HomeMy WebLinkAbout08/05/1986 V141
MEMO TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: John K. Anderson, City Administrator
RE: Non-Agenda Informational Items
DATE: July 31, 1986
1. Howard Jones, our Code Enforcement Officer, has issued
roughly 75 citations or warning tickets this year. He has
only had to go to court with one property owner so it
appears that we are getting more cooperation this year than
last. In addition, Howard indicated that we have gotten
consideration cooperation from the property owners at the
east end of town as a result of the informational meeting
the Mayor and Howard had with property owners in that area.
Howard will be assisting Public Works with code enforcement
for trees and shrubs obscuring traffic signs, etc. during
the next several weeks.
2. LeRoy Houser has scheduled a meeting with builders to review
the inspection scheduling practice he recently initiated at
7: 30 p.m. on August 11, 1986 at City Hall. City
Councilmembers are welcome to attend. Attached is the
survey done by intern Lisa Goemer of scheduling practices in
neighboring communities. It was not as thorough as we hoped
because most cities didn' t have the comparative information
readily available.
3 . Attached is an anonymous letter from a Shakopee citizen. In
checking this letter out Judi Simac, City Planner, indicated
that the sign was completely legal. The area is zoned multi
family and permits such signage. Judi does not recommend
reviewing the sign ordinance with regard to this one issue,
but suggests we review the entire sign ordinance when the
office relocations take place and the new Planner is aboard.
Any Councilmembers with additional concerns regarding this
issue should contact Judi directly.
4 . Attached is the calendar for the month of August.
Please note that the City Hall tour is set for Saturday,
August 9th from 8: 00 a.m. to 1 : 00 p.m.
Please note that on September 9th there will be a Council
meeting for special improvement project hearings.
5. Attached is the downtown streetscape improvements time
schedule approved by the Downtown Committee. The schedule
is currently on target at item No. 4. We expect the
schedule to be delayed three to four weeks as the Downtown
Committee circulates petitions for the feasibility study
rather than having City Council order the feasibility study
as listed on the schedule. At its July 30, 1986 meeting,
the Downtown Committee unanimously supported the idea of the
committee initiating the streetscaping project through
petition rather than having the City Council initiate the
project.
6. Attached is a copy of the invitation the Chamber of Commerce
has provided the hotel/motel industry to discuss the lodging
tax. Councilmembers are encouraged to attend.
7. Attached is a note from Judi Simac following up on the
Mayor' s request regarding the Canterbury Downs stables with
the white exterior.
8. Attached is an update from Don Slater, Executive Director of
the League of Minnesota Cities, regarding the Minnesota
Cities Infrastructure Financing Program.
9. Attached is a letter from Judy Cox to Pat Ploumen regarding
the blocking off of Dakota Street on August 16th for a block
party.
10. Attached is an invitation from Itasca Equipment Company to
attend their open house August 7th and 8th.
11 . Attached are the minutes of the July 28, 1986 City Hall
Siting Committee meeting.
12 . Attached are the minutes of the July 9 and July 16, 1986
Downtown Ad Hoc Committee meetings.
13 . Attached are the minutes of the July 10 , 1986 Board of
Adjustment and Appeals and Planning Commission meetings.
14. Attached are the agendas for the August 7, 1986 Board of
Adjustment and Appeals and Planning Commission meetings.
15 . Attached are various correspondences relative to the
workings of the Transportation Coalition that Councilmembers
will be interested in.
16 . The 1986 seal coating program will be completed August 1,
1986 .
17. Attached are the delinquent bill procedures Council
requested. These have been used for over one year now. If
you have questions contact Gregg.
18. Attached is the draft Tax Increment Financing "fact sheet"
Council asked for. We are on draft number 5 and cannot get
it down to 2 pages ( 1 page front and back) unless there is
some information Councilmembers feel is not needed.
19. Attached is a memo from Judi Simac regarding Final Draft
Racetrack District Report.
JKA/jms
C
MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator
FROM: Lisa Goemer, Intern
RE: Survey on Inspections
DATE: July 24 , 1986
BLOOMINGTON
Bloomington has a total inspection staff of 35-40 . They have
separate heating, plumbing, etc. inspectors and two electrical
inspectors. If anyone wants an inspection in the morning they
must call between 8 : 00 and 8 : 30 a.m. If they want it in the
afternoon they must call in the morning. They can call the day
before.
BROOKLYN PARK
Brooklyn Park has five inspectors, separate plumbing, heating,
etc. and their own part time electrical inspector. If someone
wants something inspected in the morning they must call the
afternoon prior to it. If they want an afternoon inspection they
must call that morning.
BROOKLYN CENTER
Brooklyn Center has an inspection staff of six including
clerical. They have combination inspectors and their own
electrical inspector. They must have at least a four to five
hour notice prior to the inspection.
MINNETONKA
Minnetonka has an inspection staff of six with two interns and
have separtate plumbing, heating, etc. inspectors. For morning
inspections they must call the prior afternoon and for afternoon
inspections they must call that morning.
ST. LOUIS PARK
St. Louis Park has separate plumbing, heating, etc. inspectors, a
staff of 11 and their own electrical inspector. If they want a
morning inspection they must call before 9 : 00 a.m. If they want
an afternoon inspection they must call before 1: 00 p.m.
MAPLE GROVE
Maple Grove has a staff of seven including clerical. Inspectors
are combination and use the State electrical inspector. They fit
inspections into the schedule. If they want a certain time they
can only get it if it is open.
GOLDEN VALLEY
Golden Valley has a staff of three with an intern, combination
inspectors, and they use the State electrical inspector. If
anyone wants a morning inspection they must call before 9 : 00 a.m.
but they try to be flexible.
BURNSVILLE
Burnsville has five inspectors, some are combination, two
clerical, and use the State electrical inspector. For
inspections they ask people to call in the day before when busy.
COLUMBIA HEIGHTS
Columbia Heights has three inspectors and two part time
inspectors, all are combination and have their own electrical
inspector. They try to fit in inspections as they are called in.
MAPLEWOOD
Maplewood has separate inspectors, one full time, three part
time, two consultants, and they use the State electrical
inspector. All inspections must have a 24 hour notice.
APPLE VALLEY
Apple Valley has three inspectors, all combination, and they use
the State electrical inspector. If anyone wants a morning
inspection they must call before 9: 00 a.m. If they want an
afternoon inspection they must call before 1: 00 p.m.
EDEN PRAIRIE
Eden Prairie has an inspection staff of six combination
inspectors and they use the State electrical inspector. They
must have a 24 hour notice but will try to fit it in that day if
really need to.
EAGAN
Eagan has an inspection staff of 10 combination inspectors and
their own electrical inspector. If anyone wants a morning
inspection they must call before 8: 15 a.m. , for an afternoon
inspection they must call before noon.
EDINA
Edina has a staff of six combination inspectors and use the State
electrical inspector. They need about a four hour advanced
notice before an inspection.
CHANHASSEN
Chanhassen has two combination inspectors, one plubming, and they
use the State electrical inspector. They try to schedule
inspections when the people want but when they are busy must have
a one to two day notice for some inspections such as for a meter.
SAVAGE
Savage has seven separate inspectors and their own electrical
inspector. They try to accomodate people who want inspections
but must have advanced notice for any inspection that involves
the Public Works Department.
CHASKA
Chaska has one combination inspector. They use the State
electrical inspector. They fit inspections in as they are called
in.
PRIOR LAKE
Prior Lake has one combination inspector but is working for a
second full time inspector. They use the State electrical
inspector. They do all inspection scheduling between 9 : 00 and
10: 00 a.m.
SCOTT COUNTY
Scott County has three combination inspectors and use the State
electrical inspector. Inspections are made before 10 : 00 a.m. but
will take them later if needed.
CARVER COUNTY
Carver County has two combination inspectors and use the State
electrical inspector. They want a 24 hour notice but will take
it that day if they can.
DAKOTA COUNTY
All inspections are done by the city, no county level
inspections.
In conclusion, most cities have scheduled times such as call in
the morning for afternoon inspections and prior afternoon for
morning inspections. Some demand a 24 hour notice. Smaller
cities take in inspections as they are called in, done on a first
come first serve basis. They do recommend if someone wants an
inspection by a certain time they give a 24 hour notice during
the busy season.
�� / q G�
aa,��;
�"�
.. `���
. ,; ,_ <
/� q � ,� C��. � - ��:�
i
�2�-t,� .
�(�GC,..L. (��
. � r �
��
i s
d
K
acro
.. F.. O 0 w H.
On n ONN
O (D C N• F--
rt
.r n d
((DD J (D K
• rt w
O
Ln 1p 00 F ' A
() J n C) �] C) C)
O t7 H.
C) $= rt O � rt •, O r
xaO � �C O � �C CD
In Q O O n
(D (D b P-
U) rt ~ ~
F,• K
O
� N F' �
a) 1p N U1
-] C) d Ui FH
w O C) {
O O C=] C
F • rtd U?
w rt E '� ' H
b 110
co
K �
N N �
-jHN --j C)
.• r� �:l w
w W (D �
O kl C) �:l
.� p ro U cn
3
ti O rt �
w �5 K
rt
03 O N X, J
'=J
F-i
d
K
N N F-
l0 N Un7�1-3
~
['�c
t
W
i
Downtown Streetscape Improvements
Time Schedule
Activity Date
1 . Bid for 2nd Ave. Parking Lot Awarded by City July 1
Council
2. Downtown Committee Selects Lighting Fixtures July 9
and approves lighting plan
3 . Downtown Committee finalizes all streetscape July 16
elements
4. City -Council orders feasibility Study on pro- Aug. 5
posed streetscape improvements
5 . Downtown Committee recommends Council approval Aug. 13
of feasibilty study and calls for public hearing
6 . City Council approves feasibilty study and sets Aug. 19
public hearing date for Sept. 23
7. 2nd Ave. Parking Lot Completion Date Nov. 1
8. Informational meetings held with affected pro- Sept. 8-19
perty owners to answer questions on the pro-
posed improvements
9 . Council holds public hearing and orders plans Sept. 23, 1986
and specifications
10. Bid for Downtown Streetscape Project Awarded Apr. 21, 1987
by City Council
11. Downtown Streetscape Project Complete Oct. 1
* Staff is attempting to push up the completion date so that
the parking lot can serve as a demonstration of the streetscape
plan prior to the public hearing.
EIVED
SHAKOPEE AREA
CITY OF SKAKOPEE
P.O. BOX NO. 203❑ SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA 55379 ❑ (612) 445-1660
7-28-86
Dear City Council Member :
The Shakopee City Council , at the request of the
Shakopee Area Chamber of Commerce is considering the levying
of a lodging tax, the proceeds of which would be used to
establish a Visitor Information Center and to advertise
the Shakopee area throughout at least the five northern
states area .
The City Council has requested that the Chamber of
Commerce hold an informational meeting with all of those
firms that would be affected by such a levy as well as
those who benefit .
Therefore , we invite you to a meeting to be held for
the express purpose of discussing the pros and cons of
such a tax and its use . The meeting will be held at the
School District Board Room, 505 South Holmes on Wednesday,
August 6 at 2 p .m.
Please plan to join us and participate .
Thank you.
Sincerely,
Virgil S . Mears
M/d
7
MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator
FROM: Judi Simac, City Planner
RE: Summer horse barns at Canterbury Downs
DATE: July 30 , 1986
The City Council had recently commented on the white exterior
of the newly constructed summer horse barns at Canterbury Downs
and were curious to know if the racetrack had any intention of
painting them to match the blue or beige buildings.
All of the summer horse barns are white, the exterior
material used is a form of vinyl and cannot be painted. Stan
Bowker has indicated to me that there are no plans to change the
exteriors of the barns.
tw
RII
1111 IIII JCITY F ,
league of minnesota cities
July 23, 1986
TO: Cities who have expressed an interest in the League' s
Infrastructure Bond Pool
FROM: Donald A. Slater, Executive Director
RE: Minnesota Cities Infrastructure Financing Program
On July 16 , 1986 we sent a memo advising you of the possibility
that congress was considering advancing the effective date of the
new tax law with respect to bonding legislation. We advised you
that immediate city council action was required if there was to be
any possibility for your city to participate in the pooled bond
program. It now appears that even immediate council action was
not enough . On July 17 , 1986 at 3: 00 p.m. a joint statement was
issued by the chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee, the
chairman of Senate Finance Committee and the Treasury Department
which had the affect of limiting the use of pooled bond programs.
The joint statement made it impossible for the program to continue
under its original structure.
In response to the joint statement our financial consultants and
bond counsel have been attempting to restructure the program to
bring it into compliance with the requirements of the joint
statement . We held off sending you further information on
the program with hopes that we could give you more definitive
information on how the new program might be structured . As of
todays date, attempts are still being made to restructure the
program. We will contact you as soon as we have any new
information. Contrary to statements that you may have seen,
nothing cities have done in response to the League' s survey or
participation agreement, commits cities to issue bonds as part of
the pool . If any new requirements develop we will inform you
fully.
In the meantime if you have any questions please do not hesitate
to contact Tom Grundhoefer of our staff.
We sincerely thank you for your cooperation in responding to our
letters and phone calls in the last week. The response was
tremendous.
1 80 university avenue east, st. paul, minnesota 551 01 [61 2) 227-5600
SPRINGSTED INCORPORATED
Public Finance Advisors
85 East Seventh Place,Suite 100 T
Saint Paul,Minnesota 55101.2143
612.223.3000
18 July 1986
Mr. John Anderson
Administrator
City Hall
129 East 1st Avenue
Shakopee, Minnesota 55379
Re: League Pool
Dear John:
On Thursday, July 17, 1986, a second joint statement was released by Chairman
Rostenkowski, Senator Packwood, and Treasury Secretary Baker relative
to tax-exempt financing under tax reform, specifically "Blind Pool Bonds."
I am enclosing a copy of this statement. The statement restricts the use
of such "Blind Pools," such as the League of Cities program.
Please feel free to contact us should you have any questions.
Respectfully,
David N. MacGillivray
Project Manager
/dma
Enclosure
. .u"l/ o1 / o �/,
4XH
STATEMENT ON BLIND POOLS ISSUED l\
WASH (MFX)--THE FOLLOWING IS H JOINT STATEMENT MADE BY CHAIRMAN DAN
ROSTENKOWSKI , HOUSE COMMITTEE ON WHYS AND MEANS, CHAIRMAN BOB PHCKWOOD,
SENATE COMMITTEE ON FINHNCE, AND SECRETARY OF THE TREASURY JAMES BRKER,
WITH RESPECT TO THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF H PROPOSED REQUIREMENT THAT
CERTAIN ARBITRAGE PROFITS ON TAX-EXEMPT BONDS BE REBATED TO THE FEDERAL
GOVERNMENT:
ON MARCH 149 1986P WE ISSUED H JOINT STATEMENT INDICATING OUR INTENTION
THAT CERTAIN NEW RESTRICTIONS ON TAX-EXEMPT BONDS CONTAINED IN TAX REFORM
LEGISLATION (H. R. 3838) o AS PASSED BY THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES AND
THE SENATE, NOT BE APPLIED TO BONDS USED TO FINANCE OPERATIONS OF STATE
AND LOCAL GOVERNMENTS THAT ARE ISSUED BEFORE THE EARLIER OF THE DHTE
OF ENACTMENT OF H. R. 3838 OR SEPT. 1 , 1986.
AS WE STATED IN MARCH, IT IS NOT OUR INTENT TO RESTRICT THE ABILITY
OF STATE AND LOCAL GOVERNMENTS TO FINANCE THEIR DIRECT GOVERNMENTAL
OPERATIONS OR TO FORCE STATES TO CHANGE THEIR EXISTING PRACTICES
GOVERNING FINANCING OF THOSE OPERATIONS WHILE TAX REFORM LEGISLATION
[S PENDING. AS WE ALSO STATED, HOWEVER, WE DID NOT INTEND BY OUR
STATEMENT TO CREATE AN ATMOSPHERE WHERE TAX MOTIVATED ISSUANCE OF
BONDS WOULD OCCUR. TO THAT END, WE INSTRUCTED OUR STAFFS IN THAT STATEMENT
TO MONITOR THE TAX-EXEMPT BOND MARKET AS CONSIDERATION OF TAX REFORM
LEGISLATION CONTINUED5 AND TO ADVISE US OF ANY INDICATIONS OF TAX
MOTIVATED BOND ISSUANCE.
DURING THE PAST WEEK, CONGRESSIONAL AND TREASURY STAFFS HHVE
[NFORMED US OF H SUBSTANTIAL INCREASE IN VOLUME OF TRANSACTIONS THAT
ARE MOTIVATED PRIMARILY BY THE ABILITY TO EARN AND RETAIN ARBITRAGE
PROFITS THESE ARBITRAGE MOTIVATED TRANSACTIONS WERE NEVER INTENDED
TO BE COVERED BY OUR JOINT STATEMENT IN MARCH. THE ARBITRAGE MOTIVATED
TRANSACTIONS TO WHICH WE ARE REFERRING INVOLVE THE FUNDING OF SO-CHLLED
POOLS"OOLS^ WITH TAX-EXEMPT BONDS. ISSUANCE OF TAX-EXEMPT BONDS FOR
THE POOLS IN QUESTION GENERALLY HAS NOT OCCURRED BEFORE 1986, OR HAS
OCCURRED IN MUCH SMALLER AMOUNTS THAN IN 1986. IN RDDITONv THERE ARE
"
FEW OR O BINDING COMMITMENTS AS TO THE ULTIMATE USERS OF THE PROCEEDS
nF THE BONDS IN QUESTION, AND THE BONDS ARE BEING ISSUED FOR LONGER
TERMS THAN IS CUSTOMARY FOR SUCH ISSUES.
AFTER REVIEWING THESE TRANSACTIONS, WE HAVE DETERMINED THAT ISSUANCE
OF BONDS FOR THESE ARBITRAGE MOTIVATED POOLS IS NOT WITHIN THE SPIRIT
OF OUR STATEMENT OF MARCH 14, 1986. WE ARE ANNOUNCING, THEREFOREP THAT
THE PROVISIONS OF THAT STATEMENT RELATING TO REBATE OF CERTAIN ARBITRAGE_*
PROFITS ARE NOT APPLICABLE TO BONDS ISSUED AFTER 3 P. M. , EDT , THURSDAY,
]ULY 17, 19869 FOR--
--1 POOLS THE PROCEEDS OF WHICH ARE TO BE USED TO MAKE LOANS TO
GOVERNMENTAL UNITS OTHER THAN SUBORDINATE LIOVERNMENTHL UNITS
WITHIN THE JURISDICHTION OF THE ISSUER (OR THE JURISDICTION OF
THE GOVERNMENTAL UNITS ON BEHALF OF WHICH THE ISSUER ACTS) ;
OR POOLS WITH RESPECT TO WHICH
OF (H) LESS THAN 75% OF THE PROCEEDS
---�^ THE ISSUE IS TO BE USED TO MAKE LOANS TO INITIAL BORROWERS TO FINANCE PROJECTS IDENTIFIED (WITH SPECIFICITY) BY THE ISSUER
THE DATE OF ISSUE AS PROJECTS TO BE FINANCED WITH THE PROCEEDS
ON
OF SUCH ISSUE; OR (B) ON OR BEFORE THE DATE OF ISSUEP COMMITMENTS
nAYE NOT BE ENTERED INTO BY SUCH INITIAL BORROWERS TO BORROW AT LEAST 25% OF THE PROCEEDS Of:` SUCH ISSUE. PARAGRAPH (2) APPLIES
unLY IF BONDS WERE NOT ISSUED BY THE ISSUER BEFORE 1986 TO FUND
SIMILAR POOLS, ORi IF THE ISSUER HAD ESTABLISHED H POOL BEFORE
1986P 86 THE ISSUANCE IN 1986 EXCEEDS 250% OF THE AVERAGE ANNUAL
ISSUANCE FOR SUCH POOLS DURING THE PERIOD 1983 'THROUGH 1985; OR
--a^ POOLS WHERE THE TERM OF THE BONDS EXCEEDS 30 YEARS IF THE
INIPHL REPAYMENT ON ANY LOANS ARE TO BE USED TO MAKE OR
FINANCE ADDITIONAL LOANS.
MENT AN ISSUE OF BONDS SOLD TO H SECURITIES
FOR PURPOSES OF THIS HNNOUNC� '
ACTING IN THE CAPACITY OF AN UNDERWRITER OR
FIRM, BROKER' OR OTHER PERSONHC
ISSUED BEFORE SUCH BONDS HAVE BEEN REOFFERED
TO THE PUBLIC (PURSUANT \
HHOLESHLER IS NOT TREATEDAS
FHSINML OFFERING MATERIALS) AND AT LEAST 25% OF
SUCH BONDS ACTUALLY HAVE BEEN SOLD TO THE PUBLIC^ ISSUE OF �HETHER INTERE�T
� THIS STHTEMENT IS NOT INTENDED TO ADDRESS
|THE
R WHETHER SUCH BONDS —
0N THESE BONDS IS THX-EXEMPT UNDER PRESENT
ELMWRUITRH�E PROFITS MAY BE
0UHLIFy FOR TEMPORARY PERIODS WHEN UNLIMITED AHbE By CASE BHSIS By THE
EORNED�. THAT DETERMINATION MUST BE MADE ON H CASE
TREASURY
L �DEPT.
THHT THIS LIMITED HCTION WILL PERMIT CONTINUED HCCESS TO
TAX
N�-EXEMPT��vFINANCING FOR ACTUAL NEEDS OF STATE AND LOCAL GOVERNMENTS
E;EM | ING H FURTHER RUSH TO MARKET OF TAX MOTIVATED TRANSACTIONS-
HE
RHNSHCTlONS. |
WHILE PREVENTING
E, HuWEv '
ER INSTRUCTING OUR STAFFS TO CONTINUE TO MONITOR THE
|��XM�-cXMP ' BOND MARKET AS THE CONFERENCE COMMITTEE MEETS AND REPORT
TO US TAX-EXEMPT
OF FURTHER TAX MOTIVATED TRANSACTIONS.
3: 45: 01PM 17 . JULY
_
Washington
Watch ,
By Craig T. Ferris move designed to "cast a shadow
on the whole argument(to preserve we can get to try to preserve as
L TT���� municipal bonding powers] and much of the tax-exempt market as
Rush to Mlle make the industry look like a possible. this happens. It's just
bunch of vultures." what we didn't need." the lobbyist,
Blind Pool Deals agree
many in the market privately said.
that most of the pools were The implications of the rush to
rushed to market only to do an end market and the subsequentrohi.
May run on the arbitrage rebate require- bttlon of blind pools are further
li y a Shot , ment and produce some quick and compounded by the makeup of the
shortsighted profits for several of conference committee named last
In Market's Foot the largest underwriters. week to draft the final tax bill.
BOND BUYER 7/21/86 "1 cannot believe the brass... of While most of the 22 House and
some people on Wall Street."an of- Senate conferees named are strong
ficial of a regional firm said private- supporters of tax reform, virtuall
Some players in the municipal ly, last week. "I can't believe how no staunch defenders of the enure
bond market last week dealt their stupid they are and how greedy municipal bond market are includ-
fellow state and local governments theY are." ed in the group.
and bond underwriters what may The charges of abuse and the per- Many of the conferees are focus-
prove a be a no-win hand to play in ception that Wall Street will go to Ing on other aspects of tax reform.
the final tax reform negotiations.
/ e hat Cad hand 'T„ .^ ,s,e rc� any length to earn quick underwrit- and others. stmply do not under-
"`�y "a" by e " ' ing fees may seriously harm the stand or care about the intricacies
of the recent rush by some localities market because the incident comes or import of the bond provisions.
of dollars of so-called blind financ-
and underwriters lmarket billions when tax negotiators are deciding As a result.the direction the con-
whether to impose the to re-
ing pools of tax-exempt bonds that ferees take on the bond curbs may
were designed primarily to circum- strictions on the tax-exempt mar- come from, staff members of the
vent for years to come the tough ket in the House bill or to accept the Ways and Means. Finance, and
new arbitrage restrictions included more lenient Senate-passed Congressional Joint Tax Commit-
restrictions.
in the House and Senate tax bills, tees. many of whom have serious
Although congressional and Although many House negotia- misgivings about the motives of
Treasury officials used swift and tors have appeared in recent weeks some in the municipal market.
precise surgery to halt the use of to be leaning toward accepting the One tax staffer who did not want
the arbitrage-driven pools as of 3 less restrictive Senate bond provi- to be identified said last week that
p.m. EDT last Thursday, the rush stons,the incident may give propo- the blind pool incident just proves
to market the pools may trigger se- nents of tougher bond curbs in the that tight curbs on the municipal
rious long-term consequences for House and Treasury the ammuni- market are needed.
issuers and underwriters when the tion they need. "State and local officials and un-
tax negotiators draft their final "This may raise some new issues derwriters keep coming up here
curbs on tax-exempt bonds. in the conference committee any telling us to leave the market
The rush to market the blind time somebody complains the rules alone... to let it police Itself.'* he
pools was quickly labeled by con- are too tight," a Treasury source said.
gressional and Treasury tax offi- said late last week. "How can we do that when faced
cials as an attempt to "abuse"and The flap over the rush to market with this kind of abuse?"
"pervert"the delay announced last blind pools has frightened state and
March for most of the House-passed local lobbyists who fear the attempt
curbs on public-use tax-exempt by Wall Street to earn some quick
bonds, including provisions of the profits may have seriously under-
House-passed tax bill that would cut their efforts to preserve as
require for the first time excess ar- much of the present bond market
bitrage profits earned from public- as they can.
use bonds to be reaaced to aic "TI'--e rush to market blind pools
Treasury. could not have come at a worse
"I'm terribly offended."said Sen. time."a state and local government
Bob Packwood.R-Ore.,chairman of lobbyist said late last week.
the Senate Finance Committee — "just when we need all the help
after he. Rep. Dan Rostenkowski.
D-ill., chairman of the House Ways
and Means Committee, and Trea-
sury secretary James A. Baker 3d
issued anoint statement prohibiting
the use of the pools.
"This is one more example of an
attempt to pervert our intent. They
[Wall Street underwriters] want to
protect their money." he said.
An official of the Public Securities .
Association, the municipal bond
trade group, subsequently labeled
the cutoff of the pools a "political"
CITE' OF SHAKOPEE
INCORPORATED 1870 ,.
J
129 EAST FIRST AVENUE, SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA 55379-1376 (612) 445-3650 ! + 1
July 22 , 1986
Ms. Pat Ploumen
805 East 4th Avenue
Shakopee, MN 55379
Dear Pat:
This letter is in response to your request to close 7th
Avenue between Minnesota and Dakota Streets on August 16 , 1986
between the hours of 2 : 00 p.m. and 9 : 00 p.m. for a "block party" .
I have checked with the Chief of Police, Tom Brownell , and
he has no objections with the temporary street closing; therefore ,
you may go ahead with the block party and the street closing on
August 16th.
Please contact Mr. Karkanen of Public Works , to make arrange-
ments for street barriers. He can explain the rental fees , also.
Hope you have a nice day.
Yours truly,
Judith S. Cox
City Clerk
JSC/jms
cc: Jim Karkanen
Tom Brownell
Th ueart of Progress T/a1 17
612-890-9400
Specializing in T Highway
Snow Removal A Maintenance
Equipment g Equipment
C b +.
A
A
EQUIPMENT CO. July, 1986
Junction W. 101 and Highway 13
Mailing Address: P.O. Box 377
Savage (Mpis.), Minnesota 55378
Subject: ITASCA OPEN HOUSE on August 7 and 8, 1986
You are hereby personally invited to attend our ITASCA OPEN HOUSE to be held at our
facilities located in Savage, Minnesota on Thursday and Friday, August 7 and 8, 1986.
Much of the QUALITY equipment distributed by Itasca will be on display for your in-
spection. Both our Itasca sales force and various manufacturers' representatives
will be readily available to discuss our equipment and answer your questions.
DEMONSTRATIONS of various equipment are scheduled for 10 a.m. and 2 p.m. on both days.
Buffet lunch will be served from 11 a.m. until 2 p.m. each day. Also, coffee, soft
drinks, and a beer wagon will be available to quench your thirst on a normally hot
August Day in Minnesota.
Register for door prizes! You need not be present to win.
Ample parking is available in the lot as you turn off Highway 13 South. Itasca
Equipment Co. is located one block South of the Intersection of Highway 13 and 101
stoplight located 2 miles West of the City of Savage.
We sincerely hope that you are able to attend and allow Itasca to display our im-
pressive equipment and facilities for you.
"Big John" Estenson established the Itasca Equipment Company in 1959 located in down-
town Minneapolis at 1128 South Sixth Street only a block from where the Metrodome is
now located. We moved into our Savage location in 1972. Originally, Itasca sold
only Oshkosh trucks but has selectively added other quality lines of equipment through
the years such as Wausau, SNOGO rotaries, Highway spreaders, Mobil street sweepers,
Unimog and Schmidt attachments, and many other excellent products. In 1986, Itasca
added Craig snowplows and wings, Brute (formerly Miller) tilt and ramp trailers,
Senotex and Landoll trailers.
Mark these dates, August 7 and 8, on your calendar and plan to spend a relaxing,
informative day with us! Come rain or shine, visit ITASCA - where the action is! !
Respectfully,
• v
Jo n Estenson 18rry L ng
P Xiisident ice-P esident Sales
Enclosure
MINUTES
CITY HALL SITING COMMITTEE MEETING
JULY 28 , 1986
Chairman Leroux called the meeting to order at 7 : 05 p.m.
Committee members present included Dolores Lebens, Dave Czaja and
John Leroux. Committee members absent were Dave Rockne and
Gloria Vierling. Also present were Jack Boarman, Terry Forbord
and John Anderson.
M/S/P Lebens/Czaja to approve the minutes of the July 7 , 1986
meeting.
Chairman Leroux invited Jack Boarman to review the results of his
meeting with the Downtown Committee held on Thursday noon, July
24 , 1986 . Jack noted that the Committee members went around the
table discussing the various concerns they had about locating a
City Hall downtown. Jack indicated to the Siting Committee that
it was his goal to obtain from the Downtown Committee the
characteristics they believed were crucial in supporting a
downtown site for City Hall.
Jack noted that he came up with five criteria during the meeting.
The criteria listed by Jack were as follows:
1. Elimination of blight which Jack said seemed to be their
most important characteristic.
2. The service relationship of a City Hall to the support of
the retail sector, according to the Committee members, was
stronger than was indicated by the survey done by the Siting
Committee.
3 . The City Hall was seen as providing positive imagery for
investment downtown.
4 . Timing of the relocation of City Hall was a critical issue
because it could leave a large hole in the retail stores on
the north side of Hwy 101.
5. By locating the City Hall close to the intersection of Hwy
101 and Hwy 169 the area could be cleaned up providing
positive imagery for those driving into Shakopee' s downtown.
Jack summarized by stating that he was not sure whether the
Downtown Committee had a clear picture of what they wanted the
downtown to be, and whether they actually believed that downtown
revitalization would occur. He stated that because of the timing
of the siting of the City Hall it was viewed by Committee members
as a critical project to keep downtown because no other major
activities had occurred or would be occurring in the near future.
Jack indicated that at the Committee meeting he used the term
"near hesteria" to describe how people were viewing the siting of
the City Hall as opposed to a simple factual sorting out of the
pros and cons in search for the best City Hall site.
Jack informed the Siting Committee that he had originally planned
to come to tonight ' s meeting to request that the Committee
authorize him to study a fourth site in the downtown in the
present City Hall site block. He said he originally felt there
would be a benefit to adding factual information from a third
party to his final report regarding a site in the downtown. He
noted that it would be hard to come up with a plan to
successfully sell a bond issue to Shakopee citizens if the Siting
Committee could not obtain consensus among the community
leadership. He stated that the most important thing the
Committee could do was to come up with a plan that would achieve
the needed consensus.
Mrs. Lebens suggested that a door-to-door survey of downtown
businessmen might be helpful in sheding some light on which site
businessmen really supported. She also said she preferred
putting the issue on the ballot without a specific site to
determine if there was general support for financing a City Hall.
Finally she said she was concerned that the funds in the Capital
Improvement Fund ( CIF) might be depleted if the siting process
was delayed for any length of time.
Jack said again that the Siting Committee needed to find a joint
solution to the problem of siting a City Hall. He noted that
Savage did go to the voters with a bond issue without a specific
site and that it did pass. But, he said, he didn' t know why it
failed the first time or why it passed it second time. He
reiterated that people were not looking at the site issue
objectively, but simplified the issue by characterizing it as an
opportunity to either support the downtown or pull the rug out
from under the Downtown Committee ' s efforts.
John Leroux discussed the availability of the House of Hoy site
and its potential uses including the possibility of a City Hall.
The consensus of the Siting Committee was that the site had
scored poorly in the initial City Hall siting process and that
little had changed since then.
Dave Czaja asked Jack . what he expected to accomplish in two
additional weeks studing the additional City Hall site in the
present City Hall block. Jack said that he felt it would add
some factual information to the ev&.luation process. John
Anderson indicated that for two years the Committee has known
that there was a split over siting a City Hall and that none of
the facts put forth during those two years has changed anyone ' s
mind on the Downtown Committee. He asked why the Committee
should expect any new set of facts to be treated differently.
i
i ;
i
John stated that by placing the City Hall siting question on the
"back burner" for 6 , 12 , or 18 months it might allow time for
other positive things to happen downtown. John further indicated
that not one of the Downtown Committee members attending the
Thursday noon luncheon had been swayed by facts to change their
position.
Chairman Leroux again came back to the suggestion of Mrs. Lebens
that a survey might be useful at this time. The Committee
discussed having a survey of all three business areas and the
general public . Jack stated that his firm had survey experience
and would be quite willing to conduct a survey within the scope
of the present contract. Jack stated that the survey might be
helpful in gaining consensus and questioned what would be
accomplished by a simple tabling of the siting issue. In
addition be asked what would trigger removing it from the table.
M/S/P Czaja/Lebens to instruct the Chairman, John Leroux, to meet
with the Downtown Committee at their July 30th meeting and invite
them to participate in drafting a survey to use in polling the
community regarding the City Hall siting issues.
M/S/P Czaja/Lebens to direct Jack Boarman to gather some
statistics on location of a new City Hall in the existing City
Hall block. Again it was noted that this would be done within
the existing contract and would be discussed within the
architect' s final report.
John Anderson asked about the need for the survey to be a
statistical random sample. He was concerned that an unscientific
sample of residents could be easily criticized by anyone who did
not like the results. It was decided to review this issue after
the Chairman met with the Downtown Committee.
Dave Czaja asked about the availability of the Gorman site. John
Anderson indicated that he had contacted the present owners and
that it was available.
M/S/P Czaja/Lebens to adjourn at 8 : 40 p.m.
John K. Anderson
Proceedings of the
Downtown Ad Hoc Committee
Shakopee, Minnesota
July 9 , 1986
Chrm. Laurent called the meeting to order at 7 : 40 a.m. with the
following members present; Terry Forbord, Gary Laurent, Don
Martin, Dan Steil, Jim Stillman, Joe Topic, Bill Wermerskirchen,
Tim Keane and Jerry Wampach. Absent; Mike Sortum and Pete
Sames. Also present were; John Anderson, City Administrator;
Dick Koppy, Westwood Engineering; Ken Ashfeld, City Engineer;
Barry Stock, Administrative Aide; Lou VanHout, SPUC
Superintendent and Beth Moe, Shakopee Valley News.
The following additions were made to the agenda:
6a. House of Hoy update
6b. City Hall Siting Committee
Terry Forbord/Dan Steil moved to approve the agenda with the
above additions. Motion carried.
Terry Forbord/Jim Stillman moved to approve the minutes of the
May 21, 1986 and May 28, 1986 meetings. Motion carried.
It was agreed that a tentative time schedule for downtown
streetscape improvements be published in the paper to show that
progress is being made on this project.
Terry Forbord/Jerry Wampach moved to approve the time schedule as
presented to the committee. Motion carried.
Dick Koppy gave a report on a tour he and several members had
taken to look at different lighting systems. The group seemed to
prefer the lighting on 50th and France, however, they liked the
spacing on Hennepin and Lake and the historic fixtures at
Riverplace. He presented two decision packages to the Committee,
the only difference between Package A and Package B being the
mounting poles. Each Package consists of 10 - 16 ft. historic
poles with acorn luminaire and 4 - 35 ft. poles with Parkdale
fixtures. Photometrics for both packages are identical. Using
concrete poles (Package A) the cost per block segment would be
$39,600 and using steel poles (Package B) would be $55, 900.
A discussion was held on concrete poles vs. steel poles. Lou
VanHout, SPUC Supt. , would like to check out maintenance on the
concrete poles.
Cost estimates for the 2nd Ave. parking lot were considered.
Using 3 - 16 ft. historic concrete poles with acorn luminaires
and 2 - 35 ft. concrete poles with Parkdale fixtures (Package A)
would be $14 , 300 whereas, Package B would cost $19, 700 if steel
poles were used. The cost of either package could be reduced if
the utilities did some of the work. It will take 6-8 weeks to
get the poles.
Terry Forbord/Bill Wermerskirchen moved approval of block
lighting plan as noted on Exhibit 1 Streetscape Design. Motion
carried.
Jerry Wampach/Terry Forbord moved to use Parkdale fixtures and
concrete poles.
Tim Keane/Jerry Wampach amended the motion by requesting the
consultant and Utilities Supt. to compare costs and maintenance
regarding double head fixtures. Motion carried.
Dan Steil left at 9 a.m.
Work on the retaining wall on Second Ave. is scheduled to begin
this week. The City Engineer will try to have a local
electrician install conduit along Second Ave. as this work is
being done.
Bill Wermerskirchen/Terry Forbord moved to go ahead with package
A for the 2nd Ave. parking lot.
Tim Keane/Jim Stillman amended the motion to include a double
head fixture at the stairway. Motion carried.
The next meeting of the Downtown Ad Hoc Committee will be held
July 16 at 7 : 30 a.m.
Terry Forbord/Jim Stillman moved to adjourn at 9 : 30 a.m.
Motion carried.
Darlene Schesso
Recording Secretary
PROCEEDINGS OF THE
DOWNTOWN AD HOC COMMITTEE
Shakopee, MN
July 16 , 1986
Chrm. Laurent called the meeting to order at 7 : 35 a.m. with the
following members present: Terry Forbord, Gary Laurent, Jim
Stillman & Joe Topic. Tim Keane arrived later. Absent: Don
Martin, Mike Sortum, Dan Steil, Bill Wermerskirchen, Pete Sames
and Jerry Wampach. Also present were: Barry Stock,
Administrative Aide; Dick Koppy and Tim Erkkila, Westwood
Engineering, Lou VanHout, Public Utilities Superintendent and
Beth Moe, Shakopee Valley News. John Anderson, City
Administrator arrived later.
The agenda was accepted as presented.
The Committee addressed the selection of pole design and lighting
plan elements. Dick Koppy showed sample sections of round and
octagonal concrete poles. The concrete poles have the same
wiring capabilities as the steel poles . If this type of pole is
hit by a car it will fall away from the vehicle.
The cost per block for Package A, with concrete poles, 8 single
fixtures, 2 double fixtures and 4 high level poles would be
$43 , 100 or $1,142,150 for 26 1/2 blocks. Package B, the same
basic design, using steel poles would cost $58 , 400 per block or
$1, 547 , 600 for 26 1/2 blocks.
Tim Keane arrived at 7 : 55 a.m.
Lou VanHout said he still had some questions on concrete poles
regarding breakage and chipping. He expressed concern that a
foundation still might be needed - also a handhole is needed in
the sidewalk for wiring. Hastings, Mankato and Waseca have
selected cast iron poles over concrete.
The Committee discussed the possibility of setting the poles
further into the sidewalk to prevent damage.
Lou VanHout and Dick Koppy will do some more checking on the pros
& cons of the concrete poles and report back at the July 30th
meeting.
Streetscape elements for the 2nd Ave. parking lot were discussed.
Two poles with single fixtures, 1 pole with a double fixture at
the stairs and 2 - 35 footers for the islands would cost about
$10 , 000 for material and $6 , 000 for labor. Placement of the
fixtures was not resolved.
Dick Koppy suggested that Ken Ashfeld, Lou VanHout and Tim
Erkilla work on a design and bring something back to the next
meeting.
Street plans and sidewalk plans for downtown streetscape were
reviewed by Tim Erkilla. Street plans include the jog, pavement
type, curb type and pedestrian crossing material. The Engineer
likes the jog at mid-block and recommended using bituminous on
the streets, the B6-18 modified design for curbs and doing some
painting and inlay with marking material.
Tim Keane would like to see brick at the nodes and linear brick
on the sidewalk.
Terry Forbord still expressed some concern about the mid-block
jog. Chrm. Laurent emphasized the importance of everyone
attending the July 30th meeting to make final decisions on
streetscape. The Engineers will bring back more items. for review
at that meeting -such as tree grates, benches, kiosks, special
signing, etc.
The Architect for a new City Hall will set a time and date to
meet with Downtown Committee members and see why the Committee
feels the City Hall should be built downtown.
Darlene Schesso
Recording Secretary
j3
PROCEEDINGS OF THE
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS AND APPEALS
REGULAR SESSION SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA JULY 10, 1986
Chrm. Czaja called the meeting to order at 7: 31 p.m. with Comm. Pomerenke,
Schmitt, Foudray and Lane present. Absent were Comm. VanMaldeghem and
Rockne. Also present were Judi Simac, City Planner and Cncl. Lebens.
The agenda was approved as written.
The minutes of June 5, 1986 were approved as written.
Schmitt/Pomerenke moved to adjourn. Motion carried unanimously. Meeting
adjourned at 7:32 p.m.
Judi Simac
City Planner
Diane S. Beuch
Recording Secretary
13
PROCEEDINGS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
REGULAR SESSION SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA JULY 10, 1986
Chrm. Czaja called the meeting to order at 7: 32 p.m. with Comm. Pomerenke,
Schmitt and Lane present. Comm. Rockne arrived later, and Comm. VanMaldeghem
was absent. Also present were Judi Simac, City Planner; John K. Anderson,
City Admr. and Cncl. Lebens.
