter. My telephone number is 445-8739• —— Sincerely, 4121 tL2 Fred Kopp CX 441T H ' ^I^S 5 l CARL F'IYG, accoustics expert working in Products Support Divisicn of Bell Helicopter in Fort North, Texas, gave me the following informations Outside of 'helicopter 500' away in '.'formal Flight Configuration, which is take—off, hover, and landing. 67 —76 dbA (db=decibels A=weighed noise _eve!) Comparisonss City bus or light truck (1-3 ton) 63-65 dbA ( outside the source at 500' ) 76-88 dbA ( outside the source at 75'-100' ) Semi—truck (18-wheeler) 84-96 dbA ( outside the source at 5009 ) 576VE- 1)GCCR1 (IU,.) AN 18—WHEELER IS NOISIER THAN A -?FLI-OPT,:R p� 414C DARRELL TrfESLANDER,� noise abatement expert from Metropolitan Airport Commission (MAC) at Minneapolis—St. Paul International Airport, St. Paul, Minnesota, gave me the following informations Bell Helicopter at 200' AGL (Above Ground Level) in a fly—over = 85 db Com parisonss Heavy truck = 86-91 dbA at 100' Jet take—off . = 101 dbA at 2,000' Air Conditioner = 60 dbA at 20' Effectively Perceived Noise Level (EPNL) is like dbA. EPNL is used by the FAA To determine noise levels. Bell 47 flying over at 500' 90.3 EPNL Hew-OPT+ER5 Bell 206 flying over at 500' = 85.8 EPNL Hughes 300 flying over at 500' = 82.0 EPNL Hughes 500 flying over at 500' = 85.8 EPNL DC-9 flying over at 500' = 103.0 EPNL 727 flying over at 500' = 104.4 EPNL �X N l B rr- -1- CL LL c6� z LL # CID 10 0 mCL ^ V O c r C m Ltd pm 0 = > 0. 4 � QsEN CIDcmc a3c 0 Q � m =—" : U- ... U. V S= V i' @ O Q ( z amII o� � 'm u O W m r C LLJ _ @ LL1 LL > 0-!5coo > C,- E� 3 L di c_d7 cs Q L m m �..7 'b ictm ,c - o J i3�� w101�0/�O0 � O1�•.I�.J1�.-1.r L •1mw1w•t 1R N � - JON I�'.0N N.r '� y Iui .Or O•• O•e J O r 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 "� C c RRR Z rim of m.nm.o N }•' .Oo o.00ni.Oo.O O � . J .O Cal m 1 V C1 ititf it y <S4 �1 Y r M9 ] M 7 M o�p pp pp tl i,y .000 O � m • � r � � • u 61 O A A A A T A u Si• A T A A A A u Y 7 T T T T A A �� 0 C � S L.a.►r s.a,00 � r r tr e. a.r oO ..rrY.rir Q C C c $ g v • . <f~i r < .r > O O �� ' �1 O O O 00 0 o x W� ssossgos sssossss I vg gs gs 0a� > zI ai vv.D am mm.o y vv.D O m m m.0 < < 0 CA) LD CJ t N O � \ \ O zw x �-► _T ,� ham" CD Q C O _ c CD s h O n U) ? CD `max ' i' z• x� �' CD CD [r • CD CDccm C 1 CD M x T a }. C? X N• CD s � CD O S r ,C+ a. le CD CD - ' a CD C7 o cD - K � v O � .-r cD 3 0 0cnN A C V CD C c 0 C13 O O 7C O O a _ Cn y Q CD m O c' CD m _ Q cCD CD D m Q � V 0 O N CA to Bell Helicopter k i 4A i M • Bell Helicopter Textron Inc. Post Office Box 482 A Subsidiary of Textron Inc. Fort Worth, Texas 76101 (817) 280-2011 7 May 1986 35 :CHK:wb-10047 Mr. Butch Colmer Helicopter Pilot P. 0. Box 126 Savage, MN 55378 SUBJECT: Model 206BJRIII Noise Level Information REFERENCE: Telecon with Carl King, same subject, 6 May 1986 Dear Mr. Colmer: The information you requested during the referenced telephone _ _conversation is enclosed. -Please feel free to use- the _ material in the paper you are preparing. _ If I can be of further assistance, please do not hesitate to let me hear from you. Very truly yours, BELL HELICOPTER TEXTRON R. L. Davis Manager, Propulsion/Rotors/ Drive Systems Product Support Engineering Encl: Prod. Data Excerpts Accoustics Data 16 206B JetRanger III 7 May 1986 EXCERPTS ON HELICOPTER NOISE Reference: Product Data, Bell 206B JetRanger III, Serial No. 3567 and Subsequent, February 1983 The Allison 250-C20J engine has only one difference from the earlier 250-C 20B model. The gear mesh from the power-take-off to the torque- meter has been changed to raise the pitch of the gear noise from 5, 000 to 6, 000 hertz . This new frequency reduces cabin noise because the higher pitch does not transmit as easily. The change is worth- while because it reduces the high frequency noise in the cabin by about 20 decibels - a significant improvement in the comfort level. Soundproofing blankets are installed on the -cabin ceiling and behind the parcel shelf. These are made of a fiberglass batting filling with a quilted cover. The soundproofing blankets for the cabin ceiling are covered with plastic headliners having soft fabric inserts. A one-piece trim unit covers the soundproofing blanket in the parcel shelf area. l� 206B JetRanger III 7 May 1986 ACCOUSTICS DATA During normal flight conditions-including takeoff, hover, and landing of the helicopter-an observer out-of-doors at a distance of 500 feet would experience a noise level in the range of 67 to 76 dBa (a-weighted noise level in decibels) . During acceleration (worst condition) of a city bus or light truck, an observer out-of-doors at a distance of 500 feet would experience a noise level in the range of 63 to 65 dBa. At a distance of 50 to 100 feet, the observer would experience a noise level in the range of 76 to 88 dBa. Noise level information for large, heavy trucks is not available for comparison. However, one person remembered that the Depart- ment of Transportation imposes a limit of 96 decibels inside the cab of the truck. t MEMO TO: Shakopee Planning Commission l v FROM: Judi Simac, City Planner RE: C.U.P. #450 - Edward Colmer helicoper ride business DATE: May 19 , 1986 Background: At the May 8 , 1986 meeting the Commission approved a motion to continue the public hearing on conditional use permit no. 450 to May 22nd in order for the applicant to provide additional information on safety. The Planning Commission requested Mr. Colmer to submit a written plan which indicates 1) safety standards 2 ) training of the safety persons, 3 ) the fenced area and 4 ) the proposed treatment of the parking area. Staff has not yet received this information. However additional information on this application is available: 1. With the owner ' s permission (Kopp) the applicant may use the driveway for access. y5l/,S-F00 2 • d r�ar of the Dept. of Fish and Wildlife has indicated 'that the helicopters may harm the wildlife in the trail area. The altitude of the helicopters may interfere with the flgiht patterns of the blue herons which nest near to the site. 3 . The City Attorney will respond to the liabil-i-ty of the City by the meeting date. Action Reauested: Motion to deny C.U.P. Res. ,'-:450 . go � T� l � f ACT S--F':T TOs City of Shakopee Planning Commission FFOMs Edward R. Colmer, Owner/Operator of Valley Helicopters, Inc. REGARDING: Conditional Use Permit 'i 45C This is the requested written plan with drawing which indicates the followings 1) Safety Standards 2) Training of the Safety Officers 3) Fenced Area 4) Treatment of Parking Area 1) SAFETY S'T.A'_7'ART;Ss A) Edward R. Colmer, Owner/Operator of Valley Helicopters, Inc., will be the Chief Safety Officer at Valley Heliport, and will reserve the right to make any and all safety decisions. 1) In the absence of Mr. Colmer, a safety officer will be designated . B) Safety Officer will have radio contact with the helicopter pilot at all times during the hours of operation. 1) Safety Officer will have a hand held two—way radio tuned to the same frequency as Flying Cloud Tower and the pilot. C) Nobody will be -allowed within 75' of landing pad unless escorted by the Safety Officer. I 1) Safety Officer will escort patrons both to and from the helicopter at all times. 2) Safety Officer will never escort patrons closer than 20' from the tail rotor. 3) Patrons will enter the landing pad area head—on toward the helicopter, then directly to the right door of the helicopter. D) Nobody will be allowed onto the Landing Pad when the helicopter is on the final approach. 1) If anybody is on the landing pad when the helicopter is on final approach, the Safety Officer is required to wave off the helicopter or radio to pilot NOT to land until landing pad is clear of all bodies. E) All patrons will be secured in a seat belt while riding in the helicopter. F) The tail rotor of the helicopter will always be pointed away from the parking area when sitting on the landing pad. 2) SAFETY OFFICER TRAINI'-Gs A) Safety Officer will be a responsible person between the ages of 25-50. B) Safety Officer will be thoroughly familiar with all safety rules of operation. 1) Any infringement of any Operation Rule will be grounds for immediate dismissal of Safety Officier. C) Safety Officer reserves the right to refuse to sell a ticket to anyone who is obviously intoxicated. (cont'd.) Ib Page 2 — D) Nobody will leave the parking area toward the Landing Pad unless escorted by the Safety Officer. E) All Safety Offficers have already been working for Valley Helicopters, Inc. or Hib:ing Helicopter Service, Inc. , a sister corporation, for the past 16 months, and have been adequately trained. 3) FENCED A R F A s A) The parking area will be completely fencedto contain all people. 1) There will be a flagged driveway into the parking area. 2) There will be a flagged walkway into the landing pad. a) Safety Of-'icer/Ticket Seller will be located at the entrance of the landing pad walkway from the parking area. 4) TR F ATME?dT OF PARKING AREA s A) The parking area is already in field sod (grass) , so there will not be any dust to control. In addition to requested material, I wish to submit the following information about this operations 1) IN CASE OF F TEL SPILLS A) There will be a new 40' hose on the fuel truck. B) There will be a person at the nozzle by the helicopter. C) There will be a person at the fuel truck by the pump. D) I spoke to Jack Mattlock, Supervisor or Emergency Spill Team, State of Minnesota, Pollution Control Agency, and he told met 1) If anything should happen, call the MPCA after I have taken emergency measures. 2) Excavate any major spill to the point that there is no odor. 3) The MPCA will tell you where to "thin spread" the excavated material. E) I will install a 12' X 12' mat with 2-3" of sand on it to be located at the far back of property. 1) In the event of a fuel tank rupture, I have a plug and dike kit available to repair the tank temporarily. 2) I also have available another 200 fuel tank I could pump the fuel into. ' 2) EIRE EXTINGL'ISHI;RSt A) I have talked to Joe Reis, Fire Chief, City of Shakopee, and made all arrangements with him in case of fire or fuel spill. 3) WERGENCY COb!ML"v'ICATIONSs A) There will be either a regular or mobile telephone on the site for emergency communications. ,r L 717 _Lx kk Cl fn cp I C? O `'^ a XXx d 8 00 m L Ar p N ern a I N LA ZZ> � D { j2 IC x a v z D � � o 1 r 0 A oA l J y C► � YY� rp Q Oy � d� 1 qn - 5d ( 1� L J c -,- c a a d �J Li J 11 C� r of .;► y "'�' � � � y .-. � � �' y 3 NU ci ' N cj S* e u ov I V I MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator FROM: Judi Simac, City Planner RE: Comprehensive Sewer Plan Amendment DATE: June 6 , 1986 Introduction- At their June 5 , 1986 meeting the Planning Commission approved a motion to recommend to the City Council that a Comprehensive Sewer Plan Amendment be submitted to the Metropolitan Council which will expand the year 2000 sewer service area south, to the northerly line of the TH 101/169 By Pass and east to the City limit. In addition, based on testimony received at the public hearing, the Planning Commission approved a motion to recommend to the City Council that a proposed request for annexation of property within Jackson Township be considered for sewer service, with the use of land trades. Background: The Metropolitan Council staff has responded to the sewer service land area calculations submitted by the City. They made adjustments which resulted in a credit of about 62 acres. The year 2000 land supply figure they have calculated for Shakoee is 1, 902 acres. This figure is accurate and satisfactory to staff. what the 1, 902 figure means is that 384 more acres can be opend up for sewer service. The number is determined as follows: Open land 1980+ = 490 ac. Open land = 722 ac. Alt. Area A ( residential 5/86 amendment) = 306 Total = 1518 1902 - 1518 = 384 Staff has indicated to the Met Council that the City would like to open up all land north of the proposed by-pass and extend to the east City limit. Excluded from the acreage calculations will be the undevelopable land such as the Shiely pit, NSP substation and the railroad r-o-w. The Met Council has indicated that they will look favorably upon natural/physical boundaries and be flexible with acreages. At the public hearing, Earl Dahlberg requested that his 150 acres in Jackson Twp be included in the plan amendment. Mr. Dahlberg indicated that he plans to proceed with the petition for annexation into Shakopee. In reaction to this commend the Planning Commission expressed an interest in balancing the amendment with additional residential land to the west and less industrial/ commercial to the east. However no plan amendment can be submitted for the Jackson Twp area until it is part of the City. The use of land trades or staging of the sewer service area is a good possibility in this case. If the City Council wishes to keep the option of more residential land open, then some of the land area to the east can be designated as land trade area. Therefore if the annexation becomes a reality, sewer availability can be shifted to serve it. Most important is to identify the negotiable land areas now, in the proposed amendment, so land owners don' t accuse the City of giving them sewer availability and then taking it away. Alternatives : 1. Submit the plan amendment as proposed (attachment) 2 . Submit a plan amendment which has staged areas, in order to use land trades if the annexation becomes a reality. 3 . Postpone submittal of a plan amendment until annexation can be considered further. 4. Other Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends alternative #2 . Staff will prepare for the June 10th meeting an exhibit which illustrates possible areas to be placed in the "land trade" category. Action Requested: Direct staff to submit a Comprehensive Sewer Plan Amendment to provide sewer service to the year 2000 . tw X Ry \ r`� TTl W 1-4> n ,o cn -mu T;7 --., \� F- CITY OF 1�SM/MOP rt I I• _IN ANNcli 3z I- CITY OF IM/MOPEF --.�— -CITY OF PRIOR LAME 1 ilk a O rnV ii 1 Y c� Z • , — k rTv a rn rn 4 C.n Z7 + � I V If 10 01111 h i - •' lam st — I: '4 t�M11lYEali;��� � £PioieeiMiiiiiiirr; ;! i �;1 — `v? � I• — -� _ - /,?ki _ •:mac 5F LF S I•T �t j --_ i1 ! t'�! !a eel==� I i CITY OF'SM/MOPES ZZ i Y CITY Of S/!KE — nn X V � -�- ' JF MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator FROM: Judi Simac, City Planner RE: Amending City Code to Allow Mobile Homes in Ag District DATE: June 6 , 1986 Introduction: The City Council has directed staff to prepare an ordinance which shall amend Section 11. 05 , Subd. 8 of the City Code to enable persons unrelated to the farm operator to live in a mobile home on a farm, if they are employed by that farm. Background: In order to amend the City Code, the Planning Commission must conduct a public hearing to consider the amendment. Following the public hearing the Planning Commission forwards a recommendation to the City Council. The next regularly scheduled meeting of the Planning Commission is July 10 , 1986 , therefore that is the soonest date that the amendment can be considered. Staff intends to place a legal ad for the July 10th hearing date. In regard to the State law, which governs manufactured homes, pre-empting the City' s mobile home requirements, the Building Official has informed me that he reauires the mobile units or manufactured housing to have the HUD Seal to be acceptable. tw L� MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator, FROM: Ken Ashfeld, City Engineer " SUBJECT: Eagle Creek. Junction DATE: June 5, 1986 INTRODUCTION: The attached May 29, 1986 memorandum regarding Eagle Creek Junc- tion addressed various issues relative to the assessment of benefited properties resulting from the County Road 16 utilities project. BACKGROUND: The following is a summary of costs presented : Current Project Cost $208, 006. 16 Future Lateral Cost (Laurent ) $ 46, 343. 00 Future Service Cost (Schmitt) $ 3, 600. 00 Total Future Project Cost $257, 949. 16 Total Amount Assessed $236, 500. 86 Laurent Schmitt Total Project Cost Assessment $118, 138. 10 $6, 875. 84 Current Assessment Amount $10Q, 315. 00 $6, 304. 86 Total Project Cost Adjustment $ 9, 823. 10 $ 570. 98 Cost from Project Fund $3S, 519. 90 $3, 029. 02 Property Owner Cost ( percentage) 21. 20% 15. 86% Project Fund Cast (percentage) 78. 80% 84. 14% Bo Spurrier did indicate to me that the installation of the lateral crossings to the Laurent property was discussed at the time the assessments were calculated and the assessment role developed. It was agreed that the cost should be part of the project, but due to the unknown location of the lateral cros- sings, it was mutually agreed to by Laurent and Bo to install the crossings at some future date. It was felt that the fund had adequate dollars in the future to fund this work. ALTERNATIVES: Various alternatives were presented in the May 29, 1986 memo. Eagle Creek Junction June 5, 1986 Page E RECOMMENDATION : Since the mutual decision to delay installation of the laterals may have increased the estimated future cost of laterals above that of the theoretical fund balance and since the future casts at this point are an estimate (except for one crossing) , I recom- mend a participation of the future cast as presented in the preceeding cost summary. REQUESTED ACTION : 1. Move to direct the appropriate City Officials to enter into a developers agreement with Laurent Builders, Inc. whereby the City will participate in 78. 80% of the cost of one water and sewer lateral crossing of Eagle Creek Boulevard to the proposed Eagle Creek. Junction Plat and 78. 80% of the future cost of a maximum additional three sewer and water lateral cry.ssings of Eagle Creek Boulevard to the remaining Laurent Builders, Inc. property, cost of such participation to be taken from the Special Assess- ment Fund. L. Move to direct staff to inform Mr. Howard Schmitt that the City will participate in 84. 14% of the future cost of a sewer service crossing of Eagle Creek Boulevard, cost of such participation to be taken from the Special Assess- ment Fund. KA/pmp MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator FROM: Ken Ashfeld, City Engineer `�- �' SUBJECT: Eagle Creek. Junction DATE: May 29, 1986 INTRODUCTION: At the May 20, 198E regular meeting, Council discussed a request from Laurent Builders to install sewer and water lateral con- nections across Eagle Creek Boulevard (CSAR 16) . Council di- rected staff to return with information that answers the fol- lowing questions : 1. What amount was assessed? 2. What were the actual cost breakdowns, i. e. , litigation, right-of-way, etc. ? 3. How has litigation costs been handled in the past as it relates to assessable project cost? 4. How do other Cities handle assessments for utilities paralleling one side of a road but assessed to prop- erties on both sides? BACKGROUND: I have researched available information in an attempt to answer the questions presented. 1. Total amount assessed was $23E, 500. 8E. 2. The following is a cost breakdown based upon my inter- pretation of each expenditure for the project. I did have to make some assumptions, based upon time frames, as to what was normal legal, administration, and engineering costs and what costs were attributed to litigation of right-of-way, construction claims and assessments. Construct ion $139, 5S7. 73 Right-of-Way $ 17, 300. 00 Legal & Administration $ 12, 798. 99 Engineering $ 21, 763. 21 Bonding & Fiscal $ 6, S71. 24 Litigation $ 9. 884. 99 TOTAL PROJECT COST $208, 00E. 1E Eagle Creek Junction May '29, 198E Page Difference between act ua1 protect cost and assessed cost is $28, 494. 70 3. Based upon past practices of assessing litigation costs, I could riot substantiate a firm policy regarding apportionment of assessed costs. Typically right-of- way costs and associated appraisals and legal costs are considered project costs since this is determined in advance of project implementation. I would not say that this is a firm policy though. Staff is riot farniliar with a policy providing for amending assess- merits due to legal costs associated with assessment appeals. 4. I did speak with neighboring communities on methods of assessing utilities parallel to a roadway serving benefit to properties on both sides of the roadway. The following is a summary of assessment criteria: a. Differing rates for each side of the roadway is impractical and difficult at best to substan- tiate consistency of assessment procedures. b. Laterals (or services in the case of single lot development ) are installed originally with the trunk based on one service per lot or one lateral per parcel or platted street. C. If laterals or services are not installed with the trunk, cost of proposed future laterals and services are assessed over project area. In the case of one neighboring community, services were riot installed nor future costs assessed. The community was prepared to install services, since all properties were assessed equally but a change of land use preempted this action. Alt ernat ives: In analyzing possible alternatives, the following questions should be answer-ed. a. Is benefit approximately equal or consistent over all assessed properties? b. Since the period for contesting assessment is long past, does this preclude further actions? Eagle Creek Junction May 29, 198E Page 3 C. Since the City did not formally act on previCIus staff actions, are previous actions invalid? The following are possible alternatives: 1. Do Nothing. ^c. Agree to install four water and sewer lateral crossings as requested. 3. Negotiate a compromise. 