HomeMy WebLinkAbout03/03/1987 MEMO TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: John K. Anderson, City Administrator
RE: Non-Agenda Informational Items
DATE: February 26, 1987
1. The administrators from the City, County and School District
met on Wednesday afternoon, February 25th. We made
significant progress in arriving at a better understanding
of what happened with the 1987 tax bills. We are proposing
a joint meeting of Boards on Monday, March 16, 1987 at 7:30
p.m. at the Courthouse. We will be providing all board
members with written information regarding the taxes prior
to the meeting. Please mark this date on your calendars so
that you do not schedule any conflicts.
2. Disciplinary action was taken against police officer
Teherence Doyle. He has appealed the disciplinary action
and we will be following normal grievance procedures. The
disciplinary action was taken based upon consultation with
Labor Relations Associates Inc. , Cy Smyth's office. If you
have any questions please contact Tom .Brownell.
3. The - Shak-O-Valley Amateur Hockey, Inc. has applied for
renewal of their gambling license for 1987 at the Pullman
Club. They meet the requirements of the City Code. If you
have a question please contact Judy Cox.
4. The Knights of Columbus have applied for renewal of their
gambling license. They meet the requirements of the City
Code.
5. Q Superette will be discontinuing selling 3.2 beer off-sale
effective February 24, 1987 upon cancellation of their
surety bond.
6. Attached is a notice regarding cities receiving the
Certificate of Achievement for Excellence in Financial
Reporting. Please note that Shakopee was one of 659
' agencies receiving the award in the country and one of 44 in
the State of Minnesota.
7. Attached is a memorandum from Barry Stock regarding the
proposed Dial-A-Ride/Van Pool marketing analysis.
8. Attached is a memorandum from Barry-,Stock regardtng. legal_
action against the TenEyck property for violation of city
ordinances for storage of waste materials.
9. Attached is a copy of the tax rate payable in 1978 in Scott
County. Please note that the City of Shakopee has the
t
second lowest city tax in the county. At a meeting of
County Administrators on February 25th I learned that only
Prior Lake had a lower total mill rate so it appears that
property taxes have gone up dramatically in many
jurisdictions. Please note that the Jackson Township mill
rate went from approximately 2 mills to 14 mills and that
their mill rate is higher than our rural mill rate.
10. Attached is the monthly calendar for the month of March. I
would like to discuss setting our goals and objectives
session for Tuesday, March 31 which is currently an open
date. I will bring this up at the Council meeting.
11. Attached are the minutes of the February 3 , 1987 meeting of
the City Hall Citizens Advisory Committee.
12. Attached are the minutes of the February 4, 1987 meeting of
the Downtown Ad Hoc Committee.
13. Attached are the minutes of the January 15, 1987 meeting of
the Energy and Transportation Committee. -
14. Attached are the minutes of the February 5, 1987 meetings of
the Planning Commission and Board of Adjustment and Appeals.
15. Attached are the minutes of the February 12, 1987 meeting of
the Planning Commission.
16. Attached are the agendas for the March 5, 1987 meetings or
the Planning Commission and Board of Adjustment and Appeals.
17. Attached is a letter from Fred Jurewicz to the Shakopee
School Board submitting his resignation as the school board
appointee to the Shakopee Coummunity Services Board.
18. The City has won a favorable decision in the Scott County
Lumber Co. vs. City of Shakopee (gravel pit) lawsuit. Rod
said we can expect an appeal in a zoning case such as this
and he will keep us posted.
19. Attached is a memorandum from Marilyn Remer regarding the
1986 Employee Assistance Program usage.
20. Please contact me BEFORE THE MEETING regarding any questions
you may have about the two agenda items regarding
termination of employee probation periods for Dennis Kraft
and Pennie Schlechter.
JKA/jms
• 44.95 percent of the 1985 submissions that did 1(/
not apply in 1984 received the certificate;
• 145 eligible first-year submissions were
received for review in 1985, an increase of 20
CERTIFICATE over 1erc and
• p
39.60 percent of first-year submissions received
OFACHIEVEMENT the certificate vs. 32.8 percent in 1984.
The high award rate indicates that most govem-
1986 report ments are implementing the comments and sugges-
tions for improvement provided by the certificate
Results. The Certificate of Achievement for Excel- program. The result is continuous improvement of
lence in Financial Reporting Program (certificate their CAFRs/CUFRs and the annual achievement of
program) has completed another record-breaking the certificate. To put their accomplishment into
year. Since its inception more than 40 years ago, the perspective, consider that certificate holders only -
certificate programs primary objective has been to represent approximately 1 percent of all government
provide educational assistance to units of govern- units nationwide.
ment to encourage the publication of excellent com-
prehensive annuallcomponent unit financial reports The current number of active SRC members is 331,
(CAFRSICUFRS). Qualifying reports receive recogni- an increase of 42 over last year. This increase will
tion by being awarded the coveted Certificate of allow for the review of more than 1,300
Achievement for Excellence in Financial Reporting. CAFRs/CUFRs in the coming year. Thereafter, 30
Designated individuals receive the Award for Finan. new SRC members will need to be added for every
cial Reporting Achievement to recognize their role in increase of 120 CAFR/CUFR submissions. In an
the government's receipt of the certificate. effort to continue to promote participation on the
SRC and to update new and continuing members
on technical and procedural issues, regional
The year was highlighted by the receipt of more than meetings tentatively have been scheduled for the
1,000 eligible CAFRs/CUFRs which met the certifi- fourth quarter of 1987.
cate programs eligibility requirements. Significant
increases also were experienced in the number of Prospects for the future. The program achieved its
CAFRS/CUFRs reviewed, as well as awarded, for goal in 1986 by providing results to participants in a
first-time submissions to the program. As a result of timely fashion. The goal for 1987 is to obtain a five-
the dedicated work of the Special Review Committee month turnaround time for all reports with the
(SRC), the certificate program was able to achieve expected receipt of more than 1,200 1986 fiscal
its goal of providing program participants with their year ended CAFRs/CUFRs.
review process results within five to five and one-half
months from the date the CAFR/CUFR was sub- More detailed statistics, including summaries of
mitted. Almost all 1985 fiscal year-end reports were submissions and awards by state will appear in the
processed by December 31, 1986. Certificate of Achievement program's annual report
which will be published in the near future.
The statistics presented in the accompanying table FY 1984 and FY 1985 Results
indicate that the programs objectives are being met. submitted ola not
The number of fiscal years ended in 1985 eligible awarded but not Submit Total toter for
reports submitted was 1,030, an increase of 141 for awarded for for Fres
(15.86 percent) over fiscal years ended in 1984. The Fred and Ffor Pfor Submissions
number of certificates awarded was 833, an
increase of 128 (18.16 percent) over fiscal years Awarded
ended in 1985. This resulted in an award rate of for Fees 659 ee 66 833
80.88 percent for fiscal years ended in 1985. This Submitted 1030
high award rate can be attributed to several factors: but nal
awarded
FY85 29 63 05 197
• Only 4.12 percent of prior certificate holders Did not
who resubmitted their CAFRSICUFRs failed to submitfor
maintain their certificate; FYa.5 17 33
• 97.59 percent of certificate holders resubmitted Taal for
to the program; FY" 706 184 191 .
Taal for
• 47.83 percent of the governments that did not FY" S{lA/loloee
receive the certificate in 1984 did succeed in Submbs 669
1985; sions
4 OV ii.V21) a
CERTIFICATE OF ACHIEVEMENT HOLDERS
Minnesota - 1985
City of Albert Lea
City of Anoka
City of Austin
City of Blaine
City of Bloomington
City of Brooklyn Center
City of Brooklyn Park
City of Champlin
City of Coon Rapids
City of Duluth
City of Eagan
City of Fridley
City of Goodview
City of Mankato
City of Maple Grove
City of Maplewood
City of Minneapolis
City of Minnetonka
City of Moorhead
City of Mora
City of Plymouth
City of Ramsey
City of Richfield
City of Robbinsdale
City of Rochester
City of Roseville
City of St. Cloud
City of St. Louis Park
City of Saint Paul
City of Shakopee
City of Shoreview (new)
City of Waseca
City of Willernie
Hennepin County
Olmsted County (new)
' Ramsey County
Washington County (new)
Metropolitan Airports Commision (new)
Metroppolitan Council of Twin Cities Area
Metropolitan Waste Control Commission
Minneapolis Employee Retirement Fund
State of Minnesota (new)
Western Lake Superior Sanitary District
Housing and Redevelopment Authority
of the City of Saint Paul (new)
Total - 44
CERTIFICATE OF ACHIEVEMENT HOLDERS
Minnesota - 1985
City of Albert Lea
City of Anoka
City of Austin
City of Blaine
City of Bloomington
City of Brooklyn Center
City of Brooklyn Park
City of Champlin
City of Coon Rapids
City of Duluth
City of Eagan
City of Fridley
City of Goodview
City of Mankato
City of Maple Grove
City of Maplewood
City of Minneapolis
City of Minnetonka
City of Moorhead
City of Mora
City of Plymouth
City of Ramsey
City of Richfield
City of Robbinsdale
City of Rochester
City of Roseville
City of St. Cloud
City of St. Louis Park
City of Saint Paul
City of Shakopee
City of Shoreview (new)
City of Waseca
City of Willernie
Hennepin County
Olmsted County (new)
Ramsey County
Washington County (new)
Metropolitan Airports Commision (new)
Metroppolitan Council of Twin Cities Area
Metropolitan Waste Control Commission
Minneapolis Employee Retirement Fund
State of Minnesota (new)
Western Lake Superior Sanitary District
Housing and Redevelopment Authority
of the City of Saint Paul (new)
Total - 44
MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator
FROM: Barry A. Stock, Administrative Assistant
RE: Dial-A-Ride/Van Pool Market Analysis
DATE: February 25, 1987
Introduction•
A market analysis of the dial-a-ride/van pool programs has
not been completed for quite some time. The Energy and
Transportation Committee believes it would be prudent at this
time to survey the Shakopee residents in regard to effectiveness
of both the van pool and dial-a-ride programs.
Background•
At the present time, a survey is being conducted of the
dial-a-ride users. In addition to the dial-a-ride survey, the
Energy and Transportation Committee is proposing that a
comprehensive phone survey be conducted of the residents of
Shakopee to determine the visibility, usefulness and
effectiveness of both the dial-a-ride and van pool programs.
The Energy and Transportation Committee has prepared a
telephone survey which asks specific questions regarding both the
van pool and dial-a-ride programs. The survey also solicits
information regarding the characteristics of the survey
respondent.
Initially it was the intent of the Energy and Transportation
Committee to hire an independent firm to complete an analysis of
both the van pool and dial-a-ride programs. Cost estimates of
this type of analysis ranged between $10,000 and $15,000. Upon
hearing the cost estimates, the Energy and Transportation
Committee felt that it would be just as effective to have a local
organization conduct the survey on behalf of the Energy and
Transportation Committee. The League of women Voters has been
contacted and have agreed to conduct the telephone survey on
March 5 & March 10, 1987 for a flat fee not to exceed $500.00.
The telephone lines at City Hall will be used by the League of
Women Voters to conduct the survey analysis.
Upon completion of this survey, staff will analyze the
survey results and determine a course of action based on the
results of the survey.
D
MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator
FROM: Barry A. Stock, Administrative Assistant
RE: TenEyck Violation of City Ordinance for Storage of
Waste Materials.
DATE: February 25, 1987
Introduction•
The property located at 502 East Fourth Avenue has been
cited by the Code Enforcement Officer as being in violation of
City Ordinance Section 11. 6, Subd. 2. Refuse. A court trail has
been scheduled for March 5, 1987 for action on the alleged
violation. Staff thought it would be appropriate at this time to
update the City Council on the facts as they pertain to this
case.
Background•
On September 9, 1982 the TenEycks received a variance to
allow for seven vehicles to be parked off-street and uncovered,
pursuant to the following conditions:
1. That the number of vehicles shall not exceed one vehicle per
licensed driver plus two accessory vehicles.
2. one vehicle shall be sold within three months.
In my review of the Board of Adjustments and Appeals minutes from
1982, it is clear that the primary intent of the variance was not
to allow for the storage of stock cars but to allow the property
owner to park more vehicles due to the large number of licensed
drivers within his family.
In 1985 the City Code Enforcement Officer cited the TenEycks
for the storage of inoperable vehicles and insufficient
licensing. The storage of waste material (refuse) was also cited
by the Code Enforcement Officer at that time. This case was
brought to court for preliminary hearing in October of 1985. At
a subsequent court hearing on March 17, 1986 the case was
continued for dismissal subject to the condition that the
property owner clean up the property and bring it into compliance
with City Code. In the fall of 1986 the Shakopee City Attorney
was informed that the TenEycks had not complied with the court
order and that additional court action was necessary.
A court trail for action on this issue has been scheduled
for March 5, 1987. A violations of City Code Section 11.6, Subd.
2 involves the unpermitted storage of waste materials, debris,
refuse and garbage. I have attached several pictures for the
Council' s review. I£ any of the Council members have any
questions in regard to this issue, please feel free to call me.
r+
'f I
T �•
_ e.
TAX RATES PAYABLE IN 1987 -
COUNTY OF SCOTT, N.INNESOTA -
RATE IN RATE IN
CITIES: "'VALUATIONS .MILLS SCHOOLS: *.*VALUATIONS MILLS
BELLE PLAINE 11,651,547 30.185 BURNSVILLE 46,120,518 69.427
ELKO 993,053 33. 733 LAKEVILLE 14,511,878 68.025
JORDAN 9,855,975 35.796 BLOOMINGTON 1,648,197 47.571
NEW MARKET 1,051,560 15.422 LE SUEUR 337,443 59.768
NEW PRAGUE 8,611,457 39.385 BELLE PLAIN£ 19,427,524 50.522
PRIOR LAKE 53,895,882 30.664 JORDAN 26,425,812 59.613
RURAL 23.116 PRIOR LAKE 85,810,053 55.902-
PRIOR LIKE IV 8,171,157 . . _ 29.941 SHAKOPEE 124,518,859 72.038
RURAL 22.403 NEW PRAGUE 29,542,371 63.527
SAVAGE 14,188,799 28.367 HENDERSON 120,117- 57.678
SAVAGE II 33,166,710 27.393 LAKE - NP 160,140 - 72.304
SHAKOPEE 118,884,261-_ 17.790
RURAL - 9.518
SPECIAL DIST: _
HRA (SHAK) 118,884,261 .318
HRA (EX SHAK) 229,664,651 .299
TOWNSHIPS: MET COUNCIL 339,937,455 .666
MOSQ CONTROL 348,548,912 -.560
BELLE PLAINS 6,001,180 3.749 - MET TRANSIT -
SP FIRE 4,509,791 2.069 *DISTRICT 228,306,809 3.418
JON FIRE 151,881 2.287 **AREA 111,630,646 .428
NP FIRE 1,339,507. . ` 1,264. LO MN WATER 141,740,411 .353
BLAXEL£Y 3,.435,002 9.449 PL-SL WATER 71,429,979 1.102
CEDAR LAKE 9,687,500 '-. - 4.775 CL WATER 3,279,034 1.424
NP FIRE 7,317,029 .883 REG 9 DEV 8,611,457 .156
NM FIRE 2,370,471 1.309
CREDIT RIVER 12,854,595 . 5.127
HELENA 8,380,575 5.533 COUNTY: 348,548,912 43.848
JDN FIRE 1,939,512 ..454
NP FIRE 6,441,063 1.040 +****+****++*
JACKSON 5,072,544 ',.496 NOTES
LOUISVILLE 5,935,369 - 3.651
NEW MARKET 11,104,323 - 3.532
VERM. w/m/0 6,855,745 .300 ` RATE ADJUSTED -
SAND CREEK 8,638,331 5-676 `* COUNTY EXCEPT PRIOR SAKE,
ST LAWRENCE 2,617,212 6,145 SAVAGE, SHAKOPEE, NEW PRAGUE
BP FIRE 1,312,401 `" VALUES ARE ASSESSED VALUES
. z>
JON FIRE 1,304,807 x . 3533
UNADJUSTED
SPRING LAKE 14,351,880 _ y.668
FOR TOTAL RATE ADD: - -
COUNTY, CITY OR TOWNSHIP, SCHOOL
PLUS FIRE AND SPECIAL DISTRICT
AS APPLICABLE
L9
� 3 T
3 K
O �
� R
n Y.
00 a0 N
p d J w h1 J n o Oa n •�'•� n
w n o o w w V
t� C n w >' Y. w oNH
w n off m o0 0 0 �
Ul N o
n 3 3 3 0 3 m
n
n n wnn
tll Y Y• •
n m ❑ n
O W N O 00
n � V An W ryJnO V nn
p o C M n OEE o OCC r or n
nG w o � aG � rt on `G ooh Ch
� ro Y• n o v Y. ro Y
W N r O W
P J
U� H
n n
wn �
o
R t7
3
tV]
7
W
J n b
•• O33 N
ro N 7
B O w
O G
9
K
O` •O N U
x
H
CJ
9
K
N w
J O P
C9
9
r H
LO N P V V
� a
/-.2947 0/;n scS
�L
iiu,nkna,w� l0$'1. �
nsSo0A1 ES
MEMO
T0: Citizen's Advisory Committee
BY: Jack Boarman
BT: February 3, 1987
RE: Shakopee City Hall
The commitee work began with a introduction by John Anderson, City
Administrator and John Larue, City Councilman. Mr. Boarman reviewed the
overall work organization and the general process through which the
commitee would be working over the eight weeks. The meeting dealt with
the following items:
1. John Anderson reviewed the overall city organization and stated the
departments that would be included in the city hall study. Those that
were excluded represented police, fire and public works and the
associated working committees. A copy of the city organization chart
was distributed.
2. Mr. Boarman distributed a introduction letter that listed the first
meeting adgenda. The first item included a tour of the existing
facilities which was held. After that the committee stated that they
did not need to tour the community services building which they were
familiar with.
3. A copy of the rough draft of the program for the city hall was
11stributed. It was stated by Mr. Boarman that the sixteen thousand
S.F. was the maximum space area that was projected for the ten to
fifteen year time frame. The range of projected area that had been
discussed was twelve and sixteen thousand. The committee requested a
comparison of the existing building area projected plan as well as the
amount of space occupied by the city ten years ago. This was to
lrclude staff projections, building area, and population.
4. The committee requested an illustration of the geographic areas of the
community and the bridge alignment with scheduled implementation
dates.
5. The Committee also requested a population forecast with a range from
the metro council up to a projected potential . It was suggested that
cities like Savage and Prior Lake be used as potential precedent
examples for housing growth that could confront Shakopee.
6. The site issues were reviewed and the committee was informed that the
council had decided on the two final sites. It would be put on the
ballot for advisory vote at the referendum which would be held on
April 28. The council would make the final vote to pick the site.
The committees task was to review the size and scope of a building
with the options to recommend (a) nothing be done (b) that the
existing building was fine with addition and remodeling (c) that a new
building should be built. With (b) or (c) option the committee was to
make recommendations to the council on a proposed building size,
appearance and cost effectiveness to the community.
7. The committee requested a review of the existing building from a
standpoint of code, handicapped and safety compliance and
acceptability.
8. The basic layout was requested for the existing building and any
adjacent land that would be left over after the by—pass was put in
for the new bridge. A comparison of the building program and the
existing site and structure will be prepared and sent out to the
committee.
9. The adjenda was discussed for future meetings. The dates that were
set are 7:30 on February 12, and 26th, March 12th and 26th, and April
2nd.
10. The committee requested a slide show of similar cities and their
respective city hall facilities. It was also presented that a similar
facilities survey would be presented of comparable project staff and
size.
At the conclusion of the meeting it was agreed that the requested
material would be forwarded to the committee by direct mail no later
than February 6, 1987.
If in your review of this memo there are items that are incorrect please
inform me such that revisions can be made.
Citizenis Task Force Member
John Anderson
City department heads
Siting committee
city council
mayor
PROCEEDINGS OF THE /
DOWNTOWN AD HOC COMMITTEE
CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS
FEBRUARY 4, 1987
Chairman Laurent callod the mopting to order at 7:40 a.m. with rho follwing mombprs
prpspnt: Gary Laurent, Terry Forbord, Harry Kohler, Jim Stillman, Pptpr Samos
and Molanio Kahlock. Tim Roan. arrivod later. Mombors absent: Joo Topic and
Bill Wormorsklrchpn. Also prosont worn John Anderson, City Administrator, Barry
Stock, Administrativp Assistant and Dpnnis Kraft, Community Dovplopmpnt Dirpctor.
Gary Laurpnt introduced Harry Kohlpr, now mombpr of rho Downtown Committpp.
Tprry Forbord/Pptp Samos moved that tho agenda bo approved. Motion carried.
Torry forbord/Jim Stillman moved to approvo tho minutos of tho January 14, 1987
mooting. Motion carriod.
Mr. Stock lnformod the committpo that tho date for tho public boating on tho
downtown rpdpvplopmpnt project has bopn changod from Fob. 10,1987 to March 10, 1987
at 7:00. p.m. At tho public boating, staff will bo rocommonding that thp
downtown project bo dono in tho following phases:
Phase I
1987 Construction Soason
Rodov.- Sommprvillo 6 Ivwls Stropt (1st to 3rd)
2nd Avonuo - Holmes to Sommorvillo
1988 Construction Soason
Rpdpv.- Holmos, Pullpr & Atwood (1st to 3rd)
2nd Avenue (Atwood to Holmos)
Rehab.- 3rd Avp (Sppncpr to Shumway)
Scott, Atwood, Fullor, Lowis
Sommprvillo, Sp+ncpr(3rd to 4th)
Phaso II
1991 Construction Soason
Red-v.- 1st Avpnup (Atwood to Sommorville)
Staff is also rpcommpnding that 3rd Avpnup by takpu out of the projoct and bo
complptpd as a spparatp project which would oliminatp the asspssmpnt problom on
Third Avonuo.
Tho City Administrator psplainpd that the Council could spud out specs for both
Part I 6 II of Phaso I at tho samo timo in order to obtain bottpr prices.
In rpvipwing rho asspssmpnt strategy staff is rpcommpnding that credit bo given
against rohab for ostra curb roquirod for stroptscapo, for ostra width sidewalk
and for pntprprisp (gate valves and manholes) fund work. Credit would not bo
glvon to rpsidpntial rpfprrals for Astra road width and 9 ton design or for additiion
for functional strppt lighting.
Downtown Committeo
February 4, 1987
Pago -2-
A lengthy, discussion was hold on whpthpr or not a now petition should ba circulated
to satisfy criticism of the prpsont petition. -Thp City Administrator informod the
COmmltte- that although thprp appears to by no technical flaws in tho prosent potition
a lawsuit could sot the projoct back a year. Thp consensus of the Committpp was
that thoy worked hard and long on this project and had Bono a good job on it.
Concossions and reductions havo bopn =do in the assessments and thoy boli-vo
ppoplp who understand it will want tho improvomonts. Additionally, the Committop
felt that procppding to rpcirculatp rho pptition would by like admitting that tho
first potation was invalid.
Melanio Kahlock/Jim Stillman movod to keep tho downtown r-dov-lopm-nt project
momontum moving forward.
Tim Kpano/Terry Forbord offprpd tho following amondment: and that rho Downtown
Committ-e continuo its support for the Downtown Str-pt Public Lmprovom-nts and
that the Commltt-o supports tho project asspssm-nt policies as amended and adoptod
by the City. Motion on amondmont carried.
Motion carried unanimously.
Tim Kpano suggpstpd using the media and other chamois of communications to got rho
facts and information out to too public. A sub-committee consisting of Tim Koanp,
M-lanip Kahlock, Torry Forbord and Harry Kohlor will work on this project.
John Andprson roportpd that a Committee of 25-30 citizens is trying to dptprminp
how much space is nppdpd in the now City Hall. Thoy plan to moot throo or four
mor- timos b-ford making their final report.
Mr. Andprson rpportpd that Mpritor Dpvplopment corporation had a markpt study don-
on residential building in the City. According to their report th- Council has
boon rathor slow pursuing rosidential dpvplopment.
City staff was askod to call the company that is to install the lights on th-
parking lot on a daily basis in hopes that thoy will completp tho installation
without further dolay.
Tho most m--ting will by hold Fob. 25, 1987 at 7:30 a.m.
Tprry Forbord/P-t- Samos moved to adjourn at 9:10 a.m. Motion carri-d.
DBS/pss
PROCEEDINGS OF THE SHAKOPEE ENERGY AND TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE
REGULAR SESSION SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA JANUARY 15, 1987
Chairman Ziegler called the meeting to order at 7:30 P.M. with
Commissioners Schmidt, Weeks and Spiotta present. Commissioners
Allen and Schwartz were absent. Barry Stock, Administrative
Assistant; John Anderson, City Administrator and Susan Moore,
Department of Energy and Economic Development (DEED) were also
present.
Schmidt/Weeks moved to approve the minutes of the October 23,
1986 meeting as kept. Motion carried unanimously.
Mr. Stock then introduced Miss Susan Moore of the Department of
Energy and Economic Development. He explained that Miss Moore
was the staff person at DEED who is responsible for the
administration of the Community Energy Council Grant Program.
Miss Moore then went through apresentation which indicated the
' alternatives that the City of Shakopee could pursue in
conjunction with a Community Energy Council Grant Program
application. Miss Moore briefly explained the following five
home energy programs: 1. Home Energy Check-Up, 2. Neighborhood
Energy Workshop Program, 3. Seniors helping Seniors, 4. State
Energy Rental Code Enforcement and 5. House Doctor Program. A
brief slide show was reviewed by the Committee which indicated
the primary sources of heat loss which commonly occur in
residential households.
Mr. Stock pointed out that the Community Energy Council Grant
Program is an attractive source of funding because it provides up
to $15,000 for each year in a two year period with only a 10%
local match. Miss Moore stated that she thought it would be
appropriate if the City of Shakopee contacted Minnegasco or the
local utility to request funding assistance in any program that
they intend to develop. The consensus of the Committee was that
it would be appropriate for the City to develop a grant
application which identified a target audience and some type of
home energy program.
Mr. Stock informed 'the Committee that he would continue to
monitor programs offered through the Metropolitan Council for
funding recycling related activities. However, the majority of
the programs developed to date are geared towards the communities
of Minneapolis and St. Paul. He stated that he would continue to
lobby the Metropolitan Council to develop programs that will
benefit any City in the Metropolitan Area regardless of its size.
The Committee then went through a brief goals and objectives
session to identify the direction of the Committee in 1987.
Following is a brief listing of the goals to be achieved in 1987:
1. Implement a home energy program via the Community Energy
Council Grant Program.
2. Achieve the solid waste goals for the City of Shakopee as
identified in the Scott County Solid Waste Master Plan.
3. Investigate the possibility of a compost site in Shakopee.
4. Expand the recycling program to include apartments.
5. Investigate the possibility of expanding the dial-a-ride
service to weekends and out of town trips.
6. Pursue the implementation of a reverse van pool route.
7. Investigate the possibility of an internal circulator
connection with the Eden Prairie service.
8. Improve the communications of the overall transportation
issues between the City of Shakopee and the Energy and
Transportation Committees.