The minutes of May 29, 1986 were approved as written.
The minutes of June 5, 1986 were approved as written.
PUBLIC HEARING - FISCHER CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
Foudray/Lane moved to open the public hearing to consider a conditional
use permit to operate a commercial recreation use (BMX) in a Light Indus-
trail Zoning District. Motion carried unanimously.
The City Planner reviewed the considerations of the request and recommended
approval of the permit with 8 conditions.
David Fischer, applicant, 17 Valley Haven Park, stated he originally plan-
ned this track as a free service for the kids in Shakopee, for exhibition
races. He said he doesn't think there is a need for the 6 foot security
fence recommended by the City Planner. He doesn't know of any BMX track
in Minnesota that operates with a fence around it. He has insurance which
covers this operation 24 hours a day, 365 days a year. He has been operat-
ing free, and at no profit. The fence would cost at least $2,000. The
owner of the property doesn't see any need for a fence. He informed the
Commission he has signs prohibiting kids from the track without proper
safety equipment. He thinks the sport is safe, and he has certified medical
personnel on the scene.
Mr. Fischer gave the dimensions of the parking area as 300' x 95' , and 275'
from CR16. He will have two people directing parking. He said he has put
grass over the entire area, and the only barren area is the racetrack itself.
He plans to get a truckload of crushed rock for the access road and will
level it with his bobcat.
Mr. Fischer answered further questions of the Commissioners, clarifying that
at a local race he anticipates between 30-40 cars, most with trailers. He
will also be seeking sign permits to identify the track as Hawk BMX, and
to direct traffic. He has had about 4 years experience in this area. He
plans to trophy everything that is entered. The prizes will be trophies,
plaques and gift certificates. He plans to charge an entry fee of $5, but
anyone from the community is welcome to help clean up after a race and enter
free. He thinks this operation will be non-profit because anything he gets
from it will go back into the business as incentives. He is renting the
property, and has a $1 million insurance policy which covers concessions,
spectators and operators; which is offered through the American Bicycle
Assoc. He said the meets are mainly on the week-ends, and the track is un-
supervised during non-meet times.
Shakopee Planning Commission
July 10, 1986
Page 2
The City Planner explained the recommendation regarding the fence came from
the Shakopee Police Chief, who felt the track was an attractive nuisance
which wouldn't be supervised or patrolled during the week.
Chrm. Czaja asked if there were any comments from the audience.
Kevin Lyons, Jonathan, said he has three sons who race BMX, ages 14, 9
and 7. He said on occasion his oldest son has gone over to the track to
practice riding and staying in condition during the day. He thinks that
keeps the kids from getting into other mischief. He added the safety gear
is used only under racing conditions. When there are only 2-3 kids out
there, it is very unlikely they will crash, or crash into each other. He
doesn't see the need for a security fence.
Art Fonder, 1898 Valley View Road, part owner of the property, said they
would have to forget the operation if a fence is required. He thinks that
10th Ave. is the bike riding area in Shakopee, and that is not patrolled,
and no one stops for stop signs. He thinks the kids are safer on this
track than on 10th Street in town.
Comm. Rockne arrived and took his seat at 7:55 p.m.
Foudray/Schmitt moved to close the public hearing. Motion carried unani-
mously.
Foudray/Pomerenke offered Conditional Use Permit No. 465, granting a Con-
ditional Use Permit to operate a Bicycle Motocross Track (BMX) as a com-
mercial recreational use in the I-1, and moved its adoption, subject to
the following conditions:
1. Provision of toilets per State Health Code -- one unit for
each sex and one per 100 occupants.
2. Operation shall be limited to the hours of 10 a.m. to dusk.
No exterior lighting will be permitted.
3. Parking area must be clearly defined, controlled for dust,
and have free access for all vehicles.
4. A County Entrance Permit must be obtained.
5. Use of loudspeaker will comply with City Noise Ordinance.
6. Use of facility is limited to non-motorized bicycles.
7. Permit is valid until December 31, 1986. Failure to comply
with permit conditions will result in immediate revocation
of permit.
Motion carried with Comm. Rockne abstaining because of his absence during
much of the discussion.
Chrm. Czaja informed the applicant of the 7 day appeal period.
Schmitt/Pomerenke moved to direct staff to develop suitable language for
an ordinance prohibiting the operation of any facility without the proper
variances, permits, etc. , with appropriate fines for violations to protect
the City. Motion carried unanimously.
Shakopee Planning Commission
July 10, 1986 J
Page 3
PUBLIC HEARING - CODE AMENDMENT TO ALLOW NON-FAMILY RESIDENTS IN MOBILE
HOMES IN AG ZONES
Pomerenke/Rockne moved to open the public hearing regarding the considera-
tion of an amendment to City Code to allow non-family farm workers to live
in mobile homes on the farm property. Motion carried unanimously.
The City Planner stated this recommendation was prepared because of direc-
tion from the Planning Commission and City Council.
Chrm. Czaja asked if there were any comments from the audience regarding
this proposed amendment, and there was no response.
Discussion ensued regarding language to include the immediate family of an
employee, identified as spouse and dependents. The City Planner stated
her intention of requiring a notarized affidavit by the farmer as proof
that the resident is a full-time employee of the farm.
Considerable discussion occurred regarding the reasons for considering
this amendment, including the changing nature of farming today and the
possibility of opening up the rural area to rental units. It was also
considered making an exception for dairy farming only, which seems to have
a greater requirement for on-site help.
Comm. Schmitt expressed his concern that if the non-family employee leaves
the position, the farmer is then faced with the problem of getting rid of
the mobile home on the farm, or renting it to someone else. He added that
it would be a difficult situation to police.
The City Admr. said that in more than five years that he has been here, this
need has only come up 2-3 times. He thinks it is a mistake to consider this
situation a hardship, because there are a lot of farmers out there that have
not complained or made a request to change the Code. He believes it is
just a convenience to have a hired hand live in a mobile home on the farm-
stead, but it has never been claimed that it is a hardship or the farm
would go out of business if the employee did not live on the farmstead.
This proposed amendment might open the door to allowing one mobile home per
40 acre farmstead.
Foudray/Schmitt moved to close the public hearing. Motion carried unanimously.
Lane/Schmitt moved to recommend to City Council that City Code, Section 11.05,
Subd. 8C remain as is, for the following reasons:
1. No hardship is found;
2. We do not wish to allow mobile homes as autonomous rental
units in the AG zone;
3. In the past 6 years there have been only 1-2 applications
received for either of the alternatives allowed in the Code
now, and therefore there is not a significant demand for
this proposed amendment.
Comm. Foudray spoke against this motion because even though he didn't think
it is a hardship presently, there may be more mobile homes out there that
the City doesn't know about, that can't even be seen from a road. He sug-
gested making the approval subject to yearly renewal.
Shakopee Planning Commission
July 10, 1986
Page 4
Comm. Schmitt inquired about the City's interpretation of all the horse
ranches in the area, and whether or not they would qualify as farmsteads
which would be allowed mobile homes. The City Planner replied that she
is concerned about the ranch uses and feedlots. With this language, they
would probably fit the qualification and be allowed a mobile home for an
employee, where there is a principal residence on site. However, she
feels the horse operations are more commercial in nature, and get away
from the intent of the ordinance, which is to help the family farm survive.
Comm. Rockne advised changing the Code because of the lack of availability
of housing in the area with all the recent growth.
Motion failed with Comm. Schmitt, Czaja and Lane in favor and Comm. Rockne,
Foudray and Pomerenke opposed.
Schmitt/Rockne moved for a five minute recess at 8:48 p.m. Motion carried
unanimously.
Chrm. Czaja called the meeting back to order at 8:57 p.m.
Schmitt/Foudray moved to recommend to City Council approval of an amendment
to City Code, Section 11.05, Subd. 8C as follows: to provide for a Condi-
tional Use Permit for a mobile home to be occupied by spouse, dependents
and full-time employee of the farmstead; which employment must be certified
to prior to the granting of the permit.
Comm. Pomerenke didn't think the public would be hurt by the rental of
mobile homes on farmsteads. Chrm. Czaja thought the issue would be the
proliferation of such mobile homes.
When asked about her recommendation, the City Planner replied that she
wouldn't want to recommend the ordinance be amended at all. This language
change was simply prepared at the recommendation of City Council and Planning
Commission.
Motion failed with Comm. Rockne, Pomerenke and Foudray in favor and Comm.
Lane, Czaja and Schmitt opposed.
Schmitt/Rockne moved that City Council be informed that Planning Commission
approached this issue from both the positive and negative basis, and both
motions failed for a lack of majority; and directed a transcript of the
discussions regarding this issue be provided to City Council without re-
commendation. Motion carried unanimously.
PUBLIC HEARING - PRELIMINARY AND FINAL PLAT OF MERIDEN ADDITION
Foudray/Schmitt moved to open the public hearing to consider the Preliminary
and Final Plat of Meriden Addition and an application for re-zoning. Motion
carried unanimously.
Chrm. Czaja said the applicant would like this hearing continued.
Chrm. Czaja asked if there were any comments from the audience, and there
were none.
Shakopee Planning Commission
July 10, 1986
Page 5
i
Schmitt/Pomerenke moved to continue the public hearing to August 7, 1986.
Motion carried unanimously.
DISCUSSION - FINAL PLAT OF MAPLEWOOD TOWNHOUSES 1ST ADDITION
The City Planner stated that all the conditions of the Preliminary Plat
have been met, with the exception of the Title Opinion, which is normally
completed just prior to Final Plat approval.
Lane/Schmitt moved to recommend to City Council approval of the Final Plat
of Maplewood Townhouses 1st Addition, subject to the condition of an ap-
proved Title Opinion by the City Attorney. Motion carried unanimously.
DISCUSSION - GEROLD MOBILE HOME CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
The City Planner said the farmer's son is living in the mobile home.
Schmitt/Lane offered an amendment to Conditional Use Permit Resolution No.
273, which reissues the permit for an additional five years, and moved its
adoption subject to the following conditions:
1. The Conditional Use Permit shall be reviewed on an annual
basis.
2. The mobile home may be placed on the property until May 14,
1991.
3. The mobile home shall not be used as a rental unit and shall
not be occupied by anyone other than the applicant and
family.
4. The mobile home shall utilize tie-downs.
Motion carried unanimously.
INFORMATIONAL
The City Planner informed the Commission that City Council denied the Con-
ditional Use Permit for Quest Air (helicopter) .
The City Planner also informed the Commission that the approval of Wishingwell
Farm was appealed to City Council, which approved a motion to prepare a
resolution denying the permit, which will be considered July 15. The appli-
cant has filed a complaint in Court.
OTHER BUSINESS
There was a brief discussion relative to Canterbury Park 2nd Addition. A
clarification is being sought regarding the condition requiring a tram/
pedestrian walkway. The City Planner said it is not safe to put in a ped-
estrian walkway along the entrance drive, as there isn't enough room. She
said the developer is going to provide shuttle service from the hotel to
the racetrack. She said part of the public improvement of the street would
be the sidewalk construction, which needs to be tied into the site plan.
Because the developer was not present, no action was taken at this time.
Foudray/Pomerenke moved to adjourn. Motion carried unanimously. Meeting
adjourned at 9:30 p.m.
Judi Simac, City Planner Diane S. Beuch, Recording Secretary
G'
TENTATIVE AGENDA
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT AND APPEALS
Regular Session Shakopee, MN August 7 , 1986
Chairman Czaja Presiding
1. Roll Call at 7 : 30 P.M.
2 . Approval of Agenda
3 . Approval of July 10, 1986 Minutes
4 . 7 : 30 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING: To consider a 20 ft. variance
from the required 30 ' rear yard setback, a 7 foot variance
from the required 15 ft. parking setback and a reduction in
the number of parking spaces required by code to construct
an addition to existing building upon the property located
on Block 25 , Lots 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 & 10 , Shakopee.
Applicant: Bill Henning & Cc.
Action: Variance Resolution No. 468
5 . 7 : 45 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING: To consider a variance to
construct a garage 2 feet from the side property line on the
property located at 714 South Holmes St.
Applicant: Carl Bilda/Peggy Kohl
Action: Variance Resolution No. 466
6 . 8 : 00 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING: To consider a 1p. foot variance
from the 40 foot required front yard setback to construct a
new home upon the property located on Lot 10 , Block 2 ,
Minnesota Valley 3rd Addn.
Applicant: Larry Norring
Action: Variance Resolution No. 467
7 . Other Business
8 . Adjournment
Judi Simac
City Planner
CITY OF SHAKOPEE
/ 4'
TENTATIVE AGENDA
PLANNING COMMISSION
Regular Session Shakopee, MN August 7 , 1986
Chairman Czaja Presiding
1. Roll Call at 7 : 30 P.M.
2 . Approval of Agenda
3 . Approval of July 10, 1986 Minutes
4 . 8 : 15 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING: To consider the rezoning request
of Valleyfair to rezone approximately 3 . 7 acres of property
located at One Valleyfair Drive.
Applicant: Valleyfair
Action: Recommendation to City Council
5 . 8 : 30 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING: To amend Conditional Use Permit
#424 to construct a building addition in a B-1 District upon
the property located at 1266 E. lst Avenue.
Applicant: American Legion Post #2
Action: Amend Conditional Use Permit Resolution No. 424
6 . 8 : 45 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING: To consider a request for renewal
of Conditional Use Permit #412 to construct a fraternal
institution building upon the property located on Lots 2 , 3
& 4 , Block 1, Furrie lst Addn.
Applicant: Shakopee VFW Post 4046
Action: Renew Conditional Use Permit Resolution No. 412
7 . 9 : 00 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING: To consider the rezoning of
approximately 71. 2 acres of property located in Section 7 ,
Township 115N, Range 22W, from Ag to R-2 .
Applicant: Jackson Business Park
Action: Recommendation to City Council
8. 9 : 15 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING: To consider a Conditional Use
Permit to allow outdoor storage of equipment upon the
property located at 8973 - 13th Ave.
Applicant: Cogswell Auto Repair
Action: Conditional Use Permit Resolution No. 469
9 . 9 : 30 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING: To consider a Conditional Use
Permit to exceed the height of three feet for fences in the
front yard setback upon the property located at 1075 Miller
Street.
Applicant: James Cook
Action: Conditional Use Permit Resolution No. 470
10 . 9 : 45 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING CONTINUED: To consider an
application for Preliminary and Final Plat approval of
Meriden Addition a replat of Outlot A, Prahmcoll Addition
and an application for rezoning this property from I-1,
Light Industrial to B-2 , Community Business .
Applicant: Meriden Corporation
Action: Recommendation to City Council
11. Discussion: Canterbury Park 2nd Addition
12 . Informational:
a. Meetings on Cable T.V.
b.
13 . Other Business
14 . Adjournment
Judi Simac
City Planner
CITY OF SHAKOPEE
'
MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator
FROM: Ken Ashfeld, City Engineer
SUBJECT: Scott County Transportation Coalition
DATE: August 1, 1986
Attached are various correspondences relative to the workings
of the Transportation Coalition that Council members will be
interested in.
KA/pmp
COALITION
(Yfi,- Sol omam
'10"ilzge(3 yIIZ) bletrI&A riqxi :Mf)lqg
moi#&*NcmjwnmNT ys"moJ lfo3P :T33LRU2
c3ae " .1 *wupup :31 AQ
4,f Ow 9 %'Is O*rjoa I JA
1131-I)JO3 IAMI lIc,iIfIr*i---J alit 'to
air beles-is*rti
qf*q\AA
MOtTIJADO
+� STATE OF MLVNESOTA
OFFICE OF THE G vERNOR
ST. PAUL 55155
RUDY PERPICH
GOVERNOR
July 18 , 1986
Senator Dave Durenberger
United States Senator
375 Russell Office Building
Washingt D.C. L—
I
Dear t am writing to express my support for the completion of needed
environmental and preliminary engineering work in order that the
existing Bloomington Ferry Bridge can be replaced with a new
structure as soon as possible. I know that Scott and Hennepin
Counties are looking for your help in securing most of the
needed funding (approximately $2 . 75 million) from a congressional
appropriation . I understand from talking with Senator Bob Schmitz ,
that the U.S . Senate Transportation Bill (5 . 2405) is currently
before the Environment and Public Works Committee. Bob has
worked extremely hard in an attempt to find the necessary funding
to complete this needed preliminary work. We are both hopeful
that you as a member of the Committee, will be in a position to
" earmark" funding for the Bloomington Ferry Bridge in S . 2405 as
it is reviewed and passed out by the Environment and Public Works
Committee.
I know that you are aware of the need for the existing temporary
bridge to be replaced as soon as possible . Each year the bridge
is closed for a period of time in the Spring because of high
water . This causes severe travel problems for the thousands of
vehicles which need to cross the Minnesota River each day.
Because this bridge crossing has become a vital link between
many co7-aniun Lties in MirinesoCa , ant] particularly the metropolitan
area , it is extremely critical that a new and adequate structure
replace the current temporary bridge soon.
Your help in the past has been extremely important in finding
ways to meet needs in Minnesota. In this situation , we see your
assistance as not only helpful but essential.
Please do not hesitate to contact Senator Schmitz or myself
should you have questions or need further information.
Sincerely ,
bcc:
Senator Bob Schmitz
Bill Dilks , Scott County
Brandt Richardson , Scott Co.
R Y PERPICH Richard Braun , Mn/DOT
Go erncr
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER
MARTIN OLAV SAGO
436 CANNON HOUSE OFFICE BUILDING
STH DISTRICT,MINNESOTAyrs WASHINGTON,D.C. 20515
(202)225-4755
COM M ITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONSI�I)()�"'
- sli;jll, 462 FEDERAL COURTS BUILDING
`...✓'�` 110 SOUTH 4TH STREET
SUBCOMMITTEES:
MINNEAPOLIS,MINNESOTA 55401
HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENTortgre55 of tf)e lliteb �tate5
AND INDEPENDENT AGENCIESCIES (612)349-5110
TRANSPORTATION
3�ou5e of rtrpr£5entatibe-q
ma5ijington, �3.c. 20 13
July 16, 1986
Ms. Marilyn Hagerman
Project Coordinator
Scott County Transportation Coalition
P.O. Box 153
Shakopee, Minnesota 55379
Dear Ms. Hagerman:
Thank you for your letter in support of federal funding of the
preliminary engineering and final design for the Bloomington Ferry Bridge.
I sympathize with those who live, work, or visit the attractions in
the area. As you know, the present bridge is a temporary structure
constructed under a 6-year permit by the Coast Guard in 1978 which was
extended to 1989. There is no guarantee of a further extension. Flooding
of the Minnesota River has closed the bridge for 202 days in the last four
years. Growth in the vicinity of the bridge has resulted in serious
congestion on the bridge and its approaches. There are no convenient
alternate routes and re-routing adds miles to each trip.
I serve on the Transportation Subcommittee of Appropriations in the
House of Representatives. Funding for such projects is made through the
Highway Trust Fund for which the Appropriations Committee does not make
direct appropriations. However, I did include language in the report
accompanying the Fiscal Year 1987 Transportation Appropriations bill urging
that the Federal Highway Administration give priority consideration to this
project as it allocates funds from its bridge program. The Public Works and
Transportation Committee, on which I do not serve, has the authority to
designate individual projects for funding from the Trust Fund. I understand
that efforts to include the Bloomington Ferry Bridge in legislation before
that committee were not successful but that similar report language was
adopted.
1
I appreciate knowing of your concern and hope that these actions
will have some impact on the traffic problem caused by the current bridge.
'Sincerely,
. e.
Martin 0. Sabo
'Member of Congress
XOS/jb
THIS STATIONERY PRINTED ON PAPER MADE WITH RECYCLED FIBERS
i
INNESOTA - TRUCKS SERVE F-VFIRYONE IN
• RUCKING EVERY COMMUNITY -
.` SSOCIATION
r
July 25, 1986
Honorable Rudy Boschwitz
United States Senate
Washington DC 20510
Dear Rudy
The past month or so I've written you on several matters of importance to the Minnesota
Trucking Association. Now I find myself once again at my desk to addreas a local road
issue with some fairly broad implications for a cross-section of highway users. _The sad
truth is that some road problems become so bad that they tend to evolve into a kind of
public joke - and the existing Bloomington Ferry bridge is a classic example of what I
mean.
Every spring - and in 1986, the wet summer - finds the Ferry bridge under water and
unusable. When this happens a high number of passenger vehicles are forced to travel
farther east on Highway 13 to gain access to I-35. This excess traffic greatly overloads
Highway 13 which is already a high volume roadway and a major truck route.
The result is heavy congestion and a potential safety hazard as well as an economic
bottleneck. The grain terminals, the farmers who ship to the terminals, the other
businesses along this route, the trucking companies that serve these entities and
ultimately the consumer are all penalized because of the inefficiencies and high costs
generated by this traffic overload.
The solution is obvious - realign the Ferry bridge. As I understand it, the four-year
Surface Transportation Act, as sent to the floor of the Senate, includes funding of $2.75
million for preliminary engineering of the bridge. Unfortunately, there is no provision
in the House version. Further delay in resolving this problem cannot be justified. It
is extremely important that the preliminary engineering funding, as provided by the
Senate bill, be incorporated in the final version of the Surface Transportation Act.
Your help in this regard, both on the floor and in contact with the conferees, will be
appreciated.
Sincerely
Jame N. Denn
r ident
I
cc: Congressman Bill Frenzel Same letter also sent to Ser.. Dave Durenberger
Congressman Martin Sabo
>.Brradley J. Larson, Scott County Engineer
Herb Klossner, Hennepin County Engineer
Commissioner Dick Braun, MN DOTY � I
Doug Differt, Assistant Commissioner, MN DOT ?1 ` . ,��:t
11321 UNIVERSITY AVENUE GRIGGS-MIDWAY BLDG. • ST. PAUL, MINN. 55104 AREA CODE: 612 646-7351
Highway Sixty/ACTION Corporation
July 22, 1986
Senator Rudy Boschwitz
210 Bremer Building
St. Paul , MN 55105
Dear Senator Rudy Boschwitz:
The Minnesota Highway 60 Action Corporation has existed
since 1965 for the express purpose of improving that roadway thru
Southwestern Minnesota. As a charter member, I can attest to the
problems encountered in our efforts.
i
We are also well aware of the severe traffic crisis that has
developed in and around Shakopee, Minnesota in recent years. It
is an inconvenience to the traveling public, but it is also a
great safety hazard. It is not humanitarian for ambulances from
our section of the state to have to fight five mile traffic jams
to obtain medical service in the metro area hospitals, which used ,
to be very accessible.
Having lived in Windom nearly all my life, I have driven
this corridor since 1936. Three generations of drivers in my
family had no problems with driving US 169 until my wife's van
was rear ended in downtown Shakopee by a hit-run driver in 1983.
A friend of mine totalled his .car on the same street a few years
ago.
The Scott County Transportation Coalition has furnished me
with criteria concerning their traffic problems. After studying
and discussing this material with some of their members, I
consider that they have arrived at feasible solutions to these
matters. One of the most pressing immediate hurdles is the
acquiring of funds for Scott County to prepare the Design Study
Report and Plan Preparation for the Bloomington Ferry Bridge on
CSAH 18 over the Minnesota River.
1
s
3
Senator Rudy Boschwitz July 22, 1986
Page 2
These funds are pending on the passage of the 4 Year Surface
Transportation Act being considered by Congress this summer. The
Minnesota Highway 60 Action Committee strongly requests your
support for inclusion of the Bloomington Ferry Bridge project in
this bill. This will activate one of the steps in this multi-
phased traffic improve�ent program. We also wish to impress you
with the fact that these projects affect the entire southwestern
section of Minnesota. While we consider the Shakopee area
projects to be a continuation of our route to the Minneapolis/
St. Paul area, we feel the funding should not inhibit the pro-
gress being made on Minnesota Highway 60.
Thank you for your consideration in this matter.
Sincerely,
Dr.-C. 0. Castled �ne, President
Minnesota Highway 60 Action Corporation
Box 214
Windom, Minnesota 56101
(507) 831-3497
I
i
i
i
17
Administrative Policy No.
Subject: Miscellaneous Billing
Date Adopted:
Source of Authority: Finance Department
The purpose of this policy is to delineate a standard procedure for the
invoicing of City services and supplies.
Finance Dept. will prepare and send invoices and do the collection
follow-up and record keeping. Engineering Dept. will prepare invoices
for Engineering services and Finance will take over from that point.
Individual departments are responsible for providing Finance with
complete, accurate and timely information for preparing invoices.
The types of services and materials to be invoiced include fire calls and
contracts, special assessment searches, copies, minutes, agendas, weed
mowing, gasoline sales, surveys, etc.
The City will not invoice for less than $5.00. Any amounts less than
that must be prepaid, cash or a minimum bill of $5.00.
4/13/81
INVOICE PROCEDURE
A. Daily
1 . Information is received from various sources that the City needs
to bill someone.
2. Type invoice and fill in all pertinent data (see sample) .
3. Mail white and yellow copies to invoicee.
4. File pink copy in unpaid invoice file.
5. Add invoice data to listing of invoices.
Do above steps as soon as possible to keep bills current. (i.e. 3 days)
6. When payment is received, enter paid, the date and the receipt
number on the pink copy of the invoice, the invoice list, and
notify the City Attorney if bill had previously been sent to
him. Then put the paid invoice in the file for paid invoices.
B. Monthly
1. At the end of every month go through invoice file and send first
reminder notice to every party whose bill is older than 30 days
and/or send second notice to every party whose is older than 60
days (see sample) .
2. Ten days after the 30 day reminder notice, contact the party
by telephone to follow up if payment has not been received.
3. When a bill is 90 days old make copy of bill and send to City
Attorney for collection action. Make list of bills sent to
City Attorney for file and one copy to Finance Director (see sample) .
C. Bills for Fire Calls
1. Type in "Pay to Township"
Louisville Township Jackson Township
c/o James Theis c/o Ray Vyskocil
Rt. 2 Box 317 Rt. 3 Box 458
Shakopee, MN 55379 Shakopee, MN 55379
2. Cross out "Make checks payable to City of Shakopee"
3. Send copy of invoice and Fire Report to Township.
4. Do not send delinquent invoices to City Attorney.
5. Send reminder to Township.
I. THE MECHANICS OF TAX INCREMENT FINANCING (TIF) I
Tax increment financing enables a city to use the additional property taxes that a
development generates to finance land acquisition, relocation, demolition, and other
costs necessary for that redevelopment to occur. Usually the issuance of tax-exempt
bonds is necessary to finance these up-front public costs. The principal and interest on
the bonds is repaid by the added taxes that are generated by the new development. The
taxes captured to repay the bonds come from the total tax levy on property. Under State
law each Tax Increment Financing District must go through a local public hearing and
review by the County and School District before it can be established.
Example See Figure W . In figure 'A' the City has established a tax increment district
in a blighted section of the City. A developer is considering building an office/retail
development on parcel A. The developer will not build the complex unless the City agrees
to pay the costs of land acquisition and demolition. These costs amount to approx.
650,000. TIF bonds are sold to fund these improvements. The bonds are repaid from the
annual proceeds of the taxes generated by the increase in value of the property (captured
AV x mill rate).
FIGURE 'A'
Tax Increment District Current
as a Revenue Source Assessed Value
Original (after development) Captured
Assessed Value occurs) Assessed Value
Pael rcPro j ect Area
A Parcel A $100,000 $1,600,000 $1,500,000
I
Captured Assessed Value of $1,500,000 (Current Assessed
t—Tax Increment Value minus Original Assessed Value) x Mill Rate of 100
District I Mills = Tax Increment of $150,000 per year.
Tax increment financing does not change the amount of property taxes a developer pays.
In this example, the developer of Parcel A pays taxes of $160,000 (100 mills times an
assessed value of $1,600,000), with or without T.I.F. Tax increment financing simply
determines who will receive that $160,000. Without tax increment financing the entire
$160,000 would have been distributed to the city, county, school district, and other
taxing jurisdictions according to their mill rates. With tax increment financing, only
$10,000 (100 mills times the original assessed value of $100,000 on Parcel A) will be
distributed to the various taxing jurisdictions according to their mill rates. The
remaining $150,000 in taxes on Parcel A are distributed to the city to pay the costs of
the tax increment district. (See note on bottom of page 3. )
Example See Figure 'B' . Figure B illustrates how Shakopee's six TIF districts work
together in a Master Project Area to increase the City's flexibility in using TIF
revenues within the project area while decreasing the City's exposure from a default on
any one district. T.I.F. revenue from any one T.I.F. district can be spent any where
within the project area boundaries.
FIGURE 'B'
Pooled Tax Increment Districts
In One Master Project Area
�.•.•.•.'..•.'.•.'.•:'.':':':•:I /
1i}iij}::ji}?}iiya I I
Proiect Area
v
TID #1 TID #2 Areas using tax
(pooling among TID #1 increments from
and TID 92 permitted) TID #1 and TID k2
II. AUTHORIZED USES OF TAX INCREMENT FINANCING
1. Acquisition of "blighted" properties, "marginal land", vacant or under-utilized land
or properties or of any property as part of a development plan to eliminate or
prevent the development of "blight" or the causes of blight.
2. Sale, lease or other disposition of acquired properties at or below market value
(i.e. "land write-downs").
3. Demolition and removal of "blighted" buildings or other structures.
4. Elimination of physical characteristics of the land that make development difficult.
5. Engineering, planning, and administrative costs.
6. Installation of streets, utilities, and other site improvements.
7. Relocation payments to displaced residents and businesses.
8. Construction of housing for low and moderate income persons or veterans.
9. Relocation, restoration, or rehabilitation of buildings of historical or
architectural value.
10. Interest rate reduction payments for low and moderate income housing developments,
both rental and owner occupied, and small commercial developments.
11. Acquisition and construction of parking lots and ramps, pedestrian skyways and
related facilities.
12. Guarantees or insurance for industrial development or mortgage subsidy bonds.
The City of Shakopee has used "authorized uses" 411-12 with the exception of 419 and 4112 in
its six TIF districts.
III. SHAKOPEE'S SIX TIF DISTRICTS AND THEIR IMPACT ON CITY,
SCHOOL*, AND COUNTY TAXES" AND SERVICES
Net
Increased
Impact on Impact on Assessed
District Description City Service County Services Jobs Value
1) K-Mart Water rates kept Decreased 250 $8,156,013
low thru con- direct cost FT
1979 - 3.5 million bond to finance land struction of of county
write-down, site development, widen a well, water roadway
CR 83 and construction of a water well tower and water improvements
and water tower. mains. Financed for CR 83
1984 - Refinanced bonds and issued an $1.1 mil for paid for by
additional 2.4 million in bonds to make Holmes Street the City
off-site roadway improvements, near Basin Storm
racetrack site. Sewers and $2.4
- The district is generating surplus mil in roadway
tax increments, which the City hopes improvements in
to use for highway, storm sewer and the industrial
downtown improvements. District park.
must end 2004***.
2) Senior Administration Added second 1 $419,370
High Rise and maintenance senior citizen
of congregate club (staffed
1979 - City issued $365,000 TIF bonds dining space & by County)
to subsidize 66 units of Sec. 8 parking issues. Increased
housing for senior. This provided the number
- The primary uses of TIF in the a new facility of Human Services
district were land write-down and and program for clients.
provision of water service through Shakopee senior
a limestone bed. District must end citizens.
2004.
Net
Increased
Impact on Impact on Assessed
District Description City Service County Services Jobs Value
3) Downtown Significant Captured None $323,306
Redevelopment increase in increased to date
planning time taxes from
1982 - To date no bonds have been sold. for overall business
Tax increments from other districts downtown projects expansions
have been used to fund planning Improved parking that occurred
consulting fees and the construction lot downtown downtown w/o
of a parking lot. Interest rate write T.I.F.
downs on commercial rehab loans in the inducement
downtown are also planned utilizing tax
increment proceeds. District must end
2007.+
4) Racetrack Increase Police Increased 60 Est.
activities. Jail usage FT $43,000,000
1984 - Shakopee issued 4.2 million Increased staff Ave. 1.3 1000
in tax increment bonds for the time on related people per PT
development of a horse racing track. planning & day
The primary use of the bonds were for zoning questions.
land write-down and grading. City receives 10
Projected excess increments may be cent per ticket to
used to fund highway, storm sewer, cover these &
and downtown improvements. District other service
must end 1995.+ costs, est. at
$150,000/yr.
5) Family Chow Mein None - See None 2 $17,211
3 above FT
No TIF assistance was given to the 8
developer. Restaurant currently PT
generating fewer taxes than previous
use. No bonds have been sold.
District must end 2009.
5) Minnesota Completion of None 3 1987 Est.
Valley Motel Bluff Avenue FT $269,781
Expansion of 76
1986 - Shakopee issed 500,000 total no. of PT
Tax Increment Bonds. The primary lodging rooms
use of the bonds were for land and campsites
write-down and street improvements in Shakopee.
(Bluff Street). District must Reuse of Old
end 2011. Treatment Plant.
-The School District's local taxes do not increase because the State's school aid formula
pays for assessed value captured by TIF districts simply because the formula doesn't
consider the TIF district's assessed value in the formula.
**County taxes remain the same just as though the new assessed value hadn't been added
until the specific T.I.F. district is terminated.
***The City can end a T.I.F. district any time existing bonded debt obligations are met.
Most T.I.F. districts are closed before the legal date for closure.
+These 3 T.I.F. districts have increased City taxes because the City elected to have Fiscal
Disparities, a regional tax base sharing program, paid by the City as a whole rather than
the district pay its own Fiscal Disparities. The combined tax increase equals about 1
mill.
MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator
FROM: Judi Simac, City Planner
RE: Final Draft Racetrack District Report
DATE: August 1, 1986
Background:
Attached is the draft final Racetrack District report which
has been prepared by Hoisington Group Inc. Mr. Hoisington and I
feel that the report should be distributed to City Council for
review and comment prior to adoption by resolution and completion
of the final graphics .
The ordinances for the P.U.D. regulations and mandatory
P.U.D. area are being prepared by Mr. Coller. Even though the
RTD zoning has been adopted, no one can begin the development
process until the P.U.D. requirements are in effect, because
development in the RTD must occur through P.U.D.
Staff expects to have the adoption of the RTD report and
P.U.D. Ordinances on the August 19th agenda. In the time between
now and August 12th a developer could request to be on the
Planning Commission September 4th agenda to develop in the RTD
without the City "officially" having the P.U.D. ordinance
adopted. However, the information is available to given them and
it is unlikely that anyone will be prepared to submit application
so soon.
Should Council members have any comments or questions on the
RTD report they should contact me by August 11, 1986 before the
final report is printed.
TENTATIVE AGENDA
REGULAR SESSION SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA AUGUST 5 , 1986
Mayor Reinke presiding
1 ] Roll Call at 7 : 00 P.M.
2 ] Recess for H.R.A. Meeting
31 Reconvene
4 ] Liaison Reports from Councilmembers
51 RECOGNITION BY CITY COUNCIL OF INTERESTED CITIZENS
61 Approval of Consent Business - (All items listed with an asterick
are considered to be routine by the City Council and will be
enacted by one motion. There will be no separate discussion
of these items unless a Councilmember so requests , in which
event the item will be removed from the colsent agenda and
considered in its normal sequence on the agenda. )
*71 Approval of the Minutes of July 15 , July 22 , July 25 , 1986
8 ] Communications : ( Items noted for consent will be received and filed)
a] Verbal report from Byron Laher and Leslie Turner re: United Way
b] Bruce G. Nawrocki re: Reappointment to MTC
*c] Robert Ziegler re: Resignation from Community Services Board
*d] Paul Wermerskirchen re: Appreciation for Police Escort at Funeral
*e] Lee Vickerman re: Petition for Annexation Josephine Vierling
Estate
f ] Scottland Companies re: Canterbury Square N.E. Corner County
Road 83 and 12th Avenue
*g] Don Woodward re: Tourism/Promotion Center
9 ] Boards and Commissions: None
10 ] Reports from Staff : [Council will take a 10 minute break around
9 : 00 P.M. ]
*a] Conditional Use Permit - Roy Marschall
b] Employee Housing and Dormitories as a use in the Racetrack
District
*c] Appointment to the Downtown Committee
*d] Amending Dial-A-Ride Contract
e] Drainage Problem Along 11th Avenue
f ] Holmes Street Lateral and 4th Avenue Project Update -
informational - memo on table
*g] Utility Service to City Owned Property Fourth Ave. Reconstruction_
*h] Acquisition of T. H. 101 Bypass Right-of-Way
*i] Shiely Company Water Appropriation Permit Amendment
j ] Flat Rate Sewer Billing for Single Occupant House
k] Approve bills in the amount of $2 , 898 , 853 . 36
1] Reduction of Letter of Credit - Eagle Creek Junction - memo on
table
m] Clerical Staffing
n] Sunday Liquor Licenses
o] Application for Sunday Liquor License for Clair ' s Bar Inc. -
tabled July 15th
p] Petition for Refuse Collection in the Montecito Heights
Rural Residential Area
q] Returning Surety Bond - Brooks Superette No. 42
*r] Traffic Signal Maintenance Agreement between City and SPUC
*s] Shakopee Jaycees Fundraiser for Muscular Dystrophy Association
111 Resolutions and Ordinances:
*a] Res. No. 2594 Appointment of Election Judges
*b] Res. No. 2595 Declaring Cost to be Assessed and Ordering
Preparation of Assessments Timber Trail Street Rehabilitation
*c] Res. No. 2596 Declaring Cost to be Assessed and Ordering
Preparation of Assessments Fourth Avenue Reconstruction
d] Res . No. 2597 Receiving a Report and Calling a Hearing
on Improvements to 13th Avenue from C.R. 89 to E. Corporate
Limits
121 Other Business:
a]
b]
131 Recess for Executive Session to discuss pending litigation
14 ] Reconvene
15) Adjourn to Tuesday, August 19 , 1986 at 7 : 00 p.m.
John K. Anderson
City Administrator
TENTATIVE AGENDA
Housing and Redevelopment Authority in and for the
City of Shakopee, Minnesota
Regular Session August 5 , 1986
Chairman Wampach presiding:
1. Roll Call at 7: 00 p.m.
2 . Approval of Minutes of July lst and July 22nd, 1986
3 . Resolution 86-9 - Appointing an Executive Director
to the Shakopee HRA
4 . House of Hoy Appraisal Report
5 . Request to Acquire Property (Lot 1, Blk 2 , Original Plat
- 303 E. 1st Ave. )
6. Other Business
7 . Adjourn
Barry Stock
Administrative Aide
PROCEEDINGS OF THE HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
SPECIAL SESSION SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA JULY 1, 1986
Chairman Wampach called the meeting to order at 7:05 p.m. with Comm. Lebens,
Vierling, Colligan and Leroux present. Also present were John K. Anderson,
City Admr. ; Judith S. Cox, City Clerk; Judi Simac, City Planner; Ken Ashfeld,
City Engineer; Barry Stock,Admin. Aide; Julius A. Coller, II, City Attorney
and Mayor Reinke.
Leroux/Colligan moved to approve the agenda for the special session. Motion
carried unanimously.
Vierling/Leroux moved to approve the minutes of the June 17, 1986 meeting.
Motion carried unanimously.
Lebens/Vierling moved to inform Scott County that the City is not interested
in acquiring the Scott County Garage located at 333 Shumway Street, and
request Scott County to demolish the present structure in a timely manner.
Motion carried unanimously.
Leroux/Colligan offered Resolution No. 86-6, A Resolution Approving and
Authorizing Execution of Tax Increment Pledge Agreement Respecting $500,000
G.O. Tax Increment Bonds, Series 1986A, and moved its adoption.
Roll Call: Ayes; Wampach, Colligan, Leroux, Vierling
Noes; Lebens
Motion carried.
Colligan/Vierling offered Resolution No. 86-7, A Resolution Approving and
Authorizing Execution of Tax Increment Pledge Agreement Respecting $1,645,000
G.O. Tax Increment Bonds, Series 1986B, and moved its adoption.
Roll Call: Ayes; Leroux, Vierling, Colligan, Wampach
Noes; Lebens
Motion carried.
Leroux/Vierling offered Resolution No. 86-8, A Resolution Approving and
Authorizing Execution of Amended Tax Increment Pledge Agreement Respecting
$2,105,000 G.O. Tax Increment Refunding Bonds, Series 1986A, and moved its
adoption.
Roll Call: Ayes; Colligan, Wampach, Vierling, Leroux
Noes; Lebens
Motion carried.
Colligan/Vierling moved to adjourn. Motion carried unanimously. Meeting
adjourned at 7:09 p.m.
Barry Stock
Administrative Aide
Diane S. Beuch
Recording Secretary
,lhu�_...c... .... a%1.,. alle�l V.... E. ��_11T v�) :,� `� 01 ... r:.
i^r_._-,�, „__lam a3, and Leroux pr=-sent. l�:r rY•c ,,)-' ider.. Ji1_' --. r 0::
f
^i+ dr-,inistr�tor; -u �as -_. c t,�
...'"; r..._.. 1.i... ----p f v,
7ire ctor.
c 2'Ou , Ql i10 =_ L:7ir2� to c�u�'.'30r1ZC moi: 1�P�G O l: +: 1 -
C1'3, E.:fieC �.
:iE =lease of t_3C prDmissory nc4 C- for .> ;u�rc 3 ��'1d .,2i 1a!'!. ,.iotlOn
carried unanimous'_ .
3� '1 i - =:i;illi .S •r 1t,Or Lntroduced -? 1S .r- 4 ,,,.- In a y c
ws n w o.a .. 31 r Deve opm.
Cl0r.
