HomeMy WebLinkAbout01/13/1987 TENTATIVE AGENDA
ADJ .REG.SESSION SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA JANUARY 13 , 1987
Mayor Reinke presiding
1] Roll Call at 7 : 00 P.M.
2] RECOGNITION BY CITY COUNCIL OF INTERESTED CITIZENS
31 Nominations to Boards and Commissions - bring item 12o from 1/6 agenda
4] Downtown Redevelopment Project
51 Other Business :
b]
c]
61 Recess for an executive session to discuss labor negotiations
7] Reconvene
8] Adjourn to Tuesday, January 20, 1987 at 7:00 P .M.
John K. Anderson
City Administrator
3
MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator
FROM: Judith S. Cox, City Clerk
RE: Planning Commission Opening
DATE: January 7, 1987
Lee Stoltzman called today to inform us that he is interested in
serving on the Planning Commission. His job no longer requires
him to travel and he would like to be considered for the opening
on the Planning Commision.
3
January 5, 1997
Remitter;
Robert M. Johnson
905 Sibley St.
Shakopee, Minn. 55379
TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN:
My name is Robert M. Johnson (Bob) . I live with my wife at
905 Sibley Street, Shakopee, Minnesota.
Having recently been asked by Gloria Vierling if I would be
interested in being on the Planning Commission for the City
of Shakopee, 1 have thought it over, and discussed it with my
wife; and have decided I would be interested.
I have lived in Shakopee for nearly 13 years. I have not been
involved in City Government; but have always been very
interested in what goes on in our City, and in the future of
Shakopee; and I feel I could be of help on this Commission.
1 have lots of experience dealing with people in the food
industry, in independent retail food stores, both large and
small for the past 35 years. My duties over the years have
been District Sales Representative, Store Engineer, doing
Appraisal work and New Store Development.
1 am presently employed by Red Owl Foods of Hopkins as New
Accounts Development Manager. My duties are calling on
independent food stores, talking them into switching suppliers,
going with the Red Owl Program.
We have two grown children and four grandchildren. My wife,
Lenore, is employed at First Minnesota Savings Bank in Shakopee.
MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator
FROM: Barry A. Stock, Administrative Assistant
RE: Downtown Redevelopment Project
DATE: January 9, 1987
Introduction:
On December 16 , 1986 , staff presented several alternatives
to the City Council in regard to the downtown redevelopment
project. The issues discussed at that time included project
phasing, project assessments, the inclusion of Third Avenue in
the project area, the proposed assessments on City parking lots,
and the cost of the proposed street rehabilitation vs. the cost
of the proposed streetscape elements.
After much discussion, the City Council suggested that a
Council worksession be held in January of 1987 to discuss the
downtown redevelopment project prior to any continuation of the
public hearing.
Background:
Project Phasing
Currently the downtown improvement project is proposed to be
construc�ed in two phases. Phase I includes street
rehabilitation and streetscape improvements to the streets
within the project area and south of First Avenue. Phase IT
of the project which will commence following the completion
of the mini by-pass, includes streetscape and street
rehabilitation to First Avenue between Atwood and Spencer.
Project Assessments
The assessment formula utilized in the downtown project is
based on a zonal method. This method was selected because
it most effectively distributes the actual benefits received
from the project to the effected property owners . Shown in
attachment #1 are eight different assessment alternatives.
(Z'=.-H) The assessment categories are listed on the left hand
side of attachment #1. Shown in attachment #2 is a map
which identifies the assessment property categories.
Each of the assessment alternatives addresses a different
combination of improvements , project area and proposed
assessment ratio. For example, alternative A is the project
as currently proposed. Third Ave. is proposed to be
constructed with the assessment costs of the parking lots
spread out over the properties within the redevelopment
area. Additionally, 250 of streetscape and 250 of the
rehabilitation costs are being assessed. In this example
the cost for a typical 601x142 ' lot is $8 , 231. 00 .
Alternative F on the other hand proposes to not include
Third Ave. in the project area and does not assess the costs
of the parking lots to the property owners. Additionally
the assessment ratio in alternative F proposes to assess 100
of the streetscape and 10a of the street rehab. In this
alternative the cost for a typical lot is $2 , 583 . 00 . Shown
in attachments #3 and #4 are the computer print outs
corresponding to each of the aforementioned alternative
assessment strategies. Computer print outs listing the
projected assessments for each of the other assessment
alternatives will be available at the Council worksession
for Councils revies .
Third Avenue
Because of the number of residential properties along Third
Ave. and the fact that the project as currently proposed
only assesses the north side of Third Ave. , staff would
recommend that Third Ave. be deleted from the project area.
City Owned Parking Lots
Council should discuss whether or not the assessment cost of
the City owned parking lots should be spread out over the
affected property owners within the development area or if
the cost should be picked up by tax increment financing.
If the parking lot assessment costs are picked up by
property owners within the redevelopment area the total cost
of a typical lot under alternative A would be approximately
$8, 231. 00. If the cost of the parking lots is picked up by
tax increment financing, ( alternative B attachment #1) the
cost for a typical lot would be reduced to approximately
$7 , 522 . 00 . In keeping with the City street rehabilitation
policy which assesses properties owned by the City of
Shakopee, staff would recommend that the assessment cost of
the parking lots be picked up by the City and paid for by
tax increment funds .
Street Rehab vs . Streetscape (Assessment Ratio)
The improvement costs in connection with the downtown
redevelopment project can be broken into two primary
components, street rehabilitation and . streetscape.
Currently approximately 590 of the project costs can -be
attributed to street rehabilitation and remaining 41% to
streetscape. The project as currently proposed assesses 250
of the street rehabilitation and streetscape costs.
City Council may wish to consider an assessment strategy
which would separate street rehabilitation costs from
streetscape costs. One alternative would be to assess 250
of the street rehabilitation costs and 100 of the
streetscape costs. ( alternative G attachment #1) Under
this scenario the total assessment cost for a typical lot
( 2 )
would be $4 , 592 . 00 . Other street rehabilitation vs .
streetscape ratios are listed in attachment #1 for your
review.
Question Raised by City Council at their December 16 , 1986
Meeting
J.Q. Is it legal for the City to defer residential assessments
and abate them after the bond term has been completed. Who
would pay for those abated assessments if this alternative
were pursued?
A. According to legal counsel from the League of Minnesota
Cities, a City may defer assessments in connection with an
improvement project. However, the municipality does not
have the authority to abate assessments. The Commissioners
of Revenue may abate special assessments if certain
hardships are met.
2 .Q. Would a mortgage company accept deferred assessments on the
sale of property?
A. After discussions with several lending institutions in our
area, unanimous consensus reveals that the cost of pending
assessments on a piece of property and the asking price for
the piece of property is usually worked out between the
buyer and the seller. Most often the seller would pay off
the pending assessments and add the costs on to the asking
price of the property. Another common practice is for the
buyer to accept the pending assessments as a part of the
purchase agreement. In either case, the seller would
receive compensation for the amount of the pending or
deferred assessment if that is his/her desire.
3 .Q. What is the timing of the proposed redevelopment project as
it relates to the construction of the bridge and mini by-
pass?
A. Pending Council action and the continuation of the public
hearing, it is possible that the street rehabilitation
portion of the project could be completed in 1987 . The
streetscape portion of Phase I would likely be completed in
1988 . Phase II of the project would not be initiated until
the mini by-pass- andbridge are completed.
According to Ken Ashfeld, City Engineer the mini by-pass
project is included in the Mn DOT construction program for
bid letting in December, 1989 with construction in 1990 .
Completion of the project is projected for the fall of 1991.
Assuming this time frame is accurate, Phase II of the
downtown redevelopment project would possibly commence in
the spring of 1992 . With completion also scheduled for
1992 .
( 3 )
4 .Q. How would the downtown redevelopment project be financed if
the tax increment proceeds from Canterbury Downs were
reduced?
A. The City of Shakopee has a development agreement with
Canterbury Downs which establishes the level of property
taxes paid and guarantee payment for two years. The two
year guarantee is to insure payment of taxes for 2 years
should the current owner go under and have to sell the
track. Shown in attachment #3 is a letter from Nathaniel B.