4. Install requested crossings and re-assess the original project area. If the asnwer to the above questions is yes then alternative I would be appropriate. If the answer- is no, then alternative 2 or 3 would be appropriate. To implement alternative 4, the City would have difficulty proving benefit to properties on the north side of Eagle Creek Boulevard. RECOMMENDATION: If Council agrees to install four crossings for Eagle Creek Junction, I recommend that a service also be installed to the Howard Schmitt property, thereby, providing total equity. The cost of this action, as stated in a previous memo, would be approximately $46, 3,43. 00 + $3, 600. 00 totaling $49, 94-3. 00. Since $28, 494. 70 theoretically remains in the fund balance, approxi- mately $21, 448. 30 would require outside funding. If Council believes that all fund costs should be project cost and assessed appropriately, I recommend the following compromise. Project Cost to Date $208, 006. 16 Requested Crossing Cost (Approximately) $ 49, 943. 00 Total Future Project Cost $257, 949. 16- Laurent 257, 949. 16,Laurent Builders assessment responsibility based on Future Pro- ject Cost . . . . . $118, 138. 10. Current assessment amount filed on property owned by Laurent Builders . . . . $108, 315. 00. Additional assessed cost to Laurent Builders if all costs are project, costs . . . . $9, 823. 10. Howard Schmitt assessment responsibility based on Future Project Cost . . . . $6, 875. 84 Eagle Creek Junction May 29, 198E Page 4 Current assessment amount filed on property owned by Howard Schmitt . . . . $6, 304. 8C. Additional assessed cost to Howard Schmitt if all costs are project costs . . . . $570. 98. In summary, the aforestated compromise would provide for the fund balance to pay a portion of future project cost (78. 80 % in the case of Laurent & 84. 14% in the case of Schmitt ) and each property owner pay a portion of future project cost (21. 20% in the case of Laurent & 15. 86% in the case of Schmitt ) . RECOMMENDED ACTION; Council to consider alternatives and recommendations and provide direction to staff as to desired actions. KA/pmp ECJ MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator FROM: Judith S. Cox, City Clerk RE: Renewal of Non-Intoxicating Malt Liquor Licenses DATE: June 10 , 1986 INTRODUCTION The following applicants have applied for a 1986-87 On and/or Off Sale Non-Intoxicating Malt Liquor License. There are twelve applications in order at this time. Please approve those twelve and table the other four applications that are not in order. The Building Inspector has inspected the premises of all licensees and all are in compliance with the city code. ACTION REQUESTED Approve the applications( s ) and grant a . . . license to: Approve/ Table Applicant On Sale Off Sale Approve Jim & Lucy' s Inc. X X 210 West 1st Avenue Not needed Friendly Folks Club, Inc. X Holds 123 East 1st Avenue liquor license Approve Richard E. Cleveland X 828 East 1st Avenue Approve Art Berens & Sons, Inc. X 123 West 2nd Avenue Not Juba' s, Inc. X Renewing 1100 Minnesota Valley Mall Approve Superamerica Stations Inc. X 1155 East 1st Avenue Approve Cedar Fair Limited Partnership X One Valleyfair Drive Approve Holiday Stationstores X 444 East 1st Avenue Approve Pizza Huts of the Northwest X 257 Marschall Road Approve Brooks Superette, Inc. X 615 Marschall Road Approve Speedway Concessions, Inc. X 6528 T.H. 101 Approve Q Petroleum X 235 West lst Avenue Table Coll-Prahm Inc. X 2400 East 4th Avenue Table Tom Thumb Food Markets X 590 So. Marschall Road Approve JBF Inc. X 823 East 1st Avenue Approve Fraternal Order of Eagles X 220 West 2nd Avenue Table Kwai and Grace Poon X 237 East First Avenue Table Brooks Superette, Inc. #42 X 1147 Canterbury Road JSC/jms J MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator FROM: Judith S. Cox, City Clerk RE: Renewal of 1986-87 License to Only Allow Consumption and Display of Intoxicating Liquor (Set-ups ) DATE: June 10 , 1986 INTRODUCTION The following applicants have applied for a 1986-87 Set-up License. The applications are in order at this time. Please approve. ACTION REQUESTED Approve the applications and grant a 1986-87 License to Only Allow Consumption and Display of Intoxicating Liquor to: 126Oc LUcT--s 1I1ia. 201 West 1st Avenue Approve Knights of Columbus Home Association, Inc. 1760 East 4th Avenue Approve Coll-Prahm, Inc. 2400 East 4th Avenue Approve Fraternal Order of Eagles 220 West 2nd Avenue JSC/jms MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator FROM: Judith S. Cox, City Clerk RE: 1986 Intoxicating Liquor Licenses DATE: June 10, 1986 Introduction The following applicants have applied for 1986 Liquor License(s). Staff has checked for delinquent property taxes and utility bills. The building inspector has made inspections of the premises and all are in order except for Arnie's Friendly Folks Club. The following applications are in order for Council consideration, except as noted. Recommended Action Approve the application(s) and grant a 1986-1987 Off Sale, On Sale, Sunday, and/or Club Intoxicating Liquor License(s) to: Action Applicant On Sale Sunday Off Sale Club Approve Pullman Club Inc. X X 124 W. 1st Avenue Approve XX Corp. & Wittles Inc. X X X 1561 E. 1st Avenue Approve Clair's Bar, Inc. X X 124 South Holmes Table Valley Liquor Inc. X 1104 Minn. Valley Mall Table The Weiss Company, Inc. X 8522 East Highway 101 Table R. Hanover, Inc. X X 911 East 1st Avenue Table S.E.L.F. Inc. X X 1135 East lst Avenue Table VFW Post 4046 X X 132 East 1st Avenue Approve American Legion Club X X Post No. 2 1256 E. 1st Avenue On Sale Sunday Off Sale Club Approve Knights of Columbus X X Home Assoc. Inc. 1760 E. 4th Avenue Approve Minnesota Concessions, X X X Inc. 1100 Canterbury Road Approve Family Dining X 6268 Hwy 101 Approve CRE Restaurant Co. X X 1583 E. 1st Avenue Table Friendly Folks X X X 122 E. 1st Avenue Approve Riverside Liquors, Inc. X 507 E. 1st Avenue MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator FROM: Judith S. Cox, City Clerk RE: Renewal of On Sale Wine License DATE: June 3 , 1986 INTRODUCTION The following applicant has applied for a 1986-87 On Sale Wine License. The application is in order. Please approve. ACTION REQUESTED Approve the application and grant an 1986-87 On Sale Wine License .to Cedar Fair Limited Partnership, One Valleyfair Drive. JSC/jms MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator I FROM: Judith S. Cox, City Clerk RE: Fox Run 1st Addition - Developers Agreement DATE: June 5 , 1986 Introduction Since the preparation of the standard developers agreement for Fox Run lst Addition, it has become apparent that a revised developers agreement would better serve the needs of the City and be less cumbersome for the developer. Background One of the conditions of plat approval was the execution of a developers agreement to provide for the park dedication, instal- lation of electricity, and construction of street improvements when petitioned by either the developers or the future owners of Lots 1 and 2 , with the developer waiving all rights to a hearing on the proposed assessment. Using the standand developers agreement became cumbersome when the developer is petitioning for the improvements, but they won' t be installed until either the developer or future property owners actually ask the City to construct them. The standard developers agreement requires that a letter of credit be placed on file with the City for the improvements or that the assessment for the improvements, OR ESTIMATED ASSESSMENT, be paid prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy. There is one lot which has not yet been built upon. Under the standard developers agreement, the estimated cost of the street construction would have to be paid prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy for this lot or a letter of credit would have to be placed on file and renewed every six months indefinitely. In the attached developers agreement, the developers are: a) petitioning for the street improvements and are waiving their rights to public hearings and contesting the assessments, b) agreeing to pay for installation of electricity whether or not served by SPUC and c) agreeing to paying park dedication. There is some question as to whether or not they would be served by SPUC. Although this developers agreement is not backed up by a letter of credit or agreement to pay assessments at 150% prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy, it puts future property owners on notice of the three future encumbrances . Because this is only a two lot plot, the future encumbrances will affect only one property owner for electricity and park dedication and only two for street construction. I believe the revised developers agreement is more practical than the standard developers agreement, since the City has agreed not to construct the street until the developer or property owner requests it. The recommendation of a revised developers agreement came from the Assistant City Attorney. Alternatives a. No developers agreement. b. Standard developers agreement. c. Revised developers agreement. d. Amend standard or revised developers agreement. Recommended Action Approve a revised developers agreement, versus the City' s standard developers agreement, for Fox Run 1st Addition, approved by the Assistant City Attorney. JSC/jms A� /o �,f �R 5el'� or,cec City of Shakopee 86 ooeo ° Scott County, Minnesota i 6 reg Developers Agreement fo WHEREAS, the owners and developers of Fox Run 1st Addition have received conditional approval by resolution adopted for said Fox Run 1st Addition on the conditions that they enter into this developers agreement, and WHEREAS, it is understood by the owners/developers that the City would be doing the Chapter 429 Public Improvements contained herein at the owners ' /developers ' request and convenience and would not be installing them without a waiver. THEREFORE, the undersigned owners/developers of Fox Run lst Addition: 1 . Hereby petition the City of Shakopee to install the following improvements and to assess them pursuant to Minnesota Statutes Chapter 429 : Fox Run 1st Addition street construction in accordance with design criteria and standard specifications of the City of Shakopee when requested by either the developers or the future owners of Lots 1 or 2. 2. Hereby waive their right to a public hearing prior to Council ordering the improvements and also waives their right to a public hearing prior to the levying of the assessments related to said improvements and further waives all rights to appeal said assessments which shall be assessed pursuant to Minnesota Statutes Chapter 429 as a result of the installation of the above improvements. 3 . Agree to entering into an agreement with and paying the required fee to the appropriate utilities for the installation of electricity to serve said subdivision. 4 . Agree to pay the City of Shakopee park dedication in the amount of $250 for Lot 2 at the time of building permit issuance or pay the proper amount for the ultimate density used for said Lot 2 . This agreement shall be binding on all heirs, assigns and successors. Dated this day of 1986 . OWNER/DEVELOPER P.A.C.T. Rolling Hills , a Limited Partnership By Its and Fredrick J. Corrigan, Husband and Linda M. E. Corrigan, Wife STATE OF MINNESOTA) ) ss (INDIVIDUAL ACKNOWLEDGMENT) COUNT OF SCOTT ) On this day of 19 before me, a notary public within and for said County appeared to me known to be the person( s) signed as principal( s) herein, and stated that _he_ signed the same of own free will and accord. Notary Public County, Minnesota My Commission expires Seal STATE OF MINNESOTA) ss ( INDIVIDUAL ACKNOWLEDGMENT) COUNT OF SCOTT ) On this day of 19 before me, a notary public within and for said County appeared to me known to be the person( s) signed as principal( s) herein, and stated that _he_ signed the same of own free will and accord. Notary Public County, Minnesota My Commission expires Seal 14.. �,.. MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator ra �, FROM: Ken Ashfeld, City Engineer SUBJECT: Upper Valley Drainage & Dean' s Lake Outlet DATE: May 14 , 1986 INTRODUCTION: The Upper Valley Drainage Basin has been identified as a needed storm drainage improvement. The Shakopee Water Management Or- ganization (WMO) has been formed and will hopefully develop a management plan within the next year or less. With the extension of the Metropolitan Urban Service Area (MUSA) into the drainage way of the Upper Valley and current development adjacent to the drainage way, it behooves the City to begin planning for these improvements now. BACKGROUND: Various issues need to be resolved in relation to the Upper Valley Drainage. These issues need to be addressed in a sy- stematic, chronological order as well as some issues being ad- dressed concurrently. The following are the issues and a method of resolving them. FLOW RATES The aforementioned WMO management plan will most certainly ad- dress, among other things, storm water flow rates. For a given watershed, the flow rate for a given storm event will vary de- pending upon type and degree of development and volume of storm- water detention. Since the WMO includes three jurisdictions (Prior Lake, Louis- ville Township and Jackson Township) in addition to the City of Shakopee, the City must be concerned about the flow rates developed in the plan since the drainage way, for the most part, is in the City. The flow rates developed in the plan will, in turn, govern storm drainage facility design and hence faci- litaties cost. Many jurisdictions in this country, as a rule of thumb, require that each property retain storm water such that the post develop- ment peak does not exceed the predevelopment peak. This many times result in many randoming placed, man-made detention faci- lities requiring high maintenance cost. On the other end of the spectrum, individual 1980 drainage stud- ies were completed by Suburban Engineering for Jackson Township and the City of Shakopee assuming full development of the basin and utilizing natural depressions for detention. Although the Drainage System May 14 , 1986 Page 2 two studies have inconsistent flow rates differing as high as 103 cubic feet per second, the proposed flow rates for design are very high in both studies. Jackson and Louisville Townships are, for the most part, in a predevelopment state. Based upon that fact, the City of Shakopee could pursue the following policy statements: 1. Each jurisdiction, by means of individual, scattered detention facilities or a major facility, maintain peak flow at a predevelopment rate. This would allow each jurisdiction to decide to utilize natural depressions and construct into detention facilities or require each developer to construct detention within their own site. 2 . Each jurisdiction maintain their facilities. 3 . Each jurisdiction submits to the WMO development plans within that jurisdiction for review. Based upon these policies, the City of Shakopee should be able to avoid added facility or maintenance cost as a result from development within the Townships. The WMO will hire a consultant to determine flow rates based upon WMO policy. It would behoove the City to have its civil consultant model the predevelopment flow rate such that the Shakopee Commissioner, Mayor Reinke, has a level of comfort when decisions relative to flow rates are made. DETENTION VOLUMES Upon determination of flow rates, the City can then study the important issue of detention volumes within the City. This issue really looks at the economic analysis; as detention increases, initial investment of storm sewer facilities decrease, but, as detention increases, lands that otherwise may be developable is used for detention. DRAINAGEWAY ALIGNMENT The drainage way alignment is, for all practical purposes, deter- mined by the natural drainage way. The width of the drainage way needs to be determined based upon flow rates. �.. *ft - Z h/ l Drainage System May 14 , 1986 Page 3 UPPER VALLEY OUTLET The Comprehensive Drainage Plan (attached) indicates that the outlet for the Upper Valley Drainage way is via the Mill Pond (the area designated as Mill Pond Basin is what is referred to as the Upper Valley in this memo) with the course colored yellow. The actual drainage course follows the route colored pink. Both courses need to be studied to determine the most cost effective route. The route colored pink will be discussed further under 101 Bypass Drainage. 101 BYPASS DRAINAGE AND COMBINED FACILITIES One major factor that should affect the most cost effective drainage courses is the 101 Bypass drainage plans. It appears that a substantial portion of the Bypass will drain to the east to a point where the pink line intersects the Bypass route. A joint cooperative project between the City and Mn/DOT could perhaps save both parties a substantial amount of capital invest- ment. Mn/DOT should be working on their drainage plan at this time, therefore, I do not see our schedule overly jeopardized by their schedule. DEAN LAKE OUTLET If it becomes apparent, due to the previous discussion, that the Upper Valley Drainage should flow easterly to Dean Lake, then the Dean Lake Outlet Basin Project should also be studied at this time. Major issues to be analyzed with this portion of the study are as follows: 1. Upstream detention of Upper Valley Drainage. 2 . Upstream detention of Dean Lake Basin. 3 . Determination of a Normal Ordinary High Water Level (NOHWL) of Dean Lake that is acceptable to lake resi- dents and the DNR. Neighborhood meetings should pre- ceed formal meetings with the DNR. 4 . Design of the outlet control structure based on the NOHWL. 5. Stabilization of the outlet channel by the Prior Lake/ Spring Lake Watershed District (colored blue in Comp Plan) . Drainage System May 14 , 1986 Page 4 RECOMMENDED ACTIONS : As can be imagined, the whole issue of the Upper Valley Drainage is quite complicated and controls essential land development. Therefore, I have developed what I see as a preliminary sequence of steps to complete the task of developing a storm drainage system. I . Council Authorize Consultant Cost (Spring, 1986) II. Flow Rate Determination (Summer, 1986) A. Concurrent Activities a. WMO Establishes Policies b. WMO Establishes Flow Rates C. Consultant Models Watershed B. WMO and City Agree on Plan Flow Rates III. Study of Drainage Corridors and Detention Facilities South of CSAH 16. (Summer, 1986) A. Concurrent Activities a. Upper Valley Drainage Corridor b. Upper Valley Stormwater Detention C. 101 Bypass Drainage (Mn/DOT) d. Dean Lake Basin Drainage IV. Study of Drainage Corridors and Detention Facilities North of CSAH 16. (Summer, 1986) A. Concurrent Activities a. Upper Valley Outlet Direction b. Mill Pond Outlet C. Dean Lake Outlet B. Neighborhood Meetings with Dean Lake Residents C. Determination Dean Lake NOHWL V. Coordination of City Drainage and 101 Bypass Drainage with Mn/DOT Plan (Fall 1986) VI. Predesign Study for Upper Valley (Fall, 1986) Drainage System May 14 , 1986 Page 5 VII . Predesign Study for Dean Lake if Warranted for Cost Effec- tive Routing (Fall, 1986) VIII . Cooperative Agreements with Mn/DOT (Winter, 1987) IX. Design of Upper Valley Drainage (Winter, 1987) X. Design of Dean Lake Outlet if Warranted for Cost Effective Routing (Winter, 1987) XI. Construction of Upper Valley Drainage (Summer, 1987) XII . Construction of Dean Lake Outlet if Warranted for Cost Effective Routing (Summer, 1987) This time frame certainly depends upon actions of other juris- dictions. One would expect schedule changes and additions and/or deletions to the task list. REQUESTED ACTION: 1. An indication to staff of the Councils interpretation of the task and desired time schedule to complete the task. If Council agrees with the recommended actions, then; 2 . Move to direct the City Engineer to obtain engineering cost estimates to complete the categorized tasks as indicated in his May 14, 1986 memo regarding Upper Valley Drainage and Dean Lake Outlet. KA/PmP UVP 3NMR A un w IS 03 e311.' 1 3—.,)tlL5 3rr0 tlOiYi�' / - ff 12 e! . 0 45 ✓� O -_i J •liJi t,e ,�,��«. { �.�+e"eE r t •• p j'1 .- ______.-- 1 �per. �•.r! (\ i,�,� � I� -.�.� I �I -. ...� ___ . _ � _ 1 t.. _� �_ _ � ,� � •-tea . _ o .. x i E f } k� MEMO TO : John K. Anderson, City Administrator FROM: Ken Ashfeld, City Engineer .;A7� SUBJECT : Street Rehabilitation Funding Policy INTRODUCTION : In July, 1984 , Council adopted a street preservation and rehabili tation funding policy as attached. This memo will summarize the policies and provide various suggestions for implementing this policy in conjunction with the current Capital Improvements Program ( CIP) . BACKGROUND : The policy essentially provides the following: Defines preservation efforts as crack sealing , patching , gravelling, and sealcoating. Defines rehabilitation as reconstruction, addition of curb & gutter and overlays. Defines frontage assessments and zone assessments. Defines preservation funding as City-wide levy . Defines rehabilitation funding as ; 25% zone or frontage assessments. 