^lll�; 11:`icT1in -m ved t^ .� !]o:Irn at (;C-, j;• . O lOii C?rrl Unc 21I51o'3S1.'•
^.arol Schultz
Recording secretary
1
I
i
i
I
RESOLUTION NO. 86-9
A Resolution Appointing A Executive Director
And Responsible Authority For The Shakopee Housing And
Redevelopment Authority To Comply With The
Minnesota Government Data Practices Act
WHEREAS, Minnesota Statutes, Section 15 . 162 , Subdivision 6 ,
as amended, requires that the Shakopee Housing and Redevelopment
Authority to appoint one person as the Responsible Authority to
administer the requirements for collection, storage, use and
dissemination of data on individuals, within the Authority and,
WHEREAS, the Shakopee Housing and Redevelopment Authority
shares concern expressed by the legislature on the responsible
use of all Authority data and wishes to satisfy this concern by
immediately appointing an administratively qualified Responsible
Authority as required under the statute.
BE IT RESOLVED, the Housing and Redevelopment Authority in
and for the City of Shakopee appoints Dennis R. Kraft as the
Executive Director of the Shakopee Housing and Redevelopment
Authority. The Executive Director shall serve as the Responsible
Authority for the purposes of meeting all requirements of
Minnesota Statutes, Section 15. 162 through 15. 169 , as amended,
and with rules as lawfully promulgated by the Commissioner of
Administration as published in the State Register on August 31,
1981.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the name of the Executive
Director be placed on file with the Minnesota Department of
Administration as the Responsible Authority for the Housing and
Redevelopment Authority in and for the City of Shakopee regarding
the Minnesota Government Data Practices Act.
Adopted in session of the Housing and
Redevelopment Authority in and for the City of Shakopee,
Minnesota, held this day of 1986.
Chairman
ATTEST:
Executive Director
DRAFT
MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator
FROM: Dennis Kraft, Community Development Director
RE: Working Draft of a Voluntary Property Acquisition
Policy
DATE: August 5 , 1986
Introduction:
Significant physical changes will be taking place in
Shakopee in the near future. It is anticipated that, as part of
the process of the road construction and redevelopment, numerous
parcels of property will be acquired. In the interest of
attempting to treat everyone in a fair and equitable manner, it
is in the best interest of the City/HRA to adopt a set of general
policies and procedures which would relate to all properties to
be acquired. When the City acquires real property it neither
wants to take advantage of potential sellers nor does it want to
be taken advantage of . In this role as custodian of public funds
the City is , of course held responsible for the proper
expenditure of those funds.
General Guidelines :
The guidelines discussed below will foster fair and equal
treatment of all parties involved in the property acquisition
process. The procedure discussed below should also avoid
situations whereby individual Council members are put in a
uncomfortable position by there constituents or friends who are
in the process of selling property to the City. A uniform
procedure for property acquisitions will also be in the Councils
best interest if litigation later arises out of the property
acquisition process.
In negotiating for the acquisition of property it is
desireable to have a competent third person provide an indicator
of property value. In most instances, this information is
provided by a qualified property appraiser. Under certain
circumstances, where property of limited value is being
purchased, information on value might be provided by the County
Assessor. In complex property transactions two or more
appraisals might be obtained as a part of the acquisition
process. It might also be desirable under those circumstances,
to hire a review appraiser who will verify the validity of the -
appraisal procedures utilized and also review the appraisals for
accuracy or errors in judgement.
All final decisions to purchase property will be made by
either the City Council or the Housing and Redevelopment
Authority in the form of the authorizing of a purchase agreement.
Neither the City Council nor the Housing and Redevelopment
Authority will delegate any final property purchase authority.
It is, however, desirable not to have the City Council or the
Housing Redevelopment Authority directly involved in every step
of the property acquisition process-.-. --
Appraisals and other related information which are obtained
for purposes of negotiating for property acquisition are not
considered publicinformation under the Freedom of Information
Act. This information can legally remain confidential.
It is suggested that a negotiating team, consisting of the
City Administrator, the Assistant City Attorney, and the
Community Development Director, be directly involved in the real
estate property acquisition. process. In certain instances other
staff persons as designated by the City Administrator, or other
real estate experts might also be involved in the process. If
the City Council desires, one Council member, with appointments
to be on a rotating basis, could serve in an oversight capacity.
Procedures-
The following procedure is recommended for Council
consideration for the purchase of real property.
1. The City Council/HRA would initially authorize the City
Administrator to negotiate for the acquisition of a
particular parcel of property, and specifically set the
parameters for negotiation.
2 . In those instances where clear title to the property cannot
be provided by the seller, a City Attorney may be directed
to conduct a title search of the property to insure that the
City is, in fact, negotiating with an owner who processes
marketable title and who can actually convey the property
once the satisfactory agreement has been negotiated. If the
City were to negotiate with someone not having marketable
title this could result in a considerable amount of time and
money being wasted.
3 . The negotiating team, as previously described, would
determine the precise procedures to be used for the
acquisition of a particular parcel of property and would
then select the necessary third parties to provide dependent
indicator of property value. This would in most instances
be a qualified real estate appraiser, but could also be
either the City Assessor, and under certain circumstances,
might also include the hiring of a qualified review
appraiser. Council/HRA would authorize the hiring of the
recommended appraiser.
4 . Once the property value is determined to the satisfaction of
the negotiating team, the process of negotiating with the
seller of the property would begin.
5 . At such time as a mutually acceptable price would be
negotiated for the property the negotiating team would
prepare a background report on the property and would also
present a draft purchase agreement to the City Council/HRA
at an executive session.
a. If Council/HRA agree to the draft purchase agreement it
will receive formal action at a regular meeting.
6 . At such time as the purchase agreement would be authorized
by the City Council the City Administrator would then be
responsible for completing the required steps leading up to
the City actually obtaining valid title to the property.
Alternatives :
( 1) Direct the City Administrator to prepare a final draft of
the property acquisition policy as discussed above for
formal action by the City Council/HRA-
( 2 ) Continue with the present procedure of acquiring property by
not utilizing a standardized set of guidelines and
procedures.
Recommendation:
To direct the City Administrator to procede alternative #1
above.
tw
MEMO TO: Shakopee Housing and Redevelopment Authority (HRA)
FROM: Barry A. Stock, Admin. Aide
RE: House of Hoy Appraisal Report
DATE: July 30 , 1986
Introduction•
On June 13 , 1986 , the City of Shakopee ordered an appraisal
on the property owned by Ms. Delores Hoy, more commonly referred
to as the House of Hoy and Jabberwocky. The appraisal was
ordered to ascertain the highest and best use and value of the
property in question. Said property includes 76 ft. of frontage
on First Avenue.
Background:
On July 29 , 1986 the City of Shakopee received the
appraisers report. In the opinion of the appraiser, the highest
and best use of the property calls for the removal of the
buildings situated on said property. Staff believes the
appraisal offers the City a good starting point for negotiating a
fair purchase price. In the opinion of our assistant City
Attorney, it would be both legal and wise to maintain the
confidentiality of the appraisal results. At this time, publicly
releasing the appraisers findings may adversely affect our
negotiating position.
With these thoughts in mind, on July 30 , 1986 , the Downtown
Committee moved to recommend to City Council that the appropriate
city officials be directed to negotiate a purchase price for the
property in question. The Committee firmly believes that
acquisition of the property would in the short term relieve some
of the traffic congestion on First Avenue with the subsequent
construction of a free right hand turn lane (costs to be borne by
MnDOT) . In the long term and with the construction of the mini-
by-pass, this property will be an attractive parcel for private
development. Additionally, one can not argue that the physical
appearance of the downtown will be improved markedly with the
removal of the structures situated on said property.
Alternatives:
Alternative #1 - Direct the appropriate City Officials meet
with Ms. Hoy and attempt to negotiate a purchase price on the
property known as the House of Hoy and Jabberwocky.
Alternative #2 - Do Nothing
Action Requested:
Move to direct the appropriate city officials to meet with
Ms. Hoy and attempt to negotiate a purchase price on the property
known as the House of Hoy and Jabberwocky.
Es
MEMO TO: Shakopee Housing and Redevelopment Authority
FROM: Barry A. Stock, Administrative Aide
RE: Request to Acquire Property (Lot 1, Blk 2 , Original
Plat - 303 East lst Avenue)
DATE: July 31, 1986
Introduction•
Mr. Doug Kallevig owner of property located at 303 E. lst
Ave. has approached the City and is requesting that his property
be acquired by the City in light of the proposed mini by-pass
alignment.
Background:
Mr. Kallevig' s property is located at 303 E. lst Ave. (See
attachment #1) . Construction of the proposed mini by-pass
alignment would require the acquisition of his property. Mr.
Kallevig contends that the salability of his property has been
dramatically affected by all the talk of a mini by-pass.
Additionally, Mr. Kallevig' s property has recently been declared
by the Building Inspector to be unfit for human occupancy.
The Building Inspector has stated that it will cost
approximately $5000 to bring the Kallevig property up to code.
Mr. Kallevig has informed staff that he would rather sell the
property to the City now, instead of waiting two years for the
City' s eventual taking of his property (acquisition for by-pass
right-of-way) . One should keep in mind, that if the City is to
acquire property for the mini by-pass right-of-way via
condemnation, we will be responsible for relocation costs.
In my conversation with Mr. Kallevig, a purchase price of
$75 ,000 has been discussed. Staff has informed Mr. Kallevig that
if the HRA decides to pursue acquisition, an appraisal of the
property would have to be conducted. Appraisal costs are
estimated to be approximately $1000 .
Staff believes the HRA should pursue acquisition for two
reasons: 1. Acquisition would ensure the removal of a
deteriorated structure in the downtown area, and 2. The City
would not have to expend money for relocation costs (which may be
the case if acquisition occurs through condemnation) .
If acquisition occurs, staff would recommend that the
building be sold on a bid basis to anyone who is willing to move
the structure. Because of the historical and architectural value
of the structure, staff believes there will be several interested
parties. Moving costs have been estimated to be between $10,000
and $15 , 000 . If the City takes this approach, we would not have
to incur any demolition costs (est. $10 , 000 ) . Staff has
estimated that upon the clearing of the property in question, the
vacant lot would be worth approximately $51, 120 ( 8520 sq. ft. x
$6 . 00 sq. ft. _ $51, 120 ) .
The City has pledged 1. 9 million for right - of - way
acquisition and by-pass construction. These dollars are being
allocated from the proceeds of various tax-increment projects.
Alternatives:
1. Order an appraisal at a cost not to exceed $1, 000 for the
property identified as Lot 1, Block 2, Original Plat.
2 . Do not order an appraisal on the property in question.
Staff Recommendation:
Staff recommends alternative #l.
Action Requested:
Move to order an appraisal at a cost not to exceed $1, 000 on
the property identified as Lot 1, Block 2, Original Plat.
I
i
a
of T 0! 0i + �
V
S
O T 1 ! 1
7
.n 7
117
Zvi
av Lr!
I U OI I 01
o
i
01 •::,COi
l 01 T {�
v
W
J z�, ��il1 i I„
TI
C10 !
o r• '
�cl
OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL
ADJ.REG.SESSION
SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA JULY 15, 1986
to or ier at 7 3'. wt?:
-an, -Gv.011.. '1: �amy�?n�'t,?'1rPg iv. so rr 3c? i., i-7e e 7o' ->. '"11F�„;n _f .�.
- o -f '
, . _ n, - -
ereC f-1.VPn Dy tI1 cou;^1 e^•1bEr: .
F "innesc,ta _lies address..d Council }ati _-
,o�el Jffii4'ik, .: e �;u> O -- -Y f �y l+l
v� rl u�11.1.11�'-, V+� rV.0 eC vs of forming an in rastlucture ' o.'�'v.. pool
vnc loaf,-.L. - U
financing program. "oncept is such that all the c_ties ir, the state than are
interested would Join together arid issue in advance of tieir anticipated
financing needs for infrastructure costs, sewers, roads, bridges, etc. 1Ine
intent of the pool program is to provide lower rate financing to some comL,unities
and hopefully lower transactional costs to all cities that participate. �
T;eroux/7Tierling luove� to Offer lesolution x-'2590, " ?eSOliitiOri "LpprOVing and
�uthorizin^ ?Zinriesota 'Jities Infrastructure 1'inancirg =rooram Joint Powers
4greement and the _:—ecution of participation ?greement with Respect thereto.
otion carried unani~ously.
7Tierling/?'� p�iam ach moved an amendment to the Resolution to have John T,eroux's
name submitted as a representative. ?`iotian carried unanimously.
1,erouxtl:'ampa.ch :;loved for a. 5 minute recess. 111otien carried unanimously.
Irierling�;eroux moved to reconvene. I'lotion carried unanimously.
Colligan/Wampach moved to approve the minutes for June 30, 1986. Motion
carried unanimously.
Leroux/Colligan moved to approve the minutes of July 1, 1986.
Cncl. 7ierling.. stated that on page 3 Jerome `,'ierling did not represent
Colligan/Lebens moved to amend the July 1, 1986 minutes as corrected by Cncl.
Vierling. Motion carried with Cncl. Vierling abstaining.
^olligan�Leroux moved to approve minutes: of. Jane 17, 1986.
intT I.iotion carried.
Roll Call: -A-yes:: Un?nimous Noes: Tone
1ollioan/Leroax moved to receive and file the letter from Douglas I . Olsen,
1�anager, Sha:opee American region regarding any soliciting of donations for
the new Tourism/Convention Center building.
.o ?Tnanimous
Noes: -"one .Motion dried.
Roll call: Ayes::
Colliganfteroux moved to receive and file the letter from Ietropolitan
Mosquito Control -District regarding controlling of mosquito population.
Roll Call: ayes: Unanimous I,ioes: Ione 'Motion carried.
ensue on '_`al-
T;ocatio.n of the, new C a`
4
Leroux/Vierling moved to direct staff to refer our comments re: (1) the need
for a budget with a positive year end balance, and (2) size and location of
proposed Chamber office to Mr. Mears and the Chamber of Comerce. Motion
carried unanimously.
Stan Ockwieg, Canterbury Inn, addressed the Council on the cost involved
in having a $130,000 facility for Tourism and having a Convention Manager.
The City Admr. indicated that Stan would be invited to a meeting by the
Chamber and that he could present his ideas there and Stan indicated he
would like to participate.
-,ebens/!1,Jazr,1D,%ch moved to accent and file the June 16, 1986 letter from the
L,
7-i-nnesota Deoartment of Transportation addressing sig-nal timinG at T,ewis
Street. T. otion carried unanimously.
_
7olligan/__eroux moved to 1.1,-ffer Resolution T.To. 2557, a Resolution Amending
`,-solation 'l-io. 254,71 Adopting the 1936 Bud-et, its and move for
U C;o U adoption.
Roll 'all: "Vr S: unanimous . one .-otion carried.
Colligan/leroux moved to direct staff to enter into an agreement with -prior
Take for inspection backup services.
Roll Call: Ayes: Unanimous Noes: None Motion carried
Colli-an/Leroux moved to authorize staff to place standard plates on the 1982
alibu at the cost of '59.25.
Roll 'all: Ayes: Unanimous Noes: '_,-one Motion carried.
Clliga
Do-L --/Leroux moved to direct appropriate city officials to
draw up a
resolution for Council adoption of a temporary certificate of occupancy
fee.
Roll Call: Ayes: Unanimous -7oes: :;one 1-otion carried.
Colligan
/7--eroux moved to approve the application and grant an -in-Sale non-
intoxicating liquor license to Paul 1'j. Schwaesdall dba/Pablo's Xexican
Restaurant, 230 Lewis Street, effective August 1 , 19e6,
�
doll 'all: Ayes: Unanimous --,,-.;oes: �I"one Hotion carried..
-eroux moved to approve d authorize the appropriate.olligan/7 an -propriate City officials
City
to execute a revised developers agreement, versus the City's standard
u
developers agreement for Fox Run 1st Addition, as drafted by the Assistant
City Attorney.
Roll Call: Aves: Unanimous -_?oes
: None 7otion carried.
Leroux/Vierling moved to remove from table the applications of Scottland Hotels,
Inc. for Sunday and On Sale liquor licenses, and the applications of Friendly
Folks Club for On Sale, Sunday and off Sale liquor Licenses. Motion carried
unanimously.
1,eroux/T_,ebens moved to table the applications from Scottl and Hotels -Inc. fcr
U
Sunday and On -Dale liquor license. "lotion carried unanimously.
C
-e
rect s prepa_ a.:
Inc. Motion carried
:ire:
-IlP -r,))e_4 t,-,- me-ti= cn -)e,-,t�zzi( cr
1 C-, 10-i
4
es�)I-itlio-n cce`
0, _3 e,-:,o lu u i o o. 2577, a at
1C
--'a v e z-.,_n t -rese=stion I)roCra-I "Seal `oat) 1"rojec-_
a171 "or its F'11-1A,-,-o1,i_-;n
7 4 e
o-,
L Ayes ------ 3 -.oes : d.
Vierling/Lebens moved to approve the official summary of Ordinance No. 198,
an Ordinance of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota, Amending Shakopee City Code
Chapter 5 entitled "Liquor Beer and Wine Licensing and Regulation" by Defining
and Redefining Certain Definitions; by Changing Provisions Relating to the
Proof of Age and Unlawful Acts by Minors, Financial Responsibility of Licensee,
Beer and Liquor License Regulations, 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 I and Section 5.99 which, among Other
Things, Contain Penalty Provisons.
Roll Call: Ayes: Unanimous Noes: None Motion carried.
The City Manner reviewed the --reo-metric evaluation of the folded diamond
71
..1. f the hakopee 1_�ypass and o ty
interchange concent- in the Tiadrant o. — S' a- C un
.r1oad 83 interchange that ':7/iY?T has iridertfl;en. 3asica'lly 1Di1/D0T is in
favor of the diamond interchange that has always been proposed.
Leroux/7ierl inc,0 moTedto direct staff to X�_reT)s_e anor-_'L.ine.nce _`= action- and
a memo Covering the 7ros and cons of the foldeddiamond int-erchazase. Tiotion
carried unanimously,
1d, S= fol-
_14 ;S�-"r,,-LCr Styled that the City 7-all Citing
U, U U, lo
-i 'urd�-_7-
a-u _1_ror1 8:00 a.m. to 1 :00 p.m. going to BrDokl-,-n_ ,enter,
'he to cha:nge
71 ver drove and Ea-an. __U was tl-ie co-sensos of t
11 kx __L1 0
the date for the siting tour to Augast 2, 1936, at 8:00 a.-,-.
-+ed t'he-e will be an install S
Rein1.-e thea installation of a new _Pc Master
e!
in Shakopee on July 13, 1936, at 11:00 a.m.
Colligan/Vierling moved to adjourn to Tuesday, July 22, 1986 at 7:00 p.m. Motion
carried unanimously. Meeting adjourned at 9:23 p.m.
Judith 7. nox-
Clty Clerk
"wrol h,_12tz
17+ 7rj
L" -
1 C, Sunday, and Off Sale Intoxicating liquor
S VeC� fo
licenses. Motion carried unanimously.
Discussion ensued on how long applications should be held for liquor licenses.
Cncl. asked staff to apprise Council on the status of liquor licenses. The
City Adm/r. stated that staff would at the next regular meeting.
r-an -
I I 1 1 -?7 ~u
a, 1976 :'o- 7454 surP!U-- - j' t-_ be sold a' a:ac'
'all: ayes: T*1_1_111:1110US "oel : ..cne carried.
Collip an/-rierllrie moved to approve the payment of bill.- in Fmount of "l 444,550-.2/To
T-
Roll --vll: Ayes: T)"nanL-ous -,,,-)es: :one ..,otion carried.
)4_
,iscuSsion ensued on the procedures of fast tracking of the issuance of
building permits. be a mli-iimum of the
U 1/3 additional cos' of
building permit:
Colligan/Leroux moved to direct staff to prepare the appropriate resolution
setting forth a fast tracking process for the issuance of building permits--
to include the specific items requested by Council re: giving Council flex-
ibility in increasing the fee from 30% to 100%, after discussion. Motion
carried unanimously.
The City Administrator stated that specific information on the estimated cost
of comparable worth was not available for 30-60 days and Council should defer
hiring a Planner I and hiring a Receptionist/Typist until it is ready in
another 30-60 days.
-erou:--./'.-!'a-,qpach moved to authorize the City Administrator to subridt a letter to
77
./DoT addressing the insignificance of impacts to !'Uber Pailk by any of the
final three building alternatives for the T.H. 169/T.H. 101 and Minnesota River
crossing improvements. Motion carried unanimously.
Discussion ensued on the Application for' Sunday Liquor _T'jicense by Cla4
--r _�nc. _�e quest -he--her or not -.lair's bar meets
tion was raised as to v �o
require-ent- 1'4:.heremeals or regular?y served a.t tables o tale genera-
7_ie no longer requires that meals be served on Sundays in
order to have a Sunday liquor license.
o 11 i E_an/-Tierlin, _j Limoved to table the application for Sunday Liquor License
cense
by ,"lair's
JF4—1S Bar inc. _',o
-, tion carried unanimously.
lerling moved to have staff look into the mattef requiring,jeroux/-.T.L r oreq - meals- C>
on Sunday for Sunday Liquor 71cense. roti on carried 1-1qan--mously.
Colligan/Wampach moved to reconsider Council action of July 1, 1986 directing
staff to draft a resolution denying Conditional Use Permit No. 464 for Wishing
Well Farm and Training Center, citing the possibilities of water and air pollu-
tion and the proposal as inconsistent with the Comp Plan at this time.
Motion carried Cncl. Vierling abstaining.
eroUX/T,ebens moved to set a nes.. -.Ub" -'c hearing date for q-71ember 27,
U 1936,
reopen the hearing ne a�!*cation for a Conditiona --Se -DarMi4-
o -:7 on u__:is_-:iz6 ;ell
71
-'-o construct and
u -e a commercial feedlot in the
4.Y -rl 'n' , �;_'r,_. -i 14
— - *
0_ a'7o-oe�. -d with.
OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL
ADJ.REG. SESSION l= f
^payor Reinke called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. w.th ^ncl. ,Tierling,
Lebens, ":eroux, 'r;ampach and rolligan present. _' Jso present were Judi Si gac,
".ity Planner; "udith ^,ox,
-,i-1k-,y ^lerk;c.Tohn Y.. -';nderson, "it;r Administrator;
_�:11.Uv i'.. (',7 -1.F'r, T:-, .;.L�;;' rittornev, Dennis T'"raft, ':o::'.•'": it. '.!E=V^_oprie i
�r�ctor, and 'renneth ^,shfeld, "ity '-ngineer.
I:eroux/''ierling moved to recess for -H',ZA meeting. "lotion carried unanimously.
T•eroux/Vierling moved to reconvene at 7:05 p.m. 'Motion carried unanimously.
Liaison reports were given by the councilmembers.
Mayor Reinke asked if there was anyone present who wished to address the
Council on any matter not on the agenda.
Mr. James Cook, 1075 Miller, Shakopee, r,'?d. addressed the` council stating
that on July 15, 1986, he received a letter from LeRoy Houser, Building
official, advising him that the fence he is currently installing on the
south property line is nonconforming and will either have to be lowered
to a maximum height of 3 feet, placed 30 feet back from street surface
or removed altogether. He was issued a building permit on May 27, 1986,
and he stated that he was told at that time that the fence had to be 30 feet
from the center of the street not from the curb. Discussion ensued as to the
interpretation of the City Code ordinances regarding corner lot setbacks and
front lot lines. Mr. Cook stated that this matter was purely a miscommunica-
tion. The City Planner stated that if Mr. Cook's fence is going to exceed
the height and locations a Conditional Use Permit would have to be applied
for.
Leroux/Wampach moved to waive the fee for. Mr. Cook's Conditional Use
Permit application because of possible miscommunication.
Roll Call: Ayes: Unanimous 'Noes: ',?one Motion carried.
Leroax/Uampach moved that staff be allowed to accept the application today
as being considered as of yesterday from Mr. Cook. Motion carried unanimously.
Leroux/',lampach moved to refer this matter back to staff for their studies
and recommendations to the Planning Co=mission as to how things can better
be tightened up within the code so we can eliminate misintrepretations.
Motion carried unanimously.
Clete Link addressed the Council on the letter he received a while back
from the Building Inspector stating that in order to get same day inspections,
the contractor has to call the office before 9:00 a.m. , It is causing con-
siderable problems in the construction industry and the ability to coordinate
other contractors, such as plumbers, cement men, or ready mix trucks. Discussion
ensued on manpower available for inspections and the need to sit down with all
the parties involved and discuss this matter.
+eroux/Colligan moved to send this back to staff to set up a meeting with all
the affected builders in the area, and to also research with other comnnznities
what their inspection schedules a.re.-as related to their fees. =Motion carried
unanimously.
{
4: '9
2-
Fred "orrigan stated that Rill Cohen from Senator �renburgers office called
him this afternoon saying that the Subcommittee of the L?.3. Senate Transportation
. )mmittee has alifunds f^r enginee-ri-ng the -0,1-tir ' nod tri tri?: '•
Liscussion ;o senior _ 1. is
e sue_ r „he, _ .
to those ,aho do not IMVe a. water meter, because they have a well.
I,eroux/Vierling rno�red to direct this back to staff to find some method to
reduce the sewer bill of _•`s. 'inze to be in line with other senior citizens
in the area. '.`notion carried unanimously.
Vierling/Wampach moved to receive and place on file the letter from Ann ; iggins,
Federal Liaison/Program Development, League of Minnesota Cities on Information
and Analysis of Local implications of federal tax reform bond provisions.
Roll call: Ayes: Unanimous Noes: .Tone Motion carried.
Vierling/Wampach moved that Section 11 .05, Subd. 8, C of the City Code not
be amended to allow persons unrelated to the farm operator to reside in mobile
homes on the farmstead. "Motion carried with Cncl. Lebens opposed.
Vierling/Wampach offered '-ResolutionNo. 2589, a Resolution Approving the
Final Plat of 'Iaplewood Toimhouses 1st Addn. , and move for its adoption.
Roll Call: Ayes: Unanimous .foes: 'done P•iotion carried.
Discussion of-Racetrack District Study and Adoption of Plan ensued. The City
Planner stated that Concept Plan #3 was submitted to MnDOT for review on
May 8, 1986, on the folded diamond interchange. The formal letter from InDOT
stated that they prefer the diamond interchange and not the folded diamond
interchange. Fred Hoisington stated that the racetrack has to have supurb
access. The preferred alternative is to pursue this issue with MnDOT in an
amiable manner.
Leroux/Vierling moved to adopt the plan as presented by Mr. Hoisington including
the three alternatives for the CR 83 and by-pass interchange: (1) the folded
diamond, (2) the diamond with the left turn at Secretariat Drive and (3) the
diamond without a left turn at Secretariat Drive but a new public road at Gate #1
of the racetrack running south to Secretariat Drive. Motion carried with Cncl.
Colligan abstaining.
i
Leroux/Vierling moved to direct staff -to prepare an ordinance for rezoning the
racetrack district as contained in the Plan and have it ready 6:30 p.m. July 25,
1986. Motion carried with Cncl. Colligan abstaining.
Lebens/Leroux moved for a 10 minute recess. Motian carried unanimously.
Lebans/Colligan moved to reconvene at 9:20 p.m. motion carried unanimously.
Leroux/Colligan moved to contract with Planning and Development Services, Inc.
to perform an FAw and land use analysis of the Wishingtirell Farm and Training
Center conditional use permit application, to be completed by August 29, 19861,
at an hourly rate of X35.00, total cost not to exceed u3,000.
Roll Call: Ayes: Cncl. Lebens, Colligan, Wampach, Leroux, Mayor Reinke
Abstaining: Cncl. T
ierling
Motion carried.
hakopee `-ity -.o, it
-,al<, 22 ,
J ! -
Page -3-
The City Planner gave an updated on the Comprehensive Sanitary Sewer Service
Plan Amendment as submitted to the Metropolitan Council for review and
approval. The Metropolitan Council was concerned that the City was using a
"Land Supply to 2000" figure as the "Demand with Overage 1980-2000" figure.
The Met Council agreed to include an additional 308 acres of land in the MUSA
line and to place the remaining areas in a Moratorium category which holds
the land from sewer service until the City demonstrates a need to expand the
sewer area. The parcels #15, y and #66 comprise the 308 acres. The Met
Council also agreed to allow the northerly R-O-W line of the T.H. 101/169
By-pass to serve as the MUSA line.
Colligan/Iampach moved to approve the comprehensive sanitary sewer plan
amendment as amended by staff on July 17, 1986. Motion carried unanimously.
dampach/Leroux moved to direct staff to draft a sanitary sewer allocation
plan for land within the PJSA line for City Council consideration.
Motion carried unanimously.
Jack Boarman, from Boarman Architects gave a verbal update on the three
City Hall sites. he Library site, Block 47 and the Gorman. site have been studied.
He stated that they have interviewed all the major staff in the City ,Tall
and given an interview sheet to every employee in City Hall. Considerable
thought has been given to the relationship of do,mtorm generated traffic
to the city hall. The Gorman site has no relationship to the downtown area
but is very open and very accessible. ane library site, they feel is very
tight for parking spaces available and would not be very feasible. The
site of Block 47 would cost more because it would eventually require buying
all of the homes on the block which would not be beneficial to the City.
Discussion ensued between Councilman Wampach and Jack Boarman on-coming up
with a few new sites within Shakopee for the City Hall.
Lebens/Vierling moved to approve the .application and grant a temporary on-sale
beer license to the Shakopee Jaycees at the Tahpah park ball fields for
August 1 , 2, and 3, 1986. Motion carried unanimously.
Colligan/Vierling moved to approve the application and grant a temporary
on-sale beer license to the Shakopee Jaycees at the Tahpah park ball fields
for August 8, 9, and 10, 1986. TlIotion carried unanimously.
Jampach/Leroux moved to approve the application and grant a temporary on-sale
beer license to the Shakopee Jaycees at the Tahpah Park ball fields for
August 15, 16, and 17, 1986. Tllotion carried unanimously.
Vierling/Wampach moved to accept the proposal of Jaspers, Streefland & Company
for 1986 audit services in the estimated amount of $7,900.
Roll Call: Ayes: Unanimous Hoes None motion carried.
The City 7�ngineer reviewed the lighting plan for the Second Avenue Parking
Lot. The light fixtures will be installed along Second Avenue between Holmes
and Lewis Streets and within the parking lot itself. Three different poles
are being considered, concrete, steel and aluminum. The concrete poles will
be at least 'W',400,,000 less than steel or aluminum.
si_tu 4ffi_-4 JS to eXeCllte
tr,, +tn C�rnnri avenue Paul-inS Trot for Second Avenue
parking lot lighting in the amount of $5,880.00.
Roll Call: -ayes: ".ncl. 'Tierling, 'dampach, =eroux, Colligan and Mayor Reinke
'ees: Cncl. -;ebens
;Motion carried.
I
3hakDpee 'ity -'!funAl
, alb. 22, 1956
PaSe r
Colligan/Leroux moved to authorize the appropriate City officials to order the
light poles for the Second Avenue Project at a cost not to exceed ;;10,200.
Poll Call: Qes: Cncl. Vierling, lolligan, ,;Taimpach, Taroux, and Mayor Reinke
.z-,
• __�_J
•oo�• ryc1 `eae
.otion cam : .
aerling/Wampach offered Resolution _'o. 2592, a Resolution Accepting Bid on
Timber awaails Street Rehaoil_,tation, Project 17936-5 and move for its adoption.
Roll tall: ^yes: Unani7ous *Toes: -7ne Motion carried.
Leroux/Vierling offered Resolution No. 2593, A Resolution Accepting the Bid
on the Fourth Avenue Reconstruction Project. S.A.P. 70-616-13, Project No.
1986-3 with the amendment to add that all documentation must be in order by
the Council meeting on August 5, 1986, and moved for its adoption.
Roll Call: Ayes: Cncl. Vierling, Colligan, Wampach, Leroux, and Mayor Reinke
Noes: Cncl. Lebens
Motion carried.
-.-ierlingtdampach offered Resolution No. 2591 A Resolution Apportioning
Assessment among Few Parcels Created as a Result of the Subdivision of band
Into South Parkview 1st addition, aad move its adoption.
'_ioll Call: Ayes: Unanimous Noes: _Tone Motion carried.
Vierling/'.!'ampach offered Resolution No. 2538, a Resolution Apportioning assess—
ments .Among New Parcels created as a Result of the Subdivision of Land Parcel
No. 27-907-005-0 and move its adoption.
Roll Call: Ayes: UnanimousNoes: Tone Motion carried.
Colligan/'•Tampach moved to remove the application for Intoxicating Liquor
Licenses from Scottland Hotels Inc. from the table. Notion carried unanimously.
i
Wampach/Leroux moved to approve the applications and grant on-sale and Sunday
liquor licenses to Scottland Hotels Inc., County Road 83 and Secretariat Drive,
hotel only; and direct that the licenses shall not be issued until the applicant
has fully complied with all requirements of the city code.
Roll Call: ides: Unanimous roes: None ;Motion carried.
Colligan/Vierling moved to authorize the expansion of the on-sale and Sunday
liquor licenses of Scottland Hotels Inc. to include the restaurant when the
restaurant is complete and meets all the requirements of the city code.
Roll Call: Ayes: Unanimous hhes: Tuone Motion carried.
Colligan/vierling moved to adjourn to Executive Session. Motion carried
unanimously.
Leroux/Vierling moved to reconvene as City Council. Motion carried unanimously.
The City Administrator stated that the police chief has installed temporary
2-hour parking signs that require 2-hour parking between 8:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m.
on the north side of Shakopee Avenue.
i
_,.nakopee "ity "o �cil
=uly 22, 1930
T)aae -5-
The ',it-r Administrator stated that . -,ie-lcr w_?1 he resiSning from
11
^ommunity Services office and we will be needing a replacement.
-)i,�cussi:)n ensued ori 5 -Ie kine, engagements of lit it officials on -i t, time or
on their ;D",M ;,'_::e. The City Administrator was directed to review present
practice and report to Council.
eroiuc��olligan moved to adjourn to :'ridgy, ,Tuly 25, 1986, at 6:30 p.m. =:tion
carried unanimously. Meeting adjourned at 11 ;35 p.?�.
Judith S. Cox
City Clerk
i
Carol L. Schultz
Recording Secretary
7..
OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL
SPECIAL SESSION SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA JULY 25, 1986
Mayor Reinke called the meeting to order at 6:35 p.m. with Cncl. Wampach,
Lebens, Vierling and Colligan present. Absent was Cncl. Leroux. Also present
were John K. Anderson, City Administrator and Dennis Kraft, Community
Development Director.
Colligan/Wampach moved to accept the Special Call of the Mayor. Motion carried
unanimously.
Vierling/Lebens offered Ordinance No. 204, An Ordinance of the City of
Shakopee, Minnesota Amending Shakopee City Code Chapter 11 Entitled "Land Use
Regulation (Zoning)" by Adding a New District to Section 11.20 to be known as
RTD Race Track District; by Amending Section 11.21 Zoning Map by Transferring
Certain Lands from One District to Another; By Addition a New Section 11.36
Entitled "Race Track District" and By Adopting by Reference Shakopee City Code
Chapter 1 and Sec. 11.99, and moved for its adoption.
Mayor Reinke asked for discussion regarding the proposed Ordinance. There
being no questions Mayor Reinke asked about item A-2 entitled "Employee Housing
and Dormitories" and asked how it would be controlled at the Racetrack or
similar facilities. He stated that he would prefer no housing in the proposed
zoning district except that approved under a very narrowly defined A-2. After
some discussion it was decided to handle the Mayor's concern under a separate
follow-up motion.
The City Administrator indicated that he had spoken with the Assistant City
Attorney regarding the need for five affirmative votes and that under the
circumstances Cncl. Colligan could vote rather than abstain.
Roll Call: Ayes; Unanimous Noes; None Motion carried.
Vierling/Lebens moved to direct staff to clarify the definition of the phrasing
of A-2 regarding dormitories and housing within Ordinance No. 204. Prior to
the vote on the motion an amendment was offered.
Vierling/Lebens moved to direct staff to issue no housing or dormitory building
permits under A-2 until Council received a clarification of the definition from
staff at their August 5, 1986 Council meeting. Motion to amend carried
unanimously.
The main motion was then passed unanimously.
Under other business the Mayor inquired about the Racetrack's plans for
painting the exterior of the new barns so that they match the originally
constructed barns. The City Administrator stated that he would check with the
track regarding their plans.
Cncl. Lebens asked about the follow-up on horse facilities in the City limits.
The City Administrator stated that Council had directed staff at a previous
meeting to come back with a recommendation regarding horse facilities in areas
currently zoned Ag in the City limits.
Shakopee City Council
Page Two
July 25, 1986
The Mayor brought up the discussion he had had with the City Administrator
regarding the City Hall Siting Committee's progress toward finding a final site
and the Ad Hoc Downtown Committee's concerns about the moving of City Hall. He
stated that the timing of the City Hall project could place the City Hall
project in a position which pitted Council and downtown businessmen against one
another as both sought to redevelopment the downtown and find a suitable site
for a new City Hall. The Mayor asked the City Administrator to further explain
the potential problem in trying to site a City Hall at this time. The City
Administrator reviewed the recent meeting the architect had with the Ad Hoc
Downtown Committee on Thursday noon indicating that he did not see any real
hope for a solid consensus forming behind any one site. Various other
Councilmembers commented about the timing problem including Cncl. Wampach who
also attended the Thursday noon meeting with the architect and the Ad Hoc
Downtown Committee. The consensus was that if, after thorough discussion of
the pros and cons, the best alternative was to temporarily postpone the City
Hall siting process then that was perhaps what Council should do. The City
Administrator indicated that the City Hall Siting Committee would be meeting
Monday evening, July 28th with the architect, and that the Committee could
formulate a recommendation for Council consideration at their August 5th
Council meeting.
Lebens/Vierling moved to adjourn at 7:00 p.m. Motion carried unanimously.
John K. Anderson
City Administrator
RESOLUTION NO. 2598
A RESOLUTION SUPPORTING UNITED WAY DAY,
SEPTEMBER 17, 1986, IN SHAKOPEE
WHEREAS, the United Way of Minneapolis Area currently provides
funding to thirteen agencies offering programs ranging from counsel-
ing victims of child abuse to disaster relief , which are physically
located in the southern metropolitan area; and
WHEREAS, there are an additional 53 United Way participating
agencies offering more than 150 programs which serve residents of
Scott County and the southern metropolitan area; and
WHEREAS, the United Way board of Directors has made a strong
commitment to expanding services to the Scott County and the
southern metropolitan area; and
WHEREAS, the efforts of thousands of community volunteers
enable the United Way to maintain fundraising and administrative
costs under 9� to every contributed dollar;
BE IT RESOLVED that the Mayor and City Council of Shakopee
hereby support United Way Day, Wednesday, September 17 , 1986
in the Shakopee community and further encourage local businesses
and their employees to participate in this event.
Adopted in regular session of the City Council of the City
of Shakopee, Minnesota held this 5th day of August, 1986 .
Mayor of the City of Shakopee
ATTEST:
City Clerk
Approved as to form this
day of 1986 .
City Attorney
f
BRUCE G. NAWROCKI
1255 Polk Place
Columbia Heights, Minnesota 55421
Off: (612) 571.1311 Res: (612) 571.5278
July 22 , 1986
Mayor Eldon Reinke
Shakopee City Hall
129 East First Avenue
Shakopee, Mn. 55379
Dear Eldon:
For most of the twenty five years that I have been involved as a local elected
official , I have been an active participant on various boards and committees
dealing with transportation problems , particularly the public transit aspects
of those problems.
This involvement has been motivated by a strong belief on my part that a good
metropolitan transportation system, including public transit, is vital to offer-
ing as wide a range of job, educational , cultural , and recreational opportunities
to as wide a range of individuals in the metropolitan area as possible.
It has been my privilege to serve as a member of the Metropolitan Transit Commission
for most of the years of its existence. I have always tried to be an active,
participating member of the Commission.
I am a candidate for re-appointment to the Metropolitan Transit Commission to
be the suburban representative on the Commission.
As one who has known of my involvement in governmental matters these past years ,
particularly in the area of transportation and public transit, I would be honored
if you might find my record to be worthy of a letter of support.
The Regional Transit Board is the appointing agency for the M.T.C . . If you are
so inclined , a letter of support can be sent to
Regional Transit Board
% Chairman Elliott Perovich
270 Metro Square Building
St. Paul , Mn. 55101
It would be most helpful if your letter would reach the Regional Transit Board
by. August 11th.
Thanking you for your consideration of this request, I am,
>�ce ely yours,
r e G. Nawrocki
BRUCE G. NAWROCKI
1255 Polk Place
Columbia Heights, Minnesota 55421
Off: (612)571.1311 Res: (612) 571.5278
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
EDUCATION
Columbia Heights, Minnesota , High School : Class of 1949.
University of Minnesota: (No Degree) .
Pre-Law: 1949-1951 .
Electrical Engineering : 1954-1957•
U. S. Army Electronics School : 1952-1954•
MILITARY SERVICE
U. S. Army: 1952-1954, Honorable Discharge.
PRIVATE INDUSTRY EMPLOYMENT
t, NAWROCKI , Inc. President
GOVERNMENTAL ACTIVITY
:olumbia Heights: City of
:)r: 1965-Current. Mayl
ncilman: 1961-1965. Cou
nning and Zoning Commission Member: 1961-1965• Pla
itan Transit Commission: Metropol
missioner and Past Vice-Chairman: 1967-1968, 1971 -Current. Com
wers Transit Commission: Joint Po
ber: 1966-1967. Mem
itan Mass Transit Committee: Metropol
ber: 1965-1966. Mem
tation Advisory Board and predecessor Metropolitan Area Continuing Transportation Transpor
ing Program (3-C Process) :
iicipal Representative: 1970-Current. (Serving currently on the Highway Juris- P1ann
Mur
diction Task Force, and the Transportation Directions Committee) .