Wess, Canterbury Downs Assistant General Manager, assuring
the City that they are not considering a reduction in the
property taxes below that which is required in the current
development agreement.
5 .Q. Are there any plans to improve the back sides of the
buildings currently located on the north side of First Ave. ?
A. The Downtown Committee has discussed the establishment of
the following tools that will be of assistance to the
Downtown property owners in renovating their buildings: 1.
A rental rehab loan program is already available to assist
downtown property owners in remodeling apartments that they
have above their buildings . 2 . A commercial rehabilitation
loan program is currently available to property owners in
the form of an interest write down to assist them in the
renovation of their structures. 3 . Streetscaping along the
mini by-pass has been planned to help screen the rear of
buildings from traffic on the mini by-pass and the bridge.
Summary:
At the worksession, staff will be prepared to answer any
questions regarding the proposed streetscape elements. Please
bring your copy of the Downtown Feasibility Study Report to the
Council worksession. Additionally, staff would like to discuss
each of the assessment polici
attachment # 4) . es currently proposed. ( See
Council did not set a date to continue the public hearing.
Staff is recommending that the continued public hearing for the
downtown redevelopment project be set for 'Tuesday, February 10 ,
1987 after Council completes its discussion of the project.
Alternatives:
Third Avenue
i. Remove Third Avenue from the Downtown Redevelopment Project
Area.
2 . Include Third Avenue in Phase I of the Downtown
Redevelopment Project.
( 4 )
�
City Owned Parking Lots
1. Assess City owned parking lots and have the costs for said
assessments spread out over the property owners within the
redevelopment area.
2 . Have the assessment cost of the City owned parking lots
picked up by the City and paid for by tax increment funds.
Assessment Ratio
1. 25% streetscape assessment and 25% street rehabilitation
assessment.
2. 0% streetscape assessment and 25% street rehabilitation
assessment.
3 . 10% streetscape assessment and 25% street rehabilitation
assessment.
4 . 10% streetscape assessment and 10% street rehabilitation
assessment.
Public Hearing
1. Select February 10 , 1987 as the date for continuing the
downtown public hearing.
2 . Table continuation of the public hearing to a later date.
3 . Do nothing.
Staff Recommendation:
Third Avenue
Staff recommends alternative #1.
City Owned Parking Lots
Staff recommends alternative #2 .
Assessment Ratio
Staff recommends alternative #2.
Public Hearing
Staff recommends alternative #1.
( 5 )
Action Requested:
1. Move to eliminate Third Avenue from Phase I of the Downtown
Redevelopment Project.
2 . Move to have the assessment cost of City owned parking lots
picked up by the City and paid for with tax increment funds.
3 . Move to present the 25% street rehabilitation 100
streetscape assessment ratio to the affected property owners
at the continued public hearing.
4 . Move to continue the downtown public hearing to Tuesday,
February 10 , 1987 .
( 6 )
by W H b w R b b H rd 'Z7 H R b b SY b b n It a ON a 13
r• a w R w O ri w w O b 'V w O N W O l3 O
H (n rt rn b rt VI U) b rt 5'
In 'U O (n 11:1 trJ rd m C-' H
irt a m G o m m o m m o w m m (D (D m cn x .< n
C O C O rt C In n -= w rt -- O :d En cn a
m HVl m rt Hrr ZZ, (D HHrt W m m Hrt N HHrt H xih-j F- Ht•"
H w �a. �5 r• E3 H r• H r• trJ X�l Ln
�C N UQ N m m N *t m m H m H m z N C"'
O r• m O (n = O rt to z �xi to '=J (n H - O
m w :� !n O rt z O rt N rt Ic rt y
-3 Ffi w ? H w £ '3 w w z £ w O O £ rt O £
O z O td B H H. O H rt r• y a a r l-3 O O r•
rr O rt b rt rt w rt O w rt rt O C r7 rt
w rt w r• • w do rt w :r rt m w
m w UQ w 23 =
rt H. H m H m (D
M �
rt ^
(n N
00 00 .tom w N rty a. O
(n in Ln a w
N N t-+ m rt .1-9 (n n a O
-64 PI UI 'F' C (n
H H O\ O H m :O m H. m m
m m m Z a
00 00 'TJ (n w m td H
tJ fR N •Ef3 +9 N -604 =r' n t7 a. C-' G ^
Li O W O N A Woo w w . O H. a b
In rt F-' rt
F-' H N m m w rt O
H W C
0\ H H (D
H �
m
z
rt
Ln
^ w
N rt w
� -b-) •FR 111
w D` W b N N O a.
� � Lna a
0, 00 0, o w En .114 (n ~d C b a
0o O 00 (n rt (n w m w rt
In o In (D ri 7d m rt K rt
ON (D m In ac' 7G' w
00rt 00 0o En � a ao rOt �' UQ
C7 � 0 00 o n .. (D
0 0 0 0 o ro w t, td t~ =
•rf, 0 -61r, -68, tr o r- O rt
0 w O` w m rt r• rt
00 m rt a H
H o UI
1 O H D7
H m
to
^ (n
N i E3
In \ W m
�9 ^ Ort
In Lrl In b a. rt
V w rt N fn w a a
In V -6-j- (n r{ m " C ^Ln CN N O\ o m (D z (n x' m n rt
N N H (D m Ul r• • v m
a.0'Q t z
v n G w
N lfl Ln w r H rt
N N In N b O H r•
N N N �' m rt rt C
N w to m
E9 •FA fR _6R. In N
0 o w v m
V Cil H
D\ N H
H N
W
^ r,
Lri \
w �Oq ^ Oa
�» ON W O (n N C d
W m Ln lrl a �t (D
o w rt � (n w
wW �o - o d\ — H ri (n rt -
o O, o a\ H (D x (D x z
w H o (D m (n r• O
0 0 0 1.0 rt (n rt
o ~d 0 w m aQ
O O -66. -64 n C a b
-rA i N Cl w w v t7-' G
C) O In O H.
V O (D m rt H
00 �.O rt
1.O O H
H
W
sA ty O O rt
to O,
p d` O O M N W 9 ^
H �9 rt (n rt C CrJ
N N N rt (D 7q' tD
J 7d (D [A
t A A (D (D (A z
w w w -64 W 4A b 7 rt tD w z
N ON D, — O\ N N y a O
C) - w 0 r rt
0 0 H v, .. w o
H W tD b rt ts1
o, a` (D to G
H � �'•
H H
rt
EPr {p
W W H O E r!
"R \ a
0 0 0 0 CD Lna09 ^
�O �O X�- ,,a rt N b C �J
H rt M W (D
w w .L1 (D fD "
W W (D tD to x
to
O O 0 o b W (rtn ((D
O o � n aoo w
� ,� .o w w w
, ,
In 10 r rt
0 0 Ln o (D m o
O o rt
�O H (A
H 9
rt
rt
w
^ E n �
N A N V3 F \ !y rt
C) w o 0
In In a R
pp 00 tD N 9 b C
H 'A rt to rt C7
N A " (D x O
,L- 4 tD m N• z O
U,
CD (D (n G O rt
000 In t0 In :� rt (D oo rt
_6R. N v n a'
r w
{f} Ul b rt 11•
{14 O H lJ7 (D CD (n N
OO
�
W N H
H
O \ ty
H W HON 0
�D Cn ^
0 O L n rt En En w (CD x
pp w w OJ In ri
w (D (D x
Ln w :o (D v, N• z
�O (D rt N O O
w In = (n (D UO rt
vis w w � m arra
�'b O G
cl, In (A (D rt N•
0 0 r (D In r�
w rt
H
H
• ?i„
s.
_ ♦�..M.
--------------
mow—
-I,
w
N Qi ar v v Y�"
�- �, � �s �`�?`�'�♦�GSC
♦MMI �.r
~ --
� .