75% City Cost as general obligation. Defines zones 1 through 5 . Defines credits. For the most part, the policy is straight forward and relatively easily implemented. As I interpret the policy , there are two points that I do not feel was the intent of the policy , those points being the singular definition of overlay and zone defi- nition. DEFINITION OF OVERLAY The policy states that all structural overlays will be considered rehabilitation and hence assessed. In all cases , a bituminous overlay is structural . In researching discussed memos regarding the policy, overlays were presented in two forms as normal maint- enance and rehabilitating such as in the Eaglewood Project . These two forms, or definitions were not carried through into the policy . Rehabilitation Policy May 12 , 1986 Page 2 A "normal " life cycle for a bituminous pavement should roughly follow the following schedule : Year 0 New Construction Year 3-5 Seal Coat Year 15-20 Thin Overlay Year 20-25 Seal Coat Year 40 Pavement retired , recycled , or maintained to provide base for new structural pavement. From the day that a bituminous pavement is placed in its environ- ment , it begins to age from traffic loadings and a process of oxidation whereby the bituminous loses its flexibility charac- teristics and begins to crack under loadings and gradually loses strength. Seal coats is a maintenance procedure for slowing the oxidation process. Thin overlays is a maintenance procedure for restoring lost strength through its "normal " life cycle . Thick overlays provide any of the following intentions : Staged construction to upgrade roadway strength to meet traffic demands. Increase strength due to inadequate original construc- tion . Correct major profile and cross section problems re- sulting from embankment failure . DEFINITION OF ZONES The entire urban City is divided into five districts making for very wide spread zone assessments . Coupled with the policy definition of overlays and zone designations, a typical lot in District 3 , for example, could receive the following assessments assuring a direct assessment one year and one zone street assessment per year on subsequent years . ( See Attachment B) : 1986 Direct assessment for new construction 1987-1993 Zone assessment each year 2001 Direct assessment for thin overlay 2002-2008 Zone Assessment for thin overlay each year r 14-1 WWMW 12, Rehabilitation Policy May 12 , 1986 Page 3 In a 20 year life cycle , a typical lot could receive 17 indi- vidual assessments. This can be quite cumbersome administra- tively and may be objectionable to the assessed property owners . The following alternatives are available for the implementation of the policy : OVERLAYMENTS 1 . Modify the policy to state that thin , single lift overlays are considered preservation efforts and that thick, multi- lift overlays providing structural strength beyond that of the original pavement be considered rehabilitation . 2 . Modify the policy to state that all overlays be considered preservation. 3 . Do not modify the policy . ZONES 1 . Modify the policy to create smaller zones such that indi- vidual zone assessments would increase but the number of zone assessments would decrease . 2 . Attempt to create larger projects within a zone such that the number of assessments would be less . This is a do nothing alternative . 3 . Modify the policy to define a zone as those properties lying within one block adjacent to a zone street improvement whereby each lot would receive one direct assessment for an abutting street and a maximum of two zone assessments for the two side streets adjacent to that block. RECOMMENDATIONS : OVERLAYS One intention for defining overlays in general as rehabilitation assessments was due to the fact that the preservation budget was not keeping up with overlayment demand and could not be substantially increased due to tax levy limits . I recommend overlayment implementation Alternative 1 for the following rea- sons : The existing policy interjects the need for convincing property owners that normal life cycle overlayments protect their investment better than other increased maintenance } Rehabilitation Policy May 12 , 1986 Page 4 efforts , not only in the future but now in 1986 for proposed overlays . Property owners could argue that the City does not provide adequate normal maintenance , hence requiring overlays, irregardless of the efforts of the City . Since the policy calls for a 25% project cost assessment and 20% is the statuatory minimum, the difference can be used to bolster the preservation fund without violating levy limits. Based upon cost estimates, levy amounts could be increased legally to overlay approximately one block for each block of rehabilitation . Combined with the preser- vation budget, I believe an acceptable program can be imple- See. mented while at the same time , decreasing the number of AJ+ackK,en- assessment projects for overlays . � C ZONES The existing delineations of zones is quite specific although creating wide spread assessments and if a zone project is under- taken alone, a proof of benefit problem may arise . Although I do not present a strong recommendation , I believe that a zone assessment only for the side streets adjacent to a parcel of property would be fair. The resulting total amount to be as- sessed would be the same as in the current policy . REQUESTED ACTION : Direct the City Engineer to draft a resolution modifying the Pavement Preservation and Rehabilitation Funding Policy as per recommendations presented in his May 12, 1986 memo and bring same back to Council for consideration. KA/pmp POLICY I RESOLUTION NO. 2278 A RESOLUTION ESTABLISING THE POLICY FOR rUNDING THE REHABILITATION OF STREETS IN THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE WHEREAS, advisory boards and commissions have reviewed the Pavement Preservation and Rehabilitation Policy; and WHEREAS, City Council has previously reviewed the Preserva- tion and Rehabilitation Policy for City streets. i NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE, that: 1. The following definitions which relate to pavement preservation and rehabilitation will be as follows: a. Frontaae: The least dimension of a lot abutting a rehabilitation project; or the lot 3 area divided by the average platted depth here the least dimension abutting right-of- I way abuts a rehabilitation project, where the abutting frontage is irregular cr where individual lots have been assembled for development. b. Preservation: Routine -maintenance which does not _mprove structural capacity of a roadway such as the addition of Class 5 gravel on gravel roadways , a sealcoat on an urban road- way, crack sealing on paved roadways, and patching. C. Rehabilitation: Complete or partial reconstruction, of roadway elements including an overlay for ride or structure and curb and gutter. d. District: A neighborhood subdivision o siml-lar geographic area :cn=idered re�pCnSibye for the elements of a . rc ject t'r.at are con- sidered to be of a neighborhood or iozalized benefit. ►� 0.1 c. 1)1rcSLIO,ISC,S ._n: - An as e,- mcnt tha_ no.s Frc^.tase abtatir,� �rescr� tion w�r�:. !Q" f. Spread Cost : The cost of work within i. 1;istrict , which work docs not abutt Frontage. g. Zone Assessment: An assessment of the spread cost made at an equal rate to all Frontage �..ithin the District, witnin which the work was performed. 2. All of the cost of Preservation will be paid by City- wide levy or other revenue sources as designated by the City Council of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota. 3. Rehabilitation cost shall be assessed in a three-tiered assessment. The first two tiers are the Direct Assess- ment and the Zone Assessment equaling 2"" of the project cost. The third tier is the City-wide ad valorem levy which equals 75% of the project cost. i 4. The City shall apply a credit to the assessment for Rehabilitation when the existing improvements fail before they reach the design life of the improvement, so long as such improvements were built in accordance with the City of Shakopee Design Criteria adopted and in force at the time the improvement was constructed. The depreciation shall be straight-line depreciation of five percent per year. The Cite will pay one hundred percent of the additional cost of „idth and struc_ure where the additional width and structure is required by functional class. 6. Only the rrenta,e as defined above w 11 uc assessed a Direct AF.seFsment. A Zone Assessment will be -made to the District in which non-assessable costs are incurred. The Zone -.sse=_smer:s will be based on the Frontage cf all lots %.,ithin the District. S. The urban area of Shakopee will be divided into the Districts snoa:n on the attached sawing. each rural. residential 1-lat`ed property or -,)report', which is similar 4r. density to p1 ^d . gyral residcntial would t co. i anc :noustr. rr, 7, 1G. Additional rc,a:i =; a-icth -ict regt:_rcd b shall be assessed as spe:ified it Art:cic 3 above. Adopted in nCA,i,fn_A) session of the Shakopee City U Council held this day of I / 1984. / " 0 nta�.c �inalcepee ATTEST: • .,��lM 1,l:TV l.1erK Approved to form this S day of I^ , lq�;�. GCS_ _erne, I Cl) CD � i i4e r -- - ' •1� 111 r LN �m Kim A N ti U-^, J-3 LA-D<sc:,-c- Fo R tFA\J `—1 TH 15 Fawn ck A--.3 No-r R E 5"-gsTi°tiT 1 p,`L-y ��vc szs D U-C L1H iTS . �►�Iow.�Z' Q162 cAY M ZviS pe- E CON 5 1D�r<.D 1�F5��2Vf�T1 0� . C1-rY Su-pK i NEAT 2S 11c, of ?;2EKAmrLr7A-no#J �'RasEtTS AKC A M i p�j i M L4-tK of Ac 5 S cas s co <99- A t�E ,�E-��t•�ufK ©?� - Co •-�sia�2 TY PtcA<t_ o&�45-1 3LOcK rRIC b iJ C.-C:>cGlL /All ©V 6-p-«1? 6-10"FixieD PS RA,6 t L17W,,Tl o l,-� (�p ST CA FPRo--t.) -# 9 O o p b d V 60-AY Cc,-,—, 1�I�t t7�oSE�i" �os-T (4 IF ©v 4e+2tAY M�T i S X07- c>F= oTc>i= 7bT)c�..L .oT'�Ct- ASSESSED i S � IO� 000 -; Ljb, oOa = � I. 7 ala New / MEMO TO: Mayor and City Council i FROM: John K. Anderson, City Administrator �. RE: Additional Staffing as "Temporary Employees" J� DATE: April 28 , 1986 Introduction The Shakopee City Council, at its adjourned April 16 , 1986 meeting, reviewed my recommendations regarding additional staffing, reorgan- ization of the Community Development Department and City Hall office relocations. Resulting Council Consensus 1. Staffing and Community Development Department Reorganization Recommendations: Building Inspector - Council agreed to a full time temporary position which would be eligible for all City benefits. This is a slight upgrade from the position' s present status as a contractual employee. Receptionist/Typist - Council agreed to the receptionist/typist position upon receipt of a detailed job description and an organizational commitment to continue the position as a receptionist/typist rather than adding additional jobs to the position and upgrading it in a defacto manner over time. Police Officer - Council had already authorized the hiring of an additional full-time police officer. Council ' s discussion focused primarily on the potential of using part-time licensed officers. Council discussed drawing upon retired officers or officers who are licensed and trying to obtain experience while waiting to land their first full-time police position. Council discussed at length the possibility of having Canterbury Downs contract with licensed officers who are part-time rather than burn--' ng out our regular officers with additional overtime hours. Council would like additional information regarding how a group of part-time officers might be available for Canterbury Downs and/or City needs and what type of equipment/transportation requirements would be involved. Planner I - Council tentatively agreed to this additional position in Community Development as a full-time temporary similar to the Building Inspector ' s position. Council will authorize the hiring of this position based upon our ability to find a Community Development Director with the mix of job skills we are seeking. This means that the job functions of the current City Planner and Administrative Aide will be readjusted as recommended in my memo to Council upon the hiring of a new Director and he/she having the opportunity to review with the personnel involved the proposed organizational setup. Engineering Inspectors - Council is in favor of continuing with the use of part-time inspectors as initiated this year. Public works - Council agreed that there was a need to find temporary employees that would be available for more than the two to three months of the summer season. 2 . City Hall Office Relocations : Council concurred with the City Hall office relocation scheme as proposed by City Hall department heads . The Council requested that the Mayor ' s office be located in Gregg' s present office and that the office be shared with Jeanette who will provide secretarial services for the Mayor, Clerk and City Administrator. Council also asked that we hold off on the additional meeting room at the rear of the Council Chambers. Council would like to see how the new office configuration and meeting room set up works and avoid creating the room in the rear of the Council Chambers unless it is absolutely necessary. Use of "Temporary Employee" Position Titles The present City personnel resolution establishes several employment classifications under Section 3 entitled Definitions ( attached) . These positions are treated differently for payroll purposes both within our payroll department and through our time shared program with Logis . Null-time employees receive all benefits, part-time employees receive all benefits on a pro-rated basis , temporary employees receive no benefits and contractual employees receive only those benefits agreed to by contract. Logis and our Personnel Department would not be able to use the classification ( temporary employee) and give the employee the full range of benefits because the programs are set up to treat permanent employees and temporary employees differently. Therefore, the Personnel Department cannot simply place the temporary employee title on the position of Building Inspector and Planner I as tentatively suggested by Council at its April 16th meeting. Alternatives After reviewing City Council ' s suggestion regarding the use "temporary employees" classification with the Finance Department we have come up with the following list of alternatives : 1 . Make the two positions of Building Inspector and Planner I permanent employee positions , but include a statement under the "remarks" section of the employee payroll authori- zation form attached. The remarks could be a simple straight forward sentence stating that this permanent position has been filled based upon building and community development department work loads and if there is insufficient work the employee will be given 60 days notice of termination of the position. This procedure will place both parties on notice that the position is based upon work load and the notice will be in writing. This procedure is the most straight forward way to handle the position. There is clear authority for lay offs in Section 19 of our current personnel resolution. It states, "After at least two weeks notice to the employee, the City Council may lay off any employee whenever such action is necessary because of shortage of work or funds, the abolition of the position, or changes in organization. No permanent or probationary employee a shall be laid off while there is a temporary employee serving in the same class of position for which the permanent or probationary employee is qualified, eligible, and available. " not 2. Make the building inspector position a contractual position as provided for in Section 3 Definitions. This is how we have treated the position the past two years. The same type of approach can be used for the Planner I position. The primary reason for using the "contracted employee" classification is to have both parties acknowledge that the position is unique and is viewed as a position that will end at a specified date in the future. The City of Minneapolis uses contractual employees and generally does not provide them normal City benefits . They also have "permit employees" which are contractual employees who receive City benefits . These positions are similar to the contractual employees we currently have as Building Inspector (Fulton) and Administrative Aide (Barry) . The City of Minneapolis also has a classification called "detail employee" which is an employee moved into a new classification and receiving a salary and benefits accordingly. The detail employee definition stays in force until the position is formally classified by their Civil Service Board. 3 . Use the "temporary employee" classification in our personnel resolution but run the individual through the payroll as a permanent employee. This would require an annual review and renew of the position thus underscoring the temporary nature of the position. It would also create problems with Finance which would have to deal with the position outside of normal payroll processing procedures. Recommendation Staff recommends alternative No. 1 with a statement on the employee payroll authorization form noting that the particular position is based on work load and can be laid off as per Section 19 in our personnel resolution. Action Requested Authorize the appropriate City officials to draft a permanent employee job description for a Building Official and Planner I position, each including a note on the employee payroll authori- zation regarding termination of the position based upon work load in accordance with Section 19 of the personnel resolution. The Building Official position is to be filled by Fulton Schleisman and we also note that the position is shared with Scott County. The Planner I position is vacant and the new Community Development Director will have an opportunity to review it before the position is filled. JKA/jms IVJ SECTION 3. D£rIhITIONS: Full Time Employee - nn employee normal-1v to f_ll a full-time pesitior. with an on-going regular work week of at least forty (40) hours. lmmedia-�e Family Shall mean mother, father, husband, wife , son , daugr.ter , brother , sister, or grandparent of the employee or spouse . Fart-Time Employee - An employee scheduled to fill a part-time position with an on-going regular work week of less than forty (40) hours. Permanent Employee ;tae Shall mean an employee who is appointed to a permanent position after effective completion of a probationary period. ,,ps• Position Shall mean 2 specific employment , calling for the performance of certain duties and carrying of certain responsibilities cf Amcnd one individual. Probationary Employee - Shall mean an employee originally appointed to a permanent full-time or part-time position subiec,, to a probationary period. temporary E:plovee - An ei::plcyee who i5 appointed on a temporary basis , e=ther fu-71 or Dares-time c continuous period Of time not t0 exceed One Yea.-. ' - - - -c�ed �on..r acted :,mployee An er:.plcyee who does no-. fall into c2tegcrie5 of permanent cr temporary employees and has negotiated unique terms cf er,:ploymer:t as outlined in a separate contract approved by the City Council; or any employee who has negotiated a separate employment contract approved by the v�.tY Counc Any terms Of employment nOt SpeC_f1Cal1V ^* red by the terr:.5 Of the add.-e55ed by the c - ......' 2C' shall be OOVe. Personnel. 'Policy. EMP' OYEE PAYROLL AUTHORIZATION SALARY CHANGE STATUS CHANGE NEW HIREF71 SOCIAL SECURITY # NAME PHONE ADDRESS ZIP CODE BIRTH DATE AGE DEPARTMENT POSITION DATE OF EMPLOYMENT FULL OR PART TIME PERMANENT OR TEMPORARY SALARY DATA: HOURLY MONTHLY ANNUALLY EFFECTIVE DATE REMARKS : APPROVED City Administrator Department Head Employee ' s Signature Date Pavroil Form No. 1 MEMO TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: John K. Anderson, City Administrator RE: Relocating of City Offices DATE: April 24, 1986 Introduction At the April 16 , 1986 meeting, City Council tentatively agreed to move ahead with the relocation of City offices. Council directed staff to obtain estimates of the cost of the relocation. Floor Plan and Cost Estimates The Finance Department personnel who will be moving upstairs for a minimum of two years sat down and developed the attached floor plan. They reviewed the floor plan with LeRoy Houser who then obtained the estimate for making the changes. Also attached is a memorandum from Marilyn Remer, Senior Accounting Clerk/Personnel. Her thoughts are a result of spending a few hours upstairs while Finance employees where trying to figure out how best to set up shop on the second floor. Council considered and then dismissed the alternative of moving the City Council meeting location when the recommendations first came to Council. Marilyn would like Council to discuss that alternative one more time. Alternatives 1. Authorize the Building Inspector to take proposals on the remodeling work as outlined in his memo of April 24 , 1986 . If Finance is to be moved upstairs this would provide them with a suitable working environment with the exception of the traffic noise. Council will want to discuss whether or not it can recoup the full $16 , 453 upon sale of the building. 