Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout04/21/1987 MEMO TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: John K. Anderson, City Administrator RE: Non-Agenda Informational Items DATE: April 15, 1987 1. Valleyfair has made their annual payment for additional police services in the amount of $10,200. 00. 2. Application has been made by St. Mary's Church for a gambling license for the church festival August 23, 1987. They meet the requirements of the City Code. 3. Application has been made by Shakopee Area Catholic Schools for their quarterly raffle license. They meet the requirements of the City Code. 4. Attached is a memorandum from Dennis Kraft responding to Council' s question regarding the legal impact of preliminary approval of a multi-family housing bond resolution. 5. Attached is a letter from Judy Cox to the Chicago and North- western Transportation Company regarding railroad access to Citywide Insulation Inc. 6. Attached is a letter from Bruce Malkerson and Jeff Siegel regarding an update on the proposed Starwood Music Facility. Please note that the Planning Commission has received a similar information item. 7. Enclosed is the annual Financial Report for the Shakopee Public Utilities Commission for the year ending December 31, 1986 and 1985. S. Attached is the monthly building activity report for the month ending March 31, 1987. 9. Attached are the minutes of the April 2, 1987 meeting of the Shakopee Coalition. 10. Attached are the minutes of the April 2, 1987 meeting of the City Hall Building Committee. 11. Attached are the minutes of the March 9, 1987 meeting of the Shakopee Public Utilities Commission. 12. Attached is a memo from Doug Wise with an enclosure from Allen Frechette, Scott County Environmental Health Manager, regarding the Shakopee Golf Course - Preliminary PUD application. _ 13. Attached is the Revenue and Expenditure Report as of March 31, 1987. 14. Attached is the Program Cost by Department as of April 7, 1987. 15. Attached is the bill summary from Krass & Monroe as of January 28, 1987. JKA/jms MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator FROM: Dennis R. Kraft, Community Development Director nom' RE: Legal Impact of Preliminary Multi-Family Housing Bond Resolution DATE: April 10, 1987 At the April 7, 1987 City Council meeting the question was raised relative to whether the approval of the preliminary bond resolution for multi-family housing bonds for the Wiley-Arkell Project would irrevocably committ the City to making all of the subsequent approvals which would ultimately lead to the issue of the housing revenue bonds. At the Council meeting I indicated that it was my opinion that the City had additional opportunities down the road to stop the process if they choose to do so. I checked with our bond counsel on this question and they affirmed my position, i.e. the City Council can, at it' s discretion, take steps not to issue the bonds in the future if they choose to do so. If there are further questions on this please let me know. CITY OF SHAKOPEE INCORPORATED 1870 129 EAST FIRST AVENUE, SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA 55379-1376 (612) 4453650 April 8, 1987 Mr. J. E. Terbell Chicago and Northwestern Transportation Company 275 East 4th Street St. Paul, MN 55101 Re: Crossing Inventory No. CN185-339D US DOT AAR Shakopee, Minnesota Dear Mr. Terbell: It is my understanding that the Transportation Company is proposing to close the above crossing or require Citywide Insula- tion Inc. to enter into a lease agreement to keep it open. I have been contacted by Karen Luedlo£f of Citywide Insulation Inc. and she has explained that if the roadway connecting to the cross- ing is public right-of-way, that you would keep the crossing open without requiring a lease agreement. I am enclosing a copy of the plat of Husman Addition showing the dedication of Third Street to the public. I trust that this will satisfy your requirement and that the crossing can remain open without encumbering owners of private property. It is crucial that Citywide Insulation Inc. continue to have access across the Chicago and Northwestern Transportation Company railroad crossing, as described above. I ask that you continue to maintain the crossing without requiring a lease agreement from other parties. Your help in this matter is greatly appreciated. IISincerely yours, JUQ1th St Cox City Clerk JSC/jms cc: Mr. Vanderleest, Engineering Karen Luedloff The Heart of Progress Valley THE Or,V SCOTTLAND COMPANIES April 6, 1987 Mayor Eldon Reinke, Members of the City Council, Chairwoman Jane Van Maldeghem and Members of the Planning Commission City of Shakopee 129 E. First Avenue Shakopee, MN 55379 Dear Mayor Reinke, Members of the City Council, Chairwoman Van Maldeghem and Members of the Planning Commission: As you know, we have made numerous presentations in the last four months to public officials, government agencies, property owners in Canterbury Park and in the area in order to obtain comments and suggestions before we proceeded with the formal application to the City and the Envornmental Assessment Worksheet. Based upon that input we have decided to consider as an alternative site, a site 1,000 feet to the west and further to the north. Enclosed please find the new site location map and site plan for the Music Center. By moving to this location, the project will be a conditional use (86 acres) rather than a permitted use (150 acres) as originally proposed. This will allow us to further work with the City to assure that reasonable guidelines are created to accommodate the public interest during the course of this development and operation. The site shift also moves us further from Dean's Lake and the noise generated by the Bypass, while retaining the advantages Canterbury Park offers with its industrial and recreational use surroundings. Traffic access is improved and the site gains additional aesthetic benefits from the even denser woods that will surround the back of the pavilion and the facility. We are developing an updated timeline and project review to bring to the City Council and the Planning Commission in the next two to three weeks. P.O. Box 5O9 1244 Canterbury Road Shakopee, Minnesota 55379 [612] 445-3242 City of Shakopee April 6, 1987 Page 2 We hope to obtain Conditional Use Permit approval, Indirect Source Permit approval and complete the Environmental Assessment Worksheet by August 1, 1987 or sooner, so that construction can be started by September 1, 1987 or sooner and completed by May 1, 1988 for opening in June, 1988. If you have any questions about this proposed site adjustment, please feel free to contact us at your earliest convenience. Sincerely, THE SCOTTLAND COMPANIES Bruce D. Malkerson Executive Vice President ege�� Project Manager STARWOOD MUSIC CENTER JS:ap Enclosure c.c. John Anderson Dennis Kraft Ken Ashfeld Doug Wise C MVN 6 j g SII /I) 3 E� `1 1 t $ E ! a. eO I E 1 Page 5 \ § } ! zz( 77 § ) / \ � .UG _. _VA \ . � . C 77 0 � . a © OD . � . �m� e^ ® \ P so00� if ' 1 1 ~ _ a § ! ( § e � � . , Page g CITY OF SHAKOPEE BUILDING ACTIVITY REPORT PERMITS ISSUED March, 1987 Yr. to Date Previous Year Number Number Valuation Number Valuation Mo. Ytd. Single Fam-Sewered 2 4 304,300 4 7 562, 674 Single Fam-Septic - - - 1 1 145,500 Multiple Dwellings 3 7 645,500 1 2 2,564, 000 (# Units) (YTD Units) (3) (16) - (92) (94) - Dwelling Additions 9 10 75,357 2 _2 18, 500 Other 3 4 21, 600 - - - Comm New Bldgs 1 2 546, 000 - 2 700,000 Comm Bldg. Addns 2 2 145, 000 3 3 887,267 Industrial-Sewered - - - - - - Ind-Sewered Addns - - - - - - Industrial-Septic - - - - - - Ind-Septic Addns - - - - - - Accessory/Garages 5 6 41,468 1 3 20,200 Signs & Fences 4 9 10,845 5 11 25,390 Fireplaces/Wood Stove 1 4 8,400 - 1 1,500 Grading/Foundation - - - 5 5 316,000 Remodeling (Res) 4 8 67, 340 4 5 19,700 Remodeling (Inst) - - - - - - Remodeling (Comm/Ind) 4 11 103, 850 3 10 2,699, 880 TOTAL TAXABLE 38 67 1, 969, 660 24 53 7,960,584 TOTAL INSTITUTIONAL - - - - - - GRAND TOTAL 38 67 1, 969,660 24 53 7, 960,584 No. Ytd. No. Ytd. Variances 3 4 - 2 Conditional Use 1 6 3 6 Rezoning - - - - Moving - - - 1 Electric 19 31 36 53 Plbg & Htg 12 43 27 56 Razing Permits Residential - - - - Commercial - - - Total dwelling units in City after completion of all construction permitted to date. . . . . . . 4,015 Cora Hullander Bldg. Dept. Secretary i CITY OF SHAKOPEE BUILDING PERMITS ISSUED IN MARCH, 1987 7362 Valley Fair 1 Valley Fair Dr. Addn $ 75, 000 7363 Bruers Const. 1371 W. 6th Addn 12, 500 7364 Dennis Clausen 314 S. Scott Alt. 10, 000 7365 Suburban Lighting 1107 E. 1st Ave. Sign 1, 800 7366 James Thielen 842 Minnesota Garage Demo. 100 7367 James Thielen 842 Minnesota Addn. 20, 000 7368 Cy Carlson 1054 Minnesota St. Addn. 6, 300 7369 Hoyt .Const. 1054 Merritt St. Alt. 13,000 7370 Jasper Homes 1257 Marschall Rd. Alt. 5,000 7371 Phoenix Const. 1107 MN Valley Mall Alt. 4,200 7372 Betaseed 1788 Marschall Rd. Stg. Bldg. 16, 973 7373 Joseph Link 1969 Davis Court House 74, 800 7374 Ries Bldrs. 1928 E. h opee Ave. Addn. 12, 500 7375 Virgil VanHeel 1109 Quincy Stg. Bldg. 695 7376 Pat O'Neill 538 W. 5th Apt. Addn. 7, 000 7377 J.J. Koskovich 3812 E. 4th Ave. Alt. 1, 500 7378 Glen Schmitt 1729 Presidential Lane Alt. 1, 500 7379 Glen Stier 627 VanBuren Stg. Bldg. 8, 500 7380 Gerald Popp 5055 Eagle Creek Blvd Fence 500 7381 Richard Sames 952 S. Clay Addn. 7, 500 7382 Kraus Anderson Racetrack Dorms. 346, 000 7383 John Engel 671 Menke Ave. Addn 4, 500 7384 John Puree 971 Main Alt. 340 7385 Patio Town 1718 W. 13th Addn. 6,800 7386 Gerald DeFrance 1064 Legion Addn. 700 7387 Pacific Pools 914 Dakota Pool 10, 000 7388 Donald Kollasch 1045 VanBuren Addn 590 7389 MN Petroleum 234 W. 1st Ave. Alt. 4, 450 7390 Dan Rued Const. 8914 E. 13th Ave. Addn. 70, 000 7391 Scott Gratz 633 Lewis Garage 7, 800 7392 F & S Const. 2544 Lakeview Dr. Garage 7,000 7393 Superamerica 1155 E. 1st Ave. Sign 100 7394 Robert Wolf 1170 Limestone Dr. House 89, 000 7395 Cecil Clay 2101 Austin Circle twin home 40, 200 �7 ' . /-./- (1 unit) 7396 Cecil Clay r2y2103 Au/sin� Circle twin home 35,300 nit) 7397 Mike Larsen 1240 E. 3rd Ave. Sign100 7398 Chateau Brick 1244 Tyler Chimney 1, 400 7399 Scott Builders 1244 Canterbury Rd. Alt. 3, 000 1%0' 1 -SHAKOPEE-COALITION_-_M__E_ETING MINUTES op The '�pJ APRIL 2, 1987 -MINUTES A� The meeting was called to order at 7:05 AM by Chairmen Brian F Norrie in the Citizens State Bank Community Room. Members present: Jerry Knutson (Minnesota Correctional Faculty -Shakopee), Duane Wermerekirchen (Jaycees), John K. Anderson (City Of Shakopee), Claude Kolb (K Of C), Rev. Steven Humburg (Shakopee Minlsterlum), Sr Jo Lambert (St. Francis Regional Medical Center), Joan Salter (Food Shelf), Barbara .Colhapp (Area Learning Center), Barry Stock (City Of Shakopee), and George Muenchow (Shakopee Community Services). Members introduced themselves. Barry Stock announced that the Industrial Commerce Commission was hosting a Community Open House In cooperation with Canterbury Downs at the Track on Saturday, April 18. Various governmental agencies would be represented in booths on the main floor of the grandstand to answer any questions that people might have. There is no charge. Chairman Norrie introduced the March Volunteer Of the Month, Phyllis Hanson. Mrs. Hanson is one of those super volunteers that is involved In many kinds of activities. Some them are: Room Mother, Bucket Brigade, Pre School Screening, Sunday School, Food Shelf, and Holiday Project. In addition to a Certificate Of Appreciation, Mrs. Hanson was given a 950. 00 Savings Bond courtesy of Citizens State Bank. Joan Salter reported on the Food Shelf. In Scott County 191 families were served in March (634 individuals). From Shakopee alone there were 83 families served. The Food Share Drive in March started out slowly, but built up steam the last week of the month. Over 17, 000 The of food and-$14, 000 was collected in the two counties. We were sorry to hear that Mr Jellison, our February Volunteer Of The Month, currently is in the hospital. The Scott/Carver/Dakota Economic Council soon will be moving to the former Valley Publishing site (adjacent to Jr H. S. ). Help will be needed in moving. A lengthy discussion was held regarding the need for better Promoting of Crisis Phone Numbers. A sample from the Burnsville newspaper was distributed where this information is submitted weekly. Duane Wermerekirchen commented that in Shakopee there might be a problem because of coat and, therefore, perhaps organizations might be asked to help defray these coats. It was suggested that perhaps Ade could surround this column eliminating the cost factor. Brian Norris will compile a list of Crisis Numbers, Duane Wermerekirchen will gather a list of organizations. They will report at the next meeting. Jerry Knutson gave a report on the "Helping Hands- column. There is a need for more input from citizens. Sohn Anderson reported on current Economic Development in the Community: Hauer's 4th Addition (room for 90 new homes) , construction of 13th Ave. , Laurent Golf Course b residences, Roberto Pit Area Development. Everyone was encouraged to contact Senator Boschwitz and show support for overriding President Reagan's Veto of the Federal Highway Bill. Claude Kolb commented that because of suspected •fat" in this bill that this made the gestion more difficult. George Muenchow shared with the group that the Scott County Volunteer Coalition is hosting a •Volunteer Recognition . Media Event on Thursday, April 30, at 1 :00 PM at the Shakopee American Legion Hall. All organizations in the County are being invited to send two representative volunteers to this event where they will be recognized on behalf of the thousands of volunteers In this county. The results from the Board Members Workshop Survey were distributed. Mr. Muenchow further invited the group to attend the "Beggar's Opera• production on Friday evening. The meeting was adjourned at 8:00 AM. Respectfully Submitted, George F. Muenchow, Secty. /b =v' RECEIVED APR l C 1381 CITY OF SHAKOPEE, M E M O R A N D U M RE: Shakopee City Hall DA: April 2. 1987 Comm. No. 1087.1 Present; City Hall Task Force John Anderson, City Administrator Jack Boarman - Boarman 8 Associates, Inc. to Michael Diem - Boaman d Associates, Inc. We met to review conceptual directions for the design of Shakopee City Hall. Our meeting began with a slide presentation of six local city halls. 1. Jack Boarman mentioned a review of the tax situation should be held at the next meeting. 2. Last meeting was review of plans and costs. Bond referendum was postponed due to the tax situation, time, etc. 3. Next meeting will be Thursday, April 23rd. The meeting after that will be two weeks from April 23rd. 4. Eagan City Hall was construction at a cost of $62/sq, ft. 5. Task force should consider operable vs. fixed windows. 6. Eagan has single counter concept. Task force staff should discuss department organization, staffing at counter windows. 7. Chanhassen is 11,000 per floor. The cost was about $48-50/sq.ft. 8. Plans of Eagan and Chanhassen will be made available at next meeting. 9. Separate window for Parks Area is typical. Discussion of large counter vs. individual counter. 10. 100-150 people/wk come to pay the storm sewer utility bill. 11. Cashier is from administration of finance. 12. Minnetonka has small individual windows for each department (akin to a betting window). 13. Department secretary vs, pool should be discussed. 14. Three counters are suggested for Shakopee. They are: 1. Parks and Recreation 2. Info/cashier 3. Building/engineering/planning 15. Potential of larger lobby with monitors for smokers or people who wish to talk. 16. Discussion of location of lunch room - off lobby or out of public domain? 17. April 18; four volunteers are needed to answer questions about the new City Hall project at Cantebury Downs (Saturday 1-4). MINUTES OF THE SHAKOPEE PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION The Shakopee Public Utilities Commission convened in regular session on March 9, 1987 at 4:30 P.M. in the Utilities meeting room. MEMBERS PRESENT: Commissioners Kirchmeier, Cook and Kephart. Also Manager Van Hout, Liaison Wampach and Secretary Menden. Motion by Cook, seconded by Kephart that the minutes of the February 2, 1987 regular meeting be approved as kept. Motion carried. Mr. Ken Adolf, Schoell and Madson, Mr. Gary Laurent and Mr. Keith Nelson, an Engineer for Laurent Builders were present to discuss water service to a residential/golf course development being proposed by Laurent Builders. Presentation of the planned development and a discussion followed. Motion by Cook, seconded by Kephart that the Shakopee Public Utilities Commission appropriate sufficient monies and time to investigate preliminary possibilities of owing and operating a water system in the proposed platted area by Laurent Builders. Motion carried. BILLS READ: City of Shakopee 20,032.00 Amsterdam Printing and Lithograf Corp. 5.54 Auto Central Supply 43.18 Border States Electric Supply Co. 206.40 Burmeister Electric Company 1,890.00 C.H. Carpenter Lumber 5.40 Carlson Hardware Company 50.63 City of Shakopee 772.76 City of Shakopee 128.63 City of Shakopee 847.03 Davies Water Equipment Co. 322.06 Don's Electric Forklift Service, Inc. 115.00 Excel Office Products Inc. 133.07 Feed Rite Controls, Inc. 215.20 GA Industries, Inc. 200.00 Glenwood Inglewood 22.05 Graybar Electric Co. 21,480.00 H s C Electric Supply 473.40 P.S. Heitz 114.70 Roger Hennen 102.00 Henningson, Durham and Richardson 148.55 IBM Corporation 1 245.00 Instrumentation Services, Inc. 67.32 Ken's Steel Door Repair Service 83.11 Kress and Monroe Chartered Law Offices 117.00 Layne Minnesota Company 38.24 Leef Bros. , Inc. 30.00 Link Print 70.40 Minnesota Dept. of Health 128.25 Minnesota Valley Testing Labs. , Inc. 27,20 n Motor Parts Service Co., Inc. 39.21 Northern States Power Co. 332.32 Northern States Power Co. 332.32 Northern States Power Co. 261,705.57 Gene Pass 86.00 Pitney Bowes 87.75 Ranger Products 26.66 Reynolds Welding Supply Co. 3,41 Schoell and Madson, Inc. 3,046.60 Shakopee Ford 28.68 Shakopee Public Utilities Comm. petty Cash 148.49 Shakopee Services 22.00 Southwest Suburban Publishing, Inc. 170.43 Starks Cleaning Services 53.40 Suel Business Equipment 9.52 Robert Sweeney 30.14 Walter Sweeney 62.07 Total Tool, Inc. 93.93 Unisys Corporation 76.80 Valley Industrial Propane 22,26 Wild Iris, Inc. 57.50 Woodhill Business Products, Inc. 75,75 Water Products 13.80 A T and T Information Systems 18.57 Northwestern Bell Telephone Co. 254.26 Southwest Suburban Publishing, Inc. 145.82 ABM Equipment 3,444.90 Lou Van Bout 47.63 Truck Utilities and Mfg. , Inc. 267.92 Jedlicki and Sons 1,404.70 Motion by Kephart, seconded by Cook that the bills be allowed and ordered paid. Motion carried. A letter form the Minnesota Department of Health informing the Shakopee Public Utilities Commission the results of the testing of the water samples done was acknowledged. Motion by Cook, seconded by Kephart to accept the report from the Minnesota Department of Health dated February 25, 1987 showing that they had tested City water and found it meeting all specifications as safe for public consumption. Motion carried. Liaison Wampach reported the light standards were up in the Downtown parking lot and the Shakopee Public Utilities Commission would be requested to make final connection in the near future. Preliminary audit figures were presented by Manager Van Hout. Jim Streefland and Jerome Jaspers will be present at our next meeting to present the final audit report. Motion by Cook, seconded by Kephart to adopt the supplement to Resolution #311, Adopting the Shakopee Public Utilities Commission Employee Personnel Policies Governing All Supervising personnel as outlined in the 1987 personnel policies. Motion carried. Motion by Kirchmeier, seconded by Kephart to offer Resolution #316, A Resolution Setting Water Connection Charges. Ayes: Commissioners Kirchmeier, Kephart and Cook. Mayes: none. Resolution passed. Motion carried. Motion by Kephart, seconded by Cook to offer Resolution #317, A Resolution i Adjusting the Fees Under the Trunk Nater Policy Resolution, Ayes: Commissioners I/ Kephart, Cook and Kirchmeier. Nayes: none. Resolution passed, Motion carried. Secretary Menden reported 4 fire calls for a total man hours of 2 hours and 10 minutes. There were no lost time accidents for February, 1987. The next regular meeting of the Shakopee Public Utilities Commission will be held on April 6, 1987, at 4:30 P.M. in the Utilities Meeting Roan. Motion by Cook, seconded by Kephart that the meeting be adjourned. Motion carried. N'Jp�-) Barbara Menden, fission Secretary MEMO TO: Shakopee Planning Commission FROM: Douglas K. Wise, City Planner RE: Shakopee Golf Course - Preliminary PUD Application DATE: April 14, 1987 Introduction• Enclosed is a copy of a letter from the County Environmental Health Department, for your information. Background• The developer is required to go through the environmental assessment process prior to final PUD approval. The issues raised in this letter will be addressed in the environmental review process. The Planning Commission can proceed with approval of the preliminary PUD, if the developers encounter problems during the environmental review process, they can not receive approval of the final PUD until those issues have been resolved. SCOTT COUNTY ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH COURT HOUSE A102 4..