Attachment #]
/
/
'ASS[SSA8LE PROJECT COST; $94Y`;W
A.i4VC
�ONM0WM R2EVELOPUEN7 ASSBS�[�7S 25% S7REET &
* With Jrd Avenua * STREE7SC&FE
PlD DLK FF SUFT PR0PTYPE FROFBRTy PHASE l PHAS[ Il TOTAL
8WKER ARE� (�-4> �S�ESS ASE�SG ASSE�S
Z�-O0�028-V 2 ki G52V.VV res [ech 1 �O $G 231
27-;01V29-V 2 60.V0 852V.V0 res McReynnlds �V $S`231
27-VVNJO-V 2 60.01) G520.00res Thibudeaux 1 $0 $8`2Ji $8^231
27-VVI V3\-V 2 610,.0V8520.V0 res 8nkern
if V, 60.00 R5.20,.60 res e 1
27-001034-0 3 $V
7J,5V 04J7.VV com 8rambi}lavu J,
27-061035-6 3 42.5O 60J5.VV com Topic l $V $5`83V Z5`8JV
'LiVVI3 26.OlV 3692.0O com MA-hnoey $3'567 $3`567
27-VV1VJ7-V 3 52.7V 7483.00 com Mahoney 1 $V $7/2JV $7;2JV
. 27-VV10J8-0 3 ��.VV 7389,�V com Kw�- Shing $�O`7�3 $l0'7l3
27-�O10J9-0 J 52.0O 7592.OV mm Kwi-Shin0 � $O $7'lY7 $7`lY7
27'VOl04�-O 4 55,;V 5555,0V com R&K Propertie» � $� $6'862 �6`862
27-O01V42-V 4 41.00 2255,�V com $V 14 24 I4`544
27-00\04J-� 4 20,OV 29�1,VO cnm " " � $V �2765 $2^765
27-001O44-1 4 25.V0 355IV'.V; com Hprgutt 1 �V $3`4JV $J`4JV
27-�NO�5-V 4 2O VV 284V OO M ` `
, . com amer l $V $2 744 $2 744
2;7-0;--11046-0 4 3V.O� 426O.00 com Hil] 1 -O $4'116 $4`l16
27-OV1O4!-V 4 3l.00 Hughes �4`25J
27-00�V48-V 4 28,5V 71 VV coo., Vohnoutka 1 $V 0`91V
27-0V1049-V 4 30,VV 4260.V) cit City of Shakopee 1 �V $4`!l6 $4`116
27-001V50-V 4 uO.0S 5BV.OV com Topic1 $V 15,-
2,-0V1V50-1 4 2l.0V 2982.VV cit Ciry of Shaknpee
117-Mi 5 !42.V1980O.00 mm Johnson4
27-00,lV6V-V 5 1V1,O0 I0 $14695 $14+695
27-V0N61-V 5 V 2769.0V com Vsyel l $� �4/51i �4/5U
27-VV�V62-V 5 0,OV V.VO ci� State of MH �� 1 $� '
� $V ` $O
2 -V0065-0 6 6V.0� G��.00 res L�bens 1 �V $8,23l $8,23i
27-3N06�-V 6 6O.0� B52V.0V rss U'Caoner l $0 �8,23l $3`2J{
27-VNV7V-VB52V.00 ss Du8ois l $V $8`2J� �8`231
�7-VV]O71-V 6 6V.O; 42VV.V0 ccy Hall§ren 1 �V $6`92� $6`9Z2
27-OVlV72-0 6 ��.V� 7890.VV com John�on 1 $V ��,3�5 $6,3�5
27-�0107J-V 6 35.VV 270V.VV com Rein $4,114
Z�-0��V74-0 6 25.00 2250.OV cum �eio 1 $O �3,06 ��,A36
0w5-O 7 ��.OV �26V.0S ros Gardenier l $V $7`Y�6 $7`Y�6
27-V0�086-V 7 �0.OV �260.*) res F000�ar | $V �6,94� *6`::41
$n $0 $V
27-V01l29-O 20 8V.O0 7625.00 res Giales J $9,643 $V ^9/84J
27-OV�129-1 2V 42.00 5A4O.00 com L's Standard 3 �5`432 $V �5`�82 '
27-001OV-O 20 1VO,V; \2VVV.VV ma Amer�can Oil Co. 2 $u,526 $6`526 $�3/O52
27-0V11J4-0 21 31.S3 2O64.7V com H & D Rai}way 3 $J,365 �V 865
27'V0�l35-O 21 10.J �I695.30 com S�oks 2 s3/625 $8'�25 $�7`25V
27-001l36-V 2l 0.OV VV dp City of Sin,aropee $O $V $V
27'�0�137-V 2� 0.0V 0.VV cip Ci�y of Shakopee $O $O s�
27-S01�3G'� 2� t.VV 0.OV dy City nf Shakopee $0 $V $V
27'00\39'0V.00 City o{ 6hake $V $0 $0
~
W1U�l+0 6O
2l ,0 V G52O.0� ns 0uBois 2 $4,1|6 $4`UV ��,23{
�1l�� 2l 45.N) ��.VV �s ���rn 2 .3/�7
{WU43-V 2i \35.O0 l�}7;.VV �� obil Service/ C f r,a� $9`4W4 $}B`7, �
�4U44-V 22 �42.0�
25560u 00 com ren 4241|5
0.00 6124".00 �`�4 � �`5�
7'1 \9�.00 c� �mm 3 �3`5� � �`5�
�
�.OV �VS.� com ��ic 3 �`6N $0 �/60
�1146-0 ;V 2400.00 -OM "'PE,fel 41.1 �`6N
�."i V
/�1l5�-0 22 40.0O 24V0.O0 com �mi��� 3 $4,��4 fv
0O1i51-O 22 20.O0 60V.0`0 n
C Golla 2 $�,033
)0lL52-V 22 5\.00� 7920.OV com Goebe} 2 $3,601 $3`6O\ $7,2O2
SV115J-O 22 43.60 6VO�.4O coo Gustafsan 2 $2,974 $2,974 $5`Y48
,,A'154-0 22 27.40 243R.�V com Shakopee Finance Z $1` -59 t 1`659 $3`319
JO�155-0 22 60,V0 9�2�.VV com GuEtafam 2 $�`116 $4,\16
OV1156-0 22 67.VO 1�J4O,0O cum MensinO 2 $5/J27 1327 �lV`653
�0�l57-V 22 �5.V0 72OO.VV res Mensing 2 $4`622 $4`�22 $Y.244
O01i58-V 23 l42.VO 2862O.00 CO; lst Na�. 8ank J $22`O42 $v $22,V42
J�1|5�-0 23 90.00 9180.00 ms Nermerskirchen 3 $\ ,236 $V
62-V 23 22.V0 372O.V0 com " 3 $3,199 $V �3,l99
;6J-V 23 0.00 \V8V.VV com Topic 3 $2,O22
�V,|64-0 23 36.03 312O.00 cum Shak. Po�t @4V46 2 $2`168 �2,168 $�,335
J0i165-0 23 62.00 6-50.(10 com 5F 2 $3,624 $3,624 $7,247
V0l�66-� 2J 24.00 l68O.O0 com Topic 2 N'384 $1,384 2,76f
)01167-O 23 J0,0V 3JO0.VO com
La
7112 $J,825
}V1168-1 2J 30.VO
26f).00 com Dresen 2 $2`05O $2,058 $1,116
O0l169-V ?3 26.00 �ti92.VV Cm Theis 567
0V11��-V 23 J9.0V 553D.VO com Ca�e C}othinO 2 $2,675 $2/675 �5,J5V
�01�7i-V 2J 25.00 3550.VO com Gamess 2 $1,715 ti 7A. $3'43�
23 om King Solmmnn LGge 2 $2`126
)0117J-0 23 38,�V
54,7.UV coa L�tour 2 $2�641 $2,64� �5232
273C53.OV com Roehle 2 $1`475 �1`475 $2`949
�0!i750,00 0.00 c Ct Of Shakopee $V $V $O
V1176-V 24 V.V0 cip Ci1y u; Shokopee $V $V $V
City af Shakopee $V $V $O
V.O0 cip City of Shakupee
)0!!79-0 24 �20.V0 DV4V.�O com 462
6V.OV 465O.0V com Myes
y�|81-O 24 60.VO 387V.M cno ��Gover� J $6,822 $V $6`822
�1182-0 24 6V.0V G52V.VV com Pear�oo 2 $4`1l6 $4,l16 $8`231
)�11S3-V 24 27.00 3957.VV �om C}ay 2 $1`87l �\,O7A
33.VV 4563.�V mm Schroa�er 2 $2`245 $2.245 $4`49V
)01135-O 24 6O,0V 852V.�V $4,1\6 231