9. Continue to educated ourselves on issues which affect solid
waste, energy conservation, and transportation.
Mr. Stock stated that he would put the final goals and objectives
in a final format for the Committees review and action at their
next meeting.
Chairman Zeigler left the meeting at 8: 45 p.m.
Mr. Stock reported that he had met with the transportation
coordinator for the Eden Prairie opt-out system. He went on to
state that the possibility existed for establishing an inter
connect between the Shakopee system and the Eden Prairie system.
The primary purpose for pursuing this type of service would allow
us to eliminate the need for a back-up vehicle and also provide
an alternative source of transportation for those residents who
cannot currently get to Eden Prairie via our van pool program.
Additionally, we could then pursue the possibility of eliminating
those van pools that are not effective.
' In order to determine the effectiveness of such an interconnect
system, staff is recommending that a market analysis be conducted
to determine potential ridership levels. Mr. Stock suggested
that a survey be conducted on both the dial-a-ride and van pool
programs. A brief dial-a-ride survey was presented to the
Committee for their review and comment. Mr. Stock stated that
the dial-a-ride survey would be handed out on the dial-a-ride
vehicles and collected by the dial-a-ride drivers. To get a more
representative sample of the community, Mr. Stock suggested that
a telephone survey be conducted of the residents. Mr. Stock
stated that the cost of a telephone survey from an independent
source would range between $5,000 and $15,000. With this in
mind, staff is recommending that a survey be developed and
conducted in house. A random sample of telephone numbers and
residents can be obtained from Northwestern Bell for a minimal
cost. The actual survey can be done for a small fee by one of
the many organizations in Shakopee.
The Committee then reviewed the telephone survey. Commissioner
Spiotta suggested that a question be included to ascertain the
respondents address. John Anderson suggested that a question be
added to discover whether or not the residence were aware of the
subsidized nature of the dial-a-ride and van pool programs.
Commission Spiotta also suggested that a question be added to the
survey to discover the work destination of the survey
respondents. Mr. Stock stated that he would prepare a final
survey for the Committees review at their next meeting.
Mr. Stock then presented the dial-a-ride and van pool monthly
reports to the Committee for their review.
There being no further discussion, Vice Chairman Spiotta
adjourned the meeting at 9:15 p.m.
Barry A. Stock
Recording Secretary.
F7-RUCY ., 1967
Chairman -Mia called the meeting to order at 7;42 p.m, with ^,omm. Johnson,
*'an Tialdeghem, Pomerenke, Schmitt, Rockne and 7oudray present, !iso present
were Dennis Kraft, ;ommunity Development Director; John i;• Anderson, ^_ity
Administrator; Barry Stock, Administrative Assistant; and Cncl. Clay.
Rockne/Pomerenke moved to approve the agenda ne written. ?[otion carried
unanimously.
-^,hairman Czaja passed the gavel over t., the Community Development Director
for election of officers.
;zaja/Schmitt moved to nominate Jane Van8:aideghem for Mairman. Motion
carried unanimously.
Hockne/--zaja moved to close nominations. ''otion carried unanimously.
Schmitt/Czaja moved for a unanimous ballot for Jane TanMaldeghem for
Chairman. 'lotion carried unanimously.
the gavel was passed to Chairman 7anv°aldeghem.
Pomerenke/Schmitt moved to nominate Dave Czaja for Vice Chairman. Motion
carried unanimously.
Schmitt/Czaja moved to c .ose nominations. Motion carried unanimously.
,budray/Schmitt moved for a unanimous ballot for Comm. Czaja for `lice
Chairman. -Notion carried unanimously.
- =oudray/Schmitt moved to approve the minutes of January 8, 1997. :Sotion
carried unanimously.
,FDIC n':.lR-? G - Consider rezoning of 7i.2 acres located in °on 7
_o.mship 1.:�., jenge 22.. from 'b to r: Tacks^n i�usiness
Czaja/Sohmitt moved to open the public hearing to consider the rezoning I'
of approximately 71.2 acres of property located in Section 7, Township 115`.,
Range 22:i, from _-^.o- to R-2. :.otion carried unanimously.
Chairman VanP;aldegnem asked if there was anyone from the audience who
wished to address this issue.
Schmitt/Pomerenke moved to continue the public hearing to the April
Planning ^,ommission meeting. Sotion ca-Tied unanimously.
Pl&=inC 'oLZ:�19530.
?eorua^' j, '.097
Page -2-
___ ,onsider Pine' Plat of Yarissc -ddition located at 1R^7_
zaja/SopdrK• coved to open the public nearing to consider the final plat
of Yarusso :addition lying on the property located at 1503-1395 7,a.Ile Creek
Blvd. ?lotion carried unanimously.
Chairman ':'an".;aldeghzm asked if there was anyone from audience who wished
to address this issue. There was no response.
,Chmi't/Czaja moved to continue the public hearing to the April Planning
Co=ission meeting. Motion carried unanimously.
P".TT1T ft 4-"; - amendment to Con,'.itional Hae Permit ---3?4, Thema;. .1'_en Too.
Czaja/?;ockne moved to open the public hearing to consider an amendment to
Conditional use Permit -Resolution No. :x-334 to delete a condition, which
requires a person with a minimum of 5000 hours experience of working with
mentally retarded in the event that person is the only supervisor in attendance
on property located at 1111 East '":ird Avenue, b:otiDn carried unanimanaly.
the ^ommunity Development Director said nothing could be' found in the
State statutes regarding the 5000 hour minimum requirement for a supervisor.
in the three years of operation there have been no problems with the
neighborhood.
Concern was expressed by Comm, Schmitt and Czaja on having anyone under
age 21 hired for the night shift. Dave Petermann owner of Thomas ;11en !no,
said they have not been hiring under age 21 for the night shift. Chairman
„an':;aldeghem asked about what experience was necessary for hiring anyone
21 years.
Chairman Van".faldeghem asked if there was anyone from the audience who
wished to address this issue. Ihere was no resonse.
Pomerenkef3ocLnue moved to clone the lublic hearing. : Jtion carried
unanimously.
Tbudray/Por,erenke moved to amend onditional Use Permit --334 by deleting
condition ,fl as follows, "in the event that there is a single person in
attendance at the residence that person have a mini=ms of 5000 hours expert
ence in dealing with metally retarded", and move for its adoption. Tt is
farther recommended that a new condition be attached which indicaies that any
staff working the night shift (from 11 P.M. - 7 A.H.) shall have completed
the following prior to working this shift ala e.
A. ^ ? Training
B. ':edictal Orientation
., i;edication Orientation
D. P'=;;::; Director's Orientation
lead _7C's Irientation
19S7
Forge _3'
Purther:ore all staff x_r;:ing the night shit shall meet tae following
.ongoing trainiag/inservice requirements:
A. !.'.tend quarterly safety and training meetings,
�. 'ttend tenant/staff meetings as directed b-- the Program
director to ins ude a minimum of he annual C_T1, training
oral Vulnerable Adults training,
,arthermore all staff working the night shift alone shall be at '_east 10
years of age and have at lest one Year of wor':ing experience. if the
forementioned staff does not meet this requirement they will work a minimum
of two mo.ais under the supervision of the Program Director or Lead impart—
ment Living . 00rdinator before working the night shift. 3urthe_..:cre, oro
staff under the age of 19 will be fired Tor night shift work, ;:otion carried
unanimously.
3chmitt/^zaja moved to amend the motion to delete the hours and let the
term "night shift" stand on its own merit and delete the second sentence
in the last paragraph reading "if the forementioned staff does not meet
this requirement they will work a minimum of two months under the super—
vision of the Pzogram Director or Lead Apartment Living Coordinator before
working the night shift," '-lotion carried as amended.
PTBT`C HEAR7" — Preli^.inary and Final Plat of Horizon ;_F,eights 4th !addition,
Walt _tWUenhardt.
Schmdtt/Czaja moved to open the public hearing to consider the preliminary
and final plat of Horizon Heights.Ath Addition lying on the property
located south of County Road 16, north of county Road 42, east of ;iuhlenhardt
Road and west of Hwy 13. Riotion carried unanimow.ly.
The Community Development Director said the plat consists of 48 lots and
is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. t this time he said the 10 foot
drainage easements need to be shown and a park dedication fee has to be
made, there are also several drainage problems along uhlenhardt Road wh_ch
need to be addressed.
^ommissioner ^.zaja had a question with regards to the lot sizes and if there
were any wetlands associated with this area. He asked if the term useable_
land relates to plotting as well. The City Administrator said it is perhaps
related to park dedication. ^onsensus of the Commission was that the plan
as submitted is inadequate and should be sent back to the applicant for
further completion of the plat.
Ralph Cood, Bloomington, said he owns some land to the west and asked if
this would effect him in any way. The Community Development Director said
it would not.
-hairmar, ' an:aldeghem asked if there was anyone from the audience who wished
to address this issue. ':ere was no response.
Planning :om_:ission .
�Ieoraary 5, 1987
'age —y—
Schmit Plockne moved to continue -:.e public hearing to the _.pr__ _...mins
^.ommission meeting. Tot-on carried unaninossly.
Scimitt/3ockne moved for a 10 minute recess. 'i0tion carried unanimously.
Czaja/Pomerenke moved to reconvene at 8:$5 p.m. ,otion carried unanimously.
P:7D:'^ .' 7"7A-2;, — ;onditicnal Use Pc^.lit to ailor nut side sLorage of con—
struction equ_pmea, Tang. ticmz:, and ,lames C'3rien.
,zaja/Fomerenik= moved to open the public hearing to consider an appl'catior,
for a conditional use permit to allow outside storage of construction
equipment ui+on the propeerty located on lots 1-10, 31ock 174, City of
Shakopee. ?:uticn carried unanimously.
The Community Development Director reviewed the conditions that need to
be met by the applicant such as, screeni.uig fence around the entire rear
two—thirds of the lot; time schedule for completion of project; parking
lot material being concrete or asphalt; and screening cf roof top
mechanical equipment, if any.
Comm. Pomerenke said he looked at the site and there is some vegetation
on the west end of the property in the rear which have a height of about
8 feet and a fence probably could not be seen. Comm. Schmitt said the
rear yard fencing will not do a lot for the screening but will do more
for the security due to the proximity of the residential neighborhood,
Jeff Raines, 1109 W. 3rd Avenue, said his property adjoins the applicants
property and when this was rezoned he did not receive a notice. He had
a concern over his privacy with all the cranes and other equipment which
will be stored there.
Thomas ^dman, applicant, said they have no problem with screening the
entire west end of the property to nro•vide the adjoiting property owner
with privacy and security. Ea said the maximum height of equipment will
be 12 to 13 feet aid they will not store any equipment directly against
the fence line,
Kr. Raires asked if the vote could be held over for a month so he could
have time to consult with his attorney and the applicant on these plans.
Doudray/Schmitt moved to continue the public hearing for 30 days until
March 5, 1937, Comm. zaja asked if the issues of control of flames, odor,
dust, lighting end all other issues that deal in the criteria .for a
conditional use permit be addressed in the staff report. Motion carried
unanimously.
. -=ar�.ing :nmrissio.^.
'a_e -5-
to a'lo+: a encu-^e
-
C2ajajockne moved to open the public hearing to consider an amendment to
conditional use permit resolution -375 to allow a change in hours of
operation for mini;;g operations from 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. to G:00 a.m. to
10:00 P.M. ?Motion carried unanimouL ly,
i
'_3c Co..—unity Development --j actor said the applicant is reque=ting to
extend their hours of operation, one of the advantages they stated to
this request is that during the time they mine limestone it has to be
done in a dry environment, meaning they pump water out of the quarrj in
order t; mine i . They are estimating that they could crush an adequate
amount of lime stone in a G-3 week period.
Discussion ensud on installing a street light at the location of their
driveway with _77ighway 101, which should provide additional safety at the
intersection during hours of darkness. Zi^.da Schutz. said the truck
traffic will involve about 3 dump trucks going from the p't over to
the storage piles with crushed material. She did not
think that they would be leaving the pit unless one of the employees
drove the dump track home and wcald be returning in the early morning
hours.
',oma. Szaja brought up the possibility of looking at a 3 month variable
condition for this operation and also the possibility of being able to
run 24 hours a day since the crasher will be refined in the pit and the
noise level will be greatly reduced.
Chairman ';anMaldeghem asked if there was anyone from the audience who
wished to address this issue. Ihere was no response,
I
Roudray/7chn4tt moved to close the public hearing, '_o'.ion carried '
Soh.:.41t/3oc'hcne moved to amend -Oorditianal ;;se permit ,;'375 by expanding the
boss of operation Eros, o:CO a m. to 1G:CO p.m, for a period of 4 months '
annaa.:ly. _ne applicant be al_owed on a trial basis to operate 24 hours
a day if he can show cause that the total period will be less and that
staff recommendation for lighting at intersection 1031 be deleted on the
r. basis of the applicant's testimony and the a;ended conditional use per,,.,=t
be subject to a one year review, lotion carried uamnimouc1y.
Discussion ensued on the J.!,. 3,hiely Company's operation elan for 1937,
^omm. ^.zaja asked if the present installation of the pumps if they would
be pumping at all during the shut off time or pumping at a reduced level.
;.r. Oannaway, Shiely Company replied that they should not be pumping al
all.
3chmitt/• zaja moved to accept J.D. Shiely Company's operation plan
for 19S7. ;lotion carried unanimously.
I
'aanning Commission
Pebrua^y 5, 19'_7
Page -6-
Schmitt^,zaja moved to accept the legal opinion of building over lot lines
submitted by City Attorney. :lotion carried ura.imousl .
parry Stook, Administrative Assistant, reviewed the proposal from Gary "saurent
and ;i. Tom Haugen for development of a 200 acre site near C'Dowd take Park
consisting of a residentin.= development and 19 hole golf course.
Gary Laurent reviewed the plans with the Planning ;ommission saA,ing that
the land is located north of O'Dowd ;lake. ;hey currently have secured
osmers ip of most of the property involved. Tom 7aagen is currently a
consultant with about 90 golf courses within the state of .'Unnesota. Mr.
Haugen addressed the Commission saying that golf has gained rapidly and
there is a need for golf courses in the Twin 1ity area. There will be
a club house built which w_ll have limited membersh_p. The parking lot
will be on 79 for approximately 120 vehicles. They are proposing about
88 single family building sites and along with that there will be four
6-unit single family attached on .the south border of the City pork.
Comm. Czaja asked what the average lot size would be. Air. Laurent answered
the lot sizes will vary from 19,000 to 25,000 square feet. Toncre is one
cul de sac that is longer than usually allowed. There is a possibility of
providing an emergency access to the club house. 't is in the developers
plan to do an individual soil analysis of each lot to determine that each
has suitable conditions for sewage disposal. Comm. Schmitt brought up the
possility of some sort of community water system but not a community
sewer system.,, Mr. Laurent replied that they w_11 investigate that possibility
further. Price range of residential property will be from X100,000 toj00,000.
.:r. Laarent addressed the P.Q.D. restriction of Ordinance No. 206 regarding
clarification on private water service may be allowed, no mention is made
of sewer service. Comm. Schmitt said that some provision be allowed that
would allow for smaller lot sizes so that community water service might
be available. Discussion ensued on the possibility of using trade-offs
to incorporate the 20 acre parcel currently not in the development.
Chairman 'IanA;aldegham asked if there was anyone from the audience who wished
to further address this issue. ^here was no response.
Concerns were raised by Commission members as to the density of residential
houses and sewer.
Rce'.me/Schmitt moved for a 5 minute recess. 7'otion carried unanimously.
FoudraylZchmitt moved to reconvene at 11;05 p.m. [ction carried unanimously.
tarry Frank, A:eritor Development Corporation reviewed their plans for
a residential development they are proposing for the City of Shakopee.
County Road 79 is the west properly line, llth Avenue is on the north,
the south property line is the -___ -pass. The development is proposed
to be in the Roberts Pit area. C__. ._r. was presented to the council on
February j and a few of thei a_-._,,-.r_.- _.. e bean reworked._ There is proposed
to be approximately 339 r _ .... - —at the City world be
responsible for is bringing ..-r z-.,s. :.._ ugh, =th Avenue would
have to be upgraded, and vatermadn would have to be 'brought downn, to the ll
development. ue two main concerns the City Council had were lith Avenue
not going all the way t_xodgh and lots fronting on the collectors street.
^.omm. �zaja said that one cul de sac appeared is be over the licit in
length and asked that some reworking on that be done. *!r. Gerald Poole
said that most of his concerns raised at the pity council meeting have
been answered.
Sch-itt/7za,ja moved to accept some from the ^om, ity Deveiopment Director
dated ,?anuary 26, 1967, regarding questions raised at the Sanuary 6, 1967
Planning Commission meeting with one change Leat item '-'2 be changed to
reflect R`.' park instead of mobile park. Potion carried unar.imously.
The Community Development Director said a public hearing has been set
up for consideration of rezoning certain property around Fairest .^",ade
Foods Inc, and a creation of a new district (industrial ?lamed District).
the public hearing w7ll be set for Thursday, February 12, 1957, at 7:30 p.m.
Comm. Schmitt asked the Comxuaity Development Director if anyone has
investigated the home occupation at 911 So. Holmes.
Foudray/Schmitt moved to adjourn. Motion carried unanimously. iieeting
adjourned at 11:45 p.m.
Dennis Kraft
Cos. Uty Development Director
Carol Schultz
Recording Secretary
1.;s5 /Y
.,-7JITI1' =1_7"IT --,,..:P A_^� _.,,=]-A-;. 5 103.,,
Chairman Czaja called the meeting to order at 7:715 p.m. with ^ouch. Schm_tt,
?budray, Rockne, Pomerenke, Johnson and `ian'ialdeghem present. :.iso present
were Dennis Kraft, Community Development Director; John ". ';nderson, :City
Administrator; Rarry Stock, Administrative kssistzat;-and ^ncl. Clay,
The agenda was approved as written.
^,hairman ^zaja turned the gavel over to the Community Development Director
for election of officers.
Czaja/Schmitt nominated Jane ','anMaideghem for Chairman. Motion carried.
.Schmitt/Pomerenke moved that nominations be closed. Notion carried unanimously.
Schmitt/Czaja moved for a unanimous ballot for Jane vanMaldegbem for
Chairman.
The gavel was passed to Comm. 7anbialdeghem.
Pomerenke/Tbudray moved to nominate Dave Rockne for mice Chairman.
Rockne/Schmitt moved to nominate Dave Czaja for "ice .Chairman.
Roekne/ zaja moved to close nominations. Notion carried unanimously.
Roll Call for Dave Czaja: Comm. Czaja, Rockne, Schmitt, '7an!4aldeghem
Roll Call for Dave Rockne: Comm. Jobnson, Pomerenke, %budray
Rockne/Pomerenke moved to approve the minutes of January S, 1987, with
amendment showing Comm. Schmitt absent. Notion carried unanimously.
3chmitt/^.zaja moved to adjourn. i:otion carried unanimously. '-eeting
adjourned at 7:41 p.m.
Dennis :raft
Community Development Director
Carol L. Schultz
Recording Secretary
PROCEEDINGS OF THE SHAKOPEE PLANNING COMMISSION
SPECIAL SESSION SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA FEBRUARY 12 198T
The Community Development Director called the meeting to order with Comm. Rockne,
Schmitt, Foudray, Johnson and Pomerenke present. Comm. VanMaldeghem and Czaja
were absent. Also present was Cncl. Clay.
Rockne/Pomerenke moved to nominate Comm. Schmitt as acting Chairman. Motion carried
unanimously.
Pomerenke/Rockne moved to close nominations. Motion carried unanimously.
Rockne/Pomerenke moved to approve the agenda as written. Motion carried unanimously.
PUBLIC HEARING - New Zoning District (IPD) Fairest Made Foods.
Rockne/Foudray moved to open the public hearing to consider creation of a new zoning
district, the Industrial Planned District (IPD) and the Rezoning of Certain Properties
from B-1 to IPD. Motion carried unanimously. !
The Community Development Director said the parcels of property being considered for
rezoning are the south halves of three blocks located between Fillmore and Minnesota
Streets, between 2nd Avenue and the railroad tracks on the south, and the alley
between First and Second Avenues on the north related to the Fairest Made Foods
property which is located at 134 So. Main, presently zoned B-1. It is currently
a non-conforming use and can remain there but cannot expand in that zone. The
Planned Unit Development process would require the Planning Commission to hold a
public hearing for any development proposal. The uses that would be permitted are:
A. Animal Hospitals/clinics
B. Accessory Uses
C. Assembly/Storage of:
apparel
food products (excluding slaughtering and rendering)
glass
pottery
lumber & wood products
paper products
textiles
D. Banks
E. Car Washes
F. If abutting a state highway:
-auto service stations
-hotels
-motels
-restaurants-class I
G. Limited food Processing
H. Offices
I. Open Sales Lot
J. Public Buildings
K. Retail Businesses
L. Wholesale Businesses -
n;
F�braary 2, -„
,,omm. Lomereskv asked if this development would glace a_„y restrictions on
existing uses that are not currently in the B-1 zoning. The .ommunity
Devo`3nment -irector answered that any uses p_esen4ly erictino could continue
to exist but would be non-conforming. ..^;omm. Schcitt asked if this would
pertain only to areas adjacent to railroad tracks. -10mcrunity Development
Director answered that it does- pertain to railroad tracks according to
discussion of City Council. ,. .w_. Schmitt raised a co--cern over the parking
occuring near a residential environment and thsi any parking requirements
that would apply to an industrial t_pe district e,,00ld also apply for this
district which would require off—street parking and all parking s oald be
onsite. ^.oma. Schmitt asked if there was anyone in audience who :.wished to
address this issue.
John _eroux, 10;1 Swift Street, Shakopee, member of S:.akopee ;;;ty Ouncil,
said that this is not a finished product and it is brought up to the
Pluming Commission strictly for input. it was also the consensus of the
Commission to exclude the Central Business District from this rezoning
ordinance.
Bill Jongquist Fairest !",ads zbods Inc. asked what the zoning was previous
to this. The Community Development '_;rector said that it was zoned g-1 -
from 1952 to 1955, then it was rezoned to 3-5 until 1979 and then at that
time it was zoned 1-1. -a asked about maxim building heights and why
the limit is 25 feet. Be also had a concern about they oading and service
areas not facing directly on a public street. Mr. Jongquist also raised a
concern over the r-ouirement that "no overnight operation c£ semi—trailer
or truck refrigerat-: ., s shell be allowed” he elated that electric
units are not nc- would not be objectionab'_-e.
lois Bruce, 403 , =rd Avenue, said that ?illmore street is not a dead end
street, it stops cmc because of the railroad tracks and that it is also a
run for the buses.
Beverly I'oe_nen, 2035 County ;:cad 93, owner of t'ze south half of block 2,
said she was not given a notice of this public hearing, and at this time
side is against this rezoning and would like to cors:alt with her attorney
on this matter. She ticked why her piece of property was even bein considered.
The Community Development Director said that ;t would set a dangerous
precedent to create a new zoning district and have only one property owner
affected by it. ^_r.cl. Slay said that the idea was to make the rezoning a
large enough area no as not to be construed as spot zoning. 4he two a3join_,g
pieces of prcparty have the same characteristics as ':r. Jongquist property.
Becky incius, 520 7. 1st Street, said that she is interested' in keeping
^:r. Jongquist,.here in Shakopee.
Planning Commission
February 12, 1987
Page -3-
Chairman Schmitt expressed a concern that there would be adequate parking for
Mr. Joagquist employees on site, so that they would not have to park on the street.
Cncl. Lebens replied that parking near where she lives would not bother her if
it meant keeping this business in town.
Ms. Hester, (South side of street), said she is not concerned with parking near
her property and the noise coming from these trucks will be nothing compared
to some on Main street.
Beverly Koehnen said that since she ,Just received the information last night and
has not had a chance to research it properly, at this time she is neither for
or against this rezoning. She asked if the Commission could hold off their
decision for a few weeks to give her time to consult her attorney.
Anita Lilienthal, 714 E. 1st Street, questioned the possibility of having a
45 ft. height. She would be against it if the building next to hers would
want to expand vertically.
Lois Bruce, 403 E. 2nd, asked if a house that is currently on the historical
society register would have anything to say about this rezoning. The answer
was a house on the national register of historic places list would not alter
the decision for rezoning.
Discussion ensued on the possibility of raising the height limitation and
what effect that would have on the neighboring properties.
Dennis Foster, owner of condos south of bank, said that a height of 35 feet
would not block out any noise from the railroad track.
Terry Forbord, 2103 Bridge Crossing, Shakopee, said that he would not like to
see Mr. Jonguist business leave Shakopee, but as a broker and developer he said
an analysis should be made as to the long term and short term effects of a
decision such as this rezoning. He does not feel it is in the best interest
of the City to rezone this property, and that a more suitable location within
the City would be preferred.
Pomerenke/Johnson moved to close the public hearing. Motion carried unanimously.
Pomerenke/Rockne moved for a 10 minute recess. Motion carried unanimously.
�. Chairman Schmitt called the meeting back to order at 9:30 p.m.
Discussion ensued on each of the sections within the ordinance and changes were
incorporated. Comm. Rockne said that he would like to have the zoning district
changed from Industrial Planned District to Urban Redevelopment District (URD).
Section II should have language imcorporated excluding the Central Business
District from the ordinance.
i
Planning Commission
February 12, 1987
Page -4-
Permitted Uses: Limited Food Processing should be eliminated and included in
Assemble/Storage of food products. Under Retail Businesses, only uses in B-1
District or B-2 uses that exist in the district plus those listed in item C
under Assembly/Storage. Lot Area, Width, yard and Coverage Building Height will
remain the same with wording of height limitation be the same as the zoning that
is to be overlayed. Incorporate parking under Subdivision 4 or 5, stating
that the parking requirement be the same as to the zone that this is to be overlayed.
Mr. Pomerenke said he has concern over what long term effect this rezoning might
have between the railroad track and 1st Avenue property.
The Community Development Director asked if electric refrigeration units could
be allowed in the ordinance, instead of deisel. Comm. Schmitt said that overnight
parking of units could be allowed in the overnight loading area only if that
area is screened.
Foudray moved for the adoption of the ordinance as per staffs recommendation
of memorandum dated February 7, 1987, as originally published. Motion failed
due to lack of second.
Rockne/Johnson moved to submit a proposal for an urban redevelopment district
as outlined by staff with changes discussed by the Planning Commission as
amended by the Planning Commission. Motion fails with Comm. Foudray, Schmitt
and Pomerenke opposed.
Cncl. Lebens 'asked if Planning Commissioners would state their reasons as to
their opposition to the rezoning.
Comm. Schmitt said he has a problem with the size and the long term implications
of this rezoning on the city.
Comm. Foudray replied that he stands behind the staff recommendations without
the amendments.
Comm. Pomerenke said that with the new facts presented, and with the long term
impact that this might have on the City altered his original way of thinking.
Comm. Schmitt asked if there were any further motions. There was no response.
Rockne/Pomerenke moved to adjourn. Motion carried unanimously. Meeting adjourned
at 10:20 p.m.