2. Authorize the appropriate City officials to obtain proposals ► for remodeling the second floor, but on a reduced budget. I would urge Councilmembers to stop in and walk through the second floor during the day so that they have a good understanding of what it looks like right now. Based upon a first hand review of the second floor Councilmembers may be able to arrive at a consensus on a reduced package if that is the direction the majority would like to go. 3 . Reverse your earlier decision and direct staff to find a new location for Council meetings and move Finance or some other office into the Council Chambers area. This alternative would work best for City Hall staff and citizens coming to City Hall. Council should discuss the advantages of having the Council Chambers adjacent to other City offices as compared to having Finance on the second floor of the existing building. Recommendation I am comfortable with all three recommendations. My first choice is alternative No. 3 , my second choice is alternative No. 1 and my third choice is alternative No. 2 . Even if Council picks alternative No. 2 the overall benefit to the majority of employees in City Hall and the citizens they serve will far exceed to status quo. Action Requested Authorize the appropriate City officials to seek proposals on the remodeling of the Council Chambers (or second floor of City Hall) at a cost not to exceed $ JKA/jms '% . �. MEMO TO: City Council FROM: LeRoy Houser, Building Official RE: Upstair Remodel (Finance) DATE: April 24 , 1986 INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND: I have compiled the cost estimates, as per instructions, based on the plan provided me by the Administrator ( attached) . The plan indicates three offices, conference room and reception/ equipment area. I have based my cost on full high office walls which are necessary and conducive to productivity. Staff people need a quiet, private place to work in order to maintain their train of thought and to keep distractions at a minimum. They " also need on occasion a private conference with a taxpayer citizen to solve problems, eliminating the three ring circus or zoo atmosphere with open areas. Also it injects a little professionalism into staffs daily work routine and instills pride in oneself and work. I highly recommend we complete the project as layed out. The cost incurred will be just about totally recoverable when we sell the building ( if we ever do) . The upstairs is not retail sales area and by no stretch of the imagination would a prospective purchaser consider it to be when making his purchase price offer decision. He would however consider it office area and take into account the improvement as in harmony with the principle of highest and best use. Listed below are what I believe to be reasonable cost estimates : 1 . Drop ceiling $ 1 , 803 2 . Carpet 1 ,500 3 . Walls/tape/paint 2 , 850 — 'S'oc 4. Drapes ( solar) 1 , 500 8� S . Wiring & lights 3 , 000 6 . A/C ducts & heat reg. 4 , 000 Saof��, 7 . Telephone/computer 800 loon C p��® 8 . Contingencies 1 , 000 s - Som $16 , 453 LH:cah Attachment U,,,.5.6,;,-s I 1 A i 1 n-� A_ 7 2 i ( m 6 I- 1 I �l 7 Zz- z � m h T I I I I � Q1 ^ j� �J W F t^ y 1 I � I f i I ' I T j r I I 1 }� Memo To: John K. Anderson, City Administrator I Mayor and City Council Members From: Marilyn M. Remer, Sr. Acct 'g. Clerk/Personnel �j4' r Re: City Hall Relocation Options Date: April 24, 1986 Background Information Staff and Council have recommended relocating the Finance Dept. upstairs in the area formerly occupied by Job Service. I feel there are some factors that probably were not addressed and are becoming more apparent as we are preparing info needed to make that move. It has become obvious that there is going to be a definite noise factor from the truck traffic directly below the windows. Due to the nature of detail work and the degree of concentration required with most financial work, that noise factor is not going to be very conducive to productivity. I have been told City Council meetings were held in that room in the past and that the Council proceedings would occassionally have to be interrupted due to extremely loud truck noise. Conditions are poor including an inadequate heating/cooling system and poor overhead lighting which would need some correction due to the need for proper work stations for computer terminals. LeRoy Houser has received estimates for the improvements needed to upgrade the area into habitable office space. I would like to request the Council consider the feasibility of holding Council and Commission meeting elsewhere (Scott County facilities or Ind. Dist. 720 School facilities) and use the existing Council chambers to house the Finance Dept. Our department' s use of the copier, postage meter, info needed for assessment searches is located in files in the front reception area, and increased Personnel activities with the public would be some of the areas benefitted by keeping this department on the first floor. The City of Burnsville had the same staffing problems and recently hired two new personnel and just did not have any more room to put in two more desks. The Burnsville City Council currently meets in a meeting room located in the Burnsville High School with the previous Council Chambers being remodeled to accomodate more office space. They are also working towards a referendum for a new City Hall in the a,2. e se are aapeful this i-s a short—term solution. They found that many of the schools had rooms that were available and were not being utilized as they should be. I have discussed this option with LeRoy Houser and he fully agrees that this would be the most feasible of the options, that remodeling the Council Chambers would be half the cost, and he would have several suggestions for alternate meeting sites. With Council/Commission having to hold their meetings elsewhere, hopefully the public would become more aware of overcrowding/conditions of City Hall and more susceptible to passage of a City Hall referendum. /mmr cc: LeRoy Houser Gregg tioxland '%� .� MEMO TO: City Council FROM: LeRoy Houser, Building Official RE: Addendum to City Hall Remodel DATE: April 29 , 1986 I anticipate an additional cost of $1 , 500 . 00 for work on the first floor of City Hall that will have to be completed to complete our musical chairs program. If Council decides on Alternate No. 3 , our cost would be approximately $6, 000 . 00 . This would include cutting one window in the north end of the Council Chambers . LH:cah MEMO TO: Mayor and City Council /9W FROM: John K. Anderson, City Administrator 1 L RE: Policy and Program Issues Involving Shakopee ' s 1 Use of Tax Increment Financing DATE: May 5 , 1986 Introduction In April City Council discussed several broad policy issues regarding the use of Tax Increment Financing (TIF) by the City of Shakopee. The memorandum guiding that discussion included six key policy questions. After considerable Council discussion it was decided that no new criteria or parameters would be added to the existing policies, but that additional information would be requested on the application forms so that Council would have the facts before them when deciding on individual tax increment projects . The attachments that follow provide a draft of our application forms introducing the new information required. In addition, I have included an earlier memorandum from Jeanne Andre with a copy of Council action from July 2 , 1985 regarding changes to Resolution No. 2391 establishing TIF policies for housing projects. Application Form Additions The application form additions are underlined on the attached forms and deletions are shown by dashes . By taking a number of items City Council discussed and listing them on the application form staff and Council are less likely to overlook them when processing individual applications . This provides both Council and staff with a better checklist and puts the applicant on notice that these questions will be discussed by City Council. By listing the information addressing broad policy issues in the application form, Council can still exercise maximum flexability in approving projects because the information requested does not represent a set of rigid guidelines . Tax Increment Financing for Housing Projects i have attached the Council minutes from the July 2 , 1985 meeting first and followed the minutes with Jeanne Andre ' s original June 25th memo and then the amending resolution with the new application form. Again changes on the form have been underlined for additions and stricken with a dash if deleted. The key concern of City Council was to include the phrase "extra- ordinary utility construction costs" rather than general language regarding hardship. Item No. 11 on the first page of the application form has been revised since Jeanne ' s original memo to better define "extraordinary utility construction costs" . Alternatives 1 . Approve the proposed amendments to the present TIF application form for redevelopment projects established by Resolution No. 1841 as amended by Resolution No. 2551. The purpose of the amendments is to incorporate Council ' s discussion of TIF policy issues in April in the application form without limiting City Council ' s discretion in making a final decision on particular TIF projects. 2 . Approve the proposed amendments to the present TIF applciation form for economic development projects established by Resolution No. 1842 as amended by Resolution No. 2552. The purpose of the amendments is to incorporate Council ' s discussion of TIF policy issues in April in the application form without limiting City Council ' s discretion in making a final decision on particular TIF projects. 3 . Approve Resolution No. 2391 incorporating City Council ' s July 2 , 1985 comments regarding "extraordinary utility construction costs" and Council ' s April discussions regarding overall broad policy issues in the City' s TIF application form for housing projects. 4. Pass the three resolutions amending the TIF application forms after changes that have resulted from Council ' s discus- sion. 5. Make no changes in the TIF application policies and forms as they now exist. This alternative would preserve the status quo, but would lose the intent of Council consensus on July 2 , 1985 and the benefit of Council ' s discussions in April regarding overall policy issues as they relate to TIF. Recommendation I recommend Alternative No. 1 through 3 above for the reasons listed. Action Requested 1 . Approve Resolution No. 2551 amending Resolution No. 1841 setting forth the application procedures and requirements for TIF redevelopment projects . (Only changed pages attached. ) 2. Approve Resolution No. 2552 amending Resolution No. 1842 setting forth the application procedures and requirements for TIF economic development projects. (Only changed pages attached. ) 3 . Approve Resolution No. 2391 amending Resolution No. 2191 setting forth the application procedures and requirements for TIF housing projects. (Complete policy attached. ) l RESOLUTION NO . 2551 A RESOLUTION APPROVING AND ADOPTING A CERTAIN -TAX INCREMENT FINANCING POLICIES AS APPLIED TO REDEVELOPMENT PROJECTS WHEREAS , the City of Shakopee in Resolution No . 1841 , A Resolution Approving and Adopting Certain Tax-Increment Policies Related to the Use of Tax Increment Financing for Redevelopment Projects, established certain policies on the use of tax-increment financing; and WHEREAS , the Shakopee City Council now desires to up-date those policies. NOW, THEREFORE , BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE , Scott , County, Minnesota, that : 1 . Resolution No. 1841 is hereby recinded; and 2 . The attached Policy Statement on the Use of Tax-Increment rinancing for Redevelopment Porjects is hereby adopted and made a part hereof. 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 May, 1986. City Attorney CITY OF SHAKOPEE APPLICATION TAX INCREMENT FINANCING ASSISTANCE - REDEVELOPMENT I L BACKGROUND INFORMATION Legal name of applicant: Address: Telephone number: Name of contact person: DISTRICT INFORMATION Addendums shall be attached hereto addressing in detail: 1. Location - include a location map with exact boundaries of projected develop- ment as proposed. 2. Size - describe the size of the proposed project in terms of acres. Show parcel boundaries, if known. 3. Use - describe the proposed uses for the property, by parcel, if known. 4. Value - list both the present value and t4 future tete estimated market value to result from the project by year and by parcel, by building or other appropriate spatial subdivision. a. List value before and after the proiects completion. b. List the affect of the Drciect on city, school district and County taxes. 5. Timing - describe the timing of the development improvements. 6. Public and Private Improvements - identify the Dublic� improvements recuested to be financed through the district and the timing of such improvements. i. Economic Impact - to the extent feasible, identify: a. Temporary construction jobs to be created. b. Valuation to be added. C. Impact on current comDetitcr, if any, and local develoDer/builders. d. inDaCt on the Cit-V' S current stock of ccrL-ercial or industrial buildings. e. Other assets to accrue to the community. 8. Traffic Impact - to the extent feasible, identify: a. Projected vehicle counts caused by development of the district. b. Impact on existing traffic arteries. C. Plan for traffic flow. 9. Service ImDacet a. List affect onCity services. b. 1st a-fleC- on Cour-.y services. .� st ailed or. School District services. 10. Need - explain why the improvement is not one that could n —rally be financed by the p.ivaedevelop "but for" public assistance, iat is, arr6 why the costs of the improvement cannot be paid solely by the applicant. 11. Hardship - explain extraordinary development hardships (29. Public-improvement cost which exceed normal development costs) which exist for this narcel which cause the need for tax-increment financinc assistance. 12. Eminent Domain - list any parcels that will reouire the City to exercise its rights of Eminent Domain and the legal basis for using this authority. 6 OTHER INFORMATION Provide any further information you feel may assist the City in assessing the merits of this proposal. lft• ) Z, �_ - 4. e of the Project: Because of the time and cost involved analyzing a re est for tax increment financing, and because tax incr ent financing should y be used in those instances where the project 1 have a demon- strable po 'tive impact on the community as a whol requests for tax increment fi ncing of less than $100,000 will of be considered as a general rule. A equest of this minimum size wou require a redevelopment to increase the m ket value of the property by $1,000,000 assuming the 10-to-1 ratio noted a ve. 5. Project Certainty/Financia Guarantees: n addition to the other factors, favorable consideration for tax inc ent financing will be based on (1) When the development is expec d occur; (2) The demonstrated capacity of the applicant(s) to succe fully complete the development, and (3) The certainty that the tax in eme s will be received. Tax Increment Revenue Bo s or General Obligation Bonds will not be used to fund low and mode to income inter t reduction programs. Increments will be utilized di r ctly to write down in erest rates to insure maximum protection for th City. Applicants for tax ' crement financing for interest reduction prog s will be required to sign an ceptable written agreement setting for the responsibilities of the a licant and the City with respect t the program. The performance of the app 'cant under such contract shall b supported by presentation of a financial uarantee in the form of a irrevocable letter of credit. Procedure The following procedures will be utilized in reviewing tax increment financing proposals: 1. A written request shall be submitted concurrently to the City Administrator's office and to the Executive Director of the Shakopee Housing and Redevelopment Authority by the person or firm requesting the City and HRA to utilize the City's tax increment financing capacity. The request shall contain, at a minimum, the information in the pre-application form. 2. upon submission, the request shall be reviewed by a committee chaired by the City Administrator and consisting of the Planner, City Engineer, Public Works Director, Utilities Director, County Assessor, Finance Director, and HRA Executive Director to determine, on a preliminary basis, whether the proposal appears to be feasible. r-= 3. The application and supporting financial data shall be submitted to the City's Financial Consultant for review. 4. The preliminary proposal shall be placed on the next regularly scheduled agendas of the HRA and of a City Council Work Session for their preliminary review. At those times, the applicant(s) may make a presentation, and staff will make preliminary comments concerning the perceived feasibility of the proiect. The Dreliminary DroDosal will include an application form completed by the developer, a preliminary staff analysis listing the City's new captured assessed value as a Dercertaee of total value, potential uses for related City proiects and a review of the application data Drovided by the develoDer. 5. Based on the preliminary review, the applicants) may elect to file a X ormal application with the City, accompanied by a fee of $500.00. 6. Upon the filing of a formal application, staff shall proceed to complete a tax increment financing analysis which shall examine in detail the proposal's financial viability (which may include a full appraisal by staff or M.A.I. ), and benefit to the community as outlined in the policies above. 7. The applicant(s) shall attend at least one (1) meeting with residents and property owners in and within 500 feet of the proposed tax increment district conducted by the City Council and HRA. 8. After the meeting noted in Step 7 and upon completion of the tax increment financing analysis, a recommendation will be made to the City Council and HRA. Based upon that recommendation, the Council and HRA may authorize the staff to commence negotiation of a low or moderate income interest reduction program. 9. Negotiation of the interest reduction program contract prepared by the HRA occurs. All City negotiating terms will include one or more HRA commis- sioners and legal staff. 10. During the negotiation of the contract, a tax increment financing plan will be prepared by staff with notification being provided to Scott County and the School District, if such plans have not already been adopted. 11. If a redevelopment plan is needed, such plan shall be transmitted to the Planning Commission for review and comment. 12. The HRA will be asked to approve a contract and a tax increment financing plan and redevelopment plan in the event such pians are needed. 13. The City Council will be asked to approve the redevelopment contract and, if necessary and after the appropriate public hearings (noticed via published notice and notice mailed to property owners in and within 500 feet of the proposed district), a tax increment financing plan and redevelopment plan. 14. The adopted plans will be filed with Scott County and the State of Minnesota. 15. Tax increment bonds are issued. a- RESOLUTION NO. 2552 A RESOLUTION APPROVING AND ADOPTING A CERTAIN TAX INCREMENT FINANCING POLICIES AS APPLIED TO ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS WHEREAS , the City of Shakopee in Resolution No. 1842 , A Resolution Approving and Adopting Certain Tax-Increment Policies Related to the Use of Tax Increment Financing for Economic Development Projects, established certain policies on the use of tax-increment financing; and WHEREAS , the Shakopee City Council now desires to up-date those policies. NOW, THEREFORE , BE IT RESOLVED BY '-'HE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE , Scott County, Minnesota, that : 1 . Resolution No. 1842 is hereby rescinded; and 2. The attached Policy Statement on the Use of Tax-Increment Financing for Economic Development Projects is hereby adopted and made a part hereof. 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 May, 1986 . City Attorney CITY OF SHAKOPEE ... APPLICATION TAX INCREMENT FINANCING ASSISTANCE - ECONOMIC BACKGROUND INFORMATION Legal name of applicant: Address: Telephone number: Name of contact person: DISTRICT INFORMATION Addendums shall be attached hereto addressing in detail: 1. Location - include a location map with exact boundaries of projected develop- ment as proposed. 2. Size - describe the size of the proposed project in terms of acres. Show parcel boundaries, if known. 3. Use - describe the proposed uses for the property, by parcel, if known. 4. Value - list both the present value and tj�s, future t-ke estimated market value to result from the project by year and by parcel, by building or other appropriate spatial subdivision. a. List value before and after the projects completion. b. List the affect of the project on city, school district and County taxes. 5. Timing - describe the timing of the development improvements. 6. Public and Private Improvements - identify the public improvements requested to be financed through the district and the timing of such improvements. 7. Economic Impact - to the extent feasible, identify: a. Temporary construction jobs to be created. b. Valuation to be added. c Impact on current competitor, if anv, and local developer/builders. d Impact on the City's current stock of commercial or industrial buildings. e. Other assets to accrue to the community. 8. Traffic Impact - to the extent feasible, identify: a. Projected vehicle counts caused by development of the district. b. Impact on existing traffic arteries. C. Plan for traffic flow. 9. Service Impacet a. List affect on Citv services. b. List affect on County services. c. List affect on School District services. 1C. Need - explain why the imD rovement is not one that co,-ld normally be financed o by the p-T eftt, a( Toper "but for'_' public assis, ice_, that is, ane why the costs of the impt-tvement cannot be paid solely by the applicant. 11 . Hardship - exDlair. extraordinary development hardships (eg. Dublic imyrovemer+ cost which exceed normal deveicyment costs ) which exist for this Darcel which cause the need for tax-increment financinz assistance. 12 Eminent Domain - list any Darceis that will reouire the City to exercise its rights of Eminent Domain and the iegal basis for using this authority OTHEEF INFORMATION Provide any further information you feel may assist the City in assessing the merits of this proposal. 4. Size of the Pro 'ect: Because of the time and cost !n� ved in analyzing a reques for tax increment financing, and because tancrement financing should only a used in those instances where the proj t will have a demon- strable posits e impact on the community as a w le, requests for tax increment finan ing of less than $100,000 w' 1 not be considered as a general rule. A r quest of this minimum size w ld require a redevelopment to increase the mar et value of the proper by $1,000,000 assuming the 10-to-1 ratio noted above. 