.�11G6-V 24 6O.VV G52O.00 com �ieb�naier 2 $�`1i� �4,�16 $8'2J1
>01188-V 24 26.VV �560.V0 com L:-'nen2 $1,460 t|`�6o $2`92�
89-V 24 21,00 126O.VV com Ferry 2 $1`1BV $!,180 $2,359
/�119O-V 24 J�.4� 2�27.VV mm Kn�p 2 ��,991 $�/991 $3`983 '
�1l9�'V 2� 59.55 3573.0V cce [p�ber 2 $3`J45 $3,345 $6`69O
2556�.VO coc �cst Jffice(Bort lnc 3 �21`�15 $0 $21`��5
�52V.VV
/0U98-V 25 6V.�0 ��2V.V0 cse �onrce 2 ��,116 $4,1{6 $8,2J�
�1|
'0121�O `��
~ -
'
27-0V|2��� 2G ir\.70 rss �Nhard 4 ��`�� $0 $6`��
7V5V.VV
27-0V1227-; 28 24.50 �47O.VV com Culhane 3 42`752
27-VV12%8-V29 i20.OV DV4V.VV cit Library
27-00l229-V 29 O.;0 O.OV ciy City Of Shakopee $V
27'0012J0-� 29 O.O0 V.VO cip City of Shakopee $1 $O $V
27-001231-0 29 0.V0 vV cip City of Shai,upee $0 $O $V
2/-0012J2-O 29CIty of Shakopee $0 �V $O
27-OV�23J-A 29 12.0; lZ96.00 cum N� Beli 3 $1`52J $l.52J
27-V01234-O 29 l0..OV }�040,.V0 com N� Beil J �}4`4Z3 �� �i4,42J
27-0V�235-V 29 92.0V 17064.100 com H� Be}l J $i2,621 $V $12`62�
27-*01236-0 29 95.V; l422V.OV cnm TopidMinne0a»co J $|3`254 $0 $l3'257
27-VV7V.VV 642V.OV res Strunk
27-00�23G-1 3O 59.00 7O8V.1';V cum Mnnnen 701 $V $7.70i
27-0Ol2J9-0 J0 50.0O D. Um
re= Hornjsi 3 z5`466 $0 $5`466
27-O0}2�0-0 30 60.0� R52V.VO com Drowo 3 $8,231 $0 $8,2D
27-001241-0 J0 60.00 l338V.0O com Shak. inv. One 3 $3,70J $V $9,7O3
27-0014242-0 3O 6V,OO 36OV.00 cam Hn1,fmar, 3 $6`74l $0 $6`7,41
27-VM.43-V 30 V,VO 0.60 141 C, City of Shakopee $V $0 $V
27-401244-0 JOV.V0 V,VV cip City of Shakor,ee
27-001245-0 3i t, Vv res Ryan 4 �8'231 $V $8,2J1
27-V0�246-O 3l 6V.0O O520,VO res Monrens 4 $S`23\ $O $8/2J�
27-VVl247-0 31 l50.00 O.0Vcom lsL Net. Bank 4 �2,3V5 $V $22`JO5
27-V024O-V 3� 58.50 O82V.00 com E*stman Drug 3 $8,�8l �O $8/0�
27-0V1249-V 3\ 5V.�� 72VV.VV res Case 3 $6`B9V $0 $6,89O
27-VO1250-V 3\ 6V.VV 666O.00 com Eastmao Drug 3 $7`668 $V $7'668
27-N)125\'V Jl W. 852V.VV com Scott Co. H�st Soc, J $8,2Jl �V $G,2J\
27-VO1252-V 3\ 0 852V.VV Cam, Stans Foundation 3 $8`23l
27-VV1253-V J2 60.VV 9520.VV res Yahnke
27-V01254-V 32 60.0V �520.V0 rEs Nsw�nd 4 $8'2Jl $0 $8`23�
27-001255-V 32 6V.00 V res He�nz 4 231
27-0VI256-O 32 \80.�� 25560.VV cnm �aspach 4 $24`69 $24693
27-001257-O J2 60.VO 8528.V0 cam Wampach 3 $8`23�
2I-�V|258-V 32 98.�0 D9!6.�O com Ab»ln J $13`4# $O $|3`444
27-001259-V 32 37.0V 5254.0V mm �ampach 3 $5`V76 $O $5,S76
27-V0{26V-0 J2 45.VV 6J9V.0V mm Lebens
27-00�263'0 J3 58.VV 8374.OV com Reis 4 s7,999 $V �7`999
Z7-VO}264-O 3J 42.V� 1O3;;.VO re-, Novitzki 3 $7'227 $O �7'227
O0 $591`�4 $357`�46 $949`090
C CT
CTS -c-CTS
With 3rd �venue $�49.09O $94.17 $0,3029
W/O 3rd Ave. $784,OJ� $77.79 $0.25V3
Witk 3rd Ave./�o park. lnt� ;O67,296 $�6.�5 $0.2768
W0 3rd Ave./nn
SPECIAL ASSESSMENT DECLINING BALANCE
YEAR INTEREST PRINCIPAL REMAINING
PRINCIPAL: $8,231.00 i YEARLY PAYMENT BALANCE
INTEREST: 10.00% ; $1,339.56 1 $823.10 $823.10 $7,407.90
YEARS: 10 ; X 10 2 $740.79 $823.10 $6,584.80
3 $658.48 $823.10 $5,761.70
$13,395.57 4 $576.17 $823.10 $4,938.60
5 $493.86 $823.10 $4,115.50
PRINCIPAL: $8,231.00 ; YEARLY PAYMENT 6 $411.55 $823.10 $3,292.40
INTEREST: 10.009 ; $1,082.16 7 $329.24 $823.10 $2,469.30
YEARS: 15 ; X 15 8 $246.93 $823.10 $1,646.20
9 $164.62 $823.10 $823.10
$16,232.41 10 $82.31 $823.10 ($.00)
----------------------------------
----------------------------------
TOTAL $4,527.05 $8,231.00
10 YEAR ASSESSMENT $12,758.05 /10 YRS = $1,275.80
(PRINCIPAL + INTEREST)
YEAR INTEREST PRINCIPAL REMAINING
BALANCE
1 $823.10 $548.73 $7,682.27
2 $768.23 $548.73 $7,133.53
3 $713.35 $548.73 $6,584.80
4 $658.48 $548.73 $6,036.07
5 $603.61 $548.73 $5,487.33
6 $548.73 $548.73 $4,938.60
7 $493.86 $548.73 $4,389.87
8 $438.99 $548.73 $3,841.13
9 $384.11 $548.73 $3,292.40
10 $329.24 $548.73 $2,743.67
11 $274.37 $548.73 $2,194.93
12 - $219.49 $548.73 $1,646.20
13 $164.62 $548.73 $1,097.47
14 $109.75 $548.73 $548.73
15 $54.87 $548.73 ($.00)
TOTAL $6,584.80 $8,231.00
15 YEAR ASSESSMENT $14,815.80 /15 YRS = $987.72
(PRINCIPAL + INTEREST)
Attachment #4
I .P. J
`;^i.tAi�ra.l•.I- *Lit^i•GAiCtl7 jJ�� kk
k%R:S URii �iil yELL%E tiLltl {`•+3SLr SMIENTS iij% STREET
'
Ri tot 'r d r nrr. _rn-
do i a;' i�^y LG{4
o.
T !it -
FF i ��r tit�i`T!`;`C Y%'0 CR l YPIiH`.'C f a TT
L
yr CR AREA (1-4) �f .ttkttE C`.uC•
.t
if-L{lil�:GV�f% L i,ii {�•i rli - ��.t'iC� {
k+ G3LL.};ti rc_ 1 Sl} s?,i''"Y }j '1'9
i•-fl:i �i?Q-% •7 to �c _ ,.... {i,:
00,
:_-.-•-Jl.%r%il%.i%.T_iiy--l�.%! y '_i-..'.�..� ,i :,
rnin ' :,. ,iCy
L tt #:-?•
1,%ii
8526.L0 res ThiPCdPe.ln
L: 0 JrttJt ^•- re� 6?0 $3s00
%99
`( i i i ci(G ucli. :
�
�
?_nhi i?r_n .. •.� Cuui Yra'rviiic {
i+L{a l+�+J UU .J..�{{ G ,Ca,%ifj rGl! i =C
Li 3,1A L_'�l% 3 L6.0V %r E% _ �r 1 �J �'i{1711 #Ls is'1
+' JV stk� CnW i1.I]nISCf 2 #{ rl' { ,{
ir'-lit)iL{':i7 -i
3 yv.;.70 7 z 46.1-71.
