Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
06/17/1986
MEMO TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: John K. Anderson, City Administrator RE: Non-Agenda Informational Items DATE: June 12 , 1986 1 . We are adding a new consent item to the agenda to handle routine communications. Items that can be received and filed without discussion will be noted with a consent asterick ( * ) and can be removed for discussion like all consent items . 2 . Attached is a copy of the employment letter executed by Dennis Kraft. 3 . St. Mark' s Church has requested permission to block off Third Avenue between Scott and Atwood for their upcoming Julifest. The street will be closed from July 24 through July 28 , and the closing has been okayed by Tom Brownell as per our administrative procedures. 4 . The Chamber of Commerce subcommittee on the lodging tax will not get information back to City Council until mid-July. 5 . The Police Department has been checking parks and actually caught a number of kids and required them to send two hours under police supervision cleaning up the O'Dowd Park. The police will continue to double check the parks from dusk until midnight and will flash their lights to better check shelter areas. 6 . The department retrieved most of the downtown parking citations issued and those that were not retrieved were followed up on by contacting the owners. In addition, our current Planning intern is surveying downtown businesses to inventory employee parking needs so that we can make a better recom- mendation to Council on parking lot signing. 7 . We have learned from Senator Bob Schmitz ' s office that the Coalition of Outstate Cities is budgeting $250, 000 for their lobbying for the next legislative session. The Coalition is made up of approximately three dozen cities ranging from Montevideo to Rochester in size. This group frequently lobbys with Minneapolis and St. Paul so it looks like the 1987 session will be a barn burner. 8. Judge John Fitzgerald ruled in the City' s favor in the small claims court case that Susan and Tom Johnson brought against the City to recover their one year payment on the 4th and Minnesota project. In other legal action, depositions are now being taken on the Wangerin vs. City of Shakopee (K-mart project) subcontracting claim, and the City of Shakopee vs. Hardrives ( 10th Avenue lawsuit) brought by the City of Shakopee. 9 . Attached is an informational item update from George Muenchow. 10 . Attached is a letter from Bruce Malkerson and Tim Keane apologizing for Scottland Companies mishandling of their proposed amendment to the Urban Services Area at the Canterbury Square Retail Center. 11. Attached is a letter from Mr. Robert Vierling to Howard Jones regarding Howard' s recent effort to ticket Mr. Vierling to get him to clean up his property. 12. Attached is a response from Senator Dave Durenberger regarding our concerns about the effects of H.R. 3838 on the bonding capabilities of municipalities. 13 . Attached is an interesting article from the June 2 , 1986 issue of the Nation ' s Cities Weekly regarding downtown redevelopment. 14 . Attached is the monthly building activity report for the month ending May 31 , 1986 . Note that we are running approx- imately 6 . 6 million dollars ahead of the same period in 1985 . 15 . Attached is a summary of the major provisions of S.F. 2078 passed in 1986 regarding liability insurance. 16. Attached are the minutes of the June 5 , 1986 meeting of the Shakopee Coalition. 17. Attached are the minutes of the May 14, 1986 meeting of the Industrial Commercial Commission. 18. Attached are the minutes of the May 5 , 1986 meeting of the Shakopee Public Utilities Commission. 19 . Attached are the minutes of the May 21 and May 28 , 1986 meetings of the Ad Hoc Downtown Committee. 20 . Attached is the agenda for the June 18 , 1986 meeting of the Ad Hoc Downtown Committee. 21. Attached is a copy of a letter sent to Arnold Theis regarding his liquor license renewals. 22 . Scottland' s tabled 5 . 5 acre comp sewer plan amendment will not come back as an agenda item because it incorporates in the City' s larger comp sewer plan amendment moving the boundaries to the by-pass. 23 . On Tuesday, June 17 , 1986 , CSAH 17 (Marschall Road) will be closed to through traffic between TH 101 and 4th Avenue for repair of C&NW RR track. No marked detour will be provided. The temporary closure will be in effect approximately 3 hour. JKA/jms e CITY OF SHAKOPEE INCORPORATED 1870 129 EAST FIRST AVENUE, SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA 55379-1376 (612) 445-3650 June 11, 1986 Mr. Dennis R. Kraft 703 E. 145th St. Burnsville, MIS'. 55337 RE: Employment as Shakopee's Community Development Director Dear Mr. Kraft, As per our conversation Wednesday, June ll, 1986, the City of Shakopee selected you to fill the position of Community Development Director effective July 21, 1986. You will receive the full complement of employee benefits and will receive a starting salary of $37,808 per year, which is Step 10 on the Department Head Pay Plan. Your first salary increase will occur during our regular salary adjustments at the end of 1986. Any salary changes required by the City when implementing its Comparable Worth Study will be applied to your position like all others. Council also approved your taking two (2) weeks leave without pay in 1986. It is also understood and acknowledged that as a condition of your employment you have agreed not to terminate your employment with the City before July 21, 1988 for career purposes (professional advancement) . Should you break this commitment by leaving for career purposes you will forfeit all severance pay benefits you might have accrued. I am looking forward to you getting started July 21, 1986. I am confident that you will enjoy working for the City of Shakopee. Sincerely, John R. Ande`fson City Administrator JKA:mmr cc: Personnal File I acknowledge and agree to the above conditions of yment. Dennis Kraft The Heart of Progress Valley 6/3/$6 John Anderson. . . . . .F.Y.I. 1 . The Jaycees will be doing some cleaning up and touching up at Tahpah Park this Saturday. 2. The Lions Club did some cleaning up and touching up at Lions Park last Saturday. They are starting on the construction of a new shelter at Lions Park today or tomorrow. LeRoy is working with them on this. It will be identical to the current shelter, erected near the newly paved parking lot and the pool. 3. The pool will open on time Saturday. . . . . 11 :00 A b we are not being able to do the finishing touche� �lge n a it ready because of the following delays : a. Sanding and painting the bath house floor has taken longer than the park crew planned. b. Painting of water slide has taken :Longer than what LeRoy was planning. 4. Regarding the D .N.R. Trail. . . . .there is mud on the areas that was under water, but the area ranger says that they will have this cleaned off by the end of this week. This is a particular problem for bicyclers. He promises the permanent barriers at the end of the trail will be erected by the end of the month. G.F.M. OrTHE /0 7, SCOTTLAND COMPANIES QTY OF SHAKOPFf June 3 , 1986 Mr. John Anderson City Administrator City of Shakopee 129 E. First Avenue Shakopee, MN 55379 Dear John: The purpose of this letter is to express on behalf of The Scottland Companies our sincere apology to you and all City staff for the misunderstanding regarding the proposed amendment to the Urban Service Area at the Canterbury Square Retail Center. We acknowledge responsibility for this misunderstanding. We at The Scottland Companies value the trusted working relationship with the City. We shall endeavor to improve our communications and working relationships with all City officials. All of us associated with Scottland are proud to be members of the Shakopee community and look forward to contributing to making Shakopee a better place to live and do business. Sincerely, Bruce D. Malkerson Executive Vice President ,-T Timothy Keane Vice Pre ident C. C. Mayor Eldon Reinke Judi Simac Ken Ashfeld 5244 Valley Industrial Boulevard South Shakopee, Minnesota 55379 [612] 445-3242 R Mr. Hobert Vierling 221 E. Fourth Avenue Shakopee, Nin. 55379 Mr. Howard C . Jones 476 South Gorman Street Shakopee , Nin. 55379 Dear Tfir. Jones: June 4, 1986 In reply to your letter of 5/27/86: First of all , on the ticket you wrote , "didn' t come to the door" . Your English phraseology is a little bit off, and insulting, because if I ' d been home , I would have come to the door - you made it sound like I was trying to hide from you. Now, one of the items you stated was on the back porch was listed as a refrigerator; you've got to be blind if you don' t know a refrigerator from a good dryer. The water heater also on the back porch is good. There are no tires on the front porch. The tires that are in the back are for my boat trailer , and I 'm sure not going to get rid of them for you or the City of Shakopee . On my front porch, I have my lawn mowers , which I 'm sure as hell not going to put in the house . I have a davenport that I use to sit on, and the bicycles are also going to stay on the porch, along with the barbecue . Tvow, I 've gone through this harrassment before with the City of Shakopee , and, just to clue you in, with the three large lots on that corner that I own , the City refused me a permit to build a garage , stating that I didn' t have enough property, so I have no alternative but to store my things on the front porch, so that' s what I do. If I get any more harrassment from you, I will be filing a lawsuit against Shakopee , and against you personally. I don' t think Shakopee really wants a lawsuit as I am already in the process of placing a lawsuit against them for the City1Coun- graceful excuse for an alley that they put in. The cil and Ken Ashfield know about about this already. Confer with them. If you want to confer with me , you' ll have to make an appointment. I have other things to do than to fiddle with Shakopee' s harrassments . z. "Warning" to you and the City of Shakopee . OJhile plowing my alley this winter , the City deliberately tore up my bank and then put a hump of dirt and limestone on my property . I 've told Ken Ashfield about this but it still hasn ' t been removed. I suggest that you take immediate action on this if you're worried about removing refuse . Shakopee stinks just as much in this as they do with their ordinances , variances , and brownnosers . You' d better have some of the big shots clean up their own area first as a good example . Besides , I am considering, and talking to the Government about putting low-cost housing for minorities on my property. Sincerely, K b �t Vierling J � DAVE DURENBERGER MINNESOTA '" JCniteb .utas WASHINGTON, D.C. 20510 yy May 23 , 1986 rAKOPEE John K. Anderson City Administrator City of Shakopee 129 East First Avenue i Shakopee , Minnesota 55379 Dear John : Thank you for contacting my office about the tax-exempt bond provisions in the House-passed tax bill , H.R. 3838. Like you, I don ' t like these provisions which would severely curtail the use of one of the few affordable investment tools available to state and local governments . As a member of the Finance Committee, the committee that is responsible for drafting a tax reform bill in the Senate , I have made the preservation of tax-exempt bond financing one of my top priorities . In early March, I introduced 5. 2166 , a tax-exempt bond bill which provides a comprehensive and fair alternative to H.R. 3638 . My proposal recognizes that tax--exempt financing is vital to state and local governments and that public purposes should be defined according to who receives the benefit rather than who provides the services. Because my bill quickly gained the support of more than 25 Senate co-sponsors and major state and :Local groups, I was successful in getting major provisions of the bill incorporated into the Senate Finance Committee ' s tax reform proposal. I have enclosed a summary of the current status of that tax bill . In an age of shrinking resources, we must empower , not impoverish, state and local governments . That was the primary intent of my bill , 5 . 2166 , and I am working hard to see that this principle is incorporated into the Senate tax reform bill . I will continue to press for other important issues that remain unresolved such as ensuring that tax-exempt interest will not be subject to the alternative minimum tax and maintaining the deductibility of state and local taxes . Again , thank you for your comments on this important issue. cSincerely, 1 D$ve Durenberger United States Senator DD/sjg Enclosure 4/18/86 Z� BOND FACT SHEET AGREEMENT OF SENATE FINANCE COMMITTEE ( 1 ) Interest on State and local government bonds would be taxable if more than 25 percent of the bond proceeds is to be used in a trade or business of a person other than State and local government; and more than 25 percent of the repayment of the principal and interest on the bonds is secured by property to be used in such trade or business . Exemptions from this test include IDBS issued for : Water, sewage and solid waste facilities Hazardous waste facilities Small-issue IDBS 501 (c ) (3) organizations District heating and cooling Airports, docks and wharves Student loan bonds Mortgage revenue bonds -and_ multi_-_family_ _rental housing Mass commuting facilities (2) The amount of tax-exempt IDBs that may be issued within a state during any calendar year is limited to the greater of $150 for each resident of the state or $200 million. Bonds for multi-family rental housing, 501 (c) (3) organizations and publicly owned airports , docks , wharves and mass commuting facilities would be exempt from the state volume cap. (3) The sunset for mortgage revenue bonds is repealed . As under current law, MRBs will be subject to a separate volume cap. (4) The tax exemption for all small-issue IDBs will sunset on December 31 , 1988 . (5) Tax-exemption would be allowed both for Federally guaranteed student loan bonds and for bonds issued under supplemental state programs , subject to the state volume caps . (6) An allowance for recovery of certain credit enhancement fees out of arbitrage earnings would be permitted . Costs of issuance would not be included . (7) Special penalties , in lieu of rendering bonds taxable, would be provided for certain violations of the arbitrage rebate requirement in the case of governmental bonds and bonds issued by section 501 (c) (3) organizations. (8) The $150 million per institution limit on outstanding bonds issued by 501 (c) (3) organizations , which is proposed in the House bill , would be eliminated . (9) Bonds would be eligible for up to three advance refundings . No more than three sets of bonds, including the original issue, could be outstanding at any one time . ( 10) Tax increment financing for governmental bonds would not be subject to the state volume caps . > v y -.0p L �...o or -C ^ u > c :r... ca >,A :� 3cz O W ca a O '" 40 'n L ,L a, oC`:., Oo 3 ., ;jj to �, G :a > 3 G 'R O v ° m 0) -C i — a u a s a. R v E. O > O =OJ Inc>, m 3 0 a Q .v = a O 3 n B a c C a) E 0 OO a a ` v W p R O i> p Ou z aj cua ^ ca aai ca s 775 y 'o y y �.` C aO.; vis @ v m '� v a 32 O 3 siy � ao0oc � Ra. ` � aan? nsR ° � 3 O .. 0 12re3 °0070000 �_ GOCc .a � vm -a a, .� O OO � � � M} •��—. O R X G_ O ;C a 'O.� X06 c>a d a6td W w u- , d •«_�. •i y w a ca a z a W x E" a t'. .R a C a O a a Oy u i O _COO E- a NcuCM C /W, ca O y L .� O W u� a a� ca Y v ° .0 f1 O 'a") a ° nS 0O 'B a CO o '� :� R p cn .0 e0a O C U .c L N O a cu s a- COt > a eo v d 3 v a oR`, 3 O > v a, w Eons. o o c o ° a QE 3 ° ° R ° u ° 3 0 a 3 o aEa A, W .. aLn IIiIIIIIIII G Q o o o o ... °c° c o ? ,ac vo N R °�' c o cl n m c 0 oW ° o � c .? 00v 3 c p °' a-;° o a � s o -p3E Baa, 0n IIIIIIIIIII >- y � a 0 - � ° n ° � c .. caE m upa pao U, � s � .°c ° oo ° 030 ° � — a° � a`0, " ov � » a ¢ mow a, ym � oni � Eati �acE .� o. a°jo � cv � p, c cu cS ° s0 o ° Wv � iy� aa� � aRE �° N -� � yEo � v � 0 .a O Rca O r. w ¢ M n O .. E A d RS is 60 u p Q >,y O a y y Ea ov � °�' o > c >, o � aE � � � .= oon0 � o° a tz v a .> c �'N o r c a 0°'0� o 0 v c > O > 000 0- s+ O y ^ 'p, A Q. i y 3 cc .2! 3 W 4— ,4 — cc f c � enc a R O 3 `�° p ` R E a N ° E o o p ¢ oo, y, O M c c 3 •c ' °' p o n E a E c .� W � > c � ,. �1 °~ ° ao ° °c°.E � c �- a a � a' a, caa, vov ° pA � ° � c � a, E A, � 'TuTu w .o `�,° E � m a, o Baa V/ caz u � � o � a' � ° '" GvEa �ou ' a � a° Q E a> - c u vi '_' ai X O a 'G vi a) O '•� >, rz a C- is c ccu Oa oi v 0•' O o v a ° 3 a c v'a � c v o 0 CL. cu CL4 a. EO L a, a. O a u a.O m O a a �. W ° aa„ a E o p tC .� N a O a 3 ° m .. ° w a y vOi R a0i ' vii o u p a a0i ^� C) E - ave ° o o � � � x 4 Zn 0 ° a 00 y ° O v a a•:^ v E R m ui ° O ^ m a m V u 0 n a a c F c n X a LS O a i. J] E c bD 3 y a n �? .: 'C3 G v O a O c e ¢ COo O m 2 �/ u �~ O W u i O O .~ a O i f cV 2 cn >,� v G CO O w n a� ° m u W C a� > O u R s• a x 00 O a a tO "a S. •y ca u � p v � O p ;e � O w � >> CO v a O cC O � E r `no b � a, � � - oRcca ,. R ^ csct3 Hoa,a, O y c�a >, cia a -� X 3 m a ca a� oO v p u y Q C Y E °» ... R a � � a, ar Z° a G G u o `a yo c 'c ca 3 m v G 3 E > o A, 3o � apa � a � � � 3oa ° a ca\ .00 : roa �, a p a, o o O "a o u a, u a y a w O .• v Cs L ca u� cn ca y" cn x a v s., a 'y. �, is O 6' v 'EQj > 0 3 n Q- a, H 3 a x o m Z � 3ir °avt° o � .n ¢ cacaca � vB > Bacto . c. o cu3 c `a O a" m 3 v ca , Ln °O E R v 'C G 00 > Q) y a a .0 O a a r O : p .O N O S p m u In w•�1 ¢ cq d c ca >, O O a a„ a w c a A >4'° E n 3 a � ¢ ° R a>i is v cca Cvv w '� 'n cn y � � ' E . 3c .E � avac ° ox 00 CU O a+ x a > i O ra a ¢ a' W x o rs v >,._ .�1 u O W c u CL ° s a ° O ei '� a[ G O ^ 00':. a ° f# v r o•° - c O ID ao,3 a° - E � .�c a, o o °: ° Q" c v E o >, 3 R m a wa > a ? w a y a v n c a � oU, ,0 0coa oo• s •cl�l v � O a v � ,R � .E o .� v _,.� ° c �; -°c -n `�• � a 3 c a d � d 'E c OCQ E- uc u3F~ o° c "' oC� aacco tn > := 3 ° c °» o y Fyj vatic i 'g >, °o c0 -1 w 3 E ° rd o E R Clu .4 � o Dns CITY OF SHAKOPEE BUILDING ACTIVITY REPORT PERMITS ISSUED MAY, 1986 Yr. to Date Previous Year Number Number Valuation Number Valuation Mo. Ytd. Single Fam-Sewered 3 15 1 , 157 , 874 4 16 1 , 170 , 034 Single Fam-Septic 5 7 646 , 500 1 2 160 , 843 Multiple Dwellings - 3 2, 640 , 000 1 6 709 , 600 ( # Units) (YTD Units) ( - ) ( 96) - ( 4) ( 14 ) - Dwelling Additions 4 19 113 ,860 10 17 66 , 318 Other - - - 2 5 103 , 222 Comm. New Bldgs - 4 8 , 500 , 000 1 5 2, 090 , 341 Comm Bldg. Addns - 3 887, 267 - 7 9 , 140, 010 Industrial-Sewered - - - - - - Ind-Sewered Addns - 1 3 , 600 , 000 - - - Industrial-Septic - - - - - - Ind-Septic Addns - - - - - - Accessory/Garages 4 10 57 , 500 8 15 95 , 693 Signs & Fences 13 33 45 , 944 13 27 23 , 930 Fireplaces/Wood Stove - 1 1, 500 4 9 , 980 Grading/Foundation 4 9 321,700 2 3 31 , 000 Remodeling (Res) 1 8 26, 000 3 8 42, 470 Remodeling (Inst) - - - - - Remodeling ( Comm/Ind) 3 22 3 ,734, 540 3 17 1, 479 , 801 TOTAL TAXABLE 37 135 21 ,732, 685 51 140 15, 123 , 242 TOTAL INSTITUTIONAL - - - - - GRAND TOTAL 37 135 21,732, 685 51 140 15 ,123 , 242 No. Ytd. No. Ytd. Variances - 6 3 8 Conditional Use 2 18 5 15 Rezoning - - 2 3 Moving - 1 - 2 Electric 23 107 35 107 Plbg & Htg 30 135 23 99 Razing Permits Residential Commercial Total dwelling units in City after completion of all construction permitted to date. . . . . . . 3 , 947 Cora Hullander Bldg. Dept. Secretary CITY OF SHAKOPEE BUILDING PERMITS ISSUED IN MAY, 1986 7059 Menke Const. 1180 Menke Circle douse $ 86 , 000 45 7060 Jack Howie 1415 Blue Kieron Ct. House 91, 000 7061 Fremont Inc. 4400 Valley Ind. B. Fill 100 7062 Dick Hennes 1165 Menke Circl-e House 60, 700 7063 W.M. Ewert 43 Dakota St. CJ Fence 100 7064 Michael Menke 1170 MFnke Circle , House 72, 000 7065 Jerome Johnson 92 0 Boiling p. Ln Stg��ldg 14 , 900 7066 Prestige Dev. 8175 Horizon Dr. House 45, 000 7067 Pete Shutrop 1424 Herdii Court Fence 2, 000 Addn & Stg. Bldg 7068 Signs of Quality 1240 E. 3rd Sign 270 7069 Nordquist Sign 1226 E. 4th Sign 2, 500 7070 Signs of Quality 287 Marschall Rd. Sign 231 7071 Al DuBois 1982 Davis Court Addn. 3 , 000 7072 S.M. Hentges 1513 W. 3rd Fence 2, 500 7073 Tom Sawyer 1147 Co. Rd. 83 Alt 11, 250 7074 David Towers 1001 E. 4th Ave. Fence 893 7075 Jasper Homes 2330 Berg Drive Foundation 5, 000 7076 Robert Nieters 544 E. 8th Fence 70 7077 Harold Wanous 9326 Boiling Sp. Ln Stg. 4, 200 7078 Jim Hauer 128 W. 2nd Ave. Foundation 500 7079 Jeffrey Ledel 1455 Lakeview Dr,.. House 110, 000 7080 Signs of Quality 570 Marschall Rd. Sign 800 7081 Thomas Gits 111 E. 5th Ave. Addn. 1, 260 7082 Ed Vohnoutka 327 E. 6th Ave. Fence 225 7083 Peter Sames 812 Holmes Alt. 300 7084 Wes Hukriede 2384 Marschall Rd. House 50 , 000 7085 G.F. Juergens 505 Sommerville Addn. 9 , 000 7086 Mahaffey Enterprises 2068 Hilldale Drive Garage 5 , 200 7087 Kent Busch 847 Market Garage 6 , 000 7088 Rolyn Properties 3312 Sycamore Cir. House 107 , 000 7089 James Cook 91075 Miller St. Fence 500 7090 B & B Const. 1147 Co. Rd. 83 Alt. 12, 000 7091 Robert Horgen 1174 Quincy Fence 250 7092 Valley Fair Addn. 15 , 200 7093 Thomas Brownell 120 W. 8th Fence 800 7094 Universal Sign 1147 Co. Rd. 83 Sign 4, 865 7095 Joel Hauer 2087 Co. Rd. 16 Grading 100 c - 2 - 2 . General Tort Reform • Prohibits the initial filing of punitive damages . Suits can later be amended to include punitives but only upon showing evidence to support the charge . Insurance policies don ' t generally cover punitive damages , so defendants often must hire their own attorney to provide defense . This change will eliminate much of the harassment of hiring separate defense and is expected to eliminate about 90 per- cent of punitive charges . • Requires future damages to be discounted for their present value and sets standards for reducing lump-sum payments. Future awards will be discounted by a formula based on five-year averages of interest and inflation rates, within a range of 2 to 6 percent. This will provide insurers with greater certainty and reduce litigation expenses by guaranteeing that awards reflect the notion that money today is worth more than money expected in the future. 0 Abolishes the collateral source rule to eliminate "double recovery" in suits , by requiring that damage awards are offset by other sources of compensation. Current law prohibits courts from taking into account other injury pavments , such as worker ' s compensation or employer-purchased health insurance. Private disability plans and social security funds are exempt from the offset. • Places a cap of $400 , 000 on "intangible losses , " preventing huge awards for damages such as emotional distress , embarrassment and loss of consortium. This cap may provide insurers with some assurance that their exposure for mental damages is not unlimited. • Toughens the current law on frivolous lawsuits , which provides that legal costs and fees may be awarded to a party against whom a frivolous suit is brought. The bill also permits the court to move on its own to award such costs . 3 . Governmental Immunity • Reduces local qovernment ' s liability by conforming it to those protections against lawsuits currently held by state government. After sovereign immunity for governmental units was thrown out by the courts in the 1960s , the Legislature gave state government more protection against suits than it gave to local governments . The bill brings local units ' liabilities into line with the state, reasoning that local government services are no less important than those of the state. Most of these changes are based on a report to the Governor from a commission representing all levels of government. • Restricts -joint and several liability for governmental units . If a governmental unit is found to be less than 35 percent at fault, it can only be forced to pay up to twice its percentage of fault. This will eliminate the so-called "deep pocket" strategy of finding a governmental unit that is slightly at fault in order to have one defendant that must pay the whole amount when other defendants cannot pay their share. r r _ 0 - 3 - • Expands state and local government immunity for suits based on natural accumulations of ice and snola on sidewalkF . This new protection does not apply, however, to sidewalks in front of public buildings or public parking lots . • Reduces the liabilitV of local parks and recreation facilities , consistent with the protections currently in law for state parks and private landowners leasing land for public recreational use. Suits could only be brought for very dangerous conditions--those for which a person could be sued by a trespasser. 4 . Medical Malpractice • Requires "certification of expert review" so that no suit can be filed without a medical expert agreeing it is a valid claim. In addition, that expert must be disclosed with 180 days of commencing the suit or it will be dismissed. • Reduces the statute of limitation for minors by half so that suits for birth—related injuries would have to be brought by age nine. This is expected to give insurers greater certainty for under- writing by eliminating "tail-end" suits . • Provides access to treating physician so that a defendant ' s attorney can obtain information regarding the plaintiff ' s condition, providing notice is given and the plaintiff is present. This change is expected to speed up the litigation process . • Amends the existinq Joint Underwriting Association (JUA) for medical malpractice to remove the "sunset" that would end the JUA in 1988 and change its underwriting to a "claims made" basis from an "occurrence" basis . 5 . Miscellaneous Tort Reform • Provides that unpaid directors or trustees of a nonprofit corpora tion are not individually liable for damages relating to their partici- pation on a board. • Reduces from 15 to 10 years the statute of limitations for suits based on services or construction to improve property, such as engineers , architects and construction firms . Also establishes a 10-year statute of limitations for survevors . SHAKOPEE COALITION 161- MEETING MINUTES - JUNE 5, 1986 The meeting was called to order by Past Chairman Jim Streefland at 7:00 AM in the Community Room of the Citizens State Bank. Members Present: Jim Streefland (Lions Club), St. Jo Lambert (St.Francis Regional Medical Center), Lisa Walker (Intern-St. Francis) , Don Mertz (Lions Club) , Debbra Determan (Scott County), Claude Kolb (K of C), Barbara Richardson (St Francis Foundation), Diane Johnson (Chamber of Commerce) , and George Muenchow (Shakopee Community Services). Special Guests Larry and Bing Severson were introduced. Larry was presented the Don Schultz Memorial "Volunteer Of The Month" award. She is a volunteer with the St. Francis Regional Medical Center Hospice Program and has served in this capacity many hours during the past years that this program has been in existence. People being served in the Hospice Program are those that are terminally ill. Mrs. Severson expressed her thanks to the group for the honor extended her. Barbara Richardson shared that the St. Francis Foundation provides funds for many programs at the hospital that are not self supporting such as the Hospice Program. Their current goal is $200,000.00. Diane Johnson reported on some of the C Of C activities. Colorful banners have been placed on First Avenue. A large welcoming sign is being erected on Highway 101 in eastern Shakopee. Additional signs at other community entrances will be erected next year. A hotel/motel tax is being considered to fund Chamber Tourism activities. This tax would also fund the construction of a tourism booth/office possibly to be located in Memorial Park. The Chamber is aggressively working with others to attempt to alleviate the current traffic problem in the community/county. Jim Streefland commented that the Lions Club is in process of changing officers. Their biggest project is the stands that they operate at the Rennaisance Festival. All members work hard at this money making project. Debbra Determan stated that one of Scott County's newest programs is the RSVP Program which recycles retirees in the community. The Lydia Learning Center is being updated because of the overabundance of handicapped pre-school children in the county who are served at that facility. Most of their problems deal with Learning Problems. Claude Kolb reported that the K Of C also is in process of "changing the guard" with their officers. They are proud of their building which is used by many in the community. The meeting was adjourned at 7:55 AM. Next meeting will be Thursday, July 10, at 7:00 AM at this same location. Respectfully submitted, w, George F. Muenchow, Acting Secretary 17 MINUTES INDUSTRIAL COMMERCIAL COMMISSION SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA MAY 141 1985 MEMBERS PRESENT: Jane DuBois Al Furrie, Chairman Donald Koopmann John Manahan Jim O'Neill MEMBERS ABSENT: Bud Berens Tim Keane STAFF PRESENT: Barry A. Stock, Administrative Intern Chairman Al Furrie called the meeting to order at 5: 15 p.m. and roll call was taken. MINUTES On a motion by John Manahan, seconded by Jim O'Neill, the minutes of the April 23, 1986, meeting were approved. ONE-YEAR GOALS AND OBJECTIVES Barry Stock presented one-year goals and objectives for the Star City program based on the priority ranking of the goals and objectives of the Five-Year Economic Development Plan. He briefly outlined the following goals and objectives for each of the proposed six subcommittees: Transportation Coalition: -Major bypass (Existing Committee) -Mini bypass -County Road 18 Downtown Committee: -Improve the attractiveness of the retail (Existing Committee) opportunities downtown -Work with the Chamber to explore ways of attracting more shoppers downtown -Coordinate festivals -Construct streetscape and parking improvements downtown -Clear up zoning problems Business Retention: -Create the Star City Business Retention plan (New Committee) and activate it May 1,"- , 1986 Page 2 New Development Subcommittee: -Monitor the need for development in Shakopee (New Committee) -Focus on residential development -Encourage development of off-season activities Tourism Subcommittee: -Promote tourism (Chamber) (Existing Committee) Finance Subcommittee: -Identify alternative financing options to (New Committee) use to attract development and/or redevelopment Discussion followed on the Metropolitan Development and Investment Framework with the concern being that it may limit Shakopee ' s ability to expand and grow in terms of transportation schemes and sewer avail- ability. STAR CITIES UPDATE Mr. Stock stated that the remaining elements of the Star City Program other than the One-Year Goals and Objectives include compiling the statistics of the labor survey which the Department of Energy and Economic Development (DEED) has agreed to run through their computer, a format for the presentation, and reorganization of the ICC into the proposed subcommittees. Staff recommended that the presentation be developed in-house rather than hiring an outside consultant. Concensus was that the Star City Program could be ready for presentation as early as July. IDENTIFICATION OF POTENTIAL CANDIDATES FOR EXPANDED ICC COMMITTEE Each Commissioner informed the ICC as to which potential candidates had been contacted and what response was received. It was stated that recruiting subcommittee members by the ICC would be a convenience for the City Council as there would probably be frequent membership changes due to probable subcommittee work increases/decreases. OTHEP BUSINESS Barry Stock presented the notice that will be in the Chamber of Commerce newsletter informing them of the ICC reorganization. Chairman Al Furrie noted that the Real Estate Journal has requested that a survey be completed to give them feedback on their feature of Shakopee. Staff was directed to complete and return the survey. Discussion followed on the impending teachers strike, problems with residential housing development, and several other concerns which could affect development in Shakopee. On a motion by Jim O'Neill, seconded by Jane DuBois, the ICC meeting was adjourned at 6:30 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Judy Hughes Recording Secretary MINUTES OF THE SHAKOPEE PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION The Shakopee Public Utilities Commission convened in regular session on May 5, 1986 at 4:30 P.M. in the Utilities meeting room. Commissioner Cook offered a prayer for divine guidance in the deliberations of the Commission. MEMBERS PRESENT: Commissioners Cook, Kirchmeier and Kephart. Also Liaison Wampach, Manager Van Hout and Secretary Menden. Motion by Kephart, seconded by Cook that the minutes of the March 31, 1986 regular meeting and the April 10, 1986 special meeting be approved as kept. Motion carried. BILLS READ: City of Shakopee 20,032.00 ABM Equipment 4,313.00 ABM Equipment 346.00 American Public Power Association 747.01 Astra Corporation 311.10 Auto Central Supply 58.13 Bentz Construction,. Inc. 362.50 Burmeister Electric Company 87.93 Carlson Hardware Company 64.55 Champion Auto Stores 33.70 Chapin Publishing Company 85.84 City of Shakopee 700.93 City of Shakopee 104.33 Clay's Printing Service 29.20 Eiler Company 29.08 Excel Office Products Inc. 107.52 Feed-Rite Controls, Inc. 999.36 Glenwood Inglewood 38.68 Goodin Company 5.97 Graybar Electric Company 931.00 Henningson, Durham and Richardson 608.64 Keys Well Drilling Company 1,586.75 Leef Bros. , Inc. 20.00 Link Print 74.10 Logical Development Corporation 153.18 Malkerson Motors 230.32 Minnesota Downhole Services, Inc. 1,350.00 Motor Parts Service Co. , Inc. 97.48 Northern States Power Co. 332.32 Northern States Power Co. 885.45 E.H. Renner and Sons 1,686.86 Reynolds Welding Supply Co. 4.13 Schoell and Madson, Inc. 6,087.59 f Scott County Sheriff Communications 372.20 I x Serco 64.00 Shakopee Ford 127.58 Shakopee Services 22.00 Dean Smith Trenching, Inc. 270.00 Southwest Suburban Publishing, Inc. 25.00 Suel Business Equipment 73.00 Southwest Suburban Publishing, Inc. 118.72 Starks Cleaning Services 51.40 Total Tool 35.78 Truck Utilities 1,603.92 United Compucred Collections, Inc. 79.20 Valley Industrial Propane, Inc. 21.75 Viking Safety Products 159.80 Water Products Company 2,071.80 Wesco 501.26 Wheeler Lumber Operations 1,084.10 Krass and Monroe Chartered 62.00 Shakopee Public Utilities 191.18 Ted Neisen 134.00 Northern States Power Co. 254,861.30 City of Shakopee 65.28 Lou Van Hout 45.50 Manager Van Hout presented a bill from E.H. Renner and Sons, Inc. in the amount of 25,556.32 for a contract payment for Well V. Motion by Cook, seconded by Kephart that the bills be allowed and ordered paid, including the bill to E.H. Renner for $25,556.32. Motion carried. Ken Adolf, Schoell and Madson was present to update the Commission on Well #7 progress and on the tank painting. A discussion followed. A communication from TMI Construction Co. to Schoell and Madson, Inc. regarding paint to be used in the painting of the standpipe water tank and the warranty was reviewed. Contract Amendment #1 dated 4/24/86 was presented to the Commission. Motion by Kirchmeier, seconded by Cook to approve Contract Amendment #1 to E.H.Renner and Sons for water supply well V. Motion carried. Commissioner Kephart abstained. Manager Van Hout presented a communication from the developer of the Backstretch R.V. Park. At this time there is no action requested on the Backstretch R.V. Park. A discussion was held on the existing water mains and looping necessary before extending any new watermains. The Commission was advised of the process for disconnecting and reconnecting past due customers. A communication from Einar Odland of Shakopee was read commending the crew on a nice job on repairing his lawn after doing some maintenance work in his yard. Another commendation came from Dick Nordstrom, Principal at Central Elementary for restoration of the electric service to Central in a timely manner after being struck by lightning. A phone call from Mrs. James Hauer regarding the blasting for Well #7 shaking G the foundation of her house has been turned over to the Engineering firm, Schoell and Madson, who in turn informed the Contractor of the complaint. The term of office of the Utility Commissioners was discussed. Liaison Wampach will take the opinion of the Commission back to the City Council as an issue they are concerned about. Manager Van Hout reported a new lineman had been hired. Roger Hennen will be starting at 4th Class Lineman on May 12, 1986. A detailed report that had been presented to the Downtown lighting committee by Manager Van Hout was given to the Commission. The recommendations by Manager Van Hout were perused_ The current status of the electric bill for the Valley Ice Arena was discussed. A contract for lawn maintenance with Mr. Ted Neisen was signed. A new plat, Eagle Creek Junction, was presented to the Commission. A discussion followed on the looping of the water main for the plat. Motion by Kephart, seconded by Kirchmeier to accept the non-looping of the water main for the Eagle Creek Junction plat due to the fact that it would be placed in rock and would mean a costly requirement of two separate trenches versus one common trench for sewer and water; and due to the relatively short distance with a relatively few number of customers. Motion carried. A discussion followed on the motion. Commissioner Kephart amended the motion by adding the requirement that if the Eagle Creek Junctioh Plat exceeds the R 2 zoning the watermain must be looped to County Road 16 with a separate water line. Second by Commissioner Kirchmeier. Motion carried. A report from the Minnesota Department of Transportation regarding traffic light replacement and a memo from Barb Menden and John Dellwo regarding the current practices of bulb replacement on semaphore lights were discussed by the Commission. It was the concensus of the Commission that the maintenance done by the Shakopee Public Utilities Commission has met the full intent of safety and maintenance requirements. A preliminary report on water rates will be presented at the June meeting. The summer meeting of the Minnesota Municipal Utilities Association will be held on June 22-25, 1986. An update of the schedule Pumphouse #2 refurbishing was given. There were four fire calls for a total man hours of 1 hour and 53 minutes. # 4 r There were no lost time accidents for April, 1986. i The next regular meeting of the Shakopee Public Utilities Commission will be held on June 2, 1986 at 4:30 P.M. in the Utilities meeting room. { i Motion by Kirchmeier, seconded by Kephart that the meeting be adjourned. Motion carried. Barbara Menden, Commission Secretary Proceedings of the Downtown Ad Hoc Committee Shakopee, Minnesota May 21 , 1986 Chrm Laurent called the meeting to order at 7 : 40 a.m. with the following members present; Terry Forbord, Gary Laurent, Dan Steil, Bill Wermerskirchen, Pete Somes, Tim Reone and Licison Jerry Wompoch. Absent: Don Martin, Mike Sortum &, Jim Stillmon. Also present were Ken Asfeld, City Engineer; Barry Stock, Administrative Aide, John Anderson, City Administrator; Tim Erkkila and Ann Durning of Westwood Planning & Engineering. Tim Keane/ Don Steil moved to approve the agenda. Motion carried. Terry Forbord/ Tim Keane moved to approve the minutes of the May 21 , 1986 meeting. Motion carried. Westwood presented a sketch of their final design for the downtown parking lot. The wall could be built of timber, keystone or brick. The commitee was in agreement that the keystone materials should be used. The plan would include indented areas where plantings and benches might be used. A pre-fab ground covering could be used until the permanent sidewalk is installed. There would be steps in the northeast corner of the block and in the middle of the block with a ramp on the northwest corner. Bollards and chain would be installed above the wall wherever the drop was more than four feet. Heavy horizontal timbers could also be used instead of the bollards and chains. Costs of some of the materials and construction was questioned and corrected. Tim Keane commented that it was difficult to make a decision when he doesn' t have confidence in the estimates. Terry Forbord/ Tim Keane moved to recommend to the council that the retaining wall be built of keystone and that fine tuning planning be done on the steps, bollards and plantings. Motion carried. Barry Stock said the final design will go to the council after a decision is made on the color of the keystone and all other details have been agreed on. The Engineers will bring color samples of keystone material at the meeting to be held May 28th at 7 : 30 a.m. Tim Keane left at 9 : 00 a.m. Pete Somes suggested that bollards and chain be installed wherever the insets are. Joe Topic/ Bill Wermerskirchen moved to have the Engineers prepare a final design and costs including keystone, concrete steps and concrete with brick sidewalk on the NW corner ramp and also using bollards and chain. Motion carried. Tim Erkkila suggested using pre-cut pavers in the indentations. Jerry Wampoch informed the committee that the Hoy property on 1st and Holmes is for sale. The Council would like the input of the Downtown Committee as to whether the city should consider its purchase. Joe Topic left at 9 : 30 a.m. The resignation of Steve Clay from the Downtown Committee has been received. Terry Forbord/ Pete Somes moved to adjourn. Motion carried. F Darleen Schesso Recording Secretary Proceeding of the Downtown Ad Hoc Committee Shakopee, Minnesota May 28 , 1986 Chrm Laurent called the meeting to order at 7 : 35 a.m. with the following members present; Terry Forbord, Gary Laurent, Don Martin, Mike Sortum, Jim Stillman, Joe Topic, Bill Wermerskirchin and Liaison Jerry Wampoch. Absent : Dan Steil, Pete Somes and Tim Keane. Also present were Barry Stock, Administrative Aide, Ken Ashfeld, City Engineer, Tim Erkkila, Dick Koppy and Anne Durning of Westwood Engineers and Beth Moe, Shakopee Valley News. The order of the agenda changed by moving the - Lighting Plan for the Downtown Project and 7a-Selection of a date for tour of downtownLighting Projects after No 1 on the agenda. Jim Stillman/ Bill Wermerskerchen moved to accept the agenda with the above changes. Motion carried. On May 30 Barry Stock, Dick Koppy and Lou Van Hout will tour some neighboring cities to look over their lighting systems and to see first hand how effective 1. 