5. Proiect Certainty/Financi Guarantees: n addition to the other factors, favorable consideration fo tax incr ent financing will be based on (1) When the development is expe ed to occur; (2) The demonstrated capacity of the applicant(s) to succ s lly complete the development, and (3) The certainty that the tax incre nts will be received. Tax Increment Revenue Bonds r Gener Obligation Bonds will not be used to fund low and moderat income int est reduction programs. Increments will be utilized direct to write down interest rates to insure maximum protection for the Ci Applicants for `a� increment financing for interest reduction programs 11 be required to sign n acceptable written agreement setting forth t responsibilities of the applicant and the City with respect to the ogram. The performance of the pplicant under such contract shall be su orted by presentation of a financial guarantee in the form of an irrev cable letter of credit. Procedure The following procedures will be utilized in reviewing tax increment financing proposals: 1. A written reauest shall be submitted concurrently to the City Administrator's office and to the Executive Director of the Shakopee Housing and Redevelopment Authority by the person or firm requesting the City and HRA to utilize the City's tax increment financing capacity. The request shall contain, at a minimum, the information in the pre-application form. 2. upon submission, the request shall be reviewed by a committee chaired by the City Administrator and consisting of the Planner, City Engineer, Public Works Director, Utilities Director, County Assessor, Finance Director, and HRA Executive Director to determine, on a preliminary basis, whether the proposal appears to be feasible. 3. The application and supporting financial data shall be submitted to the City's Financial Consultant for review. 4. The preliminary proposal shall be placed on the next regularly scheduled agendas of the HRA and of a City Council Work Session for their preliminary review. At those times, the applicant(s) may make a presentation, and staff will make preliminary comments concerning the perceived feasibility of the project. The Dreliminary pronosai will include an apn_ication form completed by the developer. a preliminary staff analysis listing the Citv-'s new captured assessed value as a percentage of total value, potential uses for related City proiects and a review o.- the ap-:�_icaticn data proviced by the developer. 5. Based on the preliminary review, the applicant(s) may elect to file a formal application with the City, accompanied by a fee of $500.00. 6. Upon the filing of a formal application, staff shall proceed to complete a tax increment financing analysis which shall examine in detail the proposal's financial viability (which may include a full appraisal by staff or M.A.I. ), and benefit to the community as outlined in the policies above. 7. The applicant(s) shall attend at least one (1) meeting with residents and property owners in and within 500 feet of the proposed tax increment district conducted by the City Council and HRA. 8. After the meeting noted in Step 7 and upon completion of the tax increment financing analysis, a recommendation will be made to the City Council and HRA. Based upon that recommendation, the Council and HRA may authorize the staff to commence negotiation of a low or moderate income interest reduction program. 9. Negotiation of the interest reduction program contract prepared by the HRA occurs. All City negotiating terms will include one or more HRA commis- sioners and legal staff. 10. During the negotiation of the contract, a tax increment financing plan will be prepared by staff with notification being provided to Scott County and the School District, if such plans have not already been adopted. 11. If a redevelopment plan is needed, such plan shall be transmitted to the Planning Commission for review and comment. 12. The HRA will be asked to approve a contract and a tax increment financing plan and redevelopment plan in the event such plans are needed. 13. The City Council will be asked to approve the redevelopment contract and, if necessary and after the appropriate public hearings (noticed via published notice and notice mailed to property owners in and within 500 feet of the proposed district), a tax increment financing plan and redevelopment plan. 14. The adopted pians will be filed with Scott County and the State of Minnesota. 15. Tax increment bonds are issued. 4:t[ 3a th2a arPilca- -- -- s » p4w=44 Am a*vt1 r=&.&Am a 1 wv "a r a ago. Uawpacli i.aroua moved to direct the Assistant City Attorney to attend the July 9. 1985 public nearing. Motion carried unanimously. Leroux/Lebens moved to approve the application and grant a taxicab 'license to Yellow Ta::--; Service Corporation, 127 1st Avenue i�. Minneapolis, M.inne- sota, 55413, beginning July 3, 1985. Motion carried unanimously. Lebens/Leroux moved to table the application by Palace Properties, Inc. for On Sale and Sunday, Class B, intoxicating Liquor Licenses. Motion carried unanimously. The CoMmunirz- Develop. Dir. asked for direction from Council regarding the use of Housing and Revenue Bonds and Notes for financing for multi-family developments. She went over various restrictions which could be attached to approval of the financing. She said developers are asking for this. Discussion ensued regarding conformance with the design criteria and a possible requirement of maintenance free and energy efficient construction materials. 7erou.�/Vierling moved to direct staff to draw ur, an appropriate resolution including policy, criteria and procedures for the review of riousing Revenue Bonds as presented, with the additional criteria of using brick or equivalent maintenance free exterior construction. Motion carried unarimouslv_ . 7 a�� Considerable discussion took place regarding po licv for the use of tax in- crement for financing housing projects. The Community Develop. Dir, said in the past tris financing has been discussed for use where there is extreme phvsical development difficulties, with specific mention of limestone de- posits and Roberts Pit, although Robert's Pit is not in an F,-4 zone. Mavor Reinke Suggested using mcrtg.aQe revenue bonds to w to down tine lan_ "L'rtner C1SC::S510n ensued; regard-Ing .'1aresaip _n installing L'tilitieS. Consensus was to req•,:ire a completed application prom the developer request ing the City to it-- a proje _ is w `late c` ir^ ta_V ircre neat _-unds to •-rite down the extraordinary utility construction cost of a proposed 'r.oustrg project. `-erl_ng/Col_igar. moved to authorize payment o= 53,26', .00 from General --rd CortlnQencces to ti Man as � - o , rite _ement, IrC :or =L'rn15a.�rg, hauling and dump- ing =-30 yard roll-cff containers at 599.00 each, during the aeriod June 8 through June 17, 1985, with appreciation being expressed to Fulton SCaleisman for the idea and extra time helping with the clear--up effort, and the reco=endation for an annual clear.-up day. 'Iavcr Reinke commented that this was a very visible demonstration of the use by the City of the 10c ticket tax from the racetrack. Ro_1 Ca11. Aves; Unanimous Noes; None Mot-on carried. T TO: John K. Anderson , City Administrator FROM: Jeanne Andre , Community Development Director RE: Council Policy Statement on Use of Tax Increment for Financing of Housing Projects DATE : June 25 , 1985 Introduction• The issue of use of tax-increment financing in areas with bedrock or other similar development problems has been discussed at a number of goals and objectives sessions held by City Council. It was the consensus of the City Council during those sessions to offer this type of assistance to encourage development in areas which would not otherwise develop under normal market conditions . Existing Council policies on tax-increment financing provide that tax-increment cannot be used for multifamily housing on vacant land . Therefore in areas where bedrock exists that are also in R-4 (multifamily residential) zoning, the Councils ' goals and objectives statements are in conflict with existing policies. This memo is to initiate discussion on whether to correct this conflict and the best way to do so. Background• Numerous inquires have been received by the staff as to assistance available for the development of multifamily housing in Shakopee . A number of these inquiries have been for land in the vicinity of CR 17 and CR 16 and Fourth Avenue. Therefore in order to respond to these questions, ( in regard to tax-increment financing ) the above-mentioned conflict must be resolved by the City Council . The area of mortgage revenue bonds for multifamily housing will be. brought to City Council as a separate issue . Recommended Action: Assuming the City Council wishes to revise its tax-increment financing (TIF) policy for housing to provide for use of this tool when there are physical limitations to the site such as bedrock at or near to the surface , I recommend the additions and deletions as noted on the attached policy statement be adopted. These changes provide for use of TIF for multifamily housing, but only when development hardships exist . Alternately, if the Council wishes to keep the housing TIF policy as is , the goals and objectives should be modified to remove references to use of TIF for housing , even in areas with physical limitations . Page two Memo - Tax Increment Financing Requested Action: Adopt Resolution No. 2391 which recinds Resolution No. 2191 , which adopted the previous policy for use of tax-increment financing for housing , and adopts a new policy which allows for use of tax-increment financing when physical hardships to development exist. tw RESOLUTION NC. 2391 I RESOLUTION APPROVINQ AND ADORTiNf A CEF7Aif1T TAX TC y0r,L i�,^ pRC Tc^"'S WHEREAS , the City of Shakopee in Resolution No. 21917 A Resolution Approving and Adopting Certain Tax-Increment Policies Related to the Use of Tax increment Financing for interest Rate Reduction Programs for Low and Moderate Income Families, established certain policies on the use of tax-increment financing ; and WHEREAS , the Shakopee City Council now desires to change those policies to provide for the use of tax-increment financing vacant housing on vacanland that is subject to severe development hardships , NOW , THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE, Scott County, Minnesota, that: 1. Resolution No. 2191 is hereby recinded ; and 2. The attached Policy Statement on the Use of Tax-Increment Financing for Housing is hereby adopted and made a part hereof. Adopted in - session of the Cit Y Of the City of "Shakopee , Minnesota , held this - da or Council 1985 . y Mayor ATTyST: City Clerk Approv-ed as to form day of 1985 . City Attorney CITY OF SHAKOPEE APPLICATION TAX INCREMENT FINANCING ASSISTANCE - HOUSING BACKGROUND INFORMATION Legal name of applicant: Address: Telephone number: Name of contact person: DISTRICT INFORMATION Addendums shall be attached hereto addressing in detail: 1. Location - include a location map with exact boundaries of projected develop- ment as proposed. 2. Size - describe the size of the proposed project in terms of acres. Show parcel boundaries, if known. 3. Use - describe the proposed uses for the property, by parcel, if known. 4. Value - list both the present value and the future the estimated market value to result from the project by year and by parcel, by building or other appropriate spatial subdivision. a. List value before and after the projects completion. b. List the affect of the project on city, school district and County taxes. 5. Timing - describe the timing of the development improvements. 6. Interest Rate Reduction Program - identify the level of interest rate reduction proposed and how much of it will be financed by the developer and how much by the use of tax increment financing. 7. Economic Impact - to the extent feasible, identify: a. Temporary construction jobs to be created. b. Valuation to be added. C. Impact on current housing market and local developer/builders. d. Impact on ' the City's housing stock as it relates to the City's Housing Assistance Plan. e. Other assets to accrue to the community. 8. Traffic Impact - to the extent feasible, identify: a. Projected vehicle counts caused by development of the district. b. Impact on existing traffic arteries. c. Plan for traffic flow. 9. Service Impacet a. List affect on City services. b. List affect on County services. c. List affect on School District services. 10. Need - explain why th, '.mprovement is not one that cou- normally be financed by the privet deve,tiper "but for" public assista3rem, that is, artd why ( V the costs of the improvement cannot be paid solely by the applicant. 11. Hardship - explain extraordinary development hardships (eg. public improvement cost which exceed normal development costs) which exist for this parcel which cause the need for tax-increment financing assistance. 12. Eminent Domain - list any parcels that will require the City to exercise its rights of Eminent Domain and the legal basis for using this authority. OTHER INFORMATION Provide any further information you feel may assist the City in assessing the merits of this proposal. COUNCIL POLICY STATEMENT CITY OF SHAKOPEE TAX INCREMENT FINANCING FOR HOUSING Subject _. ine�e�.•- 1 T .] /..( .l _�.. Tom. TT... sing T]r ej ets Review V��IC 1V 13.E 111 �^ There are three types of Tax Increment Financing (TIF) Districts: Redevelopment, Lew r M a a Ta..d.._t n_____ins and Economic Develop- ment. I-rre� _--}_ _-_Shakopee has elected to restrict TIF availability for any type of low and moderate income income or conventional housing unless it meets Redevelopment Project Criteria outlined in a separate Policy Statement or is proposed to be constructed on vacant parcels where unusual development hardships can be demonstrated. (i.e. TIF available will be provided for vacant parcels only where unusual development hardships are demonstrated. ) (+_ __ TIF _ __ , _L_, :t✓ __ restrieted fee en b„r�. TIF is available for Economic Development Projects and Redevelopment Projects under separate, but similar, Policy Statements. Minnesota statutes place the responsibility for low and moderate income interest reduction programs with housing and redevelopment authorities. Under Minnesota statutes, however, the interest reduction program and tax increment financing plans of the authority must be approved by the City Council. In addition, the financing of such projects requires the active involvement of the City. As a result, it is necessary that the City have a policy in regard to these projects. The purpose of this policy statement is to establish the City's restrictions with respect to the processing of requests for, and the creation and implementation of, tax increment financing districts for low and moderate income housing. STATEMENT OF POLICY Applicability It is the policy of the City of Shakopee to provide interest rate reduction programs to assist the financing of the construction, rehabilitation, and purchasing of housing units which are primarily for occupancy by individuals of low or moderate income and related or subordinate facilities (MSA 462.445, Subd. 10) in order to protect and increase property values and the tax base of the City. For those purposes, it may be necessary to create tax increment low ' and moderate income housing districts in selected portions of the City and to fund interest rate reduction programs for private developments within such districts. It is also the policy of the City of Shakopee to limit (restrict) the use of TIF interest rate reduction programs to programs that 1) provide home ownership on a scattered site basis with the TIF interest rate reduction provided to the homeowner rather than the builder/developer for quality homes compatible with the neighborhood, or 2) provide for the construction of multifamily housing on parcels where development hardships exist. Creation of tax increment low and moderate income housing districts may come as the result of City initiative, Housing and Redevelopment Authority action, or a private proposal. It is in the public interest that the creation of tax increment districts and the financing of low and moderate income interest reduction programs with tax increments be made only after the City has been fully informed concerning the proposal and its current and future prospects, and has been able to thoroughly investigate it. Where a company or individual is requesting creation of a tax increment district or the financing of interest rate reduction programs via tax increments, that company or individual will be required to furnish certain information needed for such investigation and will be required to assume the costs of the City's efforts. It shall be the expressed intent of the City to expedite to the greatest extent feasible the processing of all requests for the approval of tax increment projects so that no undue delays are experienced by the applicant. However, nothing herein shall be construed as representing a commitment on the part of the City to create tax increment districts. Policy The following policies will be observed in the Council's consideration of the approval of tax increment projects: 1. Benefit to the City: For purposes of determining benefit of a proposed tax increment district or project, both its estimated economic and other benefits shall be considered: (1) The economic benefit is the increased tax base that will result, not only in terms of the absolute increase in the tax base, but also with respect to how great an increase will be received from a given public investment; (2) Equally important is the contribution the porposal makes in creating needed housing units in accordance with the City's adopted Housing Assistance Program; (3) The level of other public and private investment involved in the project; (4) The overall risk or exposure to loss of City funds included in the project; aftd- (5) The degree to which competition in neighboring communities dictates use of such programs to create competitive housing markets in Shakopee; and (6) the degree to which the City will have access to fifth percent (50%) of the captured increment for related City projects. 2. Character of Program: A viable program should typically include participation by both the applicant(s) and the City in reducing interest rates for low and moderate income individuals. Examples of such participation include: (1) A firm commitment by the applicant(s) to build a specified number of the program's housing units or an equivalent commitment; (2) A firm commitment by the applicant(s) to contribute a stated level of interest rate reduction from non-increment sources; (3) Participation by several experienced developer/builders to insure that the program's success or failure does not depend upon on only one or two developer/builders; and (4) The demonstrated quality of the units proposed and their capability with housing units in the neighborhood. 3. Demonstration of Need: A request for tax increment financing shall demonstrate that feasible alternative financing is not available and that the ass-.stance applied for is needed in the amount requested. The developers; will be asked to submit a proforma, an estimate of the costs and revenues of the project, the amount of private capital in the project, and other infor- mation as deemed essential for analysis by the City. Such analysis will either be made by staff or through the City's financial consultant when considered necessary. An applicant who is not willing to provide this information to the City should not make a formal request for tax increment financing assistance. 0-1- 4. Size of the Project: Because of the time and cost involved in analyzing a request for tax increment financing, and because tax increment financing should only be used in those instances where the project will have a demon- strable positive impact on the community as a whole, requests for tax increment financing of less than $100,000 will not be considered as a general rule. A request of this minimum size would require a redevelopment to increase the market value of the property by $1,000,000 assuming the 10-to-1 ratio noted above. 5. Project Certainty/Financial Guarantees: In addition to the other factors, favorable consideration for tax increment financing will be based on (1) When the development is expected to occur; (2) The demonstrated capacity of the applicant(s) to successfully complete the development, and (3) The certainty that the tax increments will be received. Tax Increment Revenue Bonds or General Obligation Bonds will not be used to fund low and moderate income interest reduction programs. Increments will be utilized directly to write down interest rates to insure maximum protection for the City. Applicants for tax increment financing for interest reduction programs will be required to sign an acceptable written agreement setting forth the responsibilities of the applicant and the City with respect to the program. The performance of the applicant under such contract shall be supported by presentation of a financial guarantee in the form of an irrevocable letter of credit. Procedure The following procedures will be utilized in reviewing tax increment financing proposals: 1. A written request shall be submitted concurrently to the City Administrator's office and to the Executive Director of the Shakopee Housing and Redevelopment Authority by the person or firm requesting the City and HRA to utilize the City's tax increment financing capacity. The request shall contain, at a minimum, the information in the pre-application form. 2. Upon submission, the request shall be reviewed by a committee chaired by the City Administrator and consisting of the Planner, City Engineer, Public Works Director, Utilities Director, County Assessor, Finance Director, and HRA Executive Director to determine, on a preliminary basis, whether the proposal appears to be feasible. 