-., ._:.._.. SHAKOPEE, MN.55379-1393 (612)445-7750. E,a.m April 10, 1987 Mr. Barry Stock ?RECEIVED Administrative Assistant - City of Shakopee .SPR 1 3 1987 129 East First Avenue Shakopee, Minn. 55379 CITY OF SHAKOPEE Dear Barry: Thank you for sending me a copy of the Memo to the Shakopee Planning Commission regarding the Shakopee Golf Course - Preliminary PUD Application. As I indicated on the phone, I wanted to alert Shakopee to the study Scott County has in progress in the vicinity of Louisville Sanitary Landfill in Section 21 of Louisville Township. The purpose of this study is to determine the environmental risk to existing and future development from ground water contamination originating from the landfill. As you know, Louisville Landfill is on the superfund list because of ground water contamination with hazardous substances. The Minnesota Pollution Control Agency is studying the extent of this contamination and we are examining the risks as noted above. What does this mean in relation to the PUD proposal? I am not certain at this point. However, the PUD site is only 3 1/2 miles east of the landfill. The golf course and a municipal well will withdraw a large amount of water from the aquifer. This could reverse the natural flow of ground water and cause contamination from the landfill to move east rather than west as under natural conditions. This impact on ground water in this area was demonstrated by the J. L. Shiely study a few years ago. Such a reversal would have negative effects on ground water not only for this development but more severely for the residents in between. This concern is significant enough for Scott County to be allocating over $100,000.00 for this study. The study is expected to be completed later this spring. Hopefully, our study will provide some indication as to the risk of such a reversal occurring from various ground water influences. In order to more accurately evaluate this risk from this proposal, we will need to know what the peak water volume anticipated will be, especially during the dry periods when maximum water will be needed for lawns and the golf course. This issue must be explored further. In addition to the potential of drawing in outside contamination, 99+ homes and the sewage from a golf course club house may impact the ground water quality in this area. The information we have indicates that ground water flow is toward the City of Shakopee and thus nitrate contamination levels in the Shakopee and Jordan aquifer may increase as a result of these on-site sewage systems. The ground water located in the area identified as being highly susceptible to ground water contamination (see enclosure from the Minnesota Geological Survey Atlas) has already been shown to be contaminated with nitrates. Both private residential wells as well as some of the city wells already have alarmingly high levels of nitrates. Wells located downgradient on the water table from this subdivision may be further contaminated. A careful consideration of this should be made before approving this development. An Equal Opportunity Employer Page 2 Mr. Barry Stock n / April 3, 1987 In your agenda item, it stated that the developer would be completing an Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW). I understand that the Responsible Governmental Unit or RGU is Shakopee, and that Shakopee is actually responsible for completing this EAW, not the developer. The developer is of course responsible for providing the information necessary to complete the EAW. As you know, hydrogeological studies are not normally part of an EAW process, because of the concerns that I have noted relating to the area ground water impacts, I am recommending that an Environmental Impact Statement be completed. The size of this PUD is in fact only one lot below the 100 lower limit for a mandated EIS. In addition, some of these lots are for multiple family units, and a golf course with its impacts is included, therefore, I would think that an EIS could be required. I will send you a copy of our Environmental Risk Assessment on Louisville Landfill when it is completed. Please include me on your list of reviewers for an EAW and EIS for this project. Sincerely, Allen ett Environmental Health Manager cc: Richard Mertz, Ccum issioner Gary Laurent, Proposer Greg Downing, EQB Jim Theis, Clerk of Louisville Twp. Roselyn Menke, Clerk of Jackson Twp. a p e _dtlM1-eM_o a n a _mrb-tl m 0 0=0PPNM1�O enPNO N Y w I 111 Ilrlrlllll II 1111 Pb d < °'' OWWeoe Illi r it 1 6 Z Oo eWONweweOM1O ebM10 ^ P O e0o Oo 0000 o e0a a eoo^Oae p O OpNM-NPOOPe OwoOoe 0 tlW00btlepoOd ¢ MOb O ObowPaO�wWM1M�otl PNeO P OWe00POpW00 r M1w�-bOp^o1NN_0� < d e 0 0n00 w No0 dFedFPNWYMo F M1 > Mw 00 NPP �N= Nb. 1 _FO r .-p PWWO N_NP N M 1 6 n CJ LL j ee eWWeoeeoee eMeeedoeeeee ' O OV Oe oN_Ywomao00 oOopOnFO0e00 ' or M1 O WFp000oOb O' O O m F< 1 b OPPNtlPOM � � pwdNMtl . . m < N N N N0P NF 0 P 0 M1NOFpti r N r W >W 3 Oo 0 oo0oeo O e O Z oe a OOoeOo o O o 0 o O O e0 O > NOO ooe0oe p a e O e o o Oa o W No W oe o o e 1 opOo P Oo 0 N OOowWO NO Q no n OOW�M1OeOOWVONPN � 1 NO 0 NFe oM0 F nP wwp mN^ d0 M 'Om W �� 1 OOMONWNnM N y1 n m n F U 1 F ¢ W O U 2 6 6 W Q a Q x> F w z 3 0 J W ? 00 eNW000oe000 a Op 1 OpeepO0oe00o FF ONNOoepOOoe W o0 0 oroe0oop W < Oa N NMr POwoe a .N N oNNnoNO N YM1I _Ow N�_od W bM m 0 0 FOPNMM N ¢ ¢ O r N N 0n d ¢ , 3 3 W Q m W W = WW J0� F ¢FQF Vm 6 WLLV W O 6YU wZmOn W rFi `r W _ umV F¢- W0 mmJVnLLW WZW N W N% Z" ^ONWWW2>0 N 6 Gr6 16X yZWmnJQQ6NW¢n¢W3 1 0< W260 " WNLJ WW FF Z 0 1- rri$WOF L: fWULLLL0V2W6YZm m < ZU26 W66a_<JWZY 66 W L6 Z . ¢6J$WYYOOLL>¢_Y 0 W¢ )n0 6_yUWJ L3V6m22 < t>OF6YLLOOW W ' 2�OV20W OOf3 ZV >O _ FOUVu¢ 03wa W uu60F3WS¢Y >: 6f wQ<Ww O OL3F O VW JJ2 LLJ VY<$Z_W e.+ 0M12 W W SC 6 O LLN>W62ZJ0 F J WFrn26 ¢F b FWW W)V Y Wr+WWYV012¢^Vy O <�+ m YO O¢ p06 6FW JZ WJmUUWJJHW ¢ : $Q= b 0r F BUY W U3¢U6JJi2JwUWV V W fQWY_F_nZ¢ WJ_ $WWF63JOU " _ 200 X <OWZUOnJVJ3W¢0V0 V <VLJJQ>03u f JLOYV<0J6F00W 0 V ej yLL0 F nW__03JWWWJF_O_ _ FOOpOYnOOU 2 ' 602Z2J06JWZ3W�+ O FJ000106L3mWmLOL J 0J266mULU6 _" >6_WW66b6¢063L r O_U .-Nw P�NMPWA^OwtlF000� _NMpNbFO boo0^^ NM'^e�NM P U Qo O____ MnMMMWbm NdNNNnMMpP NNN. nMMMMMMMmm wMwWWWwNwwwwWW _ LL MMn f nnnMnnMMnMM MI'IM Mn i nMMMMnMM ♦ MMMMMnMMMMMnnn P1 �" hF n n n ac a n LL PN N w I I 6 U I IIIIIIIIP P � b l 11 P 11 N 6 S N T a j6 On0 eP P OOP o Oo O F r O o�Pee0oN0 � ON N 6 a FN- N n 0M M F -00PP P P P b PN 1` nN N b f YI M 1 6 M OJ F b 0 � oN ♦ n n ON N h LL J o O OU 0 oNP O OM100 O o n , 6 FQ N0 • F M M 0M M Q I W Y W J Z o eo O o ee o Oo e w O Oe0 a ev m ¢ p e eeoo0 0 00 e o OeoNO O 00 N a OFN- 0 No N 0n - F N00fP n M bN - bF 0 W n Y i ¢ 0 z LL a_ w 6 ¢ 2> F W Z J O 2 LJ� 1 N b b OM1 n W J oN M n o0 h hh o0 - > 26 oWNO b P P P OtlM n N W an 0 0 0 0M N 0 ¢ r 7 J Z W W ¢ Y 0 W w W LL 00 00 V W O J� W LLZ JZ< 1 ZOJ K ¢ r F ^ OLLO 0 6 WN 6 I I y 6r rW6N< r60-O Y J J 0 O I, _ N ¢ L N00UN_JJNw wW_ W_ ¢ J 2V ¢¢rO WJJh0000 LL N 6 6 ¢Z W ' LL W0 LL6N ZM1 N LL LL G J J Wy ' O UO WZWOV¢ONL W V F F wp W y 0 N \ W-UZWWNrLUJ ¢ 6 ¢WhU ZU Z - F - ¢ZJ¢r6i-NLL 6 O J YJ ZfO N 6J 6 eE ¢-OOrQW03�W S � O MQW- FL F '. V J NLLV6LL306NL¢ V V 06L L N I _ p pU pbFNnPo-NMo PZV NNNnMnf LPPN 0 -aaP O� J6 NNNNNNNNNNu b 0000 P , - LL MMMnnnnnMMn • n i nMMn • Mn M1 JmJPFa Nenatl PNtlNm-oNN-Pn n m N N LL bPPOPJ F NnPPF JnPFOM1PJPNP- 0 P N A n W < V -No_NNFOe mJhJtlePONPFdPOJNONOeO P nP P N N 6 2 VNMFMNPoo PFf_OFOMOFdJon_OOOOe F- N N N r tlaFlFNPN F P_-PNOmNfPOOMMPJMN000 - o' r O O O O ¢ FnWONhNO N MMPbPOONNPPNFO-FPMOOO nY N N F F N N 6 Pp0F0PP0 N dPYNPo_d0_Nd-NJ-N-NN- nF N 0 0 N N > PP-me _ 0 PNnPtOtl_-fFlmF_F--O<-- - n d P P Fl M 0 W - N � FNndFnn - NNAMN P N N P P M M M1 p _ _ 1 < n OG PNOPN0n00 Pf FlP Po_o 0 Jn0J OfmONooO J YP N N O OY APFNVP000 NNNmoNOO_NFAOJmOPeoO eMYtlNYN P NO�OP -NNetP-dNnYP M NO N ' W F6 t:2:2 N 00 �PFPJPmPdNMP a mY F m 6 -NO__ f _mo _NNJJn4fN0 m mY m ', ¢ hP0-Nn Od N \n6NJ N A dhPOdA I p M1 m _ 6 N M - W u :pO0ee0oN0 O Oe000000oNNONNO00No0o N e o O O O O ¢ NO FOf-O o POJNOOJOeONNNYtonnOeo d d ' N N N N N y d0-JO F m0NJ00ANh-P0Pob00NN- F d d N N RNNeetl_t_ 0 PP-NeeA__NFPP_m_n_P-- - - - P P N a tl b ' 1 P - Nb P NfAmMJ - NPFPN- Y F P P A A 6 M1 ¢ 6 O W W V_ 6 6 ¢ W S> J Z r < Me0tle0Foe N JhNfePePPOPno_mOeo00 Y P P P O J dF-FaJeeo 0 �Nn-eemeOef oPopneeeoo m N- $ U NNNJ-0d PPNNN nNF-NPPOO-NO o AO n P P i Z6 NbPNdJJ FPPd M1ofOJNNNo0P00 F NOY d W N-NP0 0 JY-O- NOPE d-Nd F 0 nn < ¢ 6 6 I y y I 1 <6 Y ¢ YM1 Ur OZ b m tll Vzz SoWW x= bW6U r NW YW_h Y~L S__ Y GO Vm WWi Nl F ¢LL r mLL y > dt r Z Y JY- JJM1 =OLLLF W F YJU mG U 3 W Y < <6 J3 WrOZ b6M1Z<Z � mNWWO JO 6 M1 '. m } N W¢ LLLLI LLLJVW 0 JL=rSnW < u00NW < W¢ X V V 11 I L LW M1OJZ W WW J-32 6 W F N Z 2 2V WWW WW<W> J W 3Y66rr0 ZVVUW ZWO 6 m IL 2 ¢ Z W W LL WW F„Y SZ ZO < yIL2LyWLLrWO ZZ- W SYJ Y Jr J W W 6 V V O UWO OOSWJ Z r r W USJr6Y ¢ <QZJ 6 6 2 6 F ^ 2 FLM1 O 66¢01 WJ066WY¢ rbW SWW J ^6 = < b W \ <¢<6WWJYL ¢ LLOJrJLL<LFW>Z3JFLLbU¢U 1 W S Z W r F M1 I, ` -M1 JWJC22<¢W Y.J<OVObJ6nrW oZ <><WWWW02 W 3J030W¢W¢OW6 ¢SYWOJW3 - 6 n ¢ Q Q V O V 3 WOW616233 6 WbL0Wb6J16FF6r0¢UOLUL UO U M Y U i OU ONee_Mo_d ONdOdNOJPe..o 0o0e0-N-P -P o N - i p2V O_ntPPNNN --dnnP---NNnNtlYOPpP-P - - m P J< _ NNNNddnnnnnnAnAnnnnPP NN ' P ; o _ LL ♦ttPPtPPP i PPPfP1ftPPttPPfttttPf ♦ Pf • ! f ♦ P N W av W 6 6 2 K a a F 9 W N 1 t m OJ 6 LL p m O OF 6 FQ Q K F 6 N W >Z O F 6 N K 6 1�1 O L F F W W K 6 6 W 2> 7 Z r O �+ S J Q N O J Hr 2 za w m w n n x � a w uz a e a e m 0 an `z � 41 W K LL 2U O VW O } � U �J O ry pU 0 ZU m O¢ P N Y N 2 a C v m M m a v r A p m O y m O r O p y0 p y- D C D y m y : r z r a A a z r i c iz r J r I PPP i uVVbONNNNNNN tlbbODUWUYUY NbVOpNro + NW+ OYN+m0PN1WN+ JUN-0J NdUro+ ': WN+WUN- I : r90 09DmT9D0 Om�+00rmO OmnD 03 " DAm ymWC+Dnm ym OT+rm yC001 D : SammXKn2 2<ACTOm2 20C3 K WWm MoomooOm 9m z..m nm mnz.. O OTA AOWmOOCA rmOnZyA AmnZ a ns zWy rzs kyr I Azx .ar�r vTzra..mr ', N rm j P a amm m amm rzz a K a ..r Krz mzs KamP nWs : K " ra : n O m mD za m m s D mlain e n m o n i . m i m om s oz s m m az m a y m 9 A m m nm roro NroW aim i + um acro-- ul :m WPWO OONOdP m pOb a NNNaN dNN CZ y0 bJ++- NWNabdV WPON ddV-tlN + NJN aD KW O NdJOWOWOYeJ-a NJOOOOOOOONOO roePbOONm o00 Wr Om W T A WK < 2 Xsmv j - - Nro a u m P roN ow 1a ' roY-OWP NPN J ++ p N NONro-+PP r ma +y tlNONWNbYNNPO W+ NONW+J+ObJ IJYPdYOP. . . . o++0oPN0tl tlNro DO mS NPO-JNdb+OVYN +JbUONaWJNNJd ProONPJbPI NJ AW m 0000 NeP+00PProPNON dOO Nb J- JWNONm Ne NaWaNNbI 0V0 WW 1 JNNN0N0 Wallo+WN00Nb0N ONJMO-N ': NJP+ P NN ro �N a d n0 W JO 0o Nro OUNY P U - lY W Y m2 . mNbN eWOP N ONPJtlmY N J J '. N N WA tlJNb 4000 P edaU. - eeeJ oe oe a0a aroNJ N eeJJOJ NN ............ e00 a NW+-aPNON+ e0 +oNro-- N PNOd OJI J0 bJ�ONW--YddNd tl Y-m N �OJ+W Nro-pN 0 00 . + NONmYJedOW OytlWdUUPONabd i-00PNmo +NP Wy ' OPo+JpWdJPPPN oroWWMNNbN roONPJbd dNN yD " WNtl roPyadOWPN+a+N e6NVJPY Y NOaJ oOdYiM r. [tea Wr : aNWJ dOP+O+abNromdN -dN0-WNOmNtlJN NJJO-N � N o - P NJNo e Nro+ 0 : P M " M 90 W-N00N0 o NNOdrodjM PJO : A T e ero+aNWW b +NNWbUa 0 0 9 m NOOONNN ONONONa N NNO m O Z o0e o e00e0000o 000 oe0 OOo O J aP000tlJ N 0dNJ0 W0- A N 10 pYddJWN JNJP-YY dU+ YIN m +oetl Peeee tl�nuHmmm ueeee o�omnmunu y000eeru PeJ z y A m y z c z o ^ 0 0 0 . m o m z o.^-• m . o mT s m a r r r r r ^ m z bmbbmmWWWWWWYY ro bb•p00000 bObbmMMyJJJMJ - •p0rr_ r N ' OPYNrmmOPNaYN+ YN_OdWN_ OYN�mOJPNlWro+ OnT%^4rTn O O%mr^ O%TArTm00 ' O-^OCZ9m m yADrw '. yTDDOrCOm ZOAZC«y2 S 2n0y ZmAOZD00Z mmrOAmmAm m AwmDy VI2 F%yO=<mD0m9 mnr yrs a y Tz yr- r r T-oya Tr Jaz-zr � a . aTAr-mn amm aT son.m.ox - o Kaiam°0-ai s i Kzm KA mmNOAa nA n" '• s Z x w Tazms 9 � ^ x o z n n TO rxAsn x Z 3 3 y m m m2 0 2xTy= 2nC y ZI Zi A D O A r o a ' yyJmry J �an"-�=em -- a+-N N Pro NyNro- NP+am oo .•n -Nam __ -N- mu y- - a WPb NmPPro+ cz io N J O. . . . . NYMY ONJe mWdJ b0-edNy %A� y edomOJONeboN N➢N NN O NNNOeNNNO NOPONOeNWPNONO % T% m m A %_y DOm z m Om OT J +NW WodNO N P N + Om TD m.N.+ roNb r mA N0+0mNPb N Www da N- roN N PY 0 Nd:PN+yY-Y!0 r0 my ' gYJOOJmb Wo+NWN bN d0md+bJN'� NbNNPmOmPJbJNN DAO S aNNNJJJ IPWJOJ +NOmNYPm+ NOYWOm+dWabo -N my = Nmm PNA w. . . . . .. NN O PmYONmWPd WNmNJmNdNOWPNP % y +Ne ++ J +NON Y N Gy N ONro eoatl Oe 0m+ m i q y0P N d N Namo m JmJM 0m Nm! 0A meo oe eP ee ee mueeu-,mu -r eeo eP eoeJmme .Yi ee ee evueew OdeePbPN YY o NNd 000J00 NooN ' 0 -NW + W➢00 J ro � aN N ' NP WdNN eb++W+ WW m+++ YmN yNro+++ NNm ny ' mo+00NPNNNOdNPm +NN NOm! y Ndmw0+y0NYl0 00 WM0oJ00mW000do bm0d+➢- 'J +m NPOPOPNPyNP Ny ' YaNNNJJ➢PIP+JJa -N00NPbbP NOWWom-aYdba+N - yD No�OPONYbYNNPNNJ mb PPmOdNONN W00Y-PNNO+mNm %r NdPWlJbao++ mm a mYONWmOY oNmNJmNdN00PN+ Dy NOWN � J mNPO d N+N➢oY➢J AO T N ON OYW W 0 Y Jy0P0NPN OT D N eONO N 000 ONNONNNN m 2 000000000000000 0o O ......... ee00000000000o O 9 �J bNyb WNbP 0 NmuoOJ+➢ A JOOOOeONNoePJ+P JJ O N000000rm yoeOOONYeymaWW y N a m u N u ry i A c m va e n m .. z + m m m -1 Sz a K a m m o n o O o y o a m 9 KK m K y i+ a o s m s o a m n c r y I r i r '. z r z i � r y T r c NNNNNNN----E-EEedddod P W bbbYYWYYWWW V NNro++ee++++++00 00o a N bJJJOYYYYWWYW p YN+yPP00NdN+OtlmyPNlY+ '. OYN+mOyPNdWN+ -sero«omma�onnmznAymm n n o9n<nmmvo n bozos-K-zrzmo-K....a Amr m m " y s..a orcrm m -rz-rzxr c smzz-�aN-�<swo z z xnrrvz..az z zmor m-n-+vmz+KnKm--n m m mmKrmmrzm mmaammaz mA- mm xzn a a AK m no T w Ks naanaKz " r nm-zz > a - amK � <r z.. mmKrKaarozz m r r �aczz zm� z wa9z.z r<.. mz..a cKnna � n.,azo-n< A Km<xmg mcwz wOmm AA z x Kxr-o -x x o nroASA ymzam mnz a a mrm<zaO mcmz ..o rm K z z nyzcz z A aKm K< o ao- zcrm Dm a s z mnm s a a_ 9K a0 Z0 w \ n n n S 9 O TOTAm mm \ 9m rm m m mrm m m aaaram SO o vA ar x x zzn x x maao..c ma o o< m m m n KmK m m - r..czm zA r cs an z z y z.. y z OD �m KOm mK n mm YO 9 A m s x xm y� y E Uro Nro NW N N+MP NN 00 . JP +NE - VNtlNNPb+yP WyPo yW+ n PIroyNNytldwaN-NyOWP NtlNaP bNNO NN AD KN ONNOONoo000PNeOmONOJN oo O NdyeOepONyd000 -+ or 0q 0 T m m < S DO n zm Om oz ro __ m -ro- ry NN ow za WW +NW N VW Wd+W Op+ oo r mA NOd Y+JNOONOpNym I JWodPPw+NYPY r0 my NWop0N001eN00NNeNaMy+ NbONd+dYNpNPJI NN DO 3 +WNJPOONYmNeyPyPYbJdo NNYNYImWONNNWJ AO T PNJPEOyJNNNy0Mo0robbed +NOPOP+WNoyP 0 -1 -mPNdN+0p00PY000aYWlN 00 Y00UYNYNwo+owJ 00 ! VY nO yy y y NN Oy YY m2 N N Wob m0 !d y y ym PO ON00000e.ee+0e.ONOy00 NN NN odp0000 Oy00Y000O Wowo0o JJ I NN YY NOa W-dNaO -NW N yd : oU Wd-W ePy0 NNN nK ' NIOPyO NN W . odPPUrNwJwNN 00 NyoroONooddN+opNdJNyy+ mm !dJ.pd+.YNNNPJN 00 my -roNbPdONYmNeyPPPeN0d0 "Np ' ypWNWdOWONNNYp oD ' or +`N PNdN+JNNNJ0yP0ybPod NN o ++NOPOP+wpoyY �� 0No0wVow0dwwdN Np J00YYNYNYO+eYY DK YW TK p p Np+N VO Ne yYyyOPN4 NN N N +N A 9 w+ N yEJ O- 00P0-1W N 00JNey O D dd y JNayd--p NN NNPWyN 9 n N NOaNONONooNo oNo NN m ooeee0e OroO OOO o0 0 000 0o O 9 m >u a rouaN-rom-NPUP u '. wm-u bb NO 0 yVJdorvN pp 00 W OVJdoo yy o+NOmOy00ayyy0lNloNOo 00 ww tlOOOOo-ONNWOPW -- S Y 1 � O ry Z A C 2 O O m a y y 9 y O O y 3+ yz m :1 m K m f y L n!•••aaaaaaa bNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN n.YWYYNNNNNNN ..PPP NNNNNNNdaa!•aaYYYWYWN . mK4N-OWro+ONOJPIN+ 0WN.0N-eb0NaN-obOKPNI- bJPaNOO OWWm9mmmTLym OF+30A3--<yTdO-y<3roaCW3<D yD2-DV Ty OTAT ODODDWPD-DXAeDOZym-DDO . 2200-mr., m Sfy9Cn9Kbr30S +Sr202D09r1 moLzzcm-ommrxazr Fx ry zmsr2 AZAWyMlYy30PD A=>mooyD9K A L<\ z_K Occ KO ' v0m WzO me r az<ar> <- 0TOye mTTrr, m a x yoaazyr a mmrz omm.Vyo\cm-1y FFO-O9 KWO ACy yy-S KK r y 0D90099 >Op T yZ00 y< -W D -SD O WO Im9D 9mWm9 D-00 03 0 9D 9 rSZm2 2<9yAC IF-A \mKF29rC0S A rD0 D TOAOy OY rT0LO1 OFSyZ-0 D T Zy m- 90 r9TWv9COW24-K90yvOrW3r z y 0A KZ4\T rrCTWr 29 D\OVD9mnATK9< W T aDy--00 mWTOW\� my9A0 m ST y CS W9T WK oWZybyZSZZW- C y D29 on O- -O T-W N ym0 A_DWTyO ZZ Ay ODy O 9 a 1 m02 DO 02 m yoK m am z c W.m.o 0 W m > 9 x _ xW bW NPN NNJ+JwW+a IG -•Y PN NN 00 ombYN oJPb--eNNJ JN-N N-WOOeN-- Na -JO CS y0 oONY eYN-•oPboMP NNIOJ M-ONNONab00P0a0+P00•mJPO 9D KN Nr y OrobN000PJNN-00J0N0 JOJOW00000NONOONNOOMOeNO00pOo0 W TW m W A W_K < DO om ov ro w N oO oW va u KyANmNl-roNammu K ro +Naro au-nro ar mA NmbabNaN-NYUJOmOJm aNNNNaN-lJ0nY0Y NNOWbN r0 Ty NNJro00WONNP-Wa-PNN oYPJN-0Pa0N4N-NOP.0. . a00ooa00 DO 3 nJJNO-000WNPNWNJdJ JY0•JmOKo+PNaoYabN+-rNy4PN0Yab 9W m "NOdroPNNNOa+oN NONaNJPOPaJbopPVJ-yJJP-n+NroWNO m y P00Y0N+POJPY+PmNNm PMW4WWdJlNNO-N-NWNNINJO-WY-aNr 0 NroP-YJN- 0 0 n - Oy J 0P_dWd_ro _ N 02 N ami.da emmum% m u ue - a m W 0 V N9 NOOOo00bNNNNObNPoa NOo0000000Y000000000NO00oo0000 M000000PeeOPNOeJeN eooeo 000000Noo 00000eJeee N WPJN 0 N NV JyroN•WJYmNeJW -NaN aYyb. •O ro O0 NWb•bN•OJdJP-NOOJY JbP•NNNbabNlK0bY0YpromYlN W 00 mNJN0eWN0dJ0mJNPNI PJN-0Pl0WYN- NOPN000 N000Jam0 Ny WyMNO-ONN--NNbd0d0 PW0dJ00Me-eN•O •• nN--JNWWPNbVab oD or -NOa+p+JKVOPJoa oNaNJPOPaONONNYJ-JJNP+N-NOYNe V00V0N-NeJPnPIOnpW PJYYWOaMaNNo+NONONbINMe-WWOdb- DK N ro - ro ay Y NNNmN neYNn b p A 9 W oJNOP -0dN 0 O 9 O ONOO ONO • N m OOO0000eeo000o000o ro0000000000000000 OO0000000o O mJJPJ %InWmo m m a m000WoemvlmruoJmr-m -WeeeeeeeeeeeeoWOW000000ueoeee z y N 2 N P w l Z C_ 9 m L T m T 9 T w x o 0 q y 3 y y O y y 09 m D T Y 9 O 2 0 1 0 0 0 O AO S r 9 r r A r r mm zm d o o yz o T Z O WWWNNNNNNNroN --+��Zw� P ���tlbdddddddd ' N-obmJPTdYro- mJPwdYN- � bmdddddddd '. ' mYN-mmJPmdYN- =9999my>D99n L3990rrn ' asao.yysa. aaomom-m m yaasasaam - zaaaLczx2vaz oozmmz m ssszrzrrssm n irr n m mm o mzzzzzzym m m„mm a y .oma Ayyyyyywa vmmm<w^�zs> mnawzca � > SmrorD oar wza..w mar m sP PPPPir a s9vcvannnL„ .haw v.. a ' -yn„m00 ZS ZSmO 02 9 Z 9 .r9Py> 00- Z wD m KAAAaaATa 0 T3 SrArr 2a M. w 2 n mm...mzz A \OD3DOy00y A D i y 999999ya D_ 0�2�ZySot;+ . 29yZy3DODSn2 2 2 AAAaAaK3 w \y\a„Lw om yxn\n„z\z zz i � .�.,i vtim i ' ^On0$yyy my y 9y00Dy y 9 2WOz Zw .1 : C. Sr AA A 9 m s 3 awepa -b--P eOvaJmeaw roN m - roma + oo n . . aroTmd ..P WJmrob-w - ed ecnmm �”-O m-bNdm+ .Pm wbYwbOmJO ryPJ1Yil�o-y AD KW PmPYm.wOwPtlw burry-Jppy- O ee O JNYoeOmOomONwm wr OW w 9 m A w_K n av zm bpdmT+ N-bW� UUbNNNd-w NN u- -r Wmo Y rw mA dmedtlOPTe>NW NwbNJwO+b N-WO.+JNOdWP-+ mbPJ+meWmJOb eee d YON WwmwbbmWtlPNbJP 3 DO m dNTdmNwNO-P WtlW7J. P- . . . w---NbNNdNY Am tlPa.. - Wooroddy yy NWwNeW-wWp--OP wb y ......... OJwoPryJNm WW o wNPOdwNWPbPdwJ aYW+m a J tlP al0 O N '. q '. d Oy Nm p�+N J J 'w mmm W Mp ”, w N w2 b N m y. m mA -bye-OroOUeow JJ�oo�O NN -b mdo o-OdN wb e0 OOP I WW o Peoe000o eOP '. N>mmm+pN-ONP PbbNNmd-d : NN w+ �- - N NWmmoNwJddb NJPb+r Wu d-Wom-JNb>Up-d 0y WbPgm-WwJtlP mPN-dNWeM bmTmOVmNbPNby- mOmbtlN- m0-YbNMMJ NPTw--- NNdNm y> ' PPOPWWmPP JdJOOJddm dWmNOW-mWP+-em wr omob NNdd wP-OPPJNd : o +NPedmNWPbPdmY Nm Pmbm+JYJTNJ Nom-PWdwm -- d + m y a0 9 -mdtlwbodObN -bw-e-ooJ ww P UNNmN W O D .PmMN+NNP-dtl b- O O mwmOomwwwwwo wow000oo0 oNwo w 9 m ooe00ooee00o ooee00000 a 00 ...00000000e O bJJmwmJ• P�bedJNNw mm w UrpN 9 em-mWJbUW -NOWPW NN yyOWWN m omdMJmdmbOJJ mJe-m+dNe a Tm o Y00e00.. oJ.