4Ra,Pmen.r .Advisore Committee of the Metropolitan Council : �t'-
icipal Representative and Past Chairman: 1976-Current. Mun
(1 )
Metropolitan Solid Waste Review Task Force:
Municipal Representative: 1973-1976.
Metropolitan Council Chair's Advisory Committee:
Member: 1974-Current.
Suburban Rate Authority:
Board Member and Past Chairman: 1963-Current.
Association of Metropolitan Municipalities:
Past President and Board Member: 1961 -1979.
Transportation Committee: Current Member.
Twin City Metropolitan Planning Commission:
Municipal Representative: 1966-1967.
Metropolitan Mayors Tax Study Committee:
Member: 1966.
N. S. P. Electric Rate Study Committee:
Chairman: 1971 -1973.
Anoka County Association of Municipalities:
Past Chairman and Member of Board of Directors: 1966-1968.
Anoka County Joint Law Enforcement Committee:
Member Board of Directors and Past Secretary/Treasurer: 1982-Current.
Economic Development Committee for Anoka County:
Member: 1977-1981 .
League of Minnesota Cities:
Board Member and Past President: 1970-1972.
Chairman State League Committee on Utility Rate Regulation: 1973-1974•
State League Committee on Revenue Sources: Member: 1980-Current.
Local Government Aids Task Force: 1984.
Federal Legislative Committee: Current Member.
State Advisory Committee on Community Development Block Grant Funds:
Member: 1981-1983.
National League .of Cities:
Transportation Steering Committee: Member: 1974-1977.
Small Cities Advisory Steering Committee: Member: 1975-Current.
Public Transportation Advisory Group: Member: 1980-1981 .
National Commission on Air Quality, Minneapolis-St. Paul Information Group:
Member 1979-1981 .
International City Management Association Financial Management Practices User Advisory
Committee:
Member: 1979-1980.
(2)
�^ V
PROFESSIONAL ASSOCIATIONS
Solid Waste Division of A. S. M. E. : Current Member.
Air Pollution Control Association of America, Upper Medwest Section:
Current Member and Past Chairman.
Sales and Marketing Executives of St. Paul : Past Member.
The Construction Specifications Institute: Past Member.
Governmental Refuse Collections and Disposal Association , Inc. : Current Member.
International District Heating Association Upper Midwest Section : Past Member.
CIVIC ASSOCIATIONS
American Lung Association of Hennepin County:
Past Chairman and Board Member.
Metro Clean Air Committee: Past Member.
Midway Civic Club of St. Paul : Past Member.
Columbia Heights Chamber of Commerce: Member and past Board Member.
Toastmasters and Jaycees: Past Member and Officer.
League of Women Voters: Current Member.
Citizens League of Minneapolis: Current Member.
Minnesota Epilepsy League: Current Member.
Association for Retarded Citizens: Current Member.
HONORS RECEIVED
SUN Newspaper' s "Man of the Year Award" for 1968.
C. C. Ludwig Award of the League of Minnesota Cities for 1970.
Columbia Heights Jaycees Distinguished Service Award for 1975•
Life Memberships in the Jaycees and the Veterans of Foreign Wars.
American Lung Association of Hennepin County Distinguished Service Award for 1982.
Recycling Unlimited of St. Paul Achievement Award for 1984.
7/1/86 (3)
V
August 1 , 1986
City Hall
Shakopee
Minnesota
ATT: John Anderson
Dear John ,
Due to conflicting schedules I will be
unable to continue my position on the
Community Service Board .
Thank you for your attention to this
matter .
Sincerely .
9
Robert J . Ziegler
July 25, 1986
k4_ & Gcv ar- 1 YAmh et s
City of Shakopee
129 1st Ave.
Mayor & Council Members: Dear P
__ express our sincere appreciation for providing the police May wi
t by Dennis Anderson at our Father's funeral. escor�
Tom Philipp of Philipp Funeral Home, said he had spoken with Also,
Benson about the construction work for the storm sewer on Dave ]
venue and on Atwood Street and 4th during the wake and funeral. 4th A-
s very cooperative as was Steve Hentges & Sons, the construction He wa
Ely,, in making the construction area as convenient as possible compa
the circumstances ana cleared t'ne =1FO lrvm St. Nar'k's (Zh',VZh
under
rvice time. at se
:id to them our heartfelt thanks. Please extei
Sincerely,
'
nnerskirchen Paul W. Wen
ily of John P. Wermerskirchen for the Fam
JASPERS, MORIARTY and WALBURG, P.A. Fel
206 SCOTT STREET
SHAKOPEE, MN 55379
JER0ti1E JASPERS TEL, 612/435-2817
DENNIS PATRICK MORIARTY
STEPHEN W. WALBURG
119 WEST MAIN
BELLE PLAINE, MN 56011
LEE V'ICKERMAN TEL. 612/873-2988
LISA A. HINIKFR July 23 , 1986 METRO: 612/445-6561
Ms. Judy Cox
Shakopee City Clerk
129 First Avenue East
Shakopee, MN 55379
RE: PETITION FOR ANNEXATION
JOSEPHINE VIERLING ESTATE
Dear Ms. Cox :
Please find enclosed, for filing, pursuant to Minn. Stat. §414 . 033 ,
subd. (5) a Petition for Annexation on behalf of the Josephine Vierling
Estate.
Very truly yours,
Jee
SPERS, MORIARTY AND WALBURG, P.A.
LL
Vickerman
Attorney at Law
LV: jt
Enc .
Action Requested
Refer to City Attorney for follow-up and verification.
4LEASE ADD?ESQ ALL �OQPF.gc NDENCE TO OiIR SHA,vnoGE !IEEJCE
PETITION BY CARL J. VIERLING AS
PERSONAL REPRESENTATIVE OF THE ESTATE
OF JOSEPHINE VIERLING FOR ANNEXATION
OF CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY BY THE CITY
OF SHAKOPEE
That the Petitioner , Carl J. Vierling , as Personal Representative
of the Estate of Josephine Vierling, decedent , for his Petition for
Annexation pursuant to Minnesota Stat. §441 . 033 , subd. 5, states the
following :
1 . That the Estate of Josephine Vierling is the sole record
fee owner of the following described real property located in Jackson
Township , Scott County, Minnesota :
The South one-half of the Northeast one-quarter of Section
12-115-23 , except approximately 10 acres thereof which 10
acres are covered by Certificate of Title No. 2034 ;
Together with the North one-half of the Southeast one-quarter
of Section 12-115-23 .
2. That the above described real property abutts to the City
of Shakopee, is unplatted and contains less than 200 acres.
3. That Petitioner requests pursuant to Minn. Stat. §441 . 033 ,
subd. 5, that the City of Shakopee annex the above described real property
into its municipal boundary .
4 . That the Petitioner has within 10 days of the date of this
Petition, filed this Petition with the Scott County Board of Commissioners,
the Jackson Township Board.
DATED :
'-7 l - -L
Carl J. Verling
STATE OF MINNESOTA )
CCUUTY OF SCOTT 1
Subscribed and sworn to before me
this_ aay of 05 1986.
0661 �m
'1;089,�qW-0 u4d
ejefter
Notaryijublic
THE:
V a SCOTTLAN D
g�
COMPANIES
July 30, 1986
Mr. John Anderson
City Administrator
City of Shakopee
129 East First Avenue
Shakopee, MN 55379
RE: Canterbury Square
N.E. Corner County Road 83
and 12th Avenue
Dear John:
It is our understanding that the Shakopee City Council and
Metropolitan Council have completed their review and approval of
the extension of the MUSA line to include the above-referenced
property. As we discussed previously with the City Council and
staff, we plan to hook up the Canterbury Square sanitary sewer
to the sanitary line in County Road 83 according to the plans on
file with the City Engineer as soon as your office issues
authorization. As part of that authorization process, you have
requested a waiver to the effect that in the event the City ever
constructs a lateral sanitary sewer line from its present
location in County Road 83 and immediately north of the retail
center to a point to the south of the retail center, we will not
raise as a defense to any proposed special assessment for such a
project, the fact that we have already hooked up the retail
center to the now existing sewer line in County Road 83.
The purpose of this letter is to serve as such a waiver.
5244 Valley Industrial Boulevard South Shakopee, Minnesota 55379 [612] 445-3242
0
City of Shakopee
July 30 , 1986
Page 2
If you have any questions or need additional information,
please call me at 445-3242 . I understand this matter will be on
the consent agenda at the City Council meeting of August 5,
1986 . In the event it is approved, we would immediately hookup.
Very truly yours,
Gkk-A-� ()-
Bruce D. Malkerson
Executive Vice President
BDM:ap
c. c. LeRoy Houser, Building Inspector
Bill Engelhardt
Tim Keane
THE
a VSCOTTLAN D
COMPANIES '`'' NIS
CITY OF SHAKOPE17'
August 5, 1986
Ms. Judith Cox
City Clerk
City of Shakopee
129 E. First Avenue
Shakopee, MN 55379
RE: Canterbury Square
Dear Judy:
As per our discussions, please find enclosed Waiver of
Objections To and Right of Appeal from Assessment for Canterbury
Square.
Very truly yours,
L to--�
Timothy J. Keane
Vice President
TJK:ap
Enclosure
5244 Valley Industrial Boulevard South Shakopee, Minnesota 55379 (612) 445-3242
FORM 4400 MILLER-DAVIS CO.,MPLS. _
Form 524.3.505 #6 UPC——
STATE OF MINNESOTA $
COUNTY COURT-PROBATE DIVISION
COUNTY OF SCOTT
In Re: Estate of Court File No. 9001
INTERIM ORDER IN SUPERVISED
Josephine vierling ADMINISTRATION FOR
Deceased Court Approval Allowing the Personal _
Representative to Petition the City of
Shakopee for Annexation of Certain Real
Property which is included in the Estate.
1
i
The application of Carl J. vierling , dated July 9 119 86, 1
for an interim order in supervised administration for Court approval in
the estate of the above named decedent having duly come on for hearing before the above named
court, the undersigned Judge having heard and considered such application, being fully advised j
in the premises, makes the following findings and determinations:
Court Approval
1. That the application for an interim order in supervised administration for
allowingthe P R to Petition the City is complete.
of Shakopee for Annexation i
3. That the applicant has declared or affirmed that the representations contained in the applica-
tion are true, correct and complete to the best of his knowledge or information.
4. That the applicant appears from the petition to be an interested person as defined by the It
laws of this state.
5. That supervised administration of this estate was ordered by this court by an order dated
Tune 29 , 1978_.
6. That an interim order for nnur+—ap rnv l al l nwi ng the p-R- to petition for Annexation
is necessary and appropriate because: Thp =ttorney fo L_tbe city of shakovee re ue s_
Zt hefnre going forward wits rnr� petition for Annexation
I
Now, therefore, it is ORDERED, ADJUDGED, and DECREED by the court as follows:
I
2. That-the application is hereby granted.
2. That this court hereby formally orders
That the Personal Representative is allowed and ordered to file a Petition with the
City of Shakopee requesting that the City of Shakopee annex the following described
areal property which is included in the estate:
the SI of NEI of Section 12, Township 115, Range 23, except
approximately to acres which are covered by Certificate of Title
No. 2034. Together with the N1 of SEI of Section 12-115-23.
i
I
I
1
1
i
i
i
Dated: �� 5
I
(COITnT SEAL) Ju e
Waiver of Objections To and Right of Appeal
from Assessment
This Agreement, made and entered into this 5th day of August,
1986 , by and between the City of Shakopee, a municipal corporation
organized under the laws of the State of Minnesota, hereinafter
called "City" and Scottland Inc. , hereinafter called "Developer" .
WHEREAS, the Developer plans to install a sanitary sewer
service to the property described in the attached Exhibit A, at its
own cost, according to approved plans on file with the City
Engineer.
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA, the Developer agrees to, and hereby does,
waive and release
(a) any and all objections to any assessment for sanitary
sewer levied by the City pursuant to this Agreement,
including, without limitation, objections to procedures
and hearings before the City Council in connection with
the assessments for future sanitary sewer improvements to
the property described in the attached Exhibit A,
objections resulting from failure to fully comply with any
applicable statute, and objections to the amount of any
assessment for sanitary sewer thereafter levied against
the property (described in Exhibit A) of Developer due to
the Improvements stated herein, and
(b) the right to appeal, pursuant to applicable Minnesota
Statutes, from any assessment for sanitary sewer levied
pursuant to this Agreement.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the City and Developer have caused this
Agreement to be duly executed on the day and year first above
written.
CITY OF SHAKOPEE
By:
Mayor
By:
City Administrator
By:
City Clerk
DEVELO 5B--
By:
TimothyJ. Id
eFor: Sc tt Inc.
Its Vice ent
EXHIBIT A
The West 494 . 00 feet of that part of the Northeast Quarter of
Section 9 , Township 115 , Range 22, Scott County, Minnesota , lying
North of the centerline of 12th Avenue as described in Document
No. 29522 in the office of the Registrar of Titles, Scott County,
Minnesota . Excepting therefrom that part of said Northeast
Quarter lying within the plat of Valley Park Third Addition.
1761m
George T. Bestrom Wallace O. Kolsrud, CPM, S.I.R.
Robert P. Boblett, Jr. Alan P. Leirness, MAI
Louis W. Frillman, MAI Harry Miller, S.I.R.
John N. Grossman John F. Nelson, Jr.
Sigurd M. Haller Robert Boblett Associates,Inc. James R. Wenthold, S.I.R.
Stewart Hineline, S.I.R. 400 Minnesota Federal Building Donald E. Woodward, S.I.R.
Harry L. Johnson Minneapolis, Minnesota 55402-1703 63
Mark W. Kolsrud Phone 612 333-6515 Robert P. Boblett, S.I.R.
Easy Link Mail Box #62859905
Industrial/Commercial Real Estate
July 31 , 1986
AU1
Mr. Eldon Reinke, Mayor CITY OF SHAKOPEE
City of Shakopee
129 E. 1st Av.
Shakopee, MN 55379
Eldon:
I read with interest the chambers proposal for a Tourism/Promotion Center
for the City of Shakopee.
I 'm suggesting to the Shakopee City Council that an alternate proposal
could be to lease space in the Warners True Value office building for
offices for the Tourism Center. By leasing space for a period of time,
it would allow for a smaller initial cash investment and provide a period
of time to evaluate the overall future needs, evaluate the staff, and
analyze the functions of the Center.
The property fronts on Highway 101 for easy access, is an attractive
property with nicely finished interior and exterior, and has ample park-
ing for tourists.
Additional information can be made available upon request and inspection
of the property can be arranged at your convenience.
Sincerely,
Don Woodward
Executive Vice President
DW:gw
Action Requested
Refer to Chamber of Commerce for recommendation.
INDIVIDUAL MEMBERSHIPS:Society of Industrial Realtors, American Society of Real Estate Counselors,
National Association of Corporate Real Estate Executives, International Council of Shopping Centers,
Federation Internationale Des Professions Immobiliers, National Association of Industrial&Office Parks, If
Urban Land Institute, Institute of Real Estate Management
FOR SALE
T-47MME INDUSTRIAL LANDANDBUILDINGS
Warner True Value Distribution Center
Shakopee
• Sixteen (16) Acres SITE PLAN
Prime Industrial Land
� AC.o MOa1N'MESTEaN a 1711
• Office— 10,000 Sq. Ft. Property
P Y
• Storage — 54,000 Sq. Ft. Omcs ASPHALT DRIVE #2
6 PARKING
YARD AREA
• Frontage on Highway 101 $ 7.40 ACRES
See Map on
• Rall. Spur On. SiBack Panelte n n 3 4
• Public Sewer & Water 397,40
For further information call:
• Fenced & Blacktopped Don Woodward, S.I.R.
8.67 ACRES
Outside Storage Area (612) 333-6515
• A Short Distance to ,
877-VMinnesota's New Horse IndividualMemoersnips
Racing Track ISociety of Industrial Realtors
MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator ✓ z
FROM: Judi Simac, City Planner
RE: Conditional Use Permit - Roy Marschall
DATE: July 30 , 1986
Introduction•
At the June 3 , 1986 meeting the City Council approved a
motion to table consideration of Conditional Use Permit
Resolution No. CC-456, which would allow Roy Marschall to place a
mobile home on farm property, in addition to the farmstead
residence. The action was tabled in order to prepare an
ordinance amendment which would allow the mobile home resident to
be unrelated to the farm operator.
Background-
The Planning Commission held a public hearing on a proposed
amendment which would change the code to allow a person unrelated
to the farm operator to live in a mobile home on the farm
property. The Planning Commission was split on the decision to
recommend to the City Council that the code be changed.
At their June 22 , 1986 meeting the City Council moved that
Section 11. 05, Subd. 8 C of the City Code not be amended to allow
persons unrelated to the farm operator to reside in mobile homes
on the farmstead. Therefore, since the code will not be amended,
the conditional use permit must be removed from the table for
final action by the City Council.
Action Requested:
1. Motion to remove from the table consideration of Conditional
Use Permit Resolution No. CC-456 .
2 . Motion to deny Conditional Use Permit Resolution No. CC-
456 .
MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator
FROM: Judi Simac, City Planner
RE: Employee Housing and Dormitories as a use in the
Racetrack District
DATE: July 30 , 1986
At their July 25 , 1986 meeting the City Council directed
staff to issue no housing or dormitory building permits (as
listed in Section 11. 36 Subd. 2 A 2 in Code) until the Council
received a clarification of the definition from staff at the
August 5 , 1986 Council meeting.
Employee housing and dormitories are listed as a customary
accessory use, activity or facility to a licensed Class A
Racetrack. The licensed Class A Racetrack is a permitted use
within the Racetrack District. All uses in the RTD are permitted
only by Planned Unit Development (P.U.D. ) and subject to all
stated conditions in the RTD and PUD ordinance. Therefore any
additional construction of uses within Canterbury Downs would
require a public hearing and Planning Commission and City Council
approval of the P.U.D.
MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator
FROM: Barry A. Stock, Administrative Aide
RE: Appointment to the Downtown Committee
DATE: July 31, 1986
Introduction and Background:
Due to work conflicts, Mr. Steve Clay resigned from the
Downtown Committee this past April. Mr. Mark Kuchenmeister owner
and operator of Link Print has expressed a strong interest in
serving on this Committee and filling Mr. Clays vacant seat. I
personally have worked with Mr. Kuchenmeister on several
occasions and I believe he would be an excellent addition to the
Committee. Several of the downtown committee members have also
informally suggested that Mr. Kuchenmeister would be an asset to
the committee.
Alternatives:
1. Appoint Mr. Mark Kuchenmeister to serve as a member of the
Shakopee Downtown Committee.
2 . Do not appoint Mr. Kuchemeister to serve as a member of the
Shakopee Downtown Committee.
Staff Recommendation:
Staff recommends alternatives #1.
Action Requested:
Move to appoint Mr. Mark Kuchenmeister to serve as a member
of the Shakopee Downtown Committee.
MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator
FROM: Barry A. Stock, Administrative Aide !1 �
RE: Amending Dial-A-Ride Contract
DATE: July 31, 1986
Introduction and Background:
The current dial-a-ride contract provides that the
contractor will supply a back-up vehicle to be used for both the
Van Pool and Dial-A-Ride programs. We are being charged $600 . 00
per month for this service. Upon review of the back-up vehicle,
staff has come to the conclusion that it does not conform to the
operating standards that we would like to maintain in our
program. After several discussions with the contractor, a mutual
agreement was reached that would allow us to delete the provision
of a backup vehicle from the dial-a-ride contract.
Staff has discovered that we can obtain a back-up through
our van pool program for approximately $500 per month. This new
back-up vehicle is in much better condition than our present
back-up vehicle. Additionally, the new back-up vehicle acquired
through the van pool contract can serve as a back-up to both the
van pool and dial-a-ride programs. No revisions to the van pool
contract will be necessary. The new back-up vehicle will be
stored at the dial-a-ride office. In brief, amending the
contract will save approximately $1200 per year and give us a
more reliable back-up vehicle.
Alternatives•
1. Amend the dial-a-ride contract deleting sections 12g
requesting the provision of a back-up vehicle.
2. Keep the status quo.
3 . Request the dial-a-ride contractor to improve the operating
condition of the existing back-up vehicle or be cited for
non compliance.
Staff Recommendation:
Staff recommends alternative #1.
Action Reauested:
Move to amend the dial-a-ride contract by deleting section
12g requesting the provision of a back-up vehicle.
/0e
MEMO TO : John K. Anderson, City Administrator
FROM : Ken Ashfeld, City Engineer f� -
SUBJECT : Drainage Problem along 11th Avenue
DATE : August 1 , 1986
INTRODUCTION :
Attached is a letter from Mr. Richard Logeais expressing concern
over the inadequate surface drainage along the north side of 11th
Avenue and east of Legion Street .
BACKGROUND :
Apparently this has been an on going problem with various at-
tempts to correct it . With the work load this summer , Engi-
neering has not had the opportunity to investigate the situation
thoroughly but to present possible solutions we have investigated
the conditions as they exist.
Also attached is a rough sketch of the area, the ditch being the
problem area referred to in Mr . Logeais ' letter . The problem
occurs from the existing culvert at Legion Street that is at the
identical elevation of the existing storm sewer inlet . In
addition to a relatively deep ditch, which has been one of the
objections of the adjacent property owner , water ponds in the
ditch making maintenance a problem . My understanding is that the
City agreed to maintain this ditch some time in the past .
Alternatives :
Various alternatives exist for correcting the problem.
1 . Relocate the culvert at Legion Street at a higher elevation
and regrade ditches east and west . This would provide a
moderate solution to the poor drainage but do nothing for
the elimination of the ditch. The estimated cost of this
alternative is $2 ,600 .00 .
2 . Remove the culvert at Legion Street and provide a bituminous
cross swale to take drainage from west to east. The ditch
would need to be filled to the east and west. Grades are so
critical for this solution to work that the following
disadvantages result.
The cross swale would create a traffic impedance .
11th Avenue
August 1 , 1986
Page 2
Grades to the west of Legion would become flat and
increase problems on that side
This solution would do nothing for the elimination of
the ditch to the east.
The estimated cost of this alternative is $2 ,800 .00 .
3 . Remove the culvert at Legion Street and extend the storm
sewer from its existing termini to the west side of Legion
and fill the ditch to the east . An apron inlet would be
provided on the west side of Legion. Due to elevations, a
catch basin could not be constructed within the curb line
along the east side of Legion, therefore , a modified drop
inlet would be built in the grassed area . The estimated
cost of this alternative is $8 , 100 . 00 . This alternative
would provide a more conducive drainage system for a
residential area .
The following alternatives would do nothing for correcting the
problem.
4 . Correct this drainage problem in the future when the prop-
erty to the south is developed and questions regarding the
future status of 11th Avenue are answered .
5 . Do Nothing.
RECOMMENDATIONS :
I recommend Alternative 4 with the expectation that the problem
can be corrected in the near future when the property develops to
the south . If Council wishes to correct the problem now, I
recommend Alternative 3 and the cost to be funded by the Storm
Sewer Fund .
REQUESTED ACTION :
Move to direct the City Engineer to notify Mr . Logeais that the
drainage problem will be monitored and corrected in conjunction
with development improvements to the south.
KA/pm p
11AVE
Logeais Homes
1221 East Fourth Avenue, Suite 125
Shakopee, Minnesota 55379 -a-
Office: (612)445.2628 Res: (612)445-4488
May 19, 1986
Mr. John Anderson
City Administrator
City Hall
Shakopee, Minnesota
Dear Mr. Anderson:
I am writing in regards to the ditch located at 11th and
Legion Streets in Eagle Bluff 2nd Addi.tIon. We have dis-
cussed the situation several times with city officials and
have not resolved the problem. Bo Spurrier said the city
would correct the water flow but it hasn' t been graded properly.
The culvert is only 1/10th of an inch drop from one to the
other. The water stands in the ditch constantly after it rains .
The new City Engineer, Ken Ashfield, and I looked at the ditch
this past week and would like it brought up before the council
so we can resolve this problem as soon as possible.
Sincerely yours,
Richard L. Lo ais
RLL/dmh
"Custom Homes"...Your Lot or Ours.
G
Q
N
n
i
d '
i
i
x
v�
v3
J�
S
6-
c � . ��,� .► CUs.�
c4
lG
s'
era � ra3. ?
--- -- �G
o �
m
_
c1� s
G
S i
_ f
C c . •
-----------
_ 1 -
d � i
MEMO TO : John K . Anderson, City Administrator
FROM : Ken Ashfeld , City Engineer,
SUBJECT : Holmes Street Lateral & 4th Avenue
Project Updates
DATE : August 5 , 1986
INTRODUCTION & BACKGROUND :
Council awarded the 4th Avenue Reconstruction Project on July 22 ,
1986 to S .M. Hentges contingent upon the delivery of all contract
requirements by August 5 , 1986 . Those requirements have been
satisfied and the documents are currently being reviewed by the
City Attorney .
The following is a status report ' on the various projects under
contract with S .M. Hentges .
EaQlewoo,d Proiect
This project is essentially complete at this time with the
exception of minor punch list items and seeding . The seeding
will be completed when allowed by Mn/DOT spec ; atter August 15 or
as allowed by long term weather forecast .
Deerview Proiect
The status of this project is the same as that of Eaglewood .
Holmes Street Lateral - Proiect
The underground installation is approximately 60% complete at
this time with surface restoration somewhat behind due to the
wetter than normal July . We had hoped for approximately 70%
underground completion and a closer follow—up of restoration. It
can be stated that the project is a difficult one considering the
various utility conflicts ( sanitary , water, gas , & telephone ) and
it appears that the toughest part is completed . Restoration is
also proceeding at a good pace now that the weather has
stabilized .
From a project planning stand point, it appears beneficial to
postpone a one block segment of storm sewer on 4th Avenue and
install that portion in conjunction with other 4th Avenue
utilities in the same area . This will create the least
disturbance to the motoring public and adjacent properties . A
change order to change the completion date for this one block
segment will be forth coming .
Project Update
August 5 , 1986
Page 2
Fourth Avenue Prosect
Obviously this project has not started as of yet. Based upon the
status of existing contracts and since the contractor met the
requirements of the contract award, Engineering is planning on
issuing the "Notice to Proceed" upon approval of the contracts by
the City Attorney .
KA/pmp
AWARD
v
MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator
FROM: Ken Ashfeld, City Engineer>��'
SUBJECT: Utility Service to City Owned Property
Fourth Avenue Reconstruction
DATE: July 24, 1986
INTRODUCTION:
The contract has been awarded for the Fourth Avenue Reconstruc-
tion Protect from Fillmore Street to Scott Street . The contract
includes, among other things, sewer and water rehabilitation
along Fourth Avenue.
BACKGROUND:
To the extent that records are complete, we have identified
those properties within the project area that are riot adequately
serviced by utilities. Two sites have been identified, stated
as follows:
1. Lots 3 through 5, Block 50 owned by the Mr. Robert
Vierling. Some time ago, I contacted Mr. Vierling
regarding service to his vacant lots. Based upon
his response and further investigation we have deter-
mined that the only deficiency that we know of is
the lacking of water service to Lot 4, Block 50.
Mr. Vierling indicated that based upon the R3 zoning,
he did not feel art additional water service was neces-
sary. If he did want the additional service, he would
make his own arrangements to have it installed under
our normal street cut permit process.
I do feel that it would be beneficial to both Mr.
Vierling and the City to have water installed to Lot
4 before the finished street is constructed. I will
present that opinion to Mr. Vierling by copy of this
memo. The only other process, if Mr. Vierling e1ects
not to install the service, is to conduct a Council
initiated 429 assessment improvement. Unless Council
directs otherwise, no other action is currently
planned.
2. Lots 3 & 4, Black 52 owned by the City of Shakopee.
This property is available for development since the
vacation of the railroad alignment and is zoned R2.
Therefore, I recommend that Council consider instal-
ling a sewer and water service group to each of the
two lets.
Utility Service ( 0
July 24, 198E
Page
The estimated cost of the two service groups is
$3, 739. 00, or $1, 869. 50 per lot. This cost can be
recovered with the eventual disposal and/or use of
the property.
Alternatives:
1. Do Nothing.
2. Install water and sewer service to Lots 3 tt 4, Block 52.
RECOMMENDATION:
Alternative 2 is recommended with associated cast to be taken
from the General Fund.
REQUESTED ACTION:
Move to direct the City Engineer to cause the installation of
water and sewer service to Lots 3 R 4, Block 52, cost of such
improvement to be taken from the General Fund.
KA/pmp
UTILITY
0
MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator
FROM: Fulton Sch1eisman, Building Inspector
SUBJECT: Acquisition of Trunk Highway 101 Bypass
Right-of-Way
DATE: July 29, 198E
INTRODUCTION:
Council action is necessary to execute a loan agreement between
the City of Shakopee and Metropolitan Council for R. O. W. acqui-
sit ion.
BACKGROUND:
In October of last year Council authorized the execution and
submittal of a loan agreement for Parcel No. 7, 14 acres of
land south c,f Minnesota Valley 5th Addition, to Metropolitan
Council. (See map attached)
This agreement , for a total loan amount of $387, 050. 00, was
not approved by Met Council. Their concern was that an excessive
amount of Parcel No. 7 was outside of the proposed right-of-way.
Instead, they embarked on a several month process to revise
the loan program guidelines.
The recently adopted revised guidelines, for the most part,
require that a parcel lie totally within a proposed highway
right-of-way.
In the case of Parcel No. 7 the owners have agreed to sell a
portion of the property, pro-rated at the previously agreed
upon acre price. (Map attached)
The selling price $8e, 704. 20 for 3 acres was supported by an
amended appraisal and approved by Mn/DOT' s right-of-way depart-
ment.
Council should note that subdivision of a parcel will occur
here without implementing the platting process.
ACTION REQUESTED:
Authorize proper City officials to execute a LOAN AGREEMENT
BETWEEN THE METROPOLITAN COUNCIL AND THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE FOR
HIGHWAY RIGHT-OF-WAY ACQUISITION for Parcel Number 7, in the
amount of $88, 374. 20.
FS/pmp
CONTRACT NO.
LOAN AGREEMENT
BETWEEN THE METROPOLITAN COUNCIL AND
THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE
THIS AGREEMENT is entered into this day of 1986, by and between
the Metropolitan Council, hereinafter referred to as the Council, and the City
of Shakopee, hereinafter referred to as the "Recipient".
WHEREAS, the Council has been authorized by Minnesota Statutes, Section
473.167, to make loans to counties, towns, and cities situated within the
Metropolitan Area for the purpose of acquisition of property within the right-
of-way of a state trunk highway shown on an official map when acquisition is
necessary to avoid imminent conversion of such property to a use which would
jeopardize the property's availability for highway construction; and
WHEREAS, the Recipient, an eligible governmental unit, has applied for such a
loan to accomplish the acquisition of threatened right-of-way within the
officially mapped corridor for Trunk Highway 101 Shakopee Bypass; and
WHEREAS, the Council has authorized that such a loan be made from the
Metropolitan Right-of-Way Acquisition Loan Fund.
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual promises and covenants herein
and the Council's agreement to loan funds to Recipient hereunder, the Council
and the Recipient agree as follows:
1 . Loan Funds
A. The Council shall loan to the Recipient, in accordance with the
schedule set forth below, a total loan amount not to exceed
$88,374.20. Loan funds shall be made available to the Recipient as
follows:
(1) Upon execution of this loan agreement, $80,703.10, for
acquisition of those parcels of real property described as
Parcel #7 in Exhibit A attached hereto and made a part
hereof.
B. An amount not to exceed $7,670.00, upon receipt of satisfactory and
complete documentation respecting Recipient's actual appraisal and
title evaluation costs.
2. Authorized Use of Loan Proceeds
The parties agree that loan proceeds may be used only for the following
purposes:
A. The costs of acquiring the parcels of land described in paragraph 1 .
B. The costs incurred by the Recipient to appraise said property and to
conduct title evaluations.
10 -�
-2-
The parties agree that no part of the loan proceeds shall be used for
relocating or moving persons or property.
3. Accounting
A. The Recipient agrees to establish and maintain a separate account for
the loan funds made available herein and to maintain accurate and
complete accounts and records relating to the receipt and expenditure
of any and all loan funds. Such accounts and records shall be kept
and maintained for a period of at least three years following
discharge of the loan.
B. The above accounts and records of the Recipient shall be audited in
the same manner as all other accounts and records of the Recipient are
audited, and may be audited and/or inspected on Recipient's premises
or otherwise by individuals or organizations designated and authorized
by the Council at any time following reasonable notification during
the loan period, and for a period of three years following final loan
discharge.
4. Reports
A. Acquisition Report. The Recipient agrees that upon completion of any
acquisition, the Recipient will submit to the Council an acquisition
report and restrictive covenant substantially in the form of Exhibit B.
B. Annual Report. The Recipient agrees to submit on or before June 30 of
each year during which this agreement is in effect an annual report on
the status of the loan, in a form to be determined by the Council.
5. Income
The Recipient agrees to transfer to the Council within 30 days of receipt
all net rents or other money received as a result of Recipient's ownership
of the property.
6. General Conditions
A. Duration. The loan award specified herein shall commence on the
execution of this agreement and remain in force and effect until the
loan is discharged.
B. Discharge. The Recipient agrees to pay to the Council, within 30
days of receipt, the following amounts upon occurrence of the
following event(s) :
(1 ) If any parcel purchased with the loan funds made available herein
is conveyed to a highway authority for construction of a highway,
the Recipient shall repay the amount specified in paragraph 1A
and the amount actually disbursed pursuant to paragraph 1B.
-3-
(2) If the Council notifies the Recipient that the plan to construct
the highway has been abandoned or the anticipated location of the
highway changed, the Recipient shall repay the fair market value
of the property as determined by sale of the property in
accordance with procedures required for the disposition of
property. No such sale shall be valid without the approval of
the Council.
(3) If the property for any other reason is sold, or if the Recipient
materially breaches any term of this agreement, the Recipient
shall repay the amount specified in paragraph 1A and the amount
actually disbursed pursuant to paragraph 1B. The Council agrees
to notify the Recipient of any such breach and to provide a
reasonable opportunity to cure.
The Council agrees that upon payment of the specified amount it will
discharge the loan.
C. Interest. The loan made herein shall bear no interest.
D. Agreement to Convey. The Recipient agrees that upon the request of
the authority authorized to construct the highway for which this right
of way has been reserved, the Recipient will convey the property to
the authority at the same price (including costs of appraisal and
title examination) which the Recipient paid for the property.
E. Rights Reserved. In the event that the Council finds that there has
been a failure to comply with the provisions of this agreement, the
Council reserves the right to take any and all such action as it deems
necessary or appropriate to protect the Council's interest, provided
that the Council agrees to notify the Recipient of any such failure to
comply and to provide a reasonable opportunity to comply.
F. Amendments. The terms of this agreement may be changed or modified
by mutual agreement by the parties hereto. Such changes or
modifications shall be effective only upon the execution of written
amendments signed by authorized representatives of the Council and
Recipient.
G. Compliance with Certain Laws. The Recipient agrees to comply with
all applicable laws relating to nondiscrimination, affirmative action,
and public purchase, contracting and employment.
In particular, Recipient agrees not to discriminate against any
employee or applicant for employment because of race, color, religion,
sex, or national origin, and to take affirmative action that
applicants and employees are treated equally with respect to the
following: employment, upgrading, demotion, transfer, recruitment,
layoff, termination, rates of pay and other forms of compensation, and
selection for training.
-4-
H. Property Maintenance. The Recipient agrees to make reasonable
efforts to maintain in a manner compatible with the surrounding
environment, as appropriate, property acquired with loan funds
provided hereunder.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Agreement to be
executed by their duly authorized representatives on the day and year first
above written.
METROPOLITAN COUNCIL
By
Maurice K. Dorton, Executive Director
CITY OF SHAKOPEE
By
Approved as to legal Eldon A. Reinke, Mayor City of Shakopee
form and adequacy
By
Legal Department John K. Anderson, City Administrator
Office of Staff Counsel Attest:
LoanAG Judith S. Cox, City Clerk
EXHIBIT A /6 ,,
LEGAL DESCRIPTIONS
Original 14 . 2 Acre Parcel
That part of the North half of the Southwest Quarter (NI/2 of SWI/4) of Section 11,
Township 115, Range 23, Scott County, Minnesota, described as follows:
Commencing at the Northwest corner of MINNESOTA VALLEY 3RD ADDITION, also
being the Southwest corner of MINNESOTA VALLEY IST ADDITION, according to the
recorded plats thereof; thence South 1 degree 04 minutes 43 seconds East along the West
line of said MINNESOTA VALLEY 3RD ADDITION, a distance of 108.11 feet; thence
South 88 degrees 55 minutes 17 seconds West along the North line of said MINNESOTA
VALLEY 3RD ADDITION, a distance of 130.00 feet to the point of beginning of the
tract of land to be described; thence South I degree 04 minutes 43 seconds East along
the West,line of said MINNESOTA VALLEY 3RD ADDITION a distance of 380.00 feet;
thence South 88 degrees 55 minutes 17 seconds West along the North line of said MIN-
NESOTA VALLEY 3RD ADDITION, a distance of 245.00 feet, thence South 25 degrees
25 minutes 17 seconds West along the Westerly line of said MINNESOTA VALLEY 3RD
ADDITION, a distance of 380.000 feet; thence South 26 degrees 04 minutes 43 seconds
East along the Westerly line of said MINNESOTA VALLEY 3RD ADDITION, a distance
of 204.23 feet to the South line of said North half of the Southwest Quarter; thence
South 86 degrees 56 minutes 16 seconds West along said South line of the North half of
the Southwest Quarter, a distance of 724.91 feet; thence North 0 degree 08 minutes 24
seconds West, a distance of 266.52 feet to the intersection with the Southwesterly exten-
sion of the Southeasterly line of VALLEY MALL FIRST ADDITION, according to the
recorded plat thereof; thence North 38 degrees 30 minutes 05 seconds East along said
Southwesterly extension and the Southeasterly line of VALLEY MALL FIRST ADDI-
TION, a distance of 1008.70 feet; thence South 51 degrees 29 minutes 55 seconds East, a
distance of 60.00 feet, thence South 42 degrees 09 minutes 03 seconds East, a distance of
120.63 feet; thence North 38 degrees 30 minutes 05 seconds East a distance of 85.00
feet, thence North 88 degrees 55 minutes 17 seconds East a distance of 226.00 feet;
thence South 1 degree`04 minutes 43 seconds East a distance of 50.00 feet to the point of
beginning.
Subject Parcel (7) To Be Taken (Estimated at 3 . 0 Acres)
That part of Parcel B Iving South and West of a straight line drawn between a point on the South
line of the North Half of Southwest Quarter of Section 11, Township 115, Range 23, distant 400
ft. East of the intersection of said South line with the Tfest line of East half of Southwest quarter
Of Section 11, Township 115, Range 23, and a point on said West line distant 600 feet North of
said intersection.
Peter J. Patchin& Associates, Inc.
1 r Q
l
i
7=71 _
LOT
LOT 2
7= �J .
li cTR i I i r "--
ua�h., ' hl.I f� Iy ♦ .1^ � .
21 is Ri:n, 6r
WAY LlaEJv
\ � I
�_ PLAT MAP
,e I
G •' II 1
f
pOL C:D,
�� R�vfrvfEr I .
.14
OUCLDt • 1. SUTC I••Y
1C P
/ �C✓� t.l 9 L 1R,.
411` •�. * „�
cPA yr
/ I ' Eo.•Ko a c••a
SKESCr
SC.•00-
If [YRfST
LUl
CRURCR 1T
MMKf
• 1 w i/
e I
i I
'
VALLEY"ALL O YUNICIP•L
� POOL
<
2 1 •- d
BLOCKI Q of 9 1
LOT
Se by I ' I• I' I _ `�
LOT 2 3
r
O
1 `r�or �'y • I Ee h > I k , /1 TN AVE.
`\ � ,) I ' i• 'f' L.OKf PARK
+5
L Si ounoT a �P, hl
n�P
_ `\\ \\®1TlD® 4 Il.�Th' AVL_ 1,=0Un0T D I[ rI t -� c4°P1!Tiu T• •_
---�1 Ib I t l•CKSOF TOw-Lrfp�'�
t
I Iot
� I
1 ! t IA. AM t -.
SJT O
D ? \V I
PARK Z
\ \ I I \
400 0 400 800
5
MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator
FROM: Ken Ashfeld, City Engineer/'
SUBJECT: Shiely Company Water Appropriation permit Amendment
DATE: July 28, 1986
INTRODUCTION:
J.L. Shiely Company has r-equested an amendment to their water
appropriation permit for the dewatering of their quarry mining
operations. Their permit application has been tentatively ap-
proved as per the attached July 221, 1986 correspondence from
the Department of Natural Resources.
The conditions of the amendment is such that Shiely Company
will be allowed to increase the dewatering amounts to 2,750
million gallons per year with a maximum rate of 10,000 gallons
per minutes. Although the amount is only a ten percent increase
from the currently allowed amount, the rate of pumping proposed
is a 67 percent increase of the current allowed rata of 6,000
gallons per minute. This represents a significant increase.
The City of Shakopee, as per state statute, may demand a hearing
of the permit before it becomes final. I understand that there
has been concern expressed regarding the previous permit and
its impact on the water table, discharge receiving stream, etc.
In discussing this matter with the planning Commission Chairman,
Dave Czaja, he felt a hearing would be appropriate.
Attached is a letter requesting a hearing to be signed by Mayor
Reinke if the Council so wishes.
RECOMMENDATION:
Request hearing of the Shiely permit amendment.
REQUESTED ACTION:
Move to authorize Mayor Reinke to submit a demand for a hearing
to the Department of Natural Resources as regarding the J.L.
Shiely Company water appropriations permit amendment.