3. The application and supporting financial data shall be submitted to the City's Financial Consultant for review. 4. The preliminary proposal shall be placed on the next regularly scheduled agendas of the HRA and of a City Council Work Session for their preliminary review. At those times, the applicant(s) may make a presentation, and staff will make preliminary comments concerning the perceived feasibility of the project. The preliminary proposal will include an application form completed by the developer, a preliminary staff analysis listing the City's new captured assessed value as a percentage of total value, potential uses for related Citv projects and a review of the application data provided by the developer. 5. Based on the preliminary review, the applicant(s) may elect to file a formal application with the City, accompanied by a fee of $500.00. (?- 6. 6. Upon the filing of a formal application, staff shall proceed to complete a tax increment financing analysis which shall examine in detail the proposal's financial viability (which may include a full appraisal by staff or M.A.I. ), and benefit to the community as outlined in the policies above. 7. The applicant(s) shall attend at least one (1) meeting with residents and property owners in and within 500 feet of the proposed tax increment district conducted by the City Council and HRA. 8. After the meeting noted in Step 7 and upon completion of the tax increment financing analysis, a recommendation will be made to the City Council and HRA. Based upon that recommendation, the Council and HRA may authorize the staff to commence negotiation of a low or moderate income interest reduction program. 9. Negotiation of the interest reduction program contract prepared by the HRA occurs. All City negotiating teams will include one or more HRA commis- sioners and legal staff. 10. During the negotiation of the contract, a tax increment financing plan will be prepared by staff with notification being provided to Scott County and the School District, if such plans have not already been adopted. 11. If a redevelopment plan is needed, such plan shall be transmitted to the Planning Commission for review and comment. 12. The HRA will be asked to approve a contract and a tax increment financing plan and redevelopment plan in the event such plans are needed. 13. The City Council will be asked to approve the redevelopment contract and, if necessary and after the appropriate public hearings (noticed via published notice and notice mailed to property owners in and within 500 feet of the proposed district), a tax increment financing plan and redevelopment plan. 14. The adopted plans will be filed with Scott County and the State of Minnesota. 15. Tax increment bonds are issued. MEMO TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: John K. Anderson, City Administrator RE: Hiring a Community Development Director DATE: June 9 , 1986 Introduction City Council, at its regular April 1 , 1986 meeting authorized city staff to recruit, screen and recommend for hiring a person to fill the position of Community Development Director. Recruitment and Screening The city advertised in the local newspaper, the Minneapolis Star and the St. Paul Pioneer Press. In addition, copies of the "help wanted" ad and a job description were mailed to all housing and redevelopment . agencies (HRAs ) in the State. The city received 30 applications which were screened by a screening committee of three persons. Serving on the committee were Ron Rankin, the Community Development Director of Minnetonka, Dick Krier, currently a development specialist with Derick Land Co. and formerly with Westwood Planning and Engineering and the City of Richfield, and me. The thirty applications were reviewed and nine were selected for reference checks . After the reference checks were completed five were scheduled for interviews and testing by Personnel Decisions, Inc. After reviewing the interview results and the results from Personnel Decisions, Inc. the screening committee is recommending that Council offer the position to Dennis Kraft who was the Director of the Department of Planning and Program Development in Iowa City from 1971 to 1980 and has served as the Director of the Department of Community Development in Richfield since 1980. Dennis has excellent credentials and has been successful in guiding major redevelopment projects to completion in Richfield (resume attached) . Financially Dennis is making a lateral move to the position in Shakopee and we are recommending that he be placed at the top salary position on the 1986 Department Head/Staff Pay Plan, Step 10 at $37, 808 per year. The justification for recommending the Step 10 salary is Dennis ' 15 years of experience as a department head for the Community Development Departments in two cities. Alternatives 1 . Approve the employment of Dennis Kraft as Community Development Director effective July 14 , 1986 at a salary of $37 , 808 per year, Step 10 in the Pay Plan. 2 . Direct the City Administrator to negotiate some other salary, benefit or employment status with Dennis Kraft. I had talked to the two top candidates about the possibility of "contract employee" status . This alternative would bring to four the total number of employees working under employment agreements for the City of Shakopee. It would be the first department head in Shakopee working under an employment agreement which is a practice that has been used by a small number of cities in the United States for the last five to ten years . There are significant advantages to the City in using the employment agreement approach which clearly outlines the terms of employment and establishes a specific time at which the agreement must be renewed. The possible negative aspects of using an agreement would be limited to those items in the agreement that allow the individual to be treated different than other department heads. The key question is whether of not the advantages to the City of an employment agreement are sufficient to justify any employment conditions that might be different from those that are offered to other department heads. 3 . Reject the list of finalists and reconsider how the City will fill the Community Development Director ' s position. Recommendation The screening committee and I recommend alternative No. 1 . The City will be obtaining the type of experienced Community Development Director it has been seeking and one with an established network of developer contact in the Metro area. Action Requested Approve the employment of Dennis Kraft as Community Development Director effective July 14, 1986 at a salary of $37, 808 per year, Step 10 in the Pay Plan. JKA/jms April 29 , 1986 703 East 145th Street Burnsville , YIN 55337 P,.r. John Anderson City Administrator City of Shakopee 129 First Avenue East Shakopee , MN 55379 Dear John: Enclosed is my resume , submitted in application for the Community Development Director position. Subsequent to our discussion, I have further evaluated the planning and development opportunities which exist in a growing community such as Shakopee , and have decided that I would like to explore them further. I have extensive experience in a wide variety of community development activities , including planning, redevelopment and tax increment and I.D.R.B. financing. My previous experience also included supervision of a code enforcement operation which was responsible for the administration of building, electrical , plumbing and mechanical codes. I have worked in the Twin Cities for the past six years , and am familiar with both metropolitan and state regulations and practices relating to redevelopment. I look forward to further discussing this position with you. Very truly yours , 414"* A- 'Z"e— Dennis R. Kraft encl. RESUME Dennis R. Kraft, AICP 703 East 145th Street Burnsville, MN 55337 telephone: (612) 432-7210 PROFESSIONAL EXPERIE10E March, 1930 Director, Department of Community Development to City of Richfield present 6700 Portland Avenue South Richfield, MN 55423 Major responsibilities : Direct planning, redevelopment, economic development and engineering act"vities of the city. Direct professional , technical , and clerical staffs in the preparation and administration of operating and capital budgets. Other responsibilities include extensive contact with, and an ability to work effectively with, elected and appointed policy makers, and private sector developers, as well as the formulation and implementation of policies and strategies for commercial and residential redevelopment programs . Directing the city's capital improvement programming, land use and planning processes, as well as identifying and implementing various municipal financial procedures, such as tax increment financing and municipal bond marketing, are other areas of accomplishment. I also represent the city on a variety of regional governmental entities, including the Metropolitan Airport Sound Abatement Council , Airport South Land Use and Transportation Study and numerous Metropolitan Council studies and committees. June, 1985 Adjunct Professor to Graduate Program in Public Administration December, 1985 Hamline University St. Paul , MN 55104 Major responsibilities : Teach planning concepts and practice to graduate students in the Hamline University Graduate Public Administration Program. The course content covered planning in various public organizations, including urban, regional and metropolitan planning agencies, as well as the planning process for non-profit c'iititics . March, 1971 to Director, Department of Plannin and Pro ram Development September, 1974 City of Iowa City 410 East Washington Street February, 1975 Iowa City, Iowa to March, 1980 Major Responsibilities: Directed the three divisions of the department, which included planning, urban redevelopment, and community development block grant Programming. Supervised the city's Construction and Minimum Housing Code Enforcement Programs, directed a 309-unit federally subsidized Section 8 low-income housing project, and supervised a housing rehabilitation program. Major accomplishments included overall direction of the comprehensive plan, establishment of the Iowa City Transit System, chairing the Area Transportation Study' s Technical Committee, coordinating the Iowa City-University of Iowa liaison committee, and developing the Iowa City Senior Citizen Center. September, 1975 Adjunct Lecturer to Graduate Program in Urban and Regional Planning January, 1977 University of Iowa Iowa City, Iowa Major responsibilities : Lectured to graduate students on a variety of subjects , including comprehensive planning, federal progamming, municipal administration and planning implementation procedures . Developed various planning case studies for use in the program. September, 1974 Acting City Manager to City of Iowa City February, 1975 410 East Washington Street Iowa City, Iowa Major responsibilities : Chief administrative officer for the city, for approximately five months. Responsible for enforcement of local ordinances , provision of the full range of traditional municipal services, operation of a mass transit system, and overall administration of the city's 370 employees. During thi.s time, two employee collective bargaining agreements were negotiated and the annual budget prepared and adopted. June, 1968 Executive Director to Johnson County Regional Planning Commission March, 1971 217 Iowa Avenue Iowa City, Iowa Major responsibilities: Directed the commission's programs in the areas of land use, transportation including mass transit) , parks , open space and law enforcement planning. Additional emphasis was in the area of intergovernmental coordination between various members of the commission and local jurisdictions, and the state and the federal governments . December, 1965 Chief Land Use Planner to Northeastern Wisconsin Regional Planning Commission September, 1967 2111 Richmond Street Appleton, Wisconsin Major responsibilities: Provided various planning services to a nine-county region, including .preparation of county environmental protection ordinances, zoning ordinances and open space acquisitions and development programs . April , 1964 Assistant Planner to Ventura County Planning Department December, 1965 52 North California Street Ventura, California Major responsibilities : Prepared a plan for regional parks, riding/hiking trails, and shoreline development. Prepared a county airport plan, participated in sub- county area planning projects, and land use and zoning ordinance implementation. June, 1962 Planner to Springfield-Sangamon County Regional Planning Commission April , 1964 Municipal Building Springfield, Illinois Major responsibilities : Prepared a comprehensive plan and implementation ordinance for a regional community; general planning and research for the City of Springfield. PROFESSIONAL- AFFILIATIONS AND ACTIVITIES Member, American Planning Association/American Institute of Certified Planners (AICP) Member, National Association of Housing and Redevelopment Officials Member, League of Minnesota Cities (serving on various legislative study and Policy recommendation committees) Delegate, Metropolitan Airport Sound Abatement Council Member, Citizens League of Minneapolis/St. Paul Iowa Chapter, American Planning Association Member, Executive Board, 1978-79 President, 1976-77 Vice-President, 1974-75 Iowa Community Betterment Program: Judge, 1976 EDUCATION B.A. , Geography Augustana College 1956-60 Rock Island, Illinois M.A. , Urban Planning University of Iowa 1967-69 Iowa City, Iowa Graduate studies , Southern Illinois University Geography Carbondale, Illinois 1961 -62 EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT SECTION ONE Terms of Employment The term of this Agreement shall be for a period of three (3) years , commencing July 14, 1986. Employee agrees not to seek other employment for career purposes within a three (3) year period from and after date of this Agreement, unless authorized to do so by the Employer. The employee agrees to thirty days written notice of termination of this agreement. No severance pay will be paid unless the Employee meets these terms of employment. In return for this employment commitment, the Housing & Redevelopment Authority (HRA) will give the employee three months notice of termination of this agreement. SECTION TWO Compensation of Emplovee Employer shall pay Employee, and Employee shall accept from Employer, in full payment for Employee's services hereunder, compensation at the rate of Step 10 or $37,808 per year for services rendered as set forth in the 1986 Departmental Head/Staff Pay Plan (Pay Plan) . Said salary shall be adjusted whenever the City adjusts the Pay Plan in the same manner adjustments are applied to other positions covered by the Pay Plan. Annual percentage increases authorized for all other City employees will be applied to the stated initial wage rate including the 1987 rate adjustment. Attendance at evening meetings as outlined in the employee's job description shall be considered a part of the employee's normal work week. The employee shall plan his schedule such that it conforms to a 40 hour work week, unless, at his election and with prior approval, he chooses to work a flex time schedule, in which case he may carry over compensating time on a two week pay period basis. As an exempt employee, comp time for hours worked over eighty (80) hours per pay period shall not be accumulated for future comp-time or pay purposes. SECTION THREE Employee Benefits Hospitalization Insurance and Long-Term Disability Employer shall provide to Employee such group hospitalization and long-term disability insurance as is provided to full-time employees of the Employer, and on the same basis. Life Insurance Employer shall provide to Employee such group term life insurance as is provided to full-time employees of the Employer, and on the same basis . Vacation. Holidays and Sick Leave Employer shall provide to Employee such vacation, holiday and sick leave as is provided to full-time employees of the Employer, and on the same basis. SECTION FOUR Other Terms If not otherwise established by this Agreement, all other terms of employment shall be established by the Shakopee Personnel Policy as adopted, March 5, 1980, and periodically amended. SECTION FIVE Job Description A complete job description outlining the employee's duties is attached and made a part of this agreement. SECTION SIX Execution In witness whereof, the parties have executed this Agreement in Shakopee, Minnesota on the day of 1986 . EMPLOYEE EMPLOYER Dennis Kraft Chairman HRA City Clerk City Administrator 't Ln Lr L_, �, n: '-- Imo. I •_ ]' ,r L7 �7 ••- i7 w CY'� +' ` �' I➢ �i In In n r7 o '7 cT C i .�- �. In W n <t IJ, r •:r .+ !n .`7.- cr Q Q i w w -1 ro J a T+ = - .'n r T ~G -. r f7 '+ (n ,.� - = v •• m `� r r I ut W -t w n f7 G f(1 O n Ina,fy o '� f° n I in — n (9 m r•J n I <+ .,,. L7 7 ['a. to r r� ,D .-. I -+I 0. rcl •-c G `� m In uD r n v rn �•. _ m rn a] r� Ia C �= 1In 3 - ' ti r,3 3 y n S In Ill u O �- rf D C r n cl <�w-r .l7 rD ,+ - .n ID r° •-• z '- T :5 3 = r9 f9 r9 '>C 1 •�+-m s l< r) C7 r'! � N •••, N in In .�- In O In O to •T r; ID in in I < In 3 '°nl [JJ " <�+ t`D(I a 7 O w .mr to rO w+ C1 :q <N•r ` - 117 r�r - G n -- C77 .- rn n. ,f U-1 Y a ewSr T ro ri 3 f9 S .-t - D L-- ,- -�,•X �_ '� , L� p c=•h _ m ro � Inn =c 2 m w Ly n In u e�-r 5 T �„� ro .r1 ID I 2 �•, y S -� - rD r 11 in in 0- e _ 0. w 7 ID w 0. j w 7 rn 19 �' CSI m In I➢ V - '� r9 I -< I m ov S , - 3 0 . N in in m r°0. •j V _ '� `� ewr rp - `n o r w IJ �• w I w �. In �+ r r - 2 T .,wn _ ..,. N J W 3 In '� j _ m In n c n In c �. nl inIr 1 rn ut X ©In m I `' •� I� v f9 0 •� :`•t v 171 O S �--• Ut 23 O cti 3 - r1, In 'Z -n m ry •�' -s r9 < F 'n .+ 2. T _ I N 19 .�'•r I' nT O _T I o _s a = `� `aT iD a -, o to n IM' r- I9 v to ru n, n) w W N ro W N 1 --A ^' `� w rD c ro r� rT n o, s _N _m_m w ul .0_r-c*+ I c., = ro Q _. I,II fun IJ] 3 r t r�.,r rr ru [D m m Ln Ln m r-n W 9 an w LrJ Ln I X cr ..-. ,L• :y ar CJ - ? to w [17 f9_V 6 u7 F Y m I n a Q �w•a I'D r• ..•. r9 = N 9 W r m Ln fT a cL y c_ a Ln O er z S cL 1 19 M. Q 1G Q a in rn r „ a m In IL 4'I a c 3 ry I� 3- v <t O N N n? .W-- W N W w N i In T " Dr " m rn a O rT [1 a S f) J JD F +n v I LT 19 S r-� a, rG J r-- •D z u7 In m •� 1 X n 6 ui .+ C, '7 !7 Iz, Ln w cz In .— •J �J Ln ^ m -9-- 9- rf1 O W .. In C7 - �l W r �` LJ In � S C to R; S ? n, -i cr ut ..., y r r0 l7 In u7 r1 m l7 ro cn T i9 Z Z T a •S i rt,N w w w W w N N i v •+ f7 '.t ro '7 K to - 7 ,.� p in r-� _F _u: ry_fV Cn m N D',� 1 -1, v rn D a< n - 1 X a -n ID ID " .-+ J rSD R rID nn rD C r m w v �! r t CG I I `� r: '9 tr -'• .S •� 6 LT+ nJ u7 C� W 9 ti .�-. i lP W P., I9 r _- Z Q. w 2 O, m N N u] CJI Crt N ' -_s rri t S •_' S T> �.� w v I Rt a rr y -ws, I'D n' ro fj in r m - j .I. r1/ In t(1 3, c w 'fl mro w L•1 W w n7 w w n: I m ^w 'D ,w-. - a CT �' T " m =r ,7 N 2 w fn 1v :z n. In rD n C ro a 19 w f9 fJ © G0'1N m 1 GJ y Lz r„/ ry w l 1 ui -- I'D ID m n -r OT - W L. m - m L. •.( ro F S OS _ 0. f9 1c: L7 as f9 w 1 w O 3 In I'l .+ 19 0. I .� n ru m ro ra w _ ro in 3' L= (n N W W w W W W W LJ I co � to •r- y C V U1 'O fD 7 <-r z fU W L S C1_ n CO _9_p ID 5 t rJi n? f9 ! [K u, V =i n rD w n? r N N [^ N m Q, 1 ,n "n 7 IT, .. •n t w 3 e-r Ln W -t m S -r m �J C.rl ( �n C11 Ul ? - ? �I S 7 ut n) I Cn er s 1 rJ _ 2 c•r G a+ cr N W GJ W W _W r _f3 I @ N w - w S w �I Cv F m V.) h , G? rD r- '7 !D .-. r„ F r_n O. w ry 'J r ` Cl] r y N ul s aaJ - — I In (T OF •7 Ln ..- Ln v Ln O-D Cl;- n, LZ Ln 0. rJ 2 fUn I c`u (rl cy rJ Q•� n.) GJ L•J�•J F LJ fes., F (..1 I •L• -ll �Y m r .-_ F L✓ f•J T (_J r7 ru n n_, :n -J .p , •- _ + ',� ? X 1 W L 47 w IT LLm Lj n> F.) I - In r1. IO n p N ..+ N 1 rY-7 in r :d I r T _ fy p CI I !7. I J 0 -SI ro W [.J W O p y TJ x ,n aA [.7t T-u3 �o G: Cn _J y I - ro eo In - I :e f.