Dennis Kraft
Community Development Director
Carol L. Schultz
Recording Secretary
TENTATIVE AGENDA
Board of Adjustment and Appeals
Regular Session Shakopee, Nal March 5, 1987
Chairperson VanMaldeghem Presiding
1. Roll Call at 7: 30 P.M.
2. Approval of Agenda
3. Approval of February 5, 1987 Minutes
4. 7: 30 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING: Request for variances to allow
the following: 1) two area identification signs, 2) one sign
to exceed the allowed height by 20 feet, 3) a second sign to
be located within 5 feet of the front property line and 4)
the second sign to be only 1 foot off the ground upon the
property located at County Road 89 and 13th Avenue.
Applicant: Jack Van Remortel (Backstretch R.V. Park)
Action: Variance Resolution #481
5. Other Business
6. Adjourn
Douglas K. Wise
City Planner
CITY OF SHAKOPEE
TENTATIVE AGENDA
PLANNING COMMISSION
Regular Session Shakopee, MN March 5, 1987
Chairperson VanMaldeghem Presiding
1. Roll Call at 7:30 P.M.
2. Approval of Agenda
3. Approval of February 5, 1987 and February 12, 1987 Minutes
4. 7:40 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING CONTINUED: To consider an
application for a conditional use permit to allow outside
storage of construction equipment upon the property located
on Lots 1-10, Block 174, City of Shakopee.
Applicant: Thomas Edman & James O'Brien
Action: Conditional Use Permit Resolution #480
5. 7:50 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING: To consider renewal of
Conditional Use Permit Resolution #465 to operate a
commercial recreational use; a bicycle motocross track upon
the property located on County Road 16 in the SW 1/4 of
Section 5 and NW 1/4 of Section 8.
Applicant: David Fischer
Action: Renewal of Conditional Use Permit Resolution 4465
6. 8: 00 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING: To consider an application for
T Conditional Use Permit to operate a bed and breakfast
facility upon the property located at 314 South Scott
Street.
Applicant: Dennis & Judith Clausen
Action: Conditional Use Permit Resolution # 482
7. 8:10 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING: To consider an application for
a Conditional Use Permit to operate a truck maintenance
garage upon the property located at 8949 - 13th Ave. East.
Applicant: Q Carriers
Action: Conditional Use Permit Resolution #483
8. 8:20 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING: To consider the preliminary
plat of Hauer' s 4th Addition lying on the property located
North of 13th Ave. , South of CR #16 and East of Hauer's 1st
Addition.
Applicant: B & D Development
Action: Recommendation to City Council
9. 8:40 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING: To consider an amendment to
the Shakopee City Code, Sections 11.40; Subd. 2C, Subd. 3
and Subd. 4F to allow private sewer service subject to City
Council approval, to allow an increase in lot densities
above the standards of the zoning district most similar in
function to the proposed use and to permit mixed uses
subject to City Council approval.
Action: Recommendation to City Council
10. 8:50 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING: To consider a request for a
preliminary Planned Unit Development for a golf course
project upon the property located North of O'Dowd Lake Park,
South of County Road 77, East of County Road 79 and west of
Timber Trails Addition.
Applicants: Gary Laurent & Tom Haugen
Action: Recommendation to City Council
11. Discussion: a. Shakopee Jaycees Fund Raising Project
b. Opinion on Valleyfair' s Sign Request
12. Other Business
13. Adjourn
Douglas K. Wise
City Planner
CITY OF SHAKOPEE
/7
February 25, 1987
Joan Lynch, Chairman
Shakopee School Board
To members of the board:
I reluctantly write to advise you that I am submitting
my resignation as the school board appointee to the Shakopee
Community Services Board of Directors effective immediately.
Family and business priorities have caused me to make
this most difficult decision. The election of new officers
for 1987 was to be completed at the February meeting. Due to
the long agenda the election was postponed until the March
meeting.
As the current Chairman, it is perhaps well that the
election had not taken place. I finally made my decision
late Monday evening after our meeting; so the "changing of the
guard" can occur with the [larch elections.
Thank you very much for your support and cooperation
over these last several years.
Sincerely yours,
Fred/ Jur iez
cc: George Muenchow, Director
John Anderson, City Adm. Ke�ys eke eo
FELCEIV��9
FEB 261981
CITY OF SHAKOPEE
/9
Memo To: John K. Anderson, City Administrator
From: Marilyn M. Remer, Personnel Coordinator
Re: 1986 Employee Assistance Program Usage
Date: February 27, 1987
Introduction
The City contracted with Process Dynamics, LTD to provide employee
assistance .services for 1986 for a fee of $869/yr to be adjusted at the
end of the year based on employee usage.
Backeround
Attached are the year-end statistical reports for the actual services
utilized. An 8% program utilization had been projected with the actual
being 68, therefore a $137.50 reimbursement has been received.
Effective January 1, 1987, the employee assistance contract with Process
Dynamics was terminated. Lifestyles of Minnesota (affiliated with St.
Francis) is the current provider at no cost to the employer.
PROCESS
DYNAMICS, LTD.
Suite 101
8140 Flying Cloud Drive
Eden Prairie, MN 55344
(612)944-2769
February 6, 1987
Gregg Voxland
City of Shakopee
129 East First Avenue
Shakopee, MN 55379.1376
Dear Gregg,
Enclosed please find the year-end statistical report for services we provided during
1986. We had projected an 8% program utilization during the year. Instead, there
was a 6% usage rate.
Because the program was under—utilized, we are also enclosing a reimbursement
for the difference between services paid for and those provided.
We certainly enjoyed working with the City of Shakopee employees. Please let us
know if we can be of any further assistance.
Sincerely,
0(- * {��, Yr1
Liz Ferron, MSW
EMPLOYEE ASSISTANCE SERVICES
PROCESS
DYNAMICS, LTD. q
Suite 101 1 I
8140 Flying Cloud Drive
Eden Prairie, MN 55344
1612) 944-2769
CITY OF SHAKOPEE
1986
Projected Actual
SERVICES TO EMPLOYER 5.0 Hours 4.0 Hours
SERVICES TO EMPLOYEES 10.8 Hours - 9.3 Hours
Difference = 2.5 Hours
2.5 Hours @ $55.00/hour = $137.50
EMPLOYEE ASSISTANCE SERVICES
15-January-1987 q
SHAKOPEE, CITY OF ) I
EMPLOYEE ASSISTANCE PROGRAM
STATISTICAL REPORT - NUMBERS 1ST HALF 2ND HALF
OF YEAR OF YEAR Total
_
1986
Payroll Count 54 54
Cases Closed (Basis for Stats) 2 54
1 g
CLIENT CAME: Self-Referred 2 1
Referred 0 0 3
Suggested p 0 0
---------------------------------------0
______i________________2_
Within Two Days 1 0 1
Within a Week 1
-__-___-__-_ A Week After Call 0 0
TELEPHONE ONLY
______________O________________O_
_______________O_ ____ _
CONTACT BY Employee Only 1 0
Family Only
0
Empl & Sig Other p 1
Empl & Family 0 1 1
_____________ 1 0 1
REOPENED CASES
_________________________O
---------------o----------------
p-
_______________________________________
_______________ ________________Z_
EMPLOYEE SEX FemaleZO
---------------------------------------0 Male
_ 1 1
PROBLEM Relationship 1 --------------p------------'-"i'
Indiv-Loss 0 0 0
Children 1 1 2
Parents 0 0 0
Phys, Sexual Abuse p 0 0
Legal O 0 0
Financial 0 0 0
Chem Dep Family 0 0 0
Chem Dep Employee 0 0 0
Co-Dependency 0 0 0
Chem Dep Trmt Repeat 0 0 0
Disability 0 0 0
Psychiatric 0 0 0
Other Medical 0 0 0
Environmental Stress 0 0 0
Career 0 0 0
Work Environment 0 0 0
Other _ 0
_____________ ________
-
____________________ _ 0
_______________________i_
RESULTS Information Only 0 0 0
Counseled Only 1 0
Declined Referral 0 0 0
Referral Accepted 1 1 2
---------g--#--------'----------
--------------------------------------Z-o-
Number of Interviews: 3 3 6
Average Interviews/Client• 1.5 3 . 0
Number of Hours: 3. 80 5.50 9. 3
Average # Hours/Client: 1 5.5 3 . 1
_________________ _g
15-January-1987
§HAKOPEE, CITY OF Q
EMPLOYEE ASSISTANCE PROGRAM b
STATISTICAL REPORT - PERCENTAGES IST HALF 2ND HALF
OF YEAR OF YEAR F1986
Payroll Count54-----__-_=-==-54----==-54-
Cases Closed (Basis for Stats) 7$ 4$ 6$
CLIENT CAME: Self-Referred100$ 5p$ 1 100$---- 00%
- -
Referred 0% 0$ 0$
-------------Suggested
0$ 0$
_______________ ______
SEEN Within Two Days 50$ O% 33%
Within a Week 50$ 100$ 67$
---_-------_ A Week After Call 0$ 0$ 0$
_________________________________
______________O$_________
0$
TELEPHONE ONLY
0$
_______________________________________________
______________ _________
CONTACT BY Employee Only 50$ O% 33%
Empl & Sig Other 0$ 0$ 0$
Empl & Family 0$ 0$ 33$
-------------Family Only50$ 0$ 33$
---------------------------------------------REOPENED CASES
---------------------------------------------
--og-
100$
EMPLOYEE SEX Female 0$ 67$
Male
0$ 100$ 33$
_________________________________________________ _
PROBLEM Relationship 50$--------------0$-----_33$
Indiv-Loss 0$ 0$ 0$
Children 50$ 100$ 67$
Parents 0$ 0$ 0$
Phys, Sexual Abuse 0$ 0$ 0$
Legal 0$ 0$ 0$
Financial 0$ 0$ 0%
Chem Dep Family 0$ 0$ 0$
Chem Dep Employee 0$ 0$ 0$
Co-Dependency 0$ 0$ 0$
Chem Dep Trmt Repeat 0$ 0$ 0$
Disability 0$ 0$ 0$
Psychiatric 0$ 0$ 0$
Other Medical 0$ 0$ 0$
Environmental Stress 0$ 0$ 0%
Career 0$ 0$ 0$
Work Environment 0$ 0$ 0$
Other 0$ 0$ 0$
______________________________________
____________________________________
RESULTS Information Only 0$ 0$ 0$
Counseled Only 50$ 0$ 33$
Declined Referral 0$ 0$ 0$
-------------Referral Accepted 50$ 100$ 67$
_________________________________________________________
TENTATIVE AGENDA
REGULAR SESSION SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA MARCH 3, 1987
Acting Mayor Leroux presiding
11 Roll Call at 7:00 P.M.
21 Recess for H.R.A. meeting
31 Re-convene
41 Liaison Reports from Councilmembers
51 RECOGNITION BY CITY COUNCIL OF INTERESTED CITIZENS
61 Approval of Consent Business - (All items listed with an asterisk
are considered to be routine by the City Council and will be
enacted by one motion. There will be no separate discussion of
these items unless a Councilmember so requests, in which event
the item will be removed from the consent agenda and considered
in its normal sequence on the agenda. )
*71 Approval of Minutes of February 17, 1987
81 Communications: (Items noted for consent will be received and filed)
*a] M. J . Broekemeier, Little Six Bingo Palace re: directional signs
b] George Muenchow, Shakopee Community Services re: joint meeting
*c] Action Alert re: Immediate action to free federal highway and
transit funds
d] Jerold Lucas re: David Leivestad/Carburetion & Turbo Systems, Inc .
*e] Association of Metropolitan Municipalities re : legislative issues
9] Public Hearings:
a] 7:30 P.M. Public Hearing on Marschall Road Watermain Improvements
from 11th Avenue South Approximately 1250 feet - bring
feasibility report
b] 8:00 P.M. Public Hearing on the Vacation of Right-of-Way in
Killarney Hills
c] 8: 15 P.M. Public Hearing on an appeal of the Planning Commission's
approval of an amendment to a conditional use permit
for the Shiely Co. to allow expanded hours of operation
10] Boards and Commissions:
Planning Commission:
a] Amending Zoning Ordinance by Adding A New Zoning District and
Rezoning Certain Property from B-1 to URD (Urban Redevelopment
District)
City Hall Building Committee:
b] Committee Report from City Hall Building Committee
JOgasgsTuTwpv AgTO
uossapuv •N ugof
(e-L86T) I asvgd 'goaCO,Td gUawanosdwj advosgaazgS umoqumoa agq
uo 2uijuaq oTlgnd v sO3 anuantl gqb gsvH OOTT 'BuTPTTng )Iua8 aas40
suazTgTO agq ge •W•d OO:L qE L86T 'OT g0JuW 'Aupsenj oq usnoCpV [91
auanuoO-ag [ST
UOT7u2T3TT 2uTpuad ssnosTp oq uoTssas anTgnoaxa JO,T SSaOaH [VI
149
�g
� :ssavTsng aaqagg0 [£T
anuantl ggOT 3O 744JON AVM-30-4011 OTTQnd uo
saIDTgaA UmBJG assOH gTgTgOad Og aPOD AgTO 2ucpuawV 'tTZ 'ON 'P10 [P
IVAOaddV gnoAul - £8-HO 3O H
.009E Oq ST-HVSO 3O M ,OUT woa3 ssadAg TOT-HZ 'L69Z 'ON 'sag CO.
TVAO.xddV gnoAvq - sg?wT'I agesodxoo
ATJagsua Oq £8-HO 3O H ,009E woaj sssdAg TOI-H,I '969Z 'ON 'saH [q.
g4TAa3agy
uOT40auuo0 UT swes2Osd quawgsanUI vTagsaO uT voT4udT0T4aud
BUTz T,xoggnV pua ,Puna gaKseW AauoW jadTOTunW agosa=iW„ ss umoux
AgTgUH UV 2UTgs?jgB4sa gsnil 3O UOT4uJHj30G V 3O w.xod agq UT
guawaaaBV Gaamod gUTof V 04UI fi4ug BuTz T,xoggnV 'L69Z 'ON 'sag [s,
:saaueUTPsO Pu SUOT4njosa8 [ZT
90'8Z0'0ST$ 3o qunowV uT STTTg anOaddV [T
A4JadOJd AgTO JO asO S ,Uos.xaNlvw [q.
POTJad kJUUOTqugoud gSTdAj/gsTUOTgdaoaH [2,
POTsad -kJuUOT4ugOSd .xogoaJTQ quawdojanaa AgTunwwoo [,T,
asegosnd a.zamg,ToS sagndwoO [a,
uOTgTsod WUG23JaS jOsqud [P.
�.. _. -. g3TgS UOT4a00q AaogTwsoa A,xngsaZu o [O
UOTssnosTO -"Fed/SuawdojaeaQ TPT4uapTsaH/as.xno03jo0 pasodosd [q
UOT40V 3O u ld jood 2uT=TmS L86T [E
[00=6 punose Nuasq agnuTw OT a aKaq TITm TTounoo] :jjvgS wos3 sguodaH [ IT
-Z- a8sd
486T '£ gOsuN
VONHOV 3AI,LVSNal
TENTATIVE AGENDA
HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA
Special Meeting March 3 , 1987
Chairman Leroux presiding
1. Roll Call at 7:00 P.M.
2. Accept Special Session Call
3. Approval of Minutes of February 3 , 1987
4. Wiley/Arkell Housing Proposal (The Cottages)
5. Other Business
6. Adjourn
Dennis R. Kraft
Executive Director
PROCEEDINGS OF THE HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
REGULAR SESSION SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA FEBRUARY 3, 1987
Chairman Leroux called the meeting to order at 7:07 p.m. with Comm. Wampach, Vierling,
Clay, and Lebens present. Also present were John K. Anderson, City Administrator;
Dennis Kraft, Executive Director; Kenneth Ashfeld, City Engineer; Barry Stock,
Administrative Assistant; Judith S. Cox, City Clerk; and Julius A. Coller II, City
Attorney.
Clay/Vierling moved to approve the minutes of January 6, 1987. Motion carried
unanimously.
Doug Kallevig, 4415 Highland Road, Minnetonka, addressed the HRA saying that in the
summer of 1985 they were contacted by the BRA concerning the acquisition of his
property at 303 E. First St., later that fall they were told that the BRA would not
purchase it. They have unsucessfully attempted to sell the property because of
the uncertainty of the Minnesota Department of Transportation's plan, and the pending
BRA proposal to purchase the property. The property is appraised at $72,000 and
they are requesting that the BRA purchase the property at the amount of the 1986
appraisal, or that the BRA state they will not purchase the property so that they
can proceed to sell the property to interested parties. The Executive Director
said that the HRA is hesitant to purchase the property knowing the uncertainty of
the future bypass alignment. Chairman Leroux stated that it is very difficult for
the BRA to purchase any property of this sort until the bypass is officially mapped.
It was the vote of the RRA and the majority carried that they would not purchase
the property at this time.
Clay/Vierling moved to adjourn. Motion carried unanimously. Meeting adjourned at
7:15 P.m.
Carol L. Schultz
Recording Secretary
�y
MEMO TO: Shakopee Housing and Redevelopment Authority (HRA)
FROM: Dennis R. Kraft, Executive Director
RE: Wiley/Arkell Housing Proposal (The Cottages)
DATE: February 26, 1987
Introduction•
The Arkell Development _'orp. and M.R. Wiley and Associates,
Inc. (the developers) are proposing to construct a two-phase
moderate income housing project for persons age 55 and older.
This project, as presently envisioned, would include 68 dwelling
units in each phase. The developers are requesting the City' s
authorization of Housing Revenue Bonds, as well as the tax
increment financing for the purpose of interest write down.
Background:
The developers are proposing to construct single story
housing on property which is located on the south side of County
Road 16 (Eagle Creek Blvd. ) approximately 330 feet southeast of
the intersection of County Road 16 & 17. This property, which is
located adjacent to Brooks Superette and the Shakopee Car Wash,
is zoned R-4 multi-family residential and is a part of the Eagle
Creek Junction, 1st Addition Plat.
Target Population:
The project is targeted for persons who do not qualify, who
can not obtain, or who will not accept governmental housing
subsidies, but who can not afford housing rental payments of $600
to $1000 per month. This appears to be a segment of the housing
market which is not being adequately addressed today in Shakopee.
The projected rental for a one bedroom unit is $385 per month; a
two bedroom unit would rent for $465 per month. The issuance of
housing revenue bonds and the provision of tax increment funding
for interest reduction would allow for this below-market rental
structure.
Project Financing:
The issuance of Housing Revenue Bonds would have no
financial impact upon the City of Shakopee. By authorizing the
issuance of these bonds, the City will enable the developer to
realize certain economic benefits which would not be available if
conventional financing were used. The bonds would have a term of
twenty-five years. At this time, it is anticipated that the
market rate of the housing revenue bonds would be approximately
eight percent.
The establishment of a tax increment district would allow
the added taxes generated by the project to be used to reduce the
effective interest rate on the project, for a period of ten
years. The infusion of tax increment proceeds into this
development would result in an effective interest rate of
approximately six per cent for the first ten years of the
project. After ten years, all taxes generated by the project
would go to the various real property taxing jurisdictions.
It is possible to structure a development agreement in such
a way that the maximum interest reduction benefit received by the
developer would be the lessor of: (1) the amount of assistance
needed to reduce the effective interest rate to six percent for a
period of ten years, or ( 2) a maximum interest rate reduction of
two percent, if the housing revenue bonds are marketed with an
interest rate in excess of eight percent.
Under the form of assistance being sought, the City would
not issue tax increment bonds. Once the taxes were paid on the
project, the City would then distribute the previously agreed
upon tax increment to the housing revenue bond trustee. I£ the
property taxes were not paid in a particular year, the City would
not have to pay the increment for that year. This form of
financing would give the City less financial exposure than the
process whereby bonds are sold, and the debt must be serviced
whether or not the taxes are paid. The project would be
structured in such a way that the various legal, financial and
administrative costs incurred by the City would be paid by the
developer. This would probably be accomplished by having the
developer make a payment to the City/HRA soon after the project
concept approval.
The amount of housing revenue bonding authority being sought
of the first phase of the project is approximately $3,200,000.
These bonds would have a term of 25 years. Phase two of the
project would require another revenue bond issue.
It is estimated that the annual tax increment assistance
needed to reduce the effective interest rate by two percent would
be approximately $ 88,000 . A more precise figure can be
determined after the assessor renders opinions on base and
completed project values. The City/HRA staff and financial
consultant will evaluate the developer' s pro forma calculations
to determine a reasonable level of tax increment assistance.
Project Description/Benefit:
Phase one of this project would include 45 two bedroom units
and 23 one bedroom units. The design of the project would allow
for an increase in the number of two bedroom units if marketing
indicated such a need. The project design would allow for the
construction of garages, if desired by residents. The monthly
garage rental costs would be $25.
The area covered by phase one would be six acres. There
would be two access points onto County road 16 and all streets in
the project would be private. Once the project were completed,
the developers would manage it. There would be an on-site staff
coordinator with responsibility for providing assistance to
residents. No nursing or health services is proposed to be
available on site, but referral services would be available.
The project would provide approximately off street
parking spaces. Approximately 55 of these spaces are to be in
garages; the remainder would be uncovered surface spaces. The
Shakopee Zoning Ordinance requires two spaces per dwelling unit,
except for elderly high rise structures, for which the City
Council can set a lower standard. It is unlikely that the height
of a building in which a person lives is a valid determination of
the minimum number of parking spaces required.
The developer has also indicated a desire to establish a
"rollover housing program" whereby assistance would be provided
to first-time home buyers so as to enable them to purchase houses
previously occupied by residents of the proposed housing project.
This would provide detached single family dwellings for younger
families and children.
Project Implementation Steps:
The developer has indicated that they would like to begin
construction on phase I of this project in early May and complete
it within six months. (It is possible that phase II would be
constructed one year later. ) Prior to the beginning of
construction, a series of legal actions must be taken to
establish a tax increment district. Concurrent with this process,
the preliminary and final subdivision plats must be reviewed by
the Planning Commission and approved by the City Council.
In order to facilitate the timely initiation of this project
the HRA should authorize the hiring of the law firm of O'Connor
and Hannan to prepare the necessary legal documents for the
establishment of the tax increment district and the preparation
of the development agreement. The HRA should also authorize the
hiring of Springstead and Associates to provide financial
consulting services.
The last preliminary action which should be taken by the HRA
would be that of authorizing the staff to set up a funding
mechanism to cover the necessary legal and administrative costs
' associated with setting up a tax increment district. The normal
procedure utilized to recover these expenses is one whereby the
tax increment bonds that are sold include provision for the
recovery of the legal administrative and issuance costs. In this
particular instance in that there will not be a bond sold,
obviously this mechanism can not be used for the recovery of
these costs. Therefore it is recommended that the staff be
directed to negotiate with the developer to provide for the
collection of these up front costs prior to the time the work on
the project begins in earnest. It should be possible for the
developers to be reimbursed for these costs by building that into
the first tax increment payment which should be received during j
calendar year 1989. It is estimated that the total cost involved
would probably be in the range of $20,000 - $25,000.
Alternatives:
1. Endorse the concept of the "Cottages" housing project and
authorize the staff to enter into the necessary agreements
with O'Connor and Hannan and Springstead and Associates and
to negotiate with the developer on establishing a mechanism
for the payment of the various up front legal and
administrative costs.
2. Indicate that the HRA does not support the project submitted
by the developer.
Requested Actions:
Move to endorse the concept of "the Cottages" housing
project and authorize the staff to enter into the necessary
agreements with O'Connor and Hannan, Springstead and Associates
and to negotiate with the developer and set up a mechanism for
the payment of the various front end legal and administrative
costs. Secondly to make the determination that the intent of
Section 11.05, Subd. 3-E. 4. of the Shakopee Zoning Ordinance is
actually to provide for allowing the Council to determine the
amount of parking needed for all elderly housing projects, not
just those projects in high rise structures. In order to
effectuate this interpretation direct the Planning Commission to
review the wording of Section 11. 05, Subd. 3-E. 4 and to make a
recommendation back to the City Council on the amendment of this
section of the zoning ordinance.
City of Shakopee
Application
Tax Increment Financing Assistance Housing
Legal Name of Applicant: The Arkell Development Corporation
and M. R. Wiley S Associates, Inc.
Address: 5001 Chowen Avenue South
Minneapolis, Minnesota 55410
Telephone: 612/920-1505
Name of Contact Person: Michael R. Wiley, Partner
1) LOCATION (See Exhibit "A" Location Map and Exhibit "B" Survey) :
The proposed development will be a one-story, multi-unit "Planned
Elderly Housing Community" , consisting of 68 one- and two-bedroom
"cottage-style"- attached units which will be located in the
southwest corner of the intersection of County Road #16 and
County Road #17 on the southeastern side of Shakopee, Minnesota.
The site is abutted by a Brooks Superette and a car wash to the
west.
Ater viewing a number of available Shakopee locations, this site
was considered to be the only feasible parcel for our proposed
"Cottage Elderly Community. " One major criterion in site selec-
tion includes that shopping and services are within walking dis-
tance for the elderly. This site allows shopping and churches
located on the same block with additional services within one
block. The location on the south side of County Road #16 is con-
sidered to be very good for access. Our community will be
compatible with the surrounding properties.
A new Mount Olive Lutheran Church is proposed to the southwest
of the site. The vacant land to the north of County Road #17 is
zoned R-4 and Commercial. Phase II will abut Phase I to the east
(see Exhibit "B") . A number of twin homes and middle bracket
SFR' s are located to the south, high on the river bluff. New
four-unit homes are proposed and under construction to the east
of Phase II.
2) SIZE:
The subject planned elderly housing community consists of two
proposed phases. Each phase consists of approximately six acres
of land area. As a final site plan is developed, Phase I (the
westerly six acres) may be increased and Phase II decreased to
accommodate the topography and land area. The primary parcel
boundaries are reflected on the attached Exhibit "B" survey.
-1-
3) USE:
Our -"Cottage Planned Elderly Housing Community" is designed to
create a secure and respectful living environment within a
specially designed cluster home setting. Our community is
designed to bridge the elderly's transition as a homeowner to the
older, more common, high-rise 'elderly housing. We have found
that the elderly much prefer our one-story, "home-style"
community when given the choice. Our design and overall
community feels similar to the SFR home they are leaving.
The Planned Elderly Housing Community will be developed on Phase
I in 1987 . This modern, one-story housing development will con-
sist of a mix of one- and two-bedroom "cottage"-style attached
rental units. According to our present site plans, Phase I would
be developed with 68 units, depending on unit mix and green area
requirements. With the completion of Phase I, it is planned that
Phase II will be developed into a comparable Planned Elderly
Housing Community similar to Phase I .
4) VALUATION•
At the present time, the Phase I and Phase II sites are vacant.
Parcel #1 is under contract for the sum of $192,000 cash terms.
Parcel 42 is under contract for the sum of $239,700 cash terms.
The distribution between Phase I and Phase II contract price may
change, should the boundary lines shift as site development
occurs .
The estimated market value of the elderly community in Phase I
II is $3,500,000 each based on 68 units per phase. Depending on
the mix, final site improvements, landscaping, etc. , the overall
market value may vary. .