71,V6% C
LntTi l+Sll iiliE-f
67-76l:t Z t j IV Si i% i: w7,1%li Cntii { 4 6U
;{ LL cc {Q{)
'.
tl'_ :ii,i%t1 ?3 rL.Jkr Cn1 }+Wl-v{ii,1i9 ; r{l #i C7i ? rt
it i•tiiilTi -C '!t% :. uiti'S,il
4 1 .iL 73Jti.l) COO- RR�, ri^nerii e5 f YS% a Ilia #+9 -i.
4?
L;-f)(%? i4_'-0 71
4 A i n{i � nr• [
' 'I.,VJ LLa�JsIa V: CQB{ n { t_'U i'L�J'.
27-01.0 1647-1 ? " s7ii.°
. etii{tuuiiiUl1kz
_ . l =tit.O�:'bti!
=Cn"i Heru-4 # __
i7-l;`:i};Ur,' -r� ^ a-4 L ' $0 x.,''74 ,•l,_`i4
f1i.k{t Cna; :t2ti4cr
zt,sVifii;Z
-'. %i =il` 00 Hi f �-.7-3 yv Cha77
tiJ itca % i �_ _{
#`• #t;=54
7- _r 4 � .50 4047..'•x% r,"I VofIrl0U1L a
k{{_% '% S-% 1.-. Yl.TLf i1 •LY
_ 3 - Cil r{2
Lltj of kni2c 504 `1.5;i{
Liv.+: ti LL•,I-�)
v__ ,iC{l.'r:i iLIP'IC i #l' is 0k,6 #i 00,6
Y'L{`JV'J
V. LiL ul:v nt :ttdksne= ...
-) Cnii? 1tnhEi="uR } ;) ? t,uC #7
lr i11,U{) Cnt YraEn?1 2 y{j t nt
y -klliy ti l'-%i J „ iti --+[; taV.li 1 {7113
-_ -~ L1V:. COT, Vn �2 .ji
_....fit{.9_A - - �',. fil- �i ..
VV
svv
r _CIn _T 14
14
Hwy
-
lil
{�
±v
rii^_9 'is Ail %%)y t1.
VV {i:cr^ :it ^.
G=i':.,•V res -
- [[ 3
v1 l�.i Q - -!
t�r r n
4666'
-'-WIVel J-r J wvs_ L7v.s V
:{71-ti b L_.:'v _yy-'. Ln-' ji=r:E { _ r• , -:?
• 1 •,: i'lq li'i +'Ss tll+
_. .712!_- r., me
._ ..__.... .r 'iC`'.C..i er i #li iL 9�1J s tll
_s':{ i 6£7-16 "'fi - __ # ' .••i 2`•
re: to
_ _ t r.
Vie- #;: �L.
t; r Cs
-.-i%til i..'l{ nij i..;: t-::;;.1 __ ._ - - i'!: siTVi+4
L. avJ„}l1 ii: .%'J 04” # �=
_--i1%)l i_ .- -i -7 - . •. .. _ - i ' .=:tomL{ 0=6u� =r..'r:
u
rS
IF L
sl{l.' Cid L1L - v-.�4:.�._}-0 � y%% y%
U Uv 0.V Cin {.i Ly' 1t i-i6kGuF2
:_-,.. Y .i C'r ,`.'i:a'r;v ?: .
l-
4+1{11466-:t ii t`l,l•'t: vvr.a ii n. - „t .__a __ t£ y #{ -,r;,9 .-t -•,• _
.. Lr-7!, __-rein, y- a Tt{ - -taZA
'
L^
0OU4l-O 2� 6V.0O 8520.0N res �s 2 ��,�4 $1'�4
O01i42-0 21 45.V0 639V.S0 res McGo��n 2 ��`{28 s1`128 $2`�I
00114J-0 21 L35,V0 �9\7;.00 l � ice/Normar 2 $3,�r �J`�� $�`77O
� 144-6 0 V V, VO cam 8aren .0 $7,71O
�1I�� � �.VO 6\2V.N) c� �r� J �,74 � �/7�
001146-V 22 32.OV ��v.('V com Brown
W}17 � � �.V0 ��,� com T�i� 3 ��� g $9�
)11� � �.V; 4�.� com ��f� 3 *9� $0 T 4
l8O0.0W com Mertz-Ho eish
WiI5V-V 22 4V.�V 24V0.00 com Daniels 3 $1`64J $0 $}`643
0O\15�-V 22 20.VV 60V.VO cos Sol la 2 $377 $377 $755
�N�52-O 22 5l.VV 7Y2V.00 com Guobel 2 ��`J16 �\,J16 �2`632
0Ol\53-0 22 4'.60 6V81,.40 cum GustP_son 2 $1,087 $i`V87 $2,\74
27.4V 2438.6V cum Shaknpee Fina, $607
55-0 22 6O.00 852V.VV com 6us�afson 2 $�,5O� ��`504 $3 609
�V1156-0 22 67.0V 1434V.0V com Ken�ing 2 $1`947 $\`947 0/894
)01{57-O 22 75.O0 7200.V0 res Meosing 2 $l,689 TI 68i $J`379
)01�5B-0, 23 |42.VO 2S62O.OV com lst �a�. 8aok 3 $S,O57 $V $8,657
oOl\59-O 23 90.VV 9180.VV com Wereerskirchen 3 �4,l\� �V $4`��4
W\162-V 23 22.60 372V.VV cam " 3 ��`169 �V 11`169
N�l63-� 23 �8.VV 0 cam Tupic 3 $7J9 Vo $7J9
164-0 2J J6.V0 3�2m V.0O coShak. Post #4V46 2 $792 $792 $1,585
�O1165-O 23 62.V0 465V.0V T. Smith ��,324 �2`64
cn9
{66-V 2J 24.VVl680.00 com Topic 2 $5;6
)01�67-0 23 J0.00 33VV.0O cam Barbershop 2 $6Y9 $699 �1'J90
)01l66-� 23 30.00 426V.OV com Dressen 2 $752 4752
�0l�69-O 23� �.OV 36Y2.V0 com �heis 65
2 $ 2 it 15
i01�7;-V 23 J9.VV 5538.0V com Cep Clo�hing 2 $97O
)01l7l-V 23 25.0V 355O,V7
''�li72-V 23 31.�0 4402.O0 cum King 5zomon Ldge 2 $777 $777 41554
}01173-0 235467.00 Cal Latour 5
�01174-{ 23 21.5O 3053.V; -am Roehle 2 $53Y $53Y
-0 2� 0.O0 0.O0 cin City of hakopee
)�1176-V 24 V.0V V.00 cip City of Shekcpue
)O1�77-V 24 V.VV �.0V ciP C�ty u� Sn�koppe
i01�78-V 24 V.VV V.0V cip Cicy af �hakopee $O $V $V
�2V,VV 17040.OV com $6,0D
�0�1BV-� 24 60.0V 4650.VO com Uyers 3 $2/58O t... $2,5BO
)�1�8i-0 24 6V.VV 387V.VV coe �c�cve'n 3 $2,494
'O|i8I-V 27 6O.0V 8520.0V com �ears�� 2 $�'5O4
�S11G3-V 24 27.VV 3957.VV cos Clay 2 t684 $684 $1,J68
01184-V 24 33.0� 4563.O0 cuw �c�rcecer 2 �821 $821 �1`64\
/01185-V 24 60.�0 85Z0.0W com CaYaoaagh 3,009
60.V0 D520.V com Siebenai*r 2 $1`5V� $1'5O4 $3,0C9
)O1\G3-V 24 26.00 �56V.00 c 0 He�nen 2 ' $534 $534
'�1lD9-V 24 2�.00 1260.V0 coa Perry 2 $4J{ $43� �S62
J5.45 2127.VO -;I,! Kopp 2 $728 $728
59 7,j J573.OV com Zwpber
'�1192-0 25 �42.VV 2556�..,0 cus Post Offic=(Bart Inc
���v�-V 25 6V.�0 B520.O0 ms ovak
'J1�9�-V 25 68,0V O52�.VV coa Nnvuk
V;.00 852O.V0 rss �awvei � $1`5�4 $1`5O4 $3'��9
25 60,0V 8520.CN
-52-.OV coa Eckart
^
'
- ` °
51.� ��.W r� BC,[nard 4_/ .07
27-VV|226-0 28 6O.OV 7��,OO mm Scnerpr J $2,�6 $V
2���1227-0 2G 24.5V iu7O.VV cnm Culhane
27-00|228-V 29 �2O.0V {N40.V; cLihrary
2�-VV>229-V 29 V.VO cip City o� Shakopep $V
41 j. 29 V.VV V.VO cip City of Shakopee �0 $0 $V
27-00l23�-� 29 0.00 ;.O0 cip City of Shakupoe $0 $O $0
27-VO12J2-� 29 O.V� V.V� cip ty Ciof Shakopee $0
2/-V0 .Vv 1296.0V cael} J $557 $� �557
27-V0 29 �`%Q.0et 14040.00 com "vv �ell 3 $5, D