`i rn --I � Ln F r.n MI I ❑] 19 f[I V `.J -F F al; Co --! r.n �.! f., f In S O. l+J L:Z Ln v U3 ' fD In f5i I ri r5 Z f.J i1 r_J F LJ i =� rIl r� iD N S In• u: <T r .5 v Crl LJ aa] �.n I_n ry In 'T 11 rt I J LT •T r,_,,r,_,, LL. , f_n '+l -, ..J i - •� vY n -/' S , J LT 1 Lr 47 J I-tiI I �n LA to ry ,.., y .1 .c •-J L.. r.; ,I I uI - - n. S 9 IGJ I 'w: c. 17 " u� ,, ; fu I •.T •.T u . .. �^- I I, •�i 1� +v L, 13 .., _ •�� 6v ftl iD L.J t- riv L-J r1J I n _ rOw ID •t� u r'. �U � 2 POSITION DESCRIPTION Position Title Director Planning & Community Development Department Community Development Accountable To City Administrator Primary Objective of Position To plan, direct and provide leadership for planning, economic development and HRA activities in a manner that will assure the effective administration and delivery of services ; and to propose, monitor and maintain sound community development plans and regulations which are current and consistent with Council policies , directives , codes and ordinances. Major Areas of Accountability Directs and administers planning programs to encourage orderly community development in accordance with applicable comprehensive plans and ordinances by providing professionally sound advice and recommendations for Planning Commission, City Council and HRA consideration. -- Establishes administrative procedures which encourage the thorough, consistent and timely review of development proposals . -- Determines compatability and consistency of development proposals with City development goals/plans . -- Recommends specific City positions on development proposals upon applicable ordinance provisions and professional judgement. Formulates and recommends plans for community development programs, and oversees economic development activities and implementation of comprehensive City plans in a manner that will assure their achievement. -- Prepares Industrial Commercial Commission ( ICC) agendas , staffs ICC meetings and follows up on all ICC directives. -- Assists ICC in establishing and implementing economic development goals including the Star Cities program. -- Initiates and promotes public/private sector cooperation in securing economic development in the community. -- Reviews and evaluates new concepts , developments and approaches , and determines applicability to community development functions . -- Recommends revisions to city land use regulations , plans , policies and procedures to adequately respond to the current development environment, and to effectively meet needs and goals of the City, e.g. promotion of residential development. Provides positive leadership for all community development department programs and determines program priorities . -- Promotes and maintains cooperative work efforts among divisions of department to assure the effective department operation. Administers and coordinates approved HRA programs to assure compliance with contractural agreements , adopted budgets, regulations and policies . -- Prepares HRA agendas , staffs HRA meetings and follows up on all HRA directives . -- Coordinates programs as necessary with appropriate Federal, State and County agencies . -- Monitors financial and contractural status of programs and accurately maintains required records . -- Formulate, sell to downtown commercial business and operate an effective commercial rehab grant/loan program. Monitors and evaluates all community development department functions and evaluates final results . -- Assures that work of all divisions is complete and sound, and that programs and staff output are consistent with City policies , goals and codes. Represents the Department with other City officials , other govern- mental agencies, and the general public , in a manner that will assure continuing effectiveness in the achievement of City objective. Prepares and administers departmental budget, including portions of the Capital Improvement Program with appropriate documentation for submission to the City Administrator. -- Assures that expenditures are consistent with the approved budget. Keeps City Administrator promptly informed of significant matters to permit effective performance of community development programs. Performs other duties as apparent or assigned. Examples of Performance Criteria Ability to creatively package and bring together the necessary public/private sector elements for successful economic development programs and projects will be assessed by the number of such programs and projects successfully undertaken. Ability to formulate and implement long range community development plans will be assessed by timeliness of plans and consistency of recommendations for development with overall plan. yell-, .Y Ability to provide adequate information and recommendations to City Council, City Administrator, and Planning Commission will be determined by consistency, thoroughness and timeliness , efficiency and economy of operating the department. Capacity to work with builders and developers in City will be determined by ability to represent and communicate City positions on specific economic development proposals and general planning issues such that they are understood by the parties involved. Supervision of Others Direct supervision over Planner II , Planner I , Economic Development Specialist and Secretary. Qualifications Training or experience equivalent to Master' s degree in public administration, planning or related fields. Should have at least five years experience in government adminis- tration, with increasing responsibility. Should have hands on experience with selling successful downtown commercial redevelopment grant/loan programs through Port Authority, HRA or other financing agencies. Must have a thorough knowledge of state, federal and municipal policies and codes affecting department operations. Must have demonstrated ability to motivate, train, direct and supervise others. Must be able to develop and maintain positive and effective working relationships with employees, elected and appointed officials, architects , contractors, developers and the general public. Must be a creative and innovative thinker. Must be able to communicate effectively orally, graphically and in writing. Desire experience in effectively stimulating residential development of a wide variety. 1� m MEMO TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: John K. Anderson, City Administrator RE: Hiring a Community Development Director DATE: June 9 , 1986 Introduction City Council, at its regular April 1 , 1986 meeting authorized city staff to recruit, screen and recommend for hiring a person to fill the position of Community Development Director. Recruitment and Screening The city advertised in the local newspaper, the Minneapolis Star and the St. Paul Pioneer Press. In addition, copies of the "help wanted" ad and a job description were mailed to all housing and redevelopment agencies (HRAs ) in the State. The city received 30 applications which were screened by a screening committee of three persons. Serving on the committee were Ron Rankin, the Community Development Director of Minnetonka, Dick Krier, currently a development specialist with Derick Land Co. and formerly with Westwood Planning and Engineering and the City of Richfield, and me. The thirty applications were reviewed and nine were selected for reference checks. After the reference checks were completed five were scheduled for interviews and testing by Personnel Decisions, Inc. After reviewing the interview results and the results from Personnel Decisions , Inc. the screening committee is recommending that Council offer the position to Thomas C. McElveen who was a Community Development Specialist for Scott County from 1978 to 1981 and has served as the Executive Director of the Waconia Housing and Redevelopment Authority since 1981. Tom has excellent creden- tials and has been successful in securing and implementing numerous Federal, State and foundation grant programs ( resume attached) . Financially Tom is making a lateral move to the position in Shakopee and we are recommending that he be placed at the top salary position on the 1986 Department Head/Staff Pay Plan, Step 10 with an adjustment of +3% similar to adjustments received by three other department heads. The justification for the +3% adjustment of the Step 10 salary is the three year employment agreement which includes conditions of employment regular full time employees are not subject to. Tom has also been able to utilize a unique program available only to city managers/administrators in the State of Minnesota, because he has been carried as the HRA Director in Waconia and not a City employee. He has asked that the City make this option available to him. To accomplish this I am suggesting that Tom be employed as a "contractual" employee under our personnel rules and regulations similar to our present Administrative Aide and part-time Building Inspector. This employment designation allows Tom to take his PERA contribution and the City' s PERA contribution and place them in a deferred comp program rather than participating in PERA. There are two other unique elements being proposed in the employment agreement attached. The first is an agreement by the City to give Tom three months or 90 days notice of termination in exchange for his commitment not to seek a job, and the second is an acceler- ation of his vacation benefits commencing at the end of his six month probationary period. Alternatives 1 . Approve the employment agreement between the City of Shakopee and Thomas C. McElveen as drafted. This alternative would bring to four the total number of employees working under employment agreements for the City of Shakopee. It would be the first department head in Shakopee working under an employment agreement which is a practice that has been used by a small number of cities in the United States for the last five to ten years. There are significant advantages to the City in using the employment agreement approach which clearly outlines the terms of employment and establishes a specific time at which the agreement must be renewed. The possible negative aspects of using an agreement would be limited to those items in the agreement that allow the individual to be treated different than other department heads. The key question is whether or not the advantages to the City of an employment agreement are sufficient to justify any employment conditions that might be different from those that are offered to other department heads. In this case I believe we have struck a reasonable balance. 2 . Approve the proposed employment agreement between the City of Shakopee and Thomas C. McElveen with minor amendments that Council feels would be necessary to improvement the "balance" discussed in No. 1 above. 3 . Reject the idea of an employment agreement and offer the Position to Thomac C. McElveen at the proposed salary as a regular full time City employee with department head status. Based on my discussion with Tom I question whether he would accept the position under these circumstances. 4. Open negotiations with the selection committee ' s second choice, Dennis Kraft the Community Development Director in the City of Richfield. Recommendation The screening committee and I recommend alternative No. 1 for the reasons listed. The City of Shakopee has been seeking an aggressive, salesman type personality for this position and Tom fits the bill better than the other four finalists . Tom is familiar with Shakopee and Scott County and already knows many of the officials he would be dealing with on a daily basis . He currently lives in Bloomington and does not plan to move. Four of the five finalists would not plan to move to Shakopee. Action Regested Recommend that the appropriate HRA officials to enter into an employment agreement between the Shakopee Housing and Redevelopment Authority and Thomas C. McElveen at their June 17 , 1986 meeting to fill the position of Community Development Director effective July 14 , 1986 through July 14 , 1989 . JKA/jms THOMAS C, McELVEEN 11211 Washburn Avenue South Bloomington , Minnesota 55431 Date of Birth: July 12, 1956 Residence ( 612) 888-8958 Marital Status : Married Work (612) 448-5215 OBJECTIVE A key position in the Housing and Community Development profession that will utilize my expertise in Planning, Finance and Human Resources Management. EDUCATION B.A. - Political Science and Geography, Gustavus Adolphus College M.B.A. - Business Management/Finance, Graduate Schools in Management, College of Saint Thomas Certified Public Housing Manager - Institute of Real Estate Management Economic Development Finance Series - The National Development Council EXPERIENCE Community Development Specialist - Scott County, Minnesota Housing and Redevelopment Authority, 1978-1981 Executive Director - Housing and Redevelopment Authority of Waconia , Minnesota, 1981-present Experience encompasses Agency Administration , Office Management, Employee Supervision and Evaluation , Strategic Planning and Housing, Commercial/Industrial and Public Facilities Project Development, Implementation and Monitoring. ACHIEVEMENTS Developed, authored and administered numerous projects utilizing CDBG, TIF, IDB's , MRB's, FmHA, LRPH and Foundation Grants. Projects and accomplishments include : * Development of 250 Housing Units * Rehabilitation of 200 Housing Units * Downtown Commercial Facade Renovation * Central Business District Renewal Projects * Public Infrastructure Improvements * Development of 42 Acre Industrial Park * Development of 200,000 square feet of Industrial Space creating over 350 permanent jobs * Established and capitalized $1 .1 million revolving Economic Development Fund QUALIFICATIONS Eight years progressively responsible project development and management experience including: * Proposal writing * Business and real estate financing * Computer application of financial feasibility/ cash flow analysis * Excellent oral and written communications skills * Demonstrated ability to deal with the public as well as officials at all levels of management and government * Executive level management experience PROFESSIONAL MEMBERSHIPS, ACTIVITIES AND AWARDS National Association of Housing and Redevelopment Officials , Minnesota, 1978-present NAHRO, MN Board of Directors, 1984-1985 NAHRO, MN Vice President for Community Revitalization and Development, 1985-1987 NAHRO North Central Regional Council Board of Directors, 1985-1987 League of Minnesota Cities/NAHRO TIF Task Force, 1985-1987 State of Minnesota Small Cities CDBG Advisory Committee, 1983-present Conference and Educational Speaker: League of Minnesota Cities NAHRO, MN National Association of Development Organizations Mankato State University NAHRO, MN 1985 Outstanding Achievement Award INTERESTS Running, Bicycling, Canoeing, Sailing and Skiing EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT SECTION ONE Terms of Employment The term of this Agreement shall be for a period of three (3) years, commencing July 14, 1986 . Employee agrees not to seek other employment for career purposes within a three (3) year period from and after date of this Agreement, unless authorized to do so by the Employer. The employee agrees to thirty days written notice of termination of this agreement. No severance pay will be paid unless the Employee meets these terms of employment. In return for this employment commitment, the Housing & Redevelopment Authority (HRA) will give the employee three months notice of termination of this agreement or three months serverance pay if the City so chooses. SECTION TWO Compensation of Employee Employer shall pay Employee, and Employee shall accept from Employer, in full payment for Employee's services hereunder, compensation at the rate of 103% of Step 10 or $38,942 per year (Step 10 = $37,808 x 103% _ $38,942) for services rendered as set forth in the 1986 Departmental Head/Staff Pay Plan (Pay Plan) . Said salary shall be adjusted whenever the HRA/City adjusts the Pay Plan in the same manner adjustments are applied to other positions covered by the Pay Plan. Annual percentage increases authorized for all other HRA/City employees will be applied to the stated initial wage rate including the 1987 rate adjustment. Attendance at evening meetings as outlined in the employee's job description shall be considered a part of the employee's normal work week. The employee shall plan his schedule such that it conforms to a 40 hour work week, unless, at his election and with prior approval, he chooses to work a flex time schedule, in which case he may carry over compensating time on a two week pay period basis. As an exempt employee, comp time for hours worked over eighty (80) hours per pay period shall not be accumulated for future comp-time or pay purposes . SECTION THREE Emplovee Benefits Hospitalization Insurance and Long-Term Disability . Employer shall provide to Employee such group hospitalization and long-term disability insurance as is provided to full-time employees of the Employer, and on the same basis. Life Insurance Employer shall provide to Employee such group term life insurance as is provided to full-time employees of the Employer, and on the same basis . Vacation. Holidays and Sick Leave Employer shall provide to Employee vacation at a rate of three (3) weeks per year after successful completion of a six-month probationary period and thereafter provide future vacation benefits on the same basis as other employees. Employer shall provide to Employee such holiday and sick leave as is provided to full-time employees of the Employer, and on the same basis. SECTION FOUR Other Terms If not otherwise established by this Agreement, all other terms of employment shall be established by the Shakopee Personnel Policy as adopted, March S, 1980, and periodically amended. SECTION FIVE Job Description A complete job description outlining the employee's duties is attached and made a part of this agreement. SECTIOi1 SIX Execution In witness whereof, the parties have executed this Agreement in Shakopee, Minnesota on the day of 1986 . EMPLOYEE EINPLOYER Thomas McElveen Chairman HRA City Clerk City Administrator r i U L24 7 fL r'7 c, Tl --.I _ .- c7 •- n "' i r ro W - _ _ an In ro .n. c1 d o I 2: ro 1Y e-f• In r. .., .,+ .r r` ro •-• v N -D W v ro In .Y �. n a ro •+ - O c c t a ]+ n ro -'++ T •' Cr u1 rt W .-' w n Y c m Y n ro a, n .r rD •• O n -+, .- .• 1 In <•. a a� n rn m n n o m c a o n Incu 0 o c- ID in _ ro I'Dv ro C-1 " ,a s 2= 1 = J IMf0 •y-- .�+ n - _ v n O I`n M W O •'* Z < ro o Y in o O I n CI7 7 d In in ID f0 ... :c •� rr T O_ 7 = n T m rD •+v 2 `< r-1 2. N T N N ro •-• ro 7 ro p rD n ro N N I < ` Ill N O, In ru ro p C En •.+ O ro d O 17 W b n er , I O ro m W CL Iv - _ r ' iS c rn •+ n G d ^ ^ .-r O C7 In CL V r-n T ro O _ I 1JL Q T -1 :o : v ILR- n ro W a `< :J''• c o rr4 am n LJ ro o _ �+ n n W 1� W o 3 n+ G 3 `t CTJ -D F 7 W .- •.., rD •5 a y Z T o ni or In rL •t `'� I - el w er ... rn N v en-r y z J .n ro 1 T T.3 v a S ra C ro 11 N CL N O ID w In CL - - d ; w' ro v u`a c n ni -D o ro ID �n -s "� cr c z t=. -- ~ in Ln In In J TJ r I .-- L— Y �. .- r-r nr ri- U7 rWi D a la �. N .+ . n r7 OL e-- r ru I 7 �• O O rp ro 1 .T n ig Ln rJ WZ ro c .moi- n C rCL i v T O .fir 1 RC q 3 :t v D 7 - z r9 Ln •T -� W 1:] c CLJ Vl T T er ►. er r-• Z O w 3 O r I w.• eY O ro ro IO I V 17 ~ ro Z -+1 ro .Jt r N O � 1-• Ul •=5 I f, r� 0 c 3 -S o m rn ro �+ •� z ro c 'n w LP rr t ID " r.-n' .�-. '` I, I N � M C. o c o vl iDin W - �• a a n In «• a, < 11 rD i .mr rn er ... v ro v rD O tU rls ro W W (V N W fV 1 v rr fD v In N 3 Iru D Ill") n ro 7 •--• `G d -1 _fJ _m_m _CJ CJ1_u] F Cr> I X •S 'n ro Q i ro r.n ro = N Ln Q1 r-n w r9 iD w,- F L_n I er I^ v-- 9 w O e-' rror 6+ LJI 9"V 1,9 �V-- u7 F - m I .1 cr W n n v Q 'art in n z R t�D O. fJ 9 W m Ln Ul 1 w a LZ y rte-- rD n 3' `Y - la p v N N ro cu m rn n O. c' c 1 [n R f-n T W C7i r'-' n Yv r� rU rY O fU Rl n? W W N W W ro } ro , .-. o- •. y r 'n «.• m a '1 w m .... a u1 <+ w 1 X n a cr p ro 3 rn y �D 3J Ia '• ro ro N LI. G 17 �v 47 in W -- rD n i ',J V Ln eD F CT I N T n '7 In n 12 .�-. ro y n w F m a7, tD C1 m Lil 1 n. 'S r G to m .-r I > > 'tl ID w CU ro s �a m - � 1 Ln m E r Z ri �' aT, m S ru m w w w ry w L- m I V ro •-* r7 ..r 1 Ij rn p < rD lG _ - •r O Ln er ^ .? �J: 5, N Ln O� nJ m t� I �- r9 v 1 N r7 ? .• '• 1 X v j v n 4 Irr rn n rD ID C F m u] �! V •--- F m �l I ^ L' ns m W 5 V V 1 N W w ,a r-n Cr n.+ •-• f 1 i W .WS aD N V ro rD .� f- O t0 •� ; n-' Eia Ln N 1-3 Ln r- ro rT rD w �' d �• n y ns w w w w ns W W IV I m V { y ..• v L c a M S O d i-n - r L, F V uJ w m+I.q i K n- .D �• r v ..r p N .. .. .. m Iv t ..• *� rD �. C ro rD W 9 rZD © r r!s T RJ m 1 -' r� In 3 n D �, y rr1 G c N w 6 Lil W r 9 W Lr I Ln F • n .t '� 1D _ ID •- m ro m W V rU F p n ID n -ro L7 Q N rD r7 ^ N ro Y Y IL In � N_ R yr N IY �' ra N w W W w w w w W ! Co V .mr .?. " -. r 7' Q~ ftJ L.1 n m 9 .a t11 rS 1 IJI nJ ro n N LJRl n r -• ;) rp y w IV M [^. M Co Q� 1 17 -O -r, _ = IZ IDn 0 .f .n <' W 3 .-r Lyl V ry1 rmu ti ftJ J > Ln � Ln Ln _ r� . ro S = w r �- n v rr 1 n n Ln In n W 7 I t "n ra co CL z r - T cr ru w w w W w LI F w I C4 v •'+ S' ^ [n ?�+ 17• - DI t �.. V �.i F Cn Il] �T �' �� I .n IV U .� ID L-- �- .: r✓ ro 1� In •- rls F Ln m C•) y 1=1 c•..1 I 'S ,c C, c. C v r-L - Cn �: i ns 1J• r W V .r 1 In Ln N IJ - y i 1 Ln ^-• c-n y Ln m rd fl,in N I'll ID I- I r -- ,J m W �- -, 11 I T� r ns c•J r.•J .1 F c r11 i c.1 I •u _ m I �Y n z :,, m rJ.> F n rl-. V ni�., I ;i•rl"• 10 1� r'J -� f-J 2• r- r0 .« .;r + J �1 n_ _r •' ,.L O W G LL7 I..i L L'✓ LJ rry f'] 10 l 0 ID N ID •-. wn.. C11 cY •- I t71 ru w 41 W F W L^ w I LJ V V ry T7 .-� K ro r.l] in LJI N L•J m L•J L` n i t- s 10 in Lr m r� :•n -1 Ln F r!1 -i ns I CoV r.n V r-.)•J w n 1 u 111 S J In iD W < n . er F y W u'-a if v � rV F 1 ' ro _ ._ W QyY I rr Y -. ID M1 V n n n n .. ;z f.J r? i Crn 10 'S ID J N U: •Y X S W L• P CJ J -A LJ 1 --a1 In - u) L•-1 �) w �^ .,J n I_n i v �� ID 11 .t y ro •T r,-', �7 -1 LT rJLL1 1 A '+a r-Il J 1 '1• -- 'Ji in ro ,n Cl L aJ V I.''s I LIl w !N ' U. - rn .t cr S I rp D IU 1 In 1 u� 1 u i r •'� •> y V 11 T.l 11 aC r •r -J IT ry L> - ^' ret n •• _ .) y SS N CN IfF rU IB I..J 4 ry ..