5) TIMING•
Arkell Development Corporation will start construction on Phase I
upon approval of the tax increment financing and sale of the
. housing revenue bonds. Phase I is tentatively scheduled to start
construction in April 1987, and should be completed in October of
r- 1987 . Phase II would start construction in April 1988 and
complete construction in October 1988 . This tentative schedule
will vary depending on time of approval of the tax increment
financing and weather.
6) INTEREST RATE REDUCTION PROGRAM:
As indicated in Section #10 "Needs" , it is not possible to
develop a "Cottage Planned Elderly Housing Community" in Shakopee
utilizing present available conventional financing. Due to the
higher cost of construction and permanent conventional financing,
-2-
T
the housing units would have to be rented for $485 to $500/month
for the one bedroom, and over $585/month for the two bedroom
units. With the use of a tax increment financing interest
reduction program, and housing revenue bonds, we are able to
construct the community for less, thus passing this savings along
to the elderly of Shakopee in the form of lower rents. To
achieve these lower rents, we utilize a tax increment financing
program to reduce overall cost of the community.
We have received the final cost estimate on installation of
utilities in the limestone presently on the site. The
contractors have estimated the cost to install utilities through
the sandstone at $100 .00 per foot.
Our primary budget would indicate a tax increment financing
program with an interest rate of 6% on the Housing Revenue Bonds
is needed for a period of ten years. We are submitting a
computerized analysis of the project demonstrating the need for
the tax increment financing and Housing Revenue Bond. The
detailed financial program is reflected in this computerized
analysis.
7) ECONOMIC IMPACT:
(A) According to our projections, approximately 30 - 40 new
temporary construction jobs will be created in 1987 and 1988 by
our Elderly Housing Community. During the construction process,
we will try to utilize as many Scott County construction
personnel as possible. Our final decision will be based on each
subcontractor' s ability to competitively complete a project of
this -size.
(B) An estimate in valuation of property in the community is
$3,500,000 per phase. This increase in valuation will increase
the tax base in this vacant site.
(C) The "Cottages" , a Planned Elderly Community .will consist of
approximately 68 one-story, basementless units. The rental of
these units will create some existing Shakopee homes presently
occupied by elderly who will move into our community, to be
placed on the market for first time home buyers. We plan to help
in the development of a procedural program to assist the first
time buyer in the acquisition of these homes. The marketing of
these homes will most likely be by a - Shakopee based real estate
company. An additional benefit will be the investment of new
money by the purchasers in the rehabilitation of some of the
existing, less-maintained, elderly housing. It is our belief
that this program will increase the rehabilitation of older homes
in Shakopee without the use of public funds, via use of funds by
the new home buyer.
-3-
Due to the unique design and concept of our "Cottage Planned n
Elderly Housing Communit )�i l
y" , we do not believe that we are
competing with any local builders and developers for this housing
market.
At this time, we are the only Elderly Housing Developers in the
State of Minnesota offering this concept 'of a "Planned Elderly
Housing Community."
(D) OUY studies indicate that our "Cottage Planned Elderly
Housing Community" is very unique because it focuses
on the low to middle income elderly who do not aualifvor will
not accent governmental subsidies We are able to offer these
individuals housing. for $385 per month for a one bedroom unit and
$465 per month for the two bedroom units. A detached one car -
garage will rent for an additional $25 per month. Appliance,
utilities, etc. , heat and telephone will be paid by the occupant.
Maintenance, building insurance, water and sewer, real estate
taxes and on-site staff is paid by the developers. The on-site -
e- supervisor is paid $1,500 per month and typically a person over
the age of 55. This person lives in one of the community' s units
and provides an array of supervisory services as coordinating
programs offered for seniors, offered by the City and the elderly
of our community. In addition, this person is involved in the
coordination of social activities with the people of our
community. The maintenance of the units and grounds (snow -
removal, lawn, garbage, etc. , ) is estimated at $25,000 (+) per
year.
At this time, there appears a strong need of housing for the
elderly that find themselves under these guidelines.- Our studies
indicate that our proposed community will be in accordance to the
City' s present City Housing Assistance Plan. -
(E) In addition to providing the community' s elderly a -
respectable existence in our planned community at a below market
rate, we offer a secure, maintenance-free environment, whereby
the elderly can develop new friendships and be more relaxed about
their future. Our full-time, on-site supervisor coordinates
community activities as well as integrating City programs
designed for the elderly.
8) TRAFFIC IMPACT•
(A) Our studies indicate that approximately 708 of the elderly
living in our communities have an automobile. Phase I would
contribute approximately 50 autos into the area. It also must be
noted that the elderly are less mobile, often driving their
automobiles only a few times per week. One of the major site -
selection factors includes nearby shopping facilities and
religious centers. Our proposed site includes three shopping
areas within two blocks and two churches within four blocks.-
-4-
(B) It is our belief that the "Cottages Planned Elderly Housing
Community" will have minimal impact on County Road #16 or County
Road #17. The community should generate a total traffic of under
125 automobiles from both phases.
(C) Per our preliminary site layout, we are planning to develop
two access driveways on County Road #16. Our site plan provides
private roadways limiting through tfaffic by persons other than
our Cottage Community Residences. The -site plan provides
excellent access into the units for our residences.
9) SERVICE IMPACT: -
(A) The "Cottage Planned Elderly Housing Community" will utilize
a number of the elderly' s programs offered by the City of
Shakopee. - We have a live-in community supervisor who will
coordinate elderly cottage programs, in addition to the City' s
Programs. The City programs utilized will be the same as being
offered to Shakopee 's elderly at this time. Therefore, we do not
anticipate an increased use of City programs due to our elderly
community.
(B) We are anticipating the same usages of County services as we
do with City programs.
(C) Our project should have no increase in school district
services.
10) NEEDS:
' In 1987, it is not feasible for a development-construction
company to construct a community like our "Cottage Elderly
Housing Community" utilizing present-day conventional mortgage
rates. The rents required to make a community of this type
economically feasible would be over $485 to $500 for a one
bedroom and over $585 for a two bedroom. With the utilization of
tax increment financing with an interest rate reduction program
and Housing Revenue Bonds, we are able to pass savings from the
cost of 'financing through to the elderly of the community, thus
offering elderly housing in a secure, respectable, planned
community for $385 on the one bedroom and $465 on the two bedroom
units. The one stall garage will rent for an additional $25
per month. We are able to demonstrate with our computer projec-
tions of the community, why this project cannot be built for the
Shakopee elderly without assistance by the City of Shakopee.
The use of tax increment financing to help offset land, utility
and road costs are passed through to the Shakopee elderly. Our
"Cottage Elderly Housing Community" will create a large tax base
for the City of Shakopee which is not taking place with the
present vacant land or another lower market value development.. -
-5-
11) HARDSHIP:
The site we have selected has a large limestone deposit -
throughout the site. In order to develop this site, assistance
with the tax increment financing in the form of a interest
reduction program is necessary. We will experience substantial
increase in development costs due to this limestone. We are
unable to define the total extent of this hardship in development
until the actual construction is underway and removal of existing
grade has taken place. The construction company has estimated
the cost to install city water and sewer at $100 per foot.
12) EMINENT DOMAIN:
No additional property should require to be acquired in the
Process of our development.
13) SUMMARY:
After analyzing the Shakopee elderly community, it is our opinion
that there is a strong need for moderate income elderly housing
in the community at this time. Our "Cottage Planned Elderly
Housing Community" consists of a secure, planned housing
community which allows the Shakopee elderly to live in a
respectable, secure environment that does not feel like apartment
or high-rise living. Our community offers on-site supervisory
staff which helps coordinate City and other inter-community
activities and programs. Our living units are specially designed
to assist in the needs of the elderly. We often find the elderly
reluctant to sell their homestead and relocate for fear of losing
their identity and independence in a more multi-family
environment, and also find children reluctant to place their
parents in typical elderly housing projects. Our "Cottage
Elderly Planned Housing Community" concept allows these senior
citizens to maintain their dignity in a secure, caring community
surrounded by friends of their own age. It is our belief that
our "Cottage Concept" will be an excellent benefit to the
community of Shakopee as a whole.
_6_ I
Statement of Poli,v
The following information is provided as a supplement to our request
for the Tax Increment Financing Assistance Interest Reduction Program
as reflected in pages one through six.
Policy
A) Benefit to the City
-1) According to the Scott County Assessor' s Department, the in-
creased tax base resulting from the development of our "Cottage
Planned Elderly Housing Community" is estimated to be $88,400 per
year based on a $3,500,000 value. This figure is based on a per-
phase basis with the total proposed being a two-phase
development. The economic benefit to the Shakopee elderly in the
form of below market rental costs, is estimated to be
approximately $81, 600 per year, per phase. We have based this
. calculation on the difference between what is considered to be
market rent of our one and two-bedroom units and the actual
reduced rent of our community.
2) Our community will create needed elderly housing in accordance
with the city' s adopted Housing Assistance Program.
3) The community will be financed with a .combination of public
private funds. The distribution of these funds are as follows:
a) $3.2 million dollars secured through the selling of
Housing Revenue Bonds;
b) A Tax Increment Financing interest reduction program by
the City of Shakopee, reducing the Housing Revenue Bonds to
a 66 interest rate for a period of 10 years;
c) A $96, 000 rent reduction reserve by the developers;
d) A developers equity position of $200,000(+) . This
financing totals $3.2 million which is the estimated cost to
complete each phase at 68 units per phase.
4) The overall risk of our cottage community to the City of
' Shakopee is very limited. Prior to starting of the community and
selling of the Housing Revenue Bonds, an extensive feasibility
study will be completed. Our Partnership is one of the most
successful development groups in the development of elderly
housing communities in the midwest at this time.
5) Our "Cottage Planned Elderly Housing Community" has been re-
viewed by Chaska, who has been receptive to the development of
a similar community in their City. At this time, we believe that
._7-
' Shakopee has a
P greater need and is more ,economically feasible
for the development.
6) The City of Shakopee will benefit immediately by reduced
rental costs to Shakopee elderly. In addition, the City will
benefit by an estimated $88,400 per year generated by the
available real estate taxes on our community.
B) Character of Program
1) We are in a position to make a firm commitment to build 68
units in Phase as reflected on our .proposed site plan. These
units are in accordance with our cottage plans and specs to be
submitted to the City of Shakopee.
2) Our community will also include a commitment to contribute a
stated limit of interest rate reduction (or developer equity)
from non-increment sources.
3) Arkell Development Corporation is a well-established St. Paul
development company who has specialized in the development of
multi-family and elderly housing communities throughout the
1970 's and 1980 ' s. Michael R. Wiley has an extensive real estate
background of 14 years of experience. His Company, M. R. Wiley
and Associates, has been involved in the development of a number
Of small commercial ventures in the last five years. Our con-
struction manager, Mr. Bruce Hedinen, of Jordan, Minnesota has
owned his own construction company for the last ten years. In
addition, we are assembling a number of experienced Shakopee and
Scott County subcontractors to complete our community. The
expertise of our group will ensure a successful Shakopee elderly
community. -
4) The overall quality and utility -of our community will be
reflected in our design plan and specifications. We will expand
on this data as requested by the City. Our "Elderly Housing
Community" is especially designed for the elderly as reflected in
our unit plans.
C) Demonstration of Need
We have submitted a proforma, an estimation of costs and
,., revenues of the project and amount of private capital in the
project to the City staff and the City's financial advisors for.
review. We will submit additional data as requested. Our -
proforma reflects the lack of and use of the proposed interest _
reduction program in two different scenarios. _
D) Size of the Proiect
The "Cottages Planned Elderly Housing Community" has an es-
timated market value of $3.5 million dollars. We are requiring
an interest reduction program to 68 on $3.2 million dollars. .
-8-
E) Project Certainty/Financial Guarantee
1) Phase I Of our Planned Elderly Community will be completed in
1987 and Phase II is proposed in 1988 . We plan to start con-
struction of Phase I in late April 1987.
2) Our strong expertise in development and past successful
history in the elderly housing, communities denotes our capacity
to complete our proposed project.
3) Our community can not be constructed without the use of tax
increment assistance. We have demonstrated that it is not
economically feasible to construct the community without the
assistance by the City of Shakopee.
Summary
To develop the "Cottage Planned Elderly Housing Community" in _
Shakopee, we will need to utilize a TIF interest reduction program as
described in our Tax Increment Financing Assistance - Housing
Application (Item #61 page 2 & 3) . We have a strong development
Partnership and management team that will insure a successful project.
In addition, our partnership is one of the most experienced elderly
housing development companies in the midwest at this time.
In reviewing the City of Shakopee, we have noted a real need for low
and moderate income housing for .the elderly. Our "Cottage Planned
Elderly Housing Community" will be an asset to the City of Shakopee.
In an effort to select cities with a strong need for low - middle
income elderly housing where we may build a successful "Cottage
Elderly Housing Community", a number of factors are taken into
consideration. These include existing elderly projects, available
sites, population trends, actual income and age of the community's
elderly, and desire by the cities to fill these needs. In reviewing
Shakopee, we feel that we have a community where a majority of these
factors exist:
Our "Cottage Elderly Housing Community" allows the elderly of Shakopee
to ive in a planned, respectable and friendly community at below
.. market rental rates. It is our strong belief that our community will
be a successful asset to the City of Shakopee.
-9-
M.R. WILEY &ASSOCIATES, INC.
5001 Chowen Avenue South
Minneapolis, MN 55410
(612)920-1523
44,
eon
COTTAGES OF SHAKOPEE
M.R. WILEY & ASSOCIATES, INC. ((
5001 Choweu Avenue South
Minneapolis. MN 55410
(612)920.1523
THE COTTAGES OF SHAKOPEE
After analyzing the Shakopee elderly community, it is our
opinion that there is a strong need for moderate income elderly
housing in the community at this time. Our "Cottage Planned
Elderly Housing Community" consists of a secure, planned housing
community which allows the Shakopee elderly to live in a re-
spectable, secure environment that does not feel like apartment
or high-rise living. Our community offers on-site supervisory
staff which helps coordinate City and other inter-community
activities and programs. Our living units are specially de-
signed to assist in the needs of the elderly. We often find
the elderly reluctant to sell their homestead and relocate for
fear of losing their identity and independence in a more multi-
family environment, and also find children reluctant to place
their parents in typical elderly housing projects. Our "Cottage
Elderly Planned Housing Community" concept allows these senior
citizens to maintain their dignity in a secure, caring community
surrounded by friends of their own age. It is our belief that
our "Cottage Concept" will be an excellent benefit to the com-
munity of Shakopee as a whole.
e ,
�1
ti
V / �// •ei ■ zoi ■
Y
.I ll7d:d i I I I " �1.1!..s SJ \Li NI,PC . ili t l
W . , P aPrPP
:)7. v- SSSSI'G. a.:fr �"' a3CTp F',B':7.12`- 17, 1937
i-iayor Reinke called the meeting to order at 7:05 P.m. with Cncl. Lebens,
',eroux, and aampsch present. Cncl. -ierling was absent. Also present were
John E. Anderson, ^..ity administrator; $enneth =shfeld, City 'hgineer; Judith
S, Cox, City ^ler':, and Julius 1. Coller II, ^ity Attorney.
Liaison reports were given by councilmembers. There was a discussion on the '
increase in the 1987 taxes. The City Administrator said he would like to get more
facts from the other taxing bodies involved and then have further discussion
on the increases in the 1987 tax statements.
I
"layer Reinke asked if there was anyone in the audience who wished to address
anything not on the agenda. There was no response.
Clay/Wa.:.pach moved to approve the minutes of February j, 1987• Motion carried
unanimously,
leroux/'ebens moved to receive and place on file the letter from the 10th and
Dakota leighborhood regarding proposed development south of 10th Avenue, Beat
of County Road 79 and West of County Road 17.
Roll ^,all: Ayes: Unanimous :does: Yone Y:otion carried.
Leroux/ ebens moved to receive and place on file the Action Alert on proposed
cut in 1987 Local Government Aid allocation.
Roll Call: Ayes: Unanimous floes: None Motion carried.
Wampach/Clay moved that the City of Shakopee join the League of Minnesota
Human Rights Commissions.
Roll Call: Ayes: Oncl. :dampach, Clay and Mayor Reinke
;gees: Cncl. Leroux and Lebens
Potion carried.
Leroux/1:'ampach moved to accept the letter from -odd Schwartz on his resimation
from Energy and Transportation Committee, TJoti:n carried unanimously.
Stan Becker, '-ice President/General '.Manager of Canterbszy Dot:ins, gave an
update on .^.anterbuy Downs' Legislative grogram.. He said Canterbury Darns
is not asking for a tax break they are asking for fair and equal taxation.
They are going to legislature for two things: one to reduce the pari—mutual
tax to half of one percent and to protect the industry. 'ihey need the support
of people to get this tax changed so that they can continue to grow. Cncl.
Leroux asked if this would affect the take out. Hr. Beaker answered that it
would remain the same but it would affect purse money. Cncl. Lebens asked
what happened to the 90 million dollars of Industrial Revenue Bonds that the city
voted the bonds for. Mr. Boeker answered that the owners do have 40 million
dollars in equity, they have used 40 million to date and the other 46 million
is parked for further expansion of the facility. Cncl. Wampach asked if this
proposal would be a permanent issue of temporary for a few years. Mr. Boeker
answered that their position is permanent.
'erouz/,lay moved to adopt r,;-n,- the
.-innesota State Legislature to '=_-., _-- - :out
of
Regulation and moved its adopt_--, . ____ :.. -.soh and
T,ebens opposed.
^Iaytwamnpach moved for a 15 minute recess. carried unanimously.
Clay/dampach moved to reconvene at 9:OC p.-.. _..,__.,n carried unanimously.
T.croux/i.ebens moved to apnrove the proposed �:akopee ?ire Department Smoking
:Policy dated 2/6/87.
R011 fall: Ayes: Unanimous )foes: ane )lotion carried.
i.eroux/Tebens moved to approve the Dy-laws of the Shakopee Fire Lepartment
dated February 17, 1997• (Including the -Physical "Smarmnation 1xo3ram)
Holl -all: :yes: Unanimous .loss: none :Roti on carried.
Leroux/Lebens moved to reject the tank body bid received December 31, 1986,
and readvertise specifications for tank truck. -
Roll Call: Ayes: 711animous Aloes: None Motion carried.
Leroux/Debens offered Resolution is. 2692, A Resolution ;mending Resolution
o. 2665, Adopting the 1947 Pay Schedule for the Officers and :don-Union
'employees of the ^ity of Shakopee, t,innesota, and moved its adoption.
Holl -all: Ayes: "narimous noes: lone Motion carried.
Leroux/Lebens Offered Resolution ilc. 2699, A Resolution Requesting that
the Minnesota Department of ^ransportation -onduct a Study for the Purpose
of Determining the Proper Safe Speed Limits Along ^ou:nsy Road 33 from
Trunk Highway 101 to 77rany Road 42, and moved its adoption.
Roll 'all: :+yes: 7nanimous :Toes: "one :notion carried.
The 8ity -�ngineer reviewed the three issues that ,:ill be discussed at
the upcoming public hearing on _uesday, 7ebrsary 24, on the Upper -Ta'_iey
Drainage 3asin. The issues are: Special Benefit Sates; Prcject Bonding;
and Drainage -may easements.
The City '. igineer said that the major issues of special benefit rates are
basically compared to a special assessment. 'lthaagh there is a credit
being made for storm detention facilities presently constructed on the
Canterbury Downs racetrack area, the geographics of the basin are such
that full complimentary benefits of their detention facilities are not being gained.
Project Bonding is a financing option that the City has. A financial
analysis has not been done by the City's Bond Council, if and when the
project is ordered then this will be one issue the City can consider.
The -ity Administrator said they had originally anticipated using tax_
increment financing for 2Y/ of these story sewer systems.
_ Co,Lncii
"eb:-uaryy 7, 1957
Page -3-
The "ity =ngineer said the drainage easements will be handled on a one to ane
-oasis with each property owner. ^.he drainage report done by the consultant
addressed two directions that drainage can be taken. It all comes from the
_ake ^.'Dowd area down through Sauers Trail. Se reviewed the alternative
routes that the drainage way could take, one would be to follow the property
line the whole way, theraby not splitting properties up; one would shoot
straight across but would 'split the 7.enzmier property up on both sides..
Discussion ensued on patting in a 80 to 90 foot trench as compared to a
6 to S foot pipe. As far as cost effectiveness goes a 80 or 90 foot trench
would be more practical from the City's standpoint.
erocx/Clay moved to direct staff to maintain the Upper Palley Basin data
base with its drainage characteristics prior to storm water detention reductions,
and to fundetention credit costs by Tax Increment Pinancing. Motion
carried unanimously.
Wampach/Leroux moved to direct staff to begin negotiations for the necessary
drainage easements of the Upper Valley �^rainage Project w?th the under-
standing that these drainage easements will satisfy related areas for park
dedication requirements for platted areas. iiozion carried unanimously.
Cncl. Clay asked if he could have a comparison of the costs between the
straight line option as compared to the zig-zag line, before the next
meeting. Cool. Wampach expressed concern over the City's liability as
far as the drainage trenches go. The City engineer replied that the
City is always liable for open drainage ways.
Lerout,./Clay Offered Resolution No. 2690, A Resolution Determining the
ecessity for and authorizing the Acquisition of Certain Property by
proceeding in Dminent Domain for Purposes of COn3tructing,a Roadway,
and moved its adoption.
Roll Call: ryes: unanimous :Roes: Yone i;otion carried.
',ebens/Teroux moved to authorize purchase of a CAD system from ')cannon
^,=uter Products, Inc. in the amount of ;14,445.00.
Roll :all: Ayes: Unanimous hoes: .-one ;lotion carried.
Lerouxf'ebens moved to authorize the purchase of computer peripherals,
equipment, f=iture and supplies from Office Products of ,innesota,
3uels Business Equipment, and Barry Office oroducts in the amount of
;1,962.33.
Roll ,all: Lyes: Unanimous :does: '_?one ::otion carried.
Leroux/�ebens moved to approve the abatement of special assessment code 51
in the amount of 580.30 and "x99.32 for pay 1987 balances, "26.78 and ;;24.83 for
pay 1987 principal, and -8.58 and 1^10.S7 for pay 1987 interest for p=rcel
27-001740-0 and also to abate assessment code 54 in the amount of -:`2,300.00 for
pay 1987 balance, ?575.00 for pay 1987 principal and '230.00 for pay 1987
interest on parcel 27-906043-0 due to prior payment.
Roll Cali: Ayes: '.naaimous ;Foes: Atone 1;otior- carried.
1tJ 2CIIn0 it v_.
pebruar: 17, 1987
Page —4—
wampac h/L be ns moved to approve the bilis in the amount of 3297,431.66.
Roll Cali: ,'ryas: Unanimous ::oes: .-.3ne Xotion carried.
Leroux/icbens i:ffered Resolution ,7o. 256e, .s Resolution iimending Resalntioi
,o. 2635 Adopting the l991, budget, and moved for its adoption.
Rol' Call: Ayes: Lnaznimous :70es: None ..olio.^. carried.
=roux/Lebens Offered Re3olution 'io. 2687, A Resolution Sccepting i/ork or.
the 1982 Pavement Preservation and Rehabilitation Program, and moved its
adoption.
Ro31_0ail: aes: Unanimous hoes: ::one :otion carried.
The City kdmitistrator said the meeting on the trail going east from the
�-,ity =all with '.r. Sweeney will be on :.arch 1S.
:he Oity :Administrator said that he is keeping aware of the Governors
tax proposal and when he has more information he will bring it up to
the 2ouncil.
"sroux/Clay moved to adjourn to Tuesday, %ebruar;j 24, 1987, at 7:00 p.m.
at Scott County Courthouse meeting room. '7otion carried unanimously.
Meeting adjo:ried at 10:30 p.m.
Judith S. Cox
City 0lerk
Carol L. Schultz
Recording Secretary
I
LITTLE SIX BINGO PALACE �I
2350 Sioux Trail N.W.
5Prior lake, Minnesota 55372
y1° ' Office: (612)4953090
Group Reservations:(612)445-0000
Information:(612)445-1002
.,y
February 19, 1987
Mr. John Anderson
Shakopee City Administrator
129 East 1st Avenue
Shakopee, MN 55379
Dear Mr. Anderson:
The Shakopee Chamber of Commerce's Tourism Committee is asking for letters of
support to enhance the feasibility of obtaining directional traffic signs to
the various attractions in the "Shakopee Showcase" area.
The action spurs from the traffic difficulties encountered by the large infl ux
of Tourists who visit the area during the Spring and Sumner months.
We, as an organization, are not asking for monetary support, only that of
agreement to the need of directional signs in the area.
Thank you.
Sincerely,
L B BIdACE
M Broekemeter
es/Public Relations
Board Member, Shakopee Chamber of Commerce
Board Member, Twin Cities Tourism Attractions Association
MOB/smh
FEB 24 IN7
Action Requested: CITY OF $HAKOPEI9
Direct the Community Development Director to review alternatives for
Council consideration.
fhukupee LommunitU 3eruices
129 Levee Drive
Shakopee. Minnesota 55375
Phone 445-2742
Community Education • Parks • Recreation • Adult Education
February 26,1987
Mr. John Anderson, Administrator
City of Shakopee
The Shakopee Community Services Board at its most recent regular meeting,
February 23, 1987, passed the following motion and is most anxious to see
a Joint Meeting of the Shakopee School Board, Shakopee City Council, Shakopee
Community Services Board, and appropriate staff members take place as soon
as possible.
Excerpt from Shakopee Community Services February 23, 1987 Minutes:
"Board and Staff spent a lengthy amount of time discussing the S.C.S. 6
Community Relations Report authorized by the Shakopee School Board. Motion
by Rislund, seconded by Roper, that a joint meeting be requested with the
Shakopee School Board, Shakopee City Council, and appropriate staff to discuss:
1. In what way and through what Model the recently authorized Public
Relations Position and proposed additional Community Education
Staff Member position be funded?
2. What is the best vehicle for guiding this program: an independent
or advisory board?
3. As recommended by the authors of the report, a Needs Analysis should
be undertaken. S.C.S. is willing to lead the way if desired, but
an understanding must be reached so that there is no duplication
on the part of all cooperating agencies.
4. That there is a concern that the good relationships that currently
exists between these cooperating agencies continue, and that areas
of responsibility be clearly defined."
Your expediting the fulfillment of this request will be greatly appreciated.
Sincerely,
George Muenchow, Director
Shakopee Community Services
A COOPERATIVE EFFORT OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE AND SCHOOL DISTRICT 720 SINCE 1954
F-1
Federal update c��
8e ,
�- Action Alert
✓URGE IMMEDIATE ACTION TO FREE FEDERAL HIGHWAY AND TRANSIT FUNDS ISI
Cities face the prospect of long delays in the construction of
vitally needed roads, bridges and access to transit funds unless
Congress acts soon to reauthorize the Surface Transportation
Assistance Act. The National League of Cities has already sent
material detailing critical issues for cities to daily newspaper
editors, including those in Austin, Brainerd, Duluth, Fairmont,
Faribault, Fergus Falls, Hibbing, Mankato, Marshall, Minneapolis,
New Ulm, Owatonna, Red Wing, Rochester, St. Cloud, St. Paul,
Virginia, Winona, and Worthington.