�7-001235-V 29 92.VV {3O64.0V com NW Ge}i 3 �4,6O $V �4.�l3
27-VV12J6-V 2Y 95.00 14220.V0 cnm Topic/Minnegasco J �4`845 $O 4.B`
27-VVl238-V 3V 70.00 8420.VV res Simok J 13`J42 $V 0,J42
27-00l239'1 3O 59.O0 708V.VO com Moonen 3 $2`B\5 �O $2'0|5
27-V01239-V JV 5V.O0 25res Horejsi $1,95O
27-0O124V-V 3V6O.VV O520.VV com Drown J �J,OO9 $0 �3`VO9
27-0V12414-0 JV 64.00 13J8V.06 cum Shak. lnv. One J $3,547 $0 $3'5�7
4 -0 O .27-0v 6CJI VV com Hoffman 3 $2,464 $V $2`464
27-VN243-V 3V V.V; 0.0V ciy Ciiy o� Shaknpee $O �O $V
27-00l244-� JV 0.O; 0.0V cip City of Shaknpee $0 $0 $V
21-VN245-V J1 6V.;0 11! 010 res Ryan 4 $3,O09 �O �3,009
27-VO|2�6-0 3\ 6�.OV 3�20.0V res ;Mon rens 4 $J,OO9 �0 $3,VV9
27-601247-0 Jl �5;.VV� 270VO.O0 com Ist Hat. Bank 4 $8` 53
27-VO|248-O 11 58.5V 882V.V0 cnm Eastman DroO 3 $2,990
249-V Jl 5V.VV 72VV.0� res Cae 3 �2`518 $V ��`518
Vl25;-O Jl 6O.0V 666V.O0 com Eastman Drug J $2`S $2,8O3
27-V31251-O cnm Scott Ca, Hist Soc. 3 $J`VV9 $0 $3`V09
2�-001252-0 3l com Stans FouoG's tinn J $3`VV9
27-00l25J-0 J2 60.00 B52V.OV res Yahnke 4 $3`V3Y
27-0O�254-0 32 6O.V0 8520.V; res Neiwind 4 $J`VOY $V $7,O09
27-VV1255-V JV. res HeL;nz 4 $3`0V9 $0 $3`VV9
27-VO1256-V �2 1 2556V,0O com Wampach 4 $9`06 $0 $9,O26
27-O0125�-0 32 W, vv 8520.VV com iiv:ampach `009 $V $3`0V9
27-0O1258-0 32 9D.00 43916.0V cnm Abein J $4,9�� $O $4,Y14
27-V�1259-V J2 37.V0 5254.OV com 0ampach J $1855 $V $1,855
27-��l26;-0 32 45,VV 639V.V0 com Leben» 3 $2`25� $V $2`257
27-�01263-V 3J 58.VV 8374.0V com �eis 4 �2/924 $0 $2,924
Z7-001264-O 3J 42.0V �08i�zki
7�55.2V 939861.OV �2�6`372 $OO`547 $346`9!9
ASSESSABLE FF SQFT
CUST COSTS L UG7S
Nith 3rd Avpnue $J79`636 $J7.67 $0.DL2
N/O Jrb Ave. $21�,576 $21.29 aV.��5
With 3rd Ave./no park. !ots $346`9�Y �34.42 $0.UV7
�/O ve./no park. Lnt� *280`895 y�7.87
SPECIAL ASSESSMENT DECLINING BALANCE
YEAR INTEREST PRINCIPAL REMAINING
RINCIPAL: $3,009.00 ; YEARLY PAYMENT BALANCE
NTEREST: 10.007 ; $489.70 1 $300.90 $300.90 $2,708.10
EARS: 10 ; X 10 2 $270.81 $300.90 $2,407.20
3 $240.72 $300.90 $2,106.30
$4,897.01 4 $210.63 $300.90 $1,805.40
5 $180.54 $300.90 $1,504.50
RINCIPAL: $3,009.00 ; YEARLY PAYMENT 6 $150.45 $300.90 $1,203.60
NTEREST: 10.007 ; $395.60 7 $120.36 $300.90 $902.70
EARS: 15 ; X 15 8 $90.27 $300.90 $601.80
9 $60.18 $300.90 $300.90
$5,934.07 10 $30.09 $300.90 $.00
----------------------------------
----------------------------------
TOTAL $1,654.95 $3,009.00
10 YEAR ASSESSMENT $4,663.95 /10 YRS = $466.40
(PRINCIPAL + INTEREST)
YEAR INTEREST PRINCIPAL REMAINING
BALANCE
1 $300.90 $200.60 $2,808.40
2 $280.84 $200.60 $2,607.80
3 $260.78 $200.60 $2,407.20
4 $240.72 $200.60 $2,206.60
5 $220.66 $200.60 $2,006.00
6 $200.60 $200.60 $1,805.40
7 $180.54 $200.60 $1,604.80
8 $160.48 $200.60 $1,404.20
9 $140.42 $200.60 $1,203.60
10 $120.36 $200.60 $1,003.00
11 $100.30 $200.60 $802.40
12 $80.24 $200.60 $601.80
13 $60.18 $200.60 $401.20
14 $40.12 $200.60 $200.60
15 $20.06 $200.60 $.00
TOTAL $2,407.20 $3,009.00
15 YEAR ASSESSMENT $5,416.20 /15 YRS = $361.08
(PRINCIPAL + INTEREST)
Attachment #5
CA
TfRBURr. ^ 71986
D O W N S
December 24, 1986
John Anderson, Administrator
City of Shakopee
129 First Avenue
Shakopee, Mn. 55379
Dear John:
Pursuant to our recent conversation, please be assured that
Canterbury Downs has no intention of asking for a reduction or
an elimination of the admission tax paid to the City of
Shakopee.
Further, there is no intent on the part of Canterbury Downs
to seek a reduction in the property taxes below that required
by our development contract with the City.
As you are already aware, Canterbury Downs ' recently
announced a program geared to making 1987 a most successful
year and with the approval of a 125-day racing season, that
program is well on its way to fruition.
Another part of that program, which would be a legislative
change regarding the percentage of each dollar wagered at the
track kept by the State, also is expected to be resolved
positively within the next few months.
Sincerely,
Nathaniel B. Wess
Vice President &
Assistant General Manager
NBW/ghs
CC : Bruce Malkerson
Stan Bowker
Canterb%Downs/1100 Canterbury Road/P.O. Box 508/Shakopee, Minnesota 55379/(612) 443-7223
Dec. 5 , 1986
Attachment # 6
Preliminary
Assessment Policies
Downtown Streetscape Project
1. The assessment district should include all parcels bounded
by Atwood (both sides of the street) on the West, the North
side of Third Avenue on the South, Sommerville on the East
including the West side of Spencer abutting First Ave. on
the East and the alley alignment between First Avenue and
Levee Drive on the North. In addition, it includes parcels
on the West side of Atwood that have front footage on said
street.