-/ I.L a art - S T - :. fn w m •�� - l: .j .y • rl •u POSITION DESCRIPTION Position Title Director Planning & Community Development Department Community Development Accountable To City Administrator Primary Objective of Position To plan, direct and provide leadership for planning, economic development and HRA activities in a manner that will assure the effective administration and delivery of services; and to propose, monitor and maintain sound community development plans and regulations which are current and consistent with Council policies , directives, codes and ordinances. Major Areas of Accountability Directs and administers planning programs to encourage orderly community development in accordance with applicable comprehensive plans and ordinances by providing professionally sound advice and recommendations for Planning Commission, City Council and HRA consideration. -- Establishes administrative procedures which encourage the thorough, consistent and timely review of development proposals. -- Determines compatability and consistency of development proposals with City development goals/plans. -- Recommends specific City positions on development proposals upon applicable ordinance provisions and professional judgement. Formulates and recommends plans for community development programs, and oversees economic development activities and implementation of comprehensive City plans in a manner that will assure their achievement. -- Prepares Industrial Commercial Commission (ICC) agendas, staffs ICC meetings and follows up on all ICC directives. -- Assists ICC in establishing and implementing economic development goals including the Star Cities program. -- Initiates and promotes public/private sector cooperation in securing economic development in the community. -- Reviews and evaluates new concepts, developments and approaches, and determines applicability to community development functions. -- Recommends revisions to city land use regulations, plans , policies and procedures to adequately respond to the current development environment, and to effectively meet needs and goals of the City, e.g. promotion of residential development. Provides positive leadership for all community development department programs and determines program priorities. -- Promotes and maintains cooperative work efforts among divisions of department to assure the effective department operation. Administers and coordinates approved HRA programs to assure compliance with contractural agreements, adopted budgets, regulations and policies. -- Prepares HRA agendas, staffs HRA meetings and follows up on all HRA directives . -- Coordinates programs as necessary with appropriate Federal, State and County agencies. -- Monitors financial and contractural status of programs and accurately maintains required records . -- Formulate, sell to downtown commercial business and operate an effective commercial rehab grant/loan program. Monitors and evaluates all community development department functions and evaluates final results. -- Assures that work of all divisions is complete and sound, and that programs and staff output are consistent with City policies, goals and codes. Represents the Department with other City officials , other govern- mental agencies, and the general public, in a manner that will assure continuing effectiveness in the achievement of City objective. Prepares and administers departmental budget, including portions of the Capital Improvement Program with appropriate documentation for submission to the City Administrator. -- Assures that expenditures are consistent with the approved budget. Keeps City Administrator promptly informed of significant matters to permit effective performance of community development programs. Performs other duties as apparent or assigned. Examples of Performance Criteria Ability to creatively package and bring together the necessary public/private sector elements for successful economic development programs and projects will be assessed by the number of such programs and projects successfully undertaken. Ability to formulate and implement long range community development plans will be assessed by timeliness of plans and consistency of recommendations for development with overall plan. Ability to provide adequate information and recommendations to City Council, City Administrator, and Planning Commission will be determined by consistency, thoroughness and timeliness , efficiency and economy of operating the department. Capacity to work with builders and developers in City will be determined by ability to represent and communicate City positions on specific economic development proposals and general planning issues such that they are understood by the parties involved. Supervision of Others Direct supervision over Planner II , Planner I , Economic Development Specialist and Secretary. Qualifications Training or experience equivalent to Master ' s degree in public administration, planning or related fields. Should have at least five years experience in government adminis- tration, with increasing responsibility. Should have hands on experience with selling successful downtown commercial redevelopment grant/loan programs through Port Authority, HRA or other financing agencies. Must have a thorough knowledge of state, federal and municipal policies and codes affecting department operations. Must have demonstrated ability to motivate, train, direct and supervise others . Must be able to develop and maintain positive and effective working relationships with employees, elected and appointed officials, architects, contractors, developers and the general public. Must be a creative and innovative thinker. Must be able to communicate effectively orally, graphically and in writing. Desire experience in effectively stimulating residential development of a wide variety. MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator J FROM: Judith S. Cox, City Clerk-- RE: By-Laws of the Shakopee Fire Department Relief Association DATE: June 5 , 1986 Introduction Mr. Mike Ryan recently brought to my attention an error in the current By-Laws of the Relief Association. Background It seems that when the formula for figuring pension benefit was added in February of 1985 (Res. No. 2371 ) there was an error made in Article VIII , Section 6 which was incorrectly brought forward from Resolution 1870 adopted July 21 , 1981. The attached resolu- tion simply corrects the errors made to coincide with the July 21 , 1981 adopted By-Laws , and adopts the formula adopted by Resolution No. 2371 and rescinds Resolution No. 2371 . Alternatives a. Correct error. b. Don' t correct error. Recommended Action Offer Resolution No. 2574 , A Resolution Amending Resolution No. 1870 , Approving the By-Laws of the Shakopee Fire Department Relief Association, and move its adoption. JSC/jms RESOLUTION NO. 2575 A RESOLUTION AMENDING RESOLUTION NO. 1870 , APPROVING THE BY-LAWS OF THE SHAKOPEE FIRE DEPARTMENT RELIEF ASSOCIATION WHEREAS , on February 19 , 1985 the Shakopee City Council adopted Resolution No. 2371 the By-Laws of the Shakopee Fire Department by substituting a new Article VII on disability benefits and a new Article VIII on death benefits and pensions ; and WHEREAS, an error was made in Article VIII , Death Benefits and Pensions , Section 6 , in the number of years service for benefits . NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA, that Resolution No. 1870 , Approving the By-Laws of the Shakopee Fire Department Relief Association, dated June 16 , 1981 are hereby amended by substituting Articles VII and VIII therein with the attached Article VII on disability benefits and Article VIII on death benefits and pensions . BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that Resolution No. 2371 is hereby rescinded in its entirety. 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 a Isle.^„De:” Cr his assccia:�_cn s'na_ DeCO ^E �c�al' � anc pe7—Mane7.,Zly c�sab;ec Zo :ne :::-,a:::la` a or surgeon, accept2ble to the board Cf trustees shall certify that such permanently prevent said member from performing tis duties in the Shakopee . ire Dep2rtment , tale assoc:aticn snali pay t0 such member the amount as calculated by the f OrmuLa provided in Attachment r., LOr Each year that he served as an aCt:ve meMber Of the Shakopee Fire Department. If a member who hes received such a disability pension should subsequently recover and return to active duty in the Shakopee :ire Department , any amount paid to rim as a disability pension shall be deducted from his service pension. DEATH nFt�F:iTS AND PENSIONS Section 1 . upon the death of any member o: the association who is in good standing at the time of his death, the association shall pay to the surviving spouse , if any , and if there is no surviving spouse , to surviving child or children , if any, and if n0 child Or children survive , t0 the estate Of such deceased member, the amount as calculated by the formula provided in Attachment A, f Or Ea Ch year trial he served as an active member of the ShakCDee .ire Department. Section 2. The association shall pay to each member who shall have served as an active f; reff ghee^ in the Shakopee . _re Deva-tmen:, .Or a period Cf 20 years Or more prior to is resignation from said Fire Department, and who has reached the age of 50 years or more . and who has been a member Of the association for at least _ 10 veers ✓L he amoun ✓ as CG l cula ✓edth y e D Attachment L, IOr each year that he served as an aC ✓_VE ember _ _ member C: said _re Department. 5 e C t i c n r`. memDe.r Cf the association vho shall have served _r. the Shakopee _ _re Departme: ✓ for at least 20 years, but has not reached ✓he age of :;)' D years may retire from said _rE Department and De placed on the de=erred pension roll . IT;hen he reaches t7je age of :�0 years , and provided that at that -me hE ,as DEEM a member Cf the as50C' t� t l ^. l �a on for ol a least 10 yea.rs , upon a✓✓ cation therefore he shall be LJGid the amount as calculated by the forul -.a wen.` or each, } ar that Yl served p.rovi Qed in A✓t2C ✓ r: f 'E t: e E a5 an aC-_VE firefig:ter _P. the Shakopee Fire Department. During the t_me ✓rata member _s ch the deferred p ._ en5_Cn rO_�` he 5hal_ COnt_nue ✓0 pay _s CUES , and he w__1 not be El_Eic'_E ✓O rECE:VE any C. ✓he bene_ _ ✓s ^ro v_ded _ Or in 5eCti0n � .. D:.. _ug the ✓_me that a member is on the deterred D. ensfon _ t.^.E aS50C t - - - _a _C.r s c_1 a.._ „0 ✓he aMZUr r ✓0 sI:::: ..._..:bE.r _.. ✓E res., , CC...p C'«r/QEQ annually , at the rG ..E c►✓.:G_.,' earned on the asse.5ts Of tae EDec_al _ ::,d , . ..t not to e ceed ' oc Per ytar . Sectcn 5 . too less tan ;C ca}'s before beccminE eli�i�_E to receive a -uL.p suW pension, a memr,er of tris associa:-cn WaN, make an irrevocatr_e elec _ion ;st suet pensfcn s:,a_1 be pa_:: .,o r_m _n a number of, annual _nstal_me:., s. Ine c.ember who nas suet an �_er^.`„ion Gres De_rore aCr ."_S pension nas been a r y amO:.n:, taerec: rema,.,_rF unpa_G a' the t, - Cr tris death shall be paid to his named beneficiarv , and _l no bene- ficiary has been named , to his surviving spouse , child er children , or estate . Ine association shall add interest , compounded annually , at the rate actually earned on the assets cf the Special Fund , but not to exceed 5 per year, to the unpaid amount of installments owed to any member who has made an installment election , or to his survivors . Section 6 . If a member shall have served for more than years , but less than 20 years , as an active firefighter in the Shakopee =ire Department , he may retire from said moire Department and be placed on the early vested pension roll . When he reaches the age of 50 vears , and provided that at ti,.at time he has been a member of the association for at least 1Rrl'v'ears , he shall upon application therefor , be paid in the following manner : S-0 `70 (a) For active duty of more --an years , but less than ;' years , ,o of the amount per year o_ service which would have Deem earned, had the member served for 1b20 years Gr more ; (b) For active duty Of more than �years , Dur less than 20 years , 4"0 o� the amount Der vear of service which would have Deem earned, had the member served for 20 years or more , shall be added to all vear s of se=-vice for each additional year of `b service between X and 20 years . (c) During the time znat any member i5 On the early vested DenSion roll , he shall continue to Day ___s dues , and he Will not De e---- 177- l - ble t0 re^eive any O_ the e ef_tS D_ d for in _ c - an D n rova ce Arti le t'II , �ensi ons Datiable to me«Ders. On the early vested Derision roll Shall De based on the amGLnt :avab_e Der year C. Ser�-�ce _n e_-ect at the t_me Cm. Such early re__re e J n i I The Shakopee :ire Department Relief kssociatic'n pension benefit ( lump sum per year Of service ) for 1985 and 1986 shall be as provided for by the formula below w-4th a , OOC . 00 r;ir.imun and any increase in benefit over ", 000 sha_1 be funeed by Specj : and sLrp�uses and not req L'' y re a C, ty ccntrlDLtlon . Tne benefit for 1987 and thereafter shall beas provided by the formula and funded by Special Fund surpluses and an average City contribution cf 45 , 000 per calendar year. When the benefit reaches 3 , 000 , any increase over the $3 , 000 shall be funded only by Special Fund surpluses and not require a City contribution. if, according to the formula , the benefit for a particular year would drop, the City would contribute funds needed to maintain the benefit level of the previous year and the total City contribution would be figured into the 45 , 000 per year averaging . ,, ormu! c defirta` i nems At December 3 i of each year the credited service shall be equal to: from 0 to 6 months = 0 years ; from 6 months to 1 - 112 years = 1 year ; from 1-112 years to 2-112 years = 2 years ; etc. through 30 years of service . Let c- = projected assets to end of current year. Let a = persons with 1 year of service . Let b = persons with 2 .years of service. Let c = persons with 3 years of service. Let b = persons with 4 years of service. Let e = persons with 7 years of service . Let f = persons with 6 years of service . Let g = persons with 7 years of service . Let h = persons with 8 years of service . Let i = persons with 9 years of service . Let = persons with 10 years c: service . Let k = persons with 11 years of service . Let l = persons with 12 years of service . Let m = persons with 13 years of service . Let n = persons with 14 years of service . Let o = persons with 15 years cf service . LEt p = persons with 16 years cf service . Let c = persons with 17 years of service . LEt r = persons with i8 years of service . Let -.s = persons with 19 years of ser�°J Let t = persons with 20 years of service . Let u = persons with 21 years of service . Let v = persons with 22 years of service . Let w = persons with 23 years of service . Let x = persons with 24 years cf service . LEt y = persons w-th 25 years Of Service . Tet Z = persons with 26 years cf SerViCE . . t as = persons with 27 years Of Berv_CE . .:j..y - .,Et aC = Persons with 29 Vears of se.^vi Ce . ..et ad = pers-ons with 30 VearS c Cery=CE . i 0u.,,uyative years or accrued , ; and a pension amour: o: 100. 00 �+ �o ++ +ryy therec: based on per year o. service . iabu' ation shown below is based on T;i, S Statutes '�nesc „a State . a Lutes 69 - 771 , SL'bd . L. nL) : 7V V a I � 60 60 1 24 62 J 190 63 . 3 4 260 5 65 6 334 66 . 8 X10 68 .33 8 "92 70 .�9 9 576 72 10 760 666 7 11 838 76 12 78 3 962 80. 17 I1070 82.31 14 1184 84 .57 1 1304 166 1 X28 86 . 93 17 89.25 18 1560 91 .76 19 1698 04 .33 20 18 97 .05 21 2000 100 thereafter 100/year 100 Divide projected assets to December < . ;, � � r 31 Of current year by accrued �i_ity F G1 u.l Der sior. ) pEr y " r to December 31 of CL'"* e:'� e Ea. S C: S-rv.;^ pro jeC.ed t. �✓, t Year per r ...ter. �� Cl pe �On per year Gf 'service - curl-e- ': to �E� amount_ o curter � � l 6 C = 1 . 2Lib = 1 9 5 . ' - 6 . 0c - 2 . 604 - 3 .' e + t . 10f - 92 7 . 60 62 + i �; . 28p - ? 5 6Oc + j 8 . 58k .� e ? - 10.70w i1 . S�;n - 1 . CL 2L� 2_ _ 26z' 16 . 9Sr G= }18 . 4�s + 20- -'21u - 22 , 3 __ o �y �o lr + 27aC + 28ab �� V t + 23w Pei-son per year of service for cutre::���yQa�, 30a ) - berm:i t per City of Shakopee POLICE DEPARTIVMNT 476 South Gorman Street SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA 55379 Tel. 445-6666 TO: Mayor, Council Members FROM: Tom Brownell RE: Downtown Parking - Informational DATE: June 6, 1986 On June 6, 1986, parking tickets were issued in the downtown area and have been voided. Due to a shift change the officer was unaware that parking tickets are not being issued in the lots. _nV-r,,c<.4 MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator FROM: Ken Ashfeld, City Engineer,,,1-,X SUBJECT: Storm Sewer Utility Billing DATE: June 6, 1986 As you know, the 1st quarter storm sewer utility bills were recently mailed to the citizens and property owners within Shako- pee. This was the initial billing of a new program and for the most part went very well. As expected there are a fair amount of delinquent payments but payments are continuing to come in. One major problem did occur within the computerized data base. Essentially, the computer incorrectly read the area of a l 1 par- cels that were billed with an acreage of 10 acres or more and reduced it to an area less than 10 acres by displacement of a decimal paint. Ninety two out of approximately 3, 700 parcels billed were affected, obviously those of the larger commercial or industrial developed properties. This under billing of these properties resulted in an under charge of approximately $40, 000. 00. The individual affect on properties range from approximately $100. 00 to $6, 000. 00 in the extreme case. The City' s contract billing company, L06IS, is in the process of repairing their faulty program at this time. Since the storm sewer utility charge is based upon an established time frame to amortize the cost of storm sewer improvements, and to keep that time frame on track, I plan to send to each of the 9E prop- erty owners the attached letter indicating the additional amount due. Since this letter will go out quite close to the second quarter billings, I plan to send out the letters as soon as possible and to give additional time for the payment of addi- tional charges due. KA/pmp INFO CITE' OF SHAKOPEE INCORPORATED 187014 129 EAST FIRST AVENUE, SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA 55379-1376 (612) 445-3650 June 6, 1986 p r 1 Parcel No. Dear Property Owner: RE: Storm Drainage Utility Charges As you know, the City of Shakopee has recently implemented a storm drainage utility for the financing and maintenance of storm sewer systems within the City. The storm sewer utility charge is based upon land use intensity and acreage of all parcels of property within the City. In April, you received a storm sewer utility billing for the first quarter of 1986. If you were one of the many larger businesses previously quoted an estimate of your bill by the Engineering Department, you were probably surprised by the low amount of the bill you received. We discovered an error in your bill and other larger bills this week. Essen- tially, the computerized data system adjusted all properties of 10 acres or more to acreages less than 10 acres by a displacement of the decimal point. Therefore, the amount of the utility bill was incorrectly calculated. Your correct storm sewer utility amount is $ Your were incorrectly charged $ Additional Balance Due for 1st Gtr. , 1986 $ Your next quarter bill will reflect the correct amount as calculated from the correct acreage of your property. Since the utility charges will continue for a specific time period to amortize the cost of storm sewer improvements, and to keep that time frame on track, we ask that you submit the additional balance due for the 1st ouarter of 1986. Realizing the untimeliness of this additional charge being quite close to the second quarter billing, we ask that this additional balance due be submitted sometime during the remaining 1986 calendar year. You have received a duplicate copy of this letter. You may keep the original for your file and please return the copy with your payment. Thank you for your cooperation and patience with this matter. If you have any questions you may contact me or Steve Hurley at 445-3650. FLEASE CONS I DE R 7 I S AN I NV O I CE Sincerely, Ken Ashfeld City Engineer The Heart of ProcreSS Valley CITY OF SHAKOPEE {�.�: �► -1 I29 East First Avenue, Shakopee, Minnesota 55379 MEMO TO: John Anderson - Administrator FROM, Jim Karkanen - Public Works SUBJECT: Flag installation on 1st Av. DATE: June 10th, 1986 INTRODUCTION: The Public Works Dept . has been installing the American flags in the street pole brackets for flag bearing commemmorative occasions for the American Legion. This directive came from the City Council last year. Several weeks ago, the Chamber of Commerce had banners installed by SPUC on these same light poles , but are installed at the same elevation as the flag brackets , and Christmas decorations . BACKGROUND: Saturday, June 14th, is Flag Day, and the American flags will have to be installed for this occasion. But , it is our understanding, that the Am. flag must be installed in the higher elevation over any other flags or banners . As an alternative, we have experimented with the flag brackets, by turning these brackets toward the sidewalks , but after consulting with Don Hamilton, the American Legion representive, he doesn ' t want this alteration to occur, and insists that the American flag be installed over the C.of.C. banners . ALTERNATIVES : 1 . If the C. of C. banners have to be removed, it would have to be done by SPUC, because we do not have the equipment for this project. Lou Van Hout has been consulted, (last week) and he indicated that SPUC might possibly temporarily remove the C.of C. banners in order to install the Am. flags , then re-install the banners after the weekend, but strongly indicated that this should not be an on-going project for each commemmorative occasion. A more permanent solution will have to be reached before the next flag occasion, which would be July 4th. 2 . The flag brackets could be permanently raised over the C.of C. banners , but would require SPUC to install the American Flag for each occasion, because a bucket truck is required for this project . 3. The Chamber banners could be lowered so that they are below the flag brackets , then the Public Works crews could still install the Am. flags by using the current step ladder in the dump box method. (This method Tags - continued is somewhat dangerous . ) However , if the Chamber banners are lowered , they will be subject to vandalism from street level . Some direction should be given by yourself or the City Council before the weekend , because this work would have to be done by Friday, to avoid the possibility of paying overtime . Also, if SPUC is to be involved , they would need some lead time for crew scheduling to remove the banners , or raise the flag brackets . Also , if SPUC is to be involved, this directive would have to come from the City Council . 4. Return the responsibility of installing the American flags to the American Legion, or not install these flags for the commemorative occasions .