Officials are strongly urged to follow up with local daily
newspaper editors to provide information on affected local highway
and transit projects and to urge editorial support for immediate
action on the legislation when Congress resumes session Feb. 17 or
1 after the current recess.
(See Cities Bulletin, Number 5, January 31-Feb. 6, 1987. )
In addition contact your congressmen and Senators_ Boschwitz and
l
Durenberger to urge them to make this a matter of highest priority
Ac.P ,and to urge Senate and House conference committee members House
Q yNU members have not yet been appointed as of 2111 to resolve the
f1 differences in the two bills passed earlier in order to vote out
a reauthorization bill immediately after the current recess.
Additional issues to be opposed
An added concern is the reported efforts by some state highway
officials from across the nation to revive a 1985 proposal from the
Urban Mass Transit Association and Amercian Association of State
Highway and Transit Officials (AASHTO) for state transportation
department administration of Section 9 transit programs for cities
under 200,000 population. Under this proposal made recently to
Senate members of the conference committee on transportation act
reauthorization, states would directly administer such funds for
smaller, non-metropolitan cities.
Raising a controversial issue of this kind in the conference
committee is sure to further delay the final adoption of the needed
reauthorization legislation. This provision has not been the
subject of previous mutual consent on the part of smaller cities
with state transportation departments. Members of the Minnesota
cong-essional delegation should be urged to reject it as an
unnecessary addition to the pending legislation now in conference.
F-2
Construction projects at risk
At stake in Minnesota are some $200 million in highway construction
projects, including $120 million in interstate highway completion
projects. There is a zero balance in the state's Interstate
Completion Fund. Also affected are 4R Primary, bridge and
interstate substitution categories. Some 75 bridge repair projects
would be among those most affected by further delays in the release
of federal funds. Our shorter construction season makes early
resolution of the debate on reauthorization even more urgent.
Background to the debate
The Surface Transportation Assistance Act of 1982 expired last
September 30. Congress failed to pass the reauthorization
legislation by the end of the 1986 Session. Since then, cities
have been unable to gain access to federal Highway Trust funds.
These funds do not contribute to reducing the federal deficit.
They come from the nine-cent per gallon federal gasoline tax and
other user fees which continue to be collectedand held by the
federal treasury unavailable to local governments that need them
for major transportation repairs and operations . Congress should
move now to release those funds without further delay. The current
balance in the federal Highway Trust Fund is $9 billion, according
to the National League of Cities.
According to national survey results from AASHTO, nearly 800
projects across the nation will be lost if reauthorization
legislation is delayed even to March 1 . Thousands more such
projects will also be lost if delays continue through summer.
g�
MACKENZIE, GUSTAFSON, LUCAS & RILEY, LTD.
ATYIWBYB AXD NYX58WL4 AT LAN
424 SOUIN MINNESOTA AVE.
P.O.BO%3fi0
MA. M K.MM ENLE ST.PSBQ MI�A aMRl PAUL H.TAMS.JR.
W M.GUSTAF N ISOTI 8313430
JAMES S.STENSON.CPA
SROID M.LUUS
MK'MAEL K.RILEY February 9, 1957
Mr. John Anderson
City Administrator
City of Shakopee
129 East First Avenue
Shakopee, MN 55379
Re: David Leivestad/ Carburetion & Turbo Systems, Inc.
Dear Mr. Anderson:
The undersigned law firm represents David Leivestad who lives in St. Peter
and who owns and operates Carburetion & Turbo Systems, Inc. in the City
of Shakopee. As you are perhaps aware, the lease on the building where
said firm is presently located will be expiring in the near future, and
Mr. Leivestad has to relocate his business.
Mr. Leivestad has signed a purchase agreement concerning property located
at 3401 Eagle Creek Road in the City of Shakopee. Said property is presently
mined by Distribution Construction Company out of Tulsa, Oklahoma. Said
property is an industrially zoned property consisting of approximately
129,900 square feet, of which approximately 120,300 is usable. The property
presently has a 5,000 square foot warehouse building located on it.
My client proposes to buy the subject parcel and to add on an additional
2,000 square foot building to the front of the existing structure. The
additional space will be used for warehousing and will measure approximately
40 X 48 feet. The proposed addition will comply in all respects with the
zoning requirements. My client has hired Lesters to design and construct
the addition, and they are preparing an architectural and landscape drawing
which will help show the proposed completed structure.
My client proposes to use the completed building for light industrial
purposes, office space, research and development,and light assembly work.
It appears that this usage falls within Ordinance #204, Section 11.36,
Subdivision 2, I - Light Industrial . The proposed plan will comply with
all the requirements of the race track district, and the site will be fully
landscaped with trees, shrubs, and other appropriate screening.
g'd
Mr. John Anderson
February 9, 1987
Page 2
We would urge you to favorably consider this proposal at your next meeting.
Sincerely,
MACKENZIE, GUSTAFSON, LUCAS & RILEY, LTD.
By
' Jerold M. cas
JML cke
cc: David E. Leivestad, Carburetion & Turbo Systems, Inc.
cc: Dennis R. Kraft, Community Development Director, City of Shakopee,
129 East First Avenue, Shakopee, MN 55379
cc: Mayor Eldon A. Reinke, City of Shakopee, 129 East First Avenue,
Shakopee, MN 55379
It is the opinion of the Community Development Director that
the provisions of the mandatory PUD ordinance do apply in
this situation. The subject property is located in the RTD
District (which requires a mandatory PUD review) and also
within the area on the zoning map designated for mandatory
PUD review. This request has not been reviewed by the
Planning Commision nor has a public hearing been held on
the request.
X
association of BULLETIN
metropolitan � ce�vo
municipalities
FEB 27 1997
February 26, 1987 CITy OF SHHKOFE=
TO: AMM Member Cities
FROM: AMM Staff
RE: CRITICAL LEGISLATIVE ISSUES WHICH NEED YOUR ATTENTION
-6x SALES TAX ON LOCAL GOVERNMENT PURCHASES
This is an obvious attempt on State Government' s part to reduce
aid to local units and help solve its problem at our expense. It
equals approximately 2% of your total annual budget and will be a
reduction in service or a pass through property tax increase if
levy limits are relaxed which is unlikely. Please take this
issue seriously . Without your help to defeat it - - it will
likely pass
-MOTOR VEHICLE EXCISE TAX (MVET)
The Governor's proposal to leave this over $200 million in the
General Fund comes at a time when highway and transit funding are
in critical need. The highway system cannot be maintained under
the current funding scheme much less with the deletion of MVET.
The Metropolitan Area is in desperate need for improved/upgraded
highways and more transit alternative/opportunities not less.
Other funding schemes, ie. increased gas tax, do not aid transit
only highway. The MVET is needed, it was promised, don' t let
them take it away without a battle. A good transportation system
is needed to continue economic growth.
-TRANSIT
The Governor has suggested that about $5 1/2 million per year be
deleted from the Regional Transit Board's state appropriation
request and be added to the property tax. Various studies have
suggested that the property tax support 35% of the Transit cost.
It now supports over 45%. How much more can it handle? MVET is
needed for transit. The metro area could be as bad or worse than
L.A. , S.F. , Chicago, N.Y. , etc. - - with traffic conjestion by
the year 2000 if we allow transit and highway funding to be
reduced. Gas tax does not support transit, only the general fund
or MVET does . Highways alone cannot do the job. A working
transit system is an absolute must. ,p ,
— Qve_/
183 university avenue east, st. paul, minnesota 55101 (612) 227-5600
-1987 LGA
The Governor' s budget proposes a reduction of the already
certified 1987 LGA by $5 million. This seems like an unnecessary
punitive position at the beginning of a biennium.
ACTION REQUESTED:
Please call and write your legislators individually. Many have
commented that they are not hearing from the folks at home on
these four important issues. PLEASE let them hear about this
soon For more information call Roger Peterson or Vern Peterson
at 227-5600.
Distribution Note:
This Bulletin has been mailed to AMM member Mayors and
Managers/Administrators only. Please distribute to other
officials in your city as you deem appropriate.
-2-
96
MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator
FROM: Ken Ashfeld, City Engineer
RE: Killarney Hills Right-Of-Way Vacation
DATE: February 27, 1987
INTRODUCTION:
At their November 4, 1986 meeting, Council directed staff to initiate vacation pro-
ceedings on the right-of-way of Sharon Parkway and Tyrone Drive within Killarney
Hills Addition that is located in the T.H. 101 bypass. Attached is a October 29,
1986 staff report that discussed the issues that led to that Council action.
A public hearing of the proposed vacation is scheduled for 8:00 P.M. , March 3, 1987
for the purpose of recieving public testimony concerning same.
RECOMMENDATION:
If there are no unresolved issues at the completion of the hearing, I recommend that
Council direct staff to prepare the appropriate resolution to finalize the vacation
proceedings.
REQUESTED ACTION:
Move to direct staff to prepare the appropriate resolution for the vacation of
Sharon Parkway and Tyrone Drive located adjacent to Lots 1 through 6 of Block 1,
Lots 6 and 7 of Block 4, Lot 1 of Block 5 and Outlot E, all aforestated parcels
being within Killarney Hills Addition.
KA/ps
Attachment
MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator
FROM: Ken Ashfel d, City Engineer/
SUBJECT: Roadways within Killarney Hills Addition
DATE: October 29, 1986
INTRODUCTION:
This memo as well as the attached memo from Jim Karkanen concerns
the roadways within the Killarney Hills Addition. The purpose is
to address the following issues:
1 . Requests for maintenance and snow plowing of unimproved
roads.
2. Future improvements to unimproved roads.
3. Rehabilitation needs of Tyrone Drive and Sharon
Parkway.
u . Future status of platted right-of-way within the
alignment of the T.H. 101 bypass.
5. Future access to Lot 1 , Block 1 , Killarney Hills
Addition .(Jim Hauer residence) .
6. Future assessments to platted park land.
BACKGROUND:
The impetus for a discussion of the stated issues has been the
request for maintenance of unimproved roadways by residents, the
condition of unimproved roadways, and the deteriorated condition
of improved roadways.
Maintenance of Unimproved Roadways: As indicated in Kark's memo,
there is additional demand for roadway maintenance services .
Sharon Parkway is in an unimproved condition with parts having
some gravel and the remaining being a dirt trail. Houses have
,. been allowed to be built adjacent to this unimproved roadway
because the adjacent lots are parcels of record with platted
right-o£-way as access. In absence of a developers agreement,
the roadway has not been improved nor is there a committment on
any party to make improvements. If Council elects to maintain
this section, Public Works would need to implement interim
improvements before freezing of the surface.
Killarney Hills Addition 7"
October 29, 1986
Page 2
Future Roadway Improvements: If Council wishes to provide
maintenance services in the future, unimproved roadways should be
constructed to City standards. This can be accomplished either
by a petitioned 429 assessment project or a Council initiated 429
assessment project.
Rehabilitation Needs of Tyrone Drive h Sharon Parkway: The
condition of the pavement is such that there are areas of failure
with the remaining portion in a severely eroded state. The
roadway does not have the capabilities of extended life by a
thin, bituminous overlay. A rehabilitation program is necessary,
to provide extended serviceability . This roadway can be
rehabilitated by either a Council initiated 429 assessment
project or a petitioned 429 assessment project. Examples of
similar Council initiated rehabilitation projects are Eaglewood, .
Timber Trails, and Fourth Avenue. -
Future Status of Platted Right-of-Nay Within the Alignment of
T.H. 101 Bypass: The existing alignment of the platted right-of-
way cannot coexist with the bypass alignment. The Metropolitan
Council has a loan program to Cities for the purpose of
preserving vacant corridors for proposed major projects. The
shaded properties are those that have been purchased by the City
through that program. With the exception of providing access to
the Jim Hauer residence, a major portion of Sharon Parkway serves
no purpose. As indicated in the sketch, Sharon Parkway could be
terminated by a cul-de-sac adjacent to Lot 5, Block 4 and Lot 8 ,
Block 1 . The remaining portion of Sharon Parkway and a short
segment of Tyrone Drive should be vacated, either now or when the
bypass is built.
Access to Lot 1 , Block 1 (Jim Hauer residence) : Currently, the
Hauer's have access to Sharon Parkway and County Road 16. Staff
has not surveyed the property but discussions with Hauer indicate
that his driveway to C. R. 16 is across Lot 2, Block 1 which is
owned by the City. It would appear that access to Lot 1 must be
from C. R. 16 after the bypass is built. If the City does
nothing, there is the threat of Hauer claiming ownership of a
portion of Lot 21 Block 1 by adverse possession. This threat
k must be considered and an adverse possession impact on the
capability to combine and develop the remnants of Lots 2, 3, and
4 of Block 1 .
Future Assessment to Platted Park Land : The park has a
considerable amount of footage abutting the roadway proposed for
improvements. If the roadways are improved, an equitable method
of spreading assessments should be established.
Killarney Hills Addition
October 29, 1986
Page 3
RECOMMENDATION:
Provide direction to staff as to the following requested actions.
Requested Action No. 4 should be complimented with additional
direction to staff for the elimination of the encroachment.
REQUESTED ACTIONS:
1 . Provide direction to staff as to maintenance to be provided
on Sharon Parkway.
2. Move to direct staff to prepare the appropriate resolutions
to commence Council initiated improvements to roadways
within Killarney Hills Addition.
3. Move to direct staff to initiate vacation proceedings on
Sharon Parkway and Tyrone Drive adjacent to Lots 1 through 7
of Block 1 , Lots 6 & 7 of Block 4, Lot 1 of Block 5 and
Outlot E, all aforestaated parcels being within Killarney
Hills Addition.
4. Move to direct staff to notify Mr. Jim Hauer that continued
encroachment of Lot 2, Block 1 of Killarney Hills Addition
is unacceptable to the City.
KA/pmp _
KILLARNEY
1,7'l Y OF SHAKOPEE _ ��
PUBLIC WORKS DEPART NT
MEMO
TO: John Anderson & Ken.Ashfeld
FROM: Jim Karkanen - Public Works
SUBJECT: Killarney Hills Maintenance
DATE: Oct. 17, 1966
INTRODUCTION:
A potential policy problem is emerging at the Killarney Hills Addition regarding
snow removal, and grading the gravel portion of Sharon Parkway where several
homes have been built, or moved in the past several years.
BACKGROUND:
We inheirited the Killarney Hills Addition with the Eagle Creek merger in 1976,
and have maintained the bituminous surface on Tyrone Drive, and the portion of
Sharon Parkway that extends 250 feet to the southeast. The remainder of the
addition was never developed, until several homes have been built, or moved in
the past several years adjacent to Sharon Parkway, and there have not been any
street improvements by the developer, or builder on this street.
Jim Hauer lives on the western edge of the Killarney Addition, and has, through
the years, requested the Public Works department to provide grading, gravel, and
snowplowing to his residence. The trail is dedicated as street R/W, however, there
has never been any development or improvements on the street R/W, so we have
refused to commit our maintenance to this area. Mr. Hauer does have a driveway
access to Co. Rd. n16, north of his residence,. so a emergency situation does not
exist for access or egress.
We have punched a trail to the houses in the winter time, to provide access
in an emergency situation, but this dirt trail is not the best surface to plow because
of the terrain. The homeowners have not been complaining, exceptforMr. Hauer,
who, I understand, was responsible for moving some of these homes into the area.
We are reluctant to add gravel, or grade and plow the Sharon Parkway area,
until we are given some policy direction from Council, because we could be setting
precedent that we would have to live with for many years.
If the City is to provide the gravel street, than we should do it before the
fall freeze-up. If the developer or builder or property owners are to provide this
material, they should begin this project immediately.
We have plowed and patched Tyrone Drive since the consolidation in 1971,
because it was a dedicated improved surface that was built when it belonged to
Eagle Creek Township. It is my opinion that this surface will need a street
rehabilition in the near future. __
QI'"g .�•� 2s
C r ti'
44] .. l \ � P IL�_•.>��.C��J''v 9/ST2w�\ 6� ErN_] ;2N-
- .. \ ' ,�1 •\`mac\ ,�zi:e:Sly`.` p.zpr'c,
0 N
.IZZ
;7:7 / pSe
ro
o a� - „ •. ., g2. �. a ,-e, , —
A' i C `t'JI�ti
`: !si't's .: : � Z•!+:� F yy".. � ,.
\„5°+''l �S tF' T �I•\.
mm --3 E'9?:3E N___m e` _ 1 ... '— r sl:2gy./• \TfV �i' F' 6
0ch
Ln
00
h>:
W C
12
u .:.n �. p•j7
COV
i
2 I I
, I I
OUiLOT C AVENUE I I
SECRETARIAT I I
2 I I-
2
' sr
10
CIO
11.1 }•�Ait i �
TzfE \�
CrT Cq �
y
e
5
OUTLOT "E' y' CLF I I
PARK 3 2 eO.
�2 ""....;., 1
s 3 a ✓CF�4
2 7 RO I
y 5
1 1 t
3
2 6
OUTLOT D
OUTLOT F OUTLOT G
1 �
i I
OUTLOT C OUTLOT B 'UTLCT A-°
11I i
i
- City Council'
November 4, 1986
Page -2-
The city Engineer reviewed the issues involved with the roadways within
Killaaey Hills Addition. In a menet from Jim Karxanen, Public Works, there
is demand for roadway maintenance services. Tnere is no developers agreement
Z and the roadway has not been improved nor is there a comitment on any party
O to make improvements. The consensus was to enter into an easement agreement
with Pf;. Hauer to allow him to use Lot 2 until such time as the by-pass is to
be constructed, and with that easement agreement we do not agree to construct,
rove, or maintain the balance of Sharon Parkway.
Leroux/Lebens m ed to put crushed rock material on Sharon Parkway so that it
J can be maintained for public saftey and keep the cost of those items recorded
V
to add to future improvement assessments. To direct staff to prepare the appro-
priate resolutions to commence Cc ncil initiated improvements to roadways within
2 Killarney Hills Addition. To direct staff to initiate vacation 2
oceedi os
7 on Sharon Parkwu and_Tvron� iacent to is 1 through o oc ,
v tso an 7-0� oc t 1 0 lock S and Outlot E, all atorestateec reels
being within KillarneyhUls Addition. To Erect start to not y T. I
Hauer coat the City enter into an=sement agreement with him on his continued
enroa--r e t of lot 2, Block 1 of Killarney Hills Addition and that a time
limit be placed on that easement agreement.
Roll Call: Ayes: Unanimous Noes: None Motion carried.
Vierling/Leroux moved to approve Change Order No. 1 to the 1986-5 Timber Trails
- Rehab'litat- Pro ' i� n the amount of $6,380.00.- -
Ro11 -&It . Ayes: uuanunrou.>s Noes: None ..Potion carried.
Vierling/Lerouc moved to adopt the investuent policy dated October 24, 1986
as proposed.
Roll Call: Ayes: tineniamus Noes: Nora Potion carried.
Lebens/Wampach moved to authorize the purchase of one Schwab Fireguard Safe
from Svel Business Egaipmant at a cost of 51;397.
Roll Call: Ayes: tinani� Noes: None Potion carried.
V'ierling/lero m ved to approve Officer Gary Nosbusch's request for a sa-cy
day leave of absence without pay cammencing November 5, 1986.
RD11 Call: Aves: UTkmunious Noes: None Potion car ed.
Vierling/Ler. moved to accept the resignation of S_=meant K�eth Hanel effective
1700 hogs, January 1, 1987.
Roll Cal-7- Aver- T"rckTd;n us. Noes' None. Potion carried.
Vierling/1eroux moved to authorize the hiring of one patrol officer effective
December 1, 1986.
Roll Call: Ayes: Sinaniarous Noes: None Motion carried.
Lerc n /Vierling m ed to accept the check from Mr. Stans and that a letter of
gratitude be sent to Mr. Stans for his generous contribution and that Mrs. Henderson
Likewise be thanked for her part in sparking this whole procedure. Potion carried
uianineusly.
qC
MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator
FROM: Dennis R. Kraft, Community Development Director
RE: Appeal of the Shiely Company Conditional Use Permit
DATE: February 27, 1987
Introduction
On February 3 , 1987 the Shakopee Planning Commission granted an
amendment to the J. L. Shiely Company to increase their daily
hours of operation for the rock excavation operation that they
have at their property which is located at 6896 Highway 101 in
the eastern part of Shakopee. Mr. Kenneth Watkins filed an
appeal to the granting of this amendment by the Shakopee Planning
Commission.
Background
The J. L. Shiely Company has been operating a rock extraction
business at the above location for a number of years. Because of
the elevation of the ground water table in the location around
the quarry, it has been necessary for the Shiely Company to
essentially pump the quarry dry before beginning the extraction
operation. The mining operation does not occur throughout the
year so the quarry is allowed to fill up with water after the
years extraction operations are completed. The Conditional Use
Permit which gave the Shiely Company the right to engage in this
extraction activity limited their hours of operation from 7:00
a.m. to 7:00 p.m. for a period of four continuous months. In
December the Shiely Company applied for an amendment to their
Conditional Use Permit to change the hours of operation from 7:00
a.m. to 7:00 p.m. to 6: 00 a.m. to 10:00 P.M. for a four
continuous month period. The reasons stated for seeking this
extension was to allow two extraction shifts to work each day
rather than the one shift which was allowed for the 7:00 a.m. to
7:00 p.m. time frame. The Shiely Company indicated that if they
were allowed to work two shifts per day to would have to pump
water for a shorter period of time each year. Mr. Kenneth
Watkins, who lives at 8464 Eagle Creek Boulevard filed an appeal
to the amendment of this Conditional Use Permit and indicated his
concern about the impact that this pumping operation might have
on the operation of the well for his house. Mr. Watkins also
indicated that a neighbor of his recently had a well that went
dry and that he does not know whether there is a connection
between this and the Shiely pumping operation.
Mr. Watkins filed his appeal as provided for in Section 11.04
Subd. 6.c.10 of the Shakopee Zoning ordinance which indicates
that a written appeal may be made by any interested party and
must be received by the City within seven days of the Planning
Commission action. Mr. Watkins did file his appeal within a
timely manner and therefore this matter is now before the City
Council for consideration.
Alternatives
1. The City Council can uphold the decision of the Planning
Commission granting the amendment to the Conditional Use
Permit for the J. L. Shiely Company.
2. The City Council can overrule the Planning Commission and
deny the amendment to the J. L. Shiely Company Conditional
Use Permit.
Recommendation
In that the J. L. Shiely Company potentially will operate for a
shorter period of time year it would appear that the amendment to
the CUP will probably have less of a negative affect upon the
level of the ground water table in the vicinity of the operation
than is currently the condition under the Conditional Use Permit
before it was amended. It is also possible that this is
something that should be brought to the attention of the
appropriate State agencies when pumping permit is granted. It is
further possible that at the time the Conditional Use Permit is
next reviewed that Mr. Watkins could be contacted to determine if
a problem does exist with the level of the ground water table at
his home.
Based upon the information which currently exists on this
subject, and the fact that the Shiely Company should be pumping
water for a shorter period of time each year it is recommended
that the City Council uphold the decision of the Planning
Commission in granting the amendment to the Conditional Use
Permit for the J. L. Shiely Company.
It is recommended that the City Council move to uphold the
amendment to the Conditional Use Permit for the J. L. Shiely
Company which was granted by the Planning Commission on February
3, 1987 and allow the hours of operation to be extended to the
time frame of 6:00 a.m. to 10: 00 p.m. for a period of four
continuous months for the property located at 6896 Highway 101.
DRK/jms
MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator
FROM: Dennis R. Kraft, Community Development Director
RE: The Creation of a New Zoning District, The Urban
Redevelopment District (URD) and the Rezoning of
Certain Properties from B-1 to URD (Lots 1-5 Blk 168
Shakopee City, South 1/2 Blk 2 East Shakopee Plat,
Lots 1-5, Block 7 East Shakopee Plat)
DATE: February 27, 1987
Introduction:
Consideration to add a new section to the Zoning Ordinance
Urban Redevelopment District (URD) and rezoning certain property
from B-1 to URD.
Background:
Mr. Bill Jongquist is the owner of Fairest Made Foods which
is located at 134 S. Main Street and is zoned B-1. The property
is used for food processing and is a non-conforming use in the B-
1 zone.
The property was zoned B-5 prior to the adoption of the
current Zoning Ordinance in 1979. Prior to that the property was
zoned R-1. The Fairest Made Foods operation was initiated in
1976. Prior to that time the building was used as a camper
topper manufacturer. Neither the camper topper use or the
Fairest Made Foods facility were permitted uses in the B-5 or R-1
Zones. The camper topper manufacturer may have been a non
conforming use in the B-5 Zone at the time Mr. Jongquist acquired
the property.
The Zoning Ordinance does not allow the expansion of a non-
conforming use. At this time, Mr. Jongquist would like to expand
his business, but cannot do so under the existing zoning
regulations. On December 4, 1986, the Planning Commission
considered an amendment to the Zoning Ordinance which would allow
limited food processing in the B-1 zone as a conditional use
(this would require the issuance of a conditional use permit
[CUP] ) . The Planning Commission recommended to the City Council
that the zoning Ordinance be amended to allow limited food
processing in the B-1 zone with the issuance of a CUP, however,
the Ordinance amendment did not receive the approval of the City
Council at the regular meeting of January 6, 1987.
Subsequent to the Council' s rejection of the CUP amendment
a special council meeting was held on January 16, 1987, at which
time the Council directed that a new zoning district be created,
(the URD District) and that the matter be referred to the
Planning Commission for a public hearing to be held on February
12, 1987. The public hearing was also for the purpose of
considering the rezoning of the three half blocks, as described
above, from B-1 to URD.
There are certain parcels of property in the City of
Shakopee which are located adjacent to the railroad tracks and
are presently either undeveloped or underdeveloped. These
properties are not particularly attractive for uses which are
allowed in the B-1 District. Likewise, the proximity of the
railroad tracks results in these properties being not suitable
for residential uses, however these properties would have some
potential for some types of commercial . or industrial use. The
subject properties are located in close proximity to residences.
The rezoning of the subject properties to either I-1 or I-2
Districts would allow the properties to accommodate industrial
uses, but would not provide protection for the nearby residential
uses.
The creation of an Urban Redevelopment District (URD) would
allow a limited number of industrial and commercial uses, but
would also provide protection for nearby residential uses by
incorporating a PUD requirement for all developments, similar to
development in the RTD (where all uses also require a mandatory
PUD) . There are also some additional performance standards which
t are built into the URD which will provide further protection for
area residential uses.
At a special meeting on February 12, 1987 the Shakopee
Planning Commission held a public hearing on the above-
discussed zoning ordinance amendment and, after discussion, voted
3-2 to deny the proposed amendment.
Recommendation:
The staff recommends that the City Council review the
attached ordinance draft. If the City Council adopts the
attached ordinance then it should also consider amending the
zoning map by rezoning the above - mentioned parcels of land from
B-1 to URD.
Alternatives which the Council could pursue include the
following:
(1) Create a new URD zoning district and rezone the properties
listed in the beginning of this memo from B-1 to URD.
i (2) Do not create a new zoning district and leave the subject
properties in the B-1 zoning district.