- m 6,:J m b J P o P mC O n T O z mT a m oP m o 0 Ao a o r Kz r r m v p P \ n a y r O N mmNmNm b044W ' PmaYN- 0WN-0m1Y Cn TJnr00 001N I - Z m POtiwm -IPAZ D Z D-ZZ02 2r�m0 fm ZSTOmm mOmC - ' r A Kam DA PO\ .. i [O1 � r ZZIAll�l0lir Tm�IP�I 9 ' I a mmzn anxx a ' ' K S OST3 K000 O ' o '. z mcmz mTa P ' s Tmo znr x m +zm cmr m oa=m yc-Oi '. Y 032K OTL K< r O T m a m x xm n - u- m N aro-wa Om Imjl -- JOANbm mPm.4 Nr Ky 0mo-Jmo WNPOm0000 Op m m Tm A 0K < 2 DO m W Om TD J bro 'N 4 NWO-OmN r mA ' - 0 -JOPYo WO Nb DO m3 -OPPP00 4oPPJ- NW A0 NK Z VWm bJNN0oOb0 N K b 00 Oe y0N0bJU ymmAyWOPP W NN m 00 4 WW 00 JVI m OK ro 00 PJ N NZ N 00 0 Km 00 00 y= m m NA YY OY or000 J400004 No0000Peo mm 00 Py N m JW-4mN nK ' J0PO4-- moPOWo mb 00 0 00 0-yePWb mObWPWryb pK y 00 Pm0 PyrbN4 KD __ mr y YY - mNPPVW- WJmNmOrobO OWY yJ ➢-NmbJK N00>JWPPP DK N TK m N TO 0 Jy roP W -N 4bP-P p m NJ O D 00 -mONL ♦ N 9 Y00mmmNO No m Z r'o 00 0o eeeooee e00000000 0 -rW N--O N aW m P e vix PP euJuaee roee000eur z ., KRASS & MONROE CHARTERED 327 South Marschall Road Shakopee, MN 55379 City of Shakopee BILLING DATE 01-2B-B7 129 1st Ave. E. Shakopee, MN 55379 C L I E N T S U M A R Y Account Number RE Line(s) Previous New Payment Current Balance Billings Received Balance 0-11373002-1 General J(/ $140.50 $1 ,446.00 $140.50 $1 ,446.00 0-11373117-1 Prior Lake Spring Lk Watershed Dist - $62.00 $0.00 $62.00 $0.00 - 0-11373137-1 Downtown Redevelopment $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 - 0-11373157-1 Racetrack Tax Increment District - $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 0-11373158-1 Racetrack bond issue $0.00 $0.00 - $0.00 $0.00 0-11373161-1 Shakopee Recreation TIF - $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 0-11373163-1 Planning District for. Race Track - $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 0-11373164-1 101 Frontage Acquisition - $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 0-11373177-1 Mining CUP $15.50 $0.00 $15.50 $0.00 RECEI flEZ) Mxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx JAN 2 91987 PLEASE RETURN COPY WITH YOUR PAYMENT xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx�xxxxxxxxxxx CITY OF SHA KOPEE PAGE 2 i City of Shakopee BILLING DATE 0I-28-87 129 1st Ave. E. ' Shakopee, MN 55379 C L I E N T S U M M A R Y Account Number RE Line(s) / Previous New Payment Current Balance Billings Received Balance -------- -------- -------- ------- 0-11373182-1 Canterbury Apts Bonds $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 0-11373184-1 condemn for rd to PH Addn(BILL APP) $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 0-11373185-1 Alltech Engineering Corp. ' $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 0-11373187-1 101 Bypass $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 0-11373188-1 NSP Dispute over poles 1/if /fUf. ;!?• y3/v SyT y-/ $396.55 $400.50 $396.55 $400.50 0-11373189-1 Merchants Hotel Renovation - $0.00 $0.00 $0..00 $0.00 0-11373192-1 Meyer Suit - $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 18-11373195-1 City Hall Bonds $341 .00 - $0.00 $341 .00 $0.00 18-11373196-1 Sewer Capacity Issues $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 18-11373197-1 Annexation - Vierling /b'/ - $0.00 $93.00 $0.00 $93.00 18-11373198-1 Downtown Redevelopment b/- f3/O. SS%•[{/ $0.00 $337.50 $0.00 $337.50 18-11373199-1 City Hall Bond Issue - $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 PAGE 3 City of Shakopee 129 1st Ave. E. BILLING DATE 01-28-87 Shakopee, MN 55379 C L I E N T S U M M A R Y Account Number RE Line(s) Previous New Payment Current Balance Billings Received Balance 0-1373177A-1 Scott Cty. Lumber 161 $350.00 $3, 140.00 $350.00 $3, 140.00 0-51373002-1 General - - $100.00 $0.00 $100.00 $0.00 0-51373118-1 Wangerin (Bill to K Mart TID) - $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 0-51373134-1 Fire Truck Problem $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 0-51373144-1 Chard - $82.00 CR $0.00 $0.00 $82.00 CR 0-51373153-1 Hardrives Suit /6-- $215.50 $658.00 $215.50 $658.00 0-51373194-1 Charitable Gambling - $93.00 $0.00 $93.00 $0.00 0-71373191-1 Purchase from Delores Hoy /5-"V3/0- /j/•/9 $256.75 $635.50 $256.75 $635.50 0-71373193-1 R.E. Purchase from Koch/Kallevig $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 19-81373011-1 Prosecutions ) d� $1 , 144.00 $1 ,506.00 $1 , 144.00 $1 ,506.00 ---_______________________________________________________ TOTAL $3,032.80 $8,216.50 $3, 114.80 $8, 134.50 f Aa. 00 KRASS & MONROE :.HARTERED /5 . 327 South Mar$chal ] Road RECEIVED Shakopee, MN „537'> MAR 3 1987 CITY Or SHAKOPEE City of Shakopee 129 1st Ave. E. BILLING DATE 02-27-87 Snakopee, MN 55379 C L I E N T S U M M AR Y Account Number RE Lines) Previous New Payment Current Balance- Billings Received Balance -------- 1&--11373002-1 General $1 ,446.00 %457.96 $1 ,446.00 5457.96 18-11373117-1 Prior Lake Spring Lk Watershed Dist $0.00 - $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 SB-11373137-1 Downtown Redevelopment ' $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 18-11373157-1 Racetrack Tax Increment District $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 18-11373158-1 Racetrack bond issue $0.00 x0.00 $0.00 $0.00 16-11373161-1 Shakopee Recreation TIF $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 18-11373163-1 - Planning District for Race Track $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 18-11373164-1 101 Frontage Acquisition $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 18-11373177-1 Mining CUP $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 The April 15 tax deadline is fastaopr,aching. For Help witn your taxes give us a tail at - - 445-5080. rAGE _ City Rvee.. E.ypee 124 ist - BILLING DATE 02-27-87 st A Shakopee, MN 55379 C L I E N T S U M M A R Y Account Number RE Line(s) Previous New Payment Current Balance Billings Received Balance -------- -------- -------- ------- 18-11373182-1 Canterbury Apts Bonds $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 18-11373184-1 condemn for rd to PH Addn (BILL APP) $0.00 $208.00 $0.00 $208.00 IS-11373185-1 Alltech Engineering Corp. $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 18-11373187-1 101 Bypass $0.00 90.00 $0.00 $0.00 18-11373168-i NSP Dispute over poles $400.50 $15.50 $400.50 x15.50 - 18-11373189-1 Merchants Hotel Renovation $0.00 $0.00 1 $0.00 $0.00 IB-11373192-1 Meyer Suit $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 18-11373195-1 City Hail Bonds $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 I9-11373196-1 Sewer Capacity Issues $0.00 $0.00 x0.00 $0.00 19-11373197-1 Annexation - Vierling $93.00 $257.50 =_93.00 $257.50 18-11373198-1 Downtown Redevelopment $337.50 $90.00 $337.50 $90.00 IB-11373199-1 City Hall Bond Issue $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 ty of Snakopee =_i__iNG DATc 02-2%-07 129 1st Ave. E. Snaropee, MN 55379 - I c rvT o .. M M A R r Account Number RE Liners% Previous New Payment Current Balance Billings Received Balance ________ -------- --__--- 18-I'>73177A-1 Scott Cty. Lumber $3, 140.00 %5,264.55 53, 140.00 85,264 .55 15-51373002-1 General $0.00 $15.50 $0.00 %15.50 16-51373144-1 Chard 50.00 $0.00 $0.00 %0.00 18-51373153-1 Hardrives Suit $658.00 50.00 5658.00 $0.00 18-51373194-1 Charitable Gambling $0.00 -0.00 50.00 50.00 18-71373191-1 Purchase from Delores Hoy $635.50 $94.84 $635.50 594.84 18-71373193-1 R.E. Purchase from Koch/Kallevig 50.00 50.00 $0.00 $0.00 19-81373011-1 Prosecutions - 81 ,506.00 $1 ,309.50 $1 ,506.00 $1 ,309.50 __________________________________________________________ TOTAL $8,216.50 $7,713.35 $8,216.50 $7,713.5 KRASS & MONROE CHARTERED 327 South Marschall Road RECEWED Shakopee, MN 55379 APR 1 1987 C'TY Or SHAKOPEE i City of Shakopee 129 1st Ave. E. BILLING DATE 03-31-87 Shakopee, MN 55379 C L I E N T S U M M g R V Account Number RE Line(s) Previous New Payment Current Balance Billings Received Balance ________ -------- IS-11373002-1 - General $457.96 8442.50 $457.96 $442.50 18-11373117-1 Prior Lake Spring Lk Watershed Dist $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 18-11373137-1 Downtown Redevelopment $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 18-11373157-1 Racetrack Tax Increment District $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 18-11373158-1 Racetrack bond issue $0.00 $0.00 80.00 $0.00 18-11373161-1 Shakopee Recreation TIF $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 18711373164-1 101 Frontage Acquisition $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 18-11373177-1 Mining CUP 80.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 18-11373184-1 condemn for rd to PH Addn (BILL APP) $208.00 $133.50 $208.00 $133. 50 The April 15 tax deadline is fast approaching. For help with your taxes give us a call at 445-5080. S PAGE 2 City of Shakopee 129 1st Ave. E. BILLING DATE 03-31-87 Shakopee, MN 55379 C L I E N T S U M M A R Y Account Number RE Lines) Previous New Payment Current Balance Billings Received ________ ________ Balance 18-11373185-1 Alltech Engineering Corp. %0.00 $0.00 $O.00 $0.00 18-11373187-1 101 Bypass $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 I8-11373188-1 NSP Dispute over poles $15.50 $0.00 $15.50 $0.00 - . 18-11373189-1 Merchants Hotel Renovation $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.60 18-11373192-1 Meyer Suit $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 18-11373195-1 City Hall Bonds $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 18-11373196-1 Sewer Capacity Issues $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 18-11373197-1 Annexation - Vierling $257.50 $0.00 $257.50 $0.00 18-11373198-1 Downtown Redevelopment $90.00 $0.00 $90.00 $0.00 18-11373199-1 City Hall Bond Issue $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 18-1373177A-1 Scott Cty. Lumber $5,264.55 $12.50 $5,264.55 $12.50 18-51373002-1 General $15.50 $125.00 $15.50 $125.00 PAGE 3 City Shakopee 129 1stst Ave. E. BILLING DATE 03-31-87 Shakopee, MN 55379 C L I E N T S U M M g R V Account Number RE Line(s) Previous New Payment Current Balance_ Billings Received Balance ------- 18-51373144-1 Chard 80.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 18-51373153-1 Hardrives Suit $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 18-51373194-1 Charitable Gambling $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 80.00 18-71373191-1 Purchase {rom Delores Hoy $94.84 $0.00 $94.84 $0.00 19-81373011-1 Prosecutions $1 ,309.50 $2,060.50 $1 ,309.50 $2,060.50 ______________________________ TOTAL $7,713.35 $2,774.00 $7,713.35 $2,774.00 TENTATIVE AGENDA ADJ.REG.SESSION SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA APRIL 21, 1987 Mayor Reinke presiding 1] Roll Call at 7:00 P.M. 21 Recess for H.R.A. Meeting 31 Re-convene 41 Liaison Reports from Councilmembers 5] RECOGNITION BY CITY COUNCIL OF INTERESTED CITIZENS 6] Approval of Consent Business - (All items listed with an asterick are considered to be routine by the City Council and will be enacted by one motion. There will be no separate discussion of these items unless a Councilmember so requests, in which event the item will be removed from the consent agenda and considered in its normal sequence on the agenda. ) *7] Approval of Minutes of April 7th and 14th, 1987 8] Communications: (Items ncted for consent will be received and filed) *a] Tom and Maggie Klein re: proposed golf course development b] G. Larry Griffith, Dorsey & Whitney re: Valleyfair request for a variance from the sign ordinance c] James A. Terwedo, Scott County Attorney re: public hearing concerning the formation of a regional railroad authority within Scott County 9] Public Hearings: None 101 Boards and Commissions: Energy and Transportation Committee : *a] Extension of Van Pool Contract *b] Van Pool Po icie P arming Commission: c] Name and Alignment of 13th Avenue d] Preliminary Plat of Canterbury Estates 1st Addition lying East of CR-79 and South of 11th Avenue e] Final Plat of Feuer' s 4th Addition lying North of 13th Avenue, South of CR-16 and East of Hauer' s 1st Addition - Res. 27:7 f] Amending City Code Regarding Therapeutic Massage g] Amending Planned Unit Development Ordinance Regarding Utilities - Updated memo on table h] Preliminary Planned Unit Development for O'Dowd Lake Estates and Golf Club - updated memo on table TENTATIVE AGENDA April 21, 1987 Page -2- 11] Reports from Staff: [Council will take a 10 minute break around 9:00] *a] Propane Conversion Units b] Providing Police Officers to Handle Traffic for Major Attractions in Shakopee *c] Interfund Transfers d] Approve bills in amount of $313, 960.32 e] Application for Temporary 3.2 Beer License by Shakopee Jaycees - memo on table f] T.H. 169 Mini-Bypass Project g] Upper Valley Alignment Design h] John Nelson Sanitary Sewer Service i] Agreement Leasing Part Of Memorial Park for Chamber Office j] Agreement with Scott County Regarding Proposed Admission Tax on Amusement Attractions k] Supporting Admission Tax Proposed by Scott County - Res. 2718 *11 Proposed Legislation Regarding Expansion of Wine Sales to Grocery Stores *m] Land and Water Conservation Fund Program *n] Proposed Legislation Extending Medicare Coverage Requirements To All City Employees Who Are Not Yet Subject To Medicare Taxes 121 Resolutions and Ordinances: *a] Res. No. 2719, Requesting Scott County to Request Mn. DOT to Conduct A Speed Study and Determine Safe Speed Limits on CR-17 Between TH 101 and 10th Avenue b] Ord. No. 214, Regulating Horse and Livery Service - tabled 4/7 c] Res. No. 2715, A Resolution Receiving A Report and Calling A Public Hearing on Improvements in Killarney Hills 1987-7 d] Res. No. 2716, A Resolution Receiving A Report and Calling A Public Hearing on Improvements to Market Street from 2nd Ave. to 4th Ave. 1987-6 *e] Res. No. 2711, Authorizing the Disposal of Unclaimed and Surplus Property 131 Other Business: a] b] c] 14] Adjourn to Tuesday, April 28, 1987 for continuation of the 1987 Strategic Planning Worksession John K. Anderson City Administrator TENTATIVE AGENDA HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY IN AND FOR THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA Special Meeting April 21, 1987 Chairperson Leroux presiding 1. Roll Call at 7: 00 P.M. 2. Accept Special Call 3 . Approval of Minutes of April 7, 1987 4. Amendment to the Shakopee Valley Square Contract 5. Other Business 6. Adjourn Dennis R. Kraft Executive Director PRCCEEDINGS OF THE HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY 3 REGULAR SESSION SHAKOPEE, MINNRSOTA APRIL 7. 1987 - Chairman Leroux called the meeting to order at 7:02 p,m, with Comm. Leben, Vierling, Wampach, and Clay present. Also present were Dennis Kraft, Executive Director; Doug Wise, City Planner; John K, Anderson, City Administrator; Kenneth Ashfeld, City Engineer; Julius A, Coller, II, City Attorney; and Mayor Reinke, Lebens/Clay moved to approve the minutes of March 17, 1987. Motion - carried unanimously. - The Executive Director reviewed the option available to the city for purchase of the old Prison Site from the State of Minnesota Dept, of _ Administration. The option agreement gives the City the opportunity to purchase the site for $145,000. -The coat to the City for the option is $1.00 and other valuable considerations. The option includes all furniture, fixtures, equipment and other personal property with the exception of some chairs and radio base station. At the present time the property is tax exempt and will remain so for the rest of 1987. Comm, Leroux said he and Dennis Kraft, Executive Director will be meeting with Ma. Tom Massey and Associates regarding their proposal on Friday afternoon. C1ay/Vierling moved that the HRA authorize and Executive Director to enter into the option agreement with the State of Minnesota for the site of the former women prison in Shakopee for an amount of $1.00 and other valuable comsideration. Roll Call: Byest Unanimous Noes: None Moticn carried, Vierling/Wampach moved to adjourn. Motion carried unanimously. Meeting adjourned at 7:15 p.m. Dennis Fraft Executive Director Carol L. Schultz Recording Secretary MEMO TO: Shakopee Housing and Redevelopment Authority (HRA) FROM: Dennis R. Kraft, Executive Director RE: Amendment to the Shakopee Valley Square Contract for Private Development DATE: April 15, 1987 Introduction• The HRA entered into a developers contract with Shakopee Square Properties in the summer of 1986 for various improvements to the Shakopee Valley Motel. The project did not proceed as envisioned and did not meet the scheduling requirements contained in the contract. The developers would like the contract amended at this time to permit a change in plans. Background: , Wallace and Lyle Bakken entered into a contract for private development with the Shakopee HRA last summer. This contract called for construction to commence by September 1, 1986. The project included an expansion to the Shakopee Valley Motel, the construction of a campground facility and related site improvements and the construction of a restaurant. This did not happen because of the developers inability to obtain financing for the project. The development agreement also called for the submission of a letter of credit in the amount of $50,000. This has been done and the letter of credit is presently in the possession of the HRA. The contract also called for the signing of an assessment agreement. This did not happen because the developers legal counsel indicated this could not be done because of the ownership status of the properties involved in the project. The amended agreement will include another assessment agreement which will have to be signed by the developer. The amended contract deletes the restaurant portion of the development. (This represented a value of $440,000. ) The developer has indicated that probably in another year or so it will be for the restaurant to be constructed. It was apparently the lack of financial feasibility of the restaurant which created the financing dilemma for the project. The original contract had an estimated market value of $1.2 million for the motel expansion. At this time it is estimated to be valued at $2 million. The original contract called for $500,000 worth of improvements for the campground and the amended contract restates that amount at $300,000. The various site improvements remain valued at $330,000 and represents no change from the original contract. The total estimated minimum market value was $2,470,000 in the original contract and the figure contained in the amended agreement is $2,630,000. This is a crucial point in that the HRA has previously sold bonds on this project. In that the proposed estimated market value exceeds the estimated market value contained in the original agreement there will be sufficient tax increment funding available to service the debt on the outstanding bonds. The original contract called for a construction start no later than September 1, 1986; obviously, this did not happen. The amended contract calls for a construction start no later than July 1, 1987 and completion no later than December 31, 1987. The attached assessment agreement calls for a minimum market value of $1.5 million as of January 2, 1987 and a minimum market value of $3. 0 million as of January 2, 1988 and thereafter extending for the life of the project. Alternatives: 1. Approve the amended and restated contract as discussed above and permit Shakopee Square Properties to delete the restaurant phase of their project. 2. Do not approve the alternative and potentially risk the ability of the developer to obtain financing for the redevelopment project. Recommendation: Approve Resolution No. 87-2 which authorizes the execution of an amended and restated contract for private development with Shakopee Valley Square Properties. RESOLUTION NO. 87-2 A RESOLUTION APPROVING AND AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION OF AN AMENDED AND RESTATED CONTRACT FOR PRIVATE DEVELOPMENT WITH SHAKOPEE VALLEY SQUARE PROPERTIES It is hereby resolved by the Board of Commissioners (the "Board" ) of the Housing and Redevelopment Authority in and for the City of Shakopee, Minnesota (the "Authority" ) , as follows: 1. Recitals. (a) The Authority has the powers provided in Minnesota Statutes, Sections 462. 