2. The assessment policy shall use the shortest distance along
a street as the front footage.
3 . Each parcel shall receive a separate assessment.
4. City use and other parcels owned by non-profit entities
will be considered as commercial for assessment purposes
(consistent with other city assessment practices) .
5 . Assessments on single family and two family residential
properties shall be deferred with no interest until property
is converted to commercial use. These assessments shall be
paid for initially from tax-increment proceeds or other
funds until the conversion use occurs.
6 . Any city parking lot shall not be assessed but the cost for
those areas shall be distributed over the rest of the
assessed parcels in the district.
7 . The 70% FF/30% square foot formula shall be utilized for
assessment purposes.
8 . 25% of project cost will be assessable to the property
owners .
9 . Standard street rehabilitation improvements on vacant lots
and properties declared unfit for human occupancy at the
time of the assessment hearings shall be assessed in a
manner that is consistent with City policy ( 25%) . The
streetscape bortion of the assessment shall be deferred for
a three year period without interest or until the property
is developed, whichever comes first.
10 . The streetscape portion of the assessment on three and four
family residential properties shall be deferred with no
interest until said property is converted to a commercial
use.
RESOLUTION NO. 2677
J
A RESOLUTION SUPPORTING THE PROPOSAL FOR THE UPPER
MIDWEST WINTER OLYMPICS
WHEREAS, State and Regional Winter Olympics Games modeled
after the Winter Olympic Games would be a tremendous asset to the
City of Shakopee and the State of Minnesota; and
WHEREAS, Regional Winter Olympic Games would enhance the
tourism climate and bring national recognition to the City of
Shakopee and the State of Minnesota; and
WHEREAS, Regional Winter Olympic Games will enhance the
training of Minnesota youth which have traditionally made up a
large number of the U.S. Olympic team; and
WHEREAS, Regional Winter Olympic Games may result in Olympic
class training facilities for Shakopee, Minnesota, and the
U.S.A. ; and
WHEREAS, the City of Shakopee and the businesses that make
their home here have property and facilities which are properly
zoned and contain sufficient acreage for such activities; and
WHEREAS, the Shakopee Valley Convention and Tourism Bureau,
by a unanimous vote on January 13 , 1987 , gave its formal
endorsement of Shakopee as the site for the future Upper Midwest
Winter Olympic Games.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF SHAKOPEE, THAT:
1. The Shakopee City Council supports the Shakopee Valley
Convention and Visitors Bureau in their efforts to establish an
annual Upper Midwest Winter Olympic Games in Shakopee; and
2 . The Shakopee City Council encourages efforts by the
Governor ' s office, State of Minnesota Tourism Office, State
Department of Economic Development and Planning, and Scott County
Commissioners to support this project.
Adopted in session of the Shakopee City
Council held this 13th day of January, 1987 .
Mayor of the City of Shakopee
ATTEST:
City Clerk
Approved as to form this
day of 1987 .
City Attorney
Second Draft 5
W I N T E R G A 1K E S
P R O P 0 S A L
I . OVERVIEW
This report will outline a proposed annual Winter Games
starting in 1988 to be hosted in the Shakopee Valley area. The
Winter Games would be a regional Winter Olympics style sports
festival open to Upper Midwest athletes from Minnesota, North
Dakota, South Dakota, Wisconsin and Iowa . Athletes would be
grouped into scholastic, open, and masters levels of
competition.
The Winter Games would be part of the State Games
movement, one of the fastest growing amateur sports movements
in America. State Games are a state version of the Olympics
and the United States Olympic Festival . State Games can be
Summer Games with Summer Olympic sports and/or Winter Games
with Winter Olympic sports . The first state games was the
Empire State Games held in New York in 1978. In 1986, 21
states held State Games ; The National State Games Congress , a
newly-formed organization affiliated with the U.S. Olympic
Committee , has a goal of State Games in all 50 states by 1990.
New York ' s Empire State Games are the biggest with over
7300 athletes , a conservative estimate of 30, 000 fans and
$1. 325 million budget for Summer and Winter Games . The Empire
State Games are now so big they are televised nationally on
ESPN. The last two governors of New York, Hugh Carey and Mario
Cuomo, have both said they consider the Empire State Games to
be the proudest achievement of their administration.
New York started the first Winter Games in 1982 with 400
athletes ; it has grown to 1200 competitors by 1986.
Massachusetts Winter Games began in 1985 with 400 athletes and
had increased to 700 by 1986 . Utah, Oregon and Montana are
scheduled to start Winter Games in 1987 . British Columbia,
Canada ' s Winter Games have been held for 10 years and have
attracted over 170, 000 participants . In 1986, the British
Columbia Winter Games hosted 2000 athletes in 21 sports on a
budget of around $600, 000-
One objective of both the Summer and Winter Games is to
annually give a large number of athletes from various age
groups on a state or regional basis exposure to an Olympic type
of experience . In order to stage a Games of this magnitude,
three key elements must come toget-'4er . GThe first is the
endorsement of thegovernor . Th42-igecond is f; nanc-; al backing
from sponsors . Thhird is suP_port from the media. These
three elements are fundamental to bringing a regional Winter
Games to the Shakopee Valley.
The 1988 Winter Games attendance goals would be 1000
athletes and 5000 spectators for the nine days of the Games .
In addition, a number of events would be held leading up to the
games as part of the whole Winter Games Festival concept. It
is estimated this would attract another 50, 000 people .
II . EVENTS AND FACILITIES
The United States Olympic Committee requires that Winter
Games include four sports from the Winter Olympics and such
sports compromise at least 80% of the program which shall be
conducted in a single geographic location.
The following lists proposed events for the 1988 Winter
Games and discusses proposed venues (See also maps on Appendix
I . )
There are also other sports both Olympic and non-Olympic
potentially appropriate for the Winter Games . (See Appendix
II . )
Proposed Event Proposed Venue
1 . Opening Ceremonies Canterbury Downs
Biathlon Canterbury Park - Course to
be constructed
Cross Country Skiing Canterbury Park - Course
portion to be constructed and
State Trail System along '
Minnesota River between
Murphy ' s Landing and County
Rd. 18 - course portion to be
completed
4. Alpine Skiing Buck Hill
�5 . Nordic Combined - Canterbury Park & State
Trail, Hyland
(6? Figure Skating Ice arena - to be constructed
adjacent to Starwood
70 Speed skating Speed skating Rink - to be
constructed adjacent to
Starwood
8. Ski Jumping Hyland
9. Ice Hockey Ice arena - to be constructed
adjacent to Starwood
Q. Snowshoeing Canterbury Park - course to
be constructed
1 . Road Race Canterbury Downs/Canterbury
Park
12. Awards Ceremonies - Canterbury Downs
`0 Closing Ceremonies - Canterbury Downs/Icea�a to
be constructed adjacent to
Starwood
Canterbury Downs would be the Winter Games
headquarters . This would give the Shakopee Valley Games site a
unique and unequaled asset . Canterbury Downs would provide an
Olympic quality host facility equal to any in the nation and
probably the world. Its combination of a state of the art
resource including closed circuit and satellite television
system, computers , medical facilities, concessions, seating,
space, press box, parking and admissions , Canterbury Downs
would add an extra dimension to the Winter Games as its
headquarters.