( 3) Amend the zoning ordinance to permit limited food processing
as a conditional use in the B-1 zone as recommended by the
Planning Commission in December.
Action Requested:
Move to adopt Ordinance No. 215.
Ordinance No. 215
Fourth Series
An Ordinance of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota Amending
Shakopee City Code Chapter 11 Entitled "Land Use Regulations
( Zoning) by Adding a New District to Section 11. 20 To Be Known
as URD Urban Redevelopment District; by Amending Section 11.21
Zoning Map by Transferring Certain Lands From One District to
Another; By Adding a New Section 11.37 Entitled "Urban
Redevelopment District" and by Adopting by Reference Shakopee City
Code Chapter I and Section 11. 99
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA ORDAINS:
Section I : New Zoning District Added
A new zoning district is added to Section 11. 20 to be known
as the URD Urban Redevelopment District.
Section II: New Section 11. 37 Added
Section 11.37 URBAN REDEVELOPMENT DISTRICT (URD) .
Subd. 1. Purpose. This planned industrial district was
created exclusively for lands located adjacent to the railroad
tracks and in the original plat of the City of Shakopee, the East
Shakopee Plat or Koeper' s Addition. To be eligible for inclusion
in the URD district property must be located in close proximity
to arterial or collector streets. All property located in the
Shakopee Central Business District (and zoned B-3 ) is
specifically excluded from eligibility to be rezoned URD. It is
the intent of the district to create an environment with a high
degree of compatibility with nearby land uses, while recognizing
the reuse limitations of certain lands adjacent to, or in close
proximity to, railroad tracks and arterial and collector streets.
It is further the intent of this district to provide for a
i
compatibility of land uses while being sensitive to the needs of
P Y
nearby land uses, and to encourage more efficient utilization of
existing developed parcels of land, and to provide the means for
greater creativity and flexibility in environment design through
the departure from the strict application of required setbacks,
yard areas and other performance standards associated with
traditional zoning.
This district will allow for the integration of compatible
uses within a project. This district will also require the
planning of an entire land ownership as a unit rather than permit
piecemeal development.
Subd. 2 Uses Permitted by Planned Unit Development (PUD)
Within the Urban Redevelopment District no structures or land
shall be used except for one or more of the following uses, which
uses shall be permitted only upon the approval of a PUD and
subject to all stated conditions:
A. Animal Hospitals/Clinics
B. Accessory Uses
C. Assembly/Storage or Processing of:
apparel
food products, (not to include slaughtering or
rendering)
glass
pottery
lumber & wood products
paper products
textiles
D. Banks
E. Car Washes
�o a�
F. If abutting a State Highway:
- auto service stations
- hotels
- motels
- restaurants - class I
G. Multi Family Residential
H. Offices
I. Open Sales Lot
J. Public Buildings
K. Retail Businesses
L. Wholesale Businesses
Subd. 3 Lot Area, width, Yard and Coverage: Building
Height
A. Minimum Lot Size: 20,000 square feet
B. Minimum Lot width: 100 feet
C. Minimum Yard Requirements:
(1) Principal Structures
a. Front Yard - 30 feet
b. Side Yard - 10 feet
C. Rear Yard - 20 feet
(2) Accessory Structures
a. Front Yard - 30 feet
b. Side Yard - 5 feet
C. Rear Yard - 8 feet
(3) Setback - Parking
a. Front Yard - 10 feet
b. Side Yard - 5 feet
C. Rear Yard - 10 feet
D. Maximum Hard Surface Lot Coverage: 90%
E. Maximum Building Height: 25 feet or 2 stories
Subd. 4 Performance Standards
A. Acceptable Building Materials
1. All portions or sides of buildings which are visible
from a public street, or abut a residential or
institutional use, or zone, or place of assembly such
as a public park or recreational facility shall be
constructed with durable, low maintenance, quality
building materials.
2. The following exterior building materials shall be
deemed acceptable for the required portions or sides of
the building: face brick, stone, glass, wood,
architecturally treated concrete, decorative block,
cast in place or precast concrete panels.
B. Minimum Landscape Requirements.
1. All plant materials used in the required landscaping of
the Urban Redevelopment District shall comply with the
following minimum sizes:
Major Deciduous 2 1/2 inch diameter
Ornamental 1 1/2 inch diameter
Coniferous 6 feet in height
Major Shrub 5 gallon
2. Landscaping shall be required in an amount equal to one
(1) caliper inch per 500 sq. ft. of building gross
floor area. Credit may be given for existing quality
trees using the same formula.
3. Landscape plans shall be required and shall be prepared
by or under the supervision of a landscape architect.
They shall show types, common and botanical names,
sizes, number and location of all plant materials.
4. No building permit 'shall be issued until the applicant
shall file with the Building Official, a performance
bond, or other guarantee acceptable to the City, in the
amount of one and one half (1 1/2) times the cost of
completing the required landscaping, said cost to be
determined by the Administrator. The bond or other
guarantee shall cover one calendar year and two
complete growing seasons.
C. Screening. The following must be screened: (1) roof-top
Facilities; ( 2) parking areas; and (3) loading and service
areas. One or any combination of the following elements may
be used to meet the screening requirements: site design,
building design, grade separation, berming, landscaping,
fences, walls or other landscape features.
/d Q/
1. Roof-top Facilities.
a) All roof-top facilities shall be either:
( 1) Totally screened from the eye level view from
adjacent parcels and existing and planned
public streets,
( 2) Painted to match or complement;
(3) Incorporated into an architectural design
which is aesthetically compatible with the
principal structure.
b) All materials used to screen roof-top utilities
shall be aesthetically compatible with the
exterior building materials of the principal
structure.
2. Parking Areas. All parking which occurs within the
required front yard shall be screened to at least the
height of the headlights of the parked vehicles or
three feet. The use of screening shall require at
least two types of screening materials use
proportionately at 60$/40$. One type of screening
material may not be used for more than 60% of the
required screening.
3 . Loading and Service Areas. Loading and service areas
shall not face directly on a public street.
Maneuvering and truck loading areas shall be at least
50% screened, to a height of four feet from the eye
level from all roadways.
4. All required screening shall comply with the
performance bonding requirements established for
Landscaping. (SUBD 4 B) .
D. Storage. The storage of all materials; semi-finished or
finished products; equipment and waste products shall be
within a completely enclosed building.
oft
' E. wherever a 1=PB District abuts, or is across a street or
railroad right of way from an R District, a fence or compact
evergreen hedge, not less than eighty percent (80%) opaque,
nor less than six feet ( 61 ) in height, except adjacent to a
street where it shall be not less than three feet (3 ' ) nor
more than four feet ( 41 ) in height, shall be erected and
maintained.
F. No overnight operation of semi-trailer or truck
refrigeration units shall be allowed, except in loading
areas which are screened in a manner consistent with the
provisions of this ordinance.
G. Loading or unloading of trucks or trailers shall not be
allowed between the hours of 10 PM and 7 AM if the use is
located within 100 feet of a residential district.
H. Off-street parking and loading spaces shall be provided for
various uses as required by Section 11.05, Subdivision 3.
SUBD. 5 Variances. Variances may be negotiated within this
district except as specifically restricted by Section 11.40,
SUBD. 4, A through F. Variances shall be allowed for access
spacing (SUBD 3 F above) only if the PUD proposal provides for a
lesser number of accesses than would be permitted by strict
application of this Section. Variances from Section 11.36, SUBD.
4, A through E shall not be negotiated. _
Section III: Zoninci Map
The following Parcels are hereby transferred from the
present zoning district as follows:
Subd. 1 From B-1 District to URD District:
A. Lots 1-5, Block 168, Shakopee City
B. South 1/2 Block 2, except Railroad Right of Way, East
Shakopee Plat
C. Lots 1-5, Block 7, East Shakopee Plat
Section Iy: Adopted by Reference
The general provisions and definitions applicable to the
entire City Code including the penalty provisions of Chapter 1
and Section 5. 99 entitled "Violation a Misdemeanor" are hereby
adopted in their entirety by reference as though repeated
verbatim herein.
Section V: When in Force and Effect
After the adoption, signing and attestation of this
Ordinance, it shall be published once in the official newspaper
of the City of Shakopee and shall be in full force and effect on
and after the date following such publication.
Adopted in session of the City Council of the
City of Shakopee, Minnesota held this day of ,
1987.
Mayor of the City of Shakopee
ATTEST:
City Clerk
/o .b
MEMO TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: John K. Anderson, City Administrator
RE: Report from City Hall Building Committee
DATE: February 27, 1987
Introduction
The City Hall Building Committee met on February 26, 1987 for the
third time to evaluate the need for a new City Hall. The
Committee focused on several key decisions so that they could
make a recommendation to City Council by Council's March 3rd
meeting as requested by Council. The minutes of their February
26th meeting are attached. Also attached is Resolution No. 2698
drafted by O'Connor Hannan
lfor authorizing the bond election.
Background 01i7ufeS /!74,,1_-01 d,,-ec�411 {/'01n
�GO/vnOIJ /j/bfli�c�'
The Committee received an orientation and additional information
from City staff and Boarman Architects regarding the proposal to
build a new City Hall.
1. The Committee obtained sketches that evaluated placing an
addition on the existing City property attached to or
adjacent to the existing Police and Public Works Building.
2. The Committee received information about the cost and
practicality of expanding the existing City Hall in the
present location to meet future space needs.
3 . The Committee received information regarding the proposed
bridge and mini by-pass as it related to the existing City
Hall facility.
4. The Committee received a list of space needs from each
department head and had an opportunity to question each
department head.
5. The Committee received a floor plan layout for a proposed
new City Hall and for expansion of the existing City Hall
for comparison purposes.
6. The Committee received projections on City growth, and
discussed growth potential with the architect and the
Community Development Director Dennis Kraft.
Findings
The Committee came to a strong consensus on the following
findings: -
1. That the existing City Hall facility could not be reasonably
expanded to accomodate the expected growth of City staff and
City activities during the 10 years. A key reason that
expansion of the existing facility was not practical was the
extensive amount of square feet devoted to hallways and the
cost of making the structure handicapped accessable.
2. That parking adjacent to the existing facility, if expanded,
would not be convenient for people using City Hall.
3. That a reasonable target for the new City Hall would be
17,800 sq. ft. This figure should provide adequate space
for at lease ten years worth of growth at the currently
projected rates.
4. That sufficient land should be purchased adjacent to either
site under consideration to enable horizontal expansion of
the facilities rather than vertical expansion or expansion
in unfinished basement areas.
5. That the total project cost should be set at $1,900,000 with
$500,000 being provided from the present Capital Improvement
Fund.
6. That a bond issue of $1,400,000 be placed before the voters.
7. That the $1,400,000 bond issue debt service be timed to
replace the current annual debt service payments for the
Public Service Building (Police and Public Works) to
minimize fluctuation in tax rates.
8. That City Council change the target date for the bond
election and seriously consider placing the issue on the
ballot this fall. The Committee recommended the change in
timing for two reasons. First, many of the citizens they
have talked to were not aware that the City was considering
building a new City Hall and, therefore, the April 28th date
would not provide enough time to "get the word out" .
Secondly, the recent mailing of 1987 tax statements has
created a good deal of concern on the Committee' s part about
whether an issue placed on the ballot for April 28th would
be successful.
Summary and Recommendation
The Committee has had a core of approximately 15 members that
have been attending meetings regularly. The Committee has one or
two meetings left to complete the charge given it by City
Council. The Committee arrived at a very strong consensus
regarding the findings listed above and members feel comfortable
in recommending to the City Council that its pursue construction
of a new City Hall. But, the Committee does not find it
advisable to place the bond issue on the ballot for April 28th
for the reasons sited above, and suggests Council consider
placing the issue on. the ballot in the fall of 1987.
JKA/jms
Extract of Minutes of Meeting
of the City Council of the City
of Shakopee, Scott County, Minnesota
Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, a regular or
special meeting of the City Council of the City of Shakopee,
Minnesota, was held at the Shakopee City Hall on January 20,
1987, commencing at 7: 30 o'clock p.m. , C.T.
The following Councilmembers were present:
and the following were absent: .
The following resolution was presented by Councilmember
, who moved its adoption.
RESOLUTION NO. 2598
RESOLUTION DETERMINING THE NEED FOR THE
ISSUANCE OF GENERAL OBLIGATION BONDS AND
CALLING A SPECIAL ELECTION THEREON
BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of
Shakopee, Minnesota, as follows:
1. The City Council hereby finds and determines:
- a) that it is in the best interests of the City
and its residents that the City acquire land and con-
struct thereon a new City Hall (the "Project" ) ; and
b) that it is necessary to the sound financial
management of the City that the Project be financed in
whole or in part by the issuance and sale of the City' s
general obligation bonds in an amount not to exceed
$ [AMOUNT) .
2. The proposition for the issuance of such bonds
shall be submitted to the voters of the City at a special
X election to be held on [REFDATE) , 1987. The election shall
be held and conducted in accordance with the laws of the
State of Minnesota relating to special elections.
3. The City Clerk shall cause a notice of election in
substantially the form attached hereto as Exhibit A to be
posted and published as required by law as follows:
a) The notice of election shall be published once
in the official newspaper of the City at least two weeks
prior to the election;
b) The notice of election and a sample ballot
shall be posted -at each of the polling places at least
ten days prior to the election;
c) The notice of election and a sample ballot
shall be posted in the office of the City Clerk at least
four days prior to the election; and
d) The sample ballot shall be published in the
official newspaper of the City at least one week prior
to the election.
4. The polls for the election shall be open at 7 :00
o' clock a.m. , C.T. , and shall remain open until 8:00 o' clock
p.m. , C.T. , and the polling places for the election shall be
as follows:
Polling Places
Precinct 1 - Fire Station
334 west 2nd Avenue
Precinct 2 - Public Library
235 So. Lewis
Precinct 3 - Presbyterian Church
909 Marschall Road
Precinct 4 - _Eagle Creek Town Hall
Junction of CR-16 and CR-83
Precinct 5 - Christ Lutheran Church
1053 So. Jefferson
5. The City Council currently has under consideration
two possible sites for a new City Ball, the Gorman Street
Site, located on Gorman Street immediately east of the
City's police and public works facility, and the Block 50
Site, located on Third Avenue immediately South of the
City's Library. In order to gather additional information
on the preferences of the electorate regarding those two
sites, the City Council hereby directs that the ballot shall
also contain an advisory question indicating whether the
voters prefer the Gorman Street Site, the Block 50 Site, or
have no preference as to those sites. This question shall
be purely advisory and is not intended to be binding on the
City Council as to one or the other of those sites or alter-
native sites.
6. The City Clerk is authorized and directed to pre-
pare separate ballots for the election to be printed on blue
paper in substantially the following form:
OFFICIAL BALLOT
SPECIAL ELECTION
CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA
k [REFDATE] , 1987
QUESTION NO. 1
SHALL THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE ISSUE AND SELL ITS GENERAL
X OBLIGATION BONDS IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $[AMOUNT] FOR
THE PURPOSE OF ACQUIRING LAND AND CONSTRUCTING THEREON A NEW
CITY HALL?
( ) YES
( ) NO
INSTRUCTIONS TO VOTERS ON QUESTION NO. 1: Voters
desiring to vote in favor of the foregoing proposition
shall make a cross mark (X) in the square opposite the
word YES. Voters desiring to vote against the foregoing
proposition shall place a cross mark (X) opposite the
word NO.
QUESTION NO. 2
WHICH OF THE FOLLOWING SITES WOULD YOU PREFER FOR THE
LOCATION OF A NEW CITY HALL?
(_) The Gorman Street Site, located on Gorman
Street immediately east of the City's police
and public works facility.
(_) The Block 50 Site, located on Third Avenue
immediately south of the City's Library.
( ) No Preference.
INSTRUCTIONS TO VOTERS ON QUESTION NO. 2: Voters
should make a cross mark (X) opposite one of the
three choices. Question No. 2 is advisory and
informational only and is not intended to be
binding on the City Council. A voter may respond
to Question No. 2 whether the voter responded YES
or NO to Question No. 1. A voter ' s failure to
respond to Question No. 2, or an invalid response
to Question No. 2, will not void the voter ' s re-
sponse to Question No. 1. _
7. The City Council shall meet in the City Hall on V
, 1987, at o'clock p.m. , C.T. , '1
to canvass and declare the results of the election.
Adopted this day of 1987.
The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution
was duly seconded by Councilmember , and
upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor
thereof:
and the following voted against the same:
whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and
adopted.
EXHIBIT A
NOTICE OF SPECIAL ELECTION
CITY OF SHAKOPEE
SCOTT COUNTY, MINNESOTA
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a special election will be
held in and for the City of Shakopee, Scott County, Minne-
sota, on [REFDATE] , 1987, at which the following proposition
will be submitted to the voters of the City for their ap-
proval or rejection:
.SHALL THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE ISSUE AND SELL ITS
GENERAL OBLIGATION BONDS IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO
EXCEED $[AMOUNT] FOR THE PURPOSE OF ACQUIRING
LAND AND CONSTRUCTING THEREON A NEW CITY HALL?
( ) YES
( ) NO
The following question shall also be submitted ' to the
voters on a non-binding advisory basis:
WHICH OF THE FOLLOWING SITES WOULD YOU PREFER FOR
THE LOCATION OF A NEW CITY HALL?
(_) The Gorman Street Site, located on
Gorman Street immediately east of
the City's police and public works
facility.
(_) The Block 50 Site, located on Third
Avenue immediately south of the
City's Library:
( ) No Preference.
The polling places for said election are as follows:
Precinct 1 - Fire Station
334 West 2nd Avenue
Precinct 2 - Public Library
235 So. Lewis
Precinct 3 - Presbyterian Church
909 Marschall Road
�6 4
Precinct 4 - Eagle Creek Town Hall
Junction of CR-16 and- CR-83
Precinct 5 - Christ Lutheran Church
1053 So. Jefferson
The polls for said election will be open at 7:00 o'clock
a.m. , C.T. , and remain open until closing at 8:00 o'clock
p.m. , C.T.
Any qualified registered voter of the City is entitled
to vote at said election, and any resident of the City not
previously registered as a voter may register on election
day, with proof of residence as required by law.
BY ORDER OF THE CITY COUNCIL
IJudith Cox
City Clerk
City of Shakopee, Minnesota
Dated:
State of Minnesota )
County of Scott ) ss. City Clerk ' s Certificate
City of Shakopee )
I, the undersigned, being the duly qualified and acting
City Clerk of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota, do hereby
certify that I have carefully compared the attached and
foregoing extract of a regular or special meeting of the
Shakopee City Council duly called and regularly held on
January 20, 1987, with the original thereof on file in my
office and I further certify that the same is a full, true,
and correct copy thereof, insofar as the same relates to the
calling of a special bond election on [REFDAT$] , 1987.
WITNESS My hand as such City Clerk and the corporate
seal of the City this day of , 1987.
City Clerk
City of Shakopee, Minnesota
(SEAL)
lob
C
-3
3 �
Mit �P�pP��
XICASSOCIAIATLS
� AS
M E M O R A N D U M
T0: All present
FR: Jack Boarman, Michael Diem from Boarman 8 Associates tvr)
DT: February 26, 1987
RE: Shakopee City Hall
We met to review the remodeled City Hall plans, and Tax Impact
Scenarios, and noted the following items:
1. Dennis Kraft, Director of Community Development, continued the
review of the program from our last meeting. Possibility of adding
Planner I or II in next 10 years. Discussion followed of
centralized verses departmental computer stations.
2. A review of the proposed mini bypass followed. The bypass would
pass directly behind the existing City Hall.
3. Jack Boarman presented the plans of the remodeled City Hall
scenario. Jack mentioned the square footage in this plan would
need to be greater than a new building due to Inefficient
circulation. After reviewing the issues, the task force felt
putting additional money into the building would be ill spent. The
issues were: lack of parking, inefficient square footage, poor
location of community services, image, and cost/value.
4. The task force reviewed the cost impacts and tax levees of the
different site options.
S. A question was raised as to the future building projects in
Shakopee which may affect taxpayers in the near future. John
Anderson said he will look into it and report at our next meeting.
6. It was felt that the sale of our existing City Hall is indefinite
in terms of a marketable selling climate. The $100,000 previously
slated for the proceeds of sale, will therefore be eliminated.
7. After a discussion concerning land, it was felt that the purchase
of additional land beyond that proposed would be unnecessary.
8. The Gorman site is 2-1/2 acres. The block 50 site is 1-1/2
acres.
9, 1.4 million shall be the recommended referendum amount.
10. After a discussion of the time table, the committee agreed to
recommend the referendum vote be postponed to the fall. This was
to enable more time to eget the work out,, to the people of
Shakopee.
11. Boarman d Associates recommended a telephone poll on April 28 and a
vote at the primarys in September.
12. Next meeting is suggested for March 19, 1987, meeting to continue on final design plans. The This meeting will be-
comm
' estimated to report in April on design issueittee planning work is
in
S.
SHAKOPEE
MUNICIPAL SWIMMING POOL
s��ish splash SWIMMINGOPEN
SWIMMING INSTRUCTION
Uj WATERSLIDE FUN
wale lode PROPOSED
1 9 g 7
it,s COOT & it 's fun! POOL HOURS
Weekdays 1:00 p.m. - 4:20 p.m.
6:30 p.m. - 8:20 p.m.
Saturdays
6 Sundays 1:00 p.m. - 7:00 p.m.
June 6 - August 23 (11 weeks)
POOL FEES WATERSLIDE FEES
Daily Pool Admission: Ticket:
Children (under 19)$1.00 4 rides $1.00
Adults $1.25
Season Pass: Session Pass:
Family $34.00 Unlimited rides
Individual $17.00 Afternoon or evening $3.00
INSTRUCTION (WEEKDAYS)
JUNE 15 - AUGUST 7 ( g weeks)
(10: 15 - 12:30 6 5:30 - 6:15)
(Two week intervals)
FEES
$12.00 / Two Week Session Wil./
SHAKOPEE
MUNICIPAL SWIMMING POOL
Featuring Swimming, Diving, Sunbathing d a Waterslide
Located in Shakopee's Lions Park (West 11th Ave. S Adams Street)
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT SHAKOPEE COMMUNITY SERVICES - (445-2742)
CITY OF SHAKOPEE MUNICIPAL SWIMMING POOL/WATER SLIDE
1987 PROGRAM/PLAN
A. INTRODUCTION
The Municipal Outdoor Swimming Pool located in Lions Park first used in 1969s
has been a summer focal point for thousands of fun seeker, swimmers, and
sunbathers. For a number of years the facility was able to meet on-site costs
from revenues generated. In the past ten years this has not happened. It was
anticipated that with the installation and operation of the Water Slide that this
deficit operation would no longer exist. This did not happen for various reasons.
It is hoped that an increase in revenue will occur eventually. The City has
operated the pool as a major service to its constituents. The goal has been to
provide a pleasurable safe atmosphere of fun and instruction with a minimum of
subsidy.
B. BACKGROUND
1. Weather conditions are a major factor that determines to what extent the pool
is used each summer. If the temperature soars into the 80's, 90's and above
people will flock to the pool in great numbers. If not, they won't.
2. Economic conditions seem to provide a framework of a wait-and-see attitude
on the part of many potential pool users. There is a hesitancy to buy season
tickets if there is a possible chance that they can get by purchasing only
a few daily tickets instead. Cold weather at the beginning of a season is the
culprit that stimulates this thinking.
3. Season ticket sales have leveled off in recent years.
4. Lessons registrations also seem to have leveled off.
5. The 1987 Swimming Pool Budget is predicated upon bare bones operation mirrored
after experiences of recent years. Emphasis on safety will remain most
important! In 1983, a $6050 deficit was budgeted with the actual deficit being
$8264. In 1984 it was budgeted at $20,650 with the actual deficit being
$17,844. The 1985 deficit was difficult to ascertain because of the blending
in of water slide capital expenses. In 1986 it was approximately $32,000.
6. Free Season Tickets and Lesson Instructions are available to residents who
qualify for the School Free Lunch Program.
C. PROPOSED HOURS OF USAGE FOR SUMMER 1987
1. The season will begin Saturday, June 6, and conclude Sunday, August 23 - 79
days. Same number of days as in 1985 and 1986.
2. Staff will meet for a few hours (paid time) prior to the start of the season
to prepare facilities and participate in staff training.
3. The total pool will be available for open swimming from 1:00-4:20 & 6:30-8:20
weekdays and 1:00-7:00 weekends, dependent upon weather.
4. Swimming Instruction will be from June 15 - August 7 weekdays. Hours are
10:15-12:30 & 5:30-6:15. Lessons are in blocks of two-week periods, 45 minutes
per day. They follow the Red Cross Program: Tiny Tots and Beginners through
Advanced Lifesaving. Advanced Lifesaving Course is for four weeks duration
during the first four weeks only.
5. The pool is available for organized responsible groups to reserve the pool
for private splash parties beyond regular hours. The fee for these groups is
$50 for 1} hours or $1/person, whichever sum is greater. If the water slide
is to be included, the group fee will be $100.00 or $2.00/person whichever
is greater.
D. PROPOSED PERSONNEL 1987
The staff will consist of a Manager, Assistant Manager, Cashier, 8
Guards/Instructors, 6 Aides, and a backup crew of part-time employees. Each of
these personnel are scheduled on a regular basis as needed. All perform important
functions. They are paid only when they work.
O �T p S ^ O I 00 O
p
00 O
m
w w w I yw w w
!Oi R N P I
n I
m 1
m I
m e+ Ue u lel I
W I
mm
I
S I
I
b O V1 m rvl �O O I ml W a
�n rn m rn mm m I n m o+ W
S m�D O �m I ul m I N r m n
N N I r N
K I K
b
Z W P rn 1
W 1
a u= el a el e+ 1
m I
1
U 1
m m O m OWN
m N V1 N MN m v N O I ml y W O �1
1 V D` Vl O ^ I V b i N ^ ^D• N
11 I I II II Y �
at N r
ytl I
> Ni Pl PJ NJ l^J PJ FJ
N
I 1'
h
a O m D\ V1 D\ S a I m O I I N
O S m o` hS � v v m vtl I � I I
Z
y
I
P R N N II II tl
It It
1
Q (o+LeJ @+lel Ve Nl Ni NJ NJ
M �C m �D ✓1 ..� vt O. r S I
H
Z m I ^1 m 1 1 w
1 � w w I wVs w
II 11 tl 0 II II II I p II II II R
m
O\ N m N N m N m
PJ NJ @J Nl lel @l leJ FJ wwww w
^ mm �> y -+ P cry I� OnO N I
O O VI N N S I
N � I
w m u E m y I m
q p a a a u
.O1 On XU Xu XU Xa Xus Hmm 0
a O 0 0
n m
m +1 +i .iUU V66 C4 F u > HH I U .i d
W Z F F m m m 1 F H O O O
HH C C G G C C C
W o O. O u u o 0 o a m m
nl m m l u u W m X
I GF m u F
Ru p F m m m a a a m m o a s v I m o 6 v -I o
p U 3 W F F
F m w m m V p a a a 1
i
F. 1987 SHAKOPEE MUNICIPAL SWIMMING POOL BUDGET
1984 1985 1986 1987
1987 CITY OF SHAKOPEE ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL APPROP.
4100 Salaries FT 4868 7106
4828.65 6300
4112 Overtime—Full Time 117 221
4130 Salaries — Temp 25163 30389 35870.23 32000
4140 PERA 262 309 205.22 350
4141 FICA 363 513 345.23 550
4143 Pensions—Medicare 500.11
4150 Health & Life Ins 429 635 434.56 675
4151 Workmens Comp. Insu 571 1010 1036.00 1200
TOTAL PERSONAL SERVICES 31773 40183 41075
4210 Supplies 3101 5102 3887.48 5400
4215 Surface Materials 154
4230 Building Maint. 804 3238 5229.91 2000
4232 Eqip. Haint & Repair 3015 495 8734.36 7000
4319 Promotions 107
4321 Telephone 296 200
227.45 300
4330 Travel & Subsisten 257
4350 Printing & Publish 164 640 323.47 700
4360 Insurance 1067 2987 2969.72 3500
4370 Utilities 4260 6774 9637.82 6500
4380 Rents 120
4395 Merchandise 3999 3979 5839. 54 4500
4411 Current Use Charge 1500 1500 1500.00 1500
TOTAL SUPPLIES & SERVICES 18206 25553 31400
4511 Capcial Equipment 2557 162505 1119.00 3000
TOTAL CAPITAL EXPENDITURE 2557 162505 3000
TOTAL THIS DIVISION 52536 228241 82688.75 75475
c�
I
m ,
P O O O P �
� � 1
9
a w w w a o 00 o a
O OI vi O O O O 00 y O y h!