411 et sem. , as amended (the "Act" ) . (b) Pursuant to and in furtherance of the objec- tives of the Act, the Authority has undertaken a program to promote development and redevelopment of certain land within the City of Shakopee and in this connection is engaged in carrying out its redevelopment project known as the Minnesota River Valley Housing and Redevelopment Project No. 1 (the "Redevelopment Project" ) in an area (the "Project Area") located in the City. (c) There has been approved by this Board, pur- suant to the Act, a Redevelopment Program for the Rede- velopment Project, as amended (the "Redevelopment Pro- gram" ) . (d) The acquisition and the subsequent sale or lease of the potential development property to private developers for development and redevelopment are stated objectives of the Redevelopment Program. (e) In order to achieve the objectives of the Redevelopment Program and particularly to make the land in the Project Area available for development by private enterprise in conformance with the Redevelopment Pro- gram, the Authority has determined to provide substan- tial aid and assistance in connection with the Rede- velopment Program through the financing of certain of the public costs of development in the Project Area. (f) Shakopee Valley Square Properties, a Minnesota general partnership (the "Developer") , has presented the Authority with an amended proposal for the construction within the Project Area of a motel expansion and a camp- ground/recreational facility, and a certain Amended and Restated Contract for Private Development between the Authority and the Developer (the "Development Agree- ment") stating the terms and conditions of such revised development proposal and stating the Authority' s responsibilities respecting the assistance thereof has been presented to this Board for its consideration. 2. This Board hereby approves the Development Agree- ment substantially in the form presented to the Board and hereby authorizes the Chairman and the Executive Director to execute the same on behalf of the Authority, with such addi- tions and modifications as those officers may deem desirable or necessary, as evidenced by their execution thereof. 3. Upon execution and delivery of the Development Agreement, the officers and employees of the Authority are hereby authorized and directed to take or cause to be taken such actions as may be necessary on behalf of the Authority to implement said agreement. 4. The Board hereby determines that the execution and performance of the Development Agreement will help realize the public purposes of the Act and are in furtherance of the Redevelopment Program. Adopted by the Shakopee HRA Board of Commissioners on , 1987 . Adopted in session of the Shakopee Housing and Redevelopment authority of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota, held this day of 1987. Chairperson ATTEST: Executive Director Approved as to form this day of 1987. Attorney 2 - BND/shakopel26 ( ' 3/30/87 DRAFT •IY AMENDED AND RESTATED CONTRACT FOR PRIVATE DEVELOPMENT I By and Between THE HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY IN AND FOR THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA And SHAKOPEE VALLEY SQUARE PROPERTIES This document drafted by: O'CONNOR & HANNAN 3800 IDS Tower Minneapolis, Minnesota 55402 (612) 341-3800 TABLE OF CONTENTS (This Table of Contents is not part of the Contract for Private Development and is only for convenience of reference. ) Page PARTIES. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1 PREAMBLE. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 ARTICLE I - DEFINITIONS Section 1.1. Definitions. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1-1 ARTICLE II - REPRESENTATIONS, COVENANTS AND WARRANTIES Section 2.1. Representations and Warranties by - the Authority. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-1 Section 2.2. Representations, Covenants and Warranties by the Developer . . . . . . . . . . .2-1 ARTICLE III - SITE ACQUISITION AND IMPROVEMENT ASSISTANCE; CONSTRUCTION PLANS; CERTIFICATE OF COMPLETION Section 3.1. Assistance for Site Acquisition and Improvement Costs. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .3-1 Section 3. 2. Construction Plans. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .3-2 Section 3. 3. Commencement and Completion of Construction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .3-3 Section 3. 4. Certificate of Completion. . . . . . . . . . . . .3-3 Section 3. 5. Letter of Credit. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .3-3 Section 3.6. Prior Agreement. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .3-3 ARTICLE IV - ASSESSMENT AGREEMENT Section 4.1. Execution of Assessment Agreement. . . . .4-1 Section 4. 2. Real Property Taxes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-1 ARTICLE V - EVENTS OF DEFAULT Section 5.1. Events of Default Defined. . . . . . . . . . . . .5-1 Section 5.2. Remedies on Default. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .5-1 Section 5.3. No Remedy Exclusive. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .5-1 f, Section 5. 4. No Additional Waiver Implied by One Waiver . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .5-1 Section 5. 5. Agreement to Pay Attorney's Fees and Expenses. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .5-2 ARTICLE VI - ADDITIONAL PROVISIONS Section 6.1. Restrictions on Use. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .6-1 Section 6.2. Notices and Demands. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .6-1 Section 6.3. Counterparts. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .6-1 Section 6.4. Law Governing. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .6-1 Section 6. 5. Termination of this Agreement. . . . . . . . .6-1 ( i ) TESTIMONIUM. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .6-2 SIGNATURES. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .6-2 EXHIBIT A - Development Property. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .A-1 EXHIBIT B - Assessment Agreement. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .B-1 EXHIBIT C - Certificate of Completion. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .C-1 (ii ) AMENDED AND RESTATED CONTRACT FOR PRIVATE DEVELOPMENT THIS AGREEMENT, made and executed on or as of the day of , 1987, by and between the Housing and Rede- velopment Authority in and for the City of Shakopee, Minne- sota (the "Authority" ) , a political subdivision of the State of Minnesota organized under the Constitution and laws of the State of Minnesota, and Shakopee Valley Square Prop- erties, a Minnesota partnership (the "Developer" ) . WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, the Board of Commissioners (the "Board" ) of the Authority has determined that there is a need for develop- ment and redevelopment within the corporate limits of the City to provide employment opportunities, to improve the tax base and to improve the general economy of the City and the State of Minnesota; WHEREAS, in furtherance of these objectives, the Author- ity has established, pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Sec- tions 462.411 et seg. (the "Redevelopment Act" ) , a redevel- opment program known as the Modified Housing and Redevelop- ment. Plan for its Minnesota River Valley Housing and Redevelopment Project No. 1 (which program is hereinafter referred to as the "Redevelopment Program") in the City to encourage and provide maximum opportunity for private devel- opment and redevelopment of certain property in the City which is not now in its highest and best use; WHEREAS, as of the date of this Agreement the Redevelop- ment Program has been prepared and approved by the Board pursuant to the Redevelopment Act, and the Authority' s Min- nesota River Valley Housing and Redevelopment Project No. 1, as amended (hereinafter referred to as the "Redevelopment District" ) , has been established; WHEREAS, pursuant to the Prior Agreement (as defined herein) the Developer agreed to construct the Camp- ground/Recreational Facilities, the Restaurant, and the Motel Expansion (as such terms are defined therein) , and the Developer has indicated that it wishes to revise its plans and to delete the Restaurant portion of the project; WHEREAS, in order to achieve the objectives of the Rede- velopment Program and particularly to make the land in the Redevelopment District available for development by private enterprise for and in accordance with the uses specified in the Redevelopment Program, the Authority has determined to provide substantial aid and assistance in connection with the Redevelopment Program through the financing of certain of the public costs of development within the Redevelopment District; and WHEREAS, the Authority believes that the fulfillment generally of the terms of this Agreement are in the best interests of the Authority and will promote the health, safety and welfare of the City's residents and are in accord with the public purposes and provisions of the applicable State and local laws and requirements under which the Rede- velopment Program has been undertaken and is being assisted: NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the premises and the mutual obligations of the parties hereto, each of them does hereby covenant and agree with the other as follows: - 2 ARTICLE I Definitions Section 1.1. Definitions. In this Agreement, unless a different meaning clearly appears from the context: "Agreement" means this Amended and Restated Contract for Private Development by and between the Authority and the Developer, as the same may be from time to time modified, amended or supplemented. "Assessed Property" means, as defined in the Assessment Agreement, the Project, as the same may exist from time to time. "Assessor ' s Minimum Market Values" means the agreed minimum market values for property tax purposes certified by the Assessor for Scott County pursuant to the Assessment ` Agreement. "Assessment Agreement" means the assessment agreement, substantially in the form of the attached Exhibit B, to be executed by and between the Authority and the Developer pursuant to the provisions and requirements of Minnesota Statutes, Section 273.76, Subd. 8, establishing the Asses- sor 's Minimum Market Values. "Authority" means the Housing and Redevelopment Author- ity in and for the City of Shakopee, Minnesota. "Board" means the Board of Commissioners, the governing body of the Authority. "Campground/Recreation Facilities" means the camping and recreational facilities to be constructed on the Development Property by the Developer pursuant to this Agreement, con- sisting of approximately 216 pads for vehicles and an ap- proximately 5,940 square foot building which shall include restroom/shower, store, swimming pool and meeting room facilities. "Certificate of Completion" means the certification, in the form of the certificate attached as Exhibit C hereto, provided to the Developer pursuant to Section 3.4 of this Agreement, upon satisfactory completion of the Minimum Improvements. "City" means the City of Shakopee, Minnesota. "Construction Plans" means, as further described in Section 3.2 hereof, the plans, specifications, drawings and 1 - 1 related documents on all improvements to be completed pur- suant to this Agreement by the Developer on the Development Property, including all on-site improvements to be per- formed, installed or constructed thereon. Such plans shall, at a minimum, include for each building or other structure or improvement to be constructed at least the following, where applicable: (i ) site plan; (ii) foundation plan; (iii) basement plans; (iv) floor plan for each floor; (v) cross sections of each (length and width) ; (vi) elevations (all sides) ; and (vii ) landscape plan, and shall include as well adequate plans, drawings and specifications relating to all driveways, walks, parking and other improvements to be constructed. "Council" means the City Council, the governing body of the City. "County" means the County of Scott, Minnesota. "Developer" means Shakopee Valley Square Properties, a Minnesota partnership, or its successors or assigns under this Agreement. "Development Property" means the real property described in Exhibit A of this Agreement. "Event of Default" means any Event of Default described in Section 5.1 of this Agreement. "Minimum Improvements" means the construction on the Development Property by the Developer of the Motel Expansion and the Campground/Recreation Facilities, and Minimum Improvements also includes all other and related improve- ments, including the Site Improvements and all related driveways, walks, parking, fixtures and equipment to be constructed or installed by the Developer pursuant to this Agreement. "Motel Expansion" means the addition to the existing motel, to be constructed by the Developer pursuant to this Agreement on the Development Property, of approximately 62 motel rooms, a swimming pool, a meeting room, and related ' facilities. "Party" means either the Developer or the Authority, as the context may require. "Parties" means the Developer and the Authority. "Prior Agreement" means that certain Contract for Private Development, executed by the Authority and the Developer in June of 1986, concerning the "Project," as defined therein. 1 - 2 "Project" means the Development Property and the Minimum improvements. "Redevelopment District" means the Authority' s Minnesota River Valley Housing and Redevelopment Project No. 1, as amended and as the same may be further amended. "Redevelopment Program" means the Authority' s Modified Housing and Redevelopment Plan for the Redevelopment Dis- trict, as amended. "Site filImprovements" means soil corrections, including excavation, ling and topsoil applications; ponding and storm sewer improvements; related drainage improvements; removal of certain existing parking lots and driveways; new parking lot and driveway preparations and construction; landscaping; utility installations; and any other improve- ments of the Development Property deemed necessary or desir- able by the Developer to prepare said property for the con- struction of the Motel Expansion or the Campground/Recrea- tion Facilities; all to be undertaken and completed on the Development Property by the Developer. "State" means the State of Minnesota. "Tax Official" means any City or County Assessor; County Auditor; City, County or State Hoard of Equalization; the Commissioner of Revenue of the State; or any State or Fed- eral District Court, the Tax Court of the State or the State Supreme Court. "Termination Date" means the date of expiration of the Assessment Agreement, as provided in Section 4.1 of this Agreement. "Unavoidable Delays" means delays, outside the control of the Party claiming its occurrence, which are the direct result of strikes, other labor troubles, material shortages, unusually severe or prolonged bad weather, Acts of God, fire or other casualty, litigation commenced by third parties which, by injunction or other similar judicial action, directly results in delays, or acts of any federal, state or local governmental unit (other than the Authority) which directly result in delays. 1 - 3 ARTICLE II Representations, Covenants and Warranties Section 2.1. Representations and Warranties by the Authority. The Authority represents and warrants that: - (a) The Authority is a municipal corporation and political subdivision of the State organized and exist- ing under the laws of the State. (b) The Authority has the authority to enter into this Agreement and carry out its obligations hereunder, subject to the same enforceability exceptions provided in Section 2.2(a) with respect to the Developer. (c) The Development Property is or will be in- cluded within the Redevelopment District. (d) The Authority makes no representation or war- ranty, either express or implied, as to the Development Property or its condition or that the Development Prop- erty shall be suitable for the Developer 's purposes or needs. (e) The Authority has received no notice or com- munication from any local, state or federal official that the performance by the Developer or the Authority under this Agreement may or will be in violation of any local, state or federal law or regulation. Section 2.2. R Dresentationst Covenants and Warranties by the Developer. The Developer represents and warrants that : (a) The Developer is a Minnesota partnership and has full power and authority to enter into this Agree- ment and the Assessment Agreement and to perform its obligations hereunder and under the Assessment Agreement and has taken or caused to be taken all actions neces- sary to make such Agreements, when executed and deliv- ered by the Parties, the valid and binding agreements , and obligations of the Developer, enforceable in accor- dance with their respective terms, except to the extent such enforceability may be limited by equitable princi- ples and by laws affecting remedies and by bankruptcy, moratorium and insolvency laws and laws affecting credi- tors ' rights, heretofore or hereafter enacted. (b) The Developer will undertake and complete the Project in accordance with the terms of this Agreement (including without limitation the Construction Plans) , 2 - 1 the Redevelopment Program and all applicable local, state and federal laws and regulations (including, but not limited to, environmental, zoning, building code and public health laws and regulations) . (c) The Developer has received no notice or com- munication from any local, state or federal official that the execution of this Agreement or the performance by the Developer or the Authority under this Agreement is, may be or will be in violation of any local, state or federal law or regulation. (d) The Developer will use its best efforts to obtain, in a timely manner, all required permits, licenses and approvals, and to meet, in a timely manner, all requirements of all applicable local, state and federal laws and regulations which must be obtained or met before the Project may be lawfully completed. ' (e) Neither the execution and delivery of this Agreement and the Assessment Agreement and the consumma- tion of the transactions contemplated hereby nor the fulfillment of or compliance with the terms and condi- tions of this Agreement and the Assessment Agreement is prevented or limited by or in conflict with or will result in a breach of the terms, conditions or provi- sions of any evidences of indebtedness, agreement or instrument of whatever nature to which the Developer is now a party or by which it or its property is bound or will constitute a default under any of the foregoing. (f) The Developer releases from and covenants and agrees that the Authority and the members of the Hoard and the officers, agents, servants and employees thereof (hereinafter, for purposes of this subsection, the "indemnified parties" ) shall not be liable for and agrees to indemnify and hold harmless the indemnified parties against any loss or damage to property or any injury to or death of any person occurring at or about or resulting from any defect in the Development Prop- erty. Except for any willful misrepresentation or any e willful or wanton misconduct of the indemnified parties, the Developer agrees to protect and defend the indem- nified parties, now or forever, and further agrees to hold the indemnified parties harmless from any claim, demand, 'suit, action or other proceeding whatsoever by any person or entity whatsoever arising or purportedly arising (1) from this Agreement (except with respect to any suit, action, demand or other proceeding brought by the Developer against the Authority to enforce the Developer 's rights under this Agreement) , or (2) the transactions contemplated hereby or the acquisition, 2 - 2 construction, installation, ownership, and operation of the Project. The indemnified parties shall not be lia- ble for any damage or injury to the persons or property of the Developer or its officers, agents, servants or employees or any other person who may be about the Proj- ect due to any act of negligence of any person. The Developer acknowledges and agrees that all covenants, stipulations, promises, agreements and obligations of the Authority contained herein shall be deemed to be the covenants, stipulations, promises, agreements and obli- gations of the Authority and not of any member of the Board or of any officer, agent, servant or employee of the Authority in the individual capacity thereof. (g) The Developer reasonably estimates that the cost of the Motel Expansion will not be less than ap- proximately $2,000,000, that the cost of the Camp- ground/Recreation Facilities will not be less than approximately $300,000 and that the total cost of the Development Property and the Site Improvements exceeds $330,000. (h) Prior to the issuance of the Certificate of Completion, except only by way of security for the pur- pose of obtaining financing necessary to enable the Developer to perform its obligations with respect to completing the Project under this Agreement, and any other purpose authorized by this Agreement, the Devel- oper (except as so authorized) has not made or created and will not make or create or suffer to be made or created any total or partial sale, assignment, convey- ance, or lease, or any trust or power, or transfer in any other mode or form of or with respect to the Agree- ment or the Development Property or any part thereof or any interest therein, or any contract or agreement to do any of the same, without the prior written .approval of the Authority. The Authority shall be entitled to re- quire, except as may otherwise be provided in this Agreement, as conditions to any such approval that: ( i) Any proposed transferee shall have the qualifications and financial responsibility, in the reasonable judgment of the Authority, necessary and adequate to fulfill the obligations undertaken in this Agreement by the Developer. (ii ) Any proposed transferee, by instrument in writing satisfactory to the Authority shall, for itself and its successors and assigns, and ex- pressly for the benefit of the Authority, have expressly assumed all of the obligations of the Developer under this Agreement and agreed to be 2 - 3 subject to all the conditions and restrictions to which the Developer is subject unless the Developer agrees to continue to fulfill those obligations, in which case the preceding provisions of this Section 2 . 