KA / pm p
SHIELY
STATE OF
H 1 Z O CTZQ l b
DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES
BOX 32 500 LAFAYETTE ROAD • ST. PAUL, MINNESOTA • 55146
DNR INFORMATION
(612) 296-6157
J y
July 21, 1986 -
J. L. Shiely Company
Attn: Linda Schultz
1101 Snelling Avenue North
St. Paul, MN 55108
Dear Ms. Schultz:
AMEN'D=, PERMIT 67-0172, SCOTT COUNTY
Enclosed is Amended Appropriation Permit 67-0172 which authorizes dewatering
of a quarry in Section 2, T115N, R22W as per your request.
Please read all the conditions of the permit, especially Condition 3.b. This
requires you to record the amounts of water appropriated. A Water Use Report
will be sent to you each January for reporting the amounts for the previous
year. The report must be submitted with the processing fee by February 15 of
each year. The fee schedule is $5.00 per each permitted ten million gallons or
fraction thereof. The permit authorizes the appropriation of 2750million
gallons per year; therefore, the annual processing fee is$500.00.Do not send the
report and fee until notified. Failure to submit the report and fee can result
in the termination of the permit.
Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 105.44, Subds. 3 and 6, the applicant,
the managers of the watershed district, the board of supervisors of the soil
and water conservation district, or the mayor of the city may demand a hearing on
the P
ermitdemand for hearinq_and the ona required are j e-
th_ 0 da s of recei t. A,corporate surety bond or
equiva ent security in the amount of $500.00 must accompany the demand for
hearing; however, the applicant may be responsible for hearing costs up to
$750.00. No bond is required of a public authority which demands a hearing. If
no demand for hearing is made or if a hearing is demanded but no bond is filed,
the Permit shall become final at the expiration of the 30 days and no appeal may
be taken to the State Court of Appeals. Bond forms will be supplied at your
request.
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER
J. L. Shiely Campany
Page 2
If you have any questions, please contact Hedia Adels.-nan at 296-0508.
Sincerely,
DIVISION OF WATERS
s
Sarah P. Tufford, istrator
Water Use Management ection
SPT -/SW: ss
cc: Kent Lokkesmoe, Regional Hydrologist
Scott County SWCD
Lacer Minnesota River WSD
John K: Anderson/
D. Czaya
A=7D j
WATER APPROPRIATION PERMIT PERMIT
NA -02628-02
INNESOTA Box 32, Centennial Office Building 67-0172
St. Paul, MN 55155 COUNTY
Department of Natural Resources Scott
Division of Waters
(THIS PERMIT SUPERSEDES PERMIT 67-172 ISSUED 4/23/67 AND ALL SUBSEQUENT AMENDMENTS)
IN THE MATTER OF THE APPLICATION FOR APPROPRIATION OF WATERS OF THE STATE, PERMISSION IS HEREBY GRANTED TO:
PERMITTEE
Authorized Agent
J. L. Shiely Company
Linda Schultz
Addre
X01 Snelling Ave. No., St. Paul, MN 55108
To Appropriate From:
A quarry
Point of Taking: NE4SM SW4 Section 2, T115N, R22W
Purpose:
Dewatering of the J. L. Shiely Shakopee Quarry for limestone removal.
Property Described as:
N2NW4 Section 11, SE4 Section 3 lying south of rail line, SW4 Section 2 lying south
of rail line; All in T115N, R22W
Authorized Signature Sarah P. Tufford
Title Administrator
Date
Water Use Management Section
_,:21 4�
This permit is granted subject to the followir'ONDITIONS:
1. QUANTITY:
The permittee is authorized to appropriate water at a rate not to exceed 10 •000 gallons per minute. The total amount of water
appropriated shall not exceed )0= acre feet or 2750 million gallons per year.
2. LIMITATIONS:
(a.) Any violation of the terms and provisions of this permit and any appropriation of the waters of the state in excess of that authorized
hereon shall constitute a violation of Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 105.
(b.) This permit shall not be construed as establishing any priority of appropriation of waters of the state.
(c.) This permit is permissive only. No liability shall be imposed upon or incurred by the State of Minnesota or any of its employees, on
account of the granting hereof or on account of any damage to any person or property resulting from any act or omission of the permittee
relating to any matter hereunder. This permit shall not be construed as estopping or limiting any legal claims or right of action of any
person other than the state against the permittee, for any damage or injury resulting from any such act or omission, or as stopping or
limiting any legal claim or right of action of the state against the permittee, for violation of or failure to comply with the provisions of the
permit or applicable provisions of law.
(d.) In all cases where the doing by the permittee of anything authorized by this permit shall involve the taking, using, or damaging of
any property, rights or interests of any other person or persons, or of any publicly owned lands or improvements thereon or interests
therein, the permittee, before proceeding therewith, shall obtain the written consent of all persons, agencies, or authorities concerned, and
shall acquire all property, rights and interests necessary therefore.
(e.) This permit shall not release the permittee from any other permit requirements or liability or obl oat on imposed by Minnesota Statutes.
Federal Law.. or local ordinances relating thereto and shall remain in force subject to all conditions and limitations now or hereafter imposed
by law.
if ) Unless explicitly specified, this permit does not authorize any alterations of the beds or banks of any public (protected) waters or
wetlands. A separate permit must be obtained from the Debartment of Natural Resources prior to any such alteration.
16 'Al
3. PERMITTEE'S RESPONSIBILITIES:
(a.) MONITORING
The permittee shall equip each installation for appropriating or using water with a device or employ a method to measure the quan-
tity of water appropriated to within ten (10) percent of actual amount withdrawn unless otherwise specified by special provision.
(b.) REPORTS.
Monthly records of the amount of water appropriated or used shall be recorded for each installation. Such readings and the total
amount of water appropriated or used shall be reported annually to the Director of the Division of Waters, on or before February 15 of the
following year, upon forms supplied by the Division. Any processing fee required by law or rule shall be submitted with the records whether
or not any water was appropriated during the year. Failure to report shall be sufficient cause for terminating the permit 30 days following
written notice.
(c.) TRANSFER OR ASSIGNMENT.
Any transfer or assignment of rights, or sale of property involved hereunder shall be reported within 90 days thereafter to the Direc-
tor of the Division of Waters. Such notice shall be made by the transferee (i.e. new owner) and shall state the intention to continue the ap-
propriation as stated in the permit. This permit shall not be transferred or assigned except with the written consent of the Commissioner.
(d.) MODIFICATION.
The permittee must notify the Commissioner in writing of any proposed changes to the existing permit. This permit shall not
be modified without first obtaining the written permission from the Commissioner.
4. COMMISSIONER'S AUTHORITY:
(a.) The Ccrrrnmissioner may inspect any installation utilized for the appropriation or use cf %rr_ter The permittee shall grant access to the
site at all reasonable times and shall supply such information concerning such installation as the Commissioner may require.
(b.) The Commissioner may, as he deems necessary, require the permittee to install gages and/or observation wells to monitor the im-
pact of the permittee's appropriation on the water resource and require the permittee to pay necessary costs of installation and main-
tenance.
(c.) The Commissioner may restrict, suspend, amend, or cancel this permit in accordance with applicable laws and rules for any
cause for the protection of public interests, or for violation of the provisions of this permit.
5. PUBLIC RECORD:
All data, facts, plans, maps, applications, annual water use reports, and any additional information submitted as part of this permit. and this
permit itself are part of the public record and are available for public inspection at the offices of the Division of Waters. The information
contained therein may be used by the Division as it deems necessary. The submission of false data, statements, reports, or any such ad-
ditional information, at any time shall be deemed as just grounds for revocation of this permit.
ADDITIONAL CONDITICNS
1. Monthly measurement of the water levels in the Prairie du chien-Jordan observation well
located in SW corner of NANW4 Section 11 shall be made on or about the 15th day
of each month and submitted on a quarterly basis to the Division of Waters, Water
Allocation Unit with the total amount of water pumped for the same period.
cc: Kent Lokkesmoe, Regional Hydrologist
Scott County SWCD
Lower Minnesota River WSD
Douglas Reeder
D. Czaya
Data Systems/Fox
INCORPORATED 1870
129 EAST FIRST AVENUE. SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA 55379-1376 1,612) 445-3650
July 28, 1986
Minnesota Department of Natural Resources
Sarah P. Tufford, Administrator
Water Use Management Section
Box 32/500 Lafayette Road
St. Paul, MN 55146
RE: Amendment to Permit 67-0172
Dear Ms. Tufford:
In response to Your July 21, 1986 correspondence to J.L. Shiely
Company and the referenced permit amendment, the City of Shakopee
her-eby demands a hearing on the permit. I assurne that no se-
curity is required since the City of Shakopee is a public author-
ity.
Please notify the City of the hearing time and place.
Sincerely,
Eldon Reinke
Shakopee Mayor
GrIcy4 t,r Fo} IG!��--
Memo To: John K. Anderson, City Administrator
From: Gregg M. Voxland, Finance Director
Re: Flat Rate Sewer Billing for Single Occupant House
Date: July 31, 1986
Introduction
Council requested that billing records be investigated to see if a flat
rate for sewer service for a single occupant (senior citizen) house could
be established.
Background
The basis of the billing system is water usage. If a senior citizen uses
less water, then they have a correspondingly lower sewer bill. Over the
past few years, Council has held down sewer services charges for small
users (seniors) by not raising the "per month" part of the sewer rate and
increasing the "per gallon" part instead.
The only departure from the basic billing philosophy that I can think of
is where there is no water meter or no usage history. The City then uses
the average residential billing of $9.10/mo. I cannot recall any
exceptions that Council has made since they changed to billing on the
basis of water used. This includes turning down two requests from Mary
Manor (seniors) to adjust its bill for lawn sprinkling.
SPUC staff could only think of Mrs. Unze and Hauer Trail accounts that
were residential accounts on private wells. The accounts on Hauer Trail
are probably not single occupant - seniors. SPUC does not keep any
occupancy data. Therefore, I suggest that if Council wants to adjust
Mrs. Unze's bill that it be treated as an exception to current policy.
this will preserve the policy Council has stuck to for the past several
years but still address what appears to be an isolated situation.
SPUC staff estimated that Mrs. Unze probable uses about 3,000 gallons per
quarter. This would be a bill of $4.22 per month. The rate for service
is $3/mo. plus $1.22/1,000 gallons.
Mrs. Unze could install a water meter at her cost and be billed on the
basis of water meter readings. A meter could lower her water pressure
and would probably take 2-3 years of lower sewer bills to pay for the
cost of installing a meter.
Alternatives
1. Maintain current $9.10/mo. billing.
2. Make exception to policy and set at $4.22/mo.
3. Customer install water meter
4. Other.
5. Change Policy.
Recommendation
If Council wants to grant relief to Mrs. Unze, then an exception to the
policy appears to be the best way to go. Establishing a flat rate for
single occupant house violates the basic philosophy for billing sewer
service that Council has set, requires manual intervention for each
account and water usage (therefore sewer usage) can vary widely from one
single occupant account to another. The number of possible cases like
this is so small that establishing a separate rate or category is
unwarranted.
Action
Move to treat the sewer service bill adjustment of Mrs. Unze as an
exception to the policy when a private well is used and to set the bill
at $4.22 per month.
rt
N
rt
N N N
#
N N
R
N
R
N
fi
N
N
fi
N
R
rJ
fi
cn cn t
ro
R
r
R
•� � r
R
r r
R
r
fi
r
fi
-+
r
1
r
fi
r
R h
R
r
!�
R
*+ h• N
R
+
�
•D �
N
t
1+
i
1
1
`R
1
1
1♦
L04
r I
r
R
O
CD
R
C+
p G '
0
R
m CD
O O
4
O
rt
O
fi
G
O
fi
o
R
O
fi V
fi
O
rn P
•
�{]
:R
14 �G �D
R
co cr
R
V
'R
IT
IJ
fi N
i
r
n
R
W
rt
O O O-
R
O O
Ln
{
E
LD
f
O
rt
I
i
of
j
I
1
R 1
I
1
1
1
l r
O
j
10 c CD
O O
o
p
O -n
a
+,
-i V V
r
V
V
r
V
v
1
v
V
'-1 Cl)
m x
w
www,
'a IA
w
w
w
U
Clw
c:l (D
G G
U
U
G
o.
u
u
n
n
7c
OD
CID OD m
OD OD
OD
W
co
m
OD
CD
co
OD
- '9
m
m m m l
o• m
m
m
a
m
m
m
m
m
rn
.,
ri
i
W N
O
I
O O
2
V V
I
N N N OD
A N
�N N
I
OD CO
N N l
M P :.
V V
OD m
F+
H
!
r F
I
VNNNI
W NN
:tom
D+a,
CP%A
NN
oo
NN
COI
tGU
O O
• / • •
• • •
• •
``
• •
i •
i
• •
• •
• •
j
.,
Or+r GD
O, PO
Www
W CL
la p�
V V
.0 .a
W W
i
OO
CD I= O OD
�
OD OD CD
CD co
I
OD ID
O+PI
NNI
NN
NN
i Ool
00
I
I
(
!
I
I
1
t
I n
I
Ii
ren=
xxrn
v
I
s
I
co
C-
i
a
a)
a
1
x
sx=
J Z. 31.
..
I
o
rn
a
n
a n n
z z
a
-c
a
V)
;v v v
1 y -�
I 2
m
-1
z
C
a
►w
0 0
i rn
I
Z
iiG
f'1
(7
n
•,
�zz
z
i
•
In
a
x
.,
o
m
D D
.
'
j
•
n
(
Z
3
b -0
co
r1
;
ccc
rnv)1j
a
I
_
I
m
rn
ICIa
cy�
i nn
tz
!
x
xI
o
rrr
; 2iI
19
G
"I
; l7
Cl
•r fr •..1
3 S
I a
!
an to to
aaI
n
•
z
v
Ip
I rn
I r
S x x
z Z
x
I
I
ti
v
ti
z
n
hi M M
I
I
z
1
I
Z
D
O O
J+I
•
1
I
m
I
b V N
{ v
I
b
2
m
-i
L7
go is f'1
;D ;
J ;
po
.,
v
c
o
;o
X
z
O
f*t
T
z a r
T -TIrri
~ ~O
N
NN
w
to
r
t7
IRS
cn
O
m
a w n
rn mrq
m
z
r r
I
m
m
~
I
I C<
C
K
►.
3
n
I C
n
o
f
j
1
rn m j
I
O
O
I
!
1 t 1
v
r
r
cn cn t
0
0 o N
1
i
1 1 1
w
xn cr r
•"
<11(A N
N
O V aD
1
j
1 1 1
W
-•
Ir r 4-
r
u
*+ h• N
4
II
I
�
•D �
N
t
1+
i
1
1
`R
1
1
1♦
L04
r I
r
h
x
'
N
I
O
O
r
v
r
r
I
til
a j
N
j
(
-•
.D
u
O
t]
•D �
N
j
1
1
1
L04
r I
r
j
I•
! t
1
1
I
w
•.. i
r
1
1
Ln
{
E
LD
f
O
rt
I
i
of
j
I
1
R 1
I
1
1
1
R
N
*
tJ
t
N
t
N N N
t
N
r� N N
N
11
t
N
t
N N
►'
N
t
N
t
F-'
T
)--
•
I-'
•
r r t+
•
F-'
--' r `-'
r'
'-'
t
h+
R
r r
n w
'-'
r
R
•
t
r
t
t
r
t
-• r r
w
r
r r
r
r
t
r
R
r Y
S 0,
O O
rrln D,
r
t
G
t
c
t
[z.
w
C•
t
W W w
w
r
-+ r .-
r
r
•
o
R
.D %D
n
O
R
U'
•
G
t
O'
t
Gi
w
P-0-0
•
�+- l,. Cn
m W
7C C1
H
2 K
p <
•
O
O T
o
p
U
o
O
0 0 �o
0
0 0 O
o
O
Lb
0 0
D
V
V
v V V
V
V 'V V
-1
V
\
\
\ \ \
\
\ \ \
\
\
\
\ \
m S
W
W
W
W
W
W W W
W
W W W
W
W
W
W W
="
0
0
m
m
m
m
m
m m CO
m
co m m
m
m
m
m m
m
m
m
m
m
lam m
m
n. m m
o•
m
m
m m
rn
i
z
r
I
r1+
NN
I
NN
rr
NUI
-�
{71
I
W W
M U)
- 414.m
m
-0 �D w'UI
r r
N vI0 UI
O O
-4-4
tD T N
N
!
is N
'Co m
t
W tN
UI -n
.41 ID
I ,D
(.1 F ID
'.,
V
i
O O
;O C)
I
D� 4�
0 0:
tr W W .UI
J V
r Y r
+D -D
0 0
V �V
W .D%
i0
OO
;OO
VV
OO
F 04P'.0
W (,W
UIPF UI
AD %D
OO
..
VV
,.
mUI(A
m m 'm
n
Cl) 0 C-)
L.
C)
n
t) n
c
rn
I
o
I
m
D n A
o
x x s
crt
a
c
o 0
C
i
O
r r r
3
`\`
V
2 3
H
K
2
Or
I
C
tz
!
<n
I
z
T T "n
r r r
=
o
m
o o
m
�'
I
=
I C
I
I
`�
• • •
!
D
ADA
z
0
n T
Z
.{
O
m
K-
OOD
C
ctC
Cl)
C
''-1
O
c'
2
'
m
O
2 2 2
O
-i
-
-4
O
rl rlm
x
Z
;o A
'I
n
u) tow
to 4n V)
a
s
a s
n
ICI
i
i
Z
I
O
! N V) W
n
-
z z
2
! m rn m
z
040 c
-.t
to to
m
zz:z
U)
zx
o
z
n
�
I
T
to �
m2:0
I
m;
mrnm
v,
I m
ov:c
rw
x 7v
m
4-rl
rn
,-1
•. a :v
H
., r,
v
I
ry
rI v
:a
I
m
� �
Iv
r ;
I v �+ �r
(
v ;
7v
v � -v
r
'a
( v
�
m
I 3 T 'm
(
2;
= 3 2
m
I 2
TI
I
1-+ Tl
m
W
j
Q•
..
:a
In
DCN
a
a a a
V)
i a
3 un
V)
z z z
.�
;�
ISI
I
Ii
II1
i
11
�.III�
J
.O
u
0 0.O
O
0 C 0
G
O
O
N O
D
F F .F
-0
F -R F
T
-0
:F
F-0
G
N
N N N
N
N) V N
N
N
. N
N N
C
O
O'
Ln
'N
I
O'
N N O
N;
N N N
O
N
l
•-'
i
W i
C
j
:Q
P
F f 6'
W
F -0
F
;.p
Ln
_
V
i
W
"'.W
�'
N N W
N:
N N N
-+
N
Ln
CO
I i
1
1 1 1
I
1
U
1 it
F 0 tT
N N N
I
I
r
(
P
.0
m
LW CA
.1
U
LnV
i
`.!!!
'V:P
UI tr N
r Y 1.+
�6
?
W of
L O
I
r
(
o C. Y
V
41 4 `
m
Y
CO UI
m
r
(p N Ln
m
V
F N
v
w
j")
o ton
I
i
m
I�
•t
m A
i
rt
t
-
w
t
R
-
w
t-
'
V: 0
w"
R
R
w'
R
R'
'
R
♦
o
n
n
r)
x
x
x
x
ch
V7
V)
y
0
to
W
V)
N
l
• N ■
N
s N
R N
• N
♦ N N N N
T N N
R N
• N
rt N N
r •
r
R r
R r
R r
R -•rrr
R r+
rt r
R .
R r+
1'7
♦ r r
r
• r
rt r
R r
R -. ►+ ►• r
rt r -+
R r
R r
R r -+
S
�
+ w R
W
R N
R N
• N
► N N N N
R NN
# N
# N
R N N
M
P
► 1 - rt
o
rt
R V
♦ -0
t W w w w
► W W
r)
• V .
LTi
: O
R tT
+ Q�
• 00 co D: Lti
R W W
R
'
G
•
K
p
o
O
O
O
O
O
(] 0 0 6
O 0
O
U
W
W
(A
u
W
w W W W
W W
W
_ w'
W W
a
u
U
O
O
V
G O O L)
O G
O
G�
Co L
7t
\
\
\
\
\
\ \ \
w
0)
ao
- fD
C
(D W a OD
co m
W
co
Co C
•p
m
m
m
m
m
omrnm
m Ol
m
m
mm
m
M
a
zr
y j
c
I
rp
�N
i
WmNi
N
Z
NN
NN.
r
In Ln
-1V
V WDmrl
P,) co
Oo
.0 41,
r r(+1 v1
rr
Ln Ln
��D i
00
co co
ro.rm -.l
ror
olm
O
j
'D CO N
• •
s •
• •
_ • •
• • • • lull
• a
U7 i.11
UI W
i
C O
0 0
0 0
i.D G ."'J L,In
Ur
i
r
I
O
I OO
O mLn OU1
000
W W
OO
OOO O
3
r
I
r
7C
..w
`
rr r.. N r.l
j..l 1..1 J
tr
I
D
>i
rt
m
z;
z z z z
V, V)
nn
z
mI
rxirxi
to
mm
w
zj
zz'
'
m
gI
m i
•. •
I
'"
z
r l
�
2 z
r�r�
c
a
i
v
mc
j
C
n
-1
Vi
Z
mr,rtm
f
In
z'r-r
'
V V V co
i.
M
f
W l
O
3
r'"O
z
1•-1 r•y r� rel
C
M f
C p
n
I
nI
I z
m
of
zzzz
cel
=
I
Ic-1
C G7 c G•1
N
_
rl
"U
1
I
n
N I
i
I
z
1
I
1
n
•
N�
� r.
eti
I
I
�
-y
j cKiri
j zzzz jji
;
zi
nt")nl7
I
I
M
I
f �'rTl
V)
z
f
(
N
fI
I
o
c
c
r
m
xxxx
rl
ooI
C
M -
b -
z`-:.
Coco
�
co
m
0
C
0!
Zf
Cc
l
m
N
!n
Ii1
-1 I
:..
-1 T '., • T1 -
In -n
II
ii
i
Iti i
!
R. 3
C.[
V N V 3
fp• W 1
1
x
rq
I
�
J mr1mrn
i
a
I
as
m
j
a+
V)
w I
►+
z z x z
to to I
a
v!
a s
V)
I
c ii
z
I ccicc
ct�
►,
I cif
j
►,.1
n
2
m !
N
62
•`[
x
f
to 1
x
{
i
f
i
f
dl
I
®
C3!
I r mNa
oo j
o
o!
oo
wrv7r
r 1
r
c
r
r'
rrrr
r�
r
r
rr;
o
IJ
N
W
N
W
Ww w W
w W
N
W
N N
i.
I
w
r l
.D I
tx
w
r r r- I
of 10
a
w w I
Z
NOj
O
O;
c 000 i
HO j
N
O I
j NNI
-1
1 f
1 1
I
1 I
:1
1
1 1 L.1
1
1
r f
.a ;
w �
.•+
... �
v v, rrr >
w w i
w
w I
r1
i T
z•
N
N
r
OD
W
N All to r
W W
r
N i
W N I
O
m j
m�
r
-.
-.!
N�ONr
rr
ro
r
rm
-� 1
r{
•"
-'
i!
r r rrr
I
W W
W
w i
' m r;
1-•+
N j
NI
r 1
[D
Ln;
i
m
w!
1
NCD
as
o
U'
1
i
i
A
r
m
N j
m
m
'v
1
1
I
i
r'
•
o
f
I
i
f I
(
i
i I
•
1
EA
Ll
-
h
f1
n
A
f7
n
m
[")
11
l"7
to
N
V
L)
V
U)
Vi
U:
V
V
W
�►
A
J,
4
Y Y
R
r
T
r
i
r
r
R
j
R
r
M
R
Y
Y
R
4
r
r
T
T
r
Y
R
T
N
Y
$ co
;L
/-'
R
r
T
Y Y
�`
r
R
R
t�
T
i
W
R
W
R
W
W
•
W
f' I C•
F
F F
R
x
R
R
•:'
(r:
W
R
r
R
�
F
�
R
W
•
N
R
Y
C')
f 4
�D �D
T
R
C:1
R
..+
Ni
R
Y
R
m
T
•F
T
.L
7. l7
a-
G '<
•
C
c �
0 6
G
O
O O
Cl
G
O
O
J
y V
V
W W
W
W
W W
W
W
W
W
W
W
a s
o
p
o n
o
Cl
r
o
..
S
Ip OD
co
OD
co OD
co
W
OD
OD
co
Cly
.. y
m
i
n
!
s
f
o
..a
N ri
m P;
z
,r co a, I
� f
N IV
O DD
N N
'P N-0!
4/ W
N UI
OO
W W'
ID ID
V V
�D 1D
N N
1- r
;pN Wj
.oO
0 C
(T
WW
ID%D
V V
oa
OD 00
0n
• • •
• •
• •
• • •
• •
• R
.t 1` O I
O O
O o
-
VI co D1
U1 U1
V V
y V
m co
o n
N N
N N
;G 0 C)
'O O
I
O O
P co _OD
O O
UI N
o G
Ut Ln
o o
(JI UI
N S
I
✓n N
y
i
1
,y
(
y ,�
'y
o
Z
Z
3
3
3
l
I n li ;
l7
1'1T
S
1''1
x
N
D
r-�
1-•.
D
o 0
O
v
O O
V
x
T
ti
z
O
3
"'1 -i i
i
•1
T
ti -1
N
1
z
r
n
II
�
c
!
z
rl
n n
n
r
(
-I -n
t)
x
'r
c
o
<
m
v
o
r
i
N w
K
11!
C
T
In In
z
<
'1
o
G
C
m
Ij
!
!
1
w w
ate•
D
C')
z
V)
7 -t -1
G
I
l'7
(n
•-1
1
fl
T T
m
tti
M,,�
z
I
i In
N
cn
77 9
f 1
G
:S
r
,
v;
rl
i
�^ I
""
m
_
1
I
m
U
2
N
'A
-i -4
i m
y
G
++
i
i !
tXh
0 0
O
O
0 CD
J
te1r{
r
a
ar
r
o
a
a
r
r
o
N N
W
'N
W N
W
W
W
N
N
W
.W
C
!W W !
; Ln'j
.W
Y .Y
.y
W
jN
N
O
'O
O O
N
O
O
:O
N'
Ln
to
V
.Cb
-
Y N
•r
N
N
N
N:
r
N
.0
Y ►+ !
r
r
W r
r
N
++
co
1
O
---j
r
f
cr,
CD
UI
I
-
co
•
:SS C,
3
V, b
R
R
R
r
R
F
R
F
•
'U, CJ
D t1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
i
I
1
TTl
/7
A
/l
r,
17
11
A
x
A
�
x
�
�c
>�
A
�c
�
G7
_
N
L,
0
V7
fA
N
N
V,
V
r
R
N
R
IV
F
N
rt
N
♦
tV
rt
fV
N
rt
N fV N
R
N
rt
N N N N N N
r
k
h+
F
•+
R
!'
R
r
R
r
rt
r
/'
rt
N -� N
rt
r
F
r r r N r N
Z
Co
R
rt
UI
R
N
R
U7
R
LI)
F
Ul -
Ln
4
UI n L.11
R
L,R
k
U7 N U1 Ul U. U:
m
Q.
rt
o
R
%U
rt
D
rt
V
rt
,RR
L
w
R
WwW
R
r
F
rrrrr"
n
R
Ol
rt
.0
rt
.r
F
CD
•
-
R
U,
L
rt
W W W
n 1
M
Z
1
�
K
•
o
o
-n
o
o
v
o
a
o
o
o d o
o o o G o o
Y
\
V
\
\
\
\
rn
=
W
CO
l,i
W
W
W
W
W W W
W
W (A W W L. w
A
L,
G O 0
n
n o 0 o v L�
7C
OD
m
00
m
m
m
m
moon
m
mQocowcum
v
m
m
a,
m
m
o, m a, m m m
r*1
m
NN
a
%.n
Ln Ul
t
a%T
WLQ
NN.
j
o 09
N OMN IDVW
1
J, .F
N N
F-0-
N Lq
W W
m m
IJt UI
m N N
I
m OD
9 co
NN
Nr
QUI;
Is N.
V nw.v
TQC';
NmW
:.
W
r .P
N N
o G
I
~OmG N UI �D
-
rN
OC
mm
Co
-
LQ
00;
oo:
On Oo
0n
►+ N %D .V LDV o
1
I
t
I
i
I
jI
1
C
G
C!
C
C
n
-�
tD Q7 co
N
I -
I
'D
i
I -
T
r ,
�I
M
K
r
i z m .�
'f7
..r .• .-1 f.l r-1 •r
V
(
r1
rn'
1 O
-y
O'
1 -C-C-C
!
A
1 z z z z z
4
r
N
1+
i CO
a
to
y
-f -4 -1 -f -f -1
O
a
m;
•
o�;
A;
aab
..
mmmrnrnm
G
{
N
t
p
'..
3.
1 c
._:,
r-
n nn
V,
OprJ 0 u
:u
rl
n n
n
zzzazz
rn
G)
I nnrnnnn
n
i
1
II
m
I
I
m;
n
s
j
I
fr*1
n -4 3
;u;x ;Q
W
v
of
o
I
a
.,
m
zacn
o
l a010C00
m
r
rt"
r
I
v
r
I
c
%'1
rI
•-It
m'
-ncn
-nT?Irnrnrn
3
-1
N!
M
r
-I I
I'1 j
K r 'LO
N
H In io fn V) w
O
•.
m
m
fn
m 1!
A
rl
I N
i•
.,
m
m
fn R� c
m
A
MMmMMm
p z x m U
m
VI
y
;
rn�
n,
c
i cccccc
n
Lo
C,_{
I
.,
I
i
~
1
I y
Z
i
i r-
o
o
O
u
Gil
Oi
o Ga
j
O!
V a,m N NN
D
I
j WNw'L Q•N
n
1 1 1
n
J c
r
r
r
c
.o
r r L,+
r
r a J,4.
0
j W
N
iN
N
W
w
W
W W m
W;
W W a• w W W
C
{
V
!
Y
r
r
W
V i
iii
i IO W Na
i
r
-+ !+ N /"' 1"a
Z
!
1
0
0
0'
N�
o 00
i
OI
j O o 0 o Oa
-4
1
W
r
V
11
t l
I
1
1 1 1 1 1 'i
KT
r
'D:
bl1 4T UI t LA
Z
'
I .t:
I
N
i
-1
r
N
N
r
0 CA Ln L
W
•+
r
N
r
r
r
1- r o
�,
N o +V N 10 T
Q
i
:I
I
1
I
1
1
I
I I I
1
!1 11 41 1 1
.
.8
A F .i* C r-0
M+
F
I
�►+
v
r
-:
N N:
r+ :
N Bio
1
W
m
or
d
i
N
cc
r+
m
j
V
1
I
•
O
N
D
1 R
-rt
�
F
R
4
k
rt
4
R
rt
y
rn
A
-
�.
A
pJ
N
N
N
W
N
N
N
N
N
N
R
N N
N
t
N
R
N
w
n u.
r
r
r
r
r
w
r
r
r
r
R
r r
+
►
-•
rt
r
=L1)
m
R
of m
P
R
P
R
D
m Cl
r
r
O
o
o
U
U
O
O
o
O
L-)
R
U) N
t
N
t
r
o
W
m
ti
m
0
N
w
O
rt
W W
N
R
P
R
-4
7< n
M
Z
U <
•
C
c '*1
o
d
o
0
0
0
o
r
o
0
m
0
00
0
O
c
n
r
r
V
V
V
V
V
\1
r
ti
r
V
v N
V
V
N
1
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W W
W
W
W
n
O
o
O
Cl
C] o
G
tU
c)
7;
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
07
m
m
T
m m
m
m
m
m
m
P
m
m
m
m
P
m
m
m
m
m m
P
m
am
rmi
n
3
O
N N
N N
2
00
o O
rr
4- 4R
-
ww
W W:
NN
r
L11 V1-
N U7
.I -4
o O
.L .D
N N
w r!
P A S.
"1 V.
W W
UI ut:
'o %D
P m'
r V F'
m m'
W W
W W
V V
W m�
o
N N'
O o'
0 0:
V -1
UI LJI i
W W i
O O;
t71 N
W W
W r w,
Ll1 vt .
W W
ID 11L`
• a
• • !
• •
• •
• •
• •
• •
• •
• •
• •
• s
•
U1 U1
NN
W CA;
C 0C3
00'.
OO
OO
V)U1OLA
N'
N N,
tD X11
f f
oO
i
C)
O0
mC ,
W W
F F'.
OO''.
00'
V d'
OOH'.
OO:
00,
Ln C3 Ln
O O
00
A f
R
rt
rt
rt
R
rt i
R
rt
R
rt
R
R
R
R �
r
R
IS+
ri
C_�
TSI
C
S
Z
O
m
a
3
NN'
x
c
L
a
a!
a
n
m
n
D
o
x
r
r*Im'
m
D
a
T:
3
m
z
c
x
a
➢
r
r;
v v
z
s
c
o
m
m
m
m
-1:
m
a
S
r
m
o'
r
m
V)
u)
z
<
z
a
o
=
I O
V)
Z
o
D
T T
I"I
W
o
m
n
Z-
C
C
m
D
o
m'
N
L
.1
p
-1'
r.
r
m
-/-
w,
z!
n!
n:
m
D',
nn'
C
D
Z
o
V-
D
o'
O
D
z'
n
a
m
z;
Lv
c
c
rn
o
z
n
E4
1
zcz
:
I
f
n
n
m
rl
'
mi
Q�
r
�)
701
-0
x f
;j
I'Ij
;o
m
m;
OI
n�
OI
m
m'
'O`
Vl�
-
j En
o
CO
to
w
D
c�
o
0
0l
zi
-n
cI
zl
cl
m�
H
G)
- -1
I
�I
C
.r .
�1
N
'n
'9 1
I li
0'1
'�I
'3
v
I4NI
rl
rr I
1
`
r
3 F
o
o
m 1
!
Y• I
r'1
o
= 1
•ti
'N
'p
=
a1
ml
mj
3i
1
s'
w
mi
rn�
mml
D'
mm
m
DI
NI
D'.
Cd
iii
NI
oN
►•
Z
O '.
(� `
►+ '
o,
O'
O ':
O
o
o
G�
o
u .
U V
G
o
L7
D
N
F
P f
f
f
F
O
N
N'
W
W
W
m
N
W
N
V1
W
N
N N
N
LA
W';
r.
�',
m.
UI,
W,
10�
W�
G
r.
r
2
O'
O�
N'
OI
N'
%D: .
O'
O'
0•w:
0;
O'
O
d
1
1
1
1�
I
1
1
r!
w(
r'
r'
r':
c;
al,
W
c
of
W
m'
ort
o
W
z
m:.
W.
o.
r.
r
r
O,
r
wl
NNW
w
r
O
L,
r
w
r
N
O'
r
w
m
O
W
►�'
Nr'
o
w
w
+ r
r
w.
r-
P
o
tT -
W
T
O
W
P
P l:
0-
f
Wr-I
N
M
aD
01.
N N!
N
r
r
m
C
C
N
vl
(.4
LP
-0
m
O
Ln
z f7
I w
W
N
n
w
O
O
m
j N
:
:
m
v0
m
-
•D
i
W
F
• Cl
V
i
s
M
0 a
•
rr
L) C,
R
r
R
D m
I
1
1
(1
n
n
n
x
7c
x
r
�o
o
L,�
t7•.
R
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N N
N
N
N
r
w
r
r
r
r
r
r r
r
r
r
c)
+
r
r
r
r
r
r
r r
r
r
r
=
*
m
m
m
m
m
¢
w
m m
m
D
rD
m
o,
♦
N
N
N
r
r
'-
r r
r
r
r
C7
R
N
r
o
x
V
m
UI J1
r
W
N
71
n
H
z
C
'
K
O
0
O
O
O
O
o
U
O
p U
p
IC)
U
3>
W
W
W
w
Iri
W
W
W W
W
W
W
a
o
C.
n
G
O
O
d
o Cl
Ci
G
G
X
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m m
m
m
m
v
m
m
m
m
m
a
m
m m
o•
m
rn
m
rl
a
s
ID
N r W
V
N R F NN UINNID
W W
-
C
�
z
1+
� r
-!I
V :
Ln
In m
m m :
N N
-1
m
N ID N 0 O` CO 4>, r Oro
N N
0 0
-1 V
0 0
O O
A NON
m m
NI UTI
w G co r W V I O W o P Q I
Ln I n
CF, III
O O
U I (n
Co O
O O
N N
N r r
L P -n
O O
G O
m
.1 o r m r w CP ID o .G) m
o o'
(n In
0 In
0 0
CD CD
0 0
UI In
-• O O
o o
W W
G O
- DI
-.4 Qca
C2 CD
oo.
00:
CD CD
CD
0 0
-P0
m %D %D
O Q
W W
Op
1
i
C
[A
70
-1
3
S
3
3 3
t
A
3
3
-'1
z
n
m
2
O
a
z
i '4
,CGCG CCGCCCC
G
-1
U)
O
-i
0'.
K<
m
�
M.
ZLZ2Z 2•ZZLZz
m
-I
Z'
V
r -I
rl'
r
00000000000
x
m'
G
69
Z
V
3 3
x
m
N
c
x1
-1
n n
T
TA
r
g
N 0�D+17I N NNO
0,
-f
z
to W N N �D --1 M N 0 'A N
-4
K
m
-I
G
O O D 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
O'
x
m'
0
r'
rn!
r r
N
T
!
-1 H --f -1
-n
-i
H
n '
00
r
m
aAasanaaanan
z'
w
n
r-rrrrrrrrr-r
c;
cn
�u
LO
-i'
In
rc
M
m
H:
m
m,
m l
I
N
i
x
cA
z
z;
Pf
i
x
m
f7
n
KA
w
NO a;o =xwm
D
C
Y
0
«,
.'V{
S
p'W
C
ID
C
—I
.O Mm m ID f7X:naaz )
z
'u;
-0
z
m
Do
m
c
rII
rn
[
�po m un m z TI Z m
'TI
-0
H
-n -n
H
M
T
g
'v
wf
In (n
•-I
d
v as«.n=m
--Ir I
m
r
m;
o`
mm
s
m
rn
N I
V7
L'i
F�
K
z
XA
D
N
[n
z c C 1 rnl a
Z
o
c
o
o
ti
►.
`
a m m c: r
o
o
I
m
S z! 0 rn K
I
I
I
{
-0
{
p
co
-
of
oo
d
a
o
a
_o!
i
r
r
r'
-P
LA
r
A.
r r
It,
.c
r
o
W
N
LA
W
m'
W j
r'
W W
W
N
N
C
I;
1D:f+!
toy
...�r
&D
W
H
2
{ !
O
1
o
1
r{
1
O 1
1
0
1
o `.
I
N;
1
O o
1 I
r
1
N
I
O
1
-1
!
N
W
N
W
o
r.