O y N W N
N
1
I I
I
I
Z
O
.N-. 00 NO N OOP O O 00 O vN
Y N O
W P MNM JNJ J J� ✓1 P � N W N
O I
U
W
6
3
W
H II O O 00 O a t
h
00 0 �
� P �M J J J J ✓1 �h P W N
} N N I
I
r I
0
O
a � I
0 0 0 00
? 00 I J o 0 0 o v 000 N
o o w P r of
E P M M I ✓1 vt O P � � W �W ti I
N ,
6
L
Z �
S ti 00 v O
I 1 � 00 � 00 O 00 v O a -+
.y 00 00 O 00 x 4
w M 0 1 O J O O h c O M W u N � cO n w •� 4 .i
O �
P MM J J a 'OM O P c1N6N N NW N
x ti
N {
E
E Ew W u H A a a >
O o a c w m O
u 0 m u c c 3 a
O O u
p q u C H a C a a P
O D U O
W W
9 �n 3 ✓ 9 y a O � .Ti u
O a c u N c Sa R 6 U OE
a o
.u.. 6 ✓� U d U U S W •-r U W c CJ .r. to U U 6 I
I• RECOMMENDATION
1. Conduct an 11 week season at the Shakopee Municipal Swimming Pool
the Summer of 1987 with fees and hours as recommended by staff:
June 6 - August 23
Open Swim Hours .. .. . 1:00-4:20 S 6:30-8:20 weekdays
. . . . . 1:00-7:00 weekends
Instruction. . . . .. . . . .Children $12/two weeks
Gate Admissions. .. .. .Children $1.00
Adults $1.25
Season Tickets:
Family $32.00
Single $17.00
Guest/Family $10.00
Guest/Indiv $ 4.00
Sr. Citizen Free
Age 1 6 Under Free
2. Water Slide Fees:
One day afternoon or evening Session Passes.. . .$3.00
Tickets (4 rides) . . .. .. . . .. . .. .. .. .. . . . . . . . . . . .$1.00
3. Grant free season tickets and swim instruction to residents that
qualify for the School District 6720 Free Lunch Program.
4. Wages shall be: Position(s) Beginning Experienced
Aides $3.10/hr. $3.50/hr.
Guards/Instructors 4.25/hr. 4.70/hr.
Cashier(s) 4.25/hr. 4.70/hr.
Managers 5.30/hr. 5.90/hr.
5. Group Pool Rental (1} hrs.) : $50.00 or $1.00/person; whichever is greater.
6. Group Pool S Slide Rental (1} hrs.) : $100.00 or $2.00/person; whichever is
greater.
7. Aggressive marketing shall take place wherever possible to encourage
maximum usage of the swimming pool complex.
Ilk
MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator
FROM: Barry Stock, Administrative Assistant
RE: Proposed Golf Course/Residential Development/P.U.D.
Discussion
DATE: February 26, 1987
Introduction•
Mr. Gary Laurent and Mr. Tom Haugen are considering the
development of a 200 acre site near O'Dowd Park west of the
Timber Trails Addition. (See attachment #1) The developers wish
to pursue a combination golf course/residential development on
the site in question under the Planned Unit Development (P.U.D. )
section of the Shakopee City Code.
On February 5, 1987 the Shakopee Planning Commission
reviewed the concept plan and provided input in regard to the
project design and restrictions imposed by our existing P.U.D.
ordinance. On March 5, 1987 the Planning Commission will be
considering several amendments to the P.U.D. section of the City
Code and the preliminary approval of the Laurent/Haugen P.U.D.
At this time, staff is requesting City Council to comment on
the Laurent/Haugen proposal and the restrictions imposed by our
P.U.D. ordinance. This will allow the developer to fine tune his
proposal prior to formal Council action on the project.
Background-
The purpose of the P.U.D. section of the zoning chapter is
to encourage innovation; variety and creativity in site planning
and architectural design; to maximize development compatibility;
to encourage the planning of entire ownerships of land as a unit;
to provide for greater efficiency in the use of land, public
streets and energy; to protect important natural and cultural
landscape features; to preserve more open space than would be
possible without P.U.D. and to provide quality living, working,
shopping and recreating environments for Shakopee' s residents and
visitors. Additionally, the intent of the P.U.D. section of the
code is to provide greater development flexibility by permitting
variances and the negotiation of development standards and such
other provisions as shall be mutually beneficial to the City and
t the applicants.
Because the Planning Commission and City Council have not
utilized this section of the code in the past, staff has
suggested to the developers that a presentation of their concept
plan be reviewed by the Planning Commission and City Council
prior to the formal application process. This would allow both
parties (the developer and the City) to familiarize themselves
with the P.U.D. regulations. Additionally, anycomments or
suggestions from the Planning Commission at the time of the -
presentation could be addressed by the developer prior to future
meetings. Finally, this approach would allow staff to point out
some of the limitations presently imposed by our P.U.D.
ordinance.
Developer: Gary Laurent and Tom Haugen
Location: See attachment #1
Zoning: R-1 - Rural Residential and S - Shoreland
Land Use: Vacant
Public Utilities: Not Available
Surrounding Land Uses: North - Rural Residential-Agriculture
East - Rural Residential-Vacant & Single
Family Residential
South - Shoreland-O'Dowd Park
West - Jackson Township-Single Family
Residential & Agriculture
Proposal: The applicant is considering a Planned Unit Development
consisting of an 18 hole privately owned and operated
golf course. The proposed P.U.D. includes single
family and multi-family residential. The proposal also
includes the placement of a golf course club house some
where on the site.
Considerations:
1. The developer is proposing approximately 83 lot for single
family dwelling units an additional four lots will be used
to accommodate four multi-family units ( 4-plexs) . This
mixture of single family and multi-family wuld account for a
total of ninety-nine dwelling units. Assuming that the site
is 200 acres, the average density for this development would
be approximately 2. 02 acres per dwelling unit. This
represents a 208 variance from the 2 1/2 lot size required
in the R-1 and Shoreland Zones. The actual lot sizes being
proposed will vary from . 5 to 1 acre.
2. The development being proposed is in an unsewered area.
3 . An environmental assessment worksheet will be completed by
the developer prior to final P.U.D. approval.
4 . The developer is proposing to provide a publicly dedicated
bituminous trail from Timber Trails to O'Dowd Lake Park and
open space in lieu of the park land dedication fee.
5. The developer proposes to complete the P.U.D. in phases over
a several year period. A phasing plan will be presented
prior to final P.U.D. approval.
6. A golf course would be allowable in an R-1 and Shoreland
Zoning District in conjunction with a P.U.D.
7. County Road access permits will be provided prior to final
P.U.D. approval.
8. The Club House parking plan meets the City Code
requirements.
9. A dedicated r-o-w along County Road 79 will be provided by
the developer for future trail improvements.
10. A justifiable sewer and water plan will be presented by the
developer prior to final P.U.D. approval. Actual location
of these services shall appear on the final P.U.D. design
map.
11. A street lighting plan will be presented by the developer
prior to final P.U.D. approval.
12. DNR approval of the proposed plan should be provided prior
to final P.U.D. approval.
13. All roads should have a 60 ft. dedicated r-o-w.
14. The plan currently contains a cul-de-sac which exceeds the
1000 ft. maximum by approximately 1400 ft.
15. Road grades will not exceed 5%.
16. A drainage plan will be presented by the developer prior to
final P.U.D. approval.
17. A golf course is a permitted conditional use in the R-1
Zoning District and a permitted use in the Shoreland Zoning
District.
Present P.U.D. Restrictions: Ordinance No. 206
1. Subdivision 2C:
Utilities - the project site shall be serviced by City water
and sewer services. Private water service maybe allowed
subject to City Council approval. No mention is made of
sewer services.
Issue: The proposed project cannot proceed without an
amendment to this section of the P.U.D. Ordinance.
2. Subdivision 3 :
Uses Permitted - the use of a P.U.D. conveys no right to the
use of land other than as permitted by the district within
which the P.U.D. is applied. Uses permitted shall be those
specified for each zoning district.
Issue: Multi-Family Residential is not a permitted or a
conditional use permit in either the R-1 or
Shoreland zoning districts. Therefore the R-1 and
Shoreland Districts would have to be amended
making multi family a conditional use in
connection with a P.U.D. in order for the project
to proceed as proposed or an amendment to the
P.U.D. ordinance allowing mixed uses would have to
be pursued by the City.
3. Subdivision 4:
Variance Restrictions - Zoning district standards may be
negotiated and variances from the district requirements may
be granted by the City as part of the P.U.D. process.
However, no variance shall be negotiated which will result
in less open space than is required by the district. This
includes yard requirements. Additionally, residential
densities shall not be increased by more than 10%.
Issue: Amendment to this section of the P.U.D. ordinance
would be necessary in order for the project to
proceed as proposed.
Action Requested:
Following the presentation of the concept plan staff is
certain that other planning and zoning issues will become
apparent. As mentioned earlier, staff is requesting City Council
to comment on Mr. Laurent' s and Mr. Haugen' s proposal and the
restrictions imposed by our existing P.U.D. ordinance.
:�.. ,;,. •�-- Attachment
Proposed
f�
r 1.
Site
,ryt K
Fk
F
zo
S— ° _-- ----- - --
p O —_
a
.i dry
y
MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator
FROM: Dennis R. Kraft, Community Development Director
RE: Waiver of Certain PUD Requirements
DATE: February 27, 1987
Introduction•
In February, 1987 Canterbury Downs received approval from
the City Council to construct three dormitory units to house
employees in the backstretch area of the racetrack facility.
This approval was granted by means of a Planned Unit Development
and the approval of the PUD was proceeded by the Planning
Commission holding a public hearing and recommending approval as
required by law.
After discussing the location of these dormitories with
various horse owners the Canterbury Management decided to change
the location for the dormitory units so as to provide for a
greater margin of safety for persons in the backstretch area.
The proposed new location of the dormitories would be within the
boundaries of the horse barn area of the backstretch facility.
Canterbury Downs then approached the City and requested approval
to shift the location of these dormitory buildings. As was
discussed at the City Council meeting in February, the intent is
to have these dormitories available for occupancy by April in the
beginning of the 1987 Racing Season.
Section 11.40, Subd. 7.B. of the Shakopee City Code (the
PUD Ordinance) states what the requirements are for the final
development plans under the PUD ordinance. This section
indicates that "the Administrator shall have the discretion to
waive project and area information and other such information as
may be deemed unappropriate for remodeling, building expansion
and similar small projects. " . In that the shift in the location
of these dormitories is a small project when viewed in terms of
operation the size of the racetrack and in that the construction
of these dormitories was approved by the city Council and
reviewed by the Planning Commission and in that the public has
had an opportunity to comment on this dormitory construction
project it is my interpretation of the zoning ordinance that the
City Administrator does have the authority to deem it
inappropriate to require the developer to repeat the entire
Planning Commission - public hearing - City Council review
process for this minor shift in the location of these three
dormitory buildings.
Therefore it is my recommendation to you that you inform the
members of the City Council of your intended action to approve
this final development plan minor amendment as requested by
Canterbury Downs and that if Council members disagree with this
interpretation that they inform you of this no later than March
3, 1987. If no dissenting comments are heard from Council
members I then recommend tnat Canterbury Downs be allowed to
proceed with the placement of the dormitory units adjacent to
buildings C-3, C-4 and D-3, D-4 and as shown on plans submitted
to the City and dated February 26, 1987.
9• i ,
fro..
i�n
2,
6D �- I peul e
- -- , soca+IDMS
i
YJ`YiL
..\{x
,
soca �-
-- . PL,4hJ-4: �"•.•'Seo -
k � j -
r
IId
TO: Mayor, Councilmembers
FROM: Tom Brownell, Chief of Police
RE: Patrol Sergeant Position
DATE: February 24, 1987
INTRODUCTION•
Patrol Sergeant Kenneth Hanel retired January 1987, reducing
the patrol division supervision to two sergeants.
BACKGROUND•
In 1979, Council authorized the department three patrol
sergeant positions to provide supervision for the patrol
division, an increase of one position. Three positions
provide supervision for approximately two thirds of the
scheduled patrol activity. Supervision is becoming an
increasingly important element as new officers are added to
the department with less experience then we have had in the
past.
RECOMMENDATION:
Authorize the department to fill the existing vacant patrol
sergeant position using the Civil Service promotional
procedures.
COUNCIL ACTION REDUEETED•
Authorize the department to fill the existing vacant patrol
sergeant position using the Civil Service promotional
procedures.
17
i
Ili
TO: Mayor, Councilmembers
FROM: Tom Brownell, Chief of Police
RE: Computer. Software Purchase
DATE: February 25, 1987
INTRODUCTION•
The Police Department computer system requires the purchase
of a Novell Advanced Netware system.
BACKGROUND:
The present PC Net system does not have adequate speed to
allow data entry without creating a backlog and time delay
when shifting files. The Novell Netware system was not
available at the time our system was installed. Cost
includes Novell Advanced Netware, installation, operator
training and service contract. Purchase has been approved by
the computer committee.
RECOMMENDATION:
Authorize the Police Department to purchase a Novell Advanced
Netware system at a cost of $4,410.00, using finance
department capitol equipment funding.
COUNCIL ACTIO REQUESTED:
Authorize the Police Department to purchase a Novell Advanced
Netware system at a cost of $4,410.00, using finance
department capitol equipment funding.
MEMO TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: John K. Anderson, City Administrator
RE: Community Development Director Probationary Period
DATE: February 27, 1967
Introduction
Dennis Kraft, Shakopee' s Community Development Director, has
completed a six month probationary period of employment with the
City.
Background
As with all City employees, Mr. Kraft received a three month
performance evaluation and a six month performance evaluation to
determine whether he had achieved acceptable standards of
performance. During his six month probationary period Mr. Kraft
also served as City Planner when Judi Simac moved to North
Carolina. I have therefore, had the opportunity to observe Mr.
Kraft in the role of Community Development Director and the role
of City Planner. I have also worked closely with him in
screening and hiring Judi's replacement, Doug Wise.
Alternatives
1. Successful completion of the probationary period.
2. Extension of the probationary period to ensure continued
improvement in areas critical to acceptable performance in
the position.
3 . Termination of employment.
Recommendation
I recommend alternative No. 1. I have already received some
positive comments from a major Shakopee developer regarding both
Dennis and Doug Wise. And, I believe that the Community
Development Department as now staffed will be a strong addition
to the City at a critical time in its development.
Action Requested '
Move to end the probationary period of Dennis Kraft as Community
Development Director.
JKA/jms
l/or66f.„n��TL
MEMO TO: Mayor and City Council /I L"("�
FROM: John K. Anderson, City Administrator
Judith S. Cox, City Clerk
RE: Receptionist/Typist Probationary Period
DATE: February 27, 1987
Introduction
Pennie Schlechter, Receptionist/Typist, has completed a six month
probationary period of employment with the City.
Alternatives
1. Successful completion of probationary period.
2. Extension of probationary period to insure continued improvement
in areas critical to acceptable performance in the position.
3. Termination of employment.
Recommendation
It is recommended that probation be extended for an additional
three months to insure continued improvement in minor areas
relating to successfully performing the responsibilities of
receptionist.
Requested Action
Move to extend the probationary period of Pennie Schlechter for
an additional three months.
JSC/jms
� j
TO: Sohn K. Anderson, City Administrator /�.Gt/
FROM: Gregg Voxland, Finance Director
RE: Malkerson's Use of City Property
DATE: February 26, 1987
Introduction
The City owns a parcel that Malkerson's is using as part of their new car
lot. Because of their use, the City is being taxed for that parcel.
Background
Last year, the Council directed that staff try to arrange a sale of the
parcel to Malkerson's. The parcel is in the south half of the block and has
r poor access, is surrounded by Malkerson property and was originally acquired
for roadway purposes. The City Attorney has been in contact with Malkerson's
but has not had much response for them. Finance did send a bill to Malkerson's
for the taxes payable last year after seeing that it was unlikely a sale would
transpire in 1986. That bill was paid.
Staff is proposing that a bill be sent to Malkerson's for taxes payable in
1987 ($1,870.52) plus storm drainage bills ($49.52/yr) plus $500 rent for that
parcel. This will recover the City's out of pocket costs for that parcel and
provide something for administrative expenses in dealing with the issue. It
may also provide some incentive for Malkerson's to purchase or pursue
negotiations to purchase the property.
Alternatives
1. Do nothing
2. Direct City Attorney to continue contacting Malkerson's to effect a sale
3. Bill Malkerson's for 1986/87 taxes, storm drainage bills and $500 rent
4. Bill Malkerson's some other amount
Recommendation
Staff recommends alternative no. 3 and 2.
Action Requested
Move to direct the City Attorney to continue contacting Malkerson Motors
to attempt to negotiate a sale of parcel 27-004161-0 and to bill Malkerson's
for the taxes payable in 1987 plus storm drainage bills for that parcel plus
$500.00 rent.
a m m m i s s m m m w
u 1 1
W I 1 1 I I
V
V m • • f
< m
6 W_
M1 m
m
M O
O d '. N NNN P bF P F
OP D o
P '. m 0m0 N IIIb 0
I w N D N
FP=P IIIwF M ♦ 0 M P
L O N e1000 0lo II o O m
h O O Pa
S P M MMP 000
p I �' P PPPf TMM N PM P P P P J
V OF O 0 0 o O
I
Ili
1 Q ID m0 li I i i
U til: co
N 0U Z2 W
p NJ� JO I W
w ii <n'sz z'zz ` oo
O ¢7 ¢O - WWm m ¢¢ J 7 O
V W
V I ^
¢ Y J 6
W
V _ U <6t6 < V V N U m
F
m `ym I IU- i:L m m ( WD
T 1 y 2zzzz V O V W W
O' W W W W W 000 O O 1 < S
V. S I 000.0 J.JJ J LL i i S 2
I I
I
m OHO d Y00 N.dOD 0000 Oe1 ff An F
e ew m: nOwa.e.. Pa Ptlk —mn 1=n nlm �� �
i ui e.e mm n-a.nr e�-e« mu oaem Inw rr •ia �
M1 6e I m M'YAh 'ff nnV I PP AM M
J I w
w ry r M1 ry
a \ 0 DDOD 10,
0 i 0 00 m
y N w 'wwww www w NN w w 'w w
6 N N '',NNNN dNN N NN N _ N N � •\l
W o o N000 OOo 0 00 0 o O O
O
O
O
2
U Y MMMI'1 FhP M1 w m
F W_ P b mNNa uad b ua u b b : n
b e a o a • O
V ♦ o ♦ o ♦ o00e • ea0 ♦ O • • • O ♦
u U V U U V V U fY.l V Y U
U W • • f f • i f _ j '
6 m • • • • i •
n W
L
r e.
m
I
n Y im m
00 _
f
I i
eII-
.
ileill i i �
ie I
F >
i I I
ml J r41i J 6 N W W. L i .• L:
w
h � I
W i i hu
y0 I - I
6 F Y
h
W m
MW
L
eel IHN nn o oe !ej FF
. n r mm rr on nn ^n 01111 wl
n_ne% ans mm LIn
W M1 M r F � F h h r ' M1I I M1
O m m O m e I m
P V N • N N '0 <:
W
e . • e e • e e e e e e • e e
•
M Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y
W I 1 a 1 11 11 ! V
6
6 W
L
F f
m
M1
' N hrF M1M1M1 �m
n '. mm m M1rrr+M1 I �m n
d nnnnnn I P
I I ed.dP _
n n '. n NN n m n NNNdNd d I'1
P f f♦ 1'1 P FfPPPP !f P'
I
I �
a. m
q � h
W: ti O ¢ p0 2 H O nmpJJD 6 Z'
Q I < p O
W O VU < _ p00000 m U
p 1 6 mp O' Z 000000 Wn
JJ U < 000000 . Z
W. V i0 I WW � : m JJJJJJ 9
>I 0 'J r. W mmmmmm . I J
p.0
j I
I
P fT PO NN !00 00 NN o N PP IT
M1: 0 PPI ImO !1'r Pl fMo
nln'P Mh ,. VIe�N.�_0' Ym
w i
W F h h Fh r h M1 M1rhr.rr iF M1'
o m mm mm O 0 O 0100
m00
Q N N N NN N'' N N gNNRNN N N'
N N N N d N d NNdNdN m d
0
T O
F Z
N M1r M1PM1M1N
W P PN nnnnnn P Q
= P N N tlNtlWWW N tl
I'1 P P 0
_ U • o • o • o • oo • O • O • 0 • Oe00Ae • N • O
< Y m N N N
Y Y Y Y
W I 1 I 1 I
W
6 W •
¢ L
F i
m O
I d ry f
N
I e n I I P
2 � rt nn n r n PtPOp _
O 1 O I o w 1 1 1 woo 1 0001 1 O O
o rt a`a n N n n n' wnrt a wwawa n a
� r rP r r r r r r rrP r ePeeP r r
-
6
V
O u W W F m < tl W dV V � III YIuu2 N. r
6 �J r. d 6 ¢'66 J JJJJ J
L h dR = LL b q F' OFF 6 6466@ LL d
W b dd ¢ p W q b' Fbb y dd6d6 O' d
f O JJ F -O 7 J O 000 J JJJDJ ¢ O
N
OOOOQ
WW U F ¢ ' WWWWW O
iF.r� � U W UVUOV J O
V yI ^^ = 6 V ««< J 6
F Y LL W W JJJJJ S d
V j w JJ O m O «<6t m Y
W z mm0wm m ¢
E. L
O m mm J -J F' X%% J LLLLLL4d
Z O LL O @ Y
0000CEO
0 J
Y_Y Y_ ! O 6_6'660 Z
J p.p 3 3 S: Wr
I ; �
I
ww OQ dab O PO O 000 eq O_00Re r
M OHO <O qlq PO rr rhhF 00 gw_ORm h
m @r@ OFF 00 I tlW, P a,w qN ROORr q0 nn Ph Fa Om @
I
r Y-r F r F r rr0r r Fh0F r
r r
mmm m mmmmm m m
� NN N N N I q N N NNN N NNNNN N N
N wN N N N N NNN w I wNNNa N a
F e ce a a o eee 01 � aaee No a. e
LL O o O O
T
F Z
V Y n m 1 - nrtn P NNNNN r
y W N NN N m mmm V
.0.000.0.1 1.
0
PS u .a tl .o tl u tl u b O
oo • o ♦ e ♦ o ♦ a o O oao O OOOOo 0 0
'i
i i N
I I n
O K
I 1 O
1 I I I I I I m
1 1 t i J J m
j j j I I I I I i m
:o
2
Y'aPO�IY mO m' mml 0
Itl J' YY-AO tl' mm 0
10 W-:Y\m.w
_C_CCCL >.
D __Sz
0: '<
r 000000 0: 'T
0.
. I : rrrrrr � z
c m
K
T m
mm3Ki 9 9
2Hm99m .Ai O y
SOT SKr m 'T
Tac W
y=W z m
cm
HC
1
I 1>
'o
C
I . 1 z0
a
I li I W
ow
3
m o
m s
m e
> m
m
i m
m
z
W m
0m0wwwwIMWo wl0OowmmmsmmmmmmmP
W F F W W W W FFNN F FF w F F F tF F FtF F F M `
N N W r Y V1 U1 �O y 0 O
N N N W Y w N N N N N N
my rnw Ol +f N O Y H Y r Y I . . . Y . . . . . Y N Y . . . . .
Yw OHO riz O
ro m rI rI oI lH
F O O 0 0000 cw O O O O OS OS 8800
8 00S O0 O0CSD Y0Sp0000 0000 0 Y VV
'0 '8 S
4 00 MmooS Y S SS
S S H
H H FVl ND
O 3 Y m P W
Y o 3 m r
H b L
'+] m o y y ,y y D\w rnw 0 00 y m m m O m m m m m m m 0 ro
C � < H � 0 . . y� W W . O HO O HO Y Y Y W r r r . . Y . . . r r . wN
m ro m m 6 - r Y Y Y Y r r r r Y r 11 r r Y r Y r N
`� m m o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O 00 0 0 0 0 00 O 000 O O
r' rOr m 0 0 0 0 0 0 O Y Y r Y Y Y r Y Y r Y HH Y Y Y r Y r n
0000 O 00 0 0 0 0 00 O 000 O O R N
.+ m
N
c*
Y Fin O O y N r w VI D\ D
OF O 3
NMY F N O O O
F C r Y Y r w 0 0 0i0 w N W c
c m y w w w w ' woo O MF m W O m F F Y O y O F
yyN W
FI F m 0, 08
, OO O NN OO FWW O m
m m m mOOO O ONN O
N D
O
n
O
c
J+1 e+ m
OVw Y r C
O N m 0 N H m m m m = r = b = r m ... ... •. m 2 0 m m S m N a N m
�Olm Fin r H N N N N O O C M N N N N C N N N N N ro
y
0=C T Y m m m m w ro w µ m ro d ro N z m N
FFII O�vr O VI y N � W N t+YJ N m r
F'I F 0\0 0 F Y
h N N N N m N W
w Y m < < < < ro W Q < D N H M D N n 7
X rf K m ? m Y. H O O n H N p
µ S S S 5 N H N O Y 3 O H
M � �
N
N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N NNN N N O
N N N N N N N NNNN N N N N N N N N N N NNN N N T.
D\ a\ 0 m D\ O` O\ to N vl N N vl to N vl vl vl N vl
0 0 0 0 0 0N w NN H Ovmi vii vmi F w o O b m y o` vl y
C
n
m ro 2 O ro 3 O
5 H O O S r H - cmi �' K µ 3 ti 3 3
F O m O N S W O
b Y W M r K O W m O W 3 '0Y
Y [�
i+ O O p W m
ml
M
N
r m O O 3 Y G 5 W O ?
O O > > Y m W N H W Y 7 W m
M r 09 'S p n z o N o m
w ro K
O M 3 N OF r m H
3 m pq N m
m
I
r R D
fm y N Y W N
SIII D\ N F O\ Y r W w Y w
N FO F
mI Y D\ y w w W W y O N m w O 0 N F �D O F
�yI N W m y y y y N O O O \0 t O 00 m
F1 F w F D\ D\ m 0 0 0 N m 0 0 D\
ray
N N o
r.
r oo m
m
o
o rr e
m
o
o r HN Y
N it
r i
a
Y Or 1'
b rr r N
N0 ly O 00 n
m m O O 00 � N
Z O H
N N a
C
3
OF Nw O
�IIN w a\ C
�Dlw vl Y �
mW SS
a
wwv 0
OV1W- N 0
OI�1 w y
m = ro ro
memo m w w a
b
K Y y
N y
� � C
< 6J
n �
� n
w 9
N
N N N F
0
00
r O O
N FF Z
O
M
n
s
' ro ro ro m a
o
on a
'f
C]
x
CF
O F �
bIw �
- 1h O
mm 0
1aa-1
TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator
FROM: Gregg Voxland, Finance Director
RE: League of Cities Investment Program - Resolution # 2697
DATE: February 26, 1987
Introduction
The League of Cities is implementing a pooled investment program for short
term investments. It appears advantageous for the City to at least try the
program.
Background
The League of Cities is implementing a pooled investment program similar
to the one in place for school districts in Minnesota. Final SEC approval is
�. expected this week and several Cities have already passed resolutions joining
the program. There is no commitment or out of pocket cost to the City to join
and we may withdraw or just not place any money in the program at any time,
depending on what rates it offers.
The Indenture of Trust referred to in the Resolution is on file and
attached to the original Resolution but due to size, was not copied for each
packet. It was prepared by the League and if any one desires a copy it can be
provided.
Alternatives
1. Join program
2. Do not join program
Recoamiendation
Alternative 1.
Action Reouested
Offer Resolution No. 2697.
RESOLUTION NO. 2697
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING ENTRY INTO A JOINT POWERS AGREEMENT IN
THE FORM OF A DECLARATION OF TRUST ESTABLISHING AN ENTITY KNOWN AS
"MINNESOTA MUNICIPAL MONEY MARKET FUND" AND AUTHORIZING PARTICIPATION
IN CERTAIN INVESTMENT PROGRAMS IN CONNECTION THEREWITH
I
WHEREAS, Minnesota Statutes Section 471.59 (the "Joint Powers Act") provides
among other things that governmental units, by agreement entered into through
action of their governing bodies, may jointly or cooperatively exercise any
power common to the contracting parties; and
WHEREAS, the Minnesota Municipal Money Market Fund was formed in January
1987 pursuant to the Joint Powers Act by the adoption of a joint powers
agreement in the form of a Declaration of Trust by a group of Minnesota
Municipalities acting as the Initial Participants thereof; and
WHEREAS, the Declaration of Trust has been presented to this council and
WHEREAS, the Declaration of Trust authorizes municipalities of the State of
Minnnesota to adopt and enter into the Declaration of Trust and become
Participants of the Fund. Municipality shall mean city, county, town, public
authority, public corporation, public commission, special district, and any
"instrumentality" (as that term is defined in the Joint Powers Act) of a
municipality and
WHEREAS, this council deems it to be advisable for this municipality to
adopt and enter into the Declaration of Trust and become a Participant of the
Fund for the purpose of the joint investment of this municipality's monies with
those of other municipalities so as to enhance the investment earnings to each,
and
WHEREAS, this council deems it to be advisable for this municipality to make
use from time to time, in the discretion of the officials of the municipality,
identified in Section 2 of the following Resolution, of the Fixed-Rate
Investment program available to Participants of the Fund.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED AS FOLLOWS:
i
Section 1. This municipality shall join with other municipalities (as such
term is defined in the Declaration of Trust) in accordance with the Joint
Powers Act by becoming a Participant of the Fund and adopting and entering into
the Declaration of Trust, which is adopted by reference herein with the same
effect as if it had been set out verbatim in this resolution, and a copy of the
Declaration of Trust shall be filed in the minutes of the meeting at which this
Resolution was adopted. The Mayor, City Administrator and City Clerk are
hereby authorized to take such actions and execute any and all such documents
as they may deem necessary and appropriate to effectuate the entry of this
municipality into the Declaration of Trust and the adoption thereof by this
municipality.
Section 2. This municipality is hereby authorized to invest its available
monies from time to time and to withdraw such monies from time to time in
accordance with the provision of the Declaration of Trust. The following
officers and officials of the municipality and their respective successors in
office each hereby are designated as "Authorized Officials" with full powers
and authority to effectuate the investment and withdrawal of monies of this
municipality from time to time in accordance with the Declaration of Trust and
Pursuant to the Fixed-Rate Investment Service available to Participants of the
Fund:
Gregg Voxland, Finance Director
Marilyn Remer, Sr. Accounting Clerk
John Anderson, City Administrator
The Clerk shall advise the Fund of any changes in Authorized Officials in
accordance with procedures established by the Fund.
Section 3. The Trustees of the Fund are hereby designated as having official
custody of this municipality's monies which are invested in accordance with the
Declaration of Trust.
Section 4. Authorization is hereby given for members of the Board of
Directors of the League of Minnesota Cities to serve as Trustees of the Fund
Pursuant to the provisions of the Declaration of Trust.
Section 5. State banks, national banks, and thrift institutions located
either within or without the State of Minnesota which qualify as depositories
under Minnesota law and are included on a list approved and maintained for such
purpose by the Investment Advisor of the Fund are hereby designated as
depositories of this municipality pursuant to Minnesota Statutes Section
118.005 and monies of this municipality may be deposited therein, from time to
time in the discretion of the Authorized Officials, pursuant to the Fixed-Rate
Investment Service available to Participants of the Fund.
Adopted in session of the City Council of the City of Shakopee,
Minnesota, held this day of 1987.
Mayor of the City of Shakopee
ATTEST:
City Clerk
Approved as to form this day
Of 1987.
City Attorney
/a b/G
MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator
FROM: Ken Ashfeld, City Engineer;"
RE: Shakopee By-Pass layout Approval Resolutions No. 2695 and No. 2696
DATE: February 27, 1987
INTRODUCTION:
Attached is Resolutions No. 2695 and No. 2696 which, if adopted, would provide
layout approval for the Shakopee By-Pass.
BACKGROUND:
Preliminary layouts were approved by the City in 1978 as per Bill Crawford's
February 6, 1987 letter (attached). Mn/DOT is requesting City approval of the
staged layout plans such that the project can move forward to design phase to
accomodate a November, 1988 bid letting of the first phase.
The By-Pass project has four major phases with the following tentative schedule:
PROJECT PHASE ESTIMATED COST LETTING DATE
1. T.H. 101, CNW Railroad Track $1,900,000 November., 1986
and CR-89 Bridges
2. CR-15, CR-77, CR-79, CR-17, $7,000,000 November, 1989
CR-16 and CR-83 Bridges
(6 bridges) Roadway (2 lanes)
Between T.H. 101 and CR-83
3. T.H. 169 Bridges (3 bridges) $11,000,000 November, 1990
and Roadway (2 lanes) Between
CR-83 and T.H. 169
4. Additional two lanes between $10,000,000 undetermined
T.H. 101 and T.H. 169
The layouts that the City is being requested to approve include the interchange
revisions at CR-83 as a result of the development in this area. The revisions
provide for added turn lanes from CR-83 to the ramps and medians to channelize
traffic to Secretariate Drive, 12th Avenue and Canterbury Downs gate.
The layouts consist of very large drawings which are non-reproducible. The layouts
are available in my office for Council review. I also plan to be available at
6:30 p.m., March 3, 1987 if Council wishes to review the drawings prior to the meeting.
RECOtM1ENDATION:
Adopt Resolutions No. 2695 and No. 2696.
REQUESTED ACTION:
1. Offer Resolution No. 2695 for Layout Approval of T.H. 101 By-Pass from
3600 Feet East of County Road 83 to the East Corporate Limits of Shakopee;
and move for its adoption.
2. Offer Resolution No. 2696 For Layout Approval of T.H. 101 By-Pass From
1200 Feet West of County Road 15 to 3600 Feet East of County Road 83;
and move for its adoption.
KA/ps
Attachments
Minnesota
ii Department of Transportation
Distnct 5
"t2055 No. Lilac Drive
rOF!/ Golden Valley, Minnesota 55422
February 6, 1987 !st_ ;4537,61
Mr. Ren Ashfeld, P.E.
City Engineer
City of Shakopee
129 East First Avenue
Shakopee, Minnesota 55379-1376
Re: S.P. 7005-42 (T.R. 101)
Shakopee By—Pass
Layout 4B
From CSAR 15 to T.R. 13
Dear Ren:
Please find enclosed layout plans depicting the stage construction on the
Shakopee By—Pass. The layout plans have also been updated to reflect the
developments in the By—Pass — County Road 63 area.
The city of Shakopee previously approved the Shakopee By—Pass layout plans in
December of 1978. Those plan approvals formed the basis for the official map
adoption and implementation in 1980.
In order to move forward on the By—Pass construction commencing in November of
1988 with the first contract letting, city approval of the staged layout plans
is requested.
If you have any questions concerning the layout plans, contact Mr. Carl
Roffstedt at 593-8540. Mr. Tim Johnson is our district design engineer on the
project and any questions relating to detail design should be directed to him
at 593-8503.
Sincere?
� u�
W. Craw o P.E.
District Engineer
Enclosures: Layout 4B
Resolutions
An Equal Opportunity Employer
q0t ®
RESOLUTION No. 2695 /r V '
LAYOUT APPROVAL OF T.H. 101 BY—PASS FROM 3600 FEET
EAST OF COUNTY ROAD 83 TO THE EAST CORPORATE LIMITS OF SHAKOPEE
At a meeting of the City Council of the City of Shakopee,
held on the day of , 1987, the following Resolution was offered
by
seconded by
to wit:
WHEREAS the Commissioner of the Department of Transportation has
prepared a preliminary layout for the improvement of a part of Trunk Highway
Number 187 renumbered as Trunk Highway No. 101 within the corporate limits of
the City of Shakopee, from 3600 feet east of County Road 83 to E. Corp. limits;
and seeks the approval thereof, and
WHEREAS said preliminary layouts are on file in the Office of the
Department of Transportation, Saint Paul, Minnesota, being marked, labeled, and
identified as Layout No. 4B S.P. 7005-42 (101=187) from 3600 feet east of County
Road 83 to T.H. 13.
NOa, THEN, BE IT RESOLVED that said preliminary layouts for the improvement
of said Trunk Highway with the corporate limits be and hereby are approved.
Upon the call of the roll the following Council Members voted in favor of
the Resolution
The following Council members voted against its adoption:
whereupon the Mayor and/or the presiding officer declared the Resolution adopted.
Dated , 1987
Mayor
Attest
City Clerk
STATE OF MINNESOTA ) as. -
COUNTY OF SCOTT )
City Attorney
CITY OF SHAKOPEE )
I do hereby certify that at said meeting (of which due and legal notice
r;. , r.....,,.41 .,c on the dao 0`
RESOLUTION No. 2696 ,
LAYOUT APPROVAL OF T.H. 101 BY-PASS FROM 1200 FEET
WEST OF COUNTY 15 TO 3600 FEET EAST OF COUNTY ROAD 83
t o mee[tng o t e tty ounct o [ e tty o a ogee,
held on the day of 1987, the following Resolution was offered
by
seconded by
to wit:
WHEREAS the Commissioner of the Department of Transportation has
prepared a preliminary layout for the improvement of a part of Trunk Highway
Number 187 renumbered as Trunk Highway No. 101 within the corporate limits of
the City of Shakopee, from 1200 feet west of CSAR 15 to 3600 feet east of County
Road 83; and seeks the approval thereof, and
WHEREAS said preliminary layouts are on file in the Office of the
Department of Transportation, Saint Paul, Minnesota, being marked, labeled, and
identified as Layout No. 4B S.P. 700542 (101=187) from 1200 feet west of CSAH
15 to 3600 feet east of County Road 83.
N67, THEN, BE IT RESOLVED that said preliminary layouts for the improvement
of said Trunk Highway with the corporate limits be and hereby are approved.
Upon the call of the roll the following Council Members voted in favor of
the Resolution
The following Council members voted against its adoption:
whereupon the Mayor and/or the presiding officer declared the Resolution adopted.
Dated 1987
Mayor
Attest
City Clerk
STATE OF MINNESOTA ) as.
COUNTY OF SCOTT )
City Attorney
CITY OF SHAKOPEE )
I do hereby certify that at said meeting (of which due and legal notice
MEMO TO: . John K. Anderson, City Administrator
FROM: Judith S. Cox, City Clerk
RE: Horse Drawn Carriages
DATE: February 26, 1987
Introduction
On February 3, 1987, Council directed staff to prepare an
ordinance regulating horse drawn carriages on right-of-way.
Background
The City has been approached by an individual who is exploring
the possibility of providing horse drawn carriages to and from
the motels/hotels to Murphy' s Landing, Valleyfair and the
Racetrack. in all cases it would be necessary to travel busy
roadways or roadways without shoulders, with one exception. It
may be possible to get from Canterbury Inn to the Racetrack using
private property mostly owned by the same parties.
It has been some time since I have spoken with the party
inquiring about horse drawn carriages. I have been unable to
reach him to discuss his recent plans and explain the proposed
ordinance. i do believe, however, that horse drawn vehicles
should not be permitted on the busy streets in Shakopee and
recommend adoption of an ordinance prohibiting this activity.
I also asked the Police Chief if he had any comments or
recommendations on regulating horse drawn carriages. He too is
of the opinion that horse drawn carriages are not appropriate on
large volume roadways.
At the Council meeting on February 3rd, Council also expressed
concern/reservations of horse drawn carriages within the City of
Shakopee. This kind of activity would not be compatible with the
traffic in Shakopee.
The City Attorney has prepared the attached ordinance which
prohibits any vehicle (engaged commercially) from carrying or
transporting passsengers drawn by any animal on any street north
of 10th Avenue.
Alternatives
1. Prohibit horse drawn vehicles on right-of-way north of 10th
Avenue.
2. Permit horse drawn vehicles on right-of-way routes approved
by Council by resolution for each applicant.
3. Permit horse drawn vehicles on right-of-way routes approved
by the Police Department for each applicant.
4. Prohibit horse drawn vehicles on all right-of-way.
Recommendation
Alternative No. 1, preclude horse drawn vehicles on public right-
of-way. (If Council prefers alternative 2 or 3 , the ordinance
will also have to be amended to address: insurance, vehicle
operation, maintenance of animals, sanitation and hours of
operation. )
Recommended Action
Offer Ordinance No. 214, An Ordinance of the City of Shakopee,
Minnesota, Amending Shakopee City Code Chapter 8 entitled
"Traffic Regulations" by Adding a New Sec. 8.07 to the City Code
Restricting the Use of Public Streets and Thoroughfares and by
Adopting by Reference Shakopee City Code chapter I and Section
8. 99, which among other things, contain penalty provisions, and
move its adoption.
JSC/jms
ORDINANCE NO. 214
Fourth Series
An Ordinance of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota, Amending Shakopee City
Code Chapter 8 entitled "Traffic Regulations" by Adding a New Sec 8.07
to the City Code Restricting the Use of Public Streets and Thoroughfares
and by Adopting by Reference Shakopee City Code Chapter 1 and Section
8.99, which among other things, contain penalty provisions
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA, ORDAINS:
SECTION I: Statement of -Policy
Animal drawn vehicles are inappropriate and dangerous on many streets of the
City because of the ever increasing volume of traffic within many parts of the City
and animal drawn vehicles could help constitute a traffic hazard.
SECTION II: Operation of certain vehicles limited by a new Section 8.07 of Shakopee
City Code.
No vehicle engaged commercially in carrying or transporting passengers drawn
by any type of animal or animals may travel on any street or public thoroughfare in
the City of Shakopee between and including., Tenth Avenue extending from the East to
the West Boundaries of the City of Shakopee and the Minnesota River.
SECTION III: Adopted byReference
The general provisions and definitions applicable to the entire City Code
including penalty provisions of Chapter 1 and Section 8.99 entitled "Violation a
Misdemeanor or Petty Misdemeanor" are hereby adopted in their entirety by reference
as though repeated verbatim herein.
SECTION IV: When in force and effect
After the adoption and attestion of this Ordinance, it shall be published in the
official newspaper of the bity of Shakopee and shall be in full force and effect on and
after the date following such publication.
Passed in session of the City Council of the City of Shakopee,
Minnesota, held this day of - - , 1987.
ATTEST:
Mayor of the City of Shakopee
City Clerk
Prepared and approved as to form this 25th day of February, 1987.
TO: Judy S. Cox
FROM: Tom Brownell, Chief of Police
RE: Horse Drawn Carriages
DATE: February 11, 1967
In response to your request for my opinion regarding the
operation of horse drawn carriages on public right-of-way, I
have the following concerns.
The area east of County Road 17 does not have appropriate
roadways for this type of activity. For the most part
carriages would have to travel on the roadway due to the lack
of adequate shoulders. The speed limits on the roadways ate
40 - 50 MPH. It would not be appropriate to allow carriages
to operate on large volume roadways as they would further
impede traffic.
I have no objection to carriages operating between Canterbury
Inn and Canterbury Downs.
/ 3a
association of
metropolitan
municipalities
TO: AMM Members
FROM: Bob Thistle, President
Walt Fehst, Chairman - Revenue Committee
SUBJECT: Fiscal Disparities Recommendations
1 . Background. Based on membership action at the November 6, 1986
meeting to refer Fiscal Disparity (F.D. ) Policy back to the Revenue
Committee, a small technical committee was formed by President
Thistle and Chairman Fehst to form a recommendation for Revenue
Committee action.
2. Committee. The committee, chaired by Neil Peterson, Bloomington,
included Bob Bocwinski , Columbia Heights; Charles Darth, Brooklyn
Park; Barry Johnson, Minnetonka; Gene Van Overbeke, Eagan; and Dick
Asleson, Apple Valley. The committee met three times and was
monitored by John Anderson, Shakopee; Diane Lynch, St. Paul; Larry
Lee, Bloomington; Bill Barnhart Minneapolis, and Jeff Van Wychen,
Minneapolis who also provided computer runs.
3. Recommendation. The sub committee made recommendations to the
Revenue Committee which met and after some modification has
recommended the attached policy that has been changed as follows:
a. The Committee reached an implied agreement that the program was
_ intended to narrow the disparity in taxable base rather than rates
which imply mill rate which has variable meanings based on location
and/or local options. Therefore the word BASE replaces RATE in
the bold type policy.
b. The Committee unanimously agreed to eliminate G-5 central
administration based on the fact that Anoka County indicated a desire
to continue administration and there is not evidence that a -change is
needed.
c. Specific recommendation for F.D. factors were to modify the
policy on TIF contribution and contribution rate. The contribution
rate to be reduced by 2% per year for 5 years to 30%. Existing pre
1979 TIF value to be held harmless until the existing bonds are paid
with only new value created through issuance of new debt to be
subject to the F.D. contribution.
183 university avenue east,st. paul, minnesota 55101 (612) 227-5600
I-G FISCAL DISPARITIES �Cv
G-1 TAX BASE SHARING PROGRAM
The basic premise for the need for a tax base sharing or tax base
redistribution system in this Metropolitan Area , is that much
commercial and industrial (C/I) development occurs based on location
and/or availability of land or particular services . If the seven
county Metropolitan Area were one political and economic unit, such as
the Houston or Omaha areas, the growth of C/I development in any part
would benefit the whole equally and tax base sharing would be
unnecessary. However, in this area with 139 cities plus many townships
and school districts that is not the case. Thus, there are many cities
that because they are fully developed with no room for expansion, or
they are located away from the center of activity without appropriate
services, or have space but are inconvenient from major transportation
facilities cannot attract C/I development . Whereas, others, more
favorably located or serviced cannot keep C/I development away. This
creates a situation, in general, where the tax base value per area,
per household, or per capita is higher, and the taxing ability of the
governmental unit greater, allowing a lower tax rate or collection of
more dollars to provide service. This, also, creates a situation where
two identical C/I facilities could have a large disparity in their
property tax rates.
THE AMM SUPPORTS A PROGRAM OR PROGRAMS WHICH CONSTRAIN TAX BASE
DISPARITIES IN THE METROPOLITAN REGION WITHIN A REASONABLE RANGE
WITHOUT STIFLING LOCAL INITIATIVES OR UNIQUE COMMUNITY NEEDS.
G-2 OPPOSE DRASTIC CHANGE
To compensate for these disparities, the 1971 legislature passed the
Fiscal Disparities Act, with a rather complicated formula, whereby 40%
of all C/I development and inflation growth from 1971 on is contributed
to a Metropolitan Pot and redistributed based on population and fiscal
capacity. After 15 years of operation, the magnitude of distribution
values both in terms of net value decrease and net value increase is
significant for many cities. If fiscal disparities were repealed in
total with no replacement or adjustments, property taxes in many cities
would increase very significantly just as they would decrease in
others.
BECAUSE THE MAGNITUDE OF FISCAL DISPARITY DISTRIBUTION IN TERMS OF
NET VALUE INCREASE AND DECREASE TO MANY CITIES IS SIGNIFICANT, THE
AMM SUGGESTS THAT NO CHANGES BE MADE THAT WOULD CAUSE DRASTIC SINGLE
YEAR SHIFTS IN PROPERTY TAXES. -
G-3 FORMULA MODIFICATIONS
The Association of Metropolitan Municipalities has spent two years of
committee work studying the fiscal disparities formula and the affects
of various modificications to that formula. There are basically two
major policy issues that need to be dealt with in a package to
accommodate the majority of cities. The first is a fairness or equity
question that deals with issues such as the 1971 Base value exemption,
equalization of the contribution, minimum distribution, etc . The
-1-
second policy issue is the rate of contribution. The AMM feels that
40% is too great especially if the base against which it is applied is
expended. Each variable factor has a major impact on a certain subset
of cities and thus changes must be done carefully.
THE AMM MEMBERSHIP SUPPORTS MODIFICATION OF THE FISCAL DISPARITIES
FORMULA THROUGH INCLUSION OF SEVERAL FACTORS AS A WHOLE. ANY CHANGES
OTHER THAN THOSE REFERENCED IN AMM GENERAL FISCAL DISPARITIES POLICIES
OR SPECIFIED HEREIN OR ANY DELETION OR SIGNIFICANT MODIFICATION OF A
SPECIFIC FACTOR LISTED HEREIN WILL RESULT IN THE AMM OPPOSING ANY
FISCAL DISPARTIY LEGISLATION UNLESS OTHERWISE AUTHORIZED BY THE BOARD
OF DIRECTORS.
FORMULA FACTORS:
-PHASE IN 1971 BASE VALUE AT 5% PER YEAR FOR 20 YEARS FOR CONTRIBUTION
PURPOSES. THE BASE VALUE FOR SOUTH ST. PAUL SHOULD BE THE CURRENT
VALUE.
-EXEMPT ALL VACANT LAND FROM CONTRIBUTION.
-CONTRIBUTION VALUES SHOULD BE EQUALIZED TO 853 BY INCREASING THE
PREVIOUS YEARS RATIO BY UP TO 3% OR THE CURRENT RATIO WHICHEVER IS
GREATER.
-THE SALES RATIO FACTOR SHOULD BE BASED ON A SAMPLE WHICH IS
STATISTICALLY SOUND TO REFLECT ACCURATELY THE REALISTIC LEVEL OF
ASSESSMENT. THIS MAY INCLUDE USING A COUNTY WIDE AVERAGE IF AN
APPROPRIATE NUMBER OF SALES HAS NOT OCCURRED LOCALLY. USE OF THE
MEDIAN RATHER THAN AGGREGATRE RATIO SHOULD BE ADOPTED SINCE THIS
MEASURE IS GENERALLY MORE REFLECTIVE OF LOCAL ASSESSING PRACTICES AND
IS LESS SUBJECT TO WIDE VARIATIONS OF SALES.
-REDUCE THE CONTRIBUTION RATE BY 2% PER YEAR FOR 5 YEARS UNTIL 30% HAS
BEEN REACHED. ALL CONTRIBUTIONS THEREAFTER WILL BE AT THE RATE OF 30%.
-THE FISCAL CAPACITY FACTOR SHOULD BE MODIFIED TO INCLUDE
MANUFACTURED HOUSING AND UTILITY VALUE.
-THE POPULATION AND TIMES TWO MULTIPLIER SHOULD BE REMOVED FROM THE
DISTRIBUTION FORMULA AS MINIMUM DISTRIBUTION FACTORS.
-THE TWO DIFFERENT POPULATION YEARS USED TO CALCULATE THE PER CAPITA
MARKET VALUE AND DISTRIBUTION SHOULD REMAIN AS THEY ARE CURRENTLY
WITHIN THE FORMULA.
-EXISTING VALUE IN PRE 1979 TIF DISTRICTS SHOULD REMAIN EXEMPT FROM
FISCAL DISPARITY CONTRIBUTION UNTIL EXISTING DEBT HAS BEEN RETIRED.
NEW VALUE CREATED WITHIN THESE DISTRICTS IN CONJUNCTION WITH NEW DEBT
ISSUED SHALL BE SUBJECT TO FISCAL DISPARITIES CONTRIBUTION.
G-4 TOTAL DISTRIBUTION
There has been some suggestions made to utilize the fiscal disparity
formula as a mechanism to create a separate transportation or
development fund by only distributing 90% of the tax dollars raised .
This would be a hidden property tax.
THE AMM STRONGLY OPPOSES USE OF FISCAL DISPARITIES TO CREATE A
METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTAITON, HIGHWAY, OR DEVELOPMENT FUND.
4 -ice o t�' I
Pq &/
MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator
FROM: Barry A. Stock, Administrative Assistant
RE: TenEyck Property Update - Informational
DATE: March 3, 1987
Introduction•
A court hearing on the TenEyck property has been scheduled
for March 5, 1987. The hearing is in regard to the TenEyck' s
violation of City Ordinance #11.60, Subd. 2. Refuse.
Background:
Today staff personally inspected the TenEyck property to
determine if it would be appropriate for the City to proceed with
the court hearing on March 5, 1987 as planned. I did contact
Susan Estill from Rod Krass ' s office to ascertain whether or not
the court charges could be dropped if the TenEyck' s complied with
the ordinance. Ms. Estill stated that she had been in contact
with the TenEyck' s Attorney (Gehl Tucker) earlier in the day and
that he had personally informed the TenEyck's that they had until
March 4th to clean up the property or be faced with the
subsequent court hearing. Ms. Estill and I concur that if the
TenEyck' s clean up their property prior to March 5, 1987 the
court proceedings will be dismissed. If the TenEyck's refuse to
clean up their property, staff believes that we have no choice
except to pursue action through the courts.