2(h) (ii) shall not apply; provided, however, that the fact that any transferee of, or any other suc- cessor in interest whatsoever to, the Development Property, or any part thereof, shall not, for what- ever reason, have assumed such obligations or so agreed, shall not (unless and only to the extent otherwise specifically provided in the Agreement or agreed to in writing by the Authority) deprive the Authority of any rights or remedies or controls with respect to the Development Property or the completion of the Project; it being the intent of the Parties as expressed in this Agreement that (to the fullest extent permitted by law and equity and excepting only in the manner and to the extent specifically provided otherwise in the Agreement) no transfer of, or change with respect to, owner- ship in the Development Property or any part there- of, or any interest therein, however consummated or occurring, and whether voluntary or involuntary, shall operate, legally or practically, to deprive or limit the Authority of or with respect to any rights or remedies or controls provided in or re- sulting from the Agreement with respect to the Development Property and the construction of the Project that the Authority would have had had there been no such transfer or change. In the absence of specific written agreement by the Authority to the contrary, no such transfer or approval by the Authority thereof shall be deemed to relieve the Developer or any other party bound in any way by this Agreement or otherwise with respect to the construction or completion of the Project from any of its obligations with respect thereto. (iii) There shall be submitted to the Authority for review and prior written approval all instru- ments and other documents involved in effecting the transfer of any interest in this Agreement or the Development Property governed by this Section 2.2(h) . 2 - 4 ARTICLE III Site Acquisition and Imrovement Assistance; Construction Plans; Certificate of completion Section 3.1. Assistance for SiteAcquisition and Improvement Costs. The Developer shall acquire all of the Development Property and, following the submission to and approval by the Authority of Construction Plans for the Minimum Improvements pursuant to Section 3.2, the Developer shall undertake and complete the Project. Upon completion of the Project, provided that no Event of Default has occurred and is continuing or will with the passage of time occur hereunder, and provided further that the Authority shall have issued the Certificate of Completion to the Developer pursuant to Section 3.4 hereof, the Authority shall pay to the Developer the sum of $330,000, which shall constitute a reimbursement and writedown of the costs of the Development Property and the Site Improvements. Section 3.2. Construction Plans. (a) Prior to the commencement of the construction of the Minimum Improvements, the Developer shall have submitted to the Authority, and the Authority shall have approved pursuant to this Agreement, Construction Plans therefor. The Construction Plans shall provide for the construction of the Minimum Improvements and shall be in conformity with the Redevelopment Program and this Agreement, and all applicable state, federal and local laws and regulations. The Authority shall approve the Construction Plans in writing if: (a) the Construction Plans conform to the terms and conditions of this Agree- ment; (b) the Construction Plans conform to the terms and conditions of the Redevelopment Program; (c) the Construction Plans are adequate to provide for the con- struction of the Minimum Improvements; and (d) no Event of Default has occurred; provided, however, that any such approval of the Construction Plans pursuant to this Section 3.2 shall constitute approval for the purposes of this Agreement only and shall not be deemed to con- stitute approval or waiver by the Authority or the City with respect to any building, zoning or other ordinances or regulations of the City, and shall not be deemed to be sufficient plans to serve as the basis for the issu- ance of a building permit if the Construction Plans are not as detailed or complete as the plans otherwise required for the issuance of a building permit. Such Construction Plans must be rejected in writing by the Authority within 30 days of submission or shall be deemed to have been approved by the Authority. If the Authority rejects the Construction Plans in whole or in 3 - 1 i part, the Developer shall submit new or corrected Con- struction Plans within 30 days after receipt by the - Developer of written notification of the rejection, accompanied by a written statement of the Authority specifying the respects in which the Construction Plans submitted by the Developer fail to conform to the re- quirements of this Agreement. The provisions of this Section relating to approval, rejection and resubmission of corrected Construction Plans shall continue to apply until the Construction Plans have been approved by the Authority. Approval of the Construction Plans by the Authority shall not relieve the Developer of any obli- gation to comply, and such approval shall not constitute or be deemed to constitute a determination by the Authority that the Construction Plans do comply, with the terms and provisions of this Agreement, the provi- sions of the Redevelopment Program, or the provisions of applicable federal, State and local laws, ordinances and regulations, nor shall approval of the Construction Plans by the Authority be deemed to constitute a waiver of any Event of Default. (b) If the Developer desires to make any material change in the Construction Plans after their approval by the Authority, the Developer shall submit the proposed change to the Authority for its approval. If the Con- struction Plans, as modified by the proposed change, conform to the approval criteria listed in Section 3.2(a) with respect to the original Construction Plans, the Authority shall approve the proposed change. Such change in the Construction Plans shall be deemed ap- proved by the Authority unless rejected in writing with- in 30 days by the Authority with a statement of the Authority' s reasons for such rejection. Section 3.3. Commencement and Completion of Construc- tion. (a) Subject to Unavoidable Delays, the Developer shall commence construction of the Minimum Improvements on or before July 1, 1987. (b) Subject to Unavoidable Delays, the Developer shall have substantially completed the construction of the Minimum Improvements on or prior to December 31, 1987. (c) All work with respect to the Project to be constructed or provided by the Developer on the Develop- ment Property shall be in conformity with the Construc- tion Plans as submitted by the Developer and approved by the Authority. 3 - 2 Section 3.4. Certificate of Completion. Promptly after completion of the Project by the Developer in accordance with the provisions of this Agreement, upon the written request of the Developer to the Authority, the Authority shall furnish to the Developer the Certificate of Comple- tion, in substantially the form set forth in Exhibit C attached hereto. If upon request by the Developer the Authority shall refuse to furnish a Certificate of Comple- tion, the Authority shall furnish the reasons for such refusal. Such Certificate of Completion shall be a conclu- sive determination of satisfaction and termination of the agreements and covenants in this Agreement with respect to the obligations of the Developer to construct and complete the Project. Section 3.5. Letter of Credit. The Developer shall furnish, or cause to be furnished, to the Authority, on or before the date on which the City authorizes the sale of its bonds to assist the Authority in financing the Authority's obligations hereunder, an irrevocable letter of credit (the "Letter of Credit" ) acceptable in form and substance to the Authority from a financial institution acceptable to the Authority in the amount of $50,000, effective until the date on which the Authority issues the Certificate of Completion and September 1, 1988, whichever shall occur earlier, which provides that if the Minimum Improvements have not been substantially completed by September 1, 1988, such that a Certificate of Completion cannot be issued by the Authority, or if there occurs an Event of Default which remains uncured for 90 days, then the Authority may draw the entire amount of the Letter of Credit, which funds the Authority shall forever retain as partial liquidated damages or reimburse- ment of expenses; provided that a Letter of Credit expiring prior to September 1, 1988, shall be acceptable to he Authority if such Letter of Credit provides that the Author- ity may draw thereon in the event that the Developer fails to furnish a replacement Letter of Credit in form and sub- stance acceptable to the Authority at least thirty (30) days prior to the expiration of the Letter of Credit then in effect. No draw on the Letter of Credit shall, in and of itself, constitute a termination of this Agreement or ab- solve the Developer of any of its obligations hereunder. The Authority at its discretion may reduce the Letter of Credit prior to the issuance of the Certificate of Comple- tion. The Parties agree that the Letter of Credit furnished by the Developer under the Prior Agreement shall continue in full force and effect. Section 3.6. Prior Agreement. Except as modified by this Agreement, the Prior Agreement shall remain in full force and effect. 3 - 3 ARTICLE IV Assessment Agreement Section 4 .1. Execution of Assessment Agreement. At the time of execution and delivery of this Agreement, or at the time at which the Developer shall have acquired the Develop- ment Property, whichever is later, the Developer shall enter into the Assessment Agreement with the Authority, pursuant to the provisions of Minnesota Statutes, Section 273.76, Subd. 8, specifying the Assessor 's Minimum Market Value which shall be established with respect to the Assessed Property, for calculation of real estate taxes. Specifi- cally, the Developer shall agree that the Assessor 's Minimum Market Values of the Assessed Property, beginning January 2, 1987, and thereafter shall be not less than the amount or respective amounts set forth in the attached form of Assess- ment Agreement. Nothing in the Assessment Agreement shall limit the discretion of the assessor to assign market values to the property in excess of such Assessor 's Minimum Market Values or prohibit the Developer from seeking through the exercise of legal or administrative remedies a reduction in such market values for property tax purposes, provided how- ever, that the Developer shall not seek a reduction of such market values below such Assessor 's Minimum Market Values in any year so long as the Assessment Agreement shall remain in effect. The Assessment Agreement shall remain in effect through December 31, 2000 ( the "Termination Date" ) , to the effect that the 2000 payable 2001 property taxes shall be the last taxes subject thereto. Pursuant to Minnesota Stat- utes, Section 273.76, Subd. 8, the Assessment Agreement shall be filed for record in the office of the county recorder or registrar of titles of Scott County, Minnesota, and such filing shall constitute notice to any subsequent encumbrancer or purchaser of the Development Property, whether voluntary or involuntary, and such Assessment Agree- ment shall be binding and enforceable in its entirety against any such subsequent purchaser or encumbrancer . Section 4.2. Real Property Taxes. (a) The Developer shall pay all real property taxes payable with respect to the Development Property and any other statutory or contractual duty which shall be payable or accrue following the Developer 's acquisi- tion thereof pursuant to this Agreement, provided that this Agreement shall not impose personal liability upon the Developer for real property taxes. 4 - 1 (b) The Developer agrees that prior to the Termi- nation Date: ( i) It will not seek administrative review or judicial review of the applicability of any tax statute relating to the taxation of real property contained within the Development Property deter- mined by any Tax Official to be applicable to the Redevelopment District or the Developer or raise the inapplicability of any such tax statute as a defense in any proceedings, including delinquent tax proceedings. (ii) It will not seek administrative review or judicial review of the constitutionality of any tax statute relating to the taxation of real property contained within the Development Property deter- mined by any Tax Official to be applicable to the Redevelopment District or the Developer or raise the unconstitutionality of any such tax statute as a defense in any proceedings, including delinquent tax proceedings. (iii) It will not seek any tax deferral or abatement, either presently or prospectively autho- rized under Minnesota Statutes, Section 273.86, or any other State or federal law, of the taxation of real property contained in the Development Property between the date of execution of this Agreement and the Termination Date; provided that the Developer may challenge a valuation in excess of the Asses- sor ' s Minimum Market Values, but may not seek a lower valuation than the Assessor 's Minimum Market Values. 4 - 2 ARTICLE V Events of Default Section 5. 1. Events of Default Defined. The following shall be "Events of Default" under this Agreement, and the term "Event of Default" shall mean whenever it is used in this Agreement any one or more of the following events: (a) Failure by the Developer to acquire the Devel- opment Property and to commence and complete the Minimum Improvements pursuant to the terms of this Agreement. (b) Failure by the Developer to substantially observe or perform any material covenant, condition, obligation or agreement on its part to be observed or performed under this Agreement. Section 5.2. Remedies on Default. Whenever any Event of Default referred to in Section 5.1 of this Agreement occurs or with the passage of time or giving of notice, or both, will occur, the Authority may take any one or more of the following actions after giving 30 days ' written notice to the Developer of the Event of Default, but only if the Event of Default has not been cured within said 30 days: (a) The Authority may suspend its performance under the Agreement until it receives assurances from the Developer, deemed adequate by the Authority, that the Developer will cure its default and continue its performance under the Agreement. (b) The Authority may cancel and rescind this Agreement. (c) The Authority may take whatever action, including legal or administrative action, which may appear necessary or desirable to the Authority to col- lect any payments due under this Agreement or to enforce performance and observance of any obligation, agreement or covenant of the Developer under this Agreement. Section 5.3. No Remedy Exclusive. No remedy herein conferred upon or reserved to the Authority is intended to be exclusive of any other available remedy or remedies here- under, but each and every such remedy shall be cumulative and shall be in addition to every other remedy given under this Agreement. No delay or omission to exercise any right or power accruing hereunder upon any default shall impair any such right or power or shall be construed to be a waiver thereof, but any such right and power may be exercised from time to time and as often as may be deemed expedient. 5 - 1 - Section 5.4. No Additional Waiver Implied by One Wai- ver . In the event any agreement contained in this Agreement should be breached by any Party and thereafter waived by any other Party, such waiver shall be limited to the particular breach so waived and shall not be deemed to waive any other concurrent , previous or subsequent breach hereunder . Section 5.5 Agreement to Pay Attorney' s Fees and Expenses. Whenever an Event of Default occurs and has not been cured during the applicable cure period and the Author- ity shall employ attorneys or incur other expenses payable to any third party for the collection of payments due or to become due or for the enforcement or performance or obser- vance of any obligation or agreement on the part of the Developer herein contained, the Developer agrees that it shall, on demand therefor, pay to the Authority the reason- able fees of such attorneys and such other expenses so incurred by the Authority. 5 - 2 ARTICLE VI Additional Provisions Section 6.1. Restrictions on Use. The Developer agrees for itself, its successors and assigns and every successor in interest to the Development Property, or any part thereof, that the Developer and such successors and assigns shall devote the Development Property to, and only to, and in accordance with, the uses specified in the City Code of Ordinances and in this Agreement. Section 6.2. Notices and Demands. Except as may be otherwise expressly provided in this Agreement, a notice, demand or other communication under the Agreement by either Party to the other shall be sufficiently given or delivered if sent by registered or certified mail, postage prepaid, return receipt requested, or delivered personally, (a) in the case of the Developer is addressed or delivered personally to Shakopee Valley Square Prop- erties, c/o Shakopee Valley Motel, 1251 East First Avenue, Shakopee, Minnesota 55379, Attention: Wallace Bakken; (b) in the case of the Authority, is addressed or delivered personally to the Authority at the Shakopee City Hall, 129 East lst Avenue, Shakopee, Minnesota 55379, Attention: Executive Director; or at such other address of a Party as may be designated in writing and forwarded to the other Party as provided in this Section. Section 6.3. Counterparts. This Agreement may be exe- cuted in any number of counterparts, each of which shall constitute one and the same instrument. Section 6.4. Law Governing. This Agreement shall be governed and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of Minnesota. Section 6.5. Termination of this Agreement. This Agreement shall terminate on the earlier of the Termination Date and the date on which this Agreement shall have been cancelled and rescinded by the Authority pursuant to Section 5.2(b) or (c) hereof. The Assessment Agreement shall also terminate upon termination of this Agreement pursuant to this Section. 