N
m OD
W
W
r
O
N r
r
r
I i -
N
W
N
mm
W
N
z
i
i
C
o
i
IM
•-
'0
1
j
•
O
i �
•
1
OD
S
MI
v
LR
A
•
a
rn
•
m
1
r'
l00000�-oo op Na\00000 10ol00 pop o000 o w o0 0000o O O
NF�NH'F-'�F'H' H O\NF'F-4F-' F -'N � F-'H� F_j F_j N F✓F�F-' H F N F - 'H' HF-'FJH'H H H
� -;='-p--;=-p�-;=-w � �-p--r:--p-� � H �W -p-p- -p- W W W W p - W P= - _P - _P - p -p -p -_P - W p -
WWW WWWLA) OJ \,D NW N NWLA) N O W OD WWW �,n\,nVlVl W OD WW WWWWW OJ F
N N N N N N N �,D N N N H' w N N W F-' F- \'D OJ OJ CO � -P- W N N O 1 -J � 7 -J -J ] Z O
F�I�F H' F -i N F_j O O\ 000 N OON O 00 000 I� 0\O_3 P O 00 00000 O O
W -r=" W N L F- H o O N \n .P- F- W F- w O N O F N N 0 0 0 0 Ol O w -P- O\ _P- W O\ N O w
Hr N N N F- -P- \n O O \O W Fv cD N Fv W O N O �n \-n \.n O O O O F O \n N F- N H- N co o F
N H N F-' N N H O O 7 -p' N N F- N O H' O -p- W N O O O O N O N 1 F H N N F-' O F -
w w FJ H F- o O F- 4:7- -P- F W N w O N O F✓ F F_ O o 0 0 O\ O w-- D\ � w O\ F- O w
F N N NF C) O \,DNNcc) NF\)w O NO vi vi n 0000 N O \nN N NHNc)o o N
000 OOF-'00 OD NO\OOOOO OD 00 000 0000 O W 00 00000 O O
H N F✓ N H � N F- N O\ N N F- N H' N \�n H N P H N F- N F- N N N
N H' H Ff H H H N H H Ff H H N N N F'' N H' Ff H N F' N H N H' N H H F-' H FJ H N Fl H'
Ooo 00000 0 0000000 0 00 0 -' 00 0000 F0O OO 00000 O O
H'
N N N Hr N N H' Ff H' N N N P Ff F
00000000 O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 O O O O O O O O O 00 00000 O O
1-3
= 0
.1.7�
N
= 3
= _
_ = 3
tzj
C7
0
~
c+
m
�:3, '-d
O
1.G
x
�.
y
C
O
O
F
F
"
c+
c]
((D
W
N
O
-.1 O
H N N
N (\ N
\�D
F_
H'
O\
N N
vi
N P N
O
N O
R) -P-
N 01\n vi
P)
ON
-J w
N W N N N
OD
co
�.O w N w H N F -j
N
W N N W \�n \,D
0
\D �,D
W OD O\
N w N
O
-1
N Co
W N O\ O O
\p
O1
-I OJ CD D\ -P- -P- vi OD
CC)
vi O\ W \,D W
0
J vi
D\ 'F -P-
CO P � \-n
(D
a\
N r
N N N \,D
N
OD
N�,O\�Dw\-n\-n O O
O
O N-4 N O Oen
0
N
-POW
N] N--�
O\
N
F H
w OD_p-(V N
-
F-
1- rn C o CO - o CO 1-0 �d r3 = = x > C/) E C -)y ''d = C = _ _ = C :9 m
i • (D 0, (D P) O (D t -i c+ c+ H. ¢�
F� S 'd (n It � (n z o m S 9) & � F-' O H. r• D7 F
(D r• ''d c+ 'td r• c+ r• Ft (� c+ r• CO (D n '0 0 N
'd c+ N P) N 'd P) 'd m (n m O 11 (D �3' (D H. r• K
O C] N 0N ( RD 3 " c1) O z m O (D c+ c+ w
(D (D H. c!) Cl) �:s p. ! H. (D
Z P) (n (n P) P> '-i O �-3 F H. o (n N (D (n
(D z r• w C Z r• H. O (n m
o m C) " z rh �rJ
y FFU' (DD (D 1 0O y
Fi O N O
(n ~ b FO-' O
O i
O
F O
NNNNNNNN N r\) r\) r\) r\) NN N N NN NNN NNNN N N NN FV FU FV NN N N
F'NH'H'H'H'F- Hj F✓HF-'f-NH H F' H F NF F F H Hj FJ H N F -'N H'NNF�H' Hj H
NNNNNNNN N NNNNNNN N NN NNN NNNN N N NN NtVNNN N N
-� __7 1 _Q l __� -11 7 7 ] -_ 7 ] ] 7 \-n Vi vi `n vi vt � -p- -�=-p- � � � � .P•• � � � .P- � .P-
NNNNN NN N H 0000000 W IV H- 000 \�D\D�,D"D oo � o,\ c,\ vivt\-n\n\-n W N
_ _
= 0
.1.7�
>
= 3
= _
_ = 3
tzj
C7
0
~
c+
m
�:3, '-d
O
1.G
x
�.
y
C
O
m
"
c+
c]
((D
W
P)
N
R
�
I
Ft
F'
H
(D
P)
C
O
O
N
N
(n
B
(D
(D
P)
(D
O
(df)
(n
�i
(D
'd
n
(D
d
(D
d
N
O
O
H
F,
H
OD
a\
vNi J
O
O
�n
`n
\0
v
N
O
co
OD
vi
O
"D \0
cc)
N
LO
-
1
O\
d\
N
O �
0
co
O
-�
F✓
_ _
= 0
.1.7�
>
= 3
= _
_ = 3
tzj
C7
0
:E:
Z
N•
C
"
((D
W
P)
(dD
R
Ft
F'
H
P)
trJ
N
N
(D
P)
(D
O
(df)
(n
n
d
d
O
H
OD
\0
N
O
co
OD
vi
O
J
O
N
1
O\
d\
N
co
1CD
C
r•
C*
n
cr
C]
x
Z
O
n
T
MWE
nr'
H
oz) !o!w
0c)
cc)
cc)
w
cocc)
co
00
O'
d
O O
\,D
�,O
\,D'
\,D
',O
',O
\,D
\O
�,D
O
H H
W
N
N
W
N
N
N
N
N
H
O O
N
co
N
H
J
W
H
O
O
>
O O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
C1
O O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
cT
O O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
Opo OHo
N N 01\ � HO
I C
Co 01)
OD
cc)
Co
co
co
co
CO
co
co
Co
� �
H
H
H
~
H
H
H
H
H
\
I I I 1 I I I
d
H d H H t7 �-3 0
r•3
O O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
P) ',D \,D O 11 (D
O
H H
H
H
H
H
H
H
H
!-
H
H
>
< °< CO 01)£ P) Z
�-3
O p
0
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
n
cD 11 o\\ ::So(D
a
cn O a c+ cn �-i
r
c+ H H O H• PL)
iA
E H s �-3 £ ci H
(D 10 P z
::s y 11 x Id
m N� a
N N
t-3 P
11 cf s n 0
oo �-
OO
w
IIn � ((D (<D
HO \-n
�
H
N
0
W
>
C+. c+ H
B
D7 z O
( � O
H
W
7
H
W
H
1,D
H
N
- 1
O
(D `d
�1 N I O
O,\
O\
\.O
\-n
\,O
O
O
-F•
H
F-
"
" s
H \-n O
O\
N
-4
O
\-n
o
-F"
W
W
O
z Z
`n O O
N
N
-1
O
O
O
\,O
OD
N
O
a. c+
O �n o
O
-p
O\
O
o
O
H
-p'
H
O
r•
tT4
C�
C
n
�
NIN
F-3 f-3
Z
W
y
co
It �'i
(D
(D
(D
(D
(D
(D
(D
(D
(D
'l
(D
O N H
P) P)
s
s
s
a
R
s
s
8
P)
s
H \D ON OD O\
Z
r•
r•
r•
r•
r•
r•
r•
H.
H.
Iz
p
-3 ILA) OD H 01\ O\
0 m
C
3
'�J
�d
ty
t7
''d
W
�
O
m
F- !\-n \n N �1 W N -P"
"t Fl
(D
H
(D
(D
W
H
H
Ft
y
y
\-n O \,D �1 C\ vi N
�t
�
>
�
((D
((DD
>
.
ovi D\N N Ovt O
O
11
P)
N
�
'•i
H
C"]
C7
(D
O
O
cn
(D
P)
'0
Id
z
<
ci-
N N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
H H
H
H
H
H
H
H
H
H
H
H
0
N N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
x
OD Oo
07
00
co
�
-.1
-j
_4
_I
_4
-Pw
N
H
O
\D
CD
-4
O\
\-n
W
z
O
H H
C
=
t7
H
b
F I
d
CZ
H
H
m w
::s
m
L=J
C7
M
O
m
m
c+ c+
O
c+
U)
a
c+
a
c+
(CD
cH+
w
0
9)
P) a)
o°a
0
9)
0
N r
F
Fl
H
co
m
w
1 I
z
I
(D
I
I
c+
to
<
cls in
P)
CD
(D
U1
CO
0
(D
o
0
0
0
C
N N
{
OD �
\-nO
-p"
H
N
O\
w
W
r
O\ -- O
H
W
-1
H
W
H
\.D
H
N
N O
O\
ON
�,o
\�n
\,o
O
O
-P-
0
O
a\
N
O
v i
O
�
W
W
O
s
\n O O
N
N
-1
O
O
O
\,D
OD
N
O
O- O
0
-r=-
O\
O
O
O
-
-t=-
H
O
H
MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator
FROM: Judith S. Cox, City Clerk--
RE:
lerk -RE: Reduction of Letter of Credit - Eagle Creek Junction
DATE: August 4, 1986
Introduction
Mr. Laurent has substantially completed the public improvements
for Eagle Creek Junction 1st Addition prior to recording the
plat. He would like to provide a letter of credit or cash
deposit for the public improvements in an amount equal to the
work remaining versus the initial cost.
Background
The developers agreement does provide for the reduction of the
letter of credit by the City upon partial completion of the
improvements. Although much of the work has been completed
before a letter of credit has been placed on file, I see no
reason why the initial letter of credit can't be reduced to
reflect the remaining work provided the maintenance bond is
placed on file with the City.
The City Engineer's estimate of the work remaining is $9,175.00
times 125% equals $11,500.00.
Alternatives
1. Require initial letter of credit in amount of total cost of
public improvements.
2. Approve a letter of credit in amount of cost of remaining
improvements.
Recommendation
Alternative No. 2.
Action Recommended
Approve the letter of credit or cash deposit in the amount of $11,500
for the remaining improvements for Eagle Creek Junction 1st
Addition, upon submission of a one year maintenance bond with
the City guaranteeing the work completed, as well as submission
of copies of the agreements with utility companies for gas and
electricity.
JSC/jms
INCA DEVELOPT1Fy`�7 the Laurent Building
118 South Fuller Street
Shakopee, NIN 55379
445-6745
Ken Ashfield
City Engineer
Citv of Shakopee
129 East 1st Avenue
Shakopee, Minnesota 55379
Dear Mr, Ashfield,
Total construction costs for the development of Eagle Creek Junction
lst Addition including watermain, sanitary sewer, storm sewer, streets,
curb and gutter and screening are $105,696.00. As of this date, this
construction is substantially complete with only the wear course at
a cost of $6,040.00 and the screening at a cost of $1,000,00 remaining
to be done, We request, as per the Development Agreement, that the
letter- of credit required by the city be adjusted to reflect the current
status of comnletion for the project. It is understood that the city
will require maintenance bonds in its favor to cover the completed work.
INCA DEVELOPMENT
Gary L. L re'
Partner
MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator
FROM: Judith S. Cox,
City Clerk
1
RE: Hauer's 3rd Addition - Letter of Credit
DATE: August 4, 1986
Introduction & Background
The letter of credit for improvements for Hauer's 3rd Addition
will be expiring on August 12, 1986. The improvements are
complete with the exception of some minor punch list items.
The City Engineer recommends reducing the letter of credit to
$4,000. The developer would like to deposit $4,000 cash rather
than obtain a letter of credit, which is provided for in the
developers agreement. The remaining work is expected to be
complete in a couple of weeks. Staff would like authority to
return the $4,000 cash deposit (check) when the remaining work
is complete.
As you will recall from a previous action reducing the original
letter of credit, the City has on file a performance/maintenance
bond from the contractor to the developer and an assignment of
that bond from the developer to the City.
Alternatives
1. Require letter of credit to be renewed for $96,250.00.
2. Authorize letter of credit to be reduced to $4,000.00.
Recommendation
Alternative No. 2.
Action Recommended
Authorize the reduction of the letter of credit for the Hauer's
3rd Addition improvements to a $4,000 cash deposit; and authorize
returning the $4,000 cash deposit to the developer upon completion
of the improvements.
MEMO TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: John K. Anderson, City Administrator
Judith S. Cox, City Clerk
RE: Clerical Staffing
DATE: July 28, 1986
Introduction
Jeanette Shaner, Administration Secretary, will be going on
maternity leave beginning September 8th until December 1st,
approximately. It is necessary to begin planning for covering
her responsibilities during her absence.
Background
Originally, it was planned that by the time Jeanette took her
leave, the offices would be remodeled, staff would be moved
around and a new receptionist would be hired. Under this plan,
Jeanette and Toni, Community Development Secretary, would be
relocated and Cora, Building Secretary, would remain out front
along with the new receptionist. A temporary secretary would be
hired to fill in for Jeanette from a workers overload agency.
Offices are being remodeled and departments will be relocated
within a couple of weeks. The hiring of a receptionist (as well
as planner) have been delayed until more information on
comparable worth becomes available, 30-60 days -- or more!
In 1986 money is budgeted for additional staff in the amount of
$68,000. This was set aside for implementation after the
staffing study was complete. Out of the $68,000, money has or
will be encumbered through 1986 as follows:
Police Officer $15,000
Building Inspector 17,000
Planner @ 4 mos. (if hired) 8,000
Receptionist @ 4 mos. (if hired) 5,000
$45,000
Balance $23,000
The additional cost to the City for a temporary secretary from
August 11th through December lst is $1,200 approximately. The
cost for additional help on the five agenda days during
Jeanette's leave would be approximately $300.
Alternatives
A) Don't move secretaries until a receptionist is hired.
B) Move secretaries (Toni and Jeanette).
C) Move Toni only.
Pros
Cons
% 0 TY\"
1. Moving secretaries would make 1. Moving secretaries prior
them closer to their departments to hiring a receptionist
and more productive, not having would create an impos-
to answer phones and walk in sible work load for
traffic. remaining secretaries.
D) Hire temporary secretary to fill in during Jeanette's
absence, only.
1. Would allow Council to wait 1.
until knowing the impact of
comparable worth before
committing to additional staff.
Secretary will be new
and unfamiliar with
responsibilities and
routine and will
probably not be as
productive as current
staff.
2. Without a receptionist
the temporary secretary
will have to be out
front.
E) Hire a receptionist and temporary secretary.
Pros
1. Will distribute work load.
2. Will permit secretaries to
relocate.
3. Better working conditions
because of less activities
out front and two secretaries
will be nearer to their
departments.
Cons
1. Council would be hiring
additional staff, prior
to knowing impact of
comparable worth study.
F) Hire receptionist already selected, but to act as temporary
secretary, with the understanding that if the receptionist
position is not authorized by the time Jeanette returns, her
job would end.
Pros
1. we would not lose the
successful candidate by
delaying the hiring.
Cons
1. Qualifications and
experience of success-
ful candidate do not
lend themselves to the
secretarial position.
2. The candidate would have
to be paid according to
the secretarial pay
range since she will be
required to perform
these responsibilities.
Then her salary would be
reduced to the recep-
tionist pay range when
Jeanette returns.
3. Candidate may not be
willing to accept this
offer, knowing that the
job may terminate.
4. Candidate will not be
as productive as
current staff, which
will put more load
on other two
secretaries.
G) Hire temporary secretary through workers overload and
authorize additional help for agenda Fridays.
Pros
Cons
1. Would allow Council to wait 1. Secretaries would not
until knowing the impact of relocate.
comparable worth before
committing to additional staff.
2. Would distribute the work load 2. Work load would not
making it more manageable. be distributed as
effectively as it would
under alternative E.
H) Hire a receptionist and temporary secretary, as in
alternative E, but with the understanding that the position
may not be budgeted in 1987.
Pros
1. Will distribute work load.
2. Will permit secretaries to
relocate.
3. Better working conditions
because of less activities
out front and two secretaries
will be nearer to their
departments.
Cons
1. If the position is
terminated in 1987,
the secretaries
relocated, will have
to return to the front
office.
Recommended Action H /6
Alternatives in order of preference: E or �.
E - Hire receptionist permanently and temporary secretary.
H - Hire receptionist temporarily and temporary secretary.
Action Requested
1. Select alternative E (or G) authorizing the hiring of a
receptionist permanently (temporarily) beginning August 11,
1986 and a temporary secretary to replace Jeanette Shaner
while on maternity leave from August 18, 1986 through
December 1, 1986.
2. Direct that the appropriate budget amendment come back for
consent approval.
3. Approve the employment of Pennie Schlechter as
receptionist/typist effective August 11, 1986 at a salary of
$924 per month, Step one in the Clerical Pay Plan for 1986.
JSC/jms
Cf '�nr�, 5CAI&CA7tel-
is !'�fa �c sc qra��/ a 5 ��'✓� fG cIQR
MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator
FROM: Judith S. Cox, City Clerk
RE: Sunday Liquor Licenses, --P/
DATE: July 25, 1986 \J
Introduction
At previous Council meetings, Council has asked staff to research
the state law regarding: (1) requirements for holding a Sunday
liquor license, and (2) whether or not sales are permitted prior
to 12:00 o'clock noon on Sunday. In follow up to these requests,
the City Attorney has drafted the attached memo.
REQUIREMENTS
Background
Following the City's receipt of an application from Clair's Bar
Inc. for a Sunday liquor, license, Council requested the City
Attorney research the current state law regulating Sunday liquor
licenses. The attached memo indicates that the requirements for
obtaining a Sunday license have been amended. In order for
Shakopee City Code to be consistent with state law, the Code
would have have to be amended by deleting from the definition of
a restaurant: "... and where, in consideration of payment
therefor, meals are regularly served at tables to the general
public, which employs an adequate staff to provide the usual and
suitable service to its guests..."
The City currently issues
licenses:
Pullman Club
Clair Is Bar
Granny's Restaurant
Shakopee House
Rock Spring Supper Club
Arnie's Friendly Folks Club
Richard's
Minnesota Concessions
nine On Sale and three Club liquor
Knights of Columbus
V.F.W.
American Legion
(tabled)
Scottland Hotels Inc. (pending)
All of these establishments currently hold a Sunday license
except the K of C and Clair's Bar Inc.
Alternatives
1. Status quo. Leave city code as written and interpret meals
and adequate staff loosely.
l°-tv
2. Amend the city code to delete reference to meals and
adequate staff.
3. Tighten up on conditions to obtain a Sunday liquor license
in Shakopee, if it is desirable to limit Sunday licenses to
restaurants serving meals with adequate staff ie: Shakopee
House, Granny's and Rock Spring. If this is desirable, the
amending ordinance would not affect any current licenses
until they are renewed in July of 1987.
SALES PRIOR TO 12:00 O'CLOCK NOON
Background
The City may, by ordinance, permit sales on Sunday at 10:00 a.m.
instead of 12:00 p.m. if the licensee is in conformance with the
Minnesota Clean Air Act. Prior to adopting the ordinance, a
public hearing must be held.
Sometime ago the Shakopee House called and asked if they could
sell liquor on Sunday before noon. At that time the City
Attorney checked the state law and advised staff that sales could
begin at 10:00 a.m. if in conjunction with the sale of food and
if the establishment was in compliance with the Clean Air Act.
That information was relayed to the Shakopee House management.
Both the Shakopee House and Granny's Restaurant are open before
noon on Sunday and do sell liquor.
As a result of consulting the state law recently, the City
Attorney discovered that Shakopee should adopt an ordinance
permitting sales on Sunday before noon after holding a public
hearing, if that is Council's desire.
Recommendation
Alternatives 2, 5, and 7.
Alternatives
4.
Don't
permit Sunday liquor
sales prior
to noon.
5.
Hold a
public hearing on
whether or
not to permit Sunday
liquor
sales prior to noon,
then decide
whether or not to
adopt
an ordinance.
6.
Allow
Shakopee House and
Granny's to
sell before noon until
the public
hearing and an
ordinance is
adopted.
7.
Advise
Shakopee House and
Granny's not
to sell before noon
until
and if an ordinance
is adopted.
Recommendation
Alternatives 2, 5, and 7.
Recommended Action
1. Direct staff to prepare the proper ordinance redefining the
term "restaurant" to mean any establishment other than a
hotel under the control of a single proprietor or manager,
having appropriate facilities for the serving of meals and
which shall have seating facilities for seating not less
than 30 guests at one time.
2. Set a public hearing for September 2, 1986, at 8:00 p.m. to
consider whether or not to permit the sale of intoxicating
liquor for consumption on the premises in conjunction with
the sale of food between the hours of 10:00 a.m. and 12:00
midnight on Sundays, provided that the licensee is in
conformance with the Minnesota Clean Air Act.
3. Direct staff to write a letter to all on sale liquor
licensees advising them of the public hearing set for
September 2, 1986, and directing them to refrain from Sunday
sales prior to 12:00 noon, if they are so doing.
JSC/jms
cJULIUS A. COLLEE, H
JULIUS A.COLLER ATTORNEY AT LAW 612-445-1244
1859-1940 2 1 1 WEST FIRST AVENUE
SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA
553Z9
MEMO TO: John K. Anderson a City Administrator
Judith S. Cox, City Clerk
Mayor Eldon Reinke
Members of the City Council
From; Julius A. Coller, II, City Attorney
In re: Sunday Liquor Sale - Council Action
Date: July 17, 1986
Shakopee City Code Section 5.34 provides On -Sale Sunday Liquor license may be issued
to hotels, motels, restaurants or clubs as defined in the Shakopee City Code and which
have facilities for seating for not less than 30 guests at one time.
Shakopee City Code Section 5.01 Subd 15 defines restaurant. See attached for copy
of the subdivision.
The State Law was amended at the last session. See the excerpt for the current
statute. This amendment removes many of the former restraints and limitations
that were incorporated in law and which were carried over in Section 5.01 Subd. 15.
If the Council wishes to bring the City Code into conformance with the State Law all
that is necessary is to repeal Section 5.01 Subd 15 and enact a new Section 5.01
Subd 15 as follows:
Subd 15 - The term "Restaurant" means any establishment other than a
hotel under the control of a single proprietor or manager, having approp-
riate facilities for the serving of meals and which shall have seating
facilities for seating not less than 30 guests at one time."
Whether the Council wishes to make this change,and if the Council does, the next
thing is to decide w+en. Both of these are of course Council decisions.
k'' '''+ t '
she age of 19
(2) between 12.00 midnight and 8:00 a.m, on Mondays]
r
he beverages.
(3) after l 00 a m: on Sundays; except as provided by
„
subdtvtsion 3,
)hcrbevarages
t:..
11',"'(4) between 8:00 p.m. on December 24 and 8:00 a.m. on
. .., J.. :`� l is t. %.1 s ..' •.f (J
December.25; except.as,provided
"
,. 71i
on;c4rd,••oi7 in
u' by subdivision 3
Subd.- 3. Intoxicatin li uor• , Runivlg
.
with a seating ca acrt for at least ersons and which o s an on-sa e..mtoxicatm
uor Iicense mnwxicating
,.;
.,
Wmid
6 �
(b) The governing body of a.muni"inali y may aft r.ori
o b1icr-Hearirie by"or man
'under
erm)t a restaurant hotel or club to sell mtoxtcatm
h uor for consum tion on."the
M
3ecisions
z t1
remises in con unction wit te.sa e ot loodbetween the
4-
hours o • a.m. an
V) 5aNrfJ I1L mg on un ays, provided t at the licensee.is in -conformance with t e mnesota
o enoctzlrjiJlean AirAct'
ring the; aB5,9f
upersedes liquor (c) An establishment' serving intoxicating liquor on Sundays must;pbtatri a Sunda
such:prov]s,ons1license, 'The license must be issued by the governmg,,body of•themunicipalitynafo;i„a
ee :M and�21: +f period of one year, and the fee for the license may not exceed $200 :3_;,” --di 5�q, t bduz
endani had`f- �a' -(d) A municipality may issue a Sunday intoxicating liquor license only if author)zed;to
ed'drinkinglthe ;'.w do so by the voters of the municipality voting on the question at a general oi.special
`§i-340.731'�(re- election. ol-
( bit ing"a person
my,; intoxicating (e) An election conducted. in a town on the question of the issuance by' thecounty of
accomplices:.to Sunday sales licenses to establishments located in the town must be held on the day of the
sor.,to a;;minor annual election of town officers.
convict defend -
App 198435,l (f) Voter approval is not required for licenses issued by the metropolitan airports
3 1 commission or common carrier licenses issued by the commissioner. Common carriers
serving intoxicating liquor on Sunday must obtain a Sunday license from the commission -
'i only contact er at an annual fee of $50, plus $5 for each duplicate.
y year-old .j
oderer Minnesota Subd. 4. Intoxicating liquor; off -sale. No sale of intoxicating liquor. may be madef.by
sconsin's drink- an off -sale licensee:
where'"she'was 3 "
(1) on Sundays;
er having been Q t
to courts lacked L�1'11
(2) before 8:00 a.m..on Monday through Saturday;
4
: 47
S Subd. 15. The term "restaurant" means any establishment,
,other than a hotel, under the control of a single proprietor or
•�(� manager, having appropriate facilities for the serving of meals,
and where, in consideration of payment therefor, meals are
p% regularly served at tables to the general public, which employs.an
p�• adequate staff to provide the usual and 'suitable service to its
guests, and which shall have seating facilities for seating not
less than thirty guests at one time.
Source: Ordinance No. 6, 4th Series
Effective Date: 5-25-78
Subd. 16. The terms "hotel" and "motel" mean and include
any establishment having a resident proprietor or manager, where,
in consideration of'payment therefor, food and lodging are
regularly furnished to transients, and which contains not less than
twenty-five guest rooms with bedding and other suitable and
u necessary furnishings in each room, and which is provided with.a
-114- (9-1-85)
MEMO TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: John K. Anderson, City Administrator
RE: Petition for Refuse Collection in the Monteci,to Heights
Rural Residential Area
DATE: August 1, 1986
Introduction
The Shakopee City Council at its July 1, 1986 meeting, received a
petition from Mr. and Mrs. Gordan Grannes and approximately 10 of
their neighbors in the Montecito Heights area for City refuse
collection. Council directed City staff to examine the potential
of expanding City refuse collection outside of the urban
residential areas of the City.
Petition Received
The petition received has signatures representing ten households
in an area with approximately 33 households. The petition
represents the first such request from a rural residential area
for City collection and disposal of refuse. The City currently
contracts with Waste Management, formally G & H Sanitation
Services of Savage, Minnesota, for urban residential refuse
collection in Shakopee under the City Code.
Applicable City Ordinance
City Code Section 3.15 entitled "Rules and Regulations Relating
To Refuse Collection" is attached. Subdivision 2 clearly
establishes that the City shall provide refuse collection, but
only in areas designated by the City Council. Subdivision a
entitled "Disposal Required" clearly establishes that any
resident or business has the option of using a collection service
other than that provided under the City's contract.
Section 3.15 has served the City of Shakopee well and there are
virtually no residents in the urban area that have opted for
providing their own refuse collection. At its July 1st meeting,
when City Council received the petition, there was discussion
regarding the possibility of "requiring" refuse collection under
the City's contract in all urban and rural residential areas
within the corporate limits. Such a requirement would require
that the City Council amend Section 3.15 so that residential
collection could be mandated.
Contract Hauler
Waste Management officials have toured the subdivision
petitioning for refuse collection and viewed the location of the
33 homes in question. Waste Management can begin collection in
the subdivision without adding the collection in other rural
residential areas. They cautioned, however, that if the City
intends to add other rural residential subdivisions the City
should have an overall plan so that Waste Management can
strategically plan their collection routes. Without such
planning Waste Management warned that subdivisions may be added
randomly only to have their day of collection revised one or more
times as subdivisions come on line. This causes a significant
amount of confusion and frustration on the part of residents
according to Waste Management.
Because of the location of the Montecito Heights area, refuse
route planning could include other subdivisions along County Road
16 including Kilarney Hills with approximately 11 homes, and
Hauers 1st, 2nd and 4th Additions with 25+ homes. The City has
done a preliminary count using an intern and we believe that
there is a minimum of 136 additional residents that could be
picked up in the rural residential area. Our hauler has
indicated that all such pickup would be curb side pickups, and
that anyone desiring something other than curb side pickup would
have to contact the hauler on an individual basis to receive a
quote. For the Montecito Heights subdivision Waste Management
has quoted the prices they currently charge under the present
contract with the City with no more than a 10% add on. Current
charges are $5.17 for a regular customer and $3.94 for a senior
citizen (both figures include a $.12 administrative charge from
the City). Waste Management would not make customer contacts
regarding the new service, the City would have to make the
contacts and we would need a significant majority of the homes to
switch to the City contract to insure residents the lower rates.
Implementation
The implementation of the petitioner's request can take one of
four forms. (1) The City can contact all 33 property owners in
the Montecito Heights subdivision and adjacent subdivisions,
generate a specific collection list and provide that to Waste
Management who would in turn then set the date for initial
collection. (2) The City can systematically survey other
subdivisions along County Road 16 and add that count to the total
number provided Waste Management. (3) The City can
systematically poll all rural residential areas at the present
time to determine whether they wish to be included on City refuse
collection routes. (4) The City can implement 1-3 above by using
a phased approach. Because the City needs to contact residents
this project will take a significant amount of time if the City
opts for including all rural residential property owners.
Billing Procedures
Most Shakopee residents receive their refuse bill on their
monthly utility bill from Shakopee Public Utilities. Whenever a
rural residential homeowner receives electrical power from SPUC
the standard billing procedures would apply. However, the
electrical power service area of SPUC does not cover all of
Shakopee. The subdivision from which the City has received the
petition is an example of an area not included in SPUC's
electrical service area. This will require that SPUC bill these
residents individually without the benefit of including water and
electric bills. This is significant because it lessens SPDC's
ability in collecting delinquent bills. Council will recall that
it is currently considering an ordinance that will allow it to
place delinquent utility bills on the tax rolls. This ordinance
is crucial for collection of delinquent refuse bills, storm sewer
bills and sanitary sewer bills currently billed by City Hall
because they are not included in SPUC water and electric utility
billing.
The policy question for Shakopee Public Utilities and the City
Council is one of billing uniformity. Should SPUC add to their
normal utility bill which includes electric, water, sewer and
garbage a smattering of bills that may only include storm water
or sewer or garbage or some combination of these three. All
utility bills falling in this category may create additional
billing work for SPUC with regard to disconnections and address
changes which are normally caught by residents or realtors when
homes are sold when they include electric, water and sewer.
SPUC is also concerned about delinquencies for this group, and
implementation of a procedure to resolve this issue. We suggest
utility bills that do not include electric or water that become
delinquent be turned over to the Finance Department at a
specified time (such as 60 or 90 days delinquent). Then the City
can be solely responsible for delinquencies and can use the
ordinance under Council consideration to place the delinquencies
on the tax rolls.
Alternatives
Collection Alternatives:
1. Continue with the present City Code Section 3.15 language
making City contract collection optional. This ordinance
has served the City well and because of the rates received
nearly all City urban residents are using the City contract
(excludes commercial and multi -family).
2. Council can amend Section 3.15 to mandate City contract
refuse collection throughout the community. This procedure
would allow the City to systematically approach all rural
areas to include them in its contract collection. Because
the rural area includes farmsteads with extraordinary long
driveways and other unusual residential situations any
property owner wishing other than curb side pickup would
have to make individual arrangements with the City's
contract hauler. The advantage of City-wide collection by
the City's contract hauler is the reduced number of trips by
heavy vehicles on all rural Shakopee residential streets. A
mandate of this nature may bring a number of rural residents
and rural haulers to Council protesting the proposed
monopoly. Should this alternative be seriously considered
Council should schedule a public hearing.
Scope of Rural Residential Collections:
1. If Council elects alternative No. 2 above then the City will
have to allocate the staff time to prepare a master notice
list, prepare information for a public meeting and assist
Waste Management with the conversion to their contract route
collections.
2. If Council elects to include one, two or three residential
areas along County Road 16 staff can prepare a mailing list
that will include from 33 to 60+ residents, contact them
regarding the petition, and the avilability of the City's
contract hauler, obtain a commitment for City collection and
then turn the list over to Waste Management. This
alternative could also include a public meeting if deemed
appropriate.
Billing Procedures:
1. City Council can direct City staff to bill for refuse
service when property owners are not in SPUC's electrical
service area. This would add to the 18 quarterly sewer
bills currently handled by the Finance Department and can be
done successfully whether the City is handling one rural
subdivision of approximately 33 homes or the total rural
residential area.
2. The City can work with SPUC to add rural residential
households outside of SPUC's service area to their utility
billing system. The City could then turn over the 18
quarterly sewer bills it now handles to SPUC. The purpose
of this alternative would be to consolidate all utility bill
functions at SPUC. This alternative would require an
agreement between the City and SPUC for the City to pickup
60 or 90 day delinquent bills that do not include SPUC
electrical or water utility charges. This procedure can be
handled by the City Finance Department. It is more
efficient for one agency to do all the utility billing.
Since it is the goal of City Council to incorporate our new
storm sewer utility billing in a master bill mailed by SPUC
once they convert to a new computer, it makes sense to have
SPUC do all the refuse and sewer billing.
Recommendation
For the reasons discussed above, staff recommends alternative No.
1 with regard to collection alternative under the City ordinance,
alternative No. 2 with regard to the scope of collections and
alternative No. 2 with regard to the billing procedure.
Action Reauested
Direct the appropriate City and SPUC staff to contact homeowners
in the Montecito Heights subdivision, make a master list of all
homeowners wishing to convert to the City's contract refuse
hauler, provide that list to Waste Management and establish a
billing procedure through SPUC to handle the billing on whatever
basis SPUC deems efficient.
MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator
FROM: Jeanette Shaner, Adm. Secretary
RE: Returning Surety Bond
DATE: July 29, 1986
Introduction
Last week Judy Cox received a call from Brooks Superette No. 42
asking if we would return the surety bond they submitted when
applying for a 3.2 beer license in March of 1986. Judy suggested
we get the City Attorney's opinion before returning it.
Background
In March of 1986 we received Surety Bond # 3SE641407-00 from
Brooks Superette No. 42 for the period March 4, 1986 to March 4,
1987 (copy attached).
The beer license they received was for the period April 1, 1986
to June 30, 1986, so the bond they submitted was for 8 months
more than the licensing period.
In June of 1986 when applying for a beer license for the
following licensing year Brooks was told they could either have
Bond # 3SE641407-00 extended to June 30, 1987 or they could
submit a new bond for the licensing period. They did chose to
submit another bond (# 3SE637065) for the license period of July
1, 1986 to June 30, 1987. This creates an overlap in coverage of
8 months. (Old bond March 1986 to March 1987, new bond July 1986
to June 1987.) We don't need duplications to protect the City.
The City Attorney said that Bond # 3SE641407-00 can be returned
to Brooks Superette after Council approval.
Alternatives
1. Return bond # 3SE641407-00 to Brooks Superette, Inc.
2. Do not return bond.
Action Requested
Authorize appropriate City officials to return bond # 3SE641407-
00 to Brooks Superette No. 42.
MEMO TO: Mayor and City Council
��
FROM: John K. Anderson, City Administrator lr r
RE: Traffic Signal Maintenance Agreement between
the City and SPUC
DATE: July 31, 1986
Introduction
SPUC and City Council agreed that it would be worthwhile for the
two bodies to have a formal agreement regarding the maintenance
of traffic signals. The attached agreement has been drafted to
reflect the discussion by SPUC and Council at their recent joint
meeting.
Background
The structure of the draft agreement attached and most of the
language was adopted from the agreement the City of Shakopee
enters into with the Minnesota Department of Transportation
(Mn/DOT) whenever new traffic signals are installed in Shakopee.
The City has surveyed both city and county governments to
determine whether or not anyone has a formal policy regarding
traffic light maintenance. A copy of that survey was forwarded
to Lou VanHout. We found that no one had a formal policy and no
one had a specified response time. In part, this could be
attributed to the fact that most cities have not "subcontracted"
this agreement with a second agency.
Alternatives
1. Approve the draft policy as presented. The policy clarifies
the responsibilities of both the City of Shakopee and SPUC.
This should result in less confusion about traffic light
maintenance at a time when the number of traffic lights is
increasing in Shakopee.
2. Modify the draft agreement after Council discussion.
3. Reject the idea of any formal agreement between the City of
Shakopee and SPUC for traffic light maintenance. This
alternative would be similar to the position most cities
have taken, however, most cities have not "subcontracted"
the maintenance responsibilities to a second agency.
Recommendation
Staff recommends alternative No. 1 for the reasons listed above.
Action Reauested
Pass a motion authorizing the appropriate City officials to enter
into an agreement with Shakopee Public Utilities for the
maintenance of traffic signals in the City of Shakopee.
TRAFFIC SIGNAL MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT
BETWEEN
THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA
two
THE SHAKOPEE PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION
THIS AGREEMENT made and entered into by and between the City
of Shakopee, Minnesota, hereinafter referred as the "City", and
the Shakopee Public Utilities Commission, hereinafter referred to
as "SPUC".
WITNESSETH:
WHEREAS, It is considered mutually desirable for the City of
Shakopee, the State of Minnesota, Department of Transportation,
and Scott County to enter into individual agreements for the
maintenance of all traffic signals located in the corporate
limits of Shakopee; and
WHEREAS, The City in each such agreement takes on the
responsibility to maintain the street light luminaire, lamp and
ballast and shall relamp, clean and paint the signals at its cost
and expense; and
WHEREAS, The City and SPUC consider it mutually desirable to
divide up the contractual responsibilities of the City outlined
in said standard agreement with the State of Minnesota,
Department of Transportation and Scott County both the City and
SPUC will participate in the cost, of the maintenance of the
street light luminaire, lamp and ballast and the cost of
relamping, cleaning and painting the signals as hereinafter set
forth; and
NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS AGREED AS FOLLOWS:
1. The City shall provide SPUC with a copy of each agreement it
executes with the State of Minnesota, Department of
Transportation or Scott County, for traffic signal
maintenance. Said agreement will serve as formal notice to
SPUC that a new traffic signal has been added to the list of
signals they are maintaining. The City shall be responsible
for notifying SPUC when there is any change in any agreement
the City has entered into with the State of Minnesota,
Department of Transportation or Scott County.
2. The City shall be responsible for cleaning and painting the
signals at its cost and expense.
3. SPUC shall maintain the street light luminaire, lamp
and ballast and shall perform all relamping at its cost
and expense. Said maintenance shall be performed
within a reasonable time of notification from any
source that a traffic signal or pedestrian signal is
not functioninq. If, upon investigat?on of a non-
functioning light, SPUC learns that the problem is
something other than maintenance of the street light
luminaire, lamp and ballast SPDC shall promptly notify
the State of Minnesota, Department of Transportation or
Scott County, depending on location, which, under its
agreement with the City, assumes all other
responsibilities for maintenance of the traffic lights.
SPUC, when relamping a burnt out light, will relamp all
lights in that particular fixture in that quadrant of
the intersection.
CITY OF SHAKOPEE
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
City Attorney by Mayor
by City Administrator
by City Clerk
SHAKOPEE PUBLIC UTILITIES
by Chairman
by Manager
16 F-'
MEMO TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: John K. Anderson, City Administrator
RE: Shakopee Jaycees Fundraiser for the Muscular Dystrophy
Association
DATE: July 31, 1986
Introduction
I have been contacted by Terry Joos, Community Development Vice
President of the Shakopee Jaycees, who has requested that the
City pass a proclamation supporting the local Jaycees' Muscular
Dystrophy Association fundraising efforts with a Mayor's
Proclamation.
Background
The proclamation is attached and explains the fundraising effort.
Terry Joos has indicated that the local chapter has planned to
set up booths at the First National Bank and Citizens State Bank
drive-thru windows on Friday, August 8th. In addition they have
locations at the Tri -Y intersection and the Shenandoah Ballroom
on Saturday and Sunday, August 9th and 10th for fund raising
activities. Terry also indicated that they have placed coin
canisters out at various businesses around town.
Terry has cleared the fund raising locations with Tom Brownell
and they will all be off the traveled portion of the adjacent
streets or highways.
Alternatives
1. Approve the proclamation as proposed.
2. Approve the proclamation with changes.
3. Do not approve the proclamation.
Recommendation
Staff recommends alternative No. 1, because we have traditionally
supported local civic organization fundraisers with Mayor's
proclamations.
Action Requested
Authorize the Mayor to sign a proclamation acknowledging the
Shakopee Jaycees participation in the Minnesota Jaycees "State
Wide Roadblock for MDA" weekend fundraiser.
JKA/jms
PROCLAMATION
WHEREAS, Muscular Dystrophy and related
neuromuscular diseases afflict thousands of our
fellow citizens throughout Minnesota, many of them
children; and
WHEREAS, the programs of basic and clinical
research and medical services maintained by the
Muscular Dystrophy Association represent a concerted
effort to find the causes and develop effective
treatments for these cripping disorders and to
provide patients with free medical care; and
o.
WHEREAS, the United States' Jaycees have
designated fundraising for MDA as.a priority project,
and the Minnesota Jaycees, have endorsed this
priority; and
WHEREAS, recent ..breakthroughs in research of
f
neuromuscular disease -have raised realistic hope for
-.
significant future progress in the fight against
= "'
neuromuscular disease;in:the foreseeable future; and
z
WHEREAS, the Shakopee -Jaycees have plans to
participate in this national fundraising for MDA on
August 8, 9 and 10, 1986.
d
fTHEREFORE,
NOW, L, Eldon°A. Reinke, Mayor of the
-
City of Shakopee, do- hereby, proclaim the second
-
weekend in August to be
SHAKOPEE JAYCEES'
"STATE WIDE ROADBLOCK FOR MDA" WEEKEND
t``.
in Shakopee, and urge that all citizens of Shakopee
Join in support of the work of the Muscular Dystrophy
r
Association.
:-
Dated this 5th day of August, 1986.
-
Mayor of the City of Shakopee
i
PC r
0
MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator �tf
FROM: Judith S. Cox, City Clerk
RE: Appointment of Election Judges
DATE: July 28, 1986
Introduction and Backaround
State law requires the appointment of election judges for the
upcoming primary election by August 15th. The judges recommended
have all been called by our summer intern and are willing to
work.
Recommended Action
Offer Resolution No. 2594, A Resolution Appointing Judges of
Election, and Establishing Compensation, and move its adoption.
JSC/jms
RESOLUTION NO. 2594
A RESOLUTION APPOINTING JUDGES OF ELECTION,
AND ESTABLISHING COMPENSATION
BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE,
MINNESOTA, that:
1. The following persons are hereby appointed Judges of
Election for the five polling precincts with the City of
Shakopee designated in Resolution No. 2021, adopted July 6,
1982:
FIRST PRECINCT
Regular Judges Winnie Anderson, Chrm.
Rose McCourtney Claude Kolb
Ann Tuttle Marcie Schmitt
SECOND PRECINCT
Regular Judges Paulette Rislund, Co-Chrm.
Catherine Radar, Co-Chrm.
Beryl Barrett Orma Kraai
Lucille Odenwald Barbara Runge
THIRD PRECINCT
Regular Judges Maetta Jurewicz, Chrm.
Joyce Schwartz Marinda Schmit
Martha Skalsky
Loretta Jaspers
FOURTH PRECINCT
Regular Judges Lillian Weinandt Chrm.
Pat Clemens Marilyn Johnson
•lge; e _ Q Bz t n Mariory Bischoff
FIFTH PRECINCT
Regular Judges Virgilla Geske, Chrm.
Rudy Maurine Carol Link
Thea May
2. The Election Judges shall be compensated for their work at
the rate of $3.40 per hour and the Chairman of the Election
Judges shall be compensated at the rate of $3.90 per hour.
3. The proper officials be and hereby are authorized and
directed to do and perform all acts necessary to carry out
the terms, intents, and purposes of this Resolution.
Adopted in session of the City Council of
the City of Shakopee, Minnesota, held this day of
1986.
Mayor of the City of Shakopee
ATTEST:
City Clerk
Approved as to form this
day of , 1986.
City Attorney
STATE OF .MI's N ESOTA
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY
LIQUOR CONTROL DIVISION
SURETY BOND
OFF SALE
BOND NO. 3SE 641 407 -OC
Inim, all nirn h -q thr-qF prr5rnt5 That we Brooks S u p e r e t t e No . 4 2
AMERICAN MANUFACTURERS MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY
as prncipal, and
organized and existing under the laws of the State of i 11 i no i s a corporation
and
transact a corporate surety business in theState of Minnesota, as surety, are held and firmly bound unto the
duly authorized to
of Shakopee (insert City
County of S c o t t
State of Minnesota, in the penal sum of Thr e e Thou s and and No / 10 0 - - - - - - - -
dollars, good and lawful
money of the united States to be paid to said Cityo f S h a k o p e e
(insert C; y; t'
for which payment we bind ourselves, our heirs, executors, administrators, successors and assigns, jointly and severally, firmly
by these presents.