4 candle power is. On June 18 the Downtown Committee will meet at City Hall at 8 p.m. and travel to 5 or 6 cities to look at lighting levels. Fact sheets will be given to each committee member and they will be asked to rate each city. A hand-out on the final design and retaining wall and planting cost estimates was distributed by Westwood Engineering. In the process of going through revisions in the plans the two tiered effect of the wall was lost. The engineers suggested a red brick color for the keystone material used on the wall. Lower areas in the wall will be seating areas . The wall will have indentation with plantings. Wooden bollards will be used in the parking area. Trees along the wall will be of different heights. A dicission was held on what type of material to use on the floor of the indentations - pre cast concrete, sod or aggregate. Steps in the final design are concrete rather than timber which raises the cost considerably. Terry Forbord/ Joe Topic moved to proceed with the proposal to follow the Engineers proto-type on the westerly bay area with a tree guard and bench and use aggregate mulch on the remaining bays on 2nd Ave. Motion carried. Terry Forbord/ Bill Wermerskichen moved to use one decorative bench in the westerly bay. Roll call vote: Ayes: Terry Forbord, Gary Laurent, Don Martin, Mike Sortum, Jim Stillman, Joe Topic and Bill Wermerskirchen. Nayes: None - Motion carried. Aquestion of Hoy property on 1st Ave was discussed. The asking price for 75 feet front is between $150 , 000 and $175 , 000 . Barry Stock recommended not taking any action until such time that a Comprehensive Plan identifying the cities financial role in terms of acquisition, demolition, rehabilitation and relocation of the buildings in the downtown area can be developed. General members expressed a desire to see the city aquire this property in order that the city could exercise control over and it would be a unique opportunity to improve the downtown area. Mike Sortum left at 8 : 00 a.m. Bill Wermerskirchen/ Terry Forbord moved that the Hoy property on 1st Ave. be appraised with intent to negotiate acquisition price for demolition or development. Motion carried. Oneappraised has been done on the Huber property but a report has not been received by the council. Tom Brownell is working on a plan for parking enforcement on city lots. Bill Wermerskirchen suggested that employees be given a small percent of parking space in the lots in a designated area. Bill Wermerskirchen/ Joe Topic moved that permit parking should be for residents of the downtown area and that 20 - 25% of parking lots be designated for 10 hr parking in the lesser used parking lots which will not interfer with customer parking and that it be strictly enforced. Motion carried. The meeting adjouned at 9 : 15 a.m. Darleen Schesso RO TENTATIVE AGENDA Downtown Ad Hoc Committee City Hall Council Chambers June 18 , 1986 8 : 00 P.M. Chrmn. Laurent Presiding 1. Call to order at 8 : 00 P.M. 2. Approval of Agenda 3 . Approval of May 21st and May 28th Meeting Minutes 4 . Tour of Downtown Lighting Projects 5 . Informational Items: a. Huber House Acquisition - Verbal Update b. House of Hoy Acquisition - Verbal Update C. City Hall Siting Committee - Verbal Update 6 . Other Business 7. Adjourn Barry A. Stock Administrative Aide CITY OF SHAKOPEE IF YOU ARE UNABLE TO ATTEND THE MEETING, PLEASE CALL BARRY OR TONI TO LET THEM KNOW. 445-3650 CITY OF S f � HAKOPEE INCORPORATED 1870 129 EAST FIRST AVENUE, SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA 55379-1376 (612) 445-3650 June 11, 1986 Mr. Arnold Theis Friendly Folks Club, Inc. 122 East First Avenue Shakopee, Mn. 55379 Dear Mr. Theis : At its regular meeting on June 10 , 1986 , Shakopee City Council directed staff to inform you that your liquor license renewals effective July 1st will not be approved until your premises are brought up to code. You have been advised by the building inspector, electrical inspector and health inspector of what improvements need to be made. If you have any qustions, please call LeRoy Houser, the building inspector. In March of 1985 the City Council adopted an ordinance requiring establishments holding liquor licenses to be in conformance with all building codes. Since this time all establishments have made the necessary improvements, except Arnie ' s Friendly Folks . Si c erely, Judith S. Cox City Clerk JSC/dbs cc: City Council LeRoy Houser The Heart of Progress Valley TENTATIVE AGENDA ADJ .REG.SESSION SHAKOPEE , MINNESOTA JUNE 17, 1986 Mayor Reinke presiding 1] Roll Call at 7 : 00 P .M. 2] Recess for HRA and Board of Review 3] Board of Review: a] Re-convene as Board of Review b] Close Board of Review as of June 23 , 1986 c] Move that the findings of the Board of Review be approved and sent to the County Auditor for certification, as of June 23 , 1986 4] Re-convene 51 Liaison Reports from Councilmembers 61 RECOGNITION BY CITY COUNCIL OF INTERESTED CITIZENS 7] 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 Communications : (Items noted for consent will be received and filed) *a] Marsha Berry, Recreational Equipment , Inc . re : 10K Liberty Walk on June 29th beginning at Huber Park *b] Anne Tuttle , League of Women Voters of Shakopee re : 1986-87 Local Study of the appointment process of advisory boards for lccal units of government *c] Robert Vierling re : Alley in Block 50 9] 7 : 30 P .M. PUBLIC HEARING - Appeal by John and Jackie Schwartz from the Planning Commission approval of a conditional use permit to operate a Heliport for amusement ride business and to run occasional air taxi service upon property located South of Hwy 101 and across from Valleyfair Amusement Park 10] Boards and Commissions : Industrial Commercial Commission: *a] One Year Economic Development Plan Planning Commission: *b] Reconsideration of Final Plat of Prairie House 1st Addition *c] Amendment to City Code for above ground bulk liquid storage d] Recommendations on Racetrack District Amendments e] Position Statement on the Metropolitan Development and Invest- ment Framework 11] Reports from Staff: [Council will take a 10 minute break around 9 : 00 PM] a] City Hall Office Relocations b] Parttime/Reserve/CSO Officers TENTATIVE AGENDA June 17, 1986 Page -2- 11] Reports from Staff continued: *c] Computer Software Purchase *d] Hiring Police Patrol Officer - Brian P . Clark *e] TH 101 Frontage Road (CR-83 to Sheily Road) f] TH 169/101 Alternative Review and Selection g] 1986 Pavement Preservation Program h] Approve payment of bills in amount of $293 , 913.59 *i] Urban Corp Work-Study Agreement *j ] Assessment Agreement with Scott County k] Renewal of Non-Intoxicating Malt Liquor Licenses. - tabled 6/10 11 Renewal of Intoxicating Liquor Licenses - tabled 6/10 m] Creation of MIS (Management Information System) Position n] Free Trash Dumping Program - 1986 121 Resolutions and Ordinances : a] Res. No. 2573 , A Resolution of Special Commendation to Richard Kaley *b] Res. No. 2576, A Resolution Approving Plans and Specifications and Ordering Advertisement for Bids for Timber Trails Road Improvements, Project No. 1986-5 c] Ord. No. 196, Amending Chapter 1 of the City Code d] Ord. No. 197 , Amending Chapter 3 of the City Code e] Ord. No. 198, Amending Chapter 5 of the City Code f] Ord. No . 199 , Amending Chapter 6 of the City Code g] Ord. No. 200, Amending Chapter 8 of the City Code h] Ord. No . 201 , Amending Chapter 10 of the City Code i] Ord. No. 202, Amending Chapter 14 of the City Code *j ] Res. No. 2578, A Resolution Authorizing the Vacation of A Certain Easement Herein Described 13] Other Business : a] Review and comment on Lower Minnesota River Watershed District 509 Plan - memo on table b] Six month Liaison appointment to Planning Commission cl d] 14] Adjourn John K. Anderson City Administrator TENTATIVE AGENDA Housing and Redevelopment Authority in and for the City of Shakopee, Minnesota Special Session June 17 , 1986 Chairman Wampach presiding: 1. Roll Call at 7 : 00 p.m. 2 . Approval of Minutes of June 3 , 1986 3 . Acquisition of Huber House - 105 So. Holmes St. 4. Opera House - 105 E. 1st Ave. - Ordering Appraisal 5 . Other Business 6 . Adjourn Barry A. Stock Admin. Aide -T T -- ' r,:-iar .7ampach called the meeting to order w* tebens, .ler lin- ' eroux, -nd ',o' li-an prese;-11U. Also Present were --_-rry ^tock, Aministrative 'dide, m o and nn-,--�tb -or, d rass, -`-9st. "ity 'ttorne ohn 'K-. -'�ndcrson, _.Itw 'dT�qiristrat U ot4 or -ol'i-an - er- inv n .Ota n i-red to approve the minutes ',a-, 20, _19"S. carried ,xiani-ously. 1,eroux/"olligan moved to amend the agenda to read regular session not adjourned %_> - 1) r egular session. !.otion carried unanimously. -olligan moved to approve Resolution _�Io. 86-5 Resolution of the eroux/ A Board of "o-missioners of the Shakopee 727itll Approving a Contract for 7rivate Development by and Eetween the Shakopee _HRA and Shakopee '-alley 3quare Prop rhes. " il otion carried unanimously. T J 7 eroux/7Tierizng moved to approve -Re-solution lo. 86-3, 'A Resolution 7,xpanding T , Minnesota River 7.7-alley Housing and Redevelopment Project 7- o. 1 and L.IendinE; the :..odified 711-ousing and redevelopment Flan Relating Thereto Pur-suant to t11e' arovisionsof inne_sota Statutes, Sections 462-411 to 4.62-716, inclusive as a-mended; and _'mending the Tax Tncrement Financing Plans --Relating to lax mtI ; Tnc re- ent DistrictsT0. 2 '.-r-u h o. 6 wthin t -e Pro, ct Area, - h'ei - I)rovisions of 1-dnr.esota Sections 273-71 to 273.78, inclusive ass amended. T,'Totion carried unanimously. Dave T,-,acGillivray of Springstead, Tnc. reviewed their recommendations for the ` C, City and the following L - bond sales: 1 . Tax Increment Bonds - Shakopee "alley Square ;`e500,000 2. Tax Tncrement Bonds - I.-I-olmes St. Sewer, Bridge Second Ave. Parkin- Tot, Second Ave. Parking Lot Landscaping - `1 ,645,000 3. Improvement Bonds — 4th t_venue and ^ mber Trails lS _ 1355,000 Dave T.-acClillivrav explained that the iT':Prove--1en+ bonds are 4- Vo include two projects, one beim 4th 11-venue Reconstruction and Timber Trails. 'II,_ese projects will be assessed approximately 25 ) of the project costs. Th e 4 balance of thCost will L11 be a general tax levy over the City. Dave I'Tac'Gillivray explained that the total project cost for Shakopee 7alley Square is .`500,000. The property owner guarantees a mininram market value of three million dollars upon completion. T,eroux/7ierliing moved that the Board of Review for the City of Shakopee consider the valuation on this property as of january 2, 1986. !"otion carried with '_'omm. Lebens opposed. Discussion ensued on Ioames Street Storm Sewer, Second avenue Parking Lot T!andscaping and the 2-ridge 7=±rorLm- ental Assessment ",orksheet. The bond issue is 21 ,0645,000. 7,he funding for this is projected to come from surplus tax increment -money generated by basically the TT-mart and Canterbury :)o,,,m District. i :e %, c��.V.. :�1C`=�•1 l jIruy S iz-.ted tl,erp is ta-,c reform ci, +'' f der c -i e TC , r=. ri,)w, "_owever, ta,x reform will not affect t e t:-_ree issues just discasse.d. _..,.ve il,. .ViF� �,.�,'l �ddres ed n. i;�:.:'til �.. ii F: w1:i1.C'.•. 13 ?, iCfLl::d one sahedul-e ay- 7 =m..n+ eri es v""!4 s 2,4' J,�'.D-�', `;:�, : Jnorei ieT_''_t ii;l_;Cl fro71 tCle mart cl_,_tr_.0 t for O. f :._-�c' race *rpCl. lI Jr Te_n2ntS 1 • '.ereux/'.-'ierlin: moved to include the f.;urth issue of ref�Lnding in the L�es:jlution 7o. 56-4 to the "'ity ''ouncil. Holl -all: 9ye,s• ''omm. "Jampa.ch, Leroux, 'Ti_erling and 1,olligan 'roes; ^_•oTl>m. ':e Dens 'lotion carried. eroux/`'ierling moved to approve Resolution ;�6-4, a Resolution of the Board of Commissioners of the Shakopee '-RA Requesting the City of ,S1lakopee to Issue its General Obligation Tax Increment Bonds to Finance Public Improvement Costs within the ='RA's T:"_innesota River 'Talley Housing and Redevelopment Project "Jo. 1 and move its adoption. i Toll ;all; dyes; Comm. t-Jampach, Leroux, Colligan and ".Tierlino .Noes; ';omm. Lebens Potion carried. Biscussion ensued on the acquisition of the Opera House - 105 E. 1st Avenue. The price or. the property is . 175,000 and is listed on the National Registrar__ of Historical Places. Leroux/-iierling moved to order an appraisal of the property at 105 E. First Avenue at a cost not to exceed x2,000 and inform Ms. sioy that the City is interested in acquisition of the property. Discussion ensued on how it fits into the plan of the highway. Comm. Leroux stated that Federal .Aid Urban dollars could be used for the purchase of this property. '_The general consensus was that at this time the purchase of the property is not beneficial to the City. Comm. *-Iampach: presented the side of the Dowmto>nl ,ommittee stating that the Committee felt that this would be a step for the downtown business city of Shakopee. J. eroax/:Colligan moved to table the motion to order an appraisal of the property until we have an idea as to where the '2,000 will come from for the appraisal, how the property will be included in any highway structure or downtown redevelopment and to be brought back to this table within the next month. TTotion carried �jnanimously. Leroux/T;ebens moved to adjourn. Notion carried unanimously. Parry Stocl- Administrative gide Carol T. Schultz Recording Secretary "tt MEMO TO: Shakopee Housing and Redevelopment Authority (HRA) FROM: Barry A. Stock, Administrative Aide RE: Acquisition of Huber House - 210 South Holmes St. DATE: June 11, 1986 Introduction• On May 6 , 1986 the Shakopee HRA moved to order an appraisal of the property at 210 South Holmes St. The HRA also moved to inform Ms . Blewitt that the City was interested in the acquisition of the property with the thought in mind of selling the structure to a potential mover and eventually reselling the property for commercial use. On June 9 , 1986 the appraisal results were submitted to the City of Shakopee. The appraiser has estimated in its highest and best use that the property in question has a market value of $56, 800 . The house and lot are estimated to be worth $53 , 800 with the salvage value/building estimated to be $3 , 000 . Background: This past April, Ms . Winnie Blewett, executor of Laura Huber' s estate approached the City to determine if we were interested in acquiring the residence at 210 South Holmes St. At that time she was offering the property to the City for approximately $48, 000 . Ms. Blewett was basing her selling price on the County Assessor' s market value. Since that time, she has discovered that the County Assessor has increased her market value to $64 , 500 . In the conversation with Ms. Blewett on June 9 , 1986 I informed her of the appraisal results. It was at that time, that she informed me that given the County' s new market value, she would not accept less than the appraiser ' s estimated value of $56 , 800 . She also informed me that there was another party interested in acquiring the property. In brief, I would like to review the alternatives that exist assuming acquisition of the property. First, the City could remove the building and create approximately 10-15 additional parking stalls in the downtown area. The cost for the parking lot alone would be approximately $15 , 000. Second, the City could remove the existing structure and leave the lot vacant. Third, the City could leave the existing structure and lease the property until such time that a suitable commercial use could be found for the property or until adequate funds could be obtained for completing a parking lot in the area in question. If the City wishes to demolish the structure on their own, the approximate cost for demolition is $2 , 000 . On the other hand, the City may wish to consider offering the home for sale to anyone who is willing to move the house. The estimated resale value of the property to a potential mover is approximately $3 , 000 . In attachment #1, I have attempted to breakdown the various costs associated with the aforementioned alternatives. Currently $150 , 000 is available in the HRA fund balance to pursue acquisition of this property if the Council so desires. In April of 1986 the Downtown Committee reviewed the acquisition of the property in question and requested City Council to pursue acquisition of said property for additional parking. In light of the increased selling price, staff believes the Downtown Committee would still feel that the property should be acquired by the City. Alternatives: 1. Purchase the home at 210 South Holmes St. and authorize staff to receive bids from individuals interested in moving the structure. 2 . Purchase the home at 210 South Holmes St. and demolish it. 3 . Respectfully inform Ms. Blewett that the City is not interested in the acquisition of the property at 210 S. Holmes. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends alternative #1. Action Requested: Move to authorize the appropriate City officials to proceed in acquiring the property at 210 South Holmes St. with the intention of selling the structure to a potential mover. Funds for the acquisition to be taken from the HRA reserve fund. Attachment tw Attachment #1 1. Acquisition costs - $56 , 800 2 . Expected building salvage value - $3 , 000 3 . Excavation costs if the residence is removed - $1, 000 4 . City Administration - $500 Total project cost if City acquires property and sells residence to a potential mover - $55 , 300 Estimated Cost to build a Parking Lot on the site - $15, 000 @ $1000 per stall Estimated Demolition Cost - $2, 000 Estimated total cost of land and parking lot improvements assuming building is sold to a potential mover - $15, 000 + $55 , 300 ( 56 , 800 - 3 , 000 + 1, 000 + 500) _ $70 , 300 - 15 stalls = $4 , 686 . 66 Note: On the 2nd Ave. Parking Lot when land values are included the City paid approximately $4 , 337 . 50 per stall. MEMO TO: Shakopee Housing and Redevelopment Authority (HRA) FROM: Barry A. Stock, Administrative Aide RE: Acquisition of Opera House - 105 E. lst Avenue DATE: June 10 , 1986 Introduction: On June 3 , 1986, the Shakopee HRA considered the acquisition of the Opera House. At that time the Authority moved to table the motion to order an appraisal until several questions could be answered in regard to the acquisition. To be more specific, the Authority questioned where the $2 , 000 would come from for the appraisal, how the property would be included in any highway design or downtown redevelopment, whether or not Federal Aide Urban Dollars (FAU) were available for the acquisition of the property and finally, where would the money come from for the actual acquisition cost. Background• In response to the Authority' s concerns, staff has investigated the aforementioned issues. Staff has discovered that Federal Aide Urban Highway Funds would be available to acquire the property and install a right hand turn lane. The City' s allocation is approximately $45 , 000 annually. In addition, we would be able to secure future FAU Dollars and maybe able to obtain FAU Dollars from cities who have not expended their allocation. Currently we have built up a FAU reserve fund of approximately $180, 000. However, these funds are earmarked for the 10th Ave. project. If FAU funds are used, a Plan Development Report and Location Design study report would need to be completed. These two reports would indicate the temporary nature of the free right turn lane as it relates to the planned bridge alignment. ( See Attachments) The District State Aide Engineer does not believe that the Federal Highway Administration would buy into the project given these facts. Additionally, if FAU Dollars are used Ms. Hoy would have to demolish the structure before the City' s acquisition because of the historical designation of the property. If the City so desired, we could pursue acquisition of the property using City dollars and offer the land to the State on a lease agreement basis. The terms of the lease would be such that the State would construct the right hand turn lane and lease the property from the City for one dollar until such time that the mini by-pass is constructed. By so doing, the City would maintain control of the property which will be more suitable for development when the mini by-pass is constructed and in the interim obtain a right hand turn lane to alleviate traffic along First Avenue. For City funding for the acquisition of the property, two sources of funding exist. First, the HRA fund balance presently amounts to approximately $150 , 000 . These dollars could be used for a portion of the acquisition cost. The second source of funding would be tax increment financing. The money from either source might be recoverable if the City sold the property to a developer after the bridge and roadway improvements are made. While Ms. Hoy is listing her property for $175 , 000 , before the City could pursue acquisition, an appraisal of the property would have to be conducted. Estimated appraisal cost is $2 , 000 . In order to get a more accurate indication of what the property is worth, staff believes it would be appropriate at this time to proceed with an appraisal of the property. Funds for said appraisal to be taken from the HRA reserve fund. Alternatives- 1. Move to order an appraisal of the property known as the Opera House and Jabberwocky at a cost not to exceed $2 , 000 . 2 . Do not order an appraisal of the property. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends alternative #1. Action Requested: Move to order an appraisal of the property known as the Opera House and Jabberwocky at a cost not to exceed $2, 000 . tw RIVERSIDE +, t �1�.. , ,,WVE 7L IVER IV L./a0' x'.'11. Yt,e Ifo .,� ;' •v 'y." �I .� • � uS Isi • IS! wE - �_ i 7205+ ti � N =�•• _-J L_\- �_�� �=J Y u �� \�- �•^CJI a ` All _ .{_`+'� ♦c`�- _ r�r�.=b- �o� �1`{- �,�-tet lt- _-_- -l. t r,�, EJGUR-E 3�ALTERNATIVE �7`A RIVERSIDE , \ PGR. ';�, �-; -- i III • : � �,� - _ — jwwwlSO /VfR i X11 Tv i IGS �— ISI&lEID 1205,— _ /iiitjSrr `\ J l^ a ALJ i. ��1 pry .s L E.bRD-r. r .. r..'r.` -- - FIGURE 5 ALTERNATIVE 13z RECREATIONAL EQUIPMENT. INC (612) 884-4315 June 5, 1986 Mayor Eldon Reinke City Hall 129 E 1st Ave. Shakopee, MN 55379 Dear Mayor Reinke; Recreational Equipment Inc. (REI) and the American Volkssport Association CAVA) are co-sponsoring a 10K walk on June 29, 1986. The Liberty Walk will be a noncompetitive event with proceeds going to the Statue of Liberty - Ellis Island Foundation. The walk will begin at Huber City Park and go west along the Minnesota Valley Trail. I have contacted Dave Berg, of the DNR, and George Muenchow about trail use and a registration area near the community center. Four to five hundred walkers are expected on June 29th. They will be beginning and ending at staggered times during the day. I look forward to our walk and have enjoyed working with Mr. Muenchow. Please join us for this fun, family event. Please do not hesitate to call if I may answer questions. Sincerely, I Marsha Berry � y Promotions Coordinator i Quality Outdoor Gear and Clothing Since 1938 WITH REI AND THE MN VOLKSSPORT ASSOCIATION LIBERTY WALK SUNDAY, JUNE 299 1986 START/FINISH TIMES Start between 8 a.m and 3 p.m. All walkers must check in and pick up a start card. Finish, check in and return your start card by 6 p.m. LIBERTY WALK ROUTE The walk will begin at Huber City Park in SHAKOPEE, MN. The paved trail heads to Chaska through lush Minnesota River bottom lands along the MN VALLEY TRAIL. Walkers will cross the Old Swing Bridge and return to Shakopee for a total walk of 10k (6 miles). MN VALLEY NATIONAL WILDLIFE REFUGE, RECREATION AREA AND STATE TRAIL. Located along a 72 mile stretch of the MN River between Fort Snelling and LeSueur, this refuge, recreation area and state trail was established to protect the river valley. The flood plain marshes, grasslands and forests are home for small mammals and white-tail deer. Each year hundreds of thousands of songbirds and waterfowl migrate through the valley flyway. HUBER CITY PARK and SHAKOPEE, MN 494- s Huber City Park is located one block north of Hwy. c. fz,z 101/169 at Lewis St. in downtown Shakopee. A municipal parking lot is located directly across the . 6 S 34 street.The park,start/finish area,has handicap acces- ��` REI sible restrooms. Water and refreshments will be available. Water will be available along the route. Bring sun- M."`""` \101 lasses, a hat, mosquito repellant and comfortable SHAKOPEE shoes.Don't forget your raingear-we will walk rain or r shine. Gasoline and a variety of restaurants are easily found L 35 in Shakopee. 1NE CLINICS AT REI Anesday June 11 7 p.m. Exercise Walking �dnesday June 18 7 p.m. An evening with the AVA turday June 21 11 a.m.-2 p.m. Anything You Always Wanted to Know REI About Walking 710 W. 98th St. dnesday June 25 7 p.m. Fitness Walking Bloomington, MN 55420 r_ League of Women Voters of Shakopee P.O. Box 113, Shakopee, MN 55379 May 28, 1986 Shakopee City Council City Nall 129 - Ist Avenue East Shakopee, MN 55379 Dear City Council Members The Shakopee League of Women Voters would like to let you know that at our Annual Meeting in May, 1986, we decided on our Local Study for 1986-1987. There is a League position to support opportunities for citizen participation in government decision making, and also, to protect the citizen right-to-know. Together with this position and our interest in observing the Shakopee City Council , the School Board and the Scott County Board of Commissioners, we have adopted the following Local Study: A study of the appointment process of advisory boards for local units of government. We are in the preliminary planning stages of the local study and following fact finding, analysis and consensus, we hope to complete this project by March of 1987. Our study committee will be making contact with your administrative personnel for information on the process of appointments in your particular unit of local government. We also anticipate needing your participation as an elected official in the future as our study develops. We hope that you are as interested in this topic as we are and that the results will be mutually beneficial to you as an elected official , the Shakopee League of Women Voters and all citizens. Sincerely, Anne Tuttle President League of Women Voters of Shakopee cc: City Administrator MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator, FROM: Ken Ashfeld, City EngineeYjAV SUBJECT: Alley in Block 50 DATE: June SQA, 1986 Attached is a letter- from Mr. Robert Vierling in response to a letter I sent informing him of Council action regarding the suject alley condition. Mr. Vierling has requested the following actions: 1. Clean the debris from his property and fix the bank along lots 4 & 5. 2. Copies of letter to go to Council. Public Works has been notified of Mr. Vierling' s request. With- out a temporary easement to slope the abutting lots, the bank will be susceptible to future damage but City forces can be as careful as possible when plowing snow. Regarding Mr. Vierling' s statement of not starting any work "until after we go to Court ", I do not believe litigation would address future City action on alley maintenance or improvements. Typically, a court hearing of 429 assessment project would only address and consider the original project improvement benefit versus assessment. I would not expect any resulting litigation to affect the current decisions of the Council. Therefore, based upon Council action, I plan to proceed with including this alley in the 1986 pavement Preservation Program for seal coating. KA/pmp BLOCK50 Mr. Robert Vierling 221 E. Fourth avenue Shakopee , Min. 55379 ;V�s. hen Ashfield, City Engineer Copies to go to the 129 E. First Avenue City Council Shakopee , Mn. 55379 Dear Nr. Ashfield: June 4, 1986 In reply to your letter of May 27 , 1986 , your first page about minimal patching stinks . It won' t improve any- thing in my part of the alley at all . My water isn ' t "ponding" - it' s changing directions five times in my part of the alley and washing out my bank. The only thing you can do to correct this is to re-do the alley. Just once , when you Engineers make mistakes , you should admit it. I 'm not about to be so stupid as to give you construction easement to slope my lots . That would only help the water erode the bank quicker and the alley would be further over on my property than it is now, and it' s already past its alley line. Also , I 'm going to tell you again - get the dirt and rocks off of my property. The City deliberately put about six feet of dirt and rock inside the alley line on my property this winter. Also , I want the bank fixed on lots 4 and 5 where the City dug into my bank in the alley. As far as the Council directing you to complete these ridiculous improvements to the alley and costing the City money, I wouldn' t even try to start that yet until after we go to Court. I realize that some of the Council people think they're God' s gift to the world, but I' m sure a few days of their time off the job and spent in Court for all the ridiculous em- barrassments they've caused me to suffer, might change their minds on just how important they really are. You really can' t tell it by their Godlike attitude , but they're public servants , nothing more , nothing less . Sincerely, Rob r� Vierling P.S . Just think how funny this is going to be when old gut- s; w less Coller , who couldn' t face me in Court without an Attorney is going to act when he has to face me and an rittorney! CITY OF SHAKOPEE _ INCORPORATED 1870 .29 EAST FIRST AVENUE, SHAKOPEE. MINNESOTA 55379"1376 1612! 445-3652 � �s�-• " s May 27, 1 986 ► ; Mr. Robert Vierling cl E. Fourth Avenue Shakopee, MN CC,;;79 RE: Plock 50 Alley Dear Mr. Vierling : The condition of the alley in Plock 50 was discussed by the City Council at their May 20, 198E meeting. The Council directed rile to complete the following actions: Minimal patching to improve drainage. As we discussed at our site meeting, this act ion would atternpt to correct any water ponding but would not correct profile grades. Back s1c,pe your lots on the east end. This action wot_tld correct erosion resulting frorn drainage along the edge of the pavement. To accomplish this work., we must have a tern Dor^ary construct ion easement to slope your lots. Please let rile know if this is agree- able to you. Seal coat the entire alley. It is intended that the aforestated work be corngleted with the City' s 1988 pavement preservat ion pro iect. The s=hedt_Lie on that project is somewhat Un certain at thi5 point, but i s expected to be completed by the end of August. If you elect to Ytot grant a temporary construction easement, we will do the best that we cart to minimize erosic-n along your property. If you have any questions, please contact rile. Sincerely, �/ f'.en Ashf ld City -Engirteer KA!!/�'t�Dma BI-1. ZK50 mac: John K. Anderson, City Admin. Memo To: John K. Anderson - City Administer From: Judi Simac - City Planner Re: Appeal of Conditional Use Permit # 452 - Quest Air Service to operate a heliport Date: June 11, 1986 Introduction At their May_ 22, 1986 meeting the Planning Commission Approved a Conditional Use Permit for Quest Air Service, Inc. to operate a heliport in the I- 2 zoning district. The C.U.P. has been appealed by John and Jackie Schwartz, 2232 Eagle Creek Blvd. Background Please find attached the following information reguarding the application: 1 . Staff reports to the Planning Commission 2 . Minutes of the May 8th and May 22nd P.C. meeting 3 . Information provided by the applicant 4 . Correspondence recieved from residents The conditions of approval included: 1. Insurance certificate be on file and the annual renewal of that certificate be on file prior to completion of annual review. 2 . Safety data sheet dated 5-16-86 be a record of condition. Ground safety officer must be a minimum of 21 years of age. 3 . The northern flight path be deleted. 4 . The flight path shall not pass directly overhead of any populated recreational areas. In reguard to liability, Mr. Coller has informed me that the city is not liable for approving the heliport. However, he recommends that a copy of the insurance certificate should be on file for public record. The manager of Flying Cloud Airport, Robert Malby has indicated that no protection is given to an airstrip (Koskovich) , that pilots are responsible for flight direction and avoiding mishaps. Also there are no regulations to prevent flying over Valleyfair. Action Requested Offer Conditional Use Permit Resolution of the City Council No - CC 452 and move for its denial or approval. northern pound 2401 Lowry Ave. N.E., Suite 201 Minneapolis, MN 55418 612-788-9296 June ll, 1986 Mr. Richard Stark, President Quest Air Service, Inc. 19702-172 St. Big Lake, Mini 55309 Dear '111r. Stark: Enclosed are the results of the noise tests conducted in the Shakopee area on June 9, 1986. The purpose of the study was to determine the noise impact that would result from operating Quest Air Service's Bell 206B JetRanger Helicopter as a ride in the vicinity of Valley Fair and Canterbury Downs. Figure 1 shows the approximate pattern for the short ride as drawn by you. The longer ride will simply expand the pattern to the East. The symbols shown in this Figure stand for the heliport (H) and the test locations (T). Figure 2 shows a more accurate identification of the test locations. The test locations were: 2461 Hauser Trail and across the street from the Bates House (5284 Eagle Creek Blvd.). Pages Al through A3 contain the results for Hauser Drive. Pages Bl through B3 contain the results for Eagle Creek Blvd. At Hauser Drive we could not see or hear the helicopter. The higher readings observed at this location were due to: light aircraft flyovers (indicated in the print-out) , loud telephone rings at one residence, children playing with motorized off-the- road vehicles, and light street traffic. At Eagle Creek Blvd. we could see and hear the helicopter. The helicopter flyovers are indicated in the printout. At this location we observed: barking dogs, light aircraft flyovers and light street traffic. As a final test, the helicopter was flown straight overhead the sound level analyzer at about 300 ft. altitude. Figure Cl contains these results. products for the control and measurement of noise Analyses of the results, in light of residential requirements, show that: (1) If the proposed routes are maintained there will not be a measurable noise impact to the cluster of residences tested. (2) There would have to be approximately 12 directly overhead flyovers above any single residence for a potential problem to develop according to the State Noise Standards. However, while flying both proposed rides, I did not observe any residences below the chosen routes. fOncerely, RTHEP SO N A on E. Perez P. AEP:ca Enclosures MURPTR"S LANDING MPI. VALLEY RESTORATION\ PEAVEY W. \ �� N R.R. \\ I V4 LL F4 iR Sr4rE TRUNK I 4M�EMEA'T PORK � AH Eat p1N��f O hI GM W4), NO C CORP. I OWENS ILLINOIS � 4TH AVE. -------- ANCHOR Al GLASS Er STE OfN E� ,/ e`yD.._no. QQ2o VALLEY I DMPP / \ TRACK (WAREHOUSE PARKING AREA m f AGE REFI O\ I U m = .NEE /J�.2 t/6� H; 2 TRACK � I NAH J�f � PARKING � 1 TORP J' ,3 Z AREA �oS" o I �_�� COMPANY H rPp �T-4 OFFICf J G O WEER WMS M> CITY MINNESOTA I K.MART DtST. CENTER J�F. I WELL RACETRACK FJt IOTM AVE y KAWASAKI INCO O I - O 00 AREA O I SfJ Opt\C� PO O O F(!r O ^ I? AQU ...................... Ii I i FUTURE DEVELOPMENT TTY � DEVELOPMENT I I WELL �_ ___�- -�.»------__-------_-------- �' p 169 BYPASS 101 c ' ��+---___-------------------------- r' U FUTURE OFFICE PARK DEVELDPMENT I I • j I I D F4 ,e T igu--r,e 1 . 110,^ �,�'# ,�' -'� _ L C'_'.'.� „t •, sem+ R 7�#;. ''",'Y� � r 1. x• r. . r"'- � � r' �" _ �':.i� i__,��"1:. !i^STK r � - �$ �� - R'Zc•,y { Sr ir 10 •{°�` W9- yY' b [ s r 1_ ' tt- .'''tr,rig• rti "'s ^"`s� � ,b � -y.Y.N. r' r(�;"� .,�9 �. ;6. 'r. '`�V���•{� �r,�*"P'5 "'a•§ Viz». 3`" ? .�'•+R r ; `*` :. P-M 7. 1" �.t~. X357 �' _ .lr � : t� .y�_., � r / � ,'!'. � - a� � �:t t•h. '. .. IF im' � y y{�� �G �#_ �G �����S•.vim �� �#"� c. 4�g�T ,ter. 'fc `{E .�• '-rte �pS .�' - t' •-�•� �� +� k-�..,�, � � � _ } s *� �- -��"yh"4' � `tel �'• ,. � � � x IAISTRUMENTATION SYSTE4 1 - Larson-Davis Labs, Model 700, Type 2 Integrating Sound Level Dieter/Dosimeter, SIN 700-20, 0385 A 0191. - B & K, Type 4230, Sound Level Calibrator, SIN 494339. - ERGO Systems, Inc. , Hush 80 Printer. SYSTEM 2 - WARTSILA, Type 7178, Type 1 Precision Integrating Sound Level Meter, SIN 71664. - WARTSILA, Type 7478, Octave Filter, SIN 74575. - WARTSILA, Sound Level Calibrator, SIN 52551. Figure 3a DRTA REPORT LARcON-DAVIS LABS -- MODEL 700 06/09/236 11 :51 : 16 SN 70OR0191 Dose 425.0 Prof 3464.0 SEL X6.0 LVL 50.5 Time 0060:`9:00 Lmin 40.5 Lmax 74.0 Lpk 89.0 OVLD 00 RMS Ex 0000 Pk Ex 00 R/S 01 Memory 5791.0 L01 62.0 L10 51.5 L50 46.0 L90 43.5 tiETUP D2--iTA Detc FAST W9ht A Pk Unust =0 Crit 35.0 Thld 35.0 Exch 3 LDL =0 RMS Thld 115.0 Pk Thld 115.0 Hy st Run date 00'00 Stop date 00/00 Run time 1 99:00 stop time 1 99:00 Run time 2 99:00 Stop time 2 99:00 Excd =1 Intv =1 Time 00:30 Ruto-Stop =0 Ln =1 Hist =1 Save Pk =0 Per 30.0 — Al — I NTV RER0RT LARSON-DRVIS LABS -- M CIEL 700 06/09/86 11 :52: 16 SN 70OR0191 Cnt LVL SEL Lmax LPk Lmin Date Time Dur Ex Pk Ov 1 50.0 82.5 70.0 84.0 41.0 9 JUN 10:42:02 0:30 min 0 0 0 L01 = 63.0 L10 = 50.5 L50 = 45.5 L90 = 43.0 2 51.0 63.5 74.0 89.0 40.5 9 JUN 11 : 12:02 0.29 min 0 0 0 L01 = 61.5 L10 = 53.0 L50 = 47.0 L90 = 44.5 99999 HIST REF-ORT LARSi iN-DAV I S LABS -- MODEL 700 06/09/86 11 :52:40 SN 700HO191 Cnt RMS Peak Base: 35.0 Per: 30.0 FAST 0 RUN 0 9 JUN 10:42:02 1 47.5 2 46.5 3 56.5 �--� 4 47.5 5 49.0 6 47.0 ---- 7 46.0 45.0 --- 9 46.0 10 44.0 --� 11 46.0 �-- 12 46.5 13 45.0 --- 14 44.5 �-- 15 44.5 -- 16 46.0 17 45.5 --- 18 44.0 19 47.0 ---- 20 46.0 21 46.5 22 60.5 Twin Engine Plane - Dir S.W. 23 60.5 t- Single Engine Plane - Dir N.W. 24 Q.b g g 25 47.4 26 56.0 27 47.5 �- 28 46.0 29 48.0 30 48.0 31 45.0 32 46.5 33 45.5 -� 34 46.0 35 47.5 �- 36 46.0 37 44.0 38 44.5 -�• 39 50.0 �- 40 44.5 -� 41 45.0 42 46.0 �- 43 46.5 44 51.0 --� 45 51.0 46 46.0 47 45.0 -- 48 44.5 49 43.5 -- 50 44.0 51 45.0 52 46.0 --� 53 46.5 -i 54 47.0 �- 55 51.0 56 48.0 57 47.0 -� 58 47.5 -- 59 45.5 -- 60 46.5 6 f 62 48.0 63 50.5 64 51.0 65 52.5 66 48.6 67 47.5 62 46.0 69 43.5 H I L•T REF>0FRT LARSON-DAVIS LABS -- MODEL 700 06!09/36 11 :55:02 SN 70OR0191 Fnt. RMS Peak Base: 35.0 Per: 30.0 FAST 70 45.5 01 47.5 72 52.6 73 50.0 �- 74 56.0 75 49.5 76 58.6 7? 47.0 �- 78 47.5 79 43.5 80 45.6 81 45.5 62 48.5 83 52.0 84 46.6 85 46.0 86 44.5 87 46.6 - 88 47.5 - 89 47.0 90 49.5 91 47.5 92 49.0 93 61.5 94 45.5 95 51.5 �- 96 47.0 Single Engine Plane - Dir S. 97 47.5 98 50.5 99 52 J�.S 16.0 48.0 101 47.5 102 48.5 163 49.6 104 48.5 -- 105 46.5 166 47.6 107 51.0 108 48.5 '�-'- 109 47.5 110 48.0 111 Jam.•J 112 47.0 -� 11 ; 50.5 114 55.5 �- 115 51.5 116 52.5 117 47.5 �- 118 48.0 119 59.5 119 STOP 1 9 JUN 11 :41 :04 99999 3 _ DHTR REPFiRT LARSON-DA'v I S LAB ; -- MCIDEL 700 06)/09/86 14:40.57 SN 700HO191 Dose365.0 Pro4 .2944.0 SEL 85.0 LYL 49.5 Time 0000:59:3` Lmin 39.0 Lmax 71.0 Lpk 87.5 OVLD 00 RMS Ex 0000 Pk Ex 00 R/S X91 Memory 5790.0 L01 58.5 L10 5L_.5 L5 47.5 L'30 43.0 SETI_IP DHTR Detc FAST Wsht A Pk Unw9t =0 Crit 35.0 Thld 35.0 Exch 3 LDL =0 RMS Thld 115.0 Pk Thld 115.0 Hyst Run date 00/00 :;top date 00/00 Run time 1 99:00 Stop time 1 99:0}73 Run t i roe 3 99:00 estop time c 99:00 txcd =1 Inty =1 Time 00:30 Auto-Stop =0 Ln =1 Nit =1 Save Pk =0 Per 30.0 _ R1 _ I MT'.- REP C4F'T LRRSON-DRYIS LABS -- MODEL 700 66/09/86 14:41 :59 SN 70OR0191 Cnt LVL SEL Lmax LPk Lain Date Time Our Ex Pk Ov 1 49.5 82.0 71.0 87.5 39.8 9 JUN 13:32:84 0:30 min 0 0 0 L01 = 59.5 L10 = 52.8 L50 = 47.0 L90 = 42.5 2 58.8 82.5 64.5 80.0 39.5 9 JUN 14:02:04 8:29 Nin 0 0 0 L91 = 58.0 L10 = 53.0 L50 = 47.5 L90 = 43.0 999919 H I E31- F_EP0RT LARSON-DAV S LABS -- MODEL 700 06!09/86 14:42:22 SN 70OR0191 Cnt. RMS Peak Base: 35.6 Per: 30.0 FAST 0 RUN 0 9 JUN 13:32:04 1 68.0 Basking Dogs 2 47.5 3 51.5 4 50.0 5 51.0 t; 47.0 7 45.5 47.5 `J 47.5 10 45.0 11 48.5 12 51.5 13 50.5 14 51.5 15 52.5 - 16 47.5 17 59.0 -� 18 48.0 19 49.9 20 50.0 21 49.0 22 51.5 23 51.5 24 49.5 25 52.0 26 48.0 7 4._`1.5.J 28 51.0 -- Single Engine Plane - Dir N 29 49.0 30 48.5 31 47.5 32 47.5_ J3 44.0 34 45.5 35 52.0 36 46.5 37 44.5 38 46.5 39 50.0 40 43.0 41 46.5 42 48.0 -s 43 43.9 44 46.0 45 42.5 46 43.5 47 46.9 48 48.5 49 5a. 50 46.0 51 48.0 52 49.0 53 47.5 54 51.5 55 51.0 56 46.5 57 47.5 58 45.5 �- 59 46.0 �- 60 43.0 Helicopter 61 46.0 62 47.0 q3 43.0 q4 401.5 65 59.5 6b 49.0 �- 67 56.5 68 48.0 G9 47.6 •-� H I '=:T REP0PT LHRSON-DAV I S LABS -- MCIDEL 766 06;'09186, 14:44:44 SN 7 00H6191 C*nt RMS Peak Base: 35.6 Per: 30.6 FRST 76 43.0 -- 71 41.5 --- '' 41.5 --- 73 46.0 74 `1.5 --- = Helico-oter 75 49.0 - 76 48.0 71 40.` -- 78 46.5 79 43.6 60 53.0 81 57.6 J2 50.5 83 56.5 84 49.5 �-- 85 49.6 -06 46.5 -- 8 r 46.6 �- 45.5 -" E Helicopter 9 50.0 90 53.5 91 48. Plane - Dir E. 5 y8 44.5 -- 93 4-,.c J 94 48.N 95 58.6 ---- 96 54.5 97 56.0 �9 54.0 160 47.0 -- 101 50.0 ---- 1021 `0.5 Plane - Dir ? 193 49.0 104 50.5 ---- 165 45.5 106 49.5 -- 167 48.0 108 5O.5 169 47.5 116 47.5 111 45.5 112 53.5 ------ 113 53.5 114 49.5 �--�- 115 49.5 --- 115 47.5 --- 117 5e.0 �-- 118 49.5 -- E 119 47..J Plane - Dir ? 129 47.0 -- 1 s0 STEP 1 9 JUN 14:31 :37 - B3 - �7ETIJP ORTR Detc FAST l,1ght A Pk Unwgt =0 Crit 35.0 Thld 35.0 Exch 3 LDL =0 RMS Thld 115.0 Pk Thld 115.0 HySt 2 Run dat.Y 00100 Stop date 00/00 Run time 1 99:00 Stop time 1 99:00 Run time 2 99:00 Stop time 2 99:00 Excd =1 Intv =1 Time00:30 Auto-Stop =0 Ln =1 Hist. =1 Save Pk =0 Per 10.0 I NT'.. REF=l CjP-T LARSON-DAYIS LABS -- MODEL 700 06/09/86 15:00: 13 SN 70080191 Cnt. L.VL SEL Lmax. Lpk L m i n Date Time Dur Lx Pk Ov 1 68.5 88.0 82.5 103.0 51.0 9 JUN 14:56:42 0:01 min 0 0 0 L01 = 80.0 L10 = 73.5 L50 = 59.5 L90 = 52.5 ';9yC4y HIST REPUF-'T LARSON-DAVIS LABS — PIODEL 700 00/09/86 15:00:30 SN 700A0191 C-rit. RMS Peak Base: 35.0 Per: 10.0 FAST 0 RUN 0 9 JUN 14:56:42 1 65.0_ 71.0 L , 3 '58.5 4 55.0 ` 5 53.5 6 53.0 =� 7 63.5 8 76.0 y 66.0 10 60.5 10 STOP 1 9 JUN 14:58: 14 99999 — C1 — MEMO TO: Shakopee Planning Commission FROM: Judi Simac, City Planner DATE: May 1, 1986 APPLICANT: Quest Air Service Inc. LOCATION: S of Valley Industrial Blvd. (Proposed Canterbury Park lst Addn) ZONING: I-2 Heavy Industrial LAND USE: Vacant (Proposed Plat) APPLICABLE REGULATIONS: Section 11. 04, Subd 6; Section 11. 33 , Subd. 3 , I FINDINGS REQUIRED: Section 11. 04, Subd. 6A SURROUNDING LAND USES: I-2 Heavy Industrial Uses and T.H. 101 PROPOSAL: The applicant is requesting a conditional use permit to operate a heliport in the I-2 District. CONSIDERATIONS: 1. The applicant proposes to operate a heliport on two acres of land for one year. The land is part of the plat of Canterbury Park lst Addn. , which has not yet been filed. However, a building permit has been applied for to construct an office warehouse on the parcel. Until the plat is filed, only one use may occur on the parcel of record. 2 . The operation of the heliport/amusement ride service is described in the attached letter to the Planning Commission. Besides operating the amusement ride, the applicant intends to run an occasional air taxi service to Minneapolis. Hours will be noon to dusk Tuesday thru Thursday and 9 : 00 a.m. to dusk Friday thru Sunday, beginning May 20, 1986. Two flight paths are proposed, one over the Minnesota River and another over the Racetrack and Industrial Park. The short ride if $9 . 50 , $19 . 50 for long ride. 3 . Proposed access to the site is from Valley Industrial Boulevard North. A parking area, shelter and take-off area are proposed. A fence will separate the parking area from the take-off area. The shelter proposed is a wood structure which is not permanent. 4. The applicant has indicated to staff that the noise from helicopters can be controlled by the way in which the equipment is maneuvered. When flying over the racetrack the ceiling is to be 750 feet. A Certificate of Insurance should be placed on file annually with the City. Recommendation: Staff recommends that the conditional use permit application be denied for the following reasons: 1. The conditional use will conflict with the existing heavy industrial businesses in the area because of the commercial nature of the activity. 2 . Establishment of the conditional use will impede the development of the surrounding vacant property. The proposed site has been approved by the City of Shakopee for an industrial plat with public utilities and street system. 3 . Valley Industrial Blvd. N. is, in its present condition, a poor access for a commercial activity. 4 . The use of a heliport, in a permanent form could be an asset to the community, however the temporary nature of the operation does not conform with the existing industrial businesses and purpose of the zoning district. 5 . The use may create a nuisance with increased traffic, noise and dust. Action Requested: Motion to deny Conditional Use Permit Resolution #452 and move for its adoption. *Note: The Shakopee Valley News has informed staff that the legal notice for this public hearing was not published on April 30 , 1986 , an error on their part. It will be published on May 7 , 1986 for the May 22, 1986 meeting. Therefore the public hearing must be continued to May 22, 1986. Attachments tw 19702 - 172st Street South Big Lake, Mn 55309 (612) 263-6161 April 21 , 1986 Chairman Dave Czaja and Members Of Planning Commission City Of Shakopee 129 E. 1 st Ave. Shakopee, MN 55379 Dear Chairman Czaja and Members Of The Planning Commission, Quest Air Service, Inc. is proposing to lease 2 acres of vacant land from Scottland, Inc, located along Valley Industrial Boulevard North directly across Highway -v101 from Valley Fair. We are applying for a 1 year conditional use permit for a Heliport. A Heliport is a conditional use in the 1-2 Heavy industrial Zone. We propose to operate a Helicopter Amusement Ride Business from the Heliport as well as have the Heliport available to run occasional Air Taxi service to and from several points in the Metropolitan area and Shakopee as well as service to and from the Minneapolis/St. Paul International Airport. We will be open 6 days/week begining May 20, 1986 and our hours will be 12:00 Noon to Dusk on Tuesday thru Thursday and 9:00 AM to Dusk Friday thru Sunday. Quest Air Service, Inc. and Hook Spray Service, Inc. are sister companies with common ownership, and have been providing helicopter services in this area for over 8 years. We spray over 150,000 acres of crops in California, Missouri, Iowa, Minnesota and Wisconsin and currently operate 6 helicopters in services ranging from rides, flight training, lift service and crop spraying. We have 35 acres in Big Lake, MN on which is a our own airport and two completely equipped maintenance hangers.All our aircraft are maintained on a perpetual maintenance program by our own licensed mechanics. All permits and licenses required by the FAA and the State of Minnesota have been obtained or will be upon this approval by the City of Shakopee. Our proposed flight routes for rides are shown on the enclosed aerie] photograph. We have two different ride routes, one twice as long as the other. The criteria for selecting these routes was safety , minimum noise and scenery. Both fly at a ceiling of 500 to 750 feet and have gradual landing and takeoff patterns to maximize safety and minimize noise. We believe the Heliport will be a real asset to the Shakopee Community both as a unique additional recreational activity and also as an important transportation link for businesses in Shakopee to the rest of the Greater Metropolitan Area. Thank you. Sincere] , Ric ar"dl`'. tark President } ..+y., } •,..::f4� ���i:=" a `. _ ; cam'' * M � :. ir * ] •S- `c„'.�c.;:-K."�.)`. .+ 4Si °c• ire?s G. p � T., rlk'�1� zet s € �..,. ,,,> z as = � ,fi i�y+j ►:. � �• ��.����a .••;a..ws .