Appendix I
APPROPRIATE MAPS
Appendix II «
OLYMPIC SANCTIONED SPORTS
1 . Archery
2. Athletics (Track and Field)
3 . Baseball
4. Basketball
* 5. Biathlon
* 6. Bobsledding
7. Boxing
8. Canoeing
9. Cycling
10. Diving
11 . Equestrian
12. Fencing
13 . Field Hockey
*14. Figure Skating
15. Gymnastics
*16. Ice Hockey
17 . Judo
*18. Luge
19. Penthathlon
20 . Rollerskating
21 . Rowing
22 . Shooting
*23 . Skiing (Alpine, Cross Country, Jumping)
24. Soccer
25 . Softball
*26. Speedskating
27 . Swimming
28. Synchronizedd Swimming
29. Table Tennis
30. Taekwondo
31 . Team Handball
32 . Tennis
33. Volleyball
34. Weightlifting
35. Wrestling
36. Yachting
* Winter Olympic Sport
OLYMPIC AFFILIATED SPORTS
1. Racquetball
2. Bowling
3 . Badminton
4. Curling
5. Karate
III . TIMING
The timing to stage the Winter Games in 1988 is on track
at this point ; However, this time track needs to be maintained
if Winter Games 1988 is to be the first class, major league
event it should be. To achieve that objective, the following
tentative timeline for Dec mber, 1986 _- March, 1987 has o.�1 �¢
limited flexibility. Ailil �5� �Y�� 7-:QA �✓' i
�C
Y_
�ormal
December, 1986 : `�4'��'
1. Commitment to 1988 Winter Games project b-y inf
organizing committee
2. Approval of short term, start-up budget by Shakopee
Hotel Tax Committee
3 . Approval of short term budget by Shakopee Chamber of
Commerce Executive Board
4. Selection of Acting Director
5. Preparation of written 1988 Winter Games Proposal
January, 1987 :
1. Approval of short term budget by Shakopee City Council
2. Completion of written 1988 Winter Games proposal
3 . Submit 1988 Winter Games proposal to Governor Perpich
4. Endorsement from Governor Perpich for 1988 Winter Games
at press conference
5. Announcement of organizing committee
6. Finalizing venues
7. Search for executive director
S. Search for board of directors
9. Search for sponsors
10. Building media relations
February, 1987
1. Selection and announcement of board of directors
2. Search for executive director
3. Search for sponsors
4. Building media relations
5. Finalizing venues
March, 1987
1. Selection and announcement of executive director
2. Announcement of major sponsor
3 . Search for sponsors
4. Search for staff
5. Building media relations
6. Finalizing venues
IV. BUDGET
A first class , major league Winter Games will cost a
premium rate, but sources of revenue are available pay that
cost .
A short term, start-up budget for the Winter Games
requires in the area of $20, 000. It is outlined below:
Salaries
Acting Director
(December 1986-March, 1987 ) $7, 200
Executive Director
(March and April 1987 ) 5, 600
Search ( for executive
director , staff ) 4, 000
Research (marketing, facilities, etc . ) 1, 000
Lobbying 2, 500
Legal (for non-profit states ) 1, 500
Total $21, 800
It is recommended this start-up budget be funded by the
Convention and Visitors Bureau and the City of Shakopee hotel
tax.
A long term, annual budget for the Winter Games would be
in the range of $200, 000-$250, 000. The largest single item on
this budget would probably by Executive Director ' s salary in
the range of $35, 000-$50, 000. The majority of the annual
budget must be raised from sponsors . Major sponsors in the
$25, 000-$50, 000 category are essential . The number of major
corporations headquartered or located in the Twin Cities makes
major sponsorship look very promising. Medium and moderate
level sponsors are also very important. Again, the overall
business climate and attitudes make these sponsorship levels
very favorable .
Additional sources of revenue are definitely there, but
in smaller amounts . For example, other projected gross revenue
for the 1988 Winter Games are :
Gate Sales $25, 000
Sale of Food & Beverage 30, 000
Entry Fees 5, 000
Total $60, 000
Other revenues would develop as the Games grow.
Potentially, the merchandising income from the Winter Games
could be very lucrative.
V. BENEFITS TO COMMUNITY
The Winter Games have the potential to produce
tremendous benefits to the Shakopee Valley area.
The Winter Games would be a major first step and the
cornerstone in creating the image of the area as the premier
all around winter sports area in the Upper Midwest including
Minnesota, Wisconsin, North Dakota, South Dakota and Iowa. The
Shakopee Valley area is in a unique geographical situation. It
is on the edge of the major metropolitan area in terms of
population and central location for not just Minnesota but the
entire Upper Midwest. Yet the Shakopee Valley is still
perceived as being out in the country. Thus, it becomes a
great place to get away to.
In the summer, the Shakopee Valley draws a great number
of visitors due to the major attractions such as Canterbury
Downs, Valleyfair, the Renaissance Festival and Murphy' s
Landing to draw visitors to the Valley. There are no major
attractions in the winter, and, as a result, there are a
minimum number of visitors . The Winter Games would do two
things. First, it would push the development of winter sports
facilities for use by both competitive athletes and
recreational citizens . Second, it would be ultimately the
biggest but certainly not the only event that would showcase
these facilities . Thus , whole Valley winter sports experience
with its quality facilities and activities would become a major
attraction. The Shakopee Valley' s image becomes the great
place to get away to in the winter as well as summer .
The potential economic impact of the Winter Games is
impressive .
Short Term Projection (based on figures for 1988 in winter
games of 1000 athletes and 5000 fans for nine days )
Room Sales - 5000 room nights for the nine days
Retail Sales - Increase 300%
Employment - Increase
The long term economic impact of the Winter Games , of
course, depends on the degree it is used as a cornerstone for
the overall development of the Shakopee Valley as a winter
sports area. However, the increase in room sales, retail
sales, and employment would be considerable.
Finally, the Winter Games would be for the civic good.
It would create needed recreational facilities for not just
Shakopee but also surrounding communities, and contribute to
the improved fitness and health of- their ,.citizens .
VI . ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURE
It is absolutely necessary the Winter Games organization
be a separate, independent entity. According to United States
Olympic Committee criteria for State Games the Olympic Games
must be the single recognized organization for State Games
within the State and be a not-for-profit organization or
organization operating under a recognized unit of state
government in order to be supported by the USOC. The
organization must be the sole "State Games " program in your
State. Non-profit status , 501 (c) 3 or 501 (c)4, must be on file
with the IRS. The Governor ' s or department within the
Governor ' s jurisdiction must recognize or oversee the
administration of the Games , and support the Winter Games as
the Winter Games for the State ' s citizens .
The best option for the Winter Games is to go the
non-profit corporation route with endorsement from the Governor .
Since the Winter Games would have to be held once before the
U.S. Olympic Committee will sanction it anyway, an interim
organization is acceptable while the non-profit 501 (c)4 or
501 (c)4 status is being obtained as long as the Winter Games
has the endorsement of the Governor .
CIL—
VII . CITY AND STATE INVOLVEMENT
For the 1988 Winter Games to become a reality, city and
state involvement are necessary.
From the Convention and Visitors Bureau and city of
Shakopee, seed money from the hotel tax is required. A request
of approximately $21, 800 for a starting budget has been made to
the Hotel Tax Committee and is awaiting approval from the
Chamber of Commerce and City Council . The projected revenue
from the hotel tax for 1987 is about $66, 000.
From the State of Minnesota, endorsement from the
Governor is mandatory in order to obtain sanction from the U. S.
Olympic Committee.
In the case of both the city and state , financial
assistance in financing the construction or improvement of
facilities would be a great boost . However, with the recent
change in laws , public involvement in financing sports
facilities has become much more difficult; therefore, this
route cannot be counted on. On the other hand, it should be
explored in the case of each individual facility. For example,
the state and federal governments have plans to develop cross
country ski trails along Hwy. 101 and the Minnesota River
between Murphy ' s Landing and Country Rd. 18 that would be part
of the Winter Games course. There will be a bill before the
1987 legislature to upgrade the ski jumping venue at Hyland in
Bloomington that looks favorable. There may be existing
federal money available to building a speedskating rink. So
public assistance to finance an ice arena needs also to be
thoroughly explored.
VIII . CALENDAR OF EVENTS
U. S. Olympic Committee specifies winter games must be
conducted within a time span appropriate for a multi-sport
event. The most preferred dates for the 1988 Winter Games
appear to be Saturday, January 30th through Sunday, February
7. 'These nine days would place the games starting on the
closing weekend of the 1988 St . Paul Winter Carnival , which is
tentatively set for January 20th through January 31st. It
would also put the games ending the weekend before the 1988
Winter Games in Calgary, Canada from February 13th through the
28th. This positioning would seem to allow maximum mutual
benefit for the Winter Carnival, Winter Olympics and the Winter
Games in 1988.
Friday, January 29, 1988 REGISTRATION
Saturday, January 30, 1988 OPENING CEREMONIES
Sunday, January 31, 1988 COMPETITIONS
Sunday, February 7, 1988 AWARDS CEREMONIES
Sunday, February 7, 1988 CLOSING CEREMONIES