Sealed with our hands and seals this 6th day of March
Whereas. The above bounden principal desires to carry on the business of handling intoxicating liquors as an ' 19-6
"Off Sale" dealer, in the said City of Shakopee
(insert City) and is
about to be granted a license for that purpose in pursuance with the provisions of Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 340, as
amended.
NOW THEREFORE, The condition of this obligation is such that if the principal shall comply with the terms of said
license or am modifications, extensions or renewals thereof, and with the provisions of the above entitied act of the legis-
lature of the State of Minnesota, and as it may at any time be amended and supplemented, and all other acts and laws of the
State of Minnesota, and with the rules, regulations and decision lawfully
State of Minnesota made and issued by the grope: authorities of the
relating thereto, and that if the said principal shall further pay to the said city when due, all taxes,
license fees. penalties and other charges provided by law, and that in the event of any violation of the provisions of any law
relating to the retail "Off Sale" of intoxicating liquor. such bond shall be forfeited to the said city as in said act provided, and
that it the said Principal shall pay to the extent of the principal amount of this obligation dry dar..a2e5 foc czath e: iniury
caused by or resulting' from the violation of any of the *provisions of this act, then this obligation shall be void, ether.;•i;e
remain in full force and eller. to
The surety company consents to be bound by this obligation, notwithstanding any informality in its execution.
This bond is for the license period commencing March 4, 1986
and ending M a r c h 4, 19 8 7
Witness our hands and seals this 6th day of
March
,19 86
signed, Sea eelive �d in the p sen f -
f/ � (Seal;
Kent D. Dixon, Vice President (Seal)
os to principai - - -- - (Seal)
AMERICAN _NJ ANUFACTUR ERS ?.tiTZAL INS. CO.
I %) r V (Seal)
D. A. Berthelsen,
Attorney -in -Fact
ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF PRINCIPAL -
For Individual
STATE OF MINNESOTA - -
ss.
County of -
On this day of
County appeared
1 19—, before me, a notary public within and for said
to me known to be theperson
wn-
signed as principal herein, and stated that he signed the same of his ofreewill and -accord -"--' --- _
Notary Public
(SEAL) County, Minnesota.
My Commission expires --
S9021 (01 )
STATE OF NIINNESOTA
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY
LIQUOR CONTROL DIVISION
SURETY BOND
OFF SALE
BOND No. 3SE 637 065
Inniu all mrn hg 14r5r 4rrrBrIlhi That we Brooks Superette No. 42
American Manufactuers Mutual Insurance COmDdn
as principal, and
, a corporation
organized and existing under the laws of the State of Il 1 i not S and duiv authorized to
transact a corporate surety business in the State of Minnesota, as surety, are held and firmly bound unto the C t�/
(Insert City)
of Shakopee County of Scott
State of Minnesota, in the penal sum of Three -Thousand and No/ 100 ---------------dollars, good and lawful
money of the United States to be paid to said Ci t of Shakopee
(Insert City)
for which payment we bind ourselves, our heirs, executors, administrators, successors and assigns, jointly and severally, firmly
by these presents.
Sealed with our hands and seals this 5th day of June 19_86
Whereas. The above bounden principal desires to carry on the business of handling intoxicating liquors as an
"Off Sale" dealer, in the said City of Shakopee and is
(Insert City)
about to be granted a- license for that purpose in pursuance with the provisions of Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 340, as
amended.
NOW THEREFORE, The condition of this obligation is such that if the principal shall comply with the terms of said
license or any modifications, extensions or renewals thereof, and with the provisions of the above entitled act of the legis-
lature of the State of Minnesota, and as it may at any time be amended and supplemented, and all other acts and laws of the
State of Minnesota, and with the rules, regulations and decision lawfully made and issued by the proper authorities of the
State of Minnesota relating thereto, and that if the said principal shall further pay to the said city when due, all taxes,
license fees, penalties and other charges provided by law, and that in the event oiany violation of the provisions of any law
relating to the retail "Off Sale" of intoxicating Iiquor, such bond shall be forfeited to the said city as in said act provided, and
that if the said principal shall pay to the extent of the principal amount of this obligation any damages for death or injury
caused by or resulting from the violation of any of the provisions of this act, then this obligation shall be void, otherwise to
remain in full force and effect.
The surety company consents to be bound by this obligation, notwithstanding any informality in its execution.
This bond is for the license period commencing July 1, 1986
and ending June 30, 1987.
Witness our hands and seals this 5th
Signed,
.as to pnnct
nce of -
°surety
dill -S. L1`r'son, Attorney - in -fact
day of June
ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF PRINCIPAL
For Individual
STATE OF MINNESOTA - ,-- -
ss.
County of
On this day of
County appeared
,1986•
(Seal)
(Seal)
(eral)
(Seal)
- , 19_, before me,—a-- notary public within and for said -
to me known to be the person
signed as principal herein, and stated that he signed the same of his own free=will and accord.- - <:1: - _---
Notary Public -_
County, Minnesota.
(SEAL) - My Commission expires -
� i t
n
MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator
FROM: Ken Ashfeld, City Engineer.
SUBJECT: Assessment Role Preparation and Hearing
Timber Trails
DATE: August 1, 1986
INTRODUCTION:
Council action is necessary to order the preparation of the
assessment role and set the assessment hearing for the Timber
Trails project.
BACKGROUND:
The bids for the improvement have been taken and awarded. Based
upon the structure of the bond issue to finance this project,
it is important that the hearing be held and assessments certi-
fied by October 10, 1986 to the County. Since this schedule
does not allow full completion of the protect, the assessment
role will be generated from the contract prices.
Various assessment procedure questions were presented at the
public hearing that I wish to address now such that those proce-
dures carp be incorporated into the assessment role. please
refer to Map A.
1. Outlot A, although riot a developable lot, is benefiting
and will be included as one lot in the assessment
calculations.
2. The number of developable lots in the unplatted area
(for assessment calculation purposes) was questioned
by the owner. The feasibility report indicated that
6 lots could front on Lake View Lane and that has
been substantiated by further analysis. NOT INCLUDING
THE FRONTAGE ABUTTING OUTLOT A, six lots can be de-
signed in the unplatted area with a minimum of 150'
frontage and 2 1/2 acre area (zoning requirements),
3. A credit is being applied on this project since the
roadway did not last 20 years. The amount of the
assessment is beirig reduced from 25% to 20%. The
feasibility report implied that since some benefited
areas were not assessed for the original project,
the 5% credit should not be applied. The owners gave
argument at the improvement hearing that the credit
should be applied since there was an original contri-
bution to the development, that being the roadway
right-of-way. The assessments should be consistent
based upon the merits of the improvements for this
Timber Trails
August 1, 1986
page 2
project only, therefore, I propose that all benefited
lots be treated egI_ia1, irregard1ess of the method
Of funding for the original improvements.
4. The City's assessment policy states that City property,
including parks, be assessed in the same manner as
private property. This particular project area is
somewhat unusual in that there exists three parks,
one of which is serni-developed. Referring to Map
A, the park area labeled A is benefited by the improve-
ment but I would contend that areas B and C do not
receive equal benefit. Therefore, I recommend that
areas B and C riot be assessed.
The following is a per, lot
of park areas assessed:
No. of parks
0 Parks
1 Park
^c Parks
3 Parks
assessment depending on the number
Assessment
$664.77
$649.66
$635.23
$621.41
The estimate in the feasibility report was $641.18.
RECOMMENDATIONS:
Order the preparation of the assessment role based upon the
aforestated procedural iterns 1 through 4. Also provide direction
if Council wishes to modify any of the procedural items.
REQUESTED ACTION:
1. Offer Resolution No. 2595, A Resolution Declaring the Cost
to be Assessed and Ordering the Preparation of Proposed
Assessments for Timber Trails Street Rehabilitation, Project
No. 1986-5 and move its adoption.
2. Council direction if modifications to the procedures out-
lined in this memo is desired.
KA / pm p
MEMOS
Lt'.IY
RESOLUTION NO. 2595
A Resolution Declaring The Cost To Be Assessed And
Ordering The Preparation Of Proposed Assessment for
Timber Trails Street Rehabilitation
Project No. 1986-5
WHEREAS, a contract has been let for the improvement of:
Timber Trails Street Rehabilitation Project No. 1986-5 and the
contract price for such improvements is $103,946.00, the con-
struction contingency amounts to $ 10,394.60 and the expenses
incurred or to be incurred in the making of such improvements
amounts to $28,585.15 so that the total cost of the improvements
will be $ 142,925.75 and of this cost the City will pay
$114,340.60 as its share of the cost.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA:
1. The cost of such improvement to be specially assessed is
hereby declared to be $ 28,585.15.
2. The City Clerk, with the assistance of the City Engineer
shall forthwith calculate the proper amount to be specially
assessed for such improvement against every assessable lot, piece
or parcel of land within the district affected, without regard to
cash valuation, as provided by law, and he shall file a copy of
such proposed assessment in his office for public inspection.
3. That the City Clerk shall, upon the completion of such
proposed assessment, notify the City Council thereof.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED:
1. That a hearing shall be held on the 23rd day of Sep-
tember, 1986, in the Council Chambers of City Hall at 7:00 P.M.
to pass upon such proposed assessments and at such time and place
all persons owning property affected by such improvements and
proposed assessments will be given an opportunity to be heard
with reference to such assessment.
2. That the City Clerk is hereby directed to cause a notice
of the hearing on the proposed assessment to be published once in
the official newspaper of the City of Shakopee at least two weeks
prior to the hearing and he shall state in the notice the total
cost of the improvements. He shall also cause mailed notice of
such hearing to be given the owner of each parcel described in
the assessment roll not less than two weeks prior to the hearing.
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
Approved as to form this
day of , 19
City Attorney
n
CL
ROAD
rn
t yam^^
�
Li
Q
j.
'%183dO8d 03.1.LV-IdNn
U �
RESOLUTION NO. 2595
A Resolution Declaring The Cost To Be Assessed And
Ordering The Preparation Of Proposed Assessment for
Timber Trails Street Rehabilitation
Pro3ect No. 1986-5
WHEREAS, a contract has been let for the improvement of:
Timber Trails Street Rehabilitation Pro)ect No. 1986-5 and the
contract price for such improvements is $103,946.00, the con-
struction contingency amounts to 5 10,394 .60 and the expenses
incurred or to be incurred in the making of such improvements
amounts to 528,585. 15 so that the total cost of the improvements
will be 5 142,925.75 and of this cost the City will pay
$114,340.60 as its share of the cost.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF -THE
CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA:
1 . The cost of such improvement to be specially assessed
is hereby declared to be $ 28,585. 15.
2. The City Clerk, with the assistance of the City Engineer
shall forthwith calculate the proper amount to be specially
assessed for such improvement against every assessable lot,
piece or parcel of land within the district affected, without
regard to cash valuation, as provided by law, and he shall file
a copy of such proposed assessment in his office for public
inspection.
3. That the City Clerk shall, upon the completion of such
proposed assessment, notify the City Council thereof.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED:
1 . That a hearing shall be held on the 9th day of Sep-
tember, 1986, in the Council Chambers of City Hall at 7:00 P .M.
to pass upon such proposed assessments and at such time and
place all persons owning property affected by such improvements
and proposed assessments will be given an opportunity to be
heard with reference to such assessment.
2. That the City Clerk is hereby directed to cause a notice
of the hearing on the proposed assessment to be published once
in the official newspaper of the City of Shakopee at least two
weeks prior to the hearing and he shall state in the notice
the total cost of the improvements. He shall also cause mailed
notice of such hearing to be given the owner of each parcel
described in the assessment roll not less than two weeks prior
to the hearing .
11�
Adopted in session of the City Council
of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota, held this day of
01 19
Mayor of the City of Shakopee
ATTEST:
City Clerk
Approved as to form this
day of 19
City Attorney
MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator
FROM: Ken Ashfeld, City Engineer^f�—
SUBJECT: Assessment Role Preparation and Hearing
Fourth Avenue; Fillmore to Scott
DATE: August 1, 1986
INTRODUCTION:
Council action is necessary to order the preparation of the
assessment role and set the assessment hearing for the Fourth
Avenue Project.
BACKGROUND:
The bids have been taken and awarded. Based upon the structure
of the bond issue to finance the project, it is important that
the hearing be held and assessments certified by October 10,
1986 to the County. Since this schedule does not allow full
completion of the project, the assessment role will be generated
from the contract prices.
REQUESTED ACTION:
Offer Resolution No. 5596, A Resolution Declaring the Cost to
be Assessed and Ordering the Preparation of Proposed Assessment
for Fourth Avenue Reconstruction, S. A. P. 70-616-13, Project
1986-3 and move its adoption.
KA/pmp
MEM2596
RESOLUTION NO. 2596
A Resolution Declaring The Cost To Be Assessed And
Ordering The Preparation Of Proposed Assessment for
Fourth Avenue Reconstruction
from Fillmore Street to Scott Street
Project No. 1986-3
WHEREAS, a contract has been let for the improvement of:
Fourth Avenue Reconstruction from Fillmore Street to Scott
Street, Project No. 1986-3 and the contract price for such im-
provements is $302,576. 04, the construction contingency amounts
to $11 , 130.00 and the expenses incurred or to be incurred in
the making of such improvements amounts to $78,426 .51 so that
the total cost of the improvements will be $ 392, 132.55 and
of this cost the City will pay $ 294,099.42 as its share of
the cost.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNE50TA:
1 . The cost of such improvement to be specially assessed
is hereby declared to be $ 98,033. 13.
2. The City Clerk, with the assistance of the City Engineer
shall forthwith calculate the proper amount to be specially
assessed for such improvement against every assessable lot,
piece or parcel of land within the district affected, without
regard to cash valuation, as provided by law, and he shall file
a copy of such proposed assessment in his office for public
inspection .
3. That the City Clerk shall, upon the completion of such
proposed assessment, notify the City Council thereof.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED:
1 . That a hearing shall be held on the 9th day of Sep-
tember, 1986, in the Council Chambers of City Hall at 7:30 P.M.
to pass upon such proposed assessments and at such time and
place all persons owning property affected by such improvements
and proposed assessments will be given an opportunity to be
heard with reference to such assessment.
2. That the City Clerk is hereby directed to cause a notice
of the hearing on the proposed assessment to be published once
in the official newspaper of the City of Shakopee at least two
weeks prior to the hearing and he shall state in the notice
the total cost of the improvements. He shall also cause mailed
notice of such hearing to be given the owner of each parcel
described in the assessment roll not less than two weeks prior
to the hearing .
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
Approved as to form this
day of 19
City Attorney
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
A1gr air ed as to f o mom,
day of , 19
City Attorney
Ac
l c'�'C,.
RESOLUTION NO. 2596
A Resolution Declaring The Cost To Be Assessed And
Ordering The Preparation Of Proposed Assessment for
Fourth Avenue Reconstruction
from Fillmore Street to Scott Street
Project No. 1986-3
WHEREAS, a contract has been let for the improvement of :
Fourth Avenue Reconstruction from Fillmore Street to Scott
Street , Project No. 1986-3 and the contract price for such im-
provements is $302 , 576 .04, the construction contingency amounts
to $11,130 .00 and the expenses incurred or to be incurred in the
making of such improvements amounts to $78 , 426 . 51 so that the
total cost of the improvements will be $ 392 ,132.55 and of this
cost the City will pay $ 294 ,099 . 42 as its share of the cost.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA:
1. The cost of such improvement to be specially assessed is
hereby declared to be $ 98 , 033 .13 .
2. The City Clerk, with the assistance of the City Engineer
shall forthwith calculate the proper amount to be specially
assessed for such improvement against every assessable lot, piece
or parcel of land within the district affected, without regard to
cash valuation, as provided by law, and he shall file a copy of
such proposed assessment in his office for public inspection.
3. That the City Clerk shall, upon the completion of such
proposed assessment, notify the City Council thereof.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED:
1. That a hearing shall be held on the 23rd day of Sep-
tember, 1986 , in the Council Chambers of City Hall at 7 :30 P.M.
to pass upon such proposed assessments and at such time and place
h all persons owning property affected by such improvements and
proposed assessments will be given an opportunity to be heard
with reference to such assessment.
2. That the City Clerk is hereby directed to cause a notice
of the hearing on the proposed assessment to be published once in
the official newspaper of the City of Shakopee at least two weeks
prior to the hearing and he shall state in the notice the total
cost of the improvements. He shall also cause mailed notice of
such hearing to be given the owner of each parcel described in
the assessment roll not less than two weeks prior to the hearing.
RESOLUTION NO. 2597
A Resolution Receiving A Report
And Calling A Bearing On Improvements To
13th Avenue From County Road 89
To The East Corporate Limits
Project No. 1986-9
WHEREAS, pursuant to Resolution No. 2542 of the City Council
adopted April 15 , 1986, a report has been prepared by hen
Ashfeld, City Engineer , with reference to the improvements of
13th Avenue from County Road 89 to the East Corporate Limits by
Street Improvements, and this report was received by the Council
on August 5, 1986.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA:
1. The Council will consider the street improvements to
13th Avenue in accordance with the report and the assessment of
abutting and benefited property for all or a portion of the cost
of the improvements pursuant to Minnesota Statutes Chapter 429 at
an estimated total cost of the improvement of $246 ,147 .00 .
2. A public hearing shall be held on such proposed improve-
ments on the 23rd day of September, 1986 , at 8 : 15 P.M. , or there-
after , in the Council Chambers of City hall, at 129 East 1st
Avenue and the Clerk shall give mailed and published notice of
such hearing and improvement as required by law.
3. The work of this project is hereby designated as part of
the 1986-9 Public Improvement Program.
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
Approved as to form this day of
19
City Attorney
f ,
MEMO TO : John K. Anderson, City Administrator
FROM: Ken Ashfeld , City Engineer
SUBJECT : 13th Avenue Feasibility Report
DATE : August 1 , 1986
INTRODUCTION :
City Council ordered a feasibility study of street improvements
to 13th Avenue from County Road 89 to the east corporate limits
of Shakopee . That study has been completed and the associated
report is attached.
BACKGROUND:
The developer of the proposed ( PV Campground) is quite anxious
for the proposed improvements. In my contacts with the devel-
oper ' s engineer we are in the process of obtaining a drainage
easement for the storm sewer referred to in the study. Although
this project is getting quite late in the year, the following
benefits will be achieved by proceeding at this time versus a
spring bid letting :
1 . It would provide for the installation of the storm
sewer outfall this fall , thereby , not creating a delay
for the developer in paving his project . I do not
believe that much more could be completed unless we
have a very good fall season.
2 . By letting contracts this fall , 90% of the state aid
amount can be obtained and be collecting interest for
the City over the winter months .
QP
REQUESTED ACTION :
Adopt Resolution No. 2597 , A Resolution Receiving a Report and
Calling a Hearing on Improvements to 13th Avenue from County Road
to the East Corporate Limits.
REQUESTED ACTION :
Offer Resolution No. 2597 , A Resolution Receiving a Report and
Calling a Hearing on Improvements to 13th Avenue from County Road
89 to the East Corporate Limits and move its adoption.
KA/pmp
MEM2597
RESOLUTION NO. 2597
A Resolution Receiving A Report
And Calling A Hearing On Improvements To
13th Avenue From County Road 89
To The East Corporate Limits
WHEREAS, pursuant to Resolution No. 2542 of the City Council
adopted April 15, 1986, a report has been prepared by Ken
Ashfeld, City Engineer, with reference to the improvements of
13th Avenue from County Road 89 to the East Corporate Limits
by Street Improvements, and this report was received by the
Council on August 5, 1986 .
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA:
1 . The Council will consider the street improvements to
13th Avenue in accordance with the report and the assessment
of abutting and benefited property for all or a portion of the
cost of the improvements pursuant to Minnesota Statutes Chapter
429 at an estimated total cost of the improvement of 5246, 147.00.
2. A public hearing shall be held on such proposed improve-
ments on the 9th day of 5eptember, 1986, at 8: 15 P .M. , or there-
after, in the Council Chambers of City Hall, at 129 East 1st
Avenue and the Clerk shall give mailed and published notice
of such hearing and improvement as required by law .
3. The work of this project is hereby designated as part
of the 1986 Public Improvement PrograA.
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
Approved as to form this day of
19
City Attorney
FEASIBILITY REPORT
FOR
IMPROVEMENT OF 13TH AVENUE
FROM
COUNTY ROAD 89
TO
EAST CORPORATE LIMITS
CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA
I hereby certify that this plan, specification, or re?ort was prepared
by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Registered
Professional Engineer under- the laws of the State of Minnesota.
Date � �/ /S � Registration No. 16185
JULY 1986
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Description Page No .
Feasibility Report
Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
Background . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
Study Area Land Use . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
Design Criteria . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
Proposed Improvements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3-4
Estimated Costs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
Assessed Cost & Funding. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-5
Assessment Procedure. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5-6
Appendix
Cost Estimates . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
Assessment Computations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8-17
Drawings
Figure1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
Soils Report . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (Attached)
FEASIBILITY REPORT
Improvement of 13th Avenue (Municipal State Aid Street 115) from
County Road 89 to the East Corporate Limits of Shakopee ,
Minnesota
INTRODUCTION
City Council of the City of Shakopee ordered the preparation of a
Feasibility Report by Resolution No. 25142 on April 15 , 1986 for
the improvement of 13th Avenue from County Road 89 to the east
corporate limits of Shakopee .
BACKGROUND
The segment of 13th Avenue under study is a Municipal State Aid
Street (MSAS Control Section 115 ) conforming neither to state
aid standards or roadway standards for the City of Shakopee . The
roadway in its existing condition consists of a 24 foot traveled
roadway with a very minimal graveled surface . The subgrade
material consists of a poorly graded sand ( see attached soils
report) exhibiting low cohesive characteristics .
There are no existing drainage facilities for the inplace roadway
except for earthened berms and shallow, non-continuous ditches .
The north and west part of the study area does not have a
drainage outlet and runoff must seep into the soil . The east end
of the study area does have a drainage outlet under Trunk Highway
101 during high runoff rates, but for the most part, runoff seeps
into the soil for the normal runoff conditions.
Since there are not adequate roadway ditches to contain and
convey runoff away from the embankment, these existing conditions
are considered inadequate and damaging to the roadway ,
particularly , in the spring.
The average annual daily traffic (AADT) as counted in 1985 is 580
vehicles per day. The design volume projection factor is 2 .00 .
1
There exists a power line along the south side of the roadway
located approximately 6 feet south of the traveled roadway . Since
the inplace roadway is shifted north of the platted centerline ,
the pole line is actually only approximately 12 feet from
centerline and must be relocated . The pole line is owned by
Minnesota Valley Electric Cooperative .
There are no existent sanitary sewer or water facilities along
the study area. Based upon the Metropolitan Urban Service Area
(MUSA) delineations and pending amendments to the MUSA, sanitary
sewer is not expected to be installed within the life expectancy
of the proposed improvements . Shakopee Public Utilities
Commission does not wish to see an extension of the existing
water system , currently located just north of the study area ,
until a looped system is installed back to the west and connected
to the system at County Road 83 . If such an improvement is
accelerated in the near future , a watermain can be installed
adjacent to the proposed surface improvements without substantial
disturbance or loss of investment in those improvements.
STUDY AREA LAND USE
The properties within the study area are zoned light industrial .
There is currently a relatively large percentage of truck traffic
and this characteristic of the traffic is expected to continue .
Although the area is zoned light industrial , approximately 12
single family dwellings exist. Immediately east of the study
area, within the City of Savage , exists a residential development
with access provided by a frontage road adjacent to Trunk Highway
101 . A 205 unit campground is proposed along the north side of
13th Avenue .
The Trunk Highway 101 Bypass is scheduled to begin construction
in 1989 . The preliminary design layouts for that project
indicate various closures of access to T.H . 101 that will affect
traffic volumes on 13th Avenue . The access at the east end of
the study area will be closed entirely . The next easterly access
servicing the aforestated frontage road will be restricted such
that there will not be a cross-over to the west bound lanes of
T.H . 101 . Therefore, the design for 13th Avenue will assume that
west bound traffic from the residential development in Savage
will travel 13th Avenue to County Road 89 and thence junction
with west bound T.H . 101 .
2
DESIGN ALTERNATIVES
Since 13th Avenue is a MSAS , its design must be in conformance
with state aid standards. Alternative design standards allow for
either a rural section with ditches or an urban section with curb
and gutter . This report is not considering the rural section
alternative and is recommending an urban section for the
following reasons :
1 . An urban section is the City Standard.
2 . The additional excavation needed for the ditches, due
to the existing cross section , plus additional
restoration cost would be substantially more than the
curb and gutter cost.
3 . Drainage can be more easily handled by an urban section
with storm sewer .
4 . Although parking is not in demand under current land
use , future development may create a need for
accommodating parking . An urban section can best
handle that need . If development creates traffic
volumes in excess of that expected, the parking can be
eliminated and additional capacity added by striping
additional lanes .
5 . A rural section would require additional right-of-way
for clear zone distances and slope easements .
6 . A rural section would require additional utility
relocation due to the clear zone distance requirements .
7 . Due to drainage outlet constraints, storm sewer would
be required for either type of section.
PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS
The proposed improvements consist of a 9 ton, 44 foot , urban
section with concrete curb & gutter and bituminous surfacing .
Boulevards would be seeded with sod placed in areas of existing
lawns and as required for erosion control . Storm sewer will be
installed to collect surface drainage and convey storm water to a
culvert under T.H. 101 . The storm sewer could be constructed on
existing right-of-way but as a cost savings approach , the
campground development is being asked to dedicate a drainage
3
easement . The result of this easement would provide for a
shorter storm sewer alignment .
The future construction of the T.H . 101 Bypass will result in
County Road 89 being raised approximately 6 feet . This will
obviously impact the profile grades of 13th Avenue on the west
end. Consequently two design grades are being established such
that the storm sewer will accommodate present and future needs as
well as verticle curvatures. At the time of the construction of
the Bypass, approximately 350 feet of 13th Avenue will need to be
reconstructed by Mn/DOT to the future grades. Therefore , it is
proposed that curb and gutter not be installed on this portion of
13th Avenue . It is intended that the full structural
capabilities be provided such that the City does not end up with
a maintenance problem until the Bypass is built .
ESTIMATED COSTS
The estimated costs of the proposed improvements are detailed in
the appendix and summarized as follows :
Street Construction $140 , 165 .00
10% Contingency Cost $ 14, 016 .00
$154 , 181 .00
25% Eng. , Legal , Fiscal Cost $ 38, 546 .00
Street Project Cost $192 ,727 .00
Storm Sewer Construction Cost $ 38 , 850 .00
10% Contingency Cost $ � , 885 .00
$ 42,735 .00
25% Eng. , Legal , Fiscal Cost $ 10, 685 .00
Storm Sewer Project Cost $ 53 ,420 .00
ESTIMATED TOTAL PROJECT COST $246, 147 .00
.ASSESSED COST AND FUNDING
The required street width to provide a local facility is 36 feet
as established by Shakopee Design Criteria . The street width
required by state aid standards is 44 feet based upon projected
traffic volumes. The assessment policy states that the cost
4
difference due to functional classification becomes a City cost.
The policy states that this City cost be reimbursed by state aid.
The amount of the street cost attributable to the local facility
(36 feet) is estimated at 82% of the project cost .
The storm sewer proposed for this project is for the specific
benefit of the street and does not provide a drainage basin wide
improvement . That is to say that without a proposed street
improvement , the storm sewer would not be proposed . Since
facility size and cost is dependent upon runoff, and the runoff
rate is dependent upon the amount of hard cover, it is proposed
that the amount of the storm sewer cost attributable to the local
facility be also considered 82% of the project cost .
Based upon the aforestated policy application to the estimated
project costs, the following is a breakdown of cost sharing :
STREET STORM SEWER TOTAL
Assessed Cost 82% $158 ,036 .00 $ 43 ,804 .00 $201 ,840 .00
City Cost 18% $ X4 , 691 .00 $ 9,616 .00 $ 44,,_ 07 .00
$192 ,727 .00 $ 53 ,420 .00 $246 , 147 .00
As stated previously, the $44 ,307 .00 City share would be eligible
for state aid funding. The $201 , 840 .00 assessed cost would be
special assessed against the benefited properties . It is
proposed that the entire state aid eligible project costs be
funded by state aid funds thereby creating a funding mechanism to
avoid the need for a bond issue and associated bonding cost.
Special assessments received would then reimburse the City ' s
state aid fund for use on a continuing street construction
program.
ASSESSMENT PROCEDURE
The City of Shakopee has basically two street construction
program policies ; 1 ) new construction, and 2) rehabilitation.
The two policies are somewhat similar in structure. The policy
for new construction allows for the assessed cost to be spread
over front footage, area or by lot. The rehabilitation policy
introduces the zone assessment concept whereas non-fronting
properties that benefit from an improvement is assessed.
The test for a proper and legal special assessment is such that
the assessment is fair, consistent , and is not in excess of the
increased property value . Figure 1 indicates the study area as
addressed in this report . The study area is zoned for light
5
industrial development . Parcels numbered 1 through 6 , 17 through
21 , and 35 are abutting on the proposed improvement . Parcels
numbered 7 through 16 , 22 , and 24 through 29 do not directly abut
the proposed improvement but do benefit from the improvement .
The increased loading capacity of 13th Avenue will provide for
increased utilization efficiency of these parcels . Parcels
numbered 23 and 30 through 34 will not receive an increased
utilization efficiency since the current use in residential with
multiple ownership and individual lots are too small for light
industrial development .
There are basically three alternatives for assessing the proposed
assessed cost to the improved area .
Alternative 1 . Spread all assessed cost to the abutting
properties.
Alternative 2. Spread all assessed cost to the improved area .
Alternative 3. Spread the assessed cost by an apportionment
method ; a portion of the assessed cost over the
abutting front footage and a portion over the
entire improved area , ie . , a zone assessment .
This report recommends Alternative 3 with 60% of the assessed
cost apportioned to the abutting property based on front footage
and 40% of the assessed cost apportioned to the improved zone for
the following reasons :
1 . There is a benefit to the zone area.
2 . Based upon efficiency of land use utilization , the
following was considered :
a. During approximately two months of the year, 13th
Avenue is posted for 5 ton load limits.
b. During the remaining ten months , 13th Avenue is
posted for 7 ton load limits.
k If 13th Avenue is upgraded to a 9 ton facility as proposed, it is
estimated that by having the capability to transport 9 ton axle
loads year round, the land use utilization could be increased by
4o% .
The appendix includes the estimated assessments associated with
each of the aforestated alternative assessment procedures . An
appraiser has stated that benefit can be proven for the lot
assessments as indicated for each alternative .
6
APPENDIX
ESTIMATE COSTS
STREET CONSTRUCTION
ITEM QUANTITY UNIT PRICE TOTAL
Comon Excavation 67200 C.Y. $ 1 .75 $ 107850.00
Subgrade Excavation 41000 C.Y. $ 1 .00 $ 4,000.00
Class 5 Aggregate 3,400 C.Y. $ 10.00 $ 347000.00
21' (2331) Bit. Base Course 1 ,250 Ton $ 23.00 $ 28,750.00
1 112" (2341) Bit. Wear Course 950 Ton $ 25.00 $ 23,750.00
Cone. Curb & Gutter 3,900 L.F. $ 6.25 $ 24,375.00
Cone. Driveway 100 S.Y. $ 24.00 $ 2,400.00
Class 2 Aggregate (Shouldering 30 C.Y. $ 10.00 $ 300.00
Clearing & Grubbing 20 STA. $ 50.00 $ 1 ,000.00
Topsoil 600 C.Y. $ 9.00 $ 5,400.00
Seeding 1 .2 Acre $700.00 $ 840.00
Sod 3,000 S.Y. $ 1 .50 $ 4,500.00
STORM SEWER CONSTRUCTION
18" RCP 400 L.F. $ 21.00 $ 8,400.00
15" RCP 1 ,250 L.F. $ 18.00 $22,500.00
12" RCP 110 L.F. $ 15.00 $ 1 ,650.00
Stand 4'-0" 0 M.H. 2 EA. $900.00 $ 1 ,800.00
Catch Basin 4 EA. $900.00 $ 31600.00
Cone. Flared End Section 1 EA. $400.00 $ 400.00
Restoration L.S. $500.00 $ 500.00
7
Total Storm Sewer Const. Cost $ 38,850.00
10% Contingency Cost $ 3,885.00
$ 42,735.00
25% Eng., Legal, Fiscal Cost $ 10,685.00
_ Total Storm Sewer Project Cost $ 53,420.00
TOTAL PROJECT COST $246,147.00
ESTIMATED ASSESSMENTS
Total Estimated Project Cost $246 , 147 .00
Proposed Assessed Cost $201 ,840 .00
Assessment Procedure Alternative 1 . (Total assessed cost spread
over abutting front footage)
Assessed Cost $201 ,840 .00
Front Footage 4 , 242.85 L. F.
Cost Per Front Foot $ 47 .57/L.F.
Assessment Procedure Alternative 2 . (Total Assessed Cost spread
over the improved zone)
Assessed Cost $201 ,840 .00
Improved Area 4 , 182 ,648 Sq . Ft .
Cost Per Square Foot $ 0 .048/Sq . Ft.
Assessment Procedure Alternate 3 (Apportionment of cost to front
footage and improved zone)
Assessed Cost $121 , 104 .00 (Front Footage)
$ 80 ,736 .00 ( Zone)
Cost Per Front Foot $ 28 .54/L. F.
Cost Per Square Foot $ 0 .019/Sq . Ft.
_ 8
Ilk
ALTERNATE # 1
H=sessegle Amount: $2011840.60
Front toot Lost: 347.571797
113th Avenue - SGeciaj 4isses;eni5 Square tGgt iost: ti.044444
------------------------------------------------------ ----------------------------------------------'---------------------
hap 100.V h -6'0. Front `oat Square toot iG_dl
Parcel # Owner Lode Description Front Ft Square Ft Hssessment 4±sse_ssent is=essment
----------------------------------------------------------------------
,-; �-1 t 1 PIT Sec 1 Twsp t C 169334 324,737.33 $4141,41)41) 3L4,737,33
t; 41v , Northwest Asphalt c, 115 521,ii) {iii
1451 CR 37 Rng 22
Shakopee, MN 55:74
2 -912006-1 Northwest Asphalt _ Pi Lt Be[ 12, Twsp 115 11527.92 670324.40 372,635,941) 30.44 372,635.90
14541 LN, 39 ling i�
Shakopee, MI, 55:411
27-51121%22'4 Eagle Creek: Land Co. Pitz 5 -
%, Sec 12, Tw_u jl5 41i,li41i x,0474.44 #19, 04.44 3ii,i)H +i-,',v41i4.44
372 St. Peter St. Rng 22
St. Paul, Mil 55102
241-912:%22-3 Eagle Creek Land Co. 4 PIT Sec 12, Twsp 115 350.00 22941690.00 319,650.13 x:,44Ip io,o5i.i3
312 St. Peter St. Rng 22
St. Paul, PIN 55142
Zi-91022-1 Eagle Creek Land CG. 5 P +'_) Sec 12, Twsp 111_ _;%,ti{i i36Y0.44 lb,tjil.i :),iii) X16„v;ii,13
372 St. Peter St. tang 22
St. Paul, ill'; 55jt%2
'77-017f)(11-0Arden & Bale Griepp 6 L1 el Iaras Add'n X03.7_ 11116 2,414141:) 13.rr;'/._5 $0.0941 si3,4r1.55
Rt 1, Box 100
Shakogee, Mir 55379
7-i�741)41)�-ii Griepp Bros. 4ontr. Co. 1 �. [1 (afa: rad n ii,li) 3_,_5,4141!.41 {%U 114141,4141;) t.l,it)
Rt 1, Box 10107
Shakopee, Mid 55379
27-057OC3-4 Arden a Dale Griepp 3 L3 B1 14aras Add'n 0.40 102725.00 $4.04 $0.00 $4.04
Rt 1, Boy iVK7
Shakopee, MN 55319
27-449441)2-ii Dwight Luella ulson 9 L1 B2 0,40 123417.0.) $0.00 34.04 $4.00
6320 Vincent Ave S. Valley Rich tat
Richfield, MN 55423
27-412026-0 Earl Zacharias 14 P/D Sec 112, Twsp 115 4.41410 103944.40 $0,40 $0.44 $0.00
PJ Box 15 Rng 22
Savage, MN 55373
INW
2r ,I2NO2 5 0 Glenn Zacharias 1, t;u Occ i2, iwsp liJ +-.41414 1089H].00 $(),0'0 $0.00 $0.00
23,04 Horizon Cir. RnG 2
Burnsville, MN 5133 f
2;-912024-4 Al Roberg Landscaping 1 P/O Sec 112, Twsp 115 ii,ii) 415981u.00 34.{i{) ;0.041)
4170:- W. 99th cut. Rng 22
Bloomington, MN 55431
,t.:
9
HssessaU Hmaur,t: $2ti1,84ti.Uti
Front haat i:ast: 14;.571797
17th Avenue - Special Assesments Square Fact Cast: t/.NOON,
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
hdp 1ti''J.UL%f. 0.00% Front root Square Taut Taldl
Parcel # Owner Code Description Front rt :quare it Assessment Assessment Hssessment
2r'-9i2-24-i iiav t. LagsW£II 13 Pi'G Sec i2, Twsp 115 0.00 54450,06 $0.0ti $0,00 -------- 0i,tiQ
112th Upton Ave. SO. Knq .:
:acaminaton, MINI 55337
27-01951 fi-0 Roy E. Cogswell 14 L1 E1 0,('ifi 69017.00 $0.0y0'.00 $10.00
11:01 Upton Ave. S. ,alley 19ic1h 1st
Ploomington, Mid 55337
27-057005-0 kiIliam H. Cooke 15 L5 ill 0.00 1042&3.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
5512 Thomas Ave. .. Maras Add`n
Minneapolis, MN 55410
27-015-160)6—ti Lundgren Prader ties i6 L= BI 1042.7.111) $0i3Oi0 $0,00 $0,00
5609 35th Ave. S. oras Add n
Minneapolis, MN 55417
C
27-057107-:.0 William H. �aa:e 17 L7 rl �n3.73 10428q.60 $l;, �y;,j, $11,1111 $13,rt5'7..v
5512 Thomas Ave. S. tiaras Add'n
Minneapolis, MPI 55;10
27'043002-0 Daniel Mahaney i V. 01,00 $4,757,1b $0.tit)
y�uyi E. 13th Ave. P,LS 424
Shakopee, FIN 55379
ii 043003-' _john E. hiller I?' L ls� u ii!:%.:%{J ..1114 :v�,737,iO
1c -J.VV 4'4,iJ7.li
Ylll ^C. 114111 Ave. !:i-_
Shakopee, MN 55371
ii-it4_l:iry-. Daniel 1~heeYer iii L °ii- 10!: 1.00% „0,'t $4.i:ii.i�� +'i%.tiV $4.757.18
91140 E. 13th Ave. FLS UN
Shakopee, Mid 55370!
21-AV430:t5-0 Raymond Moen 21 L -Eu 100.00 0i,iii) $4,/51.10 $- tit $4,757.16
RLS 1164 E. 13 ,_�
113th Ave.HYe. #24
Shakopee, Mei 55379
27-043V.V Robert k. ;tewart 22 L '_' 0.00 108763.00 $11.110 111.00 10.0t1
117,05 River Hills lir. RIS 424
% t..;t 1 a 5.57-�
7-1143016-0 Raymond E. Moer, L =F'" 11.00 0.0)0) $0,017 $0.00 $0.00
9064 E. 13th Ave. 11:111S 1424
Shakopee, MF.% Z=770
11
27-047015-101Rob+ert{�K. Stcwar: i4 L 6Uu ,j ti,Citi i5V",0i.0,01 $0.00 $0.00 $0.001
11-j J I\Iver �i1I I4lls lir. LI L
Burnsville, MN .=7'
7
1w 10
Hssessable Hmount: $201,B4(l
� front Foot cost: $4i.5)l7K
Square Foot Cost: 0,.0;_%;i!i60
----------- -----
a p i00.0(11, if, iLi.4 Front Foot Square Foot Total
F'o'r dei $ Ulmer Code Description Front Ft Square Ft Hsse55&ent Assessment Hsse55tftent
41 MC014-0 Robert K. Ste:,art ?J L "l;" ;;.tiff l5iii;ii,t}(; $v,i3U $0.00 $0.00
11305 River Bills Dr. RLS 424
Burnsville, MN 55737
`—ti43017-0 Robert K. Stewart 26 L 'M" i;0 15imu,Li; a 00 r, i( ,, i
$' .J $v.1v $l ��
113;;5 River Hills Dr. RLS 524
Burnsville, MN 55337
27-043012-0 Robert K. Stewart 27 L "Ll! V.00 fSL;i;(;.G? 0.00 $0,00 $0,00
11305 River Hills Dr. RLS X24
Burnsville, MM 55337
27-1;47018—i% Robert K. Stewart 28 FIG L "R' 0.00 283500.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
11705 River dills Dr. RLS 424
Burnsville, MN 55337
�1-043017`-V A! Rober g Landscaning :`.v i"ii L "'r" il,itt_? 92u597.vf) $0.00 $f,l it $0.00
4309 W. 99th st. RLS &1
Bloomington, PIN 55379
�'17-U�a'U i-u Richard Kessler 'r ' RKN 00, i.(i $,,�i; $0.Di $0.10:.