� � Y t alb-°'a �1 � 4 aha-i 4 n►R�a ”�T. :s4.� ,�y y � r) �3�, w +*r a '�c�',i � �`"R..i, 'a.� ��s �'�E.��YYi'.i.. �.s:. ' � ".."�� ��,t�s �stir "°"."a'•�� . � � Jam• � �. •�"•• `� _ � ^rte -` dam. �-..'� �� / ; .c• �.�:.,,,�r;, q` �' / � �• i i p'��� ���t�� � .rk `�� �� t may: + � � ��� Nq fiits`� ��.-�� _ -1 Jl •�✓ 3_.�'Fi�rf M.�..�. '� ice. �, r mak'-r'��� cw - k' ..,��s�y3 �. .. _ -..r.:... ,a.�.� � t��r,�>'s.T ..�C.c�- 1�i � ::h_ ..:�.a. t� `3 �Li�t{"�c'rvc�•wL�s�""'a�i-� J [ ., C 5 fir„ �"�.��1.• L t_L� , ., �� .,,a _L-�-tx Y iz� f 4 �.L q 4 Mae VM W�„��i.�'� d. (��(`,��• -fit �/'F it 4 � � - I�ti� l « sa..rr. f 1 -'-'\ � - .1'"1Ta .�S"]F'Y` iiK' --h�'"�'� •...r" tea•"s,i ,i3ag� - �3..xF.r � ..tl'C�i.l.�. � lam))"=r .3'fS.✓ "'.!g3. a.r.� �w.,..ww• a"+x..seF, 7F'x azi r'a. 9 sa• '- f "�'"tt _ yr a�.►_ r,�, w .�Y .-'a6'�:�•efs..M-s ri T .... y aY2r����� •~• �'" .. RTS �. �.. z v 4+ I r r =- YPt,��Y Iµrevs-�-f�� �,✓a . µ�r`-t�t --- i Li CF11-icr-/W ��CMcE c>t''E rl S�►�-t��., - C°Ar�Kir-� pF�. i Exhibit D OPEN AIR SHELTER FRONT VIEW 8 FEET O 24 FEET SIDE VIEW 2 FEET 8 FEET QJff SCALE 1" - 4' 12 FEET V, - ?-G, and anteref iri, tie resoN as a crnfition cf the :srmit ryluent *A50 w: Lh any aaRnMent that tAs fanz sheez be = ;npnd-� in to rond tho cafwy ofMyr will be on tho ar;=AL a-, times ---.j shy!1 to Fe7 arate fr-n Ov _,Prqocr if tho 1 7 1• -light ja .h cha!2 = infrinpa ia the ngrza =2 nay an in jnfrin,, ujon ine 7uO _Lran n�st!76 area n7r pass Orenly nyerheif of Ve n0jor pop ulaind recreatio_!al areas of ' -_er:,-_:7,r -wnz: -.Pnding, or any other facil.4ty iKrlich may develop in the -=Fdiate recreational area. Voti3n denied with 7omm. Foudray approved. &K.- Wldeghemtoudrny moved to open the public hearing to consider n londitional �Jjsf ?ermit for a heliport for amusement ride business and to run cccasiona-I air taxi service upon the property located South of State Fighway 101 across from 7alley Tair Amuscment Par_ 7otion carried unanimously. Zr. Stark, the applicant addressed the 7ommission on the safetyprocedure; program that they developed. issues addressed were: 1 . Safety in the Air 2. Safety on the Ground Ground support people A. land the Aircraft B. Weboarding instructions C. Boarding the aircraft D. Deboarding the aircraft 2. logging each flight F. Fire Extinguishers 3. The Shelter and Fence H. nrainfna of personnel 1. insurance The issue of fueling was raisel by so=—, lane and the applicant answered by stating that the aircraft are fueled on sive and are done so by a truck which has fuel tanks right on it. The applicant is planning on digging an area approximately 5 or 6 inches deep, about 30 ft by 30 ft, covered with plastic liner and crushed rock put on top of that so if there were any spills, it would be contained within that area. Ed Orozier, 71sh and !-.'ildlife Service, stated that the impactof this operation would be less harmful to the Great Blue Heron and —`ret Cclony but did state a concern about the northerly flight pattern. The applicant stated that they would be happy to omit this northerly routs. Robert FaImby, Chief of Flying Cloud Airport, stated that they are now in the process with either applicant of discussing a letter of agreement specifying maximum altitudes and routes of where they would be operating an and listen to our radio frequency. as rs I j /-",C-,u ray i:Jvpd o oven pu.^ii1 e- rine to c:ti sider a -.ond-I ticn,a! e to operaue a Co.mmer^i_'_ recreational u`_e; for .loll cc' l.er ride :'.0 i E'Sr i:--0 the propEr�y to:.at,e!l .:as, Of alley _''c3ir _ .a3?Iie :aril on Mate _:ig 1a�_ 101 . ? otion carried un an r.ously. '71ty _"Planner reiTiewej the conditional use per.Tl Etati:lg ..haat on =G✓T ther;O..:.i,Sl,n approved a ^1ot10n to Continue he rublic ilea`" ^.. • . t0 T":a'.,- 22� •1 ' ool, ' � -J---U J JJG, in order for the ap_.lica.rlt to provide additional information. o'_7 Safety. _)Vn-'iS el1Y "-_t-orney for _� :C� G'r, t o a�:11C2u'1t, :r cai r es^ed the .0.j:_, _ 0.1 on safety standards. The applicant indicated that he will Lrain t 1P. Safety officer himself and the safety officer will have radio contact with the helicopter pilot during all hours of the operation and will also have a hand held two-w'a",yr radio tuned -.o the same frequency of the _i'lying "Iced Zoller. tco one will l be —lowed 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 completely fenced. d Crozier, Tanager of the T•.innesota Talley ;='ildlife Refuge addressed the Planning 'Co-mmission on his concern_ of the impact of, the helicopter on the refuse in general and particularly on the creat Slue Heron 2-nd -fret :Colony located just north of flue ':ake. _.ar_e -,.ynderso-nq 00 :-r �...eS na opee ''»aJlr_an she loa` d Cr ._`..7. .J. , �. , am dress ^. re ^� _`inn - -rah 1 ^ .ink- �_ e s 1- - -K-_- . s -.a-,=1 -s -ng reserve _e 1900s and with. '-lelgoing"^i e s-ia e've"rrJ nOr 10 minutes would destroy eve—y-tnin :, tI=V are tr,-lrg 110 id.�;..r.d 1'lrc �o gv on re Cord as bei ir- apposed to thev•_'•'_eCo_'er __Qe ^'.:Sine 5S. V __ i2 ryZaja asked if t~:ere- was anyone else from audience vho wisned to as resS this issue. 7nere was no response. 'oudray/-T- :`al ' '-em moved to close the nUDli„ :.earinE .Otion cazzied unanimously. ScY.mitt/�oudray moved favorable approval oI" conditional use permit .-'450 Subject to the fo'_lo:in nn conditions: ,g 1 . ^he applicant sh=all have an insurance certificate on file, annual renewal c_ t_la,, certificate be on ._le _+i cr to ccupleticn of any annual reviews. 1 . 7, cer�_rica'e be on, rile a-.d tie __:al renalvral of th at cert_r1- :..? Ol7 file �or Z^ Co^plet_Cn of our annual rI'v -le i as a condit 1Cn. 2. _afr j" dz�to sheet dater -1 -.;h be e;ter-d into the r='.cord as condition CI recuest, a-mended to nrovide for t_`le cro--,nd safetJ or_lcer 1s to be at least a of 21 Years�,rs o f a ^e northern fl_oht pat._ be deleted as reed j,,ith the applicant. e f_it pa h a 11 no t �a.,ss d�rectl;;r overhead of any populated reCYGc.'io'''_8 i areas. _ oticn c^,r?ed w-*'h �h i=i -i Cza-a opposed. a ;alGeg,hem�.;crlu�itt moved for a 10 mLnute recess. T-otion carried nan.4n-Sus l y- _Heeting, was reconvened at 9:10 p.m. an .aldeg,hem/S-nmltt moved to open the -ouelic hearing to consider amendments tot .zoning rag, and zoning, code by establishing, a Racetrack Str1-t and Pian_x) I-:rel-ment Zone• .-...,_..__ -r=ed unan1-.,'.,'slZr. - - e :_=_ined t--- t---- -s - t_.,__ ==g, c^ t"e it =s tre s=rSt " e -''=nD �_i^ a=r_ la Di' t-'--e _?=1:1� _SSlG:1 =it1 0 a of -ajcr . ar._es in the ZoI L'lg, Code _.re in .^ . Oter 110-1, nc ^it y ^,ode an esta-Ias__i Uz, a racetrack- district. ne o t_er one -s Planned . - �'�:_-Cti___: r-g,' at=-nS 'v7 _Cn _S _..tet= of de __ a �-e_o ^ - a _ ^e o� pr_p-r-- i l apla"�7eu� GrdE'_";yT way. '7he =0-nosed amercm?nts incl_.~e: 1 Section 11 .35 Racetrack District (FT'D) 2. Section_ 11.40 Planned Unit Development (=JD) 3. Section 11.02 DG^s ;--tion 11.25 _-4 =_-:end ':ond`i eS t ora_ S G allot: fc- private clubs and lodges. 7.- -2� c an t T ff t h e _--e 717711�:: 7C, st-a _U in 4 7- .7 E, 4 r:"' a_1 7 -7- 'D� US_ t!i nr r ioc_�tkd -ast of I=:, mark on y r11a.-rinicr stayed t"niat thecnplican, is i,-,l 4s to conduct III._CC,3tCr r4 des for months (T.-a✓r 15 - zembe I from, 1C,:OC) a.m. 0 2:CO -c.m. --he Operation consists of area. f-1 or 10 cars aa,�5 anr;1 ad -area. �he proposed ocation is the ;On acre --Iradfor"-' z)roZ)erz,%T has been platted as -ra;-rie `ouze .1 d d _)cnnis 7=_Iix, attorne,, for -'dward rl'olmer, the applicant, of 230 7i;verview :circle, _arns v--Ile r , Stated that -' . 702.ger had p-rep-ared a fac-' 6emonstration to be included for the record. aTplicaant has been 4-- +.- ", . is service full ti for or a-oT)rox "imatel2 years and -Dart prior t0 that. I-;-- has contacted and made an a.�emert with them reE,ardinz his route. Discussion ensued on the 4SEU e of the access off 1* _. - waY 101 and the dust and noise that v7ili be creating a nuisance to SU=O',Zndin,g areF-S• r"-Ie issue ,.,as raised by llo=. around the paxin- area or landing area to protect c. L, 0 n the fencing the -people from enterino, the landinn., 'cad area. Tne Cha;rma_2 asked if -here was anyone from the audience who wished to address this matter. 1'here was no response. Sch*mii tt/7an 7 7a-1deghem moved to continue this hearing to 1,ay 22, IC)85, an,d.n�as_'!, that the a7-D-, 4 ___icant, supply the �:OTMLSS 4 on with a wr-Itten plan, wit; aT17r--r- --e 4ray.,4 n-s cove-, -Ine ---a- s -c s 0 oe established on t 4 S::� ing 0_4 t-a- -Z- cer, fenci:-ig rc- 'he 7reatmer.-' of the par' X1^1 L, - �. - __-_-no _'ot to be used, a-.so In X�i n, _�r4 c ce z s S on be ch e_--'X,-e d 4-.-.o to -- � ou`[ lif a - -vate d-rive-way can be used, also ahold harmless clause beporat' ed ' ' enc - into the .otion carried u:iani mously. SC -4 '/Pomerenke moved for a 5 minute recess. '--ozi on carried u-nanimously. .,a-nl',"aidelnl,h--:n/Pomere,,iL-e moved to open public hearing. r,' oioe ir =-mous Iy. ltn Carrd Me City Planner reviewed -what the applicant Ji-aj-requesting. The applicant L I U_ Proposes to operate a heliport on 2 acres of land for 1year. esides operating the amusement ride, the applicant intends to =_n an occasional 4r a- taXj service to ' ,in-neapolis. Proposed access to the site is from ,7al n Ir 11 ley- -_ dus1ria! 31vd. Tio. ',�hen flying over +' is io be 750 feet. tne racetrack the ceil ing .mitraised a concern th.at the f-I 4 ccnflictl with the 7,-o sk-o 4 �lS�ht path prop_-sed is in d-Lrect 7he '7,ichard Stax::, Has been n the h e I JL c o p e r s e r v i c e .`c r B years. is 10 'orovide _':�hakcoee with a-;r transoc—ati-n b- heliCo--lier d e �4 trans I ��_ .1 Z, -pro,-- re C-?-= al r*A�=, -^ -,_= _ - - * e:-Sueed -,-ftl'- I— 4 • r1V ic h e arJ n!-- �- - - 7� -- --y 22, n i r,, + 4 C L on -a c-a r 3,n C-g wE_,s not 61 I)e roi ' 'on -. carried ur1an-:L_,:!ou_,r___ chm 4 t t .7 an I.,'al deg?iem moved to o p-e n t ie -nubl; he= -ring to con :ceder _o, cndit_Jo,-,a] 7se T;ermit to sell tip sheets in the Darl_4r- lot on _r oPertI-T located at 12.IS6 -azt -�,irs� 'venue (A�-uerican ot lon carried unanj mously. L Theale reviewed that "' aP lican-L" has reQueE:4ed to sell racetrack 6- Ip t4,0 Sheets u at the !-merican 7.egion par-k-ing lot. �jrje --.0 si�ee4, C> - - ::';_1 be sold on racing da�rs only and O-ours Will be 11:15 :4_5 on weekends and 1 :15 3:45 on 14ednesda-,), thl_- a-'D T�ugene In.as 7crlied fo the peddler permit. Th e Police ChllCant " t-h at -ef stated r +"`_'de_P:-`7tMen-' was pleased with the applicants c'oeratuion last •, eax f 't that the -o,-d4t-* and 'e. nal Use -Permit -should be a-' pproved. 7 ;_-,nXaldegheM/SC InM`t moved to close the publichear4ng. !,lotion i unanimously. carried S-_hmi t t/7axI_M al d e gh ,hem moved to approve Conditional Use Permit "451 subject to following - - V 0 rJA City 'cdes are complied with. 2. TTIe applicant obtains a ='_ddlerls lice-n-se. or d; are Z eA ._nlaal carriea u-nani M. ods --ke -ren 77S e t 0 0 c-Pe- ]-ublic hea-j-rn �o —ne-id— Con-d-1t; S=-i=S a-n _-2 zone, limited to 15'01 floor area uT)cn the Pr^Pert-v located in the Valley -Indlastri=i -Daxk. 7�� - - =r! I-:an imous 1 y. carr-i -_ C-LtY Planner stated +hF--LL, the applicant licant is requestin!-r a ti 4 p 0 ;cc-ndii - use permit to conduct retail I sales in the Hea*,,y Industrial zon-ing district. Ene sales w:L11 include 10-5. saddI-__-,, leather goods and ve�er-*n= meAic4nes. -items will be sold to horse tra:Lners so therefo6 the wishes to be located close to t h racetrack. 7,�je a-,) "Ot :7�P-r-i-ngs A ' _DlicaMt is Tom eros, .-r-ansas. �1,— I-%- - ?�-_— .:. r- if anyone - Cr audience wished Tnere -wa§ no response. t1c) -�Cres,� this' --a.- asked %an":aide^nc�l/TaLpra {amoved 4. -lose publ, ic hearf USI, �3 c. T,� -in _n 4 4 ou-Jon carried V-0merer-ke moved' to a_-7=01kre :�onditional ^3a 3 and move i-, Use 4 t 'R=s 0-'u-i o n ag 0 7)i I On. Com. m. Schmit-L-1 suz�zested that P—n ar 7- be ---t- as a provision in tne mat c" --r-L-C ®UES7 AOR SEERWOIC:Ea QFC.. 19702 - 172st Street South Big Lake, MN 55309 (612) 263-6161 May 8, 1986 City Of Shakopee 129 E. i st Ave. Shakopee, MN 55379 Attn:Judy Simac - City Planner Dear Judy, This letter is in response to your memo to the Shakopee Planning Commission dated May 1 , 1486. Quest Air Service Response to 'Considerations' 1. There is concern that until the plat is filed on the proposed site only one use may occur on the parcel of record. Scottland the land owner has agreed to file the plat. 2. It is our intent to operate only an amusement ride business from the site at this time. When we receive the necessary licenses from the Federal Aviation Administration we will make a request for a Heliport conditional use permit at that time. Also I should note we don't intend to fly over Canterbury Downs but rather around it. 3, You mention here that our proposed structure is not permanent and later that a permanent site may be preferable to Shakopee. The structure is temporary because the conditional use permit is for only a short time, 1 year. We wanted the City to have an opportunity to review the use and then we will request a more permanent use and construct a permanent structue. 4. We will be happy to place a certificate of insurance on file with the City. Quest Air Service Response to 'Recommendation' 1. Your concern is that our conditional use "will conflict with the existing heavy industrial businesses". Since we are now only requesting that we use the site for commercial recreation this should not be a problem. The property is zoned 1-2 and commercial recreation is a permitted use in an 1-2 industrial, see Shakopee Land Use Regulations Section 11.33 Subdivision 2(B). 2. Your concern is that our conditional use "will impede the development of the surrounding vacant property". Part of the temporary nature of the use is to allow for the facility to be moved to another ration if the proposed site is in the path of industrial development. The property surrounding the 2 acre site on the South, East and West is owned by Scottland Companies and they consent to the proposed use. To the North is Valley Industrial Blvd. North, the Chicago Northwestern Railroad and Highway 0 101 which are not available for further development and therefore,will not be impeded by the proposed use. 3. Your concern is that "Valley Industrial Blvd, N. is.... a poor amass for a commercial activity". Valley Industrial Blvd. N. is a paved road which currently carries minimal traffic. It is estimated that the proposed use will result in an incremental traffic flow of approximately 5 to 15 cars per hour. We believe that Valley Industrial Blvd N. should easily accomodate that additional traffic flow. 4. Your concern is that "a heliport... in a permanent form could be an asset... however the temporary nature.... does not conform with existing industrial businesses and purpose of the zoning district". A. We fully agree that the proposed use will be an asset to Shakopee. The use fits in well with the current promotion of the Shakopee Community as "The Entertainment Showcase". At some future time, the Helicopter Transportation Service will also provide quick and convenient axes✓between Shakopee and the rest of the Metro area to businesses in the Minnesota River Valley. B. The facility is temporary because; ( i ) the conditional use application is only for a one year period at which time the structure can be easily removed (it will be portable) if the city elects to not renew the use in the following year. (2) if further Industrial Development is proposed for the site the structure can be moved. The Scottland Companies have the right to require Quest Air to relocate in that case. Note - Quest Air is willing to enter into an agreement with the City to place a more permanent structure on the site after the first six months of operation if the City so desires. C. Commercial recreation is a permitted use in I- 1 and 1-2 zones. Sea Shakopee Use Regulations Section 11.72 Sub d. 3(B) and Section 11.33 Sub d. 2(B). Also a Heliport is a conditional use in both I- 1 and 1-2. See Shakopee Use Regulations Sections 11.32 Sub d. 3(D) and 11.33 Sub d. 3(l). A Heliport is not listed as a conditional use in a B- 1 , B-2, or B-3 District. See Shakopee Use Regulations Sections 1 1.29 Sub d. (3), 1 1.30 Sub d. (3) aro:' 1 1.-1 Sub d. (j). Therefore, it appears that the intent of the City when drafting the land use regulations was to limit helicopters to Industrially Zoned land and further that Commercial Recreational uses should be permited without the needof a conditional use permit in an 1-2 zone. S. Your concern is that "the use may create a nuisance with increased traffic, noise and dust". A. We estimate the increased traffic to be only 5 to 115 cars per hour. That amount of traffic will go almost unnoticed in that area so close to Highway& 101. B. Attached is a study done by Bell Helicopter Textron, Inc. which shows that the Bell "'20613 Helicopter will create about the same noise level at 500 ft that an - automobile creates at 50 feet going about 40 miles per hour. In that particular location of Highway -v 101 the noise would probably not be any greater than the background noise of the Highway. C. The Site was selected to minimize dust problems. The landing area is in a fenced off grassy field near a water detention pond. The landing site is set back approximately 150 feet from the street such that any dust associated with the street should not be affected by the proposed use. Y It is Quest Air Services desire to cooperate fully with the City and become a valued neighbor to the other businesses in the Valley Industrial Park. Initially , the proposed use will be only for Commercial Recreation. Later, following obtainment of the necessary regulatory approvals from the FAA, Quest Air intends to use the facility as a heliport for a Metropolitan Helicopter Transportation Service. However, until the site is used for transportation to and from other destinations it is not a Heliport. The FAA defines a recreational ride as leaving one spot, flying less than 25 miles and returnina to the same spot. Therefore we feel that giving rides is a Commercial Recreational use and is a permitted use in an 1-2 zone. Given these facts we would like to table our request for a conditional use permit until a Heliport is needed and prod as a permitted use by tailoring our rides to the concerns of our neighbors and the Planning Commission. We intend to invite all our neighbors, the Planning Commission and the City Council for free rides and hopefully obtain recommendations as to how we could best serve the Community. Although our imediate concerns appear short term, our goals are all long term. We strongly believe we will become an important and needed recreational and transportation facility. it is a fact that every ride we give promotes the Shakopee area. When our passengers look down what do they see?Valley Fair,Canterbury Downs, Murphys Landing,the Speed Way and of course the rest of the beautiful Shakopee area. What could be better? If there are any questions please call. Thank you for all your help. Sin el , Richard M. Stark President Be!! Bielicapter + ; • Bell Helicopter Textron Inc. Post Office Box 482 A Suosiaiary of Textron Inc. Fort Worth, Texas 76101 (817) 280-2011 18 April 1986 81:RR:tfb-5229 S7&'R Here is some helicopter noise data which I hope will be helpful in obtaining a heliport permit. I have given you levels for the 206L-3 since I do not have a complete set of 206E data. Since the 206B will tend to be one or two dBA lower, these levels can be considered to be conservative from a noise impact standpoint. The approach, takeoff, and flyover levels are based on test profiles shown in figure 1. All levels are the maximum A-weighted sound pressure levels (dBA MAX) , except for hover, flight idle, and ground idle, which is d8A averaged over 30 seconds. 206L-3 EXTERNAL NOISE LEVELS dBAMAX Flight Condition Overhead 500 ft Sideline 9°, 57 KT Approach 400 ft Altitude 78 76 57 KT, 1200 FPM Takeoff 400 ft Altitude 77 73 500 ft Altitude, 100 KT Flyover 76 73 1000 ft Altitude, 100 Kt Flyover 70 68 5o it A1tkiQdc IOV Kt Fl-�c)vL CI_0k„ ..tea �� 70 Bell Helicopterti 18 April 1986 81:RR:tfb-5229 Page Two d8AAVERAGE Horizontal Distance, Feet 125 ft 250 ft 500 ft Hover 80-88 72-78 62-67 Flight Idle, 100's RPM 82-87 71-75 59-62 Ground Idle, 60Z RPM 72-82 61-67 50-53 If I can be of any further assistance, please feel free to contact me at 817-280-2776. Sincerely, Rick Riley Sr. Acoustic Engineer 1 I � I) / , MiGTDpROM � / ` �j( P931tprla I `\ 492 1 I Alt. FLYOVER f-9 1 YDS' Approach �``y►h '394 f ' \ 492 /. / ' APPROACH / I _ I I ,�ar.,y°QaS I 1 t I I \ ' :Take-otfn t I TAKEOFF �ut Flight Profiles for External Noise Tests. F O 0 c V 1 N N n CIO ti rO V 1 rr . O O O 00 I ' n - ..................................................... ...................................... I H N O GAO �J LsJ 0 � M W CD 00 Un O 00 0 0 0 O w = O V oLr,\ . w CL ZDV M c� W � � a Q x U U Q >+ Z U C7 �` ; O Ei o p N y O O L W U Lo 000, I � � 1 i � m 1 � N I ! 1 I I I I 0 a a ca _ z � N < H W M W l000 >4 C:+ E� � G - E- Z 1 I �— Z O W cn UW U us C I I � O co I'D a5TON 2UES7 &OR SERVOCEa Omkc.. 19702 - 172st STREET SOUTH Big Lake, MM 55309 (612) 263-6161 flay 16, 1986 City Of Shakopee 129 E. 1st Ave. Shakopee, MN 55379 Attn: Judy Simac - City Planner Dear Judy, The following is in response to your letter requesting safety information, Safety of Helicopter Rides in the Shakopee Valley 1. Safety In The Air- Required aircraft maintanance and inspections, flying conditions, pilot training, experience and licensing, landing guidelines and much, much more is covered in detail by the Federal Aviation Agencies rules and regulations part FAR 91 which are the regulations governing helicopter rides. We intend to also adhere to the much stricter FAA regulations under part FAR 135 which is required for Air Taxi but not for rides. Copies of these requlations are attached. 2. Safety On The Ground- The FAA requires that the overall safety of the operation be the responsibility of the Pilot-In-Command, Ground support people - Basic Responsibilities: - Assist the Pilot-In-Command in any request to maintain a safe environment. - Take money and issue tickets for rides. - Keep people behind fence except for loading and unloading. - Assist and guide passengers on and off aircraft. A. Landing The Aircraft- The Pilot-In-Command, as standard procedure will land the helicopter in landing area facing and perpendicular to the shelter, From that position the Pilot-In-Command can maintain a constant view of the shelter and the people in and around it. The main rotor blades on the top of the helicopter are approximately 10 feet above the ground and represent virtually no hazzard while the tail rotor blades rotate on a perpendicular plane to the main rotor baldes are only approximately 5 feet off the ground and can represent a hazzard. Therefore, a cardinal rule for the pilot is to never allow unattended people behind him. As long as the people stay in front or to the side of the aircraft there is no hazzard. B. Preboarding Instructions- In the shelter before boarding a ground support person will instruct the next 4 passengers much the same as you would be instructed before take-off on a commereciai airline. 1. How to use the seat belt- FAA regulations require all passengers to wear a seat belt. The ground support person will have a spare safety belt and show as well as tell how to use it. 2.All passengers will board the aircraft from one side, one in front and 3 in back. The front seated person will he selected at that time 3. Passengers will be instructed where the first aide kits are on board the aircraft and in the shelter. 4. All passengers are instructed not to handle door operating mechanisms or window openings in flight. C. Boarding the Aircraft- The 4 new passengers are guided by a ground support person to the right side of the aircraft The front seat person enters the front cabin door and the other 3 enter the rear cabin door. The ground support person assists and makes sure all seat belts are fastened, closes and secures the doors, then backs away from the aircrat and gives the Pilot the all clear signal. D. Deboarding the Aircraft- Upon landing a ground support person walks to the aircraft, opens the doors, assists the passengers off and guides them to the shelter. E. Logging Each Flight- Each flight is logged by a ground support person as to the number of passengers, time of takeoff, time returned, the Pilot-In-Command and general weather conditions. F. Fire extingishers- Fire extingishers are located in all of our aircraft and will also be in the shelter. G. The Shelter and Fence- The shelter is a open air structure with a crushed limestone floor and side walls that come up halfway. From inside the shelter ground support people have full vision of the entire facility. The shelter is located approxmimately in the center of the 200' X 400' property. Out from each side of the shelter and running parallel to it the full length of the property (400') is a 4' high split rail fence to separate the landing area from the rest of the facility. Posted on the fence are signs warning people to keep out of Helicopter landing and takeoff area. H. Training Of Personal - 1. The Pilot-In-Command, as part of his pilot training and aircraft checkout, is throughly familarized with the overall operation of the aircraft and all its safety features. Our Company standard for minimum experience for Pilot-In-Command is 400 total flying hours as Pilot- In-Command and at least 20 flying hours in that particular aircraft. 2.All ground support people have read and understand our ground safety procedures and are shown the location and proper use of fire extingishers and first aide kits. I. Insurance - We carry not less than $10 Million of liability insurance on helicopters that carry people. We wiI l be happy to supply the City Of Shakopee with a certificate of insurance. Judy, if there are any questions please call. Thank you. Sin el , ichard M. Stark RMS;js encl 1,ay 28, 1986 Judi Simac City Planner City of Shakopee Dear PIs. Simac : We wish to appeal the decision of May 22 , 1986 , of the Planning Commission, granting a Conditional Use Permit to guest Air Service . Sincerely, John J. Schwartz Jackie Schwartz 2232 Eagle Creek Blvd. Shakopee , 1YIN. 55379 C�.�nJ Cts-e�� /�.-� a...e- U,�.�-�.._, c(��-irs.-�-e_ �. �� D Cc�C►' -ri�f �i1Le 1 �y-qq� &O�kt le -Q.- M K3, � s 32 ? 9 Luc ci CQ. ' l f 0 :n 71 acL Qom. � �• .��� � ��� o.� , o� C-1\O .� �� �o °• `� ��rV.a.� ave ����- ss-yj<7 t Q 1 , 0. �h (a vy O o �' .SZ, C) c5h A-0 c, U . 5 � May 28, 1986 r Ms. Judy Simac City Planner City of Shakopee 129 East 1st Avenue Shakopee, Minnesota Dear Ms. Simac, I am writing to inform you of my concerns regarding the conditional use permit, which was granted on May 22, 1986 by the Planning Commission concerning the amusement and air taxi service, helicoptor business, which is to be located south of State Highway 101. Although I am not familiar with all the restrictions placed on the conditional use permit, it is my understanding that the business would be required to fly their aircraft at a very low level, and as a resident immediately adjacent to Canterbury Downs I am concerned not only about the noise factor, but also the safety factor, as there are a number of fixed wing aircraft using the airport and a number of large high voltage lines in the immediate area. I would request that another public hearing be called and that residents living adjacent to the proposed flight area, be given further information and an opportunity to state their concerns. Thank you for your time and consideration in this matter. Respectfully, Stephen L. Strehlow 2487 Hauer Trail Shakopee, Minnesota 55379 SLS/cap Dear Madan-, 1 understand st.a.'iid th'ia.t .a, conditional ia,l u e• Permit, Resolution #$52, was issued for a. heliPort for an amusement ride. I am not for. this Permit because at this time the noise level is high but We are able to i c P e with it due to the fact we .a•r•r• above the activities at Cantar'barre Downs and Valleg Fair. This activity will be above us and more _ha.rP . We have had quite a. few News HelicoPters range over us in the Past and the noise rattled the- windows. ..h e-wi'j now:. I don't want a. daily r•ePatition of this kind of noise. Th"iis, I feel is the t.iren_ to curtail activities lwadin9 to high-, noise Pollution, I dont want another Twin Cities. Int. Air''Port sit•l«Iati11.n where noise Pollution is a. hot. issue. Most of the homes in this a.r•e'a, were e•re h er•e• before either Valles Fair or Ca nt ar•barr•g Downs and I fast the Cita of Cha.koPe•a has the duty to be very sensitive to the effect of such activities. We as home owner..- still have not seen a.'n'a food side to this deve 1 oP me•'nt a •cceP t ProP e•r'ts inflation and when ,aou Plan to stag around this only increases a our taxes and insurance. We only sae increased tr•.a,f'f i , 'iii rise•, diff icult'a in shoPPing and bad roads. Also I understand a, ceiling of 300 feet i.. set uP o'n this activity . I think even this would interfere with the Fl_•+ ing Cloud Rir•Port traffic, I have noticed r�l*,ltg Planes flying quite low in r' this area. Thank you for considering this Robert. C. Eager Home owner, Hauer"s Addition yC�,1'L� �r,�. � - �j' .mac�� C���-ca' �z`��� l �'` t ly 7 l � .. � /� l � � � �z 2 /�-P ��� G�y�fZ4 ��� '�-P �L� . �-�c-t-/� q g� f , f✓-�2� �� �y� � � � �' _ -- 55317 �7 1 8� 5✓r37 ��� !/�'� v� /f � ��•-f�'j�V / "�t+a�i �/t��L C:G./Lr-rte f r -112 1 w C - _ /J -5�5 i ✓O (�T+y - �CS���¢�,i,! O�✓,v,,� C.��.s..wt�Ssrr�J� r � L 9L �L Ms l`� Ib a--) MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator 67L.&7t� FROM: Barry A. Stock, Administrative Aide RE: ICC One Year Economic Development Plan DATE: June 11, 1986 Introduction and Backaround: In order to achieve Star City designation, the City of Shakopee must complete both one and five year economic development plans . On April 8 , 1986 the Shakopee City Council approved the five-year economic development plan as recommended by the ICC. On June 11, 1986 the Shakopee Industrial Commercial Commission ( ICC) developed a one-year economic development plan for the City. ( See attachment #1) You will note in your review of the one-year plan, that a brief mission statement (goal) follows each of the identified committees and sub-committees. Following the mission statement, are the primary objectives and tasks to be achieved by the committees and sub-committees during the year. In brief, the goals and objectives for the one-year economic development plan have been extracted from the previously approved five-year economic development plan. You should also note that tba c1n�-vPa r r�Win, 4V�,�;mQ "R reorganization of the ICC into various sub-committees. This reorganization is contingent upon the City Council ' s reorganization of the Community Development Department. (Hiring another Planner and creating the Economic Development Specialist Position) The ICC unanimously moved to recommend to City Council that the one-year goals and objectives be submitted for final approval. Alternatives: 1. Approve the one-year economic development plan as submitted by the ICC. 3 . Do not approve the one-year economic development plan as submitted by the ICC. 3 . Amend the one-year economic development pian as submitted by the ICC and move its approval. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends alternative #1. Action. Reauested: Move to approve the one-year economic development plan as submitted by the ICC. tw One-Year Economic Development Goals and Objectives Broken Down By Committee and Sub-Committee ICC COMMITTEE Communicate to the City Council the strategies being employed to ensure the overall economic vitality of the City. A. Complete Star City designation process. 1) Complete revised labor standards . 2) Complete one and five year economic development plans . a) Complete goal setting process b) Write narrative chapter 3) Develop team to make star cities presentation . The team would consist of the City Administrator , Community Development Director and Representatives of the New Development and Finance subcommittees . B. Broaden the ICC Membership to more effectively promote the City' s economic development objectives. i) Establish subcommittee structure to handle specific identified economic development goals . Subcommittees to include : Downtown , New Development , Business Retention, Finance , Tourism and Transportation . 2) Develop links with other city organizations that are promoting economic development , particularly the Chamber of Commerce Tourism Committee and the Scott County Task Force on transportation . 3) Enhance breadth of community leadership by bringing in citizens to new ICC structure . TRANSPORTATION COALITION Provide for improvement of the transportation system to enhance local and regional transit objectives. A. Improve transportation downtown through the construction of T.H. 169/101 bridge junction improvements. 1 . Keep MnDOT, legislature , county and local officials focused on the need for timely construction of this project . 2 . Encourage a task force established to select the best alternative to handle proposed bridge/ junction improvements downtown to complete its study in as short a period as possible . B. Promote the construction of the proposed T .H . 101 by-pass in Shakopee and Jackson Township. 1 . Keep MnDOT, legislature , county and local officials focused on the need for timely construction of this project . 2 . Continue to work with the Metropolitan Council right-of-way acquisition loan process and MnDOT right- of-way acquisition to acquire property needed for the construction of this project . C. Promote the construction of the proposed C.R. 18 bridge. 1 . Keep MnDOT, legislature , County and local officials J., on the need for timely construction of this project . 2 . Seek special legislation to fund this needed bridge project. DOWNTOWN COMMITTEE Investigate and implement activities Which will provide for the economic security of the downtown area . A. Improve attractiveness of retail opportunities downtown 1 . Work with the Chamber Retail Committee to : a) Explore ways to improve retail mix asaa means of attracting more shoppers downtown . b) Set up and coordinate downtown sales , festivals and promotions which will attract more shoppers downtown . Attempt one new sales promotion each year and evaluate its effectiveness . ( eg . 1986 Taste of Minnesota) c) Explore ways of linking downtown promotions to other tourism promotions as a means of encouraging tourist stops downtown. 2 . Assign someone to attract one new service , one new retail and one new office-type business to the downtown each year . 3 . Establish programs to assist existing businesses to remain downtown . B. Construct streetscape and parking improvements downtown which enhance the downtown aesthetically and functionally. 1 . Select the general design and streetscape elements which maximize aesthetic needs while providing low-maintenance . 2 . Establish an assessment policy that is fair and reasonable in providing for private business contributions to needed public improvements . 3 . Develop implementation schedule which matches reasonable construction parameters with needed improvements ( streetscape , road, utilities) and available financing resources . 4 . Implement streetscape in a manner which is least disruptive to ongoing business operations . C. Clarify downtown zoning issues. 1 . Devise administrative/CUP process for implementation of downtown design standards . 2 . Review parking needs and recommend solution ( revised zoning standards or more public lots ) to deal with parking needs . BUSINESS RETENTION SUB—COMMITTEE Develop a program which will actively encourage the maintenance and expansion of existing businesses within our community . A. Develop a business retention program to assure the well being of existing city businesses. 1 . Make annual calls on existing businesses to determine if their service and development needs are being met . 2 . Create "development" files on all major industries in town to place reports on annual calls , letters , requests for financial assistance , employment data , etc . on local firms . NEW DEVELOPMENT SUB-COMMITTEE Provide mechanisms and promote activities which will allow for the orderly development of commercial , industrial , residential and recreational activities in Shakopee . A. Set up system to monitor the need for development within Shakopee. 1 . Establish system to monitor vacancy rates for rental housing and establish a trigger for more active City involvement in the development of new rental housing units . 2 . Complete zoning study of city to determine that adequate acreage , in appropriate locations and zoned properly exists for development of hotel/motels and other business . 3 . Continue to improve and expand the existing data base of vacant commercial/industrial properties 4 . Develop ( with realtors ) a system to keep track of vacant ( for sale or lease) buildings . B. Focus on City Projects which will open up land for residential development. 1 . Amend Sewer Service area to include residentially zoned land to let market forces better provide for the development of residential lots. 2 . Assure availability of sanitary sewer flow adequate to meet commercial , industrial and residential growth of the city . C. Encourage Development of off-season activities. 1 . Promote development of commercial ice arena at the Minnesota Valley Mail to encourage winter trips to the area . 2 . Follow-up on the siting of the regional speedskating facility to see if there is as a way it can be located in Shakopee . D. Encourage availability for full range of housing to serve complete life-cycle : 1 . Encourage elderly housing which provides services to allow senior citizens viable opportunities outside of the nursing home setting , while opening up existing housing stock for younger families . 2 . Increase the opportunity for development of higher- bracket housing in the urban service area . TOURISM COMMITTEE Implement activities which Will strengthen Shakopee ' s tourism industry and the overall economic character of our community. A. Develop city marketing capabilities to promote tourism. 1 . Establish a year-round convention/visitor ' s bureau to encourage tourism, especially at off-seasons . Correspond with and tour some cities with good reputations for tourism promotion . 2 . Establish firm financial base to fund publication of tourism brochure each year or every 2 years and ongoing staffing for tourist information booth . 3 . Establish committee to redo city tourism brochure each year or every 2 years . 4 . Encourage individual and joint promotion of all tourist attractions in Shakopee , including brochure , package tours and publicity via other media. 5 . Look into possible state grants and/or assistance for local promotional publications and activities . B. Support development of a local hospitality industry 1 . Encourage development of convention facilities in planned hotel/motel projects . 2 . Sponsor promotions/festivals which will attract persons from outside the community . 3 . Attract business development which encourages tourism stops , such as boutiques, bed and breakfast facilities, etc . 4 . Establish measurable goals for attraction of off-season tourism ( eg . attract 3000 tourists per week) . 5 . Study what other existing or potential local events can be more widely publicized . FINANCE SUB-COMMITTEE Identify, investigate and implement alternative financing option that can be utilized in the development or redevelopment of commercial , industrial , residential and recreational activities in the community. A. Revitalize and activate local development corporation. 1 . Resolve issue of federal stock registration . 2 . Look into broadening base of corporation through additional stock sales . 3 . Request corporation to undertake study of how its financial support can best be integrated with other financial incentives for development . B. Study ways for the City to develop expertise in packaging financial deals for economic development. 1 . Involve local banks and bankers in study of means to develop local expertise . -Patibn . puD1ic/ prhaze partic3 'inancing mechanisms for the 3 . Promote reasonable f )using in the city . construction of new he 6 MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator FROM: Judi Simac, City Planner RE: Reconsideration of Final Plat of Prairie House 1st Addition DATE: June 11, 1986 Introduction: The Planning Commission has recommended to the City Council that the revised plat of Prairie House 1st Addition be approved subject to conditions. The conditions are outlined in the attached resolution. Background: At the December 17 , 1985 meeting the City Council adopted Resolution No. 2494 , a resolution which granted final approval of Prairie House 1st Addition. Since that time the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Dept. has purchased the property indicated at Outlot E ( see attached plan) . That parcel, combined with the adjacent Kopp property will be developed in the future with a visitor center and maintenance structure. The department has an option to purchase Outlot D from the developer. Outlot E should be designated as Block 2, Lot 1. As shown, Outlots D and E do not have any access to the frontage road which will be constructed along the north side of T.H. 101. By purchasing the Kopp property and Outlot E the U.S. Fish and Wildlife will have an existing access from T.H. 101 however the frontage road in the plat must be extended to abut the south lot line of Outlot E, in order to create a lot that abuts r-o-w and to provide future extension of the frontage road. Outlot D could be labeled undeveio_Dable until re-Diatted with public road access or is acquired by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife DeDartment. Action Reauested: Adopt Resolution No. 2577 , A Resolution Approving the Final Plat of Prairie House 1st Addition. RESOLUTION NO. 2577 A Resolution Approving the Final Plat of Prairie House lst Addition WHEREAS , the Planning Commission of the City of Shakopee did approve the final plat of Prairie House 1st Addition on December 5 , 1985 , and had recommended its adoption; and WHEREAS, all notice of hearing have been duly sent and posted and all persons appearing at the hearing have been given an opportunity to be heard thereon; and WHEREAS, the City Council approved and adopted Resolution No. 2494 , A Resolution Approving the Final Plat of Prairie House Addition, subject to certain requirements , on December 17 , 1985 ; and WHEREAS, minor revisions have been made in the description of lots in the final plat of Prairie House 1st Addition, which the Planning Commission reviewed and recommended approval thereof on June 5 , 1986 ; and WHEREAS, the City Council has been fully advised in all things. NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA, that Resolution No. 2494 is hereby rescinded and that the Final Plat of Prairie House 1st Addition, described as follows : That part of Section 3 , Township 115 , Range 22 Scott County, Minnesota described as follows: Beginning at the intersection of the northerly right-of-way line of State Trunk Highway No. 101 and the North-South quarter line of said Section 3 ; thence on an assumed bearing of North 73 degrees 15 minutes 41 seconds West, along said northerly right-of-way line, 190 . 00 feet; thence North 16 degrees 44 minutes 19 seconds East, a distance of 120 . 00 feet; thence South 73 degrees 15 minutes 41 seconds East, parallel with said northerly right-of-way line, 155 . 73 Z eet to its intersection with the said North-South Quarter line; thence South 0 degrees 48 minutes 00 seconds West, along said Quarter line, 124 . 80 feet to the point of beginning. be, and the same hereby is approved and adopted with the requirements that: 1 . Approval of a Title Opinion by the City Attorney. 2 . The City Engineer must receive and approve final plans and specifications for all public facilities , including, but not limited to, roads , sanitary sewer , storm sewer and grading. 3 . The developer shall provide a recordable agreement which guarantees the looping of the water system when Outlot A is replatted. 4 . The developer shall provide a recordable agreement which describes the shared maintenance, by the lot owners , of the private lift station. 5 . The developer shall provide a recordable easement which allows for the continuation of the Minnesota River Valley Trail through the property. 6 . The developer shall obtain the necessary permits from the MN Dept. of Transportation. 7 . Execution of a Developer ' s Agreement for the construction of the required improvements : a) Water - installation of a water system in accordance with the requirements of the SPUC Manager. b) Sanitary Sewer and Storm Water System - to to be installed in accordance with the require- ments of the Design Criteria and Standard Specifications of the City of Shakopee. c) Outlots - Outlot A must be replatted prior to any futher development. Outlots B and C shall be designated and shown as dedicated right-of-way. Outlot D shall be undevelopable until it is replatted unless it is purchased by the U.S. Dept. of Fish and Wildlife for public purpose. Outlot E shall be designated as Block 2 , Lot 1 . d) Park Dedication - in lieu of land dedication, cash pavment should be made to the park fund at the time building permits are issued. e) Streets and Street Sans - to be constructed in accordance with the requirements of the Design Criteria and Standard Specifications of the City of Shakopee. The frontage road shall be constructed to serve Block 2 , Lot I . f) Street Lighting - to be installed in accordance with the requirements of the SPUC Manager. 8 . The developer shall petition for intersection improvements and the extension of Valley Park Drive North to its intersection with the service road and waives right of appeal to the assessment, in accordance with Chapter 429 , Public Improvements. BE 1T FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Mayor and City Clerk be and the same are hereby authorized and directed to execute said approved Flat and Developer ' s Agreement. Adopted in session of the City Council of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota, held this day of 1986 . Mayor cf the City of Shakopee ATTEST: City Clerk Approved as to form this day of 1986 . City Atz=ney MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator FROM: Judi Simac, City Planner RE: Amendment to the City Code to Allow Liquid Bulk Storage Above Ground Only DATE: June 11, 1986 Introduction At the June 5 , 1986 meeting the Planning Commission approved a motion to recommend to the City Council that Section 11 . 60, Subd. 9 of the City Code be amended to require bulk liquid storage in above ground tanks, except as otherwise required by law or other applicable sections of the City Code. Background The proposed amemndments shall read as follows : Section 11 . 60, Subd. 9 Bulk Storage ( liquid) . All uses associated with the bulk storage of oil, gasoline, liquid fertilizer, chemicals, and similar liquids shall require a conditional use permit in order that the governing body may have assurance that fire, explosion, or water or soil contamination hazards are not present ( that would be detrimental to the public health, safety and general welfare) . Bulk storage of liquid shall be above ground only, except as otherwise required by law or other applicable sections of the City Code. All existing above ground liquid storage tanks having a capacity in excess of ten thousand ( 10, 000) gallons shall secure a conditional use permit within twenty-four ( 24 ) months following enactment of this Chapter. The Council may require the development of diking around said tanks. Diking shall be suitably sealed, and shall hold a leakage capacity equal to one hundred fifteen percent ( 1150) of the tank capacity. Any Existing storage tank that, in the opinion of the governing body, constitutes a hazard to the public safety shall discontinue operations within five ( 5) years following enactment of this Chapter. Action Requested Direct staff to prepare an ordinance to amend Section 11 . 60, Subd. 9 of the City Code for above ground bulk liquid storage. IN( MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator :ROM: Judi Simac, City Planner RE: Amendments to the Cit P.U.D. , Definitions y Code: Racetrack District, Clubs and Lodges, uses abutting a State Highway DATE: June 12 , 1986 Introduction: At their June 5, 1986 meeting the Planning Commission approved a motion to recommend to the 11. 4City Council that Sections 11. 36 ; 0; 11. 02 , #99; 11. 28 , Subd. 3 ; 11. 32 , Subd. 3J; 11. 33 , Subd. 3J; 11. 20 ( Zoning Districts) ; and 11. 21 be amened to provide a Racetrack District and otheonirelated)amendments . The recommended amendments to the zoning plan as prepared by Hoisington Group, Inc. include: 1) The inclusion of the southwest 10 acres of the Koskovich property within the RTD. 2 ) The ommission of the Danny' s Construction property from the RTD (to remain I-2 ) . Backqround: The proposed amemdments include: 1• Section 11. 36 Racetrack District (RTD) Creates a new zoning district for land adjacent to Canterbury Downs to allow a mix of commercial ' i uses. /- gh. �ndustr ' al 2 . Section 11. 40 Planned Unit Development (PUD) Amends the existing PUD language to clarify r of submittal and performance standards. equirements 3 . Section 11. 02, #99 Definitions Provides definitions for the PUD ordinance. 4 . Section 11. 28 , Subd. 3 R-4 Conditional Uses Allows private clubs and lodges as a conditional use in the R-4 District. 5 . Section 11. 32 , Subd. W Light Industry Repeals the conditional use to allow motels and tourist accomodations , automotive service stations , restaurants and supper clubs , drive-in establishments , open sales or rental lots , if abutting a state highway. 6 . Section 11. 33 , Subd W Heavy Industry Repeals the conditional use to allow motels and tourist accomodations, automotive service stations, restaurants and supper clubs , drive-in establishments , open sales or rental lots, if abutting a state highway. 7. Section 11. 21 Amendments to the Zoning Map A. RTD and other changes B. Mandatory PUD Area Overlay Attached are two letters from property owners which request specific zoning consideration. Danny' s Construction has requested to remain I-2 and not be placed in the RTD. The Planning Commission approved the request and included it in the recommendation. Lorraine and Don Parrott have requested that both of their parcels be placed in the RTD. The Planning Commission did not include this request in their recommendation. The City Council may discuss the proposed amendments and offer recommended changes at this time. However, zoning ordinances which would implement the plan cannot be adopted until the official appro'v'al On the Concept Plan is received from MN DOT. I spoke to Carl HOffstedt, the Planning Engineer for the Shakopee By-Pass , today, to get a status report on the review. Carl said it will be at least two weeks before they will be responding. The request for review was sent to MN DOT on May 8 , 1986 . - Alternatives : The following are alternative actions the Council may wish to consider: 1. Table the discussion until the MN DOT responds to the Concept Plan. - 2 . Discuss the amendments and preliminarily approve, with final action delayed until the MN DOT approval of the Concept Plan. 3 . Discuss the amendments, preliminarily approve them, direct staff to prepare ordinances for the amendments which are not directly related to the RTD (P.U.D. , definitions, repeals ) and delay final action on the RTD and zoning map amendments until the MN DOT approval of the Concept Plan. 4 . Other Staff Recommendations : Staff recommends alternative #3 for the following reasons : 1. It allows for some final decision to be made regarding various parcels of properties. Land owners will know what is planned for their property. 2 . Staff can begin to prepare ordinances and new application forms , etc. for P.U.D. to avoid a sudden rush when RTD is approved. 3 . The amendment to Section 11. 28 will allow the K. C. Hall to move along with expansion plans. Action Requested: 1. Direct staff to prepare the appropriate ordinances to amend Sections 11. 40 ; 11. 02 , #99; 11. 28, Subd. 3 , 0; 11. 32, Subd. 3 , J; 11. 33 , Subd. 3 J, as per the recommendation of the Planning Commission. 2 . Motion to grant preliminary approval of the proposed amendments to Sections 11. 36; 11. 20 and 11. 21 as per the Planning Commission recommendation, and subject to MN DOT approval of the RTD Concept Plan. Attachments tw K. W. "O"B" O'BRIEN President Danny"S CONSTRUCTION COMPANY i Bus: 612-445.4143 3549 Eagle Creek Blvd. P.O. Box 11 Shakopee, Minn. 55379 June 3 , 1986 City of Shakopee Planning Commission c/o Judi Simac City Planner City of Shakopee 129 East First Avenue Shakopee , MN 55379-1376 Re : Race Track District Development Gentlemen and Ladies : We are taking this opportunity to set forth Danny' s Construction Company ' s position regarding any proposed change to the zoning for the property where Danny' s business currently is located , either by way of inclusion in a Race Track District , or otherwise. While we can appreciate the Planning Commission ' s stated purpose of fostering recreational development in the Shakopee area, we feel that any change in the zoning of the property being used by Danny' s Construction Company will have the effect , as a practical matter , of destroying the value of the improvements that our Company has made in this property. Obviously, such a result threatens the ability of our business to survive, and consequently we will be forced to resist any such action as strenuously as possible . Because the City Council could create a Race Track District without changing Danny' s zoning, the imposition of an adverse impact on Danny' s in creating a Race Tract District certainly violates the principles of fundamental fairness that presumably guide all of our actions . A review of the facts leading up to the present circumstance indicates that the property being used by our Company originally was purchased and developed when the current I2 zoning was in effect . The property next to Danny ' s that was subsequently purchased and developed by Scotland Corporation for the race track is also zoned I2 . It is our understanding that Scotland' s ability to develop the race track results from 'a special use permit received from the Planning Commission . To the best of our knowledge , Danny' s Construction Company is the only active business that would be adversely affected by the creation of a Race Track District to facilitate the development of the property associated with the track, primarily by Scotland Corporation . In the past , the City Council and City of Shakopee Planning Commission June 3 , 1986 Page 2 the Planning Commission have been criticized for taking actions that appear to benefit Scotland Corporation arguably to the detriment of other land owners . Although we trust that the current proposal to change Danny' s Construction Company' s zoning is not another example of such a situation , we do not think the Planning Commission or the City Council appreciate the practical effect that a zoning change would have on our property and our business . At thF last Planning Commission meeting, at least one of the Planning Commission members stated on the record that including Danny' s Construction Company in the Race Track District would not prohibit our Company from building more equipment storage facilities . Mr . Fred Hoysington of the Hoysington Group , Inc . has specifically advised us that the inclusion of Danny' s Construction Company in the Race Track District would prevent our Company from taking any steps that could be characterized as an expansion of our current use , including specifically the construction of additional equipment storage facilities . Our Company has made a substantial monetary investment in the buildings and other facilities located on our property. That expenditure was made in good faith and in reliance on the existing I2 zoning. Any change in our zoning that would preclude our Company from operating its business in the ordinary course will constitute an effective condemnation of our property. As a practical matter, our investment in our property makes economic sense for our Company because of our ability to use the property - for our business . The nature of our investment in the buildings and facilities located on our property is not such that the buildings and facilities could be used by many different kinds of businesses . If the City Council changes our zoning so that we cannot operate except under the uncertain and subjective condition that our Company not expand or intensify our current use of our property, that zoning change will have effectively taken the value of our investment in buildings and other facilities . Furthermore, because our Company is the only operating business being affected by the proposed Race Track District , basic fairness principles suggest that the Planning Commission and the City Council should not attempt to accommodate the interests of Scotland Corporation and other race track entities without attempting to eliminate any associated adverse impact on our Company. In this context , if the City Council fails to allow City of Shakopee Planning Commission ,Tune .2 1986 Page 3 our Company to continue to operate its business free from uncertain and ambiguous restrictions regarding intensification or expansion of our property use , the action of the City Council and the Planning Commission will be subject to criticism on the ground that the zoning change has both the appearance and the effect of taking a substantial portion of the value of our Company ' s property without providing any compensation for that taking. For the reasons set forth above , we feel that we would have no choice but to challenge any change in our current zoning through an appropriate legal proceeding. Naturally, we would like to avoid such an action . We believe that the Planning Commission and the City Council have an adequate basis for not including our Company' s property in the Race Track District and leaving the existing zoning intact . In fact , we feel that there are compelling fairness reasons which support such an action . Therefore , we respectfully request the Planning Commission and the City Council to leave the zoning for Danny' s Construction Company' s property unchanged. Very truly yours , Danny ' s Construction Company, Inc . B y ------------- Gerald A . O ' Brien Vice President GAO/ams ��" •`�'/✓ 'JY�!J' �J 1. 3,G 2 r Preliminary Draft: 5-13-86 Revised: 6-2-86 SECTION 11. 40 PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (PUD) SUBD 1 Purpose. It is the purpose of this Section of the Zoning Chapter to encourage innovation; variety and creativity in site planning and architectural design; to maximize development compat- ibility; to encourage the planning of entire ownerships of land as a unit; to provide for greater efficiency in the use of land, public streets and energy; to protect important natural and cultural landscape features ; to preserve more open space than would be possible without PUD and to provide quality living, working, shopping and recreating environments for Shakopee residents and visitors. It is further the intent of this Section to provide greater development flexibility by permitting variances and the negotiation of development standards and such other provisions as shall be mutually beneficial to the City and the proponent. SUBD 2 Eligibility. PUD may be applied within any district subject to the following: A. Mandatory PUD. Within areas so designated on the official zoning map of the City, the use of PUD shall be mandatory. B. Minimum PUD Size. 1. Optional PUD. The site for which an optional PUD is requested, shall be ten ( 10 ) acres or larger in size, except that PUD may be used for a smaller parcel of land where the total noncontiguous ownership is less than ten ( 10 ) acres provided there is , in the judgement of the Planning Commission, a clear benefit to the City which provides opportunities for needed control or the preservation of openspace and natural features. 2 . Mandatory PUD. No minimum size is required, however, where site ownership exceeds ten ( 10 ) acres, a minimum of ten ( 10 ) acres shall be included within a mandatory PUD. C. Utilities. The project site shall be served by city water and sewer services. Private water service may be allowed subject to City Council approval. D. Control. Land to be incorporated within a PUD shall be under the control of one ( 1) owner or a group of owners and said land shall be capable of being planned as one integral unit. SUBD 3 Uses Permitted. The use of PUD conveys no right to the use of land other than as permitted by the district within which the PUD is applied. Uses permitted shall be those specified for each zoning district. For uses requiring a Conditional Use Permit and subject to the eligibility requirements , the PUD procedure may be used in lieu of the conditional use procedure. SUED 4 Variance Restrictions . Zoning district standards may be negotiated and variances from district requirements granted by the City as part of the PUD process . The following restrictions shall apply to the granting of variances by PUD: A. Fire and Safety. No variances shall be negotiated which in any way violate the fire and safety codes of the City. B. Exterior Streets and Yards . No reduction in yard requirements shall be permitted adjacent to exterior property lines or exterior public streets . C. Interior Streets . No building shall be located less than fifteen ( 15 ) feet from the back of the curb line along interior streets that are to be maintained by the City. D. Off-Street Parking. No variances shall be negotiated for off-street parking except as specifically provided for in Section 11. 05 , Subd. 3 . E. Opensnace. No variances shall be negotiated which will result in less openspace than is required by the District. This includes yard requirements. F. Densitv. Residential densities shall not be increased by more than ten percent ( 100) . SUED 5 PUD Application Requirements A. Ar)nlication and Fees. The PUD process shall be initiated by filing an application and the required application fee with the Administrator not less than twenty eight ( 28 ) days prior to the Planning Commission meeting at which the request will be heard. In addition to a fee fixed and determined by the Council and aaoptea by resolution, the Administrator may request that the proponent deposit UP to $1, 000. 00 forplanning, engineering, administrative and legal expenses incurred by the City for the review and processing of the application, any remainder of which will be refunded to the applicant. B. Plan Requirements . No PUD application shall be accepted by the City unless it is accompanied by a Preliminary De- velopment Plan or a Final Development Plan. The applicant may submit Preliminary and Final Development Plans simul- taneously for consideration by the City. For a mandatory PUD, a building permit shall not be issued until a Final Development Plan has been approved by the City. For an optional PUD, a building permit shall not be issued unless a Final Development Plan has been approved by the City or unless the proposal conforms in all respects to the requirements of the zoning district. SUBD 6 PUD Procedures . A. planning Commission Review, Notice , Public Hearing and Recommendation. The Administrator shall post notice and refer the application to the Planning Commission for review and public hearing. Notice of the hearing shall be published in the official newspaper at least ten ( 10 ) days prior to the hearing. Notice shall also be mailed to all owners of property within 350 feet of the outer boundaries of the PUD. The Planning Commission shall submit its recommendation to the City Council within sixty ( 60 ) days of receipt of the application unless an extension is agreed to in writing by the proponent. If no recommendation is transmitted by the Planning Commission within sixty ( 60 ) days, the City Council may take action without a Planning Commission recommendation. B. City Council Review, Notice, Public Hearing and Action. Upon receiving the Planning Commission' s recommendation or after sixty ( 60 ) days from the receipt of application without a Planning Commission recommendation, the City Council shall consider the application. The City Council shall consider the advice of the Planning Commission and shall approve, disapprove or suggest modifi- cations to the PUD. C. Findings. The City Council shall not approve a PUD unless it finds as follows: 1 . The proposed development is consistent in all respects with the City Comprehensive Plan. 2 . Where . variances are requested, greater compatibility witn surrounding land uses warrants the granting of variances. 3 . The openspace gain warrants the use of PUD to grant variances. 4 . The Final Development Plan is in substantial conformance with the approved Preliminary Development Plan. D. Development Agreement. In the event of a PUD Preliminary or Final Development Plan approval, the City Council shall direct the City Attorney to draft a Development Agreement in a manner so as to allow its filing in the office of the County Recorder, that states the conditions upon which the PUD was approved. The City Council shall pass a resolution approving or denying said agreement. E. Conditions and Records . The City may impose such conditions as it deems necessary as part of the approval of a Preliminary or Final Development Plan. A complete record shall also be maintained for all approved plans , amendments and development agreements . F. Plan Amdnements and Subsequent Final Development Plans . Procedures for Preliminary Development an amendments and subsequent Final Development Plans shall be as prescribed above. Each proposed Final Development Plan phase shall be in substantial conformance with the approved Preliminary Development Plan. G. Lapse and Extension. If within one ( 1 ) year after the approval of a Final Development Plan, a building permit has not been issued and a request in writing for an extension has not been received by the City, said plan shall become null and void. If an extension is petitioned for by the proponent within one ( 1 ) year, the City Council may extend the approval of the Final Development Plan without a public hearing for one ( 1) additional year upon finding that 1 ) a good faith effort has been made to use the PUD, 2 ) there is reasonable expectation that the PUD will be used, and 3 ) the facts upon which the original PUD was issued are essentially unchanged. H. Building Permits. At the time of building permit approval, the building plans shall be reviewed by the Zoning Administrator and Building Official to establish their compliance with the approved Preliminary and Final Development Plans. If they do not comply, the plans shall be reviewed by the Planning Commission and City Council and a public hearing shall be conducted by the Planning Commission, all in accordance with the above established procedures. SUBD 7 Submission Reau4rements . A. Preliminary Development Plan. Fifteen ( 15 ) copies of the following plans and information shall accompany the application fee. Such information shall be stapled together or otherwise attached to provide a neat and organized written and graphic package. 1 . Project Information including site size, ownership, developer, development timing and such other information as will be helpful in understanding the proposal. 2. Area Information including boundary conditions , adjacent ownerships and property lines, surrounding land use, existing transportation, existing zoning, compliance with the City' s Comprehensive Plan, etc. 3 . Existina Site Information including soils , vegetation topography, slope conditions , water features, drainage, wildlife, existing land use, etc. 4 . The Preliminary Development Plan Proposal illustrating the proposed use of land, acreages , proposed densities or building square footages , building height, street and walkway locations , recreation and openspace areas , proposed utilities , landscaping concepts , mass grading, project phasing, anticipated variances, and any other information that will be helpful in understanding and evaluating the proposal. 5 . Final Development Plan Proposal for Phase I if Preliminary and Final Development Plans are to be processed simul- taneously. B. Final Development Plan. Fifteen ( 15 ) copies of the following plans and information shall accompany the application and fee. Such information shall be stapled together or otherwise attached to provide a neat and organized written and graphic package. The Administrator shall have the discretion to waive Project and Area Information and such other information as may be deemed inappropriate for remodeling, building expansion and similar small projects. 1. Project Information, Area Information and Existing Site Information as required for a Preliminary Development Plan. 2 . The Final Development Plan Proposal including the following: a) A Site Plan which illustrates the following: ( 1 ) Location and dimensions of lot, building, driveways, curb cuts and off-street parking spaces and loading areas , ( 2 ) Distances between building and front, side and rear lot lines ; principal building and accessory buildings; principal building and principal buildings on adjacent lots and requested variances , ( 3 ) Site grading including existing topography and proposed grading at two ( 2 ) foot contour intervals , ( 4 ) Location of easements and utilities, ( 5 ) Location and design of signs, ( 6 ) Building heights , and ( 7 ) A tabulation of density, land use intensity, lot coverage, and acreages and percentages of land devoted to building, parking and openspace. b) Preliminary architectural drawings illustrating schematic floor plans, building massing and elevations and exterior materials of construction. c) A landscape plan prepared by or under the supervision of a landscape architect showing material types , common and botanical names , sizes , number and location. d) A lighting plan showing the type , height and location of parking lot, driveway and security lighting. e) A drainage and erosion control plan as appropriate to satisfy the requirements of the watershed district having jurisdiction. f) Any additional written or graphic information as may reasonably be required by the Administrator and applicable sections of the Zoning Chapter, including, but not limited to, the following: ( 1 ) Type of business and proposed number of employees by shift, land use and housing profiles, etc. , ( 2 ) Estimated use per day of the sanitary sewer and public water systems, ( 3 ) Proposed private covenants or other legal instruments , ( 4 ) Phasing and construction schedule, ( 5) Proposed variances and rationale. SECTION 11 . 36 RACE TRACK DISTRICT (RTD) SUBD 1 Purpose . This mixed use district was created specifically for lands within and adjacent to the Canterbury Downs Race Track and it is the intent of the district to create a high quality environment with a high degree of land use compatibility and public street efficiency. It is further the intent of the district to protect existing landscape features , to preserve openspace , to sensitively integrate development with the natural landscape , to approppriately space accesses to the public street system and to require the planning of entire land ownerships as a unit rather than permit piecemeal or scattered development on a lot by lot basis. SUBD 2 Uses Permitted by Planned Unit Development (PUD) . Within the Race Track District, no structures or land shall be used except for one or more of the following uses, which uses shall be permitted only PUD and subject to all stated conditions: A. A Licensed Class A Race 'l rack which includes the following customary accessory uses, activities and facilities: 1. Commercial Recreation. 2 . Employee Housing and Dormitories. 3 . rood and Drink Concessions, Program Sales , etc. 4 . Horse Auctions. 5 . Horse Barns. 6 . Horse Racing. 7 . Horse Training, Grooming and Exercise Facilities. 8 . Maintenance Facilities and Ecrui pment. 9 . Off-street Parking Facilities. 10 . Paramutual Wagering. 11. Private Clubs. 12. Printing and Publishing Facilities for Race Track related purposes. 13 . Race Track Administrative Offices. 14 . Signage. B. Clubs and Lodaes including fraternal organizations, YMCA' s and YWCA' s. C. Minor Commercial Recreation including but not limited to the following: 1 . Bowling Alleys . 2 . Golf Courses . 3 . Miniature Golf Courses . 4 . Roller Skating Rinks. 5 . Water Slides . D. Community Park, Recreation and Ovenspace uses which do not conflict with Race Track operations. E. Essential Services . ` F. Health and Athletic Clubs . G. Horse Care Uses including boarding, training, showing, grooming and veterinary clinic facilities. H. Hotels , Motels and Conference Centers including such customary accessory uses as internalized retail and entertainment facilities provided such uses : 1. Are an integral part of the principal use, 2 . Have no entrance except from within the principal building, 3 . Display all external signage on the ground floor level of the building, and 4 . Occupy not more than 250 of the ground floor area. i . Licht Industrial uses but specifically limited to office- showroom, corporate offices , research and development laboratories, warehousing and light assembly type maintenance. J. Offices: Business Corporate and Professional. K. Public Buildinas. L. Restaurants: Class I and II but excluding fast-food and drive-in restaurants. M. Signage as Permitted by Chapter 4 . 30 . N. Customary Accessory Uses . SUBD 3 Lot Area, Width and Coverage; Building Height, Yard and Access Spacing Reguiremernts . A. Minimum Lot Size: One ( 1 ) Acre . B. Minimum Lot Width: 300 Feet. C. Minimum Yards : 1. Front: 50 Feet. 2 . Side: 25 Feet. 3 . Rear: 30 Feet ( 50 Feet when abutting a residential area) . D. Maximum Hard Surface Lot Coveraae: 800 . E. Maximum Building Height: 35 Feet F. Minimum Access SDacinq: No street or driveway entrance to a major street shall be located closer to another street or driveway on the same side of the street than as follows : 1. County Roads 83 and 16 : Access limited to public and private streets only having a minimum spacing of 600 feet. 2 . Shenandoah Drive and any continuation thereof to and including Secretariat Drive; and Fourth Avenue: 300 Feet. SUBD 4 Performance Standards . A. Acceptable Buildina Materials. 1. All portions or sides of buildings which are visible from a public street or abut residential or institutional uses or zones or places of assembly such as public parks or recreation facilities shall be constructed with durable, low maintenance, quality building materials. 2. The following exterior building materials shall be deemed acceptable for the required portions or sides of the building, if it is incorporated into an architectural design which is consistent with the standards established within the District: face brick, stone, glass, wood architecturally treated concrete, decorative block, cast in place or precast concrete panels. B. Minimum Landscave Reauirements. 1. All plant materials used in the required landscaping of the Race Track District shall comply with the following minimum sizes : Major Deciduous 2 1/2 inch diameter Ornamental 1 1/2 inch diameter Coniferous 6 feet in height Major Shrub 5 gallon 2 . Landscaping shall be required in an amount equal to one ( 1 ) caliper inch per 500 sq. ft. of building gross floor area. Credit may be given for existing quality trees using the same formula. 3 . Landscape plans shall be required and shall be prepared by or under the supervision of a landscape architect. They shall show types , common and botanical names , sizes , number and location of all plant materials . 4 . No building permit shall be issued until the applicant shall file with the Building Official, a performance bond, or other guarantee acceptable to the City, in the amount of one and one half ( 1 1/2 ) times the cost of completing the required landscaping, said cost to be determined by the Administrator. The bond or other guarantee shall cover one calendar year and two complete growing seasons. C. Screeninq. The following must be screened: ( 1) roof-top facilities; ( 2 ) parking areas; and ( 3 ) loading and service areas. One or any combination of the following elements may be used to meet the screening requirements : site design, building design, grade separation, berming, land- scaping, fences, walls or other landscape features. 1 . Roof-top Facilities . a) All roof-top facilities shall be either: ( 1 ) Totally screened from the eye level view from adjacent parcels and existing and planned public streets, ( 2 ) Painted to match or complement, ( 3 ) Incorporated into an architectural design which is aesthetically compatible with the principal structure. b) All materials used to screen roof-top utilities shall be aesthetically compatible with the exterior building materials of the principal structure. 2. Parking Areas. All parking which occurs within the required front yard shall be screened to at least the height of the headlights of the parked vehicles or three feet. The use of screening shall require at least two types of screening materials used proportionately at 600/400. One type of screening material may not be used for more than 600 of the required screening. 3 . Loading and Service Areas . Loading and service areas shall not face directly on a public street. Maneuvering and truck loading areas shall be at least 50o screened, to a height of four feet from the eye level from all roadways. 4 . All required screening shall comply with the performance bonding requirements established for Landscaping. ( SUBD 4 B) . D. Storaqe. The storage of all materials ; semi-finished or finished products; trucks, business vehicles and equipment and waste products shall be within a completely enclosed building. E. Existinq Landscape Features . No tree removal of any kind shall be permitted in the Race Track District until a Final Development Plan has been approved by the City Council. Grading shall be permitted only upon issuance of a Grading or Building Permit by the Building Official. SUBD 5 Variances. Variances may be negotiated within this district except as specifically restricted by Section 11. 40 , SUBD 4 , A through F. Variances shall be allowed for access spacing (SUBD 3 F above) only if the PUD proposal provides for a lesser number of accesses than would be permitted by strict application of this Section. Variances from Section 11. 36 , SUBD 4, A through E shall not be negotiated. SECTION 11 . 02 DEFINITIONS 99 . "Planned Unit Development (PUD) II A process used to acquire approvals for a project or development which requires the preparation of plans as specified herein and, upon approval of said plans by the City, establishes the land use pattern; the density or intensity of use; yard, lot coverage, landscaping, building height and spacing requirements ; the architectural character of the project; pedestrian and vehicular system locations ; outdoor storage; loading, signage, parking and open space requirements and locations and such other requirements as are deemed necessary and appropriate for the area encompassed by the PUD. "Preliminary Development Plan" r A general PUD plan which represents a long range multi- phased development concept for a larger parcel of land. "Final Development Plan" A detailed PUD plan which represents a project that is to be constructed as a single phase in the reasonably near future. OTHER RCOMM-ENDED AMENDMENTS Section 11 . 28 Multi-Family Residential (R-4 ) Amend Subdivision 3 , Conditional Uses , to read as follows: 0. Private clubs and lodges Section 11. 32 Light Industry ( I-1 ) Repeal Section 11 . 32 , Subdivision 3 J as follows : "J. If abutting a State Highway: a) Motels and tourist accomodations b) Automotive service station c) Restaurants and supper clubs d) Drive-in establishments e) Open sales .or rental lot" Section 11 . 33 Heavy Industry ( I-2 ) Repeal Section 11 . 33 , Subdivision 3 J as follows: "J. If abutting a State Highway: 1. Motels and tourist accomodations 2 . Automobile service station 3 . Restaurants and supper clubs 4 . Drive-in establishments 5 . Open sales or rental lots" AA ZL 70 ,11 111 � � _.� � i!� � ��� �■■/— C�V � '�1 ' 1 - 1 1 t' I \ 1 //�L,,� •' 1 •70 M P4 pow Ml 1 � 'i\_,•\`�. �,�n.•.:'e! :^imp T�• �i t"t% � ' i, I 1 ' r -1 :t L'J `� •bio � I a a � ' C�'• .Q l� � T � � 7 �.,.f� ^ l •�� 111 i t t; CDL I _ rn - I �i ----------------- A It ' � Tom•/� YW�• ` j ` 71 It _ �_... �„• .;tom..-;,.�1 — = : Ln / 'FS � E p I 4 R ' l ly " �• \ tg %G,E 6/13/86 revized 6/17/86 POSITION STATEMENT OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE RE: The Metropolitan Development and Investment Framework M Chair, I am Eldon Reinke, Mayor of the City of Shakopee. I am here this evening as a representative of the residents, businesses, employers and City Council to express our comments and concerns regarding the MDIF. Generally the City of Shakopee supports the purpose and goals of the MDIF. We support planning for orderly growth and the concept of managing regional resources. However, we feel our growth and economic contribution to the region as a whole has not been recognized in the MDIF. We don' t believe infrastructure investments are being planned to maintain and support our existing development. Although we are not here to request major changes in the document, there are 3 issues which we would like to bring to your attention: 1. Transportation Although a slowdown in population growth is expected as the baby boom generation ages, increases in the number of households and employment will occur. The household and population increase will create an increase in the number of trips generated. Demand for highway facilities will continue to increase through the year 2000. The text of the MDIF does not adequately explain the "Metropolitan Highway System Capacity Constraints" illustra- tion. Specifically, there is no acknowledgement of the constraints of the County Road 18 Bridge nor its improvement. This transportation link must be constructed to support the development that has occurred within the confines of the existing Comprehensive Plan. What other bridge in the Metro Area carries 12, 000 cars per day and is flooded 65 days per year. Shakopee has made financial commitments to support transportation improvements within our community, including $2. 9 million for the T.H. 101 By-Pass and the Hwy 169 Bridge leading into Shakopee, and short term funding for capacity improvements for the present CR #18 leading to the bridge. In addition, we have contributed $10,000 to the Scott County Transportation Coalition whose purpose is to preserve, maintain and improve the Scott County highway network so that the economic vitality of this area can be sustained. We are a local government that is making investments to support regional highway systems. 2. Shakopee is a Developing Area The City of Shakopee has grown to fulfill the characteristics described for a Developing Area. The Geographic Policy Area Map does not accurately illustrate Shakopee ' s proximity to the existing MUSA line. Based upon revised five year land use supply figures, which Met Council staff has tentatively approved, the Shakopee Year 2000 Sewer Service Area abuts Savage to the east. We are serviced by the Metropolitan Waste Control Commission' s Blue Lake Water Treatment Plant, which services many cities identified as Developing Areas. We have scheduled phased expansions of urban services and our residents and employers are dependent upon services, facilities and systems located within the MUSA. To the north, there is no general rural use area existing between the MUSA and Shakopee. In fact, the white area which appears on the map between Shakopee and Eden Prairie is the Minnesota Valley National Wildlife Refuge. The Minnesota Valley Trail, which runs form LeSeuer to Fort Snelling, bisects the developing areas of Shakopee, Savage, Burnsville and Eagan from the fully developed areas to the north. In summary, it appears that the Met Council is willing to reconsider geographic policy areas as evidenced by the recent redesignation of the City of Anoka from a Free Standing Growth Center to a Developing Area. We are simply requesting the same redesignation. 3 . Regional Business Concentrations The economic growth which has occurred in our area is changing the character and function of Shakopee. The grain industry which brings 4,000 trucks per day through downtown Shakopee; the entertainment industry which brings 3 .7 million tourists each year to Canterbury Downs, ValleyFair, Renaissance Festival, Little Six Bingo, Murphy' s Landing and Raceway Park; our 1200 acre fully serviced industrial park; the County Seat and Regional Hospital all contribute to the increasing economic significance of Shakopee. We feel that we are more "regional" in scope than the defined Regional Business Concentrations in the MDIF. The MDIF defines a Regional Business Concentration (RBC) as an area of contiguous business development with employment of at least 10 ,000 persons and/or (retail sales) of at least $100 million. The use of retail trade narrows the characteristic of business concentration. We believe an RBC should include all types of business - industrial, commercial, retail and recreational which contribute to the regional and state economy and require adequate transportation linkage to the balance of the Metro Area. Transportation - the key element - is the number of trips generated by the RBC. A trip is generated by a shopper going to Southdale to purchase a product, as well as by a racing patron traveling to Canterbury Downs to purchase admission, parking, food and to place a bet. The major businesses in Shakopee are within 1. 5 miles of the central business district. We have two major tourist/recreation centers, a large grain terminal and an industrial park with total sales of over $100 million, therefore we clearly qualify as an RBC! ! The MDIF states that the Council will continue to study major business locations in the region to look at other potential criteria for defining the concentrations. To ensure that the MDIF recognizes diverse business concentrations like Shakopee we suggest that the definition of business concentration be amended to expand "retail" sales to include consumer transactions, including but not limited to admission charges, parking fees and other related transactions. In summary, M Chair, We believe that: 1) The investment priorities for tansportation must be re-evaluated, 2) That Geographic Policy Areas map must be amended to illustrate Shakopee as a Developing Area, and 3 ) The definition for Regional Business Concentrations must be revised to reflect a consumer-oriented definition of retail sales, thus qualifing Shakopee as a RBC. We are more than willing to meet with the Metropolitan Council and staff to further clarify our position and assist in amending the MDIF. Thank you for the opportunity to speak to you this evening. I will stand for any questions. MEMO TO: Shakopee Planning Commission Industrial Commercial Commission FROM: Judi Simac, City Planner RE: Metropolitan Development & Investment Framework DATE: June 13 , 1986 Please find attached a draft of the Position Statement of the City of Shakopee on the Metropolitan Development and Investment Framework (MDIF) , published by the Metropolitan Council. The City Council will be reviewing the draft at the June 17, 1986 meeting, at which time comments will be received. A formal presentation will be made by Mayor Reinke at a public meeting to be held by the Metropolitan Council at the Eden Prairie School Administration Building on Wednesday, June 25th at 7 : 00 P.M. Attachment tw DRAFT POSITION STATEMENT OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE RE: The Metropolitan Development and Investment Framework M_ Chair, I am Eldon Reinke, Mayor of the City of Shakopee. I am here this evening as a representative of the residents , businesses , employers and City Council to express our comments and concerns regarding the MDIF. Generally the City of Shakopee supports the purpose and goals of the MDIF. We support planning for orderly growth and the concept of managing regional resources. However, we feel our growth and economic contribution to the region as a whole is not being recognized in this document, nor are investments in our infrastructure being planned to maintain and support our existing development. There are 3 major issues which we would like to bring to vour attention: 1. Transportation Although a slowdown in population growth is expected as the baby boom generation ages, increases in the number of households and employment will occur. The household and population increase will create an increase in the number of trips generated. Demand for highway facilities will continue to increase through the year 2000 . The text of the MDIF does not adequately explain the "Metropolitan Highway System Capacity Constraints" illustra- tion. Specifically, there is no acknowledgement of the constraints of the County Road 18 Bridge nor its improvement. This transportation link must be constructed to support the development that has occurred within the confines of the existing Comprehensive Plan. What other bridge in the Metro Area carries 12 ,000 cars per day and is flooded 65 days per year. Shakopee has made financial commitments to support transportation improvements within our community, including 2. 9 million for the T.H. 101 By-Pass and the Hwy 169 Bridge leading into Shakopee, and short term funding for capacity improvements for the present CR #18 leading to the bridge. In addition, we have contributed $10, 000 to the Scott County Transportation Coalition whose purpose is to preserve, maintain and improve the Scott County highway network so that the economic vitality of this area can be sustained. We are a local government that is making investments to support regional highway systems. 2 . Shakopee is a Developing Area The City of Shakopee has grown to fulfill the character- istics described for a Developing Area . The Geographic Policy Area Map does not accurately illustrate Shakopee ' s proximity to the existing MUSA line. Based upon revised five year land use supply figures , which Met Council staff has tentatively approved, the Shakopee Year 2000 Sewer Service Area abuts Savage to the east and Eden Prairie to the north. There is no general rural use area existing between the MUSA and Shakopee. We are tied into the Blue Lake Water Treatment Plant, a part of the Metro Sewer System. We have planned, staged expansions proposed for extending services and our residents and employers are dependent upon services, facilities and systems located within the MUSA. 3 . Regional Business Concentrations The economic growth which has occurred in our area is changing the character and function of Shakopee. The grain industry which brings 4 , 000 trucks per day through downtown Shakopee; the entertainment industry which brings 3 . 7 million tourists each year to Canterbury Downs , ValleyFair, Renaissance Festival, Little Six Bingo, Murphy' s Landing and Raceway Park; our 1200 acre fully serviced industrial park; the County Seat and Regional Hospital all contribute to the increasing economic significance of Shakopee. We feel that we are more "regional" in scope than the defined Regional Business Concentrations in the MDIF. The MDIF defines a Regional Business Concentration. (RBC) as an area of contiguous business development with employment of at least 10 , 000 persons and/or ( retail sales ) cf at least 5100 million. The use of retail trade narrows the characteristic of business concentration. We believe an RBC should include all types cf business - industrial, commercial, retail and recreational which contribute to the regional and state economy and require adequate transpor- tation linkage to the balance of the Metro Area. The major i businesses in Shakopee are within 1. 5 miles of the central business district. We have two major tourist/recreation centers, a large grain terminal and an industrial park with total sales of over $100 million, therefore we clearly qualify as an RBC! ! To ensure that the MDIF recognizes diverse business concentrations like Shakopee we suggest that the definition of business concentration be amended to expand "retail" sales to include consumer transactions , including but not limited to admission charges, parking fees and other related transactions. In summary, M_ Chair, We believe that: 1) The investment priorities for transportation must be re-evaluated, 2 ) The Geographic Policy Areas map must be amended to illustrate Shakopee as a Developing Area; 3 ) The definition for Regional Business Concentrations must be revised to reflect a consumer-oriented definition of retail sales , thus qualifing Shakopee as a RBC. We are more than willing to meet with the Metropolitan Council and staff to further clarify our position and assist in amending the MDIF. Thank you for the opportunity to speak to you this evening. I will stand for any questions. 1 1 MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator FROM: Barry A. Stock, Administrative Aide RE: City Hall Office Relocations DATE: June 12 , 1986 Introduction- At the direction of City Council, staff has investigated the cost implications of moving the City Council Chambers to a facility outside of City Hall. Staff has also investigated the projected cost of constructing offices in the existing Council Chambers. Background: On June 10 , 1986 the City Council reviewed several alternatives in relocation of the offices within City Hall. It was at that time that the Council recommended staff to proceed in investigating alternative sites to hold City Council meetings . Staff has been in contact with the following institutions or agencies: Shakopee School District, Citizens State Bank, Shakopee Public Utilities and First National Bank. The school district has informed staff that at the present time their school board meeting room is booked for three nights a week. While classroom space maybe available, they were hesitant to recommend such an alternative due to the fact one room could not be guaranteed for our continued use. Both of the banks contacted do have adequate meeting room space. However, First National Bank has their room reserved and would be unable to accomodate our needs. Citizens State Bank has indicated that their facility could be made available at a annual cost of $6 , 000 . The City would also be responsible for carrying liability insurance and property insurance on any ecuipment left in the building. Our existing policy would increase approximately $200 annually under the scenario. The Shakopee Public Utilities building does have adequate meeting room space. This building along with the others is handicapped accessible. It is my understanding that in the past, City Council meetings have been held in this facility. Mr. Lou VanHout, Utilities Superintendent has been contacted with our proposal of relocating our City Council meetings to this facility. Mr. VanHout did identify one problem with using the utilities meeting room. That is, at this time there is no barrier that would discourage the public from roaming around the utility offices prior to their entrance in to the meeting room. Staff beliveves this situation could be corrected using an expanding fence for example. The Utilities building would also allow us to set up the Council Chambers for a potential long term stay. Our new sound system could be easily moved to the Utilities building. It is also possible that we could set up the existing Council table in the Utilities building. Finally, moving the Council Chambers to 'the Utilities building would provide access to a copy machine during meeting and access to on a continuing basis during ostorage space that we could use The City Building Inspector has informed me that remodeling the existing Council Chambers into Offices additional work on the first floor could be easilympleting accomplissome hed for approximately $7 , 600 . budget breakdown. ) The (See attachment 41 Table upstairs One for floor could be remodeled for underOf51City Hall and the first Plan would include bare necessities. The remodeling atachment #1 Two) With the proposed improvements staff(See believeTable the upstairs would provide an effective work area. In fact, moving upstairs would aggravate work conditions that are already undesirable for most departments. • In light of the fact that the Utilities Munici owned, staff would recommend that we utilizeding thissstructurelly for our Council Chambers until such time that a new city hall can be completed. Alternatives: 1• Relocate the City Council Chambers to the Shakopee Public Utilities meeting room and authorize the appropriate City Officials to obtain Proposals for remodeling the existing council chambers for city $7600 . Offices at a cost not to exceed 2 • for remodeling the appropriate City officials to obtain proposals for remodeling the second floor of the existing city hall into offices at a cost not to exceed $10, 000 . 3 . Authorize the appropriate City °ff on the remodelingof t ` " •�cials to take proposals City offices at a "1e to council chambers into ,. cosnot to exceed $7, 600 and existing council chambers move the Citizens State Bank at tO e-they First National Bank an approximate cost of $6000 annually. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends alternative ttl. Action Recrues ted: Move to authorize the appropriatefr to �a Proposals on the remodelingC-tY °--icials y k at a total cost not to exceed $7, 600e existing Council Chambers Fund) and move the Council Chamber (from the Capital Improvement Bui lidng public meeting room. s to the Shakopee Public Utilities tw Attachment #1 Table One Remodeling Existing Council Chambers 1. Walls/tape/paint/doors - $5000 2 . Electrical - $ 800 3 . Window - $ 800 4 . Contingencies - $1000 Total $7 , 600 Table Two Remodeling Upstairs of City Hall 1. Walls/tape/paint/doors - $3500 2 . Wiring and lights - $3000 3 . Telephone/computer - $ 800 4 . Drop Ceiling - $1800 S . Contingencies - $ 900 Total $10, 000 MEMO TO: Mayor, Councilmembers FROM: Tom Brownell, Chief of Police RE: Parttime/Reserve/CSO Officers DATE: June 9 , 1986 INTRODUCTION• Council ' s request for information regarding the use of parttime, reserve or community service officers for the traffic, assisting pedestrians and issuin purpose of directing g parking citations. BACKGROUND: During 1985, the department spent approximately $3 , 000 directing traffic at First and Holmes. To date the expenditure for 1986 has been $1 , 140 . During 1985-86 Canterbury Downs and the Renaissance paid considerably more for the service, as the C carry the complete cost. ity did not POSITION DEFIIvTTIONS AND RE UIREMENTS : Peace Officer - has full powers of arrest. year tain law enforcement degree, complete a skillsMustocourse a two a background examination, licensing examination physicalPass and Psychological examination, physical strength and agility test, oral and written examination and obtain annual continuing education credits to maintain license. Parttime Peace Officer - has the and authority to carr firearm, same full ll powers of arrest They are allowed to work nomore than ans a uaverage ofetwentace f hour per week. Requirements for employment - y s 1• Pass felony background checks . 2. Physical examination. 3 . Psychological examination. 4 . Pass firearms training course. 5 • Successfully complete first-aid course. . 6 • Pass parttime peace officer examination. Reserve Officer - services are used at special events such as paradesclericafor traffic control, crowd control, administrative assistance. Has no authority to enforce im or laws . No training required b general criminal Position is generally comprised of volunteerecitizensof ewhoareceive un compensation. Will probably not be available during weekdays unless unemployed. Community Service Officer t law enforcemenagencies toemploFed on a fulltime basis by have no law enforcement authoritpe-form service related duties , y, no training or hiring requirements by State of Minnesota. CSO program which Attached is a copy of area. 1s similar to other departments Eden Prairie in the metro Cost of Parttime - Reserve - CSO Positions . Parttime Position 1 • Uniform 2 . Portable Radio $ 800. 00 3 • Psychological Exam $ 1, 400 . 00 4 . Physical Exam $ 300. 00 5 . Firearms Training $ 100. 00 6 . First Aid Training $ 200. 00 7. Liability Insurane 40 hrs $ 150. 00 8 . Work Comp Ins $ 500. 00 9 • PERA $ 320. 00 10. FICA $ 340. 00 11 . Medicare $ 568 . 00 Average pay $8 . 00/hour - $ 100 . 00 1 000 hr Max. of ' s Per year 8 8 , 000 00 Total Cost $12,778. 00 Would require transportation. Reserve Officer I . Traffic Training 2 . Uniform $ 200. 00 400 . 00 Cost $ 600 . 00 Communit Serv; t • ce Officer 1 . Work 2, 080 hrs per year 2• Employer Benefits 813 , 293 . 00 3 • Uniform $ 3 , 325. 00 4 . Portable Radio $ 800. 00 5 . Physical Exam $ 1, 400. 00 6 . First Aid Training $ 100. 00 7. Transportation depending on $ 150 . 00 job description Requires transportation Cost T19, 068. 00 All of the options will require assigning an officer t and provide training. o supervise An important factor a to consider is the more autho�it position the greater the liability r Of Litigation. y to the City as ayresult TTB:cah j MEMO TO: Mayor, Councilmembers FROM: Tom Brownell, Chief of Police RE: Parttime/Reserve/CSO Officers DATE: June 9 , 1986 INTRODUCTION: Council ' s request for information regarding the use of parttime, reserve or community service officers for the purpose of directing traffic, assisting pedestrians and issuing parking citations. BACKGROUND: During 1985 , the department spent approximately $3 , 000 directing traffic at First and Holmes. To date the expenditure for 1986 has been $1 , 140 . During 1985-86 Canterbury Downs and the Renaissance paid considerably more for the service, as the City did not carry the complete cost. POSITION DEFINTIONS AND REQUIREMENTS: Peace Officer - has full powers of arrest. Must obtain a two year law enforcement degree, complete a skills course, pass a background examination, licensing examination, physical and psychological examination, physical strength and agility test, oral and written examination and obtain annual continuing education credits to maintain license. Parttime Peace Officer - has the same full powers of arrest and authority to carry a firearm, as a full time peace officer. They are allowed to work no more than an average of twenty hours per week. Requirements for employment - 1 . Pass felony background checks. 2. Physical examination. 3 . Psychological examination. 4 . Pass firearms training course. 5 . Successfully complete first-aid course. 6 . Pass parttime peace officer examination. Reserve Officer - services are used at special events such as parades for traffic control, crowd control, administrative or clerical assistance. Has no authority to enforce general criminal laws. No training required by the State of Minnesota. This position is generally comprised of volunteer citizens who receive no compensation. Will probably not be available during weekdays unless unemployed. Community Service Officer - employed on a fulltime basis by law enforcement agencies to perform service related duties , have no law enforcement authority, no training or hiring requirements 1985 CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE EMP_ BEr�—EF IT P p 4 Sick, Leave Benefit Sick leave benefits are accrued one day per month (I2 days per year from Of full time employment to a maximum of one hundred days (800 hours q each ) om the date year any excess over the 800 hour accumulation will be split 506 to vacation and 506 to extended illness bank. ank ) t the end of the 800 hour accumulation. A 30-dayimmediateabanoklisbavailablee used tfr the depletion on of illness only. Extended illness banks are for employee illness onloranxt may o used upon approval by the City Manager. .Y d may only be V2Cin, Benefit--a=—_at 1 i t Accreal Two weeks ( 10 days) vacation through 5 years. Three weeks (15 days) vacation after 5 Four weeks (20 days) vacation after 15 years. years and thereafter. Vacations are not usually granted during the first six months of em One 1 cloyment. ( ) day additional to be taken as 4 hours on Christmas Eve and 4 hours Friday. This is added as one extra day to each employee's vacation balance rs on Good Payroll in January so each employee will use vacation time when theecon the Closes early on these days. Employees who must work at these times may extra day as usual vacation time. If Christmas Eve falls on a Saturdayn hall the city hall will not close early on Friday of that weekend. Employee use this those 4 hours to use as regular vacation time. or Sunday s will vain Paid Holiday_ Benefit New Year'sDay President' January 1st S Day Memorial Day 3rd Monday in February Last Monday in May Independence Day Labor Day July 4th Columbus Day 1st Monday in September Veterans Day 2nd Monday in October Thanksgiving Day November 11 Christmas Day 4th Thursday in November December 25th Two floating holidays: (This is added to the vacation balance on the first payroll If January 1, July 4, November 11, or December 25 fall on Saturday, then ,,ill be on Friday; and if it falls on Sunday, the holiday will be on Mondthe ay. holiday etirement Ben__ efit y 7e City contributes an amount equal .E.R.A. Basic Fund retirement. For em lo0'eP of the employee ' s total wage into the �curity retirement programs, the contribution will bewith mbined equal toEgRp25�aond Social :ges into P.E.R.A. ,' plus 7.05% of tine first 139,600 e City contributes 126 into P.E.R.A. for Police. of wages into Social Security. Health Insurance Benefit The employee is offered a choice of 3 different health plans (PHP, Group Health, and MedCenters Health. ) The City pays a maximum of 5153.35 per month towards the premium cost for employee dependent coverage, with the remainder withheld from the employee through payroll deduction. Employee single coverage is paid in full by the City. Life Insurance Benefit The City pays the premium of $7,500 term life insurance and accidental death or dismemberment insurance for each employee. Additional life insurance may be purchased by employees with premiums based on age and salary. Severence Employees who leave the City in good standing shall receive severence payment, in addition to accrued vacation leave, as follows: 22% unused sick leave after 5 years 25% N6 years 28% " " 7 years 31% " " ' 8 years 34% 9 years 37% " 10 years 40% " " 11 years 43% " " 12 years 46% " ' ' 13 years 49% ' 14 years 52% " 15 years Any extended illnes bank accumulated over the 800 hour sick leave maximum will not be used in the computation of severance pay. Deferred Compensation The employee is offered a choice of four deferred coripensation-prograrrs (Great West Life Assurance Co., Mtn State Retirement System, Minnesota Mutual , and Aetna Life Insurance & Annuity Co. ) These voluntary programs offer the employee an opportunity to invest for the future through salary deferral, choices of investment methods, and tax advantages on those investments. Employee Education The City will reimburse 100% of the employee expenses for tuition fees and books required for job-related educational courses upon completion of the course with a grade "Cu or better. Books and equipment paid for by the City shall remain the City's property. All courses to be approved by Department Head and City Manager. Dental Reimbursement Proaram The City will reimburse dental expenses incurred during 1985 by a family unit (employees and the employees' dependents) subject to the following limitations: A. Eighty per cent (K%) of the first 5200 in expenses will be reimbursed by the City usually within 30 days after receint of cl?imc. 1986 .CSO SALARY STEMS STEP I - 13,293 STEP 2 - 14,242 STEP 3 - 15,191 STEP 4 - 16,141 STEP 5 - 17,090 STEP 6 - 18,039 STEP 7 - 18,988 STEP 8 - 19,938 E. Answering telephones in absence of secretary. F, Assist in maintaining up-to-date files. 0. Filing Operation Identification inventory returns. `i,. ns i„.�iDn, and picking up materials at Bloomington Court, R:^hfield 6ispstch, Bureau of Criminal Apprehension, Governor's Crime C omrission, City Hall. 1. Writing supplemental reports when necessary. j. Assisting officers in patrol work. K. Calibration of speedometers on squad cars. L. Taking proper care of any vehicle assigned and reporting damage or mechanical malfunction. K. Occasional vehicle cleanliness such as washing and vacuuming out. H. All other duties assigned by supervisory personnel. V. Assist regular patrol officers with non-escalating calls for service including but not limited toParc=ime repong rts. .medical emergencies, fire calls, and property � R, Maintain inventory of emergency supplies in all police t vehicles. Q. Coordinated maintenance of police vehicles. f 307.05 EXAMS DF PERr_'pRMANCE CRITERIA: I A. Articulate nature. @. Above-average communicative abilities. ' C. Service-oriented attitude. D. Ability to follow written and oral instructions. [. Ability to maintain composure under pressure. f. Courteous and ac person and ointhe dealing telephone.hother employees and the pub EOCN PRAIRIE DCPARThCNT Dr" t 1 PUELIC SAFETY DATE NUNBEP., PONCE DI�'ISIa MANUAL 07/01/65 307.0 TITLE: COMMJN'ITY SERVICE DFFICER I DISTRIBUTICh RESCINDS ALL PERSa L PURPOSE: The purpose of this order is to define the position and the activities of Community Service Officers Police Division, in the operations of the 307.01 ACC OUN''TAS1LITY: Community Service Officers are responsible to the Operations Lieutenant and receive work direction from shift supervisors. 307.02 U!�IFORMS: The uniform of Community Service Officers is identical to that of a sworn officer except that no firearm is worn. Badges and patches signify "Community Service 0fflcer". The uniform items, except footwear, will be issued by the Division for use by Community Service Officers. 307.03 PERFORMA!CE G.JI cc; DELIN_.. iden`ly dealingthemselves with the public, Community Service Officers shall are sworn personnel.Thees such and not give tt)e impression that they C ommunity Service Officers a.^ regulations (G.0. 103.0) of e subject to all rules and should be familiar with the contentsPoflthe manual. Manual and Upon observing a crime or incident in progress, C Officers are to inform the communications operace tor and waitommunity Service responding officer(s). They are to take no enforcement action. Community Service Officers are not authorized to make traffic stops unless so authorized by the shift does not supervisor on duty. This apply to occupied stalled motorists. 307.04 MAJOR AREAS OF A`COUk7*1, ITY: A• Enrolling residents in Operation Identification, 8• Performing security surveys for residents. C. Assisting officers in P.I.N. parties (neighborhood meetings to enroll residents in Operation Identification). D. Answering crime prevention inquiries at the Public Safety Department. -151- Al - MEMO TO: Mayor, Councilmembers ( I � FROM: Tom Brownell, Chief of Police RE: Computer Software Purchase DATE: June 11 , 1986 INTRODUCTION• The Police Department has purchased IBM computer hardware and has been reviewing compatible software. BACKGROUND• The review process has included the following elements, cost, compatibility with the departments record systems and the ability of the software to interface with the State computer for operating and .reporting purposes. The cost ranges from $7 , 500 to $20, 000 . AmeriData Systems has been authorized by the State for an interface so that single entry into department and State are accomplished. The AmeriData Company has submitted a proposal, whereby they would provide eight software modules at a cost of $1 ,500, which is the complete records management system normally costing $12, 000. The Police Department would agree to cooperate and assist P.meriDate in refining their initial complaint report module, which has been enhanced beyond the requirements of departments our size. Annual update and telephone support fees are standard purchases with software systems. The proposal has been presented and approved by the computer committee. This purchase is to be funded from money in our current operating budget. RECOMMENDATION: Purchase a records management system from AmeriData Company at a cost of $1, 500, as per written proposal. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Authorize staff to purchase a records management system from AmeriData Company at a cost of $1, 500, as per written proposal. TB:cah 0 700E Northland Drive li �1L�L/1L �T- Minneapolis, � nne�o�a 55428 Phone (612) 536-6000 Sist�.rlsL�r: June 4 , 1986 Mr. Tom Brownell City of Shakopee 129 E. 1st Avenue Shakopee, MN 55379 Dear Mr. Brownell: I am pleased to provide you with the following proposal for an automated Records Management System. This proposal resulted from a number of meetings with Denny Anderson to determine system requirements for the City of Shakopee Police Department. The Records Management System includes the modules listed below: Initial Complaint Report Calls for Service Incident Name Juvenile Arrest Offense Property/Vehicle Utilities AmeriData plans to use the City of Shakopee as a test site for the ICR Module. For your coopration and assistance the city will receive a special price of $1 ,500 for the Record Management System. In addition to the cost for the software other associated costs are listed below Annual Update Fee $600.00 Telephone Support Fee: 5 Hours $200.00 10 Hours 350.00 20 Hours 650.00 Mr. Tom Brownell City of Shakopee June 4 , 1986 Page Two Mr. Brownell , I've enclosed a Software Usage Agreement, an Annual Update Agreement and a Telephone Support Agreement for your review. Should you have any questions regarding them, please do not hesitate to call me or Bill Prairie your Account Manager. Cordially, Thomas B. St. Peter National Sales Manager TSP/bp Enclosure City of Shakopee POLICE DEPARTMENT 476 South Gorman Street SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA 55379 Tel. 445.6666 TO: Mayor, Council Members FROM: Tom Brownell , Chief of Police RE: Hiring Police Patrol Officer DATE: June 9, 1986 INTRODUCTION Council authorized the hiring of one additional Police Patrol Officer during the 1986 budgeting process. BACKGROUND The Shakopee Civil Service Commission has completed the required examination process upon receipt of applications from the Minnesota Police Recruitment System. The recommended applicant placed first in the process. RECOMMENDATION Hire Brian P. Clark, as a probationary Police Patrol Officer starting July 1, 1986, at step one of the Police Patrol pay rate of $22,667. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED Hire Brian P. Clark, as a probationary Police Patrol Officer starting July 1, 1986, at step one of the Police Patrol pay rate of 522,667. C-7 r-7 �, ( i f MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator FROM: Ken Ashfeld, City Engineer SUBJECT: TH 101 Frontage Road (C. R. 83 to Sheily Road) DATE: June 10, 1986 INTRODUCTION: At the April 1, 1986 meeting, City Council directed me to review the possibility of reintiating the subject project. BACKGROUND: Attached is a November 2, 1964 memo addressing the status of the project, project cost, appraised benefit to abutting proper- ties, and scope of Mn/DOT funding. A May 9, 1986 letter from the District State Aid Engineer indicates the following guide- lines must be met to si_ipport a candidate cooperative project such as the subject project Mn/DOT' s share in the cost is less than half of the cost of the total project. Mn/DOT' s share is less than $200, 000. 00 (approximately) . That letter seems to support the information presented in the November 2, 1984 memo. I spoke with the State Aid Engineer regarding this project and he was less than enthusiastic about the project since the pro- posed Mn/DDT cost was so high. He did indicate that Mn/DOT has participated in projects in excess of the $200, 000. 00 guide- line, but as proposed, the project does riot appear cost effective based upon the escalated project cost . One other issue that was still unresolved in 1984 was the direct access to the school bus sales. The City was attempting to implement the project, yet keep this access open. Mn/DOT will riot fund this project under this condition. A1terriat ives: 1. Do Nothing. 2. Hold a public hearing to determine if the support for this project from abutting property owners has changed since the opening of the race track. TH101 Frontage Road June 10, 198E Page RECOMMENDATION : Rased upon the information I have, as proposed, the project benefit does riot appear to support the project cost. Without more support for the project from the abutting property owners and Mn/DDT, it is my opinion that the City has more pressing projects to pursue yielding a higher benefit from the cost. Therefore, I recommend Alternative 1. RE12UESTED ACTION : Move that no further consideration be given at this time to the construction of a frontage road immediately South of Hwy 101 between CR-83 and. Sheily Road. KA/pmp FRONTRD C__S TY OF E3 KCDPa. INCORPORATED 1870 ENGINEEP.ING DEPARTN'ENT +� 1.20, E. 1st. Avenue - Shakopee, lmneso a 5537 -1376 (612) 495-3550 MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administr t FROM: H. R. Spurrier-, City Engineer SUBJECT : Trunk Highway 101 Frontage Road DATE: November 2, 1984 \ INTRODUCTION: On August 28, 1984 I learned that the Minnesota Department of Transportation would fund a maximum $180, 000. 00 of the above referenced project. The total esti mated cost of the project at that point was $838, 050. 00. The appraised benefit of the project was 598, 2Z5. 00. That left an unfunded liability of $559, 815. 00 that would have to be funded out of the City' s General Fund, since no other fund, grant, or other source was available. In view of the fact that the project could not be funded, I recommended that City Council immediately halt all work on this project. At this point the City has invested T-64, 724. 45 in consulting fees and staff expense, those fees are as follows: City Staff Time 510, 516. 50 Suburban Engineering 55.?,, 679. 47 .Other Expenses $ 52B. 48 The staff time has already been funded by the General Fund and for the most part been absorbed by the Engineering Depart— ment. The balance of the cost is being funded by the Capital Improvement Fund and is included in the 19B5 Budget approved by City Council. There is no mechanism under the Chapter 429 process by which the City can recover its study cost. The only guarantee the City has in funding projects such as this is to keep closer account of grant funding such as was proposed for this project or be certain that the benefit equals or exceeds the estimated cost of the project. In the future the City should be extremely cautious about projects where the appraised benefit depends heavily on external grants. There is no action requested since the Budget for 19B5 has been approved and it funds the non assessable liability incurred by this pro, ect.HRS/pmp r MEMO TO: Jahn K. Andersen, City Administrator City Council ?� FROM: Ken Ashfeld, City Engineer j _� SUBJECT: T. H. 169/101 Alternative Review and Selection DATE: June 10, 1986 In December, 1985, City Council appointed an Alternative Selec- tion Committee (ASC) to systematically review all suggested alignment alternatives for the T. H. 169/101 Minnesota River crossing. The objective of the ASC was to reduce the number of alternatives to a few ; specifically those that satisfied established criteria. Q+f sahed :s the Tu V S iW Ai t2"f nat y, RW44. 'a'vS ared scici�ii f document which is the result of the workings of the ASC. This document identifies the process by which all alternatives were reviewed and the rationale of the selection of the remaining alternatives that will be studied further in the Environmental Assessment. If you have any questions concerning this report, do not hesitate to contact me. KA/pmp ASC TH 169/101 ALTERNATIVE REVIEW AND SELECTION JUNE 1986 Prepared by: Barton-Aschman Associates, Inc. TABLE OF CONTENTS Paoe I. INTRODUCTION 1 Purpose of Report 1 Organizational Structure 1 Report Outline 2 II. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 3 III. IDENTIFICATION OF ALTERNATIVES 4 Project History 4 Joint Partnership Considerations 4 Other Considerations 4 Alternative Recommendations 4 IV. SELECTION PROCESS 8 Development of Criteria 8 Rating Process 8 Recommendations of Participating Agencies 17 V. ISSUES AND CONCERNS 18 VI. CONCLUSIONS 20 LIST OF FIGURES Number Title Page Location Map Fig. 1 Location Alternatives 5 Fig. 2-6 Final Alternatives 11-15 LIST OF TABLES Table 1 Criteria and Measures 9 Table 2 Rating Results 16 Table 3 Preliminary Environmental Analysis Impact Summary 19 � 1 G s s� i I i U.S.2 Bemidji Hibbing Grand Rapids �o Duluth US 70 Brainerd In a St.Clou _ 1 U.S. 12 Wamar MINNEAPOLIS / ST. PAUL 7 COUNTY METRO AREA :: ul3.212 ..::. .. ... :. :... ... 1 ................... ..................................... ........ ... �r•'�r'..'.'�I t L •S E, 2 AAaJaca Rochester h Albert Lea Site Location Barton-kschman /associates, Inc. I. INTRODUCTION Purpose of Report This report documents the process by which alternatives were selected for study in the Environmental Assessment (EA) and the Project Path Report (PPR). It also identifies those issues which are to receive special attention and the agency coordination required to complete the process. The TH 169 project has as its northerly terminus either a geometric or profile tieback to the in-place roadway immediately north of the Minnesota River (depending upon a new or rehabilitated Minnesota River bridge crossing). On the south end, the project has an east and west geometric connection to the in-place First Avenue trunk highway alignment after a short (four to five block) northerly bypass of downtown Shakopee. The project's basic objectives are: to eliminate the deficiencies of the existing TH 169 Minnesota River crossing bridge, relieve the traffic congestion at the intersection of First Avenue and Holmes and remove the trucks from downtown Shakopee. In the initial phase of the process all known alignment alternatives were examined. The purpose of this effort was to determine which alternatives warrant further study and to identify those issues requiring special consideration in the EA. The tertiary function of this phase was to establish coordination with the agencies concerned about the proposed project and the corresponding study area. Organizational Structure An integral part of the evaluation of TH 169 alternatives and issues is the _ Alternative Selection Committee (ASC). The ASC is made up of technically- oriented staff members representing agencies with a vital interest in the study are a: Scott County City of Shakopee Downtown Committee (Shakopee) _ Minnesota Department of Transportation (MnDOT) Metropolitan Council Each of the above agencies has one member on the ASC, with the exception of the City of Shakopee, which is represented by a member of the City Council, City Community Development Department and City Public Works Department. Services for the committee organization are provided by the Shakopee City Engineer with technical support from members of Barton-Aschman Associates, Inc. staff. Other agencies involved in the process whose interests and input must be considered include: Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (MnDNR) US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) Hennepin County Park Reserve District f Report Outline There are six sections to this report, the first being this introduction. The second is an executive summary of the alternatives to be studied and the major concerns to be addressed. The third section identifies the alternatives initially considered for the project and the degree to which they resolve the identified transportation problem. The fourth section describes the process used to determine which alternatives warrant further study. The fifth section documents the environmental issues and concerns requiring special consideration. The sixth section states the conclusions of this study. 11. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This report explains the process used to identify alternatives that most effectively resolve the transportation problems associated with the TH 169/101 intersection in downtown Shakopee (First Avenue and Holmes Street). In this process, 15 original ideas (numbered 1 through 15 in the Appendix) were reduced ultimately to three. M inDOT provided the consultant with traffic forecasts. Four different assumptions were used in the development of this data. These assumptions related to other roadway improvements planned for the area which may or may not be in place to reduce volumes at the TH 169/101 intersection in downtown Shakopee. The four assumptions are: 1. No other area improvements will be added. 2. The outer Shakopee bypass and CSAH 18 bridge will be constructed. 3. The outer Shakopee bypass and TH 212 with the TH 41 river crossing will be constructed. 4. The outer Shakopee bypass, CSAH 18 bridge and TH 212/41 bridge will be constructed. The "worst case" scenario, in terms of traffic forecasts, assumes that no additional routes will be constructed and opened to traffic prior to 1991. For that reason, a 1991 no build forecast was used. Using these bypass trip estimates and assignments, it was quickly apparent that five alternatives (2, 3, 4, 8 and 11) could be eliminated. They do not effectively remove trucks from First Avenue, an objective considered essential to enhancing the CBD area and to reducing conflicts i and improving the level of service for the trunk highway trips. Three other alternatives (1, 5 and 9) were deleted because they created specific engineering problems. These problems include traffic not being directed to the bypass, flood plain encroachment, vertical clearance limitations between the bridge and the bypass, etc. Four alternatives (7 and 7A and 10 and 14) were combined for further study as two alternatives, 7A and 14. As a result, six alternatives, which includes a "do nothing" alternative, were accepted by the committee (6, 7A, 12, 13 and 14) for further analysis. These remaining alternatives were then ranked using the formal 20 objective rating criteria. Technical measures were involved in all but five of the criteria. The five subjective criteria were measured by averaging the rating opinions made by each of the committee members. The scoring of these alternatives is discussed in both Section 4, the Selection Process, and Section 6, Conclusions. In the final analysis phase of the process, the number of alternatives was reduced to three (7A, 13 and "do nothing"). After completing the preliminary environmental analysis, Alternative 12 was deleted because of its impacts to 4(f)/6(f) lands and noise. Alternative 6 was dropped because of its impacts on historic structures and to noise and air quality. Number 14 was deleted because of its added cost to the city since the Federal Highway Administration would not participate in the cost of a dual river crossing. z III. IDENTIFICATION OF ALTERNATIVES Project History The transportation problems of the southwestern metropolitan area have long been identified. In the late 1960's the Minnesota Highway Department engaged a consulting firm to make a corridor location study for Trunk Highways 169, 212 and 41 in the Shakopee, Chaska and the Chanhassen area. A final report delivered to the state in February of 1970 recommended a new routing and river crossing for TH 212 and TH 41, a relocation of TH 169 easterly of its present location and a southerly bypass of Shakopee. All were very costly and environmentally sensitive. _ Although none of the projects were implemented, various stages of preliminary engineering have progressed and some project construction staging has been proposed. Although this project does not specifically fit any of the original project definitions, it does reflect an area transportation improvement compromise that will contribute to the remedy of the problem at less expense to the state. The interrelationship of these projects to one another is an important element in selecting design alternatives. Joint Partnership Considerations In the fall of 1984 the City of Shakopee offered by resolution to share in the funding of two state TH projects (TH 169/101 in Shakopee and the TH 101 bypass). The city offered up to $1.9 million for design, construction and/or right-of-way acquisition for the southern approach to a new TH 169 Minnesota River bridge. The bridge work will be funded by the state (with 80 percent federal aid). Funding for the TH 101 bypass involved a contribution by the city to participate in the cost of detail desion. These actions are documented in a Memorandum of Understanding between the Minnesota Department of Transportation and the City of Shakopee. Other Considerations In 1983 the city commissioned a Downtown Revitalization Plan. A major element of this plan included recommendations to get through traffic using the trunk highway (including trucks) off East First Avenue in downtown Shakopee. This effort led to. the development of some of the first Minnesota river crossing and approach road alternatives. Subsequently, other variations were developed by MnDOT, this firm, the city, the Downtown Committee and others. This process b looks at all recommended alternatives. Alternative Recommendations Fifteen design solutions were originally proposed (see Figure 1). These 15 were considered in the first evaluation using the P.M. peak hour traffic assignments which were developed from the 1991 traffic forecasts as supplied by MnDOT. IL__ JL IL-- --JL Ir-- E3�N3 Ir-- `�Dn-3d ✓•- _ W - - �i c3n✓�'�S W it `n`l�l�e3nrv�'S Z • 3l c 3nIN�5 � r. I > I I I I 8 II E II E II II r.- ,�L __ ___JL __J LIJ L__J L. i _ i �Irr,3jl r 3 !• �IA1311- 3 tl-1�IM3l r _JL__JL J _=JL > ul--- O --_ c31� 'I� c3ll�d 1' — — I II IW __ II IW1� y II W � MI _-_J L _ .__J L =::: :L -;'J __J L GG ��i��r CI OJ wir n O Ir-00 mlr -Ir ���t < V o LL J IL__ IL__ __JL IL__ __JL Ir Ir-- e3�h13ds 11 � N1 II �I 1� NlO II 11 1p'A II = °Gh 11 +I I II GN II ' 11 E all c3nn > wE ;� 1��ti 3tnrlS > r� 111 °3wW�5 > > ' E II II " _JL J L__JL -- -IM31 I I I I it IL L. -_ ,oy }Gc X69 -i I' S,�nlUMll �6y -► It 4�N'IOT,�. I l cl 11 i ct I IL__ L-CJI IL__ L__"JL -tl3l�d II _ j _ Iwll -J L I wtl I i Q 00 r+,�r r m � 00 mlr 1r O - Ir 00 mir 1r >, L to IL_ ' -IIL-__ - JL IL-- JL �- Ir- - r Ir-- N3 r 3GN � � fcON3�S � b3J N1p�N 11� x Nl OON II =I I II Nl°GN If =I I 11 L__J L. J L. LL O -- r �l tl3nn S ri lli/Ic 3v�n�IS rt i 1e3nW�'j5 ` rz ' E I 'L I SII E I II O J L__JL. _ _ JL a 5IM31 IIIM3�r it Im31 ai II i IL -.j i \ II 11 > JJL. 1' JL_. ,6y r.lo„ �Ee �� s�w 5o H1 i ,Ey t� ✓�IOH I c TTLJ L tl311 i luwi�j a e3l'", rW�j u tl3ll e Q w Iwll + (1'I wll 11 O IL__ JL IL__ 'L Ir- -3�h3c` Ir-- �GNj o Ir-- -3Gh3 0 ItN1pGh II - II J L---j L. L. ri 3'7 c3nMS ri Y9�3niv�7$ > r�� •c3nY�i'75 E II E 11 III E 11 L JL L 3 Im3lir ! II SIm31ir II :�Irr.31r ---J L - -- -�- J L--J L - (l� `p � cl l Z� II I I cl I l� Ir I• cl l �>11.. -_ /1I ISI G __J _-J L r-'IL_ __-J L 00 f` Ir-0o rM.iv�r tr-00 h•ir�r N � U C IL-- --JL IL Ir fZ)rv3I . Ir _ 3�h31 ~1cGN 11 11 h�OGh � II -I I II O N 1 11 c - --J L. c �� + .--J L. c __J L__J L. rn C wal��tl3wn�'15 I Q E 11 E ' II E II II _JL _JL �';___J L__JL 3 -- IM31r ( 11 �Im31r p-15W-3 r L _JL __JL -_JL__JL n toy nl0^ter- ,E9 -• H r.10^-Ir ,by _---TIr--93�nlOc Lr ♦� _ [11 1�' 11 C11 �r 11 �I 1 cl l r. Ji, _ �'L O _ _all ly SII '���y .�Ii I °n'•l�h r IwIL- II null _ 1 II 00 !+.ir�r O it 00 mirlr � Ir 00 Mir �r 111 rf The following summarizes conclusions based on the assignments. Because of these results, some alternates were eliminated by inserting reasonable cutoffs for the numbers of lanes which would be completely incompatible with the CBD planning. For example, providing six or more lanes on First Avenue could negate major objectives of the CBD plan, be unrealistically expensive, etc. The Alternative Selection Committee (ASC) used this information to reduce the number of alternates. Alternate 1 This alternate splits the east-west volumes between the bypass and First. The First Avenue volumes are reduced about 25 percent. Two of the three heavy truck routings are retained on First. Alternate 2 The bypass volumes to the west are high. Trucks from the bridge to and from the east remain on First and multiple turns are required of drivers to and from the bridge. Dual lane turns would be required. Alternate 3 The volumes on First are reduced about 25 percent but two of the three heavy truck turns remain on First. The volumes on the two bypass routes are not high. Alternate 4 The Levee Bypass has low volumes whereas First and Second Avenues draw volumes comparable to the present volumes on First, west and east of Holmes respectively. The heavy truck turns occur in the CBD along Holmes. It introduces heavy truck volumes on both First and Second. Alternate 5 The alternate evenly splits the volumes between the bypass and First Avenue. First Avenue has roughly the same volumes as in 1985. About half the heavy truck turns are taken off First. The existing bridge could be used. Alternate b More than half the trucks are diverted from First Avenue. The volumes are evenly split between the bypass and First. The existing bridge could be retained. Alternate 7 The truck and through movements are effectively taken off First Avenue. The bypass volumes are very high. Holmes Street handles low volumes and provides good access to the bridge from the CBD. Alternate 7A The bypass is assioned maximum volume. Local streets receive only minor volumes. Alternate B The bypass is assigned only minor volumes. The First Avenue volumes increase 25 percent and nearly all of the trucks are on First rather than the bypass. Alternate 9 The bypass volumes are high. First has almost no trucks and low volumes and Holmes has both good bridge to CBD access and low volumes. The existing bridge could not be used. Alternate 10 The bypass is assigned maximum volume. Local streets receive only minor volumes. Alternate 11 The bypass is assioned only minor volumes. First Avenue volumes increase 25 percent and nearly all of the trucks are on First rather than the bypass. Alternate 12 The bypass receives maximum volume. First is relieved of trucks and traffic. Local streets have only minor volume. CBD access to the bridges is reasonably good. The existing bridge can be retained. Alternate 13 This alternate has all the good attributes of Alternate 12. Alternate 14 Same comments as Alternates 12 and 13 except that the existing bridge cannot be used. IV. SELECTION PROCESS Development of Criteria Before the 15 alternatives could be evaluated, a set of objective criteria had to be formulated. The criteria reflect the concerns of the public and the members of the Downtown Committee, City Council and MnDOT. Beginning with the first Downtown Committee meeting on November 27, 1985, sample criteria for evaluation of the alternatives were presented. Sample criteria originated from the city's Downtown Redevelopment Plan, meetings/discussions with MnDOT, Federal Highway Administration and city staff. These criteria were also submitted to the City Council for review and discussion prior to final refining and listing by the Alternative Selection Committee (ASC). Final revisions were made by the ASC at their February 27, 1986 meeting. The criteria and their measures are presented in Table 1. As shown, the criteria form four categories: CBD Planning Objectives, Level of Service, Cost and Ease of Implementation. Rating Process Unique to the rating process were two objectives which would serve as an overriding control in the alternative selection process. They were: 1) removal of the heavy through traffic volumes (particularly trucks) from East First Avenue, thereby enhancing the downtown shopping area and the trunk highway level of service and 2) limiting the project costs to approximately $2.0 million for the City of Shakopee and $8.0 million for MnDOT (assuming 80 percent Federal Aid). The traffic forecasts and assignment information indicated that five alternatives could not meet the overriding objective. The committee, therefore, was able to quickly narrow the number of alternatives to be processed through the multiple criteria rating process to 5. H Alternatives 1, 5 and 9 were deleted for engineering reasons. They either failed to clearly direct traffic to the bypass, encroached in the flood plain or exceeded vertical clearance limitations between the bridge and the bypass. In addition, because of similarities in alternatives 7 and 7A and 10 and 14, the most desirable features of these alternatives were combined for further study as two alternatives, 7A and 14. As a result, five alternatives plus a "do nothing" option were to be considered for final selection (see ALTERNATES SELECTED FOR FURTHER ANALYSIS, Pages 10-15). In considering the selection criteria, the ASC was aware that some of the criteria were clearly more important than others; however, because of the large number of criteria (20) and the overriding weight given to the two basic project objectives, the process worked well without adding a weighting scale to the rating system. The decisions of the ASC concerning the subjectives criteria (opinions) were tallied and averaged for each of the possible alternates and combined with the technically measured criteria ratings as shown in Table 2. Using this sheet, each alternative was rated on a 1.0 to a 2.0 rating system. For each criteria, a score of 2.0 indicated that a particular alternate fulfills a criteria well and a score of 1.0 indicated an alternate performed poorly on a particular criteria. Before rating the subjective criteria for the alternates, each member of the AS" was given similar quantitative measures interpretations and asked to measure in their opinion the relative performance of that alternative against each criteria. 8 TABLE 1. Criteria and Measures (See criteria and measure list for full description) CBD PLANNING OBJECTIVES I. Enhance Retail Core (Noise/Air) Distance from the through roadway to the CBD (1) 2. Provide Future Development Acreage remaining for new Options development in downtown 3. Increase Parking Acres of land suitable for parking divided by distance to retail core 4. Attractive Circulation System Number of pedestrian amenities - linear measure of streetscape - 5. Improve 2nd Avenue Retail Street Relative volume assigned to Second Avenue for each alternative 6. Access/Visibility to Mn R. Valley Opinion Trail Head 7. Preserve Mn R. Scenic.- Opinion Recreational Amenity S. Minimum Disruption, Senior Traffic within 500' of Center building 9. Senior Center Access to CBD Opinion LEVEL OF SERVICE 10. Accommodate Through Traffic Travel time times volume for the 3 major movements 11. Remove Core Area Through Traffic Degree to which through trips are diverted from 1st Ave. 12. Maintain Access to Retail Center Percent of trips inconvenienced 13. Convenient, Safe Entrances Opinion to Downtown 14. Efficient Circulation System for Opinion Core Retailing 15. Improve Through Traffic Level Level of service calculations of Service for TH 169 and 101 16. Minimize Ped/Vehicle Conflicts Reduction in traffic on COST 1st, 2nd & Holmes 17. Minimize Construction Cost Preliminary cost estimates for each alternative 1B. Minimize Impact on City Degree of impact (2) Well #1/Electric 19. Limit Construction Cost City $2 M EASE OF IMPLEMENTATION State $8 M 20. Minimize Detour Volume times extra travel distance times construction time (1) Close, Far, Ground Level, Depressed (2) None, Minor. Sionificant _ FINAL ALTERNATES SELECTED FOR FURTHER ANALYSIS - \ , M/ML�SO £R i � L ji L Sm UDS ul ^ter f r� i �� L _ Hca !'i FIGURE 2 ALTERNATIVE 6 T K T• !Q� 01L • \ e f , O'T 1� RWERSIDE J r PARK ! s, __- YIAV✓t TA iVfR J -,rAID736 -45 T I�r L'S 16S -;-71 1 wF L 71 ti 3—f 1_} L rJGUt'-i" E: 3 ALTERNATIVE 7A � RNERSIpE ��'IPARK I� - _, d J. _ us Ian^ .�`. \- ��• _ _._��' - �_ _ _ - —nfc vE acs � .a.- •vim �_��o� — - - �Y lu r-l-`:•-vim _ [ar IVE. FIGURE 4 ALTERNATIVE 12 14 it nTR fRIE IVERStM i :77- 1075 1165 • IS! -LIS'-E � •• J __ _ } 1105 ('y ' -i I!��,I �,��V�1• � "'�., --- �� _lam Iwo FIGURE 5 ALTERNATIVE 13 RrvE?SIDE w PAR1. \ ��L✓ 1\ b' I� r SOTA RIVER \ ,e Im ,..rte 1 '•`Ili �_- JS>�'�=r='-1 �`;Yui��...���-� `• f� �, I� �� � L �__ - �::_� E _•� .�� _� � / %�, ; --111} '�--\�`' `-=ti^ FIGURE 6 ALTERNATIVE 14 m ? Cn ^ " J N N N N N N tD N N m N N m m N N f7 w N N � N N N N N N N N N N N N C w � J Z ^ N G] t— Q N N N ^ N N N N N < N N N Q N < ^ N N N Q tD fD m m Q N N N < m N N N N C ^ ^ Pi �• ^ N N N Cy N N m \mA � N \t !DNNN ID N m C p C� N^ © ^ N N^ N^ ©^ 'J^ \ 1D ED ID c C lri C N m tD tD to N N 1D m m N 1D CD In ( N tD N LD cp ^ N N N N Q CD C NV, U N N ^ N N C N C Q Cl) N C � N ^ r, .- ^ N N N N < E o — U O ^ N N iD N N I N tD C N < ^ ^ N N 11I ^ ^ N N N N N C N W T m N G - G — O � O J LII L C 7 C _ G n J C•G G C - ._ _ L. L. Z) Jv:> UD -sir•>— w c �W u u <U U U iCc, _ ` \ c ✓' n V Co a > — - J G ° _ C Gw o H u = CLZ —51 a o ° 'c o ° m G w ° — u u o c= O J C J `a c L _ _ r — - 4 7Gaigp 5uiuue•ia O°:) ;o tana-; I 7sc::) 16 The criteria rating scores will be considered in the selection of the final alternative. Recommendations of Participating Agencies Concerns and recommendations of the public and participating agencies which are incorporated into the rating system include: - o City of Shakopee and Downtown Committee: 1) removal of heavy through traffic and trucks from First Avenue and Holmes and 2) limiting the project costs to a city share of approximately $2 million. o MnDOT: 1) concern for through State Trunk Highway user traffic, both the level of service and circuity of travel and 2) limiting the state's share (including federal aid) to $8 million. This includes bridge construction and roadway approach work considered essential to provide reasonable connections to the in-place trunk highway facility. o Federal Highway Administration - Policy and procedural requirements associated with the use of federal bridge replacement funds (e.g. rehabilitation and/or reconstruction standards, participation requirements, environmental considerations, etc.). o Other public concerns will be considered during the course of making the project environmental assessment and with the offering of an opportunity for - public hearing. 17 V. ISSUES AND CONCERNS The alternative review process revealed a number of important concerns. First, declining resources and the number of high priority projects competing for these funds dictate that construction design consider the most cost effective proposals. Because the in-place TH 169 bridge over the Minnesota River is in relatively sound condition, every effort should be made to incorporate it into the final improvement plan. However, structural limitations prevent adding lanes to the existing bridge. If the existing bridge is used to carry one-way traffic as part of a twin bridge design alternative it must be rehabilitated to the degree that the FHWA can be assured that it will provide at least 15 years of service. Based on the information available, implementing the project as proposed in any of the final alternatives will not necessitate a State environmental impact statement under any of the mandatory criteria listed in Minnesota Rules 4410.4300. A federal environmental assessment is required; existing information that the environmental assessment process is unlikely to uncover significant environmental impacts and that a finding or No Significant Impact (FONSI) will be the result. Recognizing that the Fish and Wildlife Service and Minnesota DNR owns extensive parcels of land along the Minnesota River, every effort will be made to avoid a 4(0/6(f) lands exchange delay. With the narrowing of alternatives, the environmental assessment is moving forward as will the Project Path Report preparation. The Alternative Selection Committee (ASC) will remain in tact during this period and serve as a review body for these document drafts. Both are scheduled for first draft completion in June of 1966. 18 TABLE 3 PRELIMINARY ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS IMPACT SUMMARY SHAKO.DEE BYPASS Alternative Criteria 6 7.A 12 13 14 AIR QUALITY: Exceedances of: - MPCA 8 hour standard; 5 of 9 0 of 4 1 of 5 0 of 4 0 of 5 - MPCA 1 hour standard; 0 of 9 0 of 4 0 of 5 0 of 4 0 of 5 (per number of receptors modelled) NOISE: Number of Receptors to Experience 3 dBA increase in - L10 noise level; 2 1 3 1 1 - L50 noise level; 0 1 2 0 1 WETLAND/SHORELAND/PROTECTED WATERS: - Acres Wetland Affected; 0 0 0 0 0.5 - No. of Protected Waters Affected; 1 1 1 1 1 - Acres of Shoreland Zoning District Affected; 0 0 0 0 0 FLOODPLAINS: - Longitudinal Encroachment? No No No No No - Sionificant Encroachment Under FHWA Rules? No No No No No 4(f)/6(f) LANDS: - No. of 4(f) Properties Affected; 1 1 2 1 3 - No. of 6(f) Properties Affected; 0 0 0 0 1 HISTORICAL/ARCHAEOLOGICALRESOURCES: - No. of Archaeological/ Historical Sites Negatively Impacted by R.O.W.; 4 0 1 0 0 RELOCATION: - No. of Residences to be Acquired by R.O.W.; 6 11 4 11 11 CONSISTENT WITH LOCAL LAND USE PLANS? No Yes Yes Yes Yes THREATENED/ENDANGERED SPECIES: - No. Species Potentially Affected; 0 0 0 0 0 FPPA FARMLAND: - Acres Impacted; 0 0 0 0 0 VI. CONCLUSIONS A deliberate attempt was made in this analysis to consider all possible alternatives for the south TH. 169 bridgehead and all options to reduce specific problems. As a result, the "first level evaluation" procedures were adopted. The initial evaluation requires less precise data and permits consideration of a wide range of alternates. The strong advantages of this approach are that it considers all realistic alternates and eliminates options on a consistent basis. It assumes that all alternates are equally desirable until serious conflicts with the design objectives are identified. Alternates were deleted by the Alternative Selection Committee (ASC) as it became apparent that a particular option had almost no chance of being the preferred alternative. The intention of the "first level evaluation" was to eliminate the least promising alternates, allowing the remaining two or three to be analyzed in much greater detail. Alternates 1 through 5 and 11 were deleted for further consideration while alternates 6, 7A, 12, 13 and 14 were included for more detailed analysis. The reasons for deletion are summarized on pages 6 through 7 of this report. Preliminary deletion of alternates was due primarily to an inability to remove traffic, particularly trucks, from downtown streets. This inability affects _ redevelopment plans and creates indirection and delay on the trunk highway system. Alternatives 6, 12 and 14 were deleted in the final analysis phase of the process. In April of 1986, the ASC deleted Alternative 12 because of the negative implications revealed in the preliminary environmental analysis on 4(f)/6(f) lands and noise. Subsequently, the committee dropped Alternative 6 because of its negative impacts on historic structures and to noise and air quality; and number 14 was deleted by City Council action because the Federal Highway Administration would not participate in the cost of constructing a dual river crossing as required by that plan. rnates, 7A and 13, were recommended for final The remaining most viable alte consideration by the ASC with the option that features from other layouts be incorporated, if necessary, to satisfy design requirements. In conjunction with finalizing the Environmental Assessment, a Project Path Report will be prepared which will include a further project discussion and make recommendations on a final alternate selection. ,9 MEMO TO: Jahn K. Anderson, City Administrator FROM: Ken Ashfeld, City Engineer�Y � r • SUBJECT: 1986 pavement Preservat ion Program DATE: June 13, 1986 INTRODUCTION: The 1986 Annual Budget includes $181, 000. 00 for the 1986 Pavement Preservation Program. In cooperation with the Public Works Department, this years program has been developed and is hereby presented for Council approval. BACKGROUND: This years Pavement Preservation Program consists of both a seal coat and an overlay prr,gram providing for work on those streets as indicated in Attachment 1. The streets selected are based upon need as well as reflecting a cognizance of pro- posed future street rehabilitation. Attachment 2 indicates those streets in the southwest part of the City. This attachment is provided since specific actions are being proposed in the future for bituminous overlays and street rehabilitation. These streets are somewhat unusual in that their condition differs dramatically within the area, part- icularly between 10th Avenue and 12th Avenue. The reason for this condition appears to be inadequate design, poor subgrade preparation and major differences in base construction. The differences in base construction has resulted from the reactive efforts to correct problems resulting from the previous stated causes. This difference in base construction has caused sub- stantial differential frost heaving during the winter months. RECOMMENDATIONS: It is recommended that the seal coat portion of the 1986 Pavement Preservation Program be offered for bids separate from the over- lay portion. It is further recommended to include the overlay work with the Timber Trails Project, hopefully to enhance the prices received for both projects. I also recommend that the Council initiate a public improvement project for the rehabilitation of Jackson Street between 10th Avenue and 12th Avenue and Harrison Street between 10th Avenue and 11th Avenue for the 1987 construction season. 1986 Pavement Preservation June 13, 1986 Page REQUESTED ACTIONS: 1. Move to approve the 1986-8 Pavement Preservation Seal Coat Project as presented in the City Engineer' s June 13, 1986 memo and to direct the City Clerk to advertise, as required by State Statute, the request for bids to be opened 10:00 A. M. , July 10, 198E and to be considered by City Council at 7:00 P. M. , July 15, 1986 or thereafter. 2. Move to approve the 1986 Pavement Preservation Overlay Project as presented in the City Engineer' s June 13, 198E memo and to direct the City Engineer to incorporate this project with the Timber Trails 1986-5 Tmprovement Project. 3. Direct the City Engineer to draft a resolution initiating a capital improvement project for the rehabilitation of Jackson Street between 10th Avenue and 12th Avenue and Harrison Street between 10th Avenue and 11th Avenue. KA/pmp PP RES ATTACHMENT 1 1986 PAVEMENT PRESERVATION PROGRAM SEAL COAT PROGRAM STREET TERMINI ESTIMATED COST Harrison St. 10th Ave. : 11th Ave. $ 2, 100. 00 VanBuren St. 6th Ave. : 12th Ave. $ 6,400. 00 Jefferson St. 10 Ave. : 12th Ave. $ 4,600. 00 Quincy St. 11th Ave. : 12th Ave. $ 2,000. 00 12th Ave. Jackson St. : Taylor St. $ 4,200. 00 Jackson St. 6th Ave. : 10th Ave. $ 1,600.00 Madison St. 6th Ave. : 10th Ave. $ 2,000. 00 5th Ave. Webster St. : Apgar St. $ 8, 100. 00 Main St. 5th Ave. : 10th Ave. $ 8,800. 00 Dakota St. Bluff Ave. : 2nd Ave. $ 2,200. 00 Main St. Bluff Ave. : 1st Ave. $ 1, 100. 00 Bluff Ave. Dakota St. : Main St. $ 1,900. 00 Levee Dr. Scott St. Lewis St. $ 4,000. 00 Scott St. Levee Dr. 1st Ave. $ 1,000. 00 Atwood St. Levee Dr. 1st Ave. $ 1,000.00 Fuller St. Levee Dr. 1st Ave. $ 1,000. 00 Lewis St. Levee Dr. 1st Ave. $ 1,000. 00 Block 50 Alley Lewis St. : Sommerville $ 500.00 Nort on Dr. CSAH 17 : End $ 5,200. 00 Montecito Dr. CSAR 16 : CSAH 16 $ 3,800. 00 4th Ave. CSAH 17 : Shenandoah $ 6, 100. 00 Eastview Circle 7th Ave. : Prairie St. $ 2,700. 00 Prairie St. 8th Ave. : Shakopee Ave. $ 1,900. 00 SEAL COAT PROGRAM TOTAL CONSTRUCTION COST $73,200. 00 OVERLAY PROGRAM STREET TERMINI ESTIMATED COST Tyler St. TH 300 : 12th Ave. $ 26, 500. 00 12th Ave. Adams St. Jackson St. $ 21,500. 00 Jefferson St. 6th Ave. 10th Ave. $ 12,400. 00 Market St. 7th Ave. 10th Ave. $ 23, 000. 00 Shumway St. 6th Ave. 10th Ave. $ 20, 800. 00 OVERLAY PROGRAM TOTAL CONSTRUCTION COST $104,200. 00 1986 PAVEMENT PRESERVATION PROGRAM $177, 400.00 I .� � �� � �' � I ,s I; �� :I I'. � � j i F. 5 I♦• '.rn+...w.�.�.�a•.`d �_ fI s I •i c S • e � G I .o r.... .v n., v ............. ••��'' ...fir. ............... .... ..... ...:............+•::..:.........................`.::?....:.:',;.,':•�:•:::.�:��:::�;}:..:•:.i:•:.ii?:??i'i:�:::::'::?t?Y/:'''iii:?:�:.�.::..?:::::.t::::_i}:??•i:±y'<:,.. EDWARD 5 GR: 5Vr__1':.Y •� =— SCHCD_ -LR:5 T ; Lo i1 ?.+�..�..o.�r�.,..,...+.:�.n,,,..-.�-�r�r.�...,...`..n�.+�.• .,5. :f _moo . . . . . .. . . ...... ... .. ... ....:.......::.; . .::. .:::..•...:::b>::Cy::::'.:� x.::... I Z` I I •�.I 2�' 1 2� i l • r I �� I I rS I e I i ;� I I I 1,I' � {;• I :;� I I `vl ♦ � I � �, a I :;I i � I i rz PID ..... , PA1 JT pFESZ-3VAMON 1984 -7o2w z?..sF-�) 'l9B6 .S--.4! COAT .o .� ��'_�� � ��' ••-----T� ?�O?^�.,a� �LJTL� FE!-'IABtLIT AMON r�------ ;.sem + _ SEA - Co,:-► -- - - { ATT ACHNENT 2 INVITATION FOR RIDS NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN: The City of Shakopee, Minnesota will receive bids at City Offices, 129 East lst Avenue, Shakopee, Minnesota until 10:30 A. M. or, July 10, 1986 at which time they will be publicly opened in the Council Chambers of City Hall, 129 East 1st Avenue, Shakopee, Minnesota by the City Clerk. and City Engineer; will then be tabulated and will be considered by Council at 7:00 P. M. , or thereafter on July 15, 1986, in the Council Chambers at the Municipal Building of such City for the construction of the fallowing: 1986 Pavement Preservation Program Consisting of: 37, 300 Gallons CRS-Z Bituminous Material 1 , 865 Tons FA Seal Coat Aggregate 2, 000 L. F. Crack. Cleaning & Filling 500 Tons 2341 (Modified ) Bituminous Patch Material All bids shall be accompanied by a cash deposit, cashier' s check, bid bend or certified check, payable to the order of the City of Shakopee for not less than $5, 000. 00. City Council of the City of Shakopee reserves the right t•� reject any or all bids, to waive irregularities and to award the contract in the best interest of the City. Plans, Specifications and Proposal forms may be obtained from the City of Shakopee upon deposit of $35. 00 for each set, which will be refunded to all bonafide bidders upon return of the Flans and Specifications in good condition within five (5) days after the opening of the bids. A bonafide bidder is one who actually submits a bid. /s/ Judith S. Cox City Clerk CITY OF SHAKOPEE Published in the: Shakopee Valley News on: June 25, 1986 and July 2, 1986 and in the: Construction Bulletin on: June 27, 1986 and July 4, 1986 r ► r • r� • • r r •R..r r • r ■V, a, 91 91 ► •' • r tl .0• p� R P V' • P • P P P PPP • P • P P P Y P P • P • V� N R N • N N • N R N N N NNN • N • N N N N N N rt N • N 2 U ► O • O O R O • O O 0 0 0 0 • O ♦ 0 0 0 O o 0 ► O ♦ r !7 P P ► N r r r • W • u W u W u u • w ► N N N N N N R A • W 7C n r • N • P P • W • PP sr Vl U10 O• • .PPPPPP •,,,� 2 y O K • O p �1 0 0 o 0p mcoo 0 000000 0 o a p p P P rn P P P P, P P P P P P P P PPPPPP \ \ m 2 r, ♦. r r r r r ♦+ ♦+"'r "'r r r r r�, r r r r�r r r r r .•r r \ \ O \ \ \\ \ \\ \\\\ \ \\\\\\ O 9 co O O O co O O co O O O O O W O O O O O P fm'1 P, P PP P PP PP PPPP PPP P D x O Z W W W W W W O r N W +r r N r r VI LA •D W ## A W 0 0 Apr V #N r W V W W P rl) W V V 0 0 AA ID OP W OO P V W #r0#W NN I`W OP W NL71 ON NN • • • • • • • • • ♦ • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 1 W W W W W W N O p V IP ow V1 N N V V U O r r O O V V O o 0 Ln V W O W Orr 0 0 -.4 P W W O O O O P P o C3 as a cc aaan a aaasvc s s ,y a yy x 00 V)Vl NN N C C CCC (n x y 2 2 NN Vl V) N N A y y w w z z 00 C C 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 O G m r nnnn ., o m A -4-4a 7C 7C \\\\ x nnnnnn O ,t Z • • x x xz m 1•I mm mmm a a Z 0 Z mmmm -1 O n c ., as nnne-� a �-�-ly-•y m a o Vl 4> V V C] • aaa aaa M m m 0 0 0 0 x- r r r r r r D K = s • a x zzzz c w H m 0 N y In w �1 1..y-� Y V1 N N N N N O Z Vl O O \\\\ • C C C C C C = ^ R C n z Y '9 2 ^^ �S '9 z a t"! z zzz vvvvvv r t] ' nnnn rrrrrr y 1^ "1 K KK KKK P V) r• N y m r n m y y O ^m m m W W O m m m m m m N n N G ' D mm G: ND O r rr C OO 0000 1 C ! a ^ � c rr m cccccc 1 a I, v m m ac c000 r•1 N ..•,....ry 30 �+ x P,in i, � y 1 a o - m a ZZ w wa aR.R.R. rn a aDaaa •.. y lIl y t m N I ti 1111 R� i O O O O O o o M n O O O O OO � r+ r r r r rrrrrr 1 n t 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1.1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 A O # A A# # A# A A r A # r###A A # N N W N N N N N - w N N N N N N N Y Z r W N N •O W w W w-L.1 w W W W u 1 P. ♦,• y ON N000 r r". UI Ln � N 1"'•'' r 1 1 1 1 1 1 1' 1 1 1 1 1 1 1' � 1 N r O N # rW r rr WONr r PrrNrr •0 r + ¢ Car .. rr P U, r rA W W rr N A p.w V NN NN W r_ Nr Nr V N 1 N •" G • O • 1 T a P S A L ti s rq • • V P • . R * + i r rt m • k • R 1 1 1 1 m n n n n R R R R 7C 7C N � Vi V) N N N N • r . rr • P • P u. R P A P � r r • r.r R ,r f• ♦ r ♦ .• • R N • P P R P P • P P • r N N • N ♦ N R N N R N N R P ` P • n W R r • r I� R O ♦ O R O N N • N ► N ► ♦ O ♦ O O ♦ �/I R 1D R O R O O ► D O ♦ R O • S m •, W R h'r R N ♦ r ► 19 ID ♦ NI OD R W WR V ♦ P R n P O O • W R P ► 7C n z y O K • O O O O O O O O O O O T \ \\ \ C P P P P P P P y N ou mw m 0 P P P P P Go C. N a 00 CD O W � P P p p m m a r N V V p N N r ++ C -+r •,.r N r r r Z VI IJI ON W o 0V V 0 0 A r N o a V0 0 O O OO vI UI rr PCO P lOr r A r OO WN r PP vI VI • • • • • • • O O W W r O a vl NUDA m w Om O O O O O O O 'O Wr r r�D N •+p r N yl Ia co co n nn n p pp r a i a a s as o c z zz a m i V D D yl � r r y y ry-I O K K Ra y N N p p c r. 'UQ oo zz n z m Q o zz L ss M D D n EM y co 1 I'Im w p 1 W L D R n y O w 2 O L a D lH z w w m L a s f7 T T y C m A 7c y y •a p mm C '•'� z v O n n n. A m Gl w N .y rl A A D C ti D C O 0 Q '-1 1 OT ^ Z C C'O li H m = h y rr K y r v L r •y D V N ,m r m av _ •+" sm mm .. y m t .r w D a to .0 O y H O O O O O O O r O N N O N D 1 11 1 •1 '. 1 1 1 1 W V r V f7 u N N w N N r ,., N N mLn Ul r Z L. ur N 12 O O ; I N r N N N LW Lq L4 r r W a s 'In r r r r N N r N N V A O O rA O 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 N m o O 1 I In cl C P O • 1 O a P S m 3o • • R . ♦ ♦ ` • • R s m I 1 1 I I * ` • • • O n n n n I I I m N I/f N •+ • r • r rt • r r►•►• r r r r�+r r • r�+ r r r P P R P • Y` • Y` R P P P P • P P P V`V` P • P Y^ P R P ♦ n W NN • N • N • N • NWei N • Nrow NN N ► NN N • N • S O NN • N • r ► r R rrrr R rrrrr r • r+ • r R m P r+ R O • W • V • A A A A R W W W W W N • r�+ R r • n r+ • A R N R Ln • r V V.� • 00000 W • L"Vt A R N • 7C n M Z "I O "'t • O O m 00 0 0 n 0000000=0 0 00 0 o a C`P P P Ol Pa,PP ITP P PIT P PP T P N m x r+ r r r rrrr rrr+r r r-• r r A ♦+� r r r rrrr r r r+r r r+ r r 7C m co W O W W W co co W W m W W W W W W W v lT P P P IT P P P P Y�tT U�P Q+ P 0�P lT T m D Z O N C 2 r r rr y W AA W W NcCr W W fv AA VNN W W OA PP �O W N6Ji W tT MOPP ATOP NN LM (JINN W W 00 O • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • OO Wm VVI Hili OQ%P co O VW OW Vm OO VO V AA N7W W xx = a+ m mmmm Oo0CIO o nn n mm a O H a s a p C C C C C C • • O c z z A v z V) 0 z z z 2 2 m x 2 x O Zz 2Z2 m • • S �+ m m O i'1 SSm S z 3 1'+•�1'+"°^ I`I • y G 2 z z ►• aaaa zzzzz z nn = m NN N z z Z 0 n17)G)0 V1 'DD D Z y 0 0 0 0 O O O M m H PIn00 CC CLIC rr O S • N m m m m m - G C A m y 2 • • • • • =Z V) 1'7 S F • W m 7t a c mm z n zz z x �c m c� N y m A m2 N N V) N NNN W 0 NNN V) co N m N coc c c cccc rcccc c rc o c -+ cy v vvvv ovvvv v 0v c v m r0 v -v v vlivv .Ovvvv v .Ov ►� v S V;Q r r r rrrr rrrr r r r sal m 'm m mmmm a mm mm m a m x m m a C Vi N -Y/ N V!Vl N •+V)VI N Yi N - H N a N N r m ¢ t z ►y n Z r y y z p I z i o a o o o r r O o o a o 0 0 o 0 0 0 o s r r r r r u o+r r r r r r r r r r n 1 1 1 1 1 i l l i I M 1 1 1 1 1 1 n J A A .A A A A A -A A A A A A A + l O N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N C W N r r r r r+r W r r r r r W r W r z N N O O O 0 0 0 0 O O O O O O O O N O 'N P W W A W tnrA W '." Go T PP A r Z W N r N N N A r "to N N NN-Go r - r N N r O rr N r r. NNrr ONrrr r rN <r r - 1 N N N r N N r A N r NN N r r N N r Z G W T T � v / A O r I : W A tT m v N D R • rt • • R ♦ r V) m I I 1 I 1 1 i I m n n n n n n n n A x A X z X 0 0 y� N ► p• • O• ♦ u• ► N• • p•V• P O.O•T p. P R P • P n W N N ! N • N ♦ N ♦ N • NNNNNNNN N • N • N ► = m W W • W ► W ! N • N • N N N N N N N N N • N ♦ N ♦ m fT O O ♦ U ► o ♦ m • m R ti V V V v v V P ► p) • W ► n Ol• VI • W 1 r • m ♦ 171 - • O O O o 0 0 o O • IT ♦ A ► x n z -1 Q K • O O -i O o o a o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O o o y O�T P 0)m P P m P \ \ \ \ \ \ \\\\\\\\ \ \ \ r1 S H F+ F1 N N H H r 1...•-•H r 1+ N D CD m m m W m m W m m m m m m m m m m P 0) O� P O. T P P Ol m P P P Q) 0) O• m rn D Z F•H p 01 r N N N C 2 rr+ rLn N Ln UI m •+r AO Nm r.r NN W W 1 r V L.W j. W ►A W W H r O V m O V1 m Il\N P Ir m m V N r GI TPTN N N rLn 1711+0 W F O NW 1•••1•+ P P mm F • 1 1 • 1 • 1 • • • 1 I • • I 11 0) N1 Vt "N N y1 �O N N 00 00 I+F+ 00 000 00 00 00 m m 00 v V O r r r r r r x x x x x x x x x x o a o a x m x x x m x x 11 a z t z n w D a a a A D a a x x x G7 N x A S N NN.o N NN m m D O r m r Nw w W v/h N C r z v o x x m a x c a w w w w w w w w s z A m x z z x x x x z x x x N o oocoocco O C z .Z' xxxxxxxx m = n 00000000 m m 11 m m m f•1 m f•i t) N N o z n n n n n n nn n ===xxxx= x • xxxxxxxx r1 - ti 1 ti •I ti��1 - L7 N ti m x m 1/1 w m m n Tv Lvmvm-Q m. C p oQ c m r a m x x x x x x x Q c c v v x o v o o o o o o o o c ►+ m m H -w -w n O 1••I m T T T T T T N r N x x m m c a r mmmmmmmm x' m r•. Z I'1 CCC cc cC C N C n z C '•1 O 2 m x M n � 1 C 1 rn m O i O O O m O O moNNNo00 O r1 O D N Q•r V W r1 r+1r r, F 11 n 1 ( I 1 11 •1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 n ♦ A F F A ♦ ♦A♦ N N - N N - tll 4 W W W W W W W N W I W C W N p,.. N W �+ �+1•+p.1•+f,.1+r N W V ! .D 2 N O O ♦ O •+ O O 000000 N O 1 th F W O tT r 171 LT tT 171 0 h1 r 1r 4. r N W ♦ W O W m N 0 F A o P P o) N N' ♦ N O ►' F+ r- O O N t••♦m W OO 1.o. P' N I h.. • i 1 1 I 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 P ♦ W O p� •+ A A A FOY+r1•+ T r H N N -F W O N m r`••r fro T IT C• N A N z C u � I 0 V m p, T A y 1 N W O • 1 m a P x A 9 N D 1 1 1 1 1 I I I m n n n n n n n n x x x x x x x x N f/1 N /A N N N N t R r • rr ♦ rrr rrt+rrr r•+ •' ►' � m � �� i mP i � ► r7 .Y R Y` • Y.P R V`V`U`P ff.P P P Y.N P 1 N R N r N N • N N • N ► = W ! N • N N ♦ NNN N N N N N N N N W • W ! W W • W W ♦ W R m P • W • W W R W W W W W(M W W LI W W • • N N RN N • r ► n • • i F R F i i T P A F C 0 0 F + ; ! �'D R F y. • m ► O • C� • O.PQ`P0.p.O�PP.T O. ry p K • O O T 00 O D O O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 m T P P ` K frl x C,P PT 91 Q. \ \ \\ \\ S r rr rrr rrr rrr r r rr I"" "' \ \\ \\\\\\\\\\\ co m mco w 0 C. T CD co m O4D��W CAO UD vD UDm P Q+ 0+P OSP G+ m P P.IT POMP PP T?,PTm m a S O 2 CD co mm Ar r P T r N O �O CD a,a, ~ r i 0� V IO m .+r W +A W GNr PYA N •0 L N W O F O W 0 oT P o N r N N o 0 r V F r19 N N N 471 • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • O I!I N N r V W 4Ji W O P la W o 0 v U1 N N UI O VI r V NN UI PAY �`�0 v Or NUI LIi 00 00 00 o NUI Ul0 vl O o O ► • ! • • R • c xzzsxzxszxzxs s s :cm 4:1cs s TT OQQO0o0 pO0 p .+ s �•+ -00 a Wo 00000000000 z c cc rr x mm Da C N N r N N o Z N Z m TT TTTT T T T TT< r�1~ OO0 r a 3.3-- 0 o s saaama a m o r zs zxaaaxzsAa r K mm TT z o �v r w NN hNV)N NhNhh 11 rl V)h S K r .+w - 0 y m P titi PI 2m CC • c I") f1 f'1 n Il � N H N m N N H V) IH O m m NN N N Z P N m z*a O O r m N N fel 9 y T T mmmmmmmmwo w C G a 0 m p wH CC C CCCC C TTT T "'� v V .nom .+ z z r. . T Z .,.a.n-- - v T - v T vTT VT0 fl FHM P P x x x x x x x x.m m m 'm m a a a a a a s a v)N w m .N V) a x T T z z;r w;;— C h n a CC 22Z ZZ 2Z2 '. � I p � ..t .n N m 0 y-�-•-y—1 1 y-� C C T : Z O_ 0 0 o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 C 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 D �r rr. rrr+rrrrr r r rr - r.� " n p A F F P i F i A A i F P F0i P N W G N N N N N N N N N N N Ln W -N Ln N N W - C UI N wu ww W Z, uL4 rrr r V rr r.Y N Z HI 0 NNNNNNNN 000 rt - O 00 ..N K 1 j l I l l l l l l i i l l r P p� G '2 A. G C N V W N N r W N r V N N i N N r r r A r r r Pr r.+r Nrrrrr r V i t 1 I 1 1 1 I l t 1 1 l l l 1 l 1 F„ Tall A ry AiF W W'W rrT1 .A A N rN •„n,. yl 2 N V W N N`••W N r V N N F N N < V : O r> a O r T ON 9 O ►' ell O rx'1 T N a • • • 4 � • ► r • a m ! • ! 1 t 1 I ' 1 m 1 1 1 n f"1 n Pl t"1 n 4n Jr 7C 7C rn iN VI N In lA n R r • rr • r•r • r R r • rr+..+..rp•Ir r rr r rrr • r P ♦ N R V� • N ► P fT 7+V•P P Q•P P P P P P P • r N • N • N N • N N • N • N • N N N N N N N N N N N N N N • P W r R P • I a • a R 1 • o ■ w W W W w w W W w u W u W W • N 0 V ♦ P • u • u ♦ 0 0 0 to 0 W W W 0 0 0 0 W 0 ♦ u m P O R P • r r • r y ■ Ln 0 R ✓ ► V V V V'V�1 V V V V V\V r • W x C1 Z � O K • O O O O O Co O D 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O T P P P P P P p,P O a P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P r y rr \ -r\\-\\\-+\•+\-•\-\ �\„ m S r r r'•• ..r ✓ r ✓r ✓✓✓r r r✓r✓ Y ✓ \ \ r r ✓ ✓ A \\ \\ \ \ \\\\\\\\\\\\\\ \ O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 •fl 0' P PP PP P P PP O,P PPPP PPP P PP P m a Z 0 c r •.r +o = Wwur r rr W N N P 0 a s ✓r r rr�p v r W N a N W OA a N N V V O W V r 0 0 W W 0 0 u P P a P�`u P�1 W W UI WW Vt N WW O O • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • W W 00 000 r VI OD Q, o0 N V V W 001 W 0.+10 a ra 00 R R • R ♦ • • ✓ A A A �A '9 Z z z z z z z z Z z z Z z z = +"1 mIT1 as A m LCC CLCC CGCG CCC 0 A z K K zz O y mmm OmmOmmG mmmm r 00 0 0 2 - ill m m m m PI m m m m m'I m rl � K r r 1 r r r r r r r r r r r r r r m z •' Do yy r � rrrrrrrrrrrrrr z A y y s x s 0 z m cG nn s o s 1•i m 11i m xp rr A H O O x a in o • m • 2 Z • A Q+Gl � x m 2 y 1 m A m In In y in y �+ o c c c c c m m m m m r1 i•1 m r1 m m m 1.1 m m m a c vy vv v rrrrrrrrrrrrrr = rn v v v v v (712 P I m m m m-m+9 m 19 m m m 19 = m v - rr rr r z vvvvvvvvvvvvvv r .rr mr.1 s mm mm m z o0000000000aoc n m •+ a y y y y O Z Z z z m Z Z z Z Z z Z m Z a w z fn in z y z r C y m 1'+ .N m m r y 9 N z s M A O O O O 0 0 V O r x 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ✓ r rr ✓•+ r P vlrrr✓r rrrr rr r 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 1 I l l l l l l l l l l l t l I n a 4- L. N N N N N N W W W 4 w W W W W W W W W W W W c o N 0 0 o o O M r r r r r r r r r r r r r r P y i 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I l l l l l l l l i f l l l I L : N N r P N r 1 A W W W W r✓r r r r 0 z 0 r r r r r w j W�O N r L n WN-0 V I l i u N r O O I 1 1 1 +-•r---r-r N✓rrrr O 1 1 1 +a 1 1 1 I 1 1 1 1 I 1 1 1 r W a'R .V. P N 1WWWWrr✓ LArr O r _ N aN r r r W WNr(n WNr O�14'I W N✓ O 7 c • a o P V 0 • I 0 a P 2 m t ♦ R • R I I n n f f A x m y In y y y y 7C C4, P rrr rrr.N~•.rrrr • rrr r r rr rr-1r • rr rrrr • .•rr ► r r P P P P P P P P P P P P P • P P P P P P P P P P P • P P -P P P • P P P • N S m N N N N N N N N N N N N N • N N N N N N N N N N N • N N ul Ln(NJI : a� ► P m P Ntn N ALn---NtTNN NN UI f N 000vtJ�I71 171N vl NI • W P p,. r1+ r r r rr • 0000000 O O UO ► 00 00 00 • C OO : N X 1..1 V V V V V V V+1 V V V V V • w w w w w'Dw m m W m R W W N N N N • 2 2 1 p K • O O T O OO 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 b o 0 0 O O O O O O o 0 o O D PPP PT PP PPO, PPP P PP Ol P. PP PP Olm PP PPPP PPP P 1 N rrr-+rrr-+rr rrr rrr rr rr r r-+r rr -1r rr rrr r � r r r r r r r-1r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r \ o m m m m m m m m m mmm m m m m m m m m mmm m m m m m m m m m m m m P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P D O W C N r Z V O r r N r 0 r N N N O m N r N r N N of�0 W r P Wr N m.l Om WK)NN N ON W Ln CD N rr W W F Ilio IJI rc7t�0 mm I0 P IJI Ill r 10 N P r W O O Ir P O N 10 V1 LnID O W V O O O O O 0 o U%r O F VI O F%0 O F O o 0 0 00 0 o r 0 F L.F P O P V F 10 IJI 10 0 0 0 o W W 1/1 V1 N 9)U1(A NNN NN(AN NN N NN V!N NN NN CC N NNN C'117n A -vv v vv-V-vvv vv v-0 SxS x2SS QQOO mm as 3. �. c C C C c C C C C C G C C D D a a n a a C C C C A A n n T D A A A T nn t"1n nf7 t7 n1"1 n C'f 1'7 n x AA xx Rx 11- 1 22 A 7c A OOO '•1 c000000 ixis mm coop rrr v y T T-9-0 T C Lc c A A 0'0 T a/ m mmmmmm mmmm mmmm In rn V) O Z M m m m m m m N N co W N N m m m m n e n o v .r 1 1 1 m m x x x m N N N N N N N —C 'i l T M T C C C 11 m m m i• m m N w W W 1-1 i n G J O O V r r r G r A A A A A A A C C C C wm Ni VI 0000 NNN S m a+r r Irl C CCC 00 i n n 11 n n o n n A A A A Z Z mmmmmm xmwm p N N N N N N N T n D a i A 2 2 Z Z m M P p r N 1 m A c tG C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C m m V 1 1 m m m m -9'a rl h Ta-1-�ti1 ti'��1'�11 111��111 A A AA AA OOOO .�AA O 1 �11M rrr-iNMM MI.I rrr l-IM MrM�+n+rn rr.�0 T a C CCC 000 C m 1-1 l'i r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r Z Z Z Z I T T M Z Ails n AHMA rM A - err ti Plrr H 11 V - r7m V -11 - -11 -1 X11 '-1111 x'111 m N N O 111 ~rrrr rnwr rrrw rrnrr mal w wwal ZZ Z2 mmm = m mcam mmmrtmmmm11m rlmmmmmrl o ww as as AAA a vl 12N V1NN VINNNNt/iN N1(A Ntn NNN z •" �'�� ~ n mi CcCH NN Zz A m OJ m m C C -�-r.r 1 -♦ r y O 9 En-n1 N N P w r a1 N N A A A A A O 1 1 m m m min m 2 S T9'v 'D a a T a xr w x A A A f m m o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 0 0 0 0 0 o ro 0 o a u1,Irrrrrrrrrrr rrr rrrr rrrr rr rrrr Lnr r (t 1 1 1 1 11 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 11 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 f9 F F F F F F F F F F P A F F P F F F F A F O 41 W W W W W W W W W W W N N N N W W W N C W W N cn Lh r W W W W W W r r r W Z N r 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 00 N N N N O O O N 1 i . J 1 1 1 1 P F W W r r N N r r P F F A W W r r r 2 00 N N N r N N Ili N r m m N r N N r m m t71 N W V vIP N r W r '0 V r Nall O o o P m P N r rl r r r r N r r r r r r F r o N r m r r P r r N r r r l 1 1 l l l I I 1 1 I I 1 1 1 1 OOP P J,(11 IdW W rr PPF W Wrr A Frr PF F PW W rrr F oON NNrNNUIN rmm NrNNrmm rrW V trP N-1wr �D�r N C • P v t O •" • m >r P S m � N a • • • N P • • w • a m • ► ► • m m x A N N y y V r ♦ .. tP • N i P w P ♦ P i r1,•rN rr r r rr r • •�p•r•�••1+ • •.. ► N • N • N • P P tT P P P N{T P tT N R P P P O•P P ♦ P n N • N • N N N N N N N N N N N ■ N N N N N N ! P ■ P ♦ V ♦ V • V ♦ Ut V V V VI O IJI N ut V V i N S Ia O • O ♦ r ■ a + W • NNNN NN NNNNN ■ V V v>V V V ♦ V P V • r • • o ■ V • In 0,/T PT a,a,PP/T • NN NNNN • r n O O 0000 ♦ pp � n M Z H O K • O O O O O D 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 CIOO tT P P Pp.p.P PO.O•PPPO� P tT PP ITT T y N rco „~„ r " r �•+r,-•r•+rr rrr r N r►•pa••• „�„ t1 2 m m m m Q, mmmmmmmmmmco mmmmmm m P O�Q.P Q.PQM M PIn0 IT O\PP•O�tT P rn a A �� r+ W O ' = C a s rr V V V N N z m m ► r r r y 0 0 P P r r N N N O a r r r r r a N r N NW a s p •1'�` V V�Go wap V W W V r W Ni Ol m a,cc mm �•tT W u W•H m m V a s N W�G P P N V W m V r N W.I V\I V r V �. J1 V Oo O�O� V V o 0 ►'N IM r O V V W 00 V 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 m m r a D y Q 7 ~ N N V l N N N N N N N N N N V f N N N N r a C CCC CC C CCCC .y �yy .y = Z z ri rI rI rI r1 rI rI rI rI rI rl >D D D D D V V/ r I r r r r r r r r r r r O v 7c 7c nlc 7c 7C :v c O H K > .'9 m mmt➢mtT:,mmmmCO N N NV1N N D to o n ccccccccccc z z r 7c ti N N rn V1N V VNN�NNH nnnnnn n p r rt ,t s .r& .. .We rrrrrr O Ln m v r c z z z c¢z z c z z1"1 D f`i r1 fn 1'I 19 f•119 11 I•I rl 1•I 19 l I9Immi w N a a a n V N NNNNNNf/1NVh ZZZzzz .� _ C r '•'I NNNNN V7 V NNVN •.•1.•,.,rr rlr � r., r D zzzzz o n rmmm00I.1mmo ocI c1c>ozc� ac 0000000 � ' n O O O O O O O O O O x ccccccccccc rn a vvvvvvvvvvv c, H M G 9 9 x N N N NNNN V 1 N N N W m t a m m m y 1 'y '� C CCCGCC CCCC r rrrrr � ., 0 0 0 v�vvv�vv��v o0opc0 o rt Iii 0 In 0 it O -n x i rrrrrrrrrrr '� V! h N a rr�•r rrr��•., =2 2 Z 2x N O 1.1 M .� 3i �,! NV1 V!NVl N V V)NV)N r•:., N y V! z z z z z z '9 O N W N N N N N N N N N N N N N N V r r 10 r rrrrrr.+r O V o O O O O OO O O O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 O ti r 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 F W �i N hP•• r.u.�Oa W W W�rrl+ a rN W Nr V UIW NN mOD r O 1 1 1 1 N rrr r r,DNr rr r r r AN1+ W r W 1 � I l l l l l t l l l I i l I• 11 1 a W - V - N 1P+ WHO F(.,W W W•+ a W W rr W I•• ♦ r•••NUNrrV vI V W NNr¢m2 C 3. rri • t O 0� u 1 o .• m a c• x • ♦ D • • • • • • ♦ In cri 1 1 • I m N N N y In 7C N m • P. t. r r r r rr r r 'r r • ► rr • r ► {!� 0 T P P P T O, P m mw R m • P P R Ll W • N N N N N N N N N N N N • N • N N • S LD R W W O O Lp W 0 0 LL to W 0 • P Rm 9, • m 0� • o o O O o 0 0 o O O o k LA ♦ W W • n ► O W O V P 0 A A W N r O R N R O O R T H z -1 O K • O O T O O O O O O O O O OO O O O O b P T m OI •+ r r r •-r a r r r r N r •" LP co m w m lD W co m lL lL 0 Lb m m m m m P O+ O+P P m P m P P ON m a N F r r O N O A r + + C Z 4- W V rr rr N A V lD n tT►•N N N Wm rr NN rr NN WFF W W A F WW W u Wu r LSI CD A F P OO Ol NI In L/Ly F F OO O•P V V PmlA N N r r LTO• r+r rr W O W O 1 • / • • • • • • • • • • • • / • • • / • • Ln W W W V O o W W N U1 M Ln Ln- LA co V 0 o W W O O LII 0 P W O V V V W 0 0 W W 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 W 10 0 0 0 0 N N N N W O W F • R • ♦ ♦ rt • • • R R 4 R M 7C y y y Z S 7C 7C ti'1 t D D N IC C m c z n a a mm a r r n sa T T T T Z a O KK C n r m m y y C C C C C m A 1 n y m m O n Pl n�1 z 2 Z z t y A O ti f.i S n L 1 Z r m m G O O O O O G Z a 'U v m K y m m m a m n a r ;�.X n r 'v o A x z z Nrrro m = m 0 r r oo x ., m z as o W P In A r m C 00 m z z Z O S m n11 m m f 7 M S -ynn rti s m m zz a a z ax m aaaaa z y In- rrrrr 1'1 `y mm m M aZ T n A F n X z n n (� O y 0 � y A O m 9 Z G M y ti m ."O xnxtiLn v y y r o Ln nn 0 v - v y m to.�.�m A C C m C G O O C x w G O O"L "• =m a a z o v v a) rl '7) z z v- o RR v c z n m a r v T Z n ti r _ y 1 r- m m m 71 m m m A m S m n m A y y y Vt b y V1 iY h a m m to 71 C r C n n C M z L n n z Z y y in m n K w X T n n m n z o m v Z Ln X i r r r r r r +•+ r r + r r r r n 1 1 1 I I 1 I i 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 n F A A F F F T F F F •` F A .00 O W N N W W N W W N W W N N W u C W r r N1 r W •O V Z O O O Ot r O O O O O O O N r 0 ti 1 1 1 1 1 f 1 1 ! 1 1 1 W W W r W W r►' W r W F A W V z u W r W N N '1 W W W u W r W N N C / a o T v L o ► m a Lr M M y b • rt ► • y m • R • • a m ► • ► • M 1 1 t 1 m n n n n x x y y y y W r n �o = Ya to � • n 7C n o K • O o T s � N t1 = D O r1 a N 3 O W N V O 2 N V P CD r♦ y UI O VP W I"'O�Om r Om�m 000�p y O 'T T T T T T T T `ti C C C C C C C C A i C Z i 2 f Z Z C r owcoucoo rl i mmV V O,M N N O iY y 1 y y y y y y n 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 S rrrrrrrr �c z rl c. N y f1 3 C ANN h+mr+,v Fn K O C m 1 .0 n t1 ' r A.'o t•1�D � 3 DOSP {ay crvTxs.+r m h �y>Z m X 0 n ma.+DOOM m ccz cc .. N N D m r'7 'y y y Q l S S c C y M mmz zzn o C y y y 2 O r 2 w y � K a n n 0 c z y z 0 z c a o 0� � 1 0 1 m a T m T N D N 0 s m C" m r 0 1 OD m m m co m w m m o 1000 lH- �* ,Q OD � � � � � � \D � H www "D w -F R) H N OD N O N O O O . H W H n y v~i vHi \-n F- O N z ~ w N H O H [D O O O O O O O O O N p� h, H F- 0 -1 O O O O O O O O F I' O H Co---jO `-j CO CD OD 00 M M M W M O O O H O FF' F- F- f] N H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H OD I I I d H H HH H HH H H H H H H H H H O 000 O 00 > O O O O O O O O O H OOn�o CO C) �3 H y OOOOO n o cu a o 11 11 r H P) co s✓ �t a F� � a C+ H W o0 a O O\ N H LA) B HwW N � \1D ° O \1D C)\ O � \-n O \.n N � � � N W w � H N O N O O O O\ N O\ vi \ cr OD M �� OOOOC6w w aO O � O (1 n �y O w z b a rn c� rn cu o cu rn m o _ o Cl) r C+ ::s� ' w � N m C+ C+ c+ c+ c+ c+ c+ c+ c+ n N A ::I m tt- O\-n� N N tzj d Od H H H 01) :OD--A H = � � " a C) -3 H � 0oo a11 H. a Hboo F-3 �. C �t W WN p H O W ((DD aC rn H � � a rn H H FN H FN -' FN-' iN- FN' N H IV N N H N N C') HH HH H H x H H H H H H CO O 00 ON l � � o -4 --.Q --Z -.,I \,D co � � z 0 trot m cHn d - t7 m O (D < W tD C+ Cl) H. O c+ g r� O r (D m a O 0 LTJ � O a � 0m O G 0 C � ° p (D Cl) ::51 C+ to N P) Fl x Cf) x cD C+ ,o ,0` G m < cD M S x O \ N H 1 W �- N O H W H H H H -CO VO O > O O O O H —� OD OOOODODI-p- O OD w O p W MEMO TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: John K. Anderson, City Administrator RE: Urban Corp Work-Study Agreement DATE: June 12 , 1986 Introduction Attached is an agreement with the Urban Corps for work-study students. Background This program is for a ten week period, maximum is $6 . 75/hour of which we would be responsible for 40o which would be a cost to us of $1 , 080 . 00 or we can use the stipend program at $30 . 00/ week. Over the last three years the City has used the stipend program and not the hourly program and that is the program we would continue to use. No one has contacted us regarding employment; however, should we have someone this year who is interested and had a background fitting our needs , I would ask for your approval to hire them outlining the tasks we would have them working on. Entering this agreement now merely qualifies us to become a part of the program should we decide at some time to take advantage of it and budgeted funds be available. There are two changes in the Agreements for the coming fiscal year. One change is the addition of a clause relevant to new Federal legislation mandating Medicare coverage for public employees. This contribution must be made for all interns receiving an hourly wage and who started interning after March 31 , 1986 . The Agency contribution is currently set at 1 . 5% of gross wages . The second change is in intern salaries. Due to a salary ordinance passed by the Minneapolis City Council, the hourly pay rates set for undergraduates will be $5 . 75 per hour and the pay rate for graduate students will be $6 . 75 per hour effective July 1 , 1986 . Recommended Action Authorize proper City officials to enter into an agreement for participation in Urban Corps Program between the City of Minnea- polis and the City of Shakopee for the period July 1 , 1986 to June 30 , 1987 . JKA/jms 1986 - 1987 AGREEMENT FOR PARTICIPATION IN URBAN CORPS PROGRAM BETWEEN CITY OF MINNEAPOLIS AND THIS AGREEMENT is entered into this day of 19 , by and between the City of Minneapolis (herein called "Urban Corps") and (herein called "Agency"). WHEREAS, the above named Agency, a public organization or private non-profit tax-exempt organization, desires to participate in the Twin City Area Urban Corps and in consideration for the assignment of Urban Corps student interns to the Agency, we do hereby agree to the following terms and conditions: 1. The Urban Corps shall have the right to approve or reject requests for student interns submitted by this Agency upon forms provided for that purpose by the Urban Corps. 2. The Agency will accept a student as an intern by completing and signing the Assignment section of the student's Urban Corps application form. 3. The Agency shall utilize such students as may be assigned to it in accordance with the specifications set forth in its written request to the Urban Corps, and shall immediately notify the Urban Corps of any change in nature of assignment, duties, supervisor or work location. 4. The Agency shall provide such students as may be assigned to it with a safe place to work and with responsible supervision. 5. The Urban Corps shall have the right to inspect the work being performed by such students as may be assigned to the Agency, and shall have the right to interview such students and their supervisors. 6. The Urban Corps shall have the right to require such students as may be assigned to the Agency to attend such general or special meetings, or to appear at the Urban Corps office, individually or as a group, as shall be necessary for the proper functions of the program. 7. In accordance with the requirements of Federal and State law, work performed by such students as may be assigned to the Agency shall: a. Be in the public interest; b. Not result in the displacement of employed workers or impair existing contracts for services; c. Not involve the construction, operation or maintenance of so much of any facility as is used, or is to be used, for sectarian instruction or as a place of religious worship; and d. Not involve any partisan or nonpartisan political activity associated with a candidate, or contending faction or group, in an election for public or party office. 8. The Agency shall require such students as may be assigned to it to submit time reports and follow such other procedures as may be established by the Urban Corps. 9. The Urban Corps shall have the right to remove any student assigned to the Agency from said assignment and from the Agency at any time for any reason without prior notice, and the Urban Corps shall not be obligated to replace said student. 10. The Agency shall have the right to remove any student assigned to said Agency at any time with prior notice given to the student and the Urban Corps. 11. The Agency warrants that it is in compliance with the provisions of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (P.L. 88-352, 78 Stat. 252), and Minnesota Statutes Section 181.59 and Minneapolis Code of Ordinance, Chapter 139 and 141, where applicable. 12. The Agency shall indemnify, protect and hold harmless the Urban Corps from all claims, causes or actions which may result from the assignments of- students to the Agency. 13. The Agency shall obtain at its own expense Worker's Compensation insurance (or shall be self-insured under State Law) for such students as may be assigned to it under this Agreement. 14. To comply with P.L. 99-272, the agency shall pay to the Urban Corps, for students receiving an hourly salary according to the rates specified in Section 15(a) and 15(b), Section 17(a) and 17(b), an additional 1.5p or other percentage figure as agreed upon by identifying the percentage figure on the student's Urban Corps application form of the gross compensation earned by such students assigned to and accepted by the agency after April 1, 1986. 15. The Agency shall pay to the Urban Corps 40% or other percentage figure as agreed upon by identifying the percentage figure on the student's Urban Corps application form of the gross compensation earned by such students assigned and accepted by the Agency under a Federal or State program. The Urban Corps will bill the Agency, in accordance with bi-weekly payroll periods, for its proper share of the compensation of such students as may have been assigned to the Agency and performed work during said period. Student hourly rates are set forth in Section 15(a) and 15(b) of this Agreement. a. Hourly compensation for students will be set at minimum rates of $5.75 per hour for entering freshmen through receipt of a Bachelor's degree, and $6.75 per hour for graduate students; other agreed upon hourly compensation rates not to be below the specified rates in 15(a); or other rates for Urban Corps student interns as established by the City of Minneapolis, through a salary ordinance replacing current minimum rates. b. A graduate student is defined for purposes of this Agreement as one who has received a B.A. , B.S. , or equivalent degree or is enrolled in the fifth year of a five year program. 16. At the election of the Agency, the Urban Corps shall place students to intern under a Stipend program. This option will be specified in the Assignment Form which the intern's Agency supervisor must sign before commencement of the internship. The Stipend rate which the Agency shall pay the Urban Corps is $30.00 per week for each week the student works. 17. At the election of the Agency, the Urban Corps shall place interns for whom the Agency will pay the intern's total compensation plus an additional ten percent (10�) for administrative costs. This option will be specified in the Assignment Form which the intern's Agency supervisor must sign before commencement of the internship. Agency rates for said option are set forth in Section 17(a) and 17(b) of this Agreement. a. Agency rates for students will be set at minimum rates of $6.33 per hour for entering freshmen through receipt of a Bachelor's Degree, and $7.43 per hour for graduate students; other agreed upon hourly compensation rates not to be below specified rates in 17(a); or other rates for Urban Corps student interns as established by the City of Minneapolis through a salary ordinance replacing current minimum rates. b. A graduate student is defined for purposes of this Agreement as one who has received a B.A. , B.S. , or equivalent degree or is enrolled in the fifth year of a five year program. 18. Performance under this contract shall commence on July 1, 1986 and terminate on June 30, 1987 unless amended in writing as mutually agreed upon by both the Agency and the Institution; however, either party may terminate upon sixty (60) days written notice. Based upon the statements and affirmations made by the Agency through the above document, the Urban Corps hereby agrees to the assignment of students to said Agency, in accordance with said document and the applicable laws and regulations. CITY OF MINNEAPOLIS AGENCY By City of Shakopee Mayor Name ATTEST: 129 East First Avenue Address City Clerk Shakopee, MN 55379 COUNTERSIGNED City State Zip Code City Finance Officer By Mayor Approved as to Legality: By City Administrator Attest: Assistant City of Minneapolis Attorney o--t- MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator 1 � FROM: Judith S. Cox, City Clerk(�-% RE: Assessment Agreement with Scott County DATE: June 12 , 1986 Introduction The current assessment agreement with Scott County is expiring with this assessment year and a new assessment agreement is attached for Council consideration. Background I have talked with Leroy Houser and he recommends renewing it. I also talked with Mr. Krass the Assistant City Attorney and the only suit he was involved in was regarding Rahr and that was settled through new legislation. The County Attorney is the legal counsel in suits involving the assessed evaluations rather than the City Attorney. Therefore , Mr. Krass has had no dealings with the County Assessors Office to make a recommendation one way or the other. The new contract is identical to the previous contract with three exceptions : 1 . The original rate per parcel started at $3 . 50 and the new rate per parcel starts at $4 . 25 . Our 1986 rate is $4 . 00 . The rates charged by Scott County to townships and municipalities in Scott County range between $3 .75 to $4 . 25 depending on the complexity of development in the community. Because of our many industrial properties, more time is spent on the average for parcels in Shakopee, hence our rate is at the higher range. 2 . The City Building Inspector has requested that a duplicate picture be taken of properties for his property card file when pictures are taken by the Assessor. Leroy now has to take his own pictures and it would be less costly to have the Assessor take a second picture when he takes one for his records. This averages out to an additional cost of 25� per parcel bringing the new rate per parcel to $4 . 50 . 3 . The agreement is for a three year period rather than a five year period. Alternatives 1 . Enter into a new contract with Scott County as drafted. 2 . Hire City' s own assessor. 3 . Amend proposed contract with Scott County. Recommendation Alternative No. 1 . Action Requested Authorize proper City officials to enter into an agreement with Scott County to provide for the assessment of property in Shakopee by the County Assessor. JSC/jms r ASSESSMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN CIT'r' OF SHAKOPEE AND COUNTY OF SCOTT THIS AGREEMENT is made and entered into by and between the City of Shakopee and the County of Scott , State of Minnesota, this day of 15, WHEREAS, the Ci tr of Shakopee vii rhes to enter into an acireerrment wi th the County of Scott to provide for the assessment of the property in said City by the County Assessor; and WHEREAS, it is the wish of said County to cooperate with said Cit>• to provide for a fair and equitable assessment of property; NOW THEREFORE IN CONSIDERATION OF THE MUTUAL COVENANTS HEREIN CONTAINED IT IS AGREED AS FOLLOU.iS: 1 . That the City of Shakopee which lies within the County of Scott and constitutes a separate district, shall have its property assessed by the County As of Scott Count>,, for the assessment of the years 1987 - 1929. 2. That the County Assessor of Scott County assign a knowledgeable assessor with industrial/commercial experience to provide the Shakopee assessment, said as=sessment to be reviewed by the Chief Deputy Assessor who coordinates all industrial/commercial assessments. 3. That the assessor assigned to Shakopee agrees to provide the City with duplicate picture cards taken of taxable property during each assessment year beginning with the 1987 a=ssessment. 4. That the asse=s=sor ass igred to Shakopee be available during normal working hours to respond to Shakopee citizens' requests for assessing information and requests for assessment data from the City of Shakopee. 5. That it is understood that the City of Shakopee may take legal action against the County of Scott if the City should be penalized of any State Aid resulting from the co-efficient of dispersion standards not being met. o. That the City of Shakopee will continue to conduct a Board of Review and upon the agreement of both parties, the City Attorney may assist the County Attorney in any tax appeals. 7. That in consideration for said assessment services, the City of Shakopee hereby agrees to pay the County of Scott the sum of $4.50 per parcel on or before July 15, 1987. That the sum shall not be increased by more than 10% in any one Year beginning with the 1988 assessment, with Yearly payments payable on or before July 15th of the assessment year. S. That termination of this agreement by either party shall be made by written notice no less than 120 days prior to completion of the current assessment Year on July 15th. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this agreement this day of , 19 In presence of: For City of Shakopee Signed: By Attest In presence of: For County of Scott Sio_ned: BY Attest approved as to Form: R. Kathleen Morris Scott County Attorney MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator FROM: Judith S. Cox, City Clerk RE: Renewal of Non-Intoxicating Malt Liquor Licenses DATE: June 17 , 1986 Introduction On June 10th Council tabled non-intoxicating liquor license applications that were not in order for renewal. Background The following applications are now in order and can be removed from the table for action. Licenses not in order, as noted, may be left on the table. Two licenses that were name changes and were advertised for consideration on June 17th should also be approved. Action Requested 1 . Remove the application( s ) from the table. 2 . Approve the application( s) and grant an On Sale or Off Sale Non-Intoxicating Liquor License to: Coll-Prahm Inc. , 2400 East 4th Avenue - On Sale A/ ' Tom Thumb Food Markets, 590 So. Marschall Road - Off Sale Kwai and Grace Poon, 237 East 1st Avenue - On Sale Brooks Superette, Inc. #42 , 1147 Canterbury Road - Off Sale 3 . Approve the application and grant an On Sale Non-Intoxicating Liquor License to Aires I - Daniel J. Pecha DBA Pizza ' n Pasta, 584 Marschall Road. 4 . Approve the application and grant an On Sale Non-Intoxicating Liquor License to Marlene Jarrett, 222 East First Avenue. JSC/jms SwElosr -anuaAV gsIT3 gsPS ZZZ GUGTIpW o-4 asuaoTZ IonbTZ buTgPOTXOquI-uoN @TPS u0 UP qupab pule t[OT'4EOTTddP aq4 anolddv - D, -PPOg TTEgosIPN �8S 'P4sPd u , PZZTd VgQ Puoad 'P TGTUPQ - I SGITV o-4 asuaoTq IonbTZ buTgPoTX04UI-UON GIPS uO up 4uPzb pup uOTIPOTTddP aq-4 anolddv - E GTPS ;30 - ppo-d AInga@4uP3 LtTT ' Zb# -oui 'aggaaadnS sxooag aTPS uO - anu@AV 4sT 4SPH LE;Z 'uood GOPIS pup TPMx GTPS ;;0 - pPOg TTPgosaPN 'OS 06S 'sgaXaPN poo3 gwngz wos GIPS uO - anuaAV 144� 4SPS OO�Z "OuI WT4PId-TTOO :o-4 GSUGOT7 a:OnbTq bUT-4p3TX0quI-uON GTPS ;;0 Io aTPS uO up luPlb pup ( s )UOT4p3TTddp aq-4 anolddV • Z • @Tgpl aqq woa; ( s )uOTIPOTTddp Gq� @nOWOE • T pagsann -d UOT40V •panOaddp aq osTP pTnogs g4LT aunt uO uOT4PIapTsuOo Io; pasT4I0npP Ga@M pule sabuPgo awpu aaaM -4Pgq sasuaoTT OMs ' GTgpq Gq4 uO 4;GT aq APW 'pG40u SP 'Iaplo UT 4Ou Sasu@oTq •UOT40P Io; @Tgpq aqq wol; panoW@I aq upo pup IapzO UT MOU GIP SUOT4POTTddp bUTMOTTO; aqy punol xopg -TPMaual IO; I@pIO UT 4OU @IGM 4Pg4 suOT4POTTddp asuaOTT IonbTT bUT4POTX04UT-UOU p@Tgp4 TTounoO LDOT aunt u0 UOTgonpoaqul 986T ' LT aunt :SZVQ sasuaoTq IonbTq 4TPW 5uT4POTxO4uI-uoN ;O TPMauag :Sg XIGTO A;TO 'xO0 •S g4Tpn.n :NoEz IO4PIgSTUTWPV A4T3 'uoszapuV -x ugof :01 ONSW MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator FROM: Judith S. Cox, City Clerk RE: Renewal of Intoxicating Liquor Licenses DATE: June 17 , 1986 Introduction On June 10th Council tabled intoxicating liquor applications that were not in order for renewal. Also, because of a staff error, Council approved licenses for the Pullman and KC Hall incorrectly. The Pullman applied for a Sunday license which was not approved and the KC Hall was approved for a Sunday license which was not applied for. Background The following applications are now in order and can be removed from the table for action. Licenses not in order, as noted, can be left on the table. 1 . Remove the application( s ) from the table. 2 . Approve the application( s) and grant an On Sale, Sunday, Off Sale Intoxicating Liquor License to: On Sunday Off Club /1a Valley Liquor Inc. X /, 1104 Minnesota Valley Mall NThe Weiss Company Inc. X o 8522 East Highway 101 R. Hanover Inc. X X 911 East First Avenue S.E.L.F. Inc. X X 1135 East First Avenue VFW Post 4046 X X 132 East First Avenue Friendly Folks Club, Inc. X X X No 122 East First Avenue 3 . Approve the application and grant a Sunday Liquor License to the Pullman Club Inc. , 124 West First Avenue. 4 . Reconsider liquor license applications of the Knights of Columbus Home Assoc. , Inc. , 1760 East 4th Avenue. 5 . Approve the application and grant a Club Liquor License to the Knights of Columbus Home Assoc. , Inc. , 1760 East 4th Avenue. /n7 MEMO TO: John K. Anderson FROM: Stephen Hurley, Eng. Tech. /Information Systems Coord. SUBJECT: Creation of MIS (Management Information Systems) Position DATE: June 17, 1986 INTRODUCTION: Since a large proportion of my time is spent on computer related matters (see section titled "1485 Computer Related Time" ) , the upcoming adjustment in salary as a result of the comparable worth study will reflect that time. It is therefore the purpose of this memo to recommend that a regular MIS (Management Information Systems) position be created to manage the increasingly complex and time consuming handling of information in the City. It is also recommended that it be implemented with comparable worth and/or the 1987 budget. BACKGROUND: The City is primarily an information handling organization and has spent considerable sums of money to provide the physical means necessary to handle that information. It must be willing to create the most efficient , cost effective, and comprehensive method of using the system. EXISTING DUAL ROLE With a dual role as Engineering Technician and Information Systems Coordinator my time has been split based on the highest priority of the work at hand. This gets the immediate job done but does not allow time to tackle other , and more complex tasks that allow the entire system to run smoothly. In a reactionary or maintenance position to problems and training within the system there isn 't time for creativity or even just making progress on planned projects. Of the two roles, the Information System Coordinator position has more potential for affecting the efficiency of City wide operations than does the technician role. The value to the City of a regular MIS position would be realized by increased progress toward the City 's goals and by the imple- 1 mentation of the projects we have been unable to address. Ma-jOR COMPUTER SYSTEM EM G ALS 1 . To create a City-wide property data base. i. To provide multi-user access to that data base. To move away from dependence on LUGIS by providing similar computing capability in-house. 4. To avoid duplication of effort, cost , and data by sharing resources with SPUC. S. To provide and maintain various computer related activities and applications such as word processing, spread sheets, CAD :Computer aided Drafting: , trouble shooting, hardware and software evaluation, purchasing and training. PROPOSED P40_fECTS The following is a list of projects the City will be unable to pursue in any functional detail without adequate time being committed to their implementation. 1 . The property data base is far from being completed. It does contain the basic information necessary for the Storm Drainage Utility. However , the Building, Planning and Engi- neering departments all have much more data that must be included. This will require structuring the data base to accept that Information and creating input and output for- mats. . Once a CAD system is installed, a graphic data base needs to be created which will interface with the property data base. 71. The Public Works Department is on the verge of computer- izing. An equipment inventory and management system needs to be designed , or acquired, installed and maintained. 4. The Fire Department has expressed an interest in computer- izing and could make use of our property data base. u. A comprehensive training program needs to be set up. This will get more people involved and help users feel more comfortable using all available hardware and software. b. A detailed hardware, software and personnel inventory needs to be created listing locations, serial numbers, maintenance 2 agreements, configurations, operating systems„ etc. This :ill provide a basis for planning, improving , modifying , budgeting and training. 7. Long and short range pians need to be established and put in writing. 8. Creation of a Local Area Network (LAP) or a similar method of providing multi-user access to the data base is of pri- mary importance. Documentation and SOP 's need to be written for applications and procedures to provide continuity and efficiency in training. 10. The City needs to be analyzed on a departmental basis to determine what applications would provide the greatest benefit. 11 . An electronic mail system should be set up between City Hall and Council members to help reduce time and material cost in preparing Council packets. 12. Design a computer application addressing a recent law requiring the notification of individual property owners of the actual dollar amount of any special assessment. The question that must be asked is: Are these and similar projects worth doing? I personally believe that they are, but that they won 't be accomplished until time and personnel have been dedicated to their completion. TIME SPENT To help evaluate whether an MIS position is justified a review of my time spent in 1985 doing computer system related duties may be helpful . Most computer related time was spent under four program numbers. NAME PROGRAM # HOURS COMPUTER SYS. HOURS Administration 121 oil 311 Storm Drainage Util . 731 457 347. Gen.. Management 411 342 276 Misc.. 407 163 41 „� 971 hours The time spent on 121 (Administration) was for anything involving the City computer system such as maintenance, purchasing computer committee meetings, training , etc. For 7Z! (Storm Drainage Utility) computer time has been increasing since mid 1985 primarily for building and maintaining the property database and liaison with LOUIS and Scott County. General Management and Miscellaneous time has been used for picking up one-of-a-kind projects and creating and using computer applications for various departments. A total of 971 hours of a total possible 2()80 were spent on computer mputer relaced matters. 971 / 20BO = 46. 7% Time spent on computer related items is approaching 50%, up from 30% in 1984. PROPOSED MIS POSITION I have completed a survey of seventeen Metro area Cities regarding their computer systems and how they are managed. All cities surveyed have microcomputers, seven have minicomputers and two have in-house mainframe computers. Thirteen of the seventeen are members of LOGIS. Five cities have MIS Coordinator or data Processing Manager positions. Three of the five are MIS positions, two of which are full-time and one is part-time at 60 which will become a full- time position. Five additional cities have either proposed a full-time MIS position or :Mould like to have one. Another city has an engineering department employee doing -l=ull-time computer related work, and three cities have various other full and part-time computer staff . Salary ranges for the regular ''EIS positions vary from a low of $27,011 to $36,625. A 1986 national computer salary survey published by Source EDP, a recruiting firm, lists for Office Automation Analysts (similar in duties to MIS) , a salary range of $29,000 to 137,400 for 2 to 5 years of experience. POSITION SALARY Based on experience and education, the salary ranges previously mentioned , and most of all on the value of a regular MIS position 4 to the City, I believe a salary of $01 ,500 is not unreasonable. Actual salary would depend on comparable worth results. Most of this salary could be recouped as noted below. An Engineering Technician II would replace my current Tech. III position at a savings of 15,434 to -x`10.656 depending on the level of experience. This would also depend on comparable worth. With additional time for computer related duties provided by the creation of a regular MIS position it would be possible to actively pursue the City 's independence from LOS I S for an additional savings exceeding120,000 per year. By its very nature LOG I S independence Ice woul d be one of the last steps in creating a total city computer system. Further cost savings would be possible with the increased efficiencies available following implementation of the proposed projects. RECOMMENDATION: In order to retain more than just a maintenance position with the City 's computer system and to help justify the past and future expenditure on an integrated computer system and to provide adequate planning , training and coordination, it is important to establish a position from which these concerns can be met. It is therefore my recommendation that a regular Management Information System (MIS) coordinator position be established. To help justify such a position it is also my recommendation that this position not be limited to coordination of a computer system only but be expanded to include City-wide automation needs. This would include planning, evaluating and coordination of all office systems such as micrographics, telephone, dictation/transcription systems and electronic mail . REQUESTED ACTION: A move creating a regular Management Information Systems coordinator position to be implemented with comparable worth and the 1487 budget. 5 POSITION DESCRIPTIOld POSITION: Management Information System (MIS) Coordinator DEPARTMENT: Administration RESPONSIBLE TO: City Administrator PRIMARY OBJECTIVES OF POSITION: 1 . Evaluate, implement , and interconnect microcomputers, word processing, and office teleprocessing products, to allow various levels of access to data base management systems, electronic mail , query facilities, spread sheets and decision support systems. L. Establish methods and criteria for evaluation of office automation hardware and software. Determine best uses of Local Area Networks (LAN's) to link microcomputers to each other and to larger computers. 0. Provide user training and support. Plan , evaluate, recommend , purchase, train , and coordinate maintenance of all office automation equipment such as copy machines, micrographic systems, telephone systems, dictation/transcription equipment and type- writers. EXAMPLES OF WORK: 1 . Evaluate and recommend appropriate computer hardware and software on a continuous basis. . Provide or broker- training for employees to facilitate effective use of the computer. Coordinate efforts among departments to assure a total information system. Develop and implement procedures and controls to provide accuracy, security, product quality, standardization and operational efficiency. 4. Act as an in-house consultant providing technical assitance as needed. Assist departments in tailoring software to meet specific department needs. Act as a technical "trouble shooter" O. Provide both short and long range computer information systems planning. b. Coordinate activities with LOGIS and other external resources and agencies. * Facilitate effective use of LOOIS. * Be contact person for vendors and consultants. ?. Function as staff person for City Computer Committee. Periodically report to Committee on significant develop ments and ongoing activities. Seep; policy direction from Committee as appropriate. 8. Assist in coordination of City telecommunications systems, including cable television and City telephone system, with the City 's information system. 9. Administer City 's computer activity budget. 10. Establish and oversee backup procedures for archiving records off the system. 11 . Coordinate hardware and software maintenance. 12. Establish and maintain consistent level of system supplies. 1-?. Perform related work: as required. KNOWLEDGE, SF ILLS AND ABILITIES: 1. Solid Understanding of Management information Systems. 2. Familiarity with current computer market. 3. Broad understanding and appreciation of the role, functions and responsibilities of municipal government. 4. Ability to do research and prepare reports on a variety of subjects. 5. Excellent communication skills both verbal and written. 6. Ability to work effectively with a variety of people and departments. 7. Demonstrated strong organization skills. DESIRED EXPERIENCE AND TRAINING: 1 . Degree in Management information systems or related +field. 2. Two to three years experience in computer applications. MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator FROM: Fulton Schleisman, Building Inspector RE: Free Trash Dumping Program ( 1986 ) DATE: June 12 , 1986 INTRODUCTION• As you requested, I have summarized the 1986 Clean-up Campaign, BACKGROUND: Because this was the second year of the program, a cost comparison may be helpful. 1986 1985 Eight firms were invited to Six firms were invited to furnish 30 yd containers . The furnish 30 yd containers . bids were $130 and $150 each. The bids were $99 , $120 and $130 each. A total of 47 containers were A total of 33 containers filled @ $130 = $6,110 . 00 . were filled @ $99 = $3 , 267. 00 Misc. printing and sign costs Misc. printing and sign costs totaled approximately $100 . 00 totaled approximately $35 . 00 . ( Includes a reusable sign for dump site) . Public Works furnished men and The effort was proportional equipment as follows: to 1986 . No hourly breakdown Labor: 39 hours, regular available. Labor: 8 hours, overtime Equipment: 24 hours front end loader Program Coordinator ' s time: Program Coordinator' s time: 3 hours 24 hours Some Notes of Interest: 1. Despite the "no tires accepted" rule, several dozen were dumped. They were hauled away at no additional cost to the City. 2 . The Shakopee Public Utilities Manager has asked that another site for dumping be considered. 3 . Some scavengers were observed again this year, but caused no problems. 4 . The newspaper, radio station and cable television publicized the program. S . The fact that residents of the far east end of the City had been encouraged to clean up, may have contributed to the increased participation. 6 . Promotional leaflets were inserted in S.P.U.C. utility bills last year. This year storm sewer utility bills were stuffed. As a result, a slightly different base was reached, non-resident Shakopee property owners etc. This also may have caused an increase in this year ' s program. 7. Some non-resident, non-property owners may be using the free program. 8 . Public Works hauled out several loads of brush that likely was dumped by a tree trimming contractor. It has been suggested that number 6 above could be avoided by implementing a curbside or alley pickup system. The Cities of Hopkins and Bloomington street crews conduct such operations. I expect that our public works crew would accomplish little else for a week if saddled with this task. Further, Shakopee residents appear to have the capacity to transport their junk to the dump site. (No requests were received this year for pick-up assistance) . Therefore, the City would be offering a service that the residents are now willing and able to provide, in an attempt to eliminate a few violators. Another suggestion is to hire or get a volunteer to monitor the dump location. This individual could verify residency, check for illegal materials, etc. In summary, the program was structured to avoid being labor- intensive. Any modifications may increase the cost. ACTION REQUESTED: Give staff direction to continue with the annual free trash dumping program. FS:cah I I - — I � I m �. i I N Z O n -•I DOD ---.. — 0 G) I z W m -- -- � -� rnD a I - r — - G7 I z m (fin r D I n � O c -u I cn 0 X oWQj 0 '- -- m n m _ I -q --� ,- D — _D i rZ I 2cn IO W - — � Z I � D v m 1 I N N O m r-- N w ZO D G N—4 En > co CD 74 W� G7 X C �o n-4 m 3 D D F G1 Z v mm D O m T --I c v n m m n O N O + O A r D f � O M O < v m v � n ' o m D r EW DRIVE - -----,— N U) n co D n N ! IN O O � n (!) N O o D A O co PDp 0 0 co OD N W -P r I I ' V1 C D –I –i ap D Al Cj D i� 0 0 +c l n (31 t N- A 1, U) CD i CO D Q) 6 0 C7 Q1 CD cn = 01 O + + N W O O M 0 D = o — m t> N r ;u O U) Z D D � – n r + w W n � -D D I U) I I N U1 - t CO. R. D. N0. 17 0 0 0 e C7 cn D � ?' o C) r mD U1 < X -i D �1 2m W rn D o n e o a • Cm � d = a a m d �Y • T 3 • o CL a n " 3 ; 9 W ` d o — • s a • ` 3 o " n T ! — • • CL Ch x N —{z C OD m c — z � o I'f'i•�r•�'�li+� C 2 3 m z lk co � l � D � 0 1:� L, ! , MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator FROM: Judith S. Cox, City Clerk RE: A Resolution of Special Commendation to Richard Kaley DATE: June 3, 1986 Introduction & Background In conjunction with the Employee Picnic, the City has implemented the practice of recognizing employees who have completed a continuous employment of 5, 10, 15, 20, 25 years. Certificates are presented to employees after 5, 10, 15 and 20 years. It is policy that a resolution be adopted for employees who have completed 25 years of employment with the City. Mr. Richard Kaley has recently completed 25 years of employment with the City and the attached resolution expresses the City's appreciation for his devotion to the City. Alternatives 1. Adopt Resolution No. 2573. 2. Don't adopt Resolution No. 2573. Recommendation Alternative No. 1. The resolution will be presented to Mr. Kaley at the picnic. Action Requested Offer Resolution No. 2573, A Resolution of Special Commendation to Richard Kaley, and move its adoption. JSC/jms RESOLUTION NO. 2573 A RESOLUTION OF SPECIAL COMMENDATION TO RICHARD KALEY Be it remembered that on the 1st day of October, 1960 RICHARD KALEY entered City employment and from that date on he has faithfully served the City of Shakopee, its citizens and residents over and beyond the call of duty for all these many years. Therefore, Be It Resolved by the Shakopee City Council that the City hereby expresses its deep appreciation and gratitude and do hereby commend Richard Kaley for his devotion to duty, his loyalty and his friendship. Adopted in adjourned regular session of the City Council of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota, held this 17th day of June, 1986. Mayor of the City of Shakopee ATTEST: City Clerk Approved as to form this day of , 1986. City Attorney i /J Iib MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator, Fm''LrIY; J t� f H�1 I l c i u, V i L �' zIiLg �`in. � I SUBJECT: Resolution No. 2576, Approval of Plans R Specifications for Timber Trails DATE: June 12, 1986 INTRODUCTION: Plans for the Timber Trails rehabilitation project is being submitted for approval and the establishment of a bid opening date. BACKGROUND: In developing the plans for the subject project, no major incon- sistencies were encountered from that studied and presented in the feasibility report. Due to the fact that there are five Tuesdays in July and based upon the required advertising period, note that I am requesting a special meeting to consider awardal of the lowest bid at 7:00 P.M., July 22, 1986. This will save valuable prime construction time. RECOMMENDATION: Offer and adopt Resolution No. 2576, A Resolution Approving Plans and Specifications and Ordering Advertisement for Bids for Timber Trails Road Improvements, Project No. 1986-5. If Council wishes to amend the time of the special meeting, please indicate revised time in motion. REQUESTED ACTION: Offer Resolution No. 2576, A Resolution Approving Plans and Specifications and Ordering Advertisement for Bids for Timber Trails Road Improvements, Project No. 1986-5. KA/pmp MEM2576 RESOLUTION NO. 2576 A Resolution Approving Plans And Specifications And Ordering Advertisement For Bids Timber Trails Road Improvements ProDect No. 1986-5 WHEREAS, pursuant to Resolution No. 2561 adopted by City Council on May 27, 1986, Ken Ashfeld, City Engineer has prepared plans and specifications for the improvement of Roadway in Timber Trails Addition and has presented such plans and specifications to the Council for approval NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA: 1. Such plans and specifications, a copy of which is on file and of record in the Office of the City Engineer, are hereby approved. 2. The City Clerk shall prepare and cause to be inserted in the official paper and in the Construction Bulletin an adver- tisement for bids upon the making of such improvements under such approved plans and specifications. The Advertisement for Bids shall be published for three weeks, shall specify the work to be done, shall state that bids will be received by the City Clerk until 10:00 A.M., on July 18, 1986, at which time they will be publicly opened in the Council Chambers of the City Hall by the City Clerk and Engineer, or their designated party, will then be tabulated, and will be considered by the Council at 7:00 P.M., or thereafter on July 22, 1986, in the Council Chambers, and that no bids will be considered unless sealed and filed with the City Clerk and accompanied by a cash deposit, cashier's check, bid bond or certified check payable to the order of the City of Shakopee for not less than five (5%) percent of the amount of the Bid. Adopted in the City of Shakopee, . 19 ATTEST: City Clerk session of the Minnesota, held this Approved as to form this day of , 19 City Attorney City Council of day of Mayor of the City of Shakopee ENGINEERS ESTIMATE TIMBER TRAILS ROAD IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT NO. 1986 ITEM DESCRIPTION UNIT QUANTITY UNIT PRICE TOTAL 1. Remove Bituminous Pavement S. Y. 7170.00 $1.25 $S,962.50 2. Sub -Grade Excavation C. Y. 2870.00 $3.00 $8,610.00 3. Sub -Grade Prep. STA. 21.50 $200.00 $4,300.00 4. Salvage & Placement of Existing Base Material STA. 21.50 $200.00 $4,300.00 5. Class 5 Aggregate (3138) TONS 3630.00 $6.00 $21,00.00 6. 2331 Bituminous Patching TONS 600.00 $25.00 $20,000.00 7. 2341 Bituminous Wear Course TONS 1500.00 $22.00 $331000.00 S. Class c Aggregate Shouldering TONS 254.00 $6.00 $1,524.00 9. Seeding ACRE 1.00 $700.00 $700.00 10. Geotextile Const. Fabric S.Y. 8600.00 $0.90 $7,740.00 11. 4143D C.B. Castings EA. 10.00 $100.00 $1,000.00 12. D3 Dozer Time HRS. 8.00 $30.00 $240.00 TOTAL $112,15S.50 O MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator FROM: Judith S. Cox, City Clerk RE: Annual Updating of City Code DATE: June 12, 1986 Introduction The annual revision conference with Municipal Ordinance Codifiers, Inc. was conducted in April. The City Attorney and City Clerk were in attendance. As a result of that conference, the Codifiers have prepared seven ordinances for Council consideration. Background Ord. No. 196, Amending Chapter 1 Section 1.10 is added stating that the title of a section is for convenience only and that the contents of the paragraph shall not be controlled by the title. Section 1.11 is added, for clarification only, stating that a public official's designee in his absence is also a public official. Ord. No. 197, Amending Chapter 3 *This ordinance provides that all municipal utilities shall be billed to property owner, unless contracted by the owner and the tenant as agent for the owner. It also makes each account a lien upon the property which if unpaid can be placed upon the tax rolls. Ord. No. 198, Amending Chapter 5 Sec. 5.01 Definitions are added and updated. Malt and wine coolers are included in the definitions of beer, wine and liquor. Definitions of alcoholic beverages, malt liquor and minor (in accordance with Laws 1986) are added. Sec. 5.08 has been expanded to include unlawful acts of minors and these will eliminate duplication in other sections of the chapter. Sec. 5.09 deletion of reference to a repealed state statute. *Sec. 5.10 this section is being updated and it eliminates the need for a beer license if the licensee has a liquor license. Sec. 5.30 this section does not require a liquor licensee to obtain a separate beer license - this is consistent with changes in Sec. 5.10 above. *Sec. 5.32, Subd. 1 specifies that no more than one off sale liquor license can be issued to any one person for more than one place and goes on to define "interest" one may have which would preclude a 2nd license. License maybe granted to resident aliens in addition to citizens of the U.S. This is consistent with state law. Subd. 4 contains disqualifications for obtaining a liquor license. Resident aliens maybe granted a license. No license may be issued to a person who within five years of the application has been convicted of a willful violation of the law, has had a license revoked within five years of the application, to anyone who at the time of the violation owns more than 5% of the capital stock of a corporate licensee, or a person not of good moral character. Subd. 13 lists unlawful acts not pertaining to minors. Sec. 5.091 prohibits alcoholic beverages on school grounds. Sec. 5.092 prohibits alcoholic beverages on parks, streets, public property and parking lots. At the recommendation of the Codifiers this is being removed from the park regulations and placed in the liquor regulations. In a court of law, it is more enforceable under liquor violations than park violations. *Sec. 5.36 adds language permitting a temporary liquor license under certain conditions. Ord. No. 199, Amending Chapter 6 The exemption from having insurance coinciding with the taxicab license for businesses operating in other cities is being clarified so that this exemption does not extend to all licenses contained in Chapter 6. Ord. No. 200, Amendinq Chapter 8 Adopts by reference MSA 168, 169, and 171 regarding traffic regulations. Ord. No. 201, Amending Chapter 10 Deletes references to alcoholic beverages in certain sections, which are now covered in Chapter 5 ie. trespassing upon land, disorderly conduct at events, consumption on streets and public property and private parking lots. Ord. No. 202, Amending Chapter 14 Deletes reference to alcoholic beverages in the park regulations, which is now covered in Chapter 5. A cross reference/codifiers note will be inserted in the park regulations. *Policy Decisions Policy decisions which Council may or may not wish to adopt, I'd like to point out as follows: *1. Ord. No. 197, permits the City to assess delinquent utility bills. *2. Ord. No. 198, Sec. 5.10 eliminates the need for a 3.2 beer license if one has a liquor license. *3. Ord. No. 198, Sec. 5.32 prohibits a person from holding more than one off sale liquor license. *4. Ord. No. 198, Sec. 5.36 permits a temporary liquor license under certain conditions. Alternatives a. Adopt ordinances as presented. b. Amend ordinances as desired. JSC/jms ORDINANCE NO. 196 , FOURTH SERIES / ;� AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA, AMENDING CITY CODE CHAPTER 1 ENTITLED "GENERAL PROVISIONS AND DEFINITIONS APPLICABLE TO THE ENTIRE CITY CODE INCLUDING PENALTY FOR VIOLATION" BY ADDING PROVISIONS RELATING TO TITLES AND PUBLIC OFFICIALS; AND, MAKING THIS ORDINANCE APPLICABLE TO EVERY CHAPTER, SECTION OR OTHER PROVISION OF THE CITY CODE. THE CITY COUNCIL OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA, ORDAINS: SECTION I. Shakopee City Code Chapter 1 is hereby amended by adding Sections, to read: SEC. 1.10. TITLES. A title or caption to or in any chapter, section, subdivision, subparagraph or other provision of the City Code is for convenience only and shall not limit, expand, or otherwise alter or control the content, wording or interpretation thereof. SEC. 1.11. REFERENCE TO A PUBLIC OFFICIAL. Wherever a public official is referred to in the City Code, the reference shall include such public official, or his designee in the absence or during the disability of the public official. SECTION II. This ordinance shall be applicable to every chapter, section, or other provision of the City Code. SECTION III. After the adoption, signing and attestation of this Ordinance, it shall be published once in the official newspaper of the City of Shakopee and shall be in full force and effect on and after the date following such publication. Adopted in _session of the City Council of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota, held this day of 19 Mayor of the City of Shakopee ATTEST: City Clerk Prepared and approved as to form this day of ► 19 City Attorney Published in the Shakopee Valley News this day of , 19 ORDINANCE NO. 197 , FOURTH SERIES AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA, AMENDING CITY CODE CHAPTER 3 ENTITLED "MUNICIPAL AND PUBLIC UTILITIES - RULES AND REGULATIONS, FRANCHISES AND RATES" BY ADDING A PROVISION RELATING TO DELINQUENT UTILITY RATES AND CHARGES; AND, BY ADOPTING BY REFERENCE, SHAKOPEE CITY CODE CHAPTER 1 AND SECTION 3.99 WHICH, AMONG OTHER THINGS, CONTAIN PENALTY PROVISIONS. THE CITY COUNCIL OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA, ORDAINS: SECTION I. Shakopee City Code Chapter 3 is hereby amended by adding a Section, to read: SEC. 3.04. MUNICIPAL UTILITY SERVICES AND CHARGES A LIEN. Subd. 1. Payment for all municipal utility (as that term is defined in City Code, Section 3.01) service and charges shall be the primary responsibility of the owner of the premises served and shall be billed to him unless otherwise contracted for and authorized in writing by the owner and the tenant, as agent for the owner, and consented to by the City of Shakopee, Minnesota. The City may collect the same in a civil action or, in the alternative and at the option of the City, as otherwise provided in this Subdivision. Subd. 2. Each such account is hereby made a lien upon the premises served. All such accounts which are more than forty-five days past due may, when authorized by resolution of the Council, be certified by the City Clerk of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota, to the County Auditor, and the City Clerk in so certifying shall specify the amount thereof, the description of the premises served, and the name of the owner thereof. The amount so certified shall be extended by the Auditor on the tax rolls against such premises in the same manner as other taxes, and collected by the County Treasurer, and paid to the City along with other taxes. SECTION II. Shakopee City Code Chapter 1 entitled "General Provisions and Definitions Applicable to the Entire City Code Including Penalty for Violation" and Section 3.99 entitled "Violation a Misdemeanor" are hereby adopted in their entirety, by reference, as though repeated verbatim herein. SECTION III. After the adoption, signing and attestation of this Ordinance, it shall be published once in the official newspaper of the City of Shakopee and shall be in full force and effect on and after the date following such publication. Adopted in session of the City Council of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota, held this --------day of 19 :Mayor of the City of Shakopee ATTEST: City Clerk Prepared and approved as to form this _day of , 19 City Attorney Published in the Shakopee Valley News this I ay of ORDINANCE NO. 198 , FOURTH SERIES /,� AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA, AMENDING CITY CODE CHAPTER 5 ENTITLED "LIQUOR, BEER AND WINE LICENSING AND REGULATION",BY DEFINING AND REDEFINING CERTAIN DEFINITIONS; BY CHANGING PROVISIONS RELATING TO PROOF OF AGE AND UNLAWFUL ACTS BY MINORS, FINANCIAL RESPONSIBILITY OF LICENSEES, BEER AND LIQUOR LICENSE REQUIREMENTS, RESTRICTIONS AND UNLAWFUL ACTS; BY ADDING PROVISIONS RELATING TO ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES IN CERTAIN BUILDINGS AND GROUNDS, CONSUMPTION AND POSSESSION OF ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES, AND TEMPORARY LIQUOR LICENSES; BY REPEALING PROVISIONS RELATING TO UNLAWFUL ACTS BY MINORS; AND, BY ADOPTING BY REFERENCE, SHAKOPEE CITY CODE CHAPTER 1 AND SECTION 5.99 WHICH, AMONG OTHER THINGS, CONTAIN PENALTY PROVISIONS. THE CITY COUNCIL OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA, ORDAINS: SECTION I. Shakopee City Code, Section 5.01 is hereby amended in its entirety, to read: SECTION 5.01. DEFINITIONS. As used in this Chapter, unless otherwise stated in specific sections, the following words and terms shall have the meanings stated: 1. "Alcoholic Beverage" means any beverage containing more than one-half of one percent alcohol by volume, including, but not limited to, beer, wine, and liquor as defined in this Section. 2. "Applicant" means any person making an application for a license under this Chapter. 3. "Application" means a form with blanks or spaces thereon, to be filled in and completed by the applicant as his request for a license, furnished by the City and uniformly required as a prerequisite to the consideration of the issuance of a license for a business. 4. "Beer" means malt liquor containing not less than one-half of one percent alcohol by volume nor more than 3.2 percent alcohol by weight. (This definition includes so-called "malt coolers" with the alcoholic content limits stated herein.) 5. "Brewer" means a person who manufactures beer for sale. 6. "Club" means an incorporated organization organized under the laws of the State for civic, fraternal, social, or business purposes, for intellectual improvement, or for the promotion of sports, or a congressionally chartered veterans' organization, which: (1) has more than fifty members; (2) has owned or rented a building or space in a building for more than one year that is suitable and adequate for the accommodation of its members; (3) is directed by a board of directors, executive committee, or other similar body chosen by the members at a meeting held for that purpose. No member, officer, agent, or employee shall receive any profit from the distribution or sale of beverages to the members of the club, or their guests, beyond a reasonable salary or wages fixed and voted each year by the governing body. Such club or congressionally chartered veterans' organization must have been in existence for at least three years. 7. "Commissioner" means the Minnesota Commissioner of Public Safety. 8. "Exclusive Liquor Store" means an establishment used exclusively for the sale of liquor except for the incidental sale of ice, tobacco, beer, beverages for mixing with liquor, and soft drinks may also be sold, and the establishment may offer recorded or live entertainment and make available coin-operated amusement devices. "Exclusive liquor store" also includes an on - sale or combination on -sale and off -sale liquor establishment which sells food for on -premise consumption when authorized by the City. 9. "Hotel" means an establishment where food and lodging are regularly furnished to transients and which has: (1) a resident proprietor or manager; (2) a dining room serving the general public at tables and having facilities for seating at least thirty guests at one time; and (3) at least twenty-five guest rooms. 10. "License" means a document, issued by the City, to an applicant permitting him to carry on and transact the business stated therein. 11. "Licensee" means an applicant who, pursuant to his approved application, holds a valid, current, unexpired license, which has neither been revoked nor is then under suspension, from the City for carrying on the business stated therein. 12. "License Fee" means the money paid to the City pursuant to an application and prior to issuance of a license to transact and carry on the business stated therein. 13. "Licensed Premises" means the premises described in the issued license. 14. "Liquor" means ethyl alcohol and distilled, fermented, spirituous, vinous and malt beverages containing in excess of 3.2 percent of alcohol by weight. (This definition includes so-called "wine coolers" and "malt coolers" with the alcoholic content limits stated herein.) 15. "Malt Liquor" means any beer, ale, or other beverage made from malt by fermentation and containing not less than one-half of one percent alcohol by volume. -2- 16. "Manufacturer" means every person who, by any process of manufacture, fermenting, brewing, distilling, refining, rectifying, blending, or by the combination of different materials, prepares or produces alcoholic beverages for sale. 17. "Minor" means any natural person who has not attained the age of 19 years; provided, that after September 1, 1986, the term means any natural person who either (1) has not attained the age of 21 years, or (2) was born after September 1, 1967. 18. "Off -Sale" means the sale of alcoholic beverages in original packages for consumption off the licensed premises only. 19. "On -Sale" means the sale of alcoholic beverages for consumption on the licensed premises only. 20. "Package" and "Original Package" mean any..container or receptacle holding alcoholic beverages, which container or receptacle is corked, capped or sealed by a manufacturer or wholesaler. 21. "Restaurant" means an establishment, other than a hotel, under the control of a single proprietor or manager, where meals are regularly served at tables to the general public, and having seating capacity for at least thirty guests. 22. "Sale", "Sell" and "Sold" mean all barters and all manners or means of furnishing alcoholic beverages to persons, including such furnishing in violation or evasion of law. 23. "Wholesaler" means any person engaged in the business of selling alcoholic beverages to a licensee from a stock maintained in a warehouse. 24. "Wine" means a beverage made without rectification or fortification by the fermentation of sound ripe grapes, grape juice, other fruits, or honey, and also carbonated wine, wine made from condensed grape must, wine made from other agricultural products, imitation wine, compounds sold as wine, vermouth, cider, perry and sake, containing not less than one-half of one percent nor more than fourteen percent alcohol by volume. (This definition includes so-called "wine coolers" with the alcoholic content limits stated herein.) SECTION II. Shakopee City Code, Sec. 5.08 entitled "Proof of Age" is hereby amended, to read: ACTS. SEC. 5.08. MINORS AS DEFINED IN SECTION 5.01 - UNLAWFUL Subd. 1. Consumption. It is unlawful for any: A. Licensee to permit any minor to consume alcoholic beverages on licensed premises. Acis B. Minor to consume alcoholic beverages except in the household of the minor's parent or guardian, and then only with the consent of such parent or guardian. Subd. 2. Purchasing. It is unlawful for any: A. Person to sell, barter, furnish, or give alcoholic beverages to a minor unless such person is the parent or guardian of the minor, and then only for consumption in the household of such parent or guardian. B. Minor to purchase or attempt to purchase any alcoholic beverage. C. Person to induce a minor to purchase or procure any alcoholic beverage. Subd. 3. Possession. It is unlawful for a minor to possess any alcoholic beverage with the intent to consume it at a place other than the household of the minor's parent or guardian. Possession of an alcoholic beverage by a minor at a place other than the household of the parent or guardian is prima facie evidence of intent to consume it at a place other than the household of his parent or guardian. Subd. 4. Entering Licensed Premises. It is unlawful for a minor to enter licensed premises for the purpose of purchasing or having served or delivered to him any alcoholic beverage. Subd. 5. Misrepresentation of Age. It is unlawful for a minor to misrepresent his age for the purpose of purchasing an alcoholic beverage. Subd. 6. Proof of Age. Proof of age for purchasing or consuming alcoholic beverages may be established only by a valid driver's license, a Minnesota identification card, or, in the case of a foreign national, by a valid passport. SECTION III. Shakopee City Code, Sec. 5.09 entitled "Financial Responsibility of Licensees" is hereby amended by changing Subd. 1, to read: Subd. 1. Proof. No beer, wine or liquor license shall be issued or renewed unless and until the applicant has provided proof of financial responsibility imposed by Minnesota Statutes by filing: (Subparagraphs A, B and C remain the same.) SECTION IV. Shakopee City Code, Sec. 5.10, is hereby amended, to read: -4- SEC. 5.10. BEER LICENSE REQUIRED. It is unlawful for any person, directly or indirectly, on any pretense or by any device, to sell, barter, keep for sale, or otherwise dispose of beer, as part of a commercial transaction, without a license therefor from the City. This Section shall not apply to sales by manufacturers to wholesalers or to sales by wholesalers to persons holding beer licenses from the City. Annual on -sale beer licenses may be issued only to drug stores, restaurants, hotels, clubs, and establishments used exclusively for the sale of beer with the incidental sale of tobacco and soft drinks. Any person licensed to sell liquor at on -sale shall not be required to obtain an on - sale beer license, and may sell beer on -sale without an additional license. Any person licensed to sell liquor off -sale shall not be required to obtain an off -sale beer license, and may sell beer off -sale without an additional license. SECTION V. Shakopee City Code, Sec. 5.13 entitled "Beer License Restrictions and Regulations" is hereby amended by changing Subd. 2, to read: Subd. 2. No license shall be issued to other than a citizen of the United States or a resident alien, at least twenty-one (21) years of age, and who shall be of good moral character and repute. SECTION VI. Shakopee City Code, Sec. 5.30 entitled "Liquor Generally", is hereby amended, to read: SEC. 5.30. LIQUOR LICENSE REQUIRED. It is unlawful for any person, directly or indirectly, on any pretense or by any device, to sell, barter, keep for sale, or otherwise dispose of liquor, as part of a commercial transaction, without a license therefor from the City. This Section shall not apply (1) to such potable liquors as are intended for therapeutic purposes and not as a beverage, (2) to industrial alcohol and its compounds not prepared or used for beverage purposes, (3) to wine in the possession of a person duly licensed under this Chapter as an on - sale wine licensee, (4) to sales by manufacturers to wholesalers duly licensed as such by the Commissioner, or (5) to sales by wholesalers to persons holding liquor licenses from the City. The City may issue annual on -sale liquor licenses only to the following: (1) hotels; (2) restaurants; (3) clubs or congressionally chartered veterans' organizations, provided that liquor sales will be made only to members and bona fide guests; and, (4) exclusive liquor stores. The City may issue annual off - sale or combination off -sale and on -sale liquor licenses to exclusive liquor stores. Any person licensed to sell liquor at on -sale shall not be required to obtain an on -sale beer license, and may sell beer on -sale without an additional license. Any person licensed to sell licruor off -sale shall not be required to obtain an off -sale beer iicense, and may sell beer off -sale without an additional license. SECTION VII. Shakopee City Code, Sec. 5.32 entitled "Liquor License Restrictions and Regulations" is hereby amended, to read: SEC. 5.32. LIQUOR LICENSE RESTRICTIONS, REGULATIONS AND UNLAWFUL ACTS Subd. 1. Limitations on Issuance of Licenses to One Person or Place. A. No off -sale liquor license may be issued to any one person for more than one place in the City. Any person holding an interest in two or more such licenses in the City shall be deemed to hold more than one license. B. For the purpose of this Subdivision, the term "interest": (1) includes any pecuniary interest in the ownership, operation, management, or profits of a retail liquor establishment, and a person who receives money from time to time directly or indirectly from a licensee, in the absence of consideration and excluding gifts or donations, has a pecuniary interest in the retail business; and, (2) does not include loans; rental agreements; open accounts or other obligations held. with or without security arising out of the ordinary and regular course of business of selling or leasing merchandise, fixtures, supplies to the establishment; an interest in a corporation owning or operating a hotel but having at least 150 or more rental units holding a liquor license in conjunction therewith; or ten percent or less interest in any other corporation holding a license. C. In determining whether an "interest" exists, the transaction must have been bona fide and the reasonable value of the goods and things received as consideration for a payment by the licensee and all other facts reasonably tending to prove or disprove the existence of a purposeful scheme or arrangement to evade the restrictions of this Subdivision must be considered. Subd. 2. Licenses Limited to Certain Areas. No on - sale or off -sale license shall be effective beyond the compact and contiguous space named therein for which the same was granted. Subd. 3. Federal Permits as a Condition to License. No license shall be effective until a permit shall be issued to the licensee under the laws of the United States, if such a permit be required under such laws. Subd. 4. Persons Disqualified. A. No license under this Chapter may be issued to: (1) a person not a citizen of the United States or a resident alien; (2) a person who within five years of the license application has been convicted of a willful violation of a Federal or State law, or local ordinance governing the manufacture, sale, distribution, or possession for sale or distribution, of alcoholic beverages; (3) a person who has had an alcoholic beverage license revoked within five years of the license application, or to any person who at the time of the violation owns any interest, whether as a holder of more than five percent of the capital stock of a corporate licensee, as a partner or otherwise, in the premises or in the business conducted thereon, or to a corporation, partnership, association, enterprise, business, or firm in which any such person is in any manner interested; or, (4) a person not of good moral character and repute. B. No person holding a license from the Commissioner as a manufacturer, brewer or wholesaler may have any ownership, in whole or in part, in a business holding an alcoholic beverage license from the City. (Subdivisions 5 through 12 remain the same.) Subd. 13. Unlawful Acts. It is unlawful for any: A. Licensee to sell, offer for sale, or keep for sale, liquor in any original package which has been refilled or partly refilled. B. Person to knowingly induce another to make an illegal sale or purchase of liquor. C. Licensee, or an employee of a licensee, to sell liquor on any day, or during any hour, when sales of liquor are not Dermitted by Minnesota Statutes. D. Person to purchase liquor on licensed premises on any day, or during any hour, when sales of liquor are not permitted by Minnesota Statutes. E. Licensee to sell liquor on any day, or during any hour, when sales of liquor are not permitted by Minnesota Statutes. SECTION VIII. Shakopee City Code, Chapter 5, is hereby amended by adding Sections, to read: SEC. 5.091. ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES IN CERTAIN BUILDINGS AND GROUNDS. It is unlawful for any person to introduce upon, or have in his possession upon, or in, any school ground, or any schoolhouse or school building, any alcoholic beverage, excerpt for experiments in laboratories and except for those organizations who have been issued temporary licenses to sell beer, and for any person to possess beer as a result of a purchase from those organizations holding temporary licenses. SEC. 5.092. CONSUMPTION AND POSSESSION OF ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES ON STREETS, PUBLIC PROPERTY, PRIVATE PARKING LOTS TO WHICH THE PUBLIC HAS ACCESS, AND OTHER PRIVATE PROPERTY. It is unlawful for any person to consume, or possess in an unsealed container, any alcoholic beverage on any (1) City park, (2) street, (3) public property, or (4) private parking lot to which the public has access, except on such premises when and where -7- permission has been specifically granted or licensed by the Council. It is also unlawful for any person to consume, or possess in an unsealed container, any alcoholic beverage on any private property of another which is not a private parking lot to which the public has access, without a specific oral or written invitation or permit to do so from the owner, lessee, or other person in lawful possession of such property. Provided, that this Section shall not apply to the possession of an unsealed container in a motor vehicle when the container is kept in the trunk of such vehicle if it is equipped with a trunk, or kept in some other area of the vehicle not normally occupied by the driver or passengers, if the motor vehicle is not equipped with a trunk. For the purpose of this Section, a utility or glove compartment shall be deemed to be within the area occupied by the driver or passengers. Provided, however, that it is not a violation of this Section to consume or possess in an unsealed container any beer in a City park where such possession and consumption is in a picnic, grandstand or shelter area. SEC. 5.36. TEMPORARY LIQUOR LICENSE. Subd. 1. License Authorized. Notwithstanding any provision of the City Code to the contrary, the Council may issue a license for the temporary on -sale of liquor in connection with a social event sponsored by the licensee. Such license may provide that the licensee may contract with the holder of a full - year on -sale license, issued by the City, for liquor catering services. Subd. 2. Applicant. The applicant for a license under this Section must be a club or charitable, religious, or other non-profit organization in existence for at least three years. Subd. 3. Terms and Conditions of License. A. No license is valid until approved by the Commissioner. B. No license shall be issued for more than three consecutive days. C. All licenses and licensees are subject to all provisions of statutes and the City Code relating to liquor sale and licensing. The licensee shall provide proof of financial responsibility coverage and, in the case of catering by a full - year on -sale licensee, such caterer shall provide proof of the extension of such coverage to the licensed premises. D. Licenses may authorize sales on premises other than those owned or permanently occupied by the licensee. SECTION IX. Shakopee City Code, Chapter 5, is hereby amended by repealing Sec. 5.15 entitled "Restrictions on Minors" and Sec. 5.33 entitled "Unlawful Acts". SECTION X. Shakopee City Code Chapter 1 entitled "General Provisions and Definitions Applicable to the Entire City Code Including Penalty for Violation" and Section 5.99 entitled "Violation a Misdemeanor" are hereby adopted in their entirety, by reference, as though repeated verbatim herein. SECTION XI. After the adoption, signing and attestation of this Ordinance, it shall be published once in the official newspaper of the City of Shakopee and shall be in full force and effect on and after the date following such publication. Adopted in__ session of the City Council of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota, held this— —day of —, 19 Mayor of the City of Shakopee ATTEST: City Clerk Prezared and approved as to form this day of , 19 City Attorney Published in the Shakopee Valley News this , 19 day of ORDINANCE NO. 199 , FOURTH SERIES AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA, AMENDING CITY CODE CHAPTER 6 ENTITLED "OTHER BUSINESS REGULATION AND LICENSING" BY CHANGING PROVISIONS RELATING TO INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS GENERALLY AND AS TO TAXICABS; AND, BY ADOPTING BY REFERENCE, SHAKOPEE CITY CODE CHAPTER 1 AND SECTION 6.99 WHICH, AMONG OTHER THINGS, CONTAIN PENALTY PROVISIONS. THE CITY COUNCIL OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA, ORDAINS: read: SECTION I. Shakopee City Code, Sec. 6.10, is hereby amended, to SEC. 6.10. INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS. whenever insurance is required by a Section of this Chapter, after approval by the Council, but before the license shall issue,. the applicant shall file with the City Clerk a policy or certificate of public liability insurance showing (1) that the limits are at least as high as required, (2) that coverage is effective for at least the license term approved, and (3) that such insurance will not be cancelled or terminated without thirty days written notice served upon the City Clerk. Cancellation or termination of such coverage shall be grounds for license revocation. SECTION II. Shakopee City Code, Sec. 6.22 entitled "Taxicabs and Drivers", is hereby amended by changing Subparagraph A of Subd. 6, to read: Subd. 6. Bond or Insurance. A. No license shall be issued or continued in operation unless there is in full force and .effect a liability insurance policy for each vehicle authorized in the amount of $100,000.00 for bodily injury to any one person, in the amount of $300,000.00 for injuries to more than one person which are sustained in the same accident, and $50,000.00 for property damage resulting from any one accident. Said insurance shall inure to the benefit of any person who shall be injured or who shall sustain damage to property proximately caused by the negligence of a holder, his servant, or agents. Notwithstanding any other provision of this Chapter, the insurance coverage need not extend for the exact term of the license if the applicant or licensee also operates similar service in other cities. SECTION III. Shakopee City Code Chapter 1 entitled "General Provisions and Definitions Applicable to the Entire City Code Including Penalty for Violation" and Section 6.99 entitled "Violation a Petty Misdemeanor are hereby adopted in their entirety, by reference, as though repeated verbatim herein. lY i SECTION IV. After the adoption, signing and attestation of this Ordinance, it shall be published once in the official newspaper of the City of Shakopee and shall be in full force and effect on and after the date following such publication. Adopted in_ -------- session of the City Council of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota, held this________ day of ___________________ 19 Mayor of the City of Shakopee ATTEST: City Clerk Prepared and approved as to form this day of , 19 City Attorney Published in the Shakopee Valley News this day of 19 ;_ ORDINANCE NO. 200, FOURTH SERIES AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA, AMENDlNu CITY CODE CHAPTER 8 ENTITLED "TRAFFIC REGULATIONS" BY CHANGING THE PROVISION RELATING TO ADOPTION OF CERTAIN STATUTES BY REFERENCE; BY ADDING A PROVISION RELATING TO MOTORIZED GOLF CARTS; AND, BY ADOPTING BY REFERENCE, SHAKOPEE CITY CODE CHAPTER 1 AND SECTION 8.99 WHICH, AMONG OTHER THINGS, CONTAIN PENALTY PROVISIONS THE CITY COUNCIL OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA, ORDAINS: SECTION I. Shakopee City Code, Section 8.01, is hereby amended, to read: SECTION 8.01. MINNESOTA STATUTES, CHAPTERS 168, 169 and 171 ADOPTED BY REFERENCE. Except as otherwise provided in this Chapter, or in Chapters 7 and 9 of this Code, the regula- tory and procedural provisions of Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 168, Chapter 169 (commonly referred to as the Highway Traffic Regulation Act) and Chapter 171, as amended through Laws 1986, are hereby incorporated herein and adopted by reference, including the penalty provisions thereof. SECTION II. Shakopee City Code Chapter 1 entitled "General Provisions and Definitions Applicable to the Entire City Code Including Penalty for Violation" and Section 8.99 entitled "Violation a Misdemeanor or Petty Misdemeanor" are hereby adopted in their entirety, by reference, as though repeated verbatim herein. SECTION =II. After the adoption, signing and attestation of this Ordinance, it shall be published once in the official newspaper of the City of Shakopee and shall be in full force and effect on and after the date following such publication. Adopted insession 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 , =986 City Attorney ORDINANCE NO. 20! , FOURTH SERIES AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA, AMENDING CHAPTER 10 ENTITLED "PUBLIC PROTECTION, CRIMES AND OFF-vi,)ES" BY CHANGING PROVISIONS RELATING TO TRESPASSES UPON LAND; BY REPEALING PROVISIONS RELATING TO CONSUMPTION AND POSSESSION OF BEER, WINE AND LIQUOR ON PUBLIC PROPERTY AND PRIVATE PARKING LOTS; AND, BY ADOPTING BY REFERENCE, SHAKOPEE CITY CODE CHAPTER 1 AND SECTION 10.99 WHICH, AMONG OTHER THINGS, CONTAIN PENALTY PROVISIONS. THE CITY COUNCIL OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA, ORDAINS: SECTION I. Shakopee City Code, Sec. 10.62 entitled "Trespass Upon Land For Purposes of Consumption of Alcohol or Controlled Substances" is hereby amended, to read: SEC. 10.62. TRESPASS UPON LAND FOR THE PURPOSE OF USING CONTROLLED SUBSTANCES. Subd. 1. It is unlawful for any person to do any of the following: A. Trespass by Individual. The uninvited entry on to land of another for the purpose of using controlled substances. B. Trespass by Motor Vehicles. The uninvited entry by motor vehicle on the land of another to facilitate the use of controlled substances. C. Permitting Trespass by Motor Vehicle. As owner of a motor vehicle, to allow the uninvited entry by motor vehicles on the land of another to facilitate the use of controlled substances. Subd. 2. Uninvited Entry Defined. An entry is uninvited if the person on the land cannot produce written or oral permission from the landowner or lessee for the entry, or if the landowner or lessee is not present and consenting to the entry. Subd. 3. Determination of Purpose of Entry. To determine the purpose of an uninvited entry of a person or motor vehicle onto the land of another, the factors to be considered include, without limitation, the following: A. Time of day; B. Presence of paraphernalia containing identifiable residues of a controlled substance; C. Noise level; D. Lighting; E. Identified physiological responses; and, F. Conduct of persons in the presence of a peace officer. Subd. 4. Defenses. If the trier of fact finds that the landowner or lessee expressly consented, endorsed or ratified the entry onto land, such a finding shall constitute an absolute defense to charges under this Section. Subd. 5. Owner - Lessee Liability. A landowner or lessee who expressly consents to, endorses, or ratifies an entry onto land is not presumed to be in control of the persons gathered on the land, nor is the landowner or lessee presumed to have knowledge or knowledge of an unlawful act merely because of express consent, endorsement or ratification. SECTION II. Shakopee City Code, Chapter 10, is hereby amended by repealing Subparagraph J of Subd. 3 of Sec. 10.261 entitled "Disorderly Conduct at Events" relating to consumption of beer, wine or liquor on public or private parking lots; and Sec. 10.57 entitled "Consumption of Beer, Wine or Liquor on Streets and Public Property" and Sec. 10.58 entitled "Consumption of Beer, Wine or Liquor on Private Parking Lots". SECTION III. Shakopee City Code Chapter l entitled General Provisions and Definitions Applicable to the Entire City Code Including Penalty for Violation" and Section 10.99 entitled "Violation a Petty Misdemeanor" are hereby adopted in their entirety, by reference, as though repeated verbatim herein. SECTION IV. After the adoption, signing and attestation of this Ordinance, it shall be published once in the official newspaper of the City of Shakopee and shall be in full force and effect on and after the date following such publication. Adopted in session of the City Council of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota, held this day of 19 Mayor of the City of Shakopee ATTEST: City Clerk Prepared and approved as to form this day of , 19 City Attorney Published in the Shakopee Valley News this day of 19 -2- b ORDINANCE NO. 202 , FOURTH SERIES AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA, AMENDING CITY CODE CHAPTER 14 ENTITLED "REGULATING AND GOVERNING THE USE OF PARKS" BY REPEALING A PROVISION RELATING TO ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES IN REGULATIONS GOVERNING THE USE OF PARKS; AND, BY ADOPTING BY REFERENCE, SHAKOPEE CITY CODE CHAPTER 1 AND SECTION 14.99 WHICH, AMONG OTHER THINGS, CONTAIN PENALTY PROVISIONS. THE CITY COUNCIL OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA, ORDAINS: SECTION I. Shakopee City Code Chapter 14 is hereby amended by repealing Subd. 13 of the Regulations and relating to possession, display, consumption or use of liquor and beer in parks and other areas. SECTION II. Shakopee City Code Chapter 1 entitled "General Provisions and Definitions Applicable to the Entire City Code Including Penalty for Violation" and Section 14.99 entitled "Violation a Misdemeanor" are hereby adopted in their entirety, by reference, as though repeated verbatim herein. SECTION III. After the adoption, signing and attestation of this Ordinance, it shall be published once in the official newspaper of the City of Shakopee and shall be in full force and effect on and after the date following such publication. Adopted in session of the City Council of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota, held this____ day o --------- Mayor ___—___ Mayor of the City of Shakopee ATTEST: City Clerk Prepared and approved as to form this day of , 19 City Attorney Published in the Shakopee Valley News this day of 19 MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator J FROM: Judith S. Cox, City Clem J RE: Vacation of a Certain Easement DATE: June 13, 1986 Introduction and Background A property owner is requesting the vacation of an easement given to the City for an electric distribution line. As it turns out the easement description was incorrectly described and therefore no easement is actually needed from this property owner. Shakopee Public Utilities asked the City Attorney to prepare the appropriate documentation vacating the easement. The attached quit claim deed must be signed by proper City officials after Council adoption of Resolution No. 2578, authorizing execution of the deed. Alternatives 1. Vacate Easement. 2. Don't vacate easement. Action Requested Offer Resolution No. 2578, A Resolution Authorizing the Vacation of a Certain Easement Herein Described, and move its adoption. JSC/jms TO: Judy Cox, Shakopee City Clerk FROM: Lou Van Hout RE: Easement vacation DATE: 5/15/86 A property owner has advised us that an easement description incorrectly drawn up in 1981 is now causing problems with a land sale and is asking us to vacate that easement. 1. The easement description is in error. 2. We do not need that easement. 3. I recommend that the Council vacate that easement. The attached Exhibit A describes the easement in question. Would You please process this matter through Council? Thank you. RESOLUTION NO. 2578 A Resolution Authorizing the Vacation of a Certain Easement Herein Described WHEREAS, on or about the 18th day of November, 1980, David Sweet and Debra Sweet, the owners of the real estate hereinafter described,did for good and valuable consideration make, execute and deliver to,the City of Shakopee, a municipal corporation, and its Utility Commission an easement for the purposes therein described; said easement being over the following described property, to -wit: An easement for Utility purposes, over, under and across that part of the East one-half of the Northeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter of Section 29, Township 115, Range 22, Scott County, Minnesota, being 10.0 feet in witdth and lying 5.0 feet on either side of the described center line. Beginning at the Northwest corner of the property described above, thence East along the North property line for a distance of 5.0 feet, thence South parallel to the west property line for a distance of 75.0 feet to the point of beginning of easement, continuing on the same line for a distance of 1035.0 feet and there terminating. WHEREAS, the description furnished to the City was in error and the City does no longer need the easement. THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Shakopee City Council that the Council does hereby vacate and surrender the easement and authorize the proper City officials to make, execute and deliver a Quit Claim Deed to extinguish the easement to the said David Sweet and Debra Sweet and do all other things necessary and proper to vacate and cancel the easement. Passed in day of session of the Shakopee City Council this 1986. Mayor of the City of Shakopee ATTEST: City Clerk Prepared and approved as to form this 28th day of May, 1986. CIA -pr _= A jp�- ity Attorney e—p—wn w Joint T—w ' ""'• •vv" ""—'•'• giiwwewu l:nifo�m Con veYwCiwr {gram.. (1851). bey 3nbenture, .Made this ............ ............. I ................... ................day Of ...................................... 19..$.6.., between ............. - ...... Lh.e ..G�.tY....tzf...Sk1aiC9R. e.,....a..z9l�EliciP..a.....corporation.,.... and...it.s..Utilit Commission a corporation under the laws of the State of.........Minnesota................... •••••••...•...•........, party of the first part, and ................... Paye.,.Sweet..,and Debra Sweet .................................................................................................................................................................................................. .......................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... of the County of....S.c.4.t.t;.................................................................and State of...Mineso.to............................... parties of the second part, ULiitntgZaj, That the said party of the first part, in consideration of the sunt of .............I................ One..Dollar and other good, and..valuable. consideration.....($1...00,),.,.------------ .................. _- DOLL.I R S, to it in hand paid by the said parties of the second part., the receipt whereof is hereby acknowledi'ed, does hereby Grant, Bargain, Quit -claim, and Convey unto the said parties of the second part as joint tenants and not as tenants in comnwn, their aseigns, the survivor of said parties, and the heirs and assigns of the survivor, Forever, all the, tract......... or parcel.........of land lying and being in the County of ............. 5.c.o.t.t............ •••••••••.••••••.••••••••••••.•..•..•••.................................and State of .411nnesota, described as follows, to-uit: An easement for Utility purposes, over, under and across that part of the East one-half the Northeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter of Section 29, Township 115, Range 22, Scott County, Minnesota, being 10.0 feet in width and lying 5.0 feet on either side of the described center line. Beginning at the Northwest corner of the property described above, thence East along the North property line for a distance of 5.0 feet, thence South parallel to the west property line for a distance of 75.0 feet to the point of beginning of easement, continuing on the same line for a distance of 1035.0 feet and there terminating. The purpose of this deed is to vacate and surrender the easement granted to the City of Shakopee over the above described property on November 18, 1980. To babe anb to Jbolb the tame, Together with all the hereditaments and appurtenances thereunto belonging or in anywise appertaining, to the said part.._. ies of the second part, their assigns, the sur• vivor of said parties and the heirs and assigns of the survivor, Forever, the said parties of the second part taking as joint tenants and not as tenants in common. In Ce.5timonp Wbemf, The said first party has caused these presents to be executed in its corporate name by its .._. May.R.t................. IBX and its.....UtYC-Ierkt.......................and its corporate seal to be hereunto of fixed the day and year first above written. ,TiiE•,_GT.X...QF.. SHQ?.FFn�...A..ZN.�.IPAL.. CORPORATIQN> In Presence of By..................................................................................I............. ...................................................... _..................... .._........ Ita..Y°r...................pid� ................... Its.......City..Clerk ............................ MEMO TO: Jahn K. Anderson, City Administrator FROM: Ken Ashfeld, City Engineer SUBJECT: Lower Minnesota River Water -shed District 509 Plan DATE: June 16, 1986 INTRODUCTION: The 509 Surface Water Management Flan for the Lower Minnesota River Watershed District (LMRWD) has been received and I have completed my review. Comments to the plan must be submitted prior to the end of June. BACKGROUND: The stated plan, as required by state statute, is to be reviewed by adjacent Water Management Organizations and Political juris- dictions within the district boundaries as well as other regu- latory agencies. All 509 plans are to contain specific infor- mation as a minimum requirement of the law. The subject plan appears to be very deficient of meeting the requirements of the law. I have compiled various comments in a letter to the LMRWD as attached for Council review. Since the Shakopee WMO 509 plan is to be reviewed by the LMRWD and the City will need to work with the district in the future, I have limited the City's proposed comments to those that di- rectly affect the City. The Shakopee WMO will respond to the plan under separate cover and I suspect that other regulatory agencies will comment to its deficiencies. RECOMMENDATION: Move to authorize Mayor Reinke to respond to the Lower Minnesota River Watershed District 509 Water Management plan on behalf of the City of Shakopee. REQUESTED ACTION: Move to authorize Mayor Reinke to respond to the Lower Minnesota River Watershed District 509 Water Management Plan on behalf of the City of Shakopee. KA/pmp LMRWD Lower Minnesota River Watershed District Warrior Office Building Burnsville, MN 55337 RE: Chapter 509 Report Gentlemen: We have completed our review of the Lower Minnesota River Water- shed District's (LMRWD) 509 Watershed Management plan arid offer the following comments. Bol_tndari es The City of Shakopee, for the most part, is within the Shakopee Watershed Management Organization (WMO). This WMO is currently forming and is in the process of establishing its hydrologic bot_indari es. It is evident that the boundary between the Shakopee WMO and the LMRWD needs refinement and adjustment to facilitate both of our planning needs. The time frame allowed by State Statute to WMO's for 509 plan development is quite short at this point and requires the Shakopee WMO to act expeditiously. This time frame may riot allow lengthy proceedings for the chang- ing of boundaries for the original WMO plans but plan amendment procedures Would be a nat Ltra 1 met hod to accr_imp I i sh boundary changes in the future. The City of Shakopee views the LMRWD boundary as being incorrect hydrolocially and arbitrarily located. In recognition of the fact that the LMRWD is a partial watershed, the plan states that as Objectives, policies and Management Principles, the plan will identify "principles and Policies of how the District may affect other water management organi- zations in dealing with water resources which ultimately dis- charge into the Minnesota River Valley". Beyond general state- ments, no specific policies were detailed in the plan. Based upon the hydrologic correlation between the LMRWD and the Shako- pee WMO, policies of one district will directly affect the other. What current policies, if any, are in affect now that the plan does riot address? Under what criteria are development .plans currently reviewed and how will that criteria be continued in the future? The he aQri Qf Pr� f SCC F'a'1011 { CITY OF SHAKOPEE INCORPORATED 1870 129EASTEAST FIRST AVENUE, SHAKOPEE. MINNESOTA 55379-1376 X6121 445-3650 June 16, 1986 Lower Minnesota River Watershed District Warrior Office Building Burnsville, MN 55337 RE: Chapter 509 Report Gentlemen: We have completed our review of the Lower Minnesota River Water- shed District's (LMRWD) 509 Watershed Management plan arid offer the following comments. Bol_tndari es The City of Shakopee, for the most part, is within the Shakopee Watershed Management Organization (WMO). This WMO is currently forming and is in the process of establishing its hydrologic bot_indari es. It is evident that the boundary between the Shakopee WMO and the LMRWD needs refinement and adjustment to facilitate both of our planning needs. The time frame allowed by State Statute to WMO's for 509 plan development is quite short at this point and requires the Shakopee WMO to act expeditiously. This time frame may riot allow lengthy proceedings for the chang- ing of boundaries for the original WMO plans but plan amendment procedures Would be a nat Ltra 1 met hod to accr_imp I i sh boundary changes in the future. The City of Shakopee views the LMRWD boundary as being incorrect hydrolocially and arbitrarily located. In recognition of the fact that the LMRWD is a partial watershed, the plan states that as Objectives, policies and Management Principles, the plan will identify "principles and Policies of how the District may affect other water management organi- zations in dealing with water resources which ultimately dis- charge into the Minnesota River Valley". Beyond general state- ments, no specific policies were detailed in the plan. Based upon the hydrologic correlation between the LMRWD and the Shako- pee WMO, policies of one district will directly affect the other. What current policies, if any, are in affect now that the plan does riot address? Under what criteria are development .plans currently reviewed and how will that criteria be continued in the future? The he aQri Qf Pr� f SCC F'a'1011 Chapter 509 Report June 1E, 198E Page c Surface Water Drainage Systems The report is silent as it relates to detention reauivements and flow rate restrictions. Capital Improvement Prooram The report identifies a Dean Lake Development engineering study. What is the nature of the proposed study and are there capital improvments proposed? Land Use Plan The City of Shakopee has specific land use plans for areas within the LMRWD. Has the plan accounted for this as there are no data or land use maps within the plan document? This concludes our review of the LMRWD 509 Plan. Thank you for the opportunity to present our comments. Sincerely, Eldon Reinke Mayor of Shakopee cc: Water Resources Board 1986 COUNCIL LIAISON APPOINTMENTS *Shakopee Community Services *Public Utilities Commission *Planning Commission *Hazardous Waste & Sewer Services Board *Vice Mayor *Purchasing Committee Downtown Committee (Member) Appointments made 1/7/86 Cncl. Colligan Cncl. Wampach Cncl. Lebens— (delete ebens (delete for 1 year) Cncl. Wampach Cncl. Leroux and Cncl. Vierling Cncl. Wampach MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator FROM: Barry A. Stock, Admin. Aide RE: Taste of Minnesota Festival DATE: June 17, 1986 Introduction and Backqround On July 5th, the City of Shakopee will be featured at the Taste of Minnesota Festival in St. Paul. The festival runs from 11:00 a.m. - 11:00 p.m. The invitation to this event was made to the City of Shakopee. A committee comprised of city staff, business representatives, chamber officials and recreational representatives has been working on the planning activities for this event. During the day on the 5th, the Shakopee High School Band and characters and performers from ValleyFair, the Rennaissance Festival and Murphy's landing will be representing our community. Shakopee's booth is located directly in the middle of the Festival. We are trying to make our booth as attractive as possible using limited funds. During the day we will be handing out literature on Shakopee and its attractions. We will also be offering drawings for ticket giveaways to all the major attractions in Shakopee. Our preliminary budget reveals that the costs for promoting Shakopee at this event will be approximately $1000. Since the local businesses and attractions in Shakopee will be manning the booth and supplying performers and tickets to the attractions in Shakopee, the committee is requesting the City of Shakopee to dedicate $500 to offset some of the transportation costs of the band ($200) and the cost of T-shirts ($350) for both the band and booth workers. Funds for this type of activity could be taken from the ICC budget used for City promotional activities. Local service clubs are also being contacted for a monetory donation to offset additional costs for the festival. Alternatives 1. Offer $500 to the Chamber of Commerce to offset some of the promotional costs of Shakopee's appearance at the Taste of Minnesota Festival. 2. Do not offer $500 to the Chamber of Commerce to offset some of the promotional costs of Shakopee's appearance at the Taste of Minnesota Festival. 3. Offer some other dollar amount to the Chamber of Commerce to offset some of the promotional costs of Shakopee's appearance at the Taste of Minnesota Festival. Staff Recommendation Staff recommends alternative #1. Action Requested Move to offer $500 to the Chamber of Commerce to offset some of the promotional costs of Shakopee's appearance at the Taste of Minnesota Festival. Funds to be taken from the ICC budget.