6 - 1 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Authority has caused this Agree- ment to be duly executed in its name and behalf by its duly authorized representatives, and the Developer has caused this Agreement to be duly executed in its name and behalf by its duly authorized representatives on or as of the date first above written. THE HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY IN AND FOR THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA By Chairman And Executive Director 6 - 2 SHAKOPEE VALLEY SQUARE PROPERTIES By Its And Its [Execution page of Developer of Amended and Restated Con- tract for Private Development between the Housing and Redevelopment Authority in and for the City of Shakopee, Minnesota, and Shakopee Valley Square Properties] 6 - 3 STATE OF MINNESOTA) ) ss. COUNTY OF SCOTT ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of , 1987, by and the Chairman of the Hoard of Directors and Executive Director, respectively, of the Housing and Redevelopment Authority in and for the City of Shakopee, Minnesota, on behalf of said Authority. Notary Public IIi 6 - 4 STATE OF MINNESOTA) )ss. COUNTY OF ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of 1987, by and , the and respectively, of Shakopee Valley Square Properties, a Minnesota partnership, on behalf of said Notary Public 6 - 5 EXHIBIT A (Development Property) Lot 1, Block 1 , Halo Second Addition, according to the recorded plat thereof, Scott County, Minnesota. That part of Lots 2 and 3, Block 1 , Halo Second Addition, according to the recorded plat thereof, Scott County, Minnesota described as follows: - Beginning at the northwest corner of said Lot 2; thence northeasterly along the northerly line of said Lot 2 and 3 a distance of 198 .00 feet; thence southeasterly parallel with the easterly line of said Lot 2 to the southerly line of said Lot 3 ; thence southwesterly along said southerly line a distance of 150. 00 feet; thence deflecting at an angle of 48 degrees 54 minutes to the right to the westerly line of said Lot 2 ; thence northerly along said westerly line to the point of beginning. That part of Lot 3, Block 1 , Halo Second Addition, according to the recorded plat thereof, Scott County, Minnesota, lying easterly of the following described line: Commencing at the southeast corner of said Lot 3 ; thence southwesterly along the southerly line of said Lot 3 a distance of 150.00 feet to the point of beginning of the line to be described; thence northwesterly at right angles a distance of 150.00 feet to the northerly line of said Lot 3 and there terminating. That part of Lot 2, Block 1, Halo Second Addition, according to the recorded plat thereof , Scott County, Minnesota, lying southwesterly of the following described line: Commencing at the southeast corner of said Lot 2; thence southwesterly along the southerly line of said Lot 2 a distance of 126 .00 feet to the point of beginning of the line to be described; thence deflecting at an angle of 48 degrees 54 minutes to the right to the westerly line of said Lot 2 and there terminating. Lot 4, Block 1, Halo Second Addition, according to the recorded plat thereof, Scott County, Minnesota. Together with that part of Government Lots 4 and 5, Section 6 , Township 115, Range 22 , Scott County, Minnesota, described as follows: A - 1 Beginning at the northeast corner of Lot 4 , Block 1 , Halo Second Addition, according to the recorded plat thereof , Scott County, Minnesota ; thence southeasterly along the easterly line of said Lot 4 to a point 310.00 feet north- westerly of the north right of way line of First Street and parallel with Naumkaeg Street; thence North 79 degrees 17 minutes 51 seconds East parallel with said First Street to a line 73. 00 feet westerly of and parallel with the east line of said Government Lot 5; thence North 0 degrees 10 minutes 51 seconds East parallel with said east line a distance of 63.30 feet; thence North 71 degrees 57 minutes 51 seconds East to the east line of said Government Lot 5 ; thence North 0 degrees 10 minutes 51 seconds East along said east line to the waters edge of the Minnesota River; thence westerly along said waters edge to the intersection with a line described as follows: Commencing at a point on the east line of previously men- tioned Naumkaeg Street 889. 00 feet northerly of the southwest corner of Block 31, East Shakopee, Minnesota, according to the recorded plat thereof; thence North 79 degrees 17 minutes 51 seconds East, parallel with the previously mentioned First Street 601.20 feet to the point of beginning of the line to be described; thence North 11 degrees 03 minutes 07 seconds West , parallel with said Naumkaeg Street to the waters edge of said Minnesota River and there terminating. Thence South 11 degrees 03 minutes 07 seconds East along the last described line to the point of beginning of said line; thence South 51 degrees 41 minutes 07 seconds East to the intersection with a line 100.00 feet westerly of and parallel with the east line of said Government Lot 4 ; thence South 0 degrees 04 minutes 06 seconds West along said parallel line to the northwest corner of Halo First Addition, according to the recorded plat thereof; thence South 68 degrees 20 minutes 48 seconds East along the northeasterly line of said Halo First Addition to the intersection with a line described as follows: Commencing at the northeast corner of said Lot 4 , Block 1 , Halo Second Addition; thence South 79 degrees 17 minutes 51 seconds West along the northerly line of said Lot 4 a distance of 366.35 feet; thence North 9 degrees 36 minutes 05 seconds West a distance of 241.75 feet ; thence South 81 degrees 45 minutes 03 seconds West a distance of 365. 00 feet to the point of beginning of the line to be described; thence South 6 degrees 35 minutes 19 seconds West to the northeasterly line of said Halo First Addition and there terminating. Gf Thence North 6 degrees 35 minutes 19 seconds East along the last described line to the point of beginning of said line; thence North 81 degrees 45 minutes 03 seconds East a distance of 365. 00 feet ; thence South 9 degrees 36 minutes 05 seconds East to the northerly line of said Lot 4, Block 1, Halo Second Addition; thence easterly along said northerly line to the point of beginning. Together with that part of Outlot A, Halo First Addition, according to the recorded plat thereof, Scott County, Minnesota, lying easterly of the following described line: Commencing at the east corner of said Outlot A; thence westerly along the southerly line of said Outlot A a distance of 66.00 feet to the point of beginning of the line to be described; thence northwesterly to a point on the northeasterly line of said Outlot A lying 120 feet (as measured along the northeasterly line of said Outlot A) northwesterly of the east corner of said Outlot A. Commencing at the northeast corner of Lot 4 , Block 1 , Halo Second Addition, according to the recorded plat thereof, Scott County, Minnesota; thence southwesterly along the northerly line of said Lot 4 a distance of 366.35 feet to the point of beginning of the land to be described; thence North 9 degrees 36 minutes 05 seconds West a distance of 241.75 feet; thence South 81 degrees 45 minutes 03 seconds West a distance of 365.00 feet; thence South 6 degrees 35 minutes 19 seconds West to the northeasterly line of Outlot A, Halo First Addition according to the recorded plat thereof, Scott County, Minnesota; thence southeasterly along said northeasterly line to the east corner of said Outlot A; thence northeasterly along the northerly line of said Lot 4 to the point of beginning. Except that part of said Government Lot 5, described as follows: Commencing at the northeast corner of said Lot 4 , Block 1 , Halo Second Addition; thence southwesterly along the i northerly line of said Lot 4 a distance of 421.40 feet to the point of beginning of the land to be described; thence North 10 degrees 39 minutes 24 seconds West a distance of 189.87 feet; thence South 79 degrees 17 minutes 35 seconds West a distance of 117 .28 feet; thence South 10 degrees 33 minutes 02 seconds East a distance of 177. 60 feet; thence South 18 degrees 56 minutes 02 seconds West to the northerly line of said Lot 4 ; thence northeasterly along said northerly line to the point of beginning. ��I EXHIBIT B ASSESSMENT AGREEMENT and ASSESSOR' S CERTIFICATION By and between THE HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY IN AND FOR THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA and SHAKOPEE VALLEY SQUARE PROPERTIES This document drafted by: O'CONNOR & HANNAN 3800 IDS Tower Minneapolis, Minnesota 55402 (612) 341-3800 B - 1 THIS AGREEMENT, dated as of this day of 1987, by and between the Housing and Redevelopment Authority in and for the City of Shakopee, Minnesota, a municipal cor- poration and political subdivision of the State of Minnesota organized and existing under the Constitution and laws of the State of Minnesota (the "Authority") , and Shakopee Valley Square Properties, a Minnesota partnership (the "Developer" ) ; WITNESSETH, that WHEREAS, on or before the date hereof the Authority and the Developer have entered into a Contract for Private Development dated as of June, 1986, as amended by that cer- tain Amended and Restated Contract for Private Development, dated as of , 1987 (the "Development Agreement") , regarding certain real property located in the Authority's Minnesota River Valley Housing and Redevelopment Project No. 1, pursuant to which the Developer is to acquire certain i property, hereinafter referred to as the Development Prop- erty and legally described in Attachment A hereto; and WHEREAS, it is contemplated that pursuant to said Devel- opment Agreement the Developer will construct on the Devel- opment Property certain improvements; and WHEREAS, the Authority and the Developer desire to establish minimum market values for the Development Property and the improvements to be constructed thereon pursuant to the Development Agreement (as such Development Property and such improvements may exist from time to time, the "Assessed Property" ) , for the calculation of real property taxes, or taxes in lieu thereof pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Sec- tion 272.01, or any successor statute, pursuant to the pro- visions of Minnesota Statutes, Section 273.76, Subdivision 8: NOW, THEREFORE, the parties to this Agreement, in con- sideration of the promises, covenants and agreements made by each to the other, do hereby agree as follows: j 1. The minimum market values which shall be estab- lished for the Assessed Property as of January 2 of the following years shall not be less than the following amounts, respectively: Year Amounts 1987 $1,500,000 1988 and thereafter 3,000,000 H - 2 2. This Agreement shall terminate if the Development Agreement is terminated pursuant to Section 6.5 thereof. 3. The minimum market values herein established shall be of no further force and effect and this Agreement shall terminate on December 31, 2000, to the effect that the 2000 payable 2001 property taxes shall be the last taxes subject to this Agreement. 4. Nothing in this Assessment Agreement (a) shall limit the discretion of the Assessor for Scott County to assign market values to the Assessed Property in excess of the minimum market values set out in paragraph 1 of this Agreement or (b) prohibit the Developer from seeking through the exercise of legal or administrative remedies a reduction in such market values for property tax purposes; provided, however, that the Developer shall not seek a reduction of the market values of the Assessed Property below the minimum market values set out in paragraph 1 of this Agreement so long as this Agreement shall remain in effect. 5. Neither the preambles nor provisions of this Agree- ment are intended to, nor shall they be construed as, mod- ifying the terms of the Development Agreement. 6. This Agreement shall inure to the benefit of and be binding upon the successors and assigns of the parties. HOUSING REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY IN AND FOR THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA By Chairman By Executive Director B - 3 1 II SHAKOPEE VALLEY SQUARE PROPERTIES By Its And Its [Execution page of Developer to Assessment Agreement between Shakopee Valley Square Properties and the Housing and Redevelopment Authority in and for the City of Shakopee, Minnesota. ] B - 4 STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) SS COUNTY OF SCOTT ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of , 1987, by and the Chairman and Executive Director, respectively, of� the Housing and Redevelopment Authority in and for the City of Shakopee, Minnesota, on behalf of said Authority. Notary Public H - 5 - STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) SS COUNTY OF ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of , 1987, by and , the and , respectively, of Shakopee Valley Square Properties, a Minnesota partnership, on behalf of said Notary Public B - 6 - ATTACHMENT A TO ASSESSMENT AGREEMENT )Development Property) The Development Property is located in the City of Shakopee, County of Scott, State of Minnesota, and is legally described as follows : Lot 1 , Block 1 , Halo Second Addition, according to the recorded plat thereof, Scott County, Minnesota. That part of Lots 2 and 3, Block 1, Halo Second Addition, according to the recorded plat thereof, Scott County, Minnesota described as follows : Beginning at the northwest corner of said Lot 2; thence northeasterly along the northerly line of said Lot 2 and 3 a distance of 198.00 feet; thence southeasterly parallel with the easterly line of said Lot 2 to the southerly line of said Lot 3; thence southwesterly along said southerly line a distance of 150. 00 feet; thence deflecting at an angle of 48 degrees 54 minutes to the right to the westerly line of said Lot 2; thence northerly along said westerly line to the point of beginning. That part of Lot 3, Block 1 , Halo Second Addition, according to the recorded plat thereof, Scott County, Minnesota, lying easterly of the following described line: Commencing at the southeast corner of said Lot 3; thence southwesterly along the southerly line of said Lot 3 a distance of 150.00 feet to the point of beginning of the line to be described; thence northwesterly at right angles a distance of 150.00 feet to the northerly line of said Lot 3 and there terminating. That part of Lot 2, Block 1, Halo Second Addition, according to the recorded plat thereof, Scott County, Minnesota, lying southwesterly of the following described line: Commencing at the southeast corner of said Lot 2; thence southwesterly along the southerly line of said Lot 2 a distance of 126.00 feet to the point of beginning of the line to be described; thence deflecting at an angle of - 4B degrees 54 minutes to the right to the westerly line of said Lot 2 and there terminating. Lot 4 , Block 1 , Halo Second Addition, according to the recorded plat thereof , Scott County, Minnesota. Together with that part of Government Lots 4 and 5, Section 6, Township 115, Range 22 , Scott County, Minnesota, described as follows: Beginning at the northeast corner of Lot 4 , Block 1 , Halo Second Addition, according to the recorded plat thereof, Scott county, Minnesota; thence southeasterly along the easterly line of said Lot 4 to a point 310.00 feet north- westerly of the north right of way line of First Street and parallel with Naumkaeg Street; thence North 79 degrees 17 minutes 51 seconds East parallel with said First Street to a line 73 . 00 feet westerly of and parallel with the east line of said Government Lot 5; thence North 0 degrees 10 minutes 51 seconds East parallel with said east line a distance of 63 . 30 feet ; thence North 71 degrees 57 minutes 51 seconds East to the east line of said Government Lot 5; thence North 0 degrees 10 minutes 51 seconds East along said east line to the waters edge of the Minnesota River; thence westerly along said waters edge to the intersection with a line described as follows: commencing at a point on the east line of previously men- tioned Naumkaeg Street 889 .00 feet northerly of the southwest corner of Block 31 , East Shakopee, Minnesota, according to the recorded plat thereof ; thence North 79 degrees 17 minutes 51 seconds East, parallel with the previously mentioned First Street 601 .20 feet to the point of beginning of the line to be described; thence North 11 degrees 03 minutes 07 seconds West, parallel with said Naumkaeg Street to the waters edge of said Minnesota River and there terminating. Thence South 11 degrees 03 minutes 07 seconds East along the last described line to the point of beginning of said line; thence South 51 degrees 41 minutes 07 seconds East to the intersection with a line 100.00 feet westerly of and parallel with the east line of said Government Lot 4 ; thence South 0 degrees 04 minutes 06 seconds West along said parallel line to the northwest corner of Halo First Addition, according to the recorded plat thereof; thence South 68 degrees 20 minutes 48 seconds East along the northeasterly line of said Halo First Addition to the intersection with a line described as follows: commencing at the northeast corner of said Lot 4 , Block 1 , Halo Second Addition; thence South 79 degrees 17 minutes 51 seconds West along the northerly line of said Lot 4 a distance of 366. 35 feet; thence North 9 degrees 36 minutes 05 seconds West a distance of 241.75 feet; thence South 81 degrees 45 minutes 03 seconds West a distance of 365.00 feet to the point of beginning of the line to be described; thence South 6 degrees 35 minutes 19 seconds West to the northeasterly line of said Halo First Addition and there terminating . R - R Thence North 6 degrees 35 minutes 19 seconds East along the last described line to the point of beginning of said - line; thence North 81 degrees 45 minutes 03 seconds East a distance of 365.00 feet; thence South 9 degrees 36 minutes 05 seconds East to the northerly line of said Lot 4 , Block 1 , Halo Second Addition; thence easterly along said northerly line to the point of beginning. Together with that part of Outlot A, Halo First Addition, according to the recorded plat thereof, Scott County, Minnesota, lying easterly of the following described line : Commencing at the east corner of said Outlot A; thence westerly along the southerly line of said Outlot A a distance of 66. D0 feet to the point of beginning of the line to be described; thence northwesterly to a point on the northeasterly line of said Outlot A lying 120 feet (as measured along the northeasterly line of said Outlot A) northwesterly of the east corner of said Outlot A. Commencing at the northeast corner of Lot 4 , Block 1 , Halo Second Addition, according to the recorded plat thereof, Scott County, Minnesota ; thence southwesterly along the northerly line of said Lot 4 a distance of 366. 35 feet to the point of beginning of the land to be described; thence North 9 degrees 36 minutes 05 seconds West a distance of 241.75 feet; thence South 81 degrees 45 minutes 03 seconds West a distance of 365.00 feet; thence South 6 degrees 35 minutes 19 seconds West to the northeasterly line of Outlot A, Halo First Addition according to the recorded plat thereof, Scott County, Minnesota; thence southeasterly along said northeasterly line to the east corner of said Outlot A; thence northeasterly along the northerly line of said Lot 4 to the point of beginning. Except that part of said Government Lot 5, described as follows: Commencing at the northeast corner of said Lot 4 , Block 1 , Halo Second Addition; thence southwesterly along the northerly line of said Lot 4 a distance of 421 .40 feet to the point of beginning of the land to be described; thence North 10 degrees 39 minutes 24 seconds West a distance of 189.87 feet; thence South 79 degrees 17 minutes 35 seconds West a distance of 117 .28 feet; thence South 10 degrees 33 minutes 02 seconds East a distance of 177.60 feet; thence South 18 degrees 56 minutes 02 seconds West to the northerly line of said Lot 4 ; thence northeasterly along said northerly line to the point of beginning. ATTACHMENT B TO ASSESSMENT AGREEMENT Minnesota Statutes, Section 273.76, Subdivision 8: An authority may, upon entering into a development or redevelopment agreement pursuant to section 273.75, subdivi- sion 5, enter into a written assessment agreement in record- able form with the developer or redeveloper of property within the tax increment financing district which estab- lishes a minimum market value of the land and completed improvements to be constructed thereon until a specified termination date, which date shall be not later than the date upon which tax increment will no longer be remitted to the authority pursuant to section 273.75, subdivision 1. The assessment agreement shall be presented to the county assessor, or city assessor having the powers of the county assessor, of the jurisdiction in which the tax increment financing district is located. The assessor shall review the plans and specifications for the improvements to be con- structed, review the market value previously assigned to the land upon which the improvements are to be constructed and, so long as the minimum market value contained in the assess- ment' agreement appears, in the judgment of the assessor, to be a reasonable estimate, shall execute the following certi- fication upon such agreement: The undersigned assessor, being legally responsible for the assessment of the above described property upon completion of the improvements to be constructed thereon, hereby certifies that the market value assigned to such land and improvements upon completion shall not be less than $ Upon transfer of title of the land to be developed or redeveloped from the authority to the developer or redevel- oper, such assessment agreement, together with a copy of this subdivision, shall be filed for record and recorded in the office of the county recorder or filed in the office of the registrar of titles of the county where the real estate or any part thereof is situated. Upon completion of the improvements by the developer or redeveloper, the assessor shall value the property pursuant to section 273.11, except that the market value assigned thereto shall not be less than the minimum market value contained in the assessment agreement. Nothing herein shall limit the discretion of the assessor to assign a market value to the property in excess of the minimum market value contained in the assessment agreement nor prohibit the developer or redeveloper from seeking, through the exercise of administrative and legal remedies, a reduction in market value for property tax pur- poses; provided, however, that the developer or redeveloper B — la shall not seek, nor shall the city assessor, the county assessor, the county auditor, any board of review, any board of equalization, the commissioner of revenue or any court of this state grant a reduction of the market value below the minimum market value contained in the assessment agreement during the term of the agreement filed of record regardless of actual market values which may result from incomplete construction of improvements, destruction or diminution by any cause, insured or uninsured, except in the case of acquisition or reacquisition of the property by a public entity. Recording or filing of an assessment agreement complying with the terms of this subdivision shall consti- tute notice of the agreement to any subsequent purchaser or encumbrancer of the land or any part thereof, whether volun- tary or involuntary, and shall be binding upon them. , H - 11 • CERTIFICATION BY SCOTT COUNTY ASSESSOR The undersigned, having reviewed a certain Assessment Agreement between the Housing and Redevelopment Authority in and for the City of Shakopee, Minnesota, and Shakopee valley Square Properties, a Minnesota partnership (the "Assessment Agreement") , and being of the opinion that the minimum mar- ket values contained in the Assessment Agreement appear reasonable, hereby certifies as follows: The undersigned Assessor, being legally responsible for the assessment of - the above described property, hereby certifies that the market values assigned to such land and facilities thereon shall, as of January 2, 1987, not be less than $1,500,000, and as of January 2, 1988, and thereafter shall not be less than $3,000,000 (until such time as the Assessment Agreement shall be its terms terminate) . Assessor for Scott County, Minnesota Dated: 1987. i B - 12 EXHIBIT C CERTIFICATE OF COMPLETION WHEREAS, the Housing and Redevelopment Authority in and for the City of Shakopee, Minnesota, a municipal corporation and political subdivision of the State of Minnesota (the "Authority" ) , and Shakopee Valley Square Properties, a Minnesota partnership (the "Developer" ) , have executed a Contract for Private Development] dated June, 1986, as amended by a certain Amended and Restated Contract for Private Development, dated as of , 1987 (the "Development Agreement" ) , with respect to the construction of a certain Minimum Improvements (the "Improvements" ) on certain land (the "Development Property") by the Developer in conformance with certain Construction Plans (as defined in the Development Agreement) and pursuant to certain other provisions of the Development Agreement; and WHEREAS, said Developer has to the present date per- formed its undertakings under the Development Agreement in a manner deemed sufficient by the Authority to permit the execution of this certification; NOW, THEREFORE, this is to certify that the Minimum Improvements have been completed in substantial conformance with the Construction Plans. The Housing and Redevelopment Authority in and for the City of Shakopee, Minnesota By Chairman By Executive Director C - 1 PROCEEDINGS OF THE SHAKOPEE CITY COUNCIL REGULAR SESSION SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA APRIL 7, 1987 Mayor Reinke called the meeting to order at 7: 00 p.m. with Cncl. Leroux, Wampach, Clay, Vierling and Lebens present. Also present were John K. Anderson, City Administrator; Doug Wise, City Planner; Kenneth Ashfeld, City Engineer; Judith Cox, City Clerk; Dennis Kraft, Community Development Director; and Julius A. Coller II, City Attorney. Clay/Lebens moved to recess for HRA. Motion carried unanimously. Wampach/Lebens moved to reconvene to City Council at 7: 15 p.m. Motion carried unanimously. Liaison reports were given by councilmembers. Mayor Reinke asked if there was anyone from the audience who wished to address anything not on the agenda. Sister Agnes, St. Francis Hospital, gave an update on the status in terms of the transfer of the hospital. The order has decided to transfer the sponsorship to another catholic sponsor within the United States. There have been two organizations so far that have come for a site visit. In May they will know for sure which organization has an interest in sponsoring St. Francis and their proposals will be reviewed then. Clay/Leroux moved to approve the consent business. Roll Call: Ayes : Unanimous Noes: None Motion carried. Clay/Leroux moved to receive and file the letter from Mrs. Bing Severson stating her approval off the proposed golf course. Motion approved under consent. Clay/Leroux moved to contact State Legislators regarding a Bill Creating a Statewide Public Employees Insurance Plan, requesting that no further action be taken on the bill until representatives of local governments and other public employees have an opportunity to study the bill and its implications. Motion approved under consent. The City Administrator reviewed the League of Minnesota Cities memo on Threat of LGA Cuts nd Sales Tax on City Purchases. Leroux/Lebens moved to contact State Legislators and inform them what the impact will be on the City of Shakopee if Local Government Aid is reduced. Motion carried unanimously. Leroux/Vierling moved to state to our Legislators what the impact of the 68 tax would be on the City of Shakopee and inform them City Council April 7, 1987 Page -2- that the City does not feel the taxes should be applied to City purchases. Motion carried unanimously. The City Administrator reviewed the ICC open house that will be held in conjunction with Canterbury Downs Annual Exhibition Day on April 18, 1987, to be held on the grandstand main floor area from 1:00 p.m. to 4: 00 p.m. Linnea Stromberg Wise, Chamber President, reviewed the proposed chamber/tourism center. They are hoping to build the new center at the Memorial Park. They are requesting the City give them a ground lease at $1.00 per year and an approval for a joint power agreement between the City of Shakopee and the Shakopee Chamber of Commerce whereby the Chamber of Commerce would own the Center. Wampach/Vierling moved to direct staff to prepare the lease the agreement and the amendment for the existing agreement between the Chamber and the City and bring back to the next meeting. Motion carried with Cncl. Lebens opposed. Leroux/Vierling moved to express concern and opposition to our Senator on S.F. 1341, regarding Mandatory Primaries, Superceding Home Rule Charters and Mandating Additional Costs for the Conduct of Elections. Motion carried unanimously. Vierling/Leroux moved to reopen the public hearing on vacation of public right-of-way in Killarney Hills. Motion carried unanimously. Discussion ensued on the vacation of the public right-of-way in Killarney Hills. The City Engineer said vacating the right-of- way would eliminate the City's liability for roadway maintenance and public safety. Ross Clay, owner of Lot 5, Block 4, asked if a cul de sac would be made if the City vacated that street, and where the bypass would be going through and how long until the portion of the bypass is scheduled for construction. He expressed concern over problems that might be encountered if he tried selling his lot. The City Engineer replied that a cul de sac would be built and did not believe he would have any legal problems in selling his lot. Jim Hauer asked if it was legal for the City to shut off the road. The City Attorney answered that it was as long as abutting properties are provided with suitable ingress and egress. The City Engineer said they had discussion with Mr. Hauer on providing access off of County Road 16 versus access on Sharon Parkway. City Council , April 7, 1967 Page -3- Clay/Wampach moved to close the public hearing. Motion carried unanimously. Leroux/Wampach moved 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 off Block 4, Lot 1 of Block 5 and Outlot E of Killarney Hills Addition. Motion carried unanimously. Wampach/Clay moved to direct staff to prepare an easement to Mr. and Mrs. James Hauer for access purposes over Sharon Parkway located adjacent to Lots 1 through 6, of Block 1, Lots 6 & 7 of Block 4, and Lot 1, Block 5 of Killarney Hills Addition. Motion carried unanimously. The City Planner reviewed Amendments to City Code Regarding Planned Unit Developments. He said the Planning Commission recommendation was to allow private sewer services in R-1 and Shoreland Zones with three conditions being maximum deviation of land density should not exceed 208, each lot within the PUD should have two septic sites identified and there should be an acre of land available either within the lot or in adjoining easement to serve the purposes of the lot and treatment of the septic system. The recommendation of the Planning Commission is to permit an increase in the density up to 258, and they also recommend to allow mixed uses within the PUD, the primary uses would be allowed within the district but other uses would be allowed on a very limited basis. The fourth area was Administrative Waiver, stating that the Administrator shall have the discretion to waive the Planned Unit Development approval process or information required for either adoption of a PUD or amendment of an approved PUD under certain conditions. Ms. VanMaldeghem, Chairwoman of the Planning Commission said that the intent of the Planning Commission was that enough septic system area be made available so that the size of the lot is relevant and the developer will have to provide this additional easement. Cncl. Clay said the Planning Commission' s intent was to have a minimum of one acre either by actual ownership of the land or have an additional easement to make one acre to facilitate not only adequate area for septic systems but also to control the densities of septic systems within one area. Discussion ensued on whether or not to require soil tests on every lot. Two options identified regarding Density criteria and performance criteria: City Council April 7, 1987 Page -4 Option A: The Planning Commission must require easements of adjoining open space for sewage treatment to supply at least one acre of site area for each residence. Where soil conditions such as clay exist, the applicant may be required to use alternative systems such as mounds, double tanking, etc. , as proposed by the Planning Commission. - Option B: An Easement may be required on the adjoining open space if the required two septic sites must exceed the size of the building site lot to meet the two septic site per lot requirement. An easement so required must be included in the plat. The two options are minimum lot area versus a performance requirement. Leroux/Vierling moved to adopt the amendments to the City code Section 11.40 and direct staff to prepare an ordinance with the two options under utilities, subsection 2C, Item 3. Roll Call: Ayes: Unanimous Noes: None Motion carried. Leroux/Lebens moved to authorize implementation of the guidelines for administrative waivers immediately, giving the administrator descretion to waive the Planned Unit Development approval process or information required for either adoption of a PUD or amendment of our approved PUD when certain conditions are met. Roll Call: Ayes: Unanimous Noes: None Motion carried. Clay/Wampach moved for a 15 minute recess. Motion carried unanimously. Wampach/Leroux moved to reconvene at 10: 20 p.m. Motion carried unanimously. Clay/Leroux moved to extend the service contract agreement with New Frontier Productions, Inc. for an additional year with the changes in the contract language as proposed by the Cable Commission. (Approved under consent business) . (CC-DOC #133) . Discussion ensued on park dedication for Hauer' s 4th Addition. The City Planner reviewed the three alternative sites the developer has proposed for park dedication. The consensus was to keep away from the 13th Avenue site. Vierling/Leroux moved that the developer use site B East of Jasper Rd. and North of Jade Circle for park dedication in Hauer' s 4th Addition. Motion carried unanimously. City Council April 7, 1987 Page -5- Clay/Leroux moved to adopt Resolution No. 2709, A Resolution Initiating the Vacation of 13th Avenue and Certain Easements According to the Plat of Hauer's 3rd Addition, Scott County, Minnesota and moved its adoption. (Approved under consent business) . Leroux/Vierling moved to award Chassis bid to Mack Trucks Inc. for one 1987 Chassis in the amount of $61, 125.00. Roll Call: Ayes: Cncl. Wampach, Leroux, Clay, Vierling and Mayor Reinke Noes: Cncl. Lebens Motion carried. Vierling/Wampach moved to award Tank Body Apparatus to Smeal Fire Equipment in the amount of $46,515. 00. Roll Call: Ayes: Cncl. Wampach, Leroux, Clay, Vierling and Mayor Reinke Noes: Cncl. Lebens Motion carried. Leroux/Vierling moved to approve rotary gangmower specifications as submitted for a rotary gang mower, and set May 12, 1987, at 2: 00 p.m. CDST, as the bid opening date. Roll Call: Ayes: Cncl. Wampach, Leroux, Clay, Vierling and Mayor Reinke Noes: Cncl. Lebens Motion carried. Vierling/Wampach moved to approve Change Order No. 6 for an additional amount of $3, 985. 20 to the Holmes Street Basin Lateral Project No. 1986-1. Roll Call: Ayes: Cncl. Wampach, Leroux, Clay, Vierling and Mayor Reinke Noes: Cncl. Lebens Motion carried. Clay/Leroux moved to authorize the appropriate City Officials to execute the consultant services contract with Westwood Planning and Engineering as modified by the City Engineer's April 3, 1987, memo in an amount not to exceed $239, 500.00 for the Downtown Redevelopment Project No. 1987-5. (CC DOC #134) Roll Call: Ayes: Cncl. Clay, Vierling, Leroux and Mayor Reinke Noes: Cncl. Wampach and Lebens Motion carried. Wampach/Vierling moved to receive and place on file the memo from the City Engineer dated April 3, 1987, reviewing 13th Avenue Cost Comparisons, Straight Alignment versus Curve-a-linear Alignment. Motion carried unanimously. City Council April 7, 1987 Page -6- The Community Development Director reviewed the Wiley/Arkell Housing Proposal Resolution Giving Preliminary Approval to Project Financing as Provided for Under Chapter 462 C of the Minnesota Statues. He said the City does not have any financial responsibility at all and this is purely housing revenue bonds for multi-family housing. Mayor Reinke expressed concern that the City may be binding themselves to approval of this development. It was opinion of the developer that the City would not be binding themselves to final approval of this plat. Clay/Vierling moved to Adopt Resolution No. 2713, A Resolution Giving Preliminary Approval to a Project and Its Financing, Under Minnesota Statues, Chapter 462C and moved its adoption. Roll Call: Ayes : Cncl. Clay, Vierling, Leroux and Mayor Reinke Noes : Cncl. Wampach and Lebens Motion carried. Vierling/Lebens moved that the letter off credit for the overlot grading for Lot 1, Block 1, Century Plaza Square 2nd Addition be allowed to expire. Motion carried unanimously. Leroux/Vierling moved to approve the payment of bills in the amount of $143, 230. 79. Roll Call: Ayes: Unanimous Noes: None Motion carried. Clay/Leroux moved to authorize the appropriate City Officials to execute an amended agreement dated April 13, 1987, between the City of Shakopee and Independent School District No. 720 concerning the operation of a jointly sponsored recreation program. (Approved under consent business) . Leroux/Vierling moved to remove Ordinance No. 214 (regulating horse drawn carriages) from the table. Motion carried unanimously. Cncl. Leroux said he had a call from the Chief of Police requesting that a Minnesota Driver License be required under Subd. 5 (Driver of Vehicle) under Horse Drawn Carriages regulation. He also expressed a concern to have the driver no younger than age 18. Leroux/Vierling moved to amend subd. 5 to change the age requirement to 18 and add the driver of such vehicle shall have a current Minnesota Drivers License, Class C. Motion carried unanimously. City Council April 7, 1987 Page -7- Leroux/Vierling moved to table Ordinance No. 214 and refer - it back to staff with corrections as .noted .for final draft. Motion carried unanimously. Leroux/Vierling offered Resolution No. 2710, A Resolution Initiating the Vacation of Austin Street South of Davis Court, According to the Plat of J.E.J. 2nd Addition to the City of Shakopee, Scott County, Minnesota, and moved its adoption. Motion carried unanimously. Clay/Leroux offered Resolution No. 2712, A Resolution Amending Resolution No. 2665, Adopting. the 1987 Pay Plan, and moved its adoption. (Approved under consent business) Discussion ensued on Lodging Tax on Campgrounds, the campground association feels that the law does not permit taxing campgrounds unless it is a municipal campground. The question is, does the state law include campgrounds in lodging tax? The City Attorney' s opinion is that campgrounds are included in the state law. Leroux/Vierling offered Ordinance No. 216, An Ordinance off the City of Shakopee, Minnesota Amending Ordinance No. 212 Which Amended the Shakopee City Code Chapter 6 Entitled "Other Business Regulations and Licensing" by Imposing a Lodging Tax, Providing for the Payments and Use Thereof and by Adopting by Reference Shakopee City Code Chapter 1 and Sections 6. 99, Which Among Things Contain Penalty Provisions. City Administrator said staff will be notifying the campgrounds that the City will be collecting tax. Roll Call: Ayes: Cncl. Wampach, Vierling, Clay, Leroux and Mayor Reinke Noes: Cncl. Lebens Motion carried. Vierling/Leroux moved to adjourn to April 14, 1987 at 7:00 p.m. Motion carried unanimously. Meeting adjourned at 11: 35 p.m. Judith S. Cox City Clerk Carol L. Schultz Recording Secretary PROCEEDINGS OF THE SHAKOPEE CITY COUNCIL ADJ.REG.SESSION SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA APRIL 14, 1987 Mayor Reinke called the meeting to order at 6:30 p.m. with Cncl. Clay, Vierling, Wampach, and Leroux present. Cncl. Lebens was absent. Also present were John K. Anderson, City Administrator; Ken Ashfeld, City Engineer; Dennis Kraft, Community Development Director; Judith S. Cox, City Clerk, Julius A. Coller II, City Attorney; Tom Brownell, Chief of Police; Jim Karkanen, Public Works Superintendent; George Muenchow, Community Services Director; LeRoy Houser, Building Inspector; Gregg Voxland, Finance Director and Joe Ries, Fire Chief. Also were present were members of the Scott County Board: Bill Koniarski, Dallas Bohnsack, Dick Mertz, Mark Stromwall and John Casey, as well as Joe Ries, Scott County Administrator; Brandt Richardson, Assistant County Administrator; Brad Larson, County Highway Engineer; Bill Dilks, County Lobbyist; Representative Becky Kelso; Al Laird, from Senator Schmitz ' s Office; and Fred Corrigan and Stan Bowker from the racetrack. Discussion ensued on the proposed legislation, initiated by the County Board, seeking authority for imposition of an admissions tax on amusement facilities within the County and how this revenue would be spent. A 25 cent admission tax for 15 years would generate approximately $5.5 million which could go toward roadway improvements for roads in the county leading to the amusement facilities. After considerable discussion a committee was established to discuss the need for an admissions tax and how it would be used. The committee to be comprised of Councilman Leroux, Councilman Wampach, Commissioner Mertz, Commissioner Koniarski, and a staff person from both governmental units. Vierling/Clay moved to reconsider Resolution No. 2709, A Resolution Initiating the Vacation of 13th Avenue and Certain Easements According to the Plat of Hauer' s 3rd Addition, Scott County, Minnesota. Motion carried unanimously. Leroux/Wampach moved to approve Resolution No. 2709 as redrafted to include consideration of the vacation of Onyx Drive and a portion of the southerly 100 feet of Limestone Drive. Motion carried unanimously. After a ten minute break at 7:45 p.m. the City's 1987 strategic planning worksession began with Councilmembers and City staff participating. Leroux/Vierling moved to adjourn to April 21, 1987 at 7:00 p.m. Motion carried unanimously. Meeting adjourned at 9:47 p.m. Judith S. Cox City Clerk Recording Secretary Dear Eldon, I would appreciate you addressing the council with the contents of this letter: We were at the Planning Commission meeting last Thursday and heard several presentations and comments about the proposed Golf Course Devel- opment. We would like to go on the record as being very ` much in favor of this proposal. Our area has a Tr-eat influx of executive level people who work in Shakopee. Unfortunately they don' t live here because there is not an area that is upper brack- et at the present time. Therefore off to Eden Prairie they go along with the dollars they could be spending on housing and shopping in Shakopee. We are really sick of them going over the river to live. If you would talk to these people on a day to day basis like we do you would find out they want to live her too! ! ! They don' t like fighting the traffic-but where do they go. Please consider this Golf Course and Lot Dev- elopment as a positive and pleasant experience for Shakopee-we certainly do. Thank you. \� Sincerely, f TRsya A • � b DORSEY & WHITNEY 2200 FIRST RANK PLACE EAST Aew maeew maces MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 55402 �z A (melaa-cevo (612)340-2600 aao na noxev Adxe emvo>xo re1.Ax As-oAON ml P.o.A��nm r ve o ° elvuxos.Noxrexe awm xoceesrze,Nm.As�ace meow rn1.NcoF1eN felel a4o-este 1<oaleez-aeon (�1em-aaa e axrALL v+e mw A xAsou sreaer A OAurAeuvs xoxr..o.aAm� er.eec>iNN�>mesvre mla I+vAl m>-osaz Ivielez,-em> G. LA88Y PwIpd T Nlee]u'1olapmLL-vBaYraIA°eO� INO GRIFFITH, P. A. (612)340-2747 srn pp eAv(aael>a�-oven � xvece srx u mtnA April 7, 1987cnm'sc ou-aaol.a-Ae-ae-a° City Council The City of Shakopee Attention: John Anderson, City Administrator CST 129 First Avenue East Shakopee, Minnesota 55379 Re: Application of Valleyfair for Variance to City Sign Ordinance FF Gentlemen: On March 26, Valleyfair, through its General Manager Walt Wittmer, appeared before the Board of Adjustment to request a variance from the City's Sign Ordinance so that Valleyfair could build a sign to replace the marquee which is being destroyed in connection with the reconstruction of the entryway and related condemnation proceeding. The Board of Adjustment denied the variance request primarily, if not exclusively, because it was worried that by granting the variance to Valleyfair it would create a precedent which might enable other subsequent applicants to obtain a variance even though the same or other legitimate bases for hardship were not present. Valleyfair has appealed the decision of the Board of Adjustment, and the matter will be heard by the City Council on April 21, 1987 . It is likely that the members of the City Council may have the same or similar precedent concerns as the members of the Board of Adjustment. It is clear under the present set of facts and the law surrounding variances and the proof of hardship, that approval of Valleyfair's request would not in anyway establish precedent which would be either legally enforceable or psychologically significant. City Council-Shakopee DoRSEY & WHITNEY_ Page 2 4/7/87 As you know, I am the attorney for Valleyfair, and consequently, my opinion does not have the same credibility as that of the counsel for the City. I would appreciate it if in anticipation of the upcoming meeting you would ask Mr. Rod Krass, who is involved in the Valleyfair proceedings to date, if he would issue his opinion on the question of whether or not granting the variance to Valleyfair would establish a precedent as to subsequent variance requests. Thank you for your consideration' of this matter. Very truly your4s 7 ' L G. Larry if£ith�/ AV GLG:kh ✓✓✓ cc: Walter R. Wittmer Phillip R. Krass RECEIVED � i UW OEFlCES APR 16 1981 KRASS & MONROE CITY OF SHAKOPEE CHARTERED Phillip R. K.. Dennis L.Monrce Marschall Rced B nines Center Barry K. Meyer Trevor R. Walsten 327 Marschall Road Eltrabeth B.McLaughlin P.O. Box 216 Bryan Wm.Huber Shakopee,Minnesota 55379 Susan L. Estill Telephone 4455080 Diane M.Carlson Kent A. Carlson,CPA April 15, 1987 City Council of Shakopee Attention: John Anderson 129 First Avenue East Shakopee, MN 55379 ` RE: Valleyfair Sign Variance Our File No. 1-1373-184 Dear John and Council Members: You asked that I issue an opinion regarding whether the City of Shakopee will be setting an unfavorable precedent should they grant Valleyfair's request for a variance to the sign ordinance. In my opinion, granting such a variance will not, in fact, set an unfavorable precedent. The authority for a city council to grant a variance to an ordinance is found in Minn. Stat. 5462.357 Subd. 6. This ordinance states in pertinent part that a city council may hear requests for variances from the literal provisions of the ordinance in instances where the strict enforcement of that ordinance would cause undue hardship because of circumstances unique to the individual property under consideration, and to grant such variance only when it is demonstrated that such action will be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the ordinance. That Statute has defined undue hardship as that which means the _ property in question cannot be put to a reasonable use if used under conditions unique to the property not created by the land owner, and the variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of locality. From the language of this Statute, it is apparent that the granting of a variance is done on a case-by-case basis, with the facts and circumstances of each situation dictating whether a variance should be given. The undue hardship demonstrated by the applicant for the variance must be unique to that property. Hedlund v. City of Maplewood 366 N.W.2d 624 (Minn. App. 1985). The provisions of the laws relating to variances are intended to deal with unique situations and are to be employed only under exceptional circumstances. McQuillin, Municipal Corporations 3d, 525.160 (1983 6 Supp). The burden of meeting the undue hardship criteria in the application for the variance is on the applicant. Inland Construction Company v. City of Bloomington 195 N.W.2d 558 (Minn. 1972). If the applicant meets his or her burden, then the variance should be granted. City Council of Shakopee Attention: John Anderson Page -2- April 15, 1987 Thus, because of the language in the Statute indicating that the reasons for the variance must be unique to the property in question, because of the strict burden of proof placed upon the applicant that he or she will suffer undue hardship should the variance not be issued, and because each variance must be decided on a case-by-case basis, in my opinion, subsequent applicants will not be able to use the granting of the variance in the Valleyfair case as precedent for requiring the City Council to grant a variance in their own case. Subsequent land owners must show how their own specific piece of property will be uniquely harmed should a variance not be issued. Should the City decide to issue the variance, to further protect them- selves, the Council must set forth with great particularity the reasons for the granting of the variance. Generally, lack of the finding of facts and suf- ficient reasons for determining whether or not a variance should be issued will constitute a prima facie showing of arbitrariness. Holasek v. Villiage of Medina 226 N.W.2d 900 (Minn. 1975). Again, findings showing how the reasons for granting a variance in this case will add to the uniqueness of the situation, and deter for future property owners from using the granting of this variance to their advantage. If you have any further questions, please contact my office. Very trul ours, BRASS MO MASTERED illip R. rasa PRR:pw:jl JAMES A. TERWEDO SCOTT COUNTY ATTORNEY AFL+ COURT HOUSE 206 AF SHAKOPEE, MN. 55379-1380 (612}937-6240 !� r0� Z90 syAk�p��l April 2, 1987 TO: All City Administrators/Township Clerks This letter is to inform you of the intention of the Scott County Board of Commissioners to hold a public hearing concerning the formation of a regional railroad authority within Scott County at the time, date, and place stated in the notice of public hearing enclosed herein. Please advise the governing body cf your city or town regarding this hearing. In addition, this notice will be published in the official county newspaper at least thirty days - prior to the hearing. Sincerely, JAIME.S A. TERWEDO SCOTT COUNTY ATTORNEY as A. Terrwedo TAT/jkf An Equal Opponunity Employer NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN: Pursuant to provisions of Minnesota Statute, Chapter 398A, the Regional Railroad Authorities Act, the Scott County Board of Commissioners will hold a Public Hearing on Tuesday, May 19, 1987 at 11:00 a.m. or soon thereafter in the Assembly Roam of the Scott County Courthouse, 428 South Holmes Street, Shakopee, Minnesota to consider the formation of the Scott County Regional Railroad Authority. The purpose of the formation of a regional railroad authority is to provide a means whereby the County, with state and federal aids as may be available, may provide for the preservation and improvement of local rail service for agriculture, industry, or passenger traffic when determined to be practical and necessary for the public welfare, particularly in the case of abandonment of local rail lines. James A. Terwedo Scott County Attorney Scott County Courthouse Shakopee, MN 55379 E�Y MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator FROM: Barry A. Stock, Administrative Assistant RE: Extension of Van Pool Contract DATE: April 8, 1987 Introduction• The existing van pool agreement between the City of Shakopee and Van Pool Services Inc. (VPSI) expires on April 15, 1987. On April 6, 1987 the Energy and Transportation Committee moved to recommend to City Council that the existing contract with VPSI be extended for one additional year. Background: At the present time the City of Shakopee is leasing six vans from Van Pool Services to operate the City' s van pool program. One of the vehicles being leased serves as a back-up for the van pool program. The lease cost as specified in the van pool agreement are $415. 00 per month for a 12 passenger vehicle and $465.00 per month for a 15 passenger vehicle. In addition to these monthly fixed costs an additional six cents per commute mile is charged to each van pool. In past meetings the Energy and Transportation Committee has discussed the possibility of eliminating those van pools that are not being operated efficiently. This could be achieved through the negotiation of a contract agreement with the Southwest Area - --- Transit System. Final details of this alternative have not been worked out at this time. In any event, the van pool agreement as it currently exists would allow the City to eliminate as many van pools as we wish without nullifying the agreement. Therefore, at some future date it is possible that we may only be operating two van pool vehicles through the van pool contract agreement. Other commuters could be serviced through the contract agreement with the Southwest Area Transit System. This type of service would probably be a fixed route service with a time transfer at the Eden Prairie Center. Renewing the van pool agreement with VPSI for an additional year allows the City of Shakopee the flexibility that we need to maintain a level of service that is satisfactory to our riders. The existing contract with VPSI does have a one year contract extension clause which is available at the option of the City. The Energy and Transportation Committee has recommended that the City exercise it' s option and extend the van pool agreement for an additional year. If Council concurs,it would be appropriate at this time move that the Van Pool Contract Agreement with Van Pool Services Inc. be extended for one additional year. Alternatives- 1. Move that the Van Pool Contract Agreement with Van Pool Services Inc. be extended for one additional year. 2. Do not recommend that the contract with Van Pool Services be extended for an additional year. 3 . Table the issue pending further information from staff. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends alternative #1. Action Requested: Move that the Van Pool Contract Agreement with Van Pool Services Inc. be extended for one additional year. MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator b I FROM: Barry A. Stock, Administrative Assistant Kl RE: Van Pool Policies DATE: April 8, 1987 Introduction: In the last three months several issues have been brought to staffs attention which should be clarified in the form of transit policies. Background: Recently we experienced a situation in which a van pool driver was not performing in a satisfactory manner. This problem has been taken care of with the resignation of the driver. In an effort to insure that this situation does not occur again, staff is recommending that a new van pool policy be adopted which would .initiate a probationary period for all new van pool drivers --- _--- and/or- back-up drivers. (See Attachment #1) The probation policy simply establishes a six month probationary period for all new van pool drivers and/or back-up drivers. If any new driver or back-up driver is not performing in a satisfactory manner, the transit coordinator has the authority to recommend the termination of the drivers position with the approval of the Energy and Transportation Committee. It is my hope that we will never have to use this policy, however I believe it is very important for us to have this policy on file. - The second issue which relates to the van pool drivers probationary period, is a policy which identifies the responsibilities of the van pools/back-up driver. This issue should be addressed in a separate policy. (See Attachment #2 ) . On April 6, 1987 the Energy and Transportation Committee moved to recommend Council approval of Van Pool polices #20 an #21. If Council concurs with the committee' s recommendations, it would be appropriate at this time to approve van pool policy #20 and #21. Alternatives• 1. Move to approve van pool policy #20 and van pool policy #21 as recommended by the Energy and Transportation Committee. 2. Move to approve the van pool policies with some minor modifications. 3. Do nothing. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends alternative #1. Action Requested: Move to approve Van Pool Policy #20 - Probationary Period and Van Pool Policy #21 - Driver/Back-up Driver Responsibilities. Policy Number 20 / Adopted: Effective: NEW DRIVER PROBATION PERIOD The probationary period is an integral part of the driver/back-up driver selection process and shall be utilized for observing the driver/back-up drivers work for securing the most effective adjustment of the driver/back-up driver to the position and for rejecting any driver/back-up driver whose performance does not meet the required work standards. Every new driver/back-up driver shall be subject to a six month probationary period. The Energy and Transportation Committee may release a probationary driver/back-up driver anytime during the probationary period if in the Transit Coordinator' s opinion the working test indicates that the driver/back-up driver is unable or unwilling to perform the duties of the position satisfactorily or that his/her habits and dependability do not merit continuance in this position. The driver/back-up driver shall be notified in writing of the reasons for the termination and shall not have the right to appeal. Adopted: Policy Number 21 Effective Date: DRIVER/HACK-UP DRIVER RESPONSIBILITIES The responsibilities of the Van Pool Driver are as follows: 1. Ensure van is kept in satisfactory operating conditions including regular maintenance checks as established by Van Pool Services Inc. 2. Complete the monthly report and return it to the Transit Coordinator prior to the 15th of each month. 3 . Ensure that the interior and exterior of the van is kept clean. 4. Ensure that the van pool riders are picked up in a timely manner for their trip to work. 5. Ensure that the van pool riders are picked up in a timely manner for their return trip to Shakopee. 6. Notify Van Pool Services Inc. and the Transit Coordinator of any accidents or injuries that occur in connection with the van pool program or the drivers private use of the vehicle. 7 . Adhere to Minnesota State Driving regulations and operate the van in such a manner that it does not jeopardize the lives of the van pool passengers. The back-up drivers shall be held accountable for all of the aforementioned responsibilities when he/she is operating the van. Please replace .1 OC witYi tYiis memo _ MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator ✓✓ FROM: Douglas K. Wise, City Planner RE: Name and Alignment of 13th Avenue DATE: April 16, 1987 Introduction• At their April 9, 1987 meeting the Planning Commission approved the proposed alignment of 13th Avenue as presented to the City Council at their March 17, 1987 meeting. (Map attached) The Planning Commission also passed a motion recommending that the name remain 13th Avenue. Background- The City Council at their March 17, 1987 meeting reviewed the proposed alignment for 13th Avenue from County Road 416 to County Road #15. The City Council agreed with the alignment proposed and referred it back to the Planning Commission for their further review. The Planning Commission recommends approval of the alignment as presented to the City Council at their March 17, 1987 meeting. The Planning Commission also felt the name should remain 13th Avenue even though the street curves around. The Commission felt the use of the 13th Avenue name would help people locate the street within the community. Requested Action: A motion approving the alignment of 13th Avenue from County Road #16 to County Road #15 as shown on the attached map. - W - - rtv Wm e c icy I A a s I _ 7 IDA MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator FROM: Douglas K. Wise, City Planner