3697 E. 13th Ave. RLS 424
Shakopee, MN 55379
27-1;43010-0 Steven G. velde 31 L °1=' V.UV V.VV $i,i;ii
9095 E. 13th five.NW
RLS 824
Shakopee, MN 55379
27-f43i?i}9-0 Nei 1 J. Krause 1 L °1 ii,till i,ii;:i $L ii(i $i?, ?i,; $i),Cj0
06005 E. l<.th Ave FiLS� �ii
Shakopee, MPS 5:779
27-04A7 08-i% Neil J. Krause L "r° 4;,ilii ii,ilii $i;. �u $u.0"' MOO
9085 E. 13th Ave RLS 424
Shakopee, MM 55379
27-0470[17-0 Charles A. an Hale 74 L "6° 0.Oft 0,00 $0.00 0.
9»vi E. 13th Hrc. iiLu 524
Shakopee, MN 55:79
27-if47 fiy6-(; Jerry L. Rice 75 L F° 117.47 ?,lit'% $5,588.25 $0.00 $5,598.26
910:% E. 13th Ave. RLS s24
Shakopee, MU 5577
ll
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total 4142.85 4275+.2.00 $t 1.940.00 $1.00 $2[;1,84%.t%0
---------------
---------------
��
ALTERNATE + 2
Hssessad11e Amount: 3201,840,0i%
Front root lost: $(l 1;(%i%iii 0
1' h l+veflue - special 4.4ssescents Square Foot lost' {1.047172
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------
a p IV4%,;I• : Fr ont foot Square Coot Total
Parcel Owner Lode description front rr"t Square Ft Assessment Assessment Hssessfent
2-71-:1 i'tf�"t-1 1�rLnWest ;sphalt f .!C Sec 12. _WSp 115 �`i,(( 16ra84-.-k0)
Aa-------.v-n:-------$--,i-A-1a�-----------u-
--------
I.J
1451 CR 89 Rng 22
1111
Shakopee, MN
7 , r ,
2r_9f {%tlt-f ilOrihWesi Asahait 2 PIT siec 12, TWsp 115 11527.012 t7,08L4.v. $0.00 $'31,6,43,94 $-7-,,454'.a,4
1451 CR 85 Rng 22
Shakopee, MN 55379
27'12022-4 Eagle Creek: Land Co. v P!0 Sec 12, TWsp 115 410.00 250470.00 3:1.%i% $11,815.11 $11,815.11
372 It. Peter 5t. Rng 22
St. Paul, MN 55102
a =,5 - 7
11-X12012
Eagle Lreef: Land Co. 4 Pri nec 12, TWsp 115 a,�i.OG 2230/0.00 '{v.0(1 $10,,781t.71 310,78/.,7
1
372 St. Peter St. Rng 22
low -jt. Pali, ilii 551.4
27-912022-1
Eagle Creek Land Co. 5 P;0 pec 111 115 35il,liii 21286010.00' r 7:- 7 $i r.
pp7
g , TWsp V {ft 1,L'!a/1 311x,Ia 1i
.72 St. Peter St. Rng 22
St. Paul, MN 55102
7-057001-0 Arden dale G%riepp s, Li _1 vara: Add n 283. - ifih-vZ u i fi%,V 35.264.46 35,264.46
Rt f, Not 102')7
Shakopee. rill 55379
27-057!}t'tt-0 Lriepp Bros. Contr. Co. =1 d (1,(i!: "55a ; i' %i :,re ^,c
liar a=_ Hu ie i__ u.t•l) 3v. i.v �,7i 3L,C�u4.71
Rt 1, Yvon 1007
shakcpee, rira 55379
!t
i- 5i003-ii Arden d Dale Brlepp u __ N1 liaras Add n 0.00 1027 5.00 $011100 i A=,,7 2 A 8475.7"
Rt 1, Fox 1i107
Shakopee, 4M 55779
L, 0,/002 0 dWiaht & Luella ikon 9 L1 N2 01100 12123417.003i:�,�i�� 35s-5,221.80 $5,821.80
e�t
6F40 Vincent Ave S. italley RIch 1st
Richfield, MIF 55411-3
1;-q1M'*-0 Earl Zacharias 112% Fr'O Sec ii, T�;_.p 115 0.00 1i,8�;2.00 $0.00 $,,,137.00
PO cox 115 Rng 22
Savage, MN 55378
27-912025-0 Glenn Zacharias 11 P110 Sec 12, TWsp 115 :..00 108900.00 3i%,i%ii ,1 l%il ;.5,,1.-;,(iii
2300 Horizon lir. Rng 22
Burnsville, MN 55:37
27-912024-s% Af RoQerg Landscaping 12 r'fii Sec 12 iwsp 115 11;.00 415; 6.0?: U ` - _- _a
'u`' .Lb ?11 -MLL.wt i'1 .OZ..uu
43%Y na q94-r
ti.
RnG_ 2i
Bloomington, MPS 554311
12
Assessat+l£ Amount: r201.84!.i}0
Front Foot Lost: ;. ;;,;!,;!
1'th Avenue - Special Assesments Square Foot Cost: 0 (}47172
------- ------------- -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
map t;,{,%0 is%0.0 % Front Foot Square Foot Tutai
Parcel a 04ner Lode Uescriytlon Front Ft :,cuare Ft HSsessment Assessment Hssessgent
2 9120,241 1 Roy E. Cogswell 1' P,:0 Se1: Tasp 115 -----5 41,50. L5�V V.50 $2,56.0.5.0
1120,1 Upton Ave. S. Ring 21
B;oomington, MN 55'�•r
17':190';}1';; Roy E. Cogswell i4 Li CI i't,!'(i 6961 .00 $},i) 63,255.65
LJ
11101 Upton Ave. J, Valley Rich 1st
Elcaminaton. M.1' =77
;7-057()05-0% gill1am H. Coo If.e 15 L5 B11 V.vv }i�! it'.•=J `;Ic. i r4,019.2i
5512 Thomas Ave. S. Maras Add'n
Minneapolis, MN 55410
27-05;00:6-0 Lundgren Properties
es 16 L5 R1 ;;,R;i! + ; -�-, ;Cl9 p- 1410 i f.0 Q i $4,919.'; $419H.31
560? 35th Ave. S. Maras Add n
Minneapolis, MN 55417
27-057007-0 William H. Cooke 17 L7 ni �--. 0 ^°°.00 s!. jl 4.91u.49 f4 919.49
-- ._ i 42B
55121
Thomas Ave. S. Maras Add n
Minneapolis, MN 55410
27-043002-0 Daniel Mahoney iG L
8991 E. lath Ave. RIS t 2 4
Shakopee, MN 55379
27-04 003-0 _Sohn E. Miller 19 L _ 1El0.0,0, 01.0j $(".0t,
w�. �(.v.. #:•,Oil
;516 E. 1'th Ave. RLS' s24
Shakopee, MINI 5531y
27'i!4'L%t}4-U Daniel C1'iee'r£r 1011,i)(i 0.06 l}i 1 ;;, U, 00
9040 E. l:tn A'r'e. P': '524
Shakopee, MN 55'-°
27-+.!42.01}5-0 Raymond Moen 21 "E° ltti}.tjt} 0.00 $0.00 Vis),t:i! o. }v'
%vi E. 1''sh life. N.b 524
_ZZ?.0
Feiean"ode£, MN. u�>•i r
:;4'::19—i: Robert ye a L 0.00 1018-16,35.00 :0.00 $5,130.54 t5,130.54
11305 River Hills Dr. RLS 124
Burnsville, MN
27-:14'016-0 Raymond E. Moen 23 L RPO 0.;;v ti.v0 $0.00 ;G,00 $0.00
64 E. 13th Ave. PLS #24
Shakopee, Mid 5379
1-7-047-6,15-0 Robert ,. StewartL "L` 0.00 i5000.00 #:i.lJt 571!7.58 #!1;7.58
11105 River Hills Dr. r:L= t2*
Lurnsville, MN SNJJ/
1 �
Front Foot Cost: $0.000000
13t i Avenue - 4uerial ses8)ent5 Quare Foot (:QSt: 0.047172
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------
Map .!,'':1�' f," Foot Square vat i;=ta1
� .!.;. 1ti;,ii�,; From F
iarCei # under i:ove Description Front Ft 115CHr£ Ft Hssesseent HSSessdent Hssessment
?A i u 1.,..1 k L r n u' if;
2%-4r4.v19'J 0u[i t n. Steuart 25 L N lt,f,tl i_500.
c}.,}i),Vi! $:1,!9' $7 $1L71.:O
1131"15 river Hills Dr. RLS #24
Burnsville, HN 553.'/
Z., V4 i%1'-. rCv£f t K. `ierar t b L °�i'1 lt.i%U 1150166,00 $0,i)Q
113(%5 river Hills Dr. RLS #24
Burnsville, HN 55337
21-043012-0 Robert K. Stewart 27 L `L° 6.00 15600.06 ti)'00 $76`.58
11305 River Hills Dr. RLS #24
Burnsville, HN 5573
27-4%4?618-:) Rooert k;. Stewart 28 F'!0 L °R° 6.i)6 283560.Cit $0.00 $13,1.13.19 $13,373,19
11705 River Hills Dr. RLS #24
Burnsville, HN 15-5,7
1.?-V V19-Li Al roGerg Landscaping
r'rD L °H" i).U0 82t597,i}i) $0.Of, $78,y92,0:, $'8,°92.($3
4309 W. 99th St. RLS #24
BloominGton, HN 15'70
27-$)43011-f) Richard Kessler ';) L °K` O.; r),%6s`.i7,i7c%
9fM E. 13th Ave. RLS 24
Shai:uBee, MN 553'°
27-64361$1-0 Steven G. i+ei ae 31 L `t.. 6,6; 6, ii
l 6 $ii, ri
9095 E. i3th Ave. rL, rz.
Shakopee, HN 5.3 9
27-04-00?-V Nell J. F.rause 1? '(iV, 0
9085 E. 13th Ave Ri .; t24
Shakopee, HN 55379
�r u•,,:
271-043008-0N£11 J. Krause L !1 :iii i.{ii) $0.00
9685 E. 13tH Ave
Shakopee, MN 5:-).',7-
'1
043607-0 Charles A. `lar$ Hale 34 L t.`1, U.UV V.iii) $6,66 $0.00 $0.00
9081 E. 13th Ave. RLS tat tY
,.. Shakopee, HN 5571-
27-643006-0 Terry L. Rite 35 L Fu6.'.. $6,G"•7 $6,6:7
9100 E. 13th Ave, RLS s24
Shakopee, JIN 553;
Tt3! 4242.85 42.78832.66 $0.06 $261,640.06 $°.11i M—%,6A
---------------
---------------
14
ALTERNATE # 3
Assessable Amount: €201,640.00
Front Foot Cost: €:.6.543076
13th Avenue - Special Asses;ents Square Foot Cost: 0.416869
-------------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------------------------------------
e.-
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
hiap 6t%,�!! 4U,
Farcei i Owner Code Description Front Ft Square Ft FF Assess SF Assess Total Assess
--------------------------------------------- ------
21-91;'1%lv-i hcrthwest Hsphalt 1 F' G Sec 11.
, Twsp 115 520'.00 169684.1%�% $14,844.40 €3,2t%5.49-----€16,041.69
1451 CR 89 Eng 22
Shakopee, MN 55379
27-91 0:%6-i Northwest Asphalt P1u :;ec 12, Twsp 115 1527.92 6701824,01% €43,611.54 €12,651.56 €56,269.12
ACt
1,57 CR 61 Rny 22
Shakopee, MN 55379
%7_011
2, ,2021-4 Eaple Creek Land Co. 3 'r', Tw'ry 115 250410.00 ,uivi €4,776
,04 €16,426,71
372 St. Peter St. Rr,g 22
St. Paul, MN 55102
27-912012-3 Cagle Creek. Land Co. 4 PHO Sec 12, Twsp 115 350.60 226690,00 €9, 08 $4,315,00 €14,305.16
372 St. Peter St. Rng 22
St. Paul, MN 55102
_u ,21_1 C - : 7 1 "'_ Y' �,C-6io'. , +to -Ci+ '- SR _^c
ii :120- 2 a Eagle Creek Land Co, P%t% £C lc, Twsp 1,5 :_+0,175 �2vu,t..0?% ,,, rrv.vc .+ -'.� ;1401;%6.11
372 .cit, Peter St. RR�j 22
St. Paul, MN 55140%2
17_ �;011t1-0 Arden n Dale Griepp 6 Li B1 �ara5 HG_ n [�•_„ li L € u.=_ F ,ivt. lt%.2v�.3i
t1
...
Rt 1, Box 1007
Shakopee, MN 55379
27-05,7002-0 Griepp Bros, Contr. Co. 7 Lt BI tsar== Hoon (%i% "�° i%(i €0.001 €6ii.B6 381',08
'iJ 556, i
Rt 1, Box 1007
Shakopee, 'rtr' 55319
27-{%5,''01:3-ti Arden e7 Dale Griepp 0 0 Bi 10 -5 "HO n i,iiil 102725.00 €11,00 €I,93 .i9 €1,936.i;
Rt 1, Box 1007
Shakopee, MN 5:53 9
,(;,- {� t.., ..)0 123417 t $0.00 € 72 € %'
2, ?•,9102 i% Dwight & Luella Olson L1 62 i , ,0% 1,326. .: 2,328.7_
6826 Vincent Ave S. aiie Rich ist
Richfield, 14N 55423
tI-`.%12_20 C > 7 tip ift -t 9
147 -0 Earl Zacharias 10% PIG _£c 12, Iwsp :,�, 0%' 106,00.00 rv, it, €;,054,a0 €2,054.80
PO Bon 15 Rrig 214
.r
Savage, MN 55376
27-9112025-0 Glenn Zacharias 11 P O Sec 11, Iwe.p 115 0.0%0 106900.00 #.; % €2,l%54.0+0% %2,054.8S;
2300 Horizon Cir. RRC.
Burnsville, MN 55337
17-912014-0 Al Rooera Landscaping 12 PSec 121 Twsp 115 {%.014% t% $0.Of) $7 8"?.15
4 09 W. 99th St. Rrio 22
Bloomington, MN 55431
15
Assessable Amount: $201,840.Of,
Front Foot Cost: $28.543078
17th Avenue - Special Assesmerts `quare FootCest: %.016869
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
il."•'1V.
Map G 4111.i°j 4
Parcel 4 Owner Code Description Front Ft Square 'rt FF Assess SF Assess Total Assess
27-912024-1 Rov E. Cogswell 13 PiD Sec 112, Twsp 115 0.00 54450.00
0.00 X1,017.4} $1,027.40
112101 Upton Ave. S. Rng 22
loox.inoton, MN 1.5777
27-i:c?O;i-0 Roy E. Cogswell 14 Li Bi 0.00 69017.00 $0.00 $1,302.26 $1,302.26
112;1 Upton Ave. S. Vallev Rich 1st
Bloomington, MIN 55337
..
27-057005-0 William N. Cooke 15 !` _1 0.00 104283.$70 $0.00 $1,967.68 $1,967.68
5512 Thomas Ave. S. Maras Add`n
Minneapolis, MN 55410
27-057006-0 Lundgren Properties i6 L6 B1 0.00 $04285.00 $0.00 $1,967.72 #1,967.72
5609 35th Ave. S. tiaras Add:n
..
Minneapolis, MN 554$7
27-057007-0 William H. Cooke i? Li si 263.7; 104289.00 $8,098.53 $1,967.60 $10,066.33
5512 Thomas Ave. S. raras Add'n
Minneapolis, MN 55410
41 0430012-0 Daniell Mahoney i8 L "B' 100101) i%,t}:? ::2,854.31 $0.06 32,654.•31
8992 E. 13th Ave. RLS 424
Shakopee, MN 55:701
-h430 3- 2 % -r%a " ill' ri-` -r'' 71 $r} �i� � X04.31
i/ 43Vi3 i. John C. Miller ii � I 10 Cl 1 C'..til• +�,�_i.• .1 L,
9616 E. 17th Ave. RLS 424
Shakopee, MN 55379
, i , 54.3i $V.G'0 -2,85;.3127-0430(4-i Daniel Cneever f;ii(} (,
Yi
9040 E. 113th Ave. ";La %2�
Shakopee, MN 55379
'7-OA7 c_Gi'-Vv Raymond Moen 21 L 'E" 100.1161-b„ 0.00 �.654.11.1 V1,,00 2, c4.31
9064 E. lith Ave. RLQ 4224
Shakopee, MN 55779
"7-'1 i 9- } 2n "`" (i,it% �' ' t`1 '}, %0 (1 ' 22 ' ' "
.. 0430_ 0 Robert K. Stewart 2 L r 108:63.00 $; C $�,_5�.�. $�,05�..�
11305 River Hills Dr. RLS 124
Burnsville, MN 5533•'
27-043016-0 Raymond E. Moen 27 L "P" 01,00 0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
00164 E. 134-h Av£. RLS 124
Shakopee, MN 553$9
t7-014$0%10-0 Robert K. Stewart 24 L "D" 0.0015000.00 $0,001 F26 .0}7 112=3.07
11105 River Hills Dr. RLS z*24
Burnsville, MN 55737
16
Assessabie Amount: $201,84).00
Front toot most: $28.547078
13L 1 Aven�lie - Sped Ll Ass-_'l ent-2 Square 1 LV4. C�st:
'lap Gly.I,f 1'H 411,t,%:j Xh
Parcel # Owner Lode Description Front Ft Square Ft FF Assess SF Assess Total Assess
17-04ZV _0 °' 11�° 154G0 ��% $i% $LVJ.U3
1715;•14 t• Robert �,. Stewart 25 'L r, 11,1111 1 , r iii; 3 1? ,��
11305 River Hills Dr. RmL5 #24
Burnsville, Mil' )r51533'
, 1
21-043013'0 rab£ri_ lK:. Stewart
5i%iit%._. �tl,{jil sB .0 $283.V31
113:15 River Hills Lr. RLS n24
Burnsville, MN 5533;
27-0430112-0 Robert K. Stewart -,7 L "L° i1,1i% 15011.(10 $V.V- $283.VJ $i`w.U3
11305 River Hills lir. RLS #24
Burnsville, 191; 55337
27-1143018-i1 Robert K. Stewart 28 P.10 L °R° 0.110 28351 .00 $0.00 $J,J47.L8 $5,349.28
11305 River Hills Dr. RLS 124
Burnsville, 41111 55737
27-043014-0 AI Roberg Landscaping 29 P I L "F'" 11,111; 81i=9i.l.;i; y!,q! $1.15 v.S1 X15.5;6.81
43(i° u 94th : ,: ,
R. st. R. i•fL7
Bloomington, MN 55374
�1 43011-i% Richard Kesler L '"'k; ii,i,ii ;,ii:i ;.;,1111 ;`.ti, TV,VV
90197 E. 13th Ave. RLS #24
Srakopee, MN 55319
27-043610-0 Steven G. Velde -i L °J ti,;i; 'ii V V I, ii V ti 1
V. $_•... $i is �:. 0
_ 9095 E. lath Ave. RLS #24
Shakopee, Mei :55374
27-047000-0 Neil J. Kraalse2, L "l° ..111% ;ii + IJ
9085 E. 13th Ave r,LS 414
Shakopee, MN 55379
27-04366B-0 Heil s. Krause 33 L `H° 0.00 0,11:1 $U,i%i% $0 00, $0.00
9085 E. l3th Ave t1Li #214
S1a'roue£, MN 5031
'17-043007-0 Charles A. Van Hale 34 L i;,fi;l !t'% $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
01081 E. 13th Ave. ;:LS X24
M{{, r-'!V
'-1143006-0 Terry L. Rice 5 _ `F` 117.4'7 t;,;it; $3,352.46
2 $O.Oi% $3,352.45
;kill E. 13th Ave. RLS ;i4
Shakopee, MN 55379
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total 14c 2.815 4-27 31.6 ti-1.1.} .Vi $vi%.i__.l',I. ;LVI,8t.00
---------------
---------------
17
STUDY AREA
BOUNDARY ,
STORM
"`.► SEWER -
2 -
- FRONT FOOTAGE
\ - - - 13th A f �f
J�
PROJECT ARE -•
1 1819120121 135
1
\\ 6 17 \/!/ 23 34
1 3 4 5 /¢/4/ 33
22 1 25: 32
�--_ 16 2C1 131
2-Z� 130
8 ///!\�
15 28
NON—ABUTTING
BENEFITED AREA s
!_ 14
10 13
11
29
12
q 10
J �
12
FIG . 1
STUDY A R LEA _ /!///!!/ ///1////11/1!;�
1Q"
ALLIED TEST DRILLING COMPANY
A4000 BEAU D'RUE DRIVE
EAGAN, MN 55122
D
Exploration - Evaluation - Foundation Engineering
(612) 452.6413
28 June 1985
Mr Ray Ruska
Assistant Engineer
City of Shakopee
129 1st Avenue East
Shakopee MN 55379
Re : Subgrade Soil Investigation
Proposed Improvement of 13th Avenue
From Co Hwy 89 to East City Limits
Shakopee, Minnesota
Project 86089
In accordance with your request we have completed the en-
closed report for the above referenced project . A descrip-
tion and analysis of soils encountered together with our
conclusions and recommendations are presented in that
report .
Also enclosed is an invoice for our services .
If you have any questions on this or any other matter , or
if we can be of service in any additional capacity , do not
hesitate to contact us at your convenience .
Sincerely ,
ALLIED TEST DRILLING COMPANY
Patrick J Hines , PE
President
enclosures
pH
ALLIED TEST DRILLING COMPANY
SUBGRADE SOIL INVESTIGATION _
FOR
Proposed Highway Improvements
13th Avenue from Co Hwy 89 to East City Limits
Shakopee, Minnesota
26 June 1986
Project 86089
INTRODUCTION
This report summarizes the findings of a subgrade soil
investigation completed by Allied Test Drilling Company for
the proposed improvement of 13th Avenue in Shakopee, Minne-
sota . Project termini are from Scott County Highway 89 to the
east City Limits , a distance of approximately 2400 feet . Said
work was performed for the City of Shakopee, hereinafter re-
ferred to as the "Owner" .
Three soil borings were performed within the project
area to establish soil profiles , water table elevations , and
other information . In addition , gradation and organic content
tests were performed upon selected samples . From this data ,
recommendations were made regarding pavement design and sub-
grade soil suitability for pavement support.
The proposed project consists of grading , draining , and
surfacing the roadway within the above described termini .
BORING LOCATIONS AND ELEVATIONS _
The boring locations and depths were generally chosen by
the Owner in conjunction with Allied Test Drilling Company .
Borings were located in an attempt to best assess representa-
tive soils within the project area . Locations are as noted
86089
on the boring logs .
Ground elevation at each boring was not determined as
this information can be readily obtained by field crews in
the course of site surveying .
FIELD INVESTIGATION
The borings were performed usinc the Power Flight
Auger method of investigation . Refer to the attachment
(color-coded blue) for a description of this procedure .
Also contained on that attachment are descriptions of
methods of soil classification and groundwater measure-
ment. In addition to the textural classification according
to the Mn/DOT tri-axial chart , soils were further classi-
fied according to AASHTO M 145 , Classification of Soils
for Highway Construction Purposes . This classification
system is also illustrataed on the referenced attachment .
SOIL BORING RESULTS
Attached are logs for each of the borings together
with a key explaining terms and entries . The depth of in-
dividual layers of soil may vary somewhat from those indi-
cated on the logs due to the inexact nature of auger sam-
pling and the occurence of transition between soil layers .
Also attached is a report on laboratory tests results
for organic material and a report detailing gradation
results .
The borings evidence the area under consideration to
have buried organic soil in two out of three borings (Bor-
86089
--:1-
ing 1 , 3" to 2 ' 6 Boring 2 , 2 ' to 3 .51 ) . Organic content
varied , but is somewhat low in both , less than =% .
Material above organics in Boring 2 is a sandy grav-
el . Excepting this , thin layers of aggregate surfacing ,
and buried organic layers , the site consists of a clean to _
loamy fine sand .
Groundwater is evidenced directly in Borings 1 and 2 ,
5 to 6 feet . This is especially significant because of
frost-susceptible soils (buried organic layers) present in
these borings . No groundwater is indicated in Boring 3 .
However , it is once again emphasized , as explained in
the attachments , that water level indications are for the
time of testing only .
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
The following conclusions and recommendations are
based upon interpreted results of boring logs . Because the
borings represent a small portion of the site in relation
to the proposed area of work , ongoing review of construc-
tion should be carried out . Actual excavations may reveal
subsurface soils of a different nature than those observed
in the borings , in which case the Soils Engineer may want
to be contacted for revised recommendations (see the fol-
lowing "Limitations of Investigation") .
1 . Embankments :
Fills for roadway construction purposes should conform
to the requirements of AASHTO M 57 , "Materials for Em-
bankments and Subgrades" . A-1 , A-2-4 , A-2-5 , or A-3 ma-
86089
-4-
terials , compacted to 100% of maximum density at optim-
um moisture content , should be used in the upper 3 feet
OF suborade . Below , 95% of compaction should be
attained .
Z . Pavement Design Values :
The pavement design section in the area of the pro-
posed construction is somewhet limited by the presence
Of organic soils . These soils should be removed and not
used for any construction purpose except possibly top-
soiling . Other areas of construction should be careful-
ly monitored to detect additional layers of buried or-
ganic soil , which also should be removed .
The overlying fill material in Boring Z and other
granular soils that may overlie buried organic layers
may be salvaged and used for roadway embankment pur-
poses .
ur-
poses .
If organic soils are removed as outlined above , and
if the upper three feet of proposed roadway embankment
are constructed using material similar to basal soils
found in all borings , then pavement design sections may
be designed using a Soil Resistance Strength (R-value)
OF 70 .
Design of pavements should conform to Mn/DOT flex-
ible pavement design policy and chart as given in the
Road Design Manual , Chapter 7-5 . 0 .
86089
-6-
Limitations of Investigation
The Soils Engineer has prepared this report in accord-
ance with generally accepted soils engineering practices .
Because the borings represent only a small area of the
total site and for other reasons , Allied Test Drilling Com-
pany does not warrant that the borings are necessarily rep-
resentative of the entire project , but only of the boring
locations at the time of investigation . No warranty of the
site is made or implied .
The scope of this report is limited strictly to estab-
lishment of soil profile together with only those conclu-
sions expressly made . The site investigated is not certi-
fied with respect to any requirements such as building codes ,
local or state ordinances , federal rules and regulations ,
1pot boundary surveys and setbacks , environmental considera-
tions , etc , which may or may not be applicable .
Allied Test Drilling Company has backfilled and com-
pacted all boring holes as well as possible under then ex-
isting conditions . However , some continuing settlement may
occur if construction does not take place within the near
future . The Owner should check boring holes ( frequently at
first , then after each change of season) for signs of set-
tlement . Any settlement discovered should be backfilled
with additional soil , preferably free-flowing granular ma-
terial . This monitoring should continue for at least one
season until no additional settlement is evidenced .
86089 I
-7-
Samples of soil from the borings will be retained in
the office of Allied Test Drilling Company for a period of
90 days from the date of testing . After 90 days , the sam-
ples may be discarded unless a request is received to re-
tain them for a longer period .
Engineer ' s Certificate
I hereby certify that this plan , specification , or
report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision
and that I am a duly registered Professional Engineer under
the laws of the State of Minnesota .
ALLIED TEST DRILLING COMPANY
Patrick J . Hines , P .E Date
Registration No . 1?086
Method of Investigation (cont , d)
Unless otherwise specified , no tests upon inplace
soil , such as for compaction , percolation , etc . , were per-
formed except , in some instances , to note the rate of
drilling ( a general indication of inplace compaction) .
Soil Classification
Sails were classified by field personnel and verified
by the Soils Engineer according to the Minnesota Department
of Transportation (Mn/DOT) triaxial chart . A reproduction
of this chart showing composition by grain size percentages
of the various soil class types is attached to this report .
Groundwater
In order to establish the possible occurance of ground-
water in the region of testing , one or more of the boring
holes were allowed to stand for a period of time , that peri-
od depending on the free-draining nature of soils encounter-
ed , and then checked for standing water or cave-in prior to
backfilling . In addition , soil samples were checked for
mottling ( discoloration the result of oxidation in water
flucuation zone) and saturation .
However , because of the nature of soil and due to va-
rious meteorological and geological influences which occur
over a large area and time span and which can affect the
site , an accurate measurement of the highest annual ground-
water or range in fluctuations thereof usually cannot be
determined in the time frame and scope allowed for most
investigations . Observed water levels , if any , are indica-
tive of groundwater at the time of testing only .
}
ALLIED TEST ORILLIN3 =O ''ANY Attachment tc Soils Report f' itC.
MrTHDD 0= INV71-ST12ATION
AUGER BORINGS
Allied Test Drilling Company uses a number of varia-
tions of methods of investigation by auger borings to de-
termine soil profile . Most commonly , the power flight auger
(FA) method is employed . Sometimes a hand operated auger
(HA ) is used . Refer to the main body of the report and to
the boring logs for an indication of the method chosen .
Requirements for these investigations are outlined in
ASTM D 1452 , "Soil Investigation and Sampling by Auger Bor-
ings" . In the power flight auger procedure , a S" diameter
solid stem helical flight auger is advanced into the ground
by mechanical/hydraulic means and withdrawn at appropriate
intervals . Nature of subsurface soil is determined by ob-
serving and sampling disturbed material found on the flight
auger . Representative samples are retained , sealed , and
stored for future testing or reference , if necessary . After
cleaning the auger , it is inserted into the bore hole again
and the process is repeated until the desired testing depth
is accomplished or until refusal (failure to advance the
auger due to bedrock , detached boulder , hardpan , etc , ) oc-
curs . A log of each boring is kept noting date , depth of
changes in strata , description of soil in each major strat-
um , groundwater conditions , and other data .
The hand operated auger procedure is the same as
above , except that the 1" to 3" auger is advanced into the
ground by hand means . This type of boring is usually re-
served for investigations to a shallow depth in an area
fairly inaccessible by machinery .
( over , please)
Attachment to
Soil Investigation Report
ALLIED TEST DRILLING COMPANY
CLAY
100%
O
r
90
0�
so
0
70
0
e
CLAY 60
0
ar
50
0�
40
Or SANDY CLAY SILTY CLAY
30
CLAY LOAM
OA SANDY CLAY LOAM SILTY CLAY LOAM
20
O �G SANDY LOAM LOAM
6 y
SILT LOAM
st slinniiy plastic
�2
0?0 G A,
SGS O O Oss' O O
TEXTURAL CLASSIFICIATION OF SOILS
FROM : Mn/DDT Grading S Base Manual
Figure B 5-592 . 603
Note ; The term "Loam" refers to a particular mixture of
sand , silt , and less than 20% clay . Adjectives des-
cribe the prdominating material (s) in a loam .
Classification of SoillSandioil-A
--------------
ggregate Mixtures
Grncral(7.,<aifxatinn Granular Materials Silt-Clay Materials
UCS.or less passing f)n75 mm) 04ore than 35,7,passing 0.075 mm)
E-I A-2
croup Cl.�aaificn Linn --A-3 A-2.4 A-2.3 A-2.6 A-2-7 A-4A-3 A 6 A•7-
3Siem Analyse.Percent pasvngA-7-6
2(I)mm INn 10150 0425 mm INo 4013tl min. .... ....0memm INo 2nm 1U mac 14 mit, 75 crux. 33 rnac. )3 crus. 36 min. 36 min. 36 min. 36 rain.
Charagena,cs of Fracm+,pasmng 0.424 mm INn 401
Lis(u,d omit .
F'L,.,,s;tr i,xks .... 40 mist. 41 min. 40 max. 41 min. 40 cru:. 41 min. 40 mat. 41 min.
6 mix. N P. 10 ns:,a. 10 nus. I I min. I I min. 10 crux. 10 Max. 11 min. l I mint
Usual Types of Significant C—%f,tuenl Alnrria is Stene FraFmentf, Fi of
I LI Sand Sint Silty or Clayey ayeY Grascl and d Silty Soils Clayey Soils
General Rung as SuhgraAe Exccllcni In Grind
Fair to Poor
•Plaatmts index of A-7-5 subgroup m equal to or less than LL mint,30.Piasticlly index of A-7-Ls sabgtoup is greater than LL minor 30(see Figure 2).
From : AASHTO M 145
ALLIED TEST DRILLING COMPANY
I
PROJECT: 86089 - 13th Ave from CR89 to East City Limits , Shakopee , MN
LOG OF BORING NO: 1
+ 1 G
DEPTH SURFACE ELEVATION: SAMPLE LAS 8 OTHER TESTS
IN GEOLOGY N WB TYPE R W E p.L .
FEET DESCRIPTION AND CLASSIFICATION
3„ and o1 Surfacing N
1 Black S1 . Organic Loamy Sand Topsoil FA
(A-3 6 A-8) Organics
2
Tan Loamy Fine Sand FA radation
3 (A-3) Dee ITCO
eport
5 #200+)
6 6 ' )
saturated
7
1 '
8
9
10
End of Boring - No Refusal
11
12-
13-
14J
213-14J
I
15
1B-
I
17-
is-
19-
20-
21-
WATER
718182021WATER LEVEL MEASUREMENTS DRILLING DATA
DATE TME SAMPLED CASING CAVE-INDRILLING WATER
DEPTH DEPTH DEPTH t4UD LEVEL LEVEL Crew Chief GV
6-5 5 : 35 E ' 4" 6 ' 4" Method F1 i cht Auoer
I
IBoring Completed: 6-5--S 5
ALLIED TEST DRILLING COMPANY
PROJECT: 86089 - 13th Ave from C989 to East City Limits , Shakopee , MN
LOG OF BORING NO: 2 - 8+50
DEPTH SURFACE ELEVATION: SAMPLE
IN LAB OTHER TESTS
GEOLOGY N WB
FEET DESCRIPTION AND CLASSIFICATION TYPE R W DEN p.�: radation
1 .Tan Sandy Gravel Roadway FA See ITCO
1 (A.-1-b) Fill Report #
86203
2
Black Oroanic 51 . Plastic Topsoil
3 Sandy Loam (A-2-4$ A=8) 2 . 6%
Organics
4 Brown Fine Sand
(A-3)
5 5 . )
wet
6
7
8
9
10
End of Boring - No Refusal
11—
12-
13 ( i
14
i
is-
Is-
17-
5
16-
17
18
18
20
21
WATER LEVEL MEASUREMENTS DRILLING DATA
DATE TIME SAMPLED CASING CAVE-IN DRILLING WATER
DEPTH DEPTH DEPTH UD LEVEL LEVEL Crew Chief GV
10 7 ' 4" None Method 6- Flight Auoer
Boring Completed 6-5-86
ALLIED TEST DRILLING COMPANY
PROJECT: SSOB5 - 13th Ave . from CRSS to East City Limits , Shakopee , MN
LOG OF BORING NO: 3 - Eta 16+ 15
DEPTH SURFACE ELEVATION: I SAMPLE LAB b OTHER TESTS
IN GEOLOGY N WB
FEET DESCRIPTION ANDCLASSIFItATION } TYPE R WEN1p:L.
Orange-Tan Fine Sand FA Dradation
1 (A_3) See ITCO _
sport #
2 6204
(4.4% Pass
3-
4-
5-
7-
12-
13 4571213
14-
15 N
End of Boring - No Refusal
16
17
Note : Surface oil trea me t
is-
19-
20-
21-
WATER
8182021WATER LEVEL MEASUREMENTS DRILLING DATA
SAMPLED CASING CAVE-IN DRILLING WATER
DATE TIME DEPTH DEPTH DEPTH LID LEVE LEVEL Crew Cnoet GV
6-5 4 : 47 14 ' Ory Method
E" F 1 i ght Auger
.
Boring Completed:
I T _ INSTANT TESTING COMPANY
! 4000 BEAU D' RUE DRIVE
Co EAGAN, MINNESOTA 55122 TEST REPORT
Phone 454-3544
GRADATION ANALYSIS FOR LAB. NO. 862202" — r2'04
CITY OF SHAKOPEE
PROJECT: :B 8608-0
SUBMITTED BY: ALLIED TEST DRILLING COMPANY
PAT HINES, PE
DATE SAMPLED: JUNE 5, 1906
DATE SUBMITTED: JUNE 6 1986
TEST RESULTS ON :AMPLE: OF: INPLACE MATERIAL FROM AUGER BORINGC
:AMPLEG FROM: ROADWAY AS BELOW
•GRADATION TEST RESULTS
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
LAE. NO. 26— �Crc— X04
SAMPLED FROM BORING NO. 1 2
SUBGRAC-E ROADWAY FILL SUBGR'ADE
DEPTH: C — 10' 0 — 2' 0 — 15:.
SIEVE SIZE PASSING PA':SING % PASSING
------ --------- --------- ---------
-. , .ii 10F1
100
#4 99. 5 G2. 9
#20 99. 1 42. 2 99=
#4b 4 —'7'5. r
5
vim.
#80 :17-
6 17. c; 12. 0
#2710c1 B. 4 9. C 4. 4
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
CHARGE CODE:
COPIES TO: ALLIED TEST DRILLING COMPANY
Signed `
I
G. J. Kopacek Professional Engineer - Registration No. 7254
University of Minnesota SOIL TEST REPORT PAGE Z OF 12 `
Soil Testing Laboratory
St. Paul, MN 55108 ALLIED TEST DRIL I hl; _ _ Report No: 2954
4CCC SEAL D'RUE DR Date Received:
PAT HINES 06/06/86
eportedQ
�.UL E � •,�, Date R : 06/1G/E6 _
SOIL TEST RESULTS
Field and Laborator Sampiing Soll Or snit NOg-N Bray 1 P Olsen P K
y g Soil Buffer phosphorus Phosphorus Potassium
Sample Number Depth Texture Matter Nitrate
Numbers Inches (lb/A) PH Index (Ib/A) (Ib/A) (Ib/A
1 175E C-2 LS L 1. 1
2 1757 2-3 I LS L 2.6
Field ---7—
nd Mp S Zn Cu B Soluble 1
NS.umbers Mag,/Aum tPPSuITr (PP—)
CoPR!r DPM) (PPM) Salts
I MANGANESE
(L�/A mmho
L
F
RECOMMENDATIONS
LNKs'�Cr.N
AC CRGP INEICATEC. FCk VERTILIZEk RECUMMENDATIGN CiNTACT YGUR
COWivTY EXIrASICh OFFICE ( BELCH) CF REFER TG EXT. BULLETIN )
AG—Bit-0d5IS CL16t TO CCN.PLITEP Fi CGkAMMLD SGIL TEST khL0YPENDATI01\S.
1
1
I
l
S
Soil Series(type) For additional information contact
Gount
y•HENN EP I N or Mapping Unit your county extension spent'
Township: RL'BERT J AUGAAj (612) 5.79-4321_
Section. Q>vl� CUSTOMER
Receipt. This is to acknowledge receipt of payment in the amount of$
l3
LAW OFFICES
KOENIG, ROBIN, JOHNSON & V700IJ
WILLIAM R. KOENIG 730 EAST LAKE STREET JAMES M. VENTURA
JAMES G.ROBIN WAYZATA, MINNESOTA 55391 T.CHRIS STEWART
PETER W.JOHNSON
JOHN W.WOOD,JR. (612)475-1515 GREGORY E. KELLER
GARY L.PHLEGER
C.SCOTT MASSIE CONNIE GARDNER
ANN C. SCHULL Leal Assistant
,July 25, 1986
Mr . Julius Coller
Attorney at Law
211 First Avenue West
Shakopee, MN 55379
Re; Wishing Well Farm, Inc. v. City of Shakopee
Dear Mr . Coller ;
I would like to take this opportunity to formally restate my
client ' s offer of a compromise in order to bring about a speedy
resolution to its dispute with the City. The success of my
client ' s venture depends upon its ability to enter into binding
contracts with its potential customers prior to the end of the
Thoroughbred Meet at Canterbury Downs (September 2, 1986 ) . Such
contracts will require my client to make assurances of completed
facilities by April of 1987. Without a timely resolution of our
dispute, such assurances cannot be given and Wishing Well. Farm
will likely suffer significant financial losses in 1987.
I have been authorized to propose a compromise that would impose
the following two additional conditions upon the CUP;
1 ) That the CUP would expire in 15 years if , at such time,
the contiguous properties have been rezoned to
residential .
2 ) That the density of horses not exceed three horses per
acre.
In exchange, we request that the condition prohibiting
construction of a residence be deleted , Harry Hacek presently
resides in Shakopee and has his children enrolled in the Shakopee
school system. He plans to make his permanent home in Shakopee
and would much prefer that his home be located on the training
center site. Based on comments made by council members, it did
not appear that they would object to Mr . Hacek residing on the
premises.
Mr . Julius Coller
Page 2
July 25, 1986
As I have indicated, my client has far too much invested in this
business venture to abandon it. As a result, we must either
continue our legal battle or reach a compromise. My concern is
that our present legal dispute, if not resolved by compromise,
will spawn many future legal disputes that will unnecessarily
burden the time and financial resources of the city and my
client . The compromise seems to be in the best interest of all
parties concerned.
Julius, I would like to re-emphasize that this project will have
a number of substantial benefits to the community and its
citizens . It will certainly increase the property tax revenues
for the City of Shakopee and Scott County. It will increase the
number of available jobs within the community. It will be a
consumer of the county' s agricultural products and it will
provide a source of natural fertilizer at no cost to surrounding
farmers. In addition, and perhaps even more importantly, Wishing
Well Farm will be a pleasant visual experience. Its quality
buildings and fences and the fact that most of the acreage will
remain green will yield an appearance like that of the most
impeccably maintained farm.
Wishing Well wants to be a productive and contributing member of
the Shakopee community. In order that it might do so, I
respectfully request that you present each member of the Shakopee
Council with a copy of this compromise offer. To assist you in
complying with my request, I have enclosed additional copies of
this letter . I would appreciate your prompt action on my request
and look forward to your response with the council ' s reaction .
Thank you for your consideration.
Very truly yours,
KOENIG, ROBIN, JOHNSON & WOOD
J -
Ja es G. Robin
.✓
JGR:crh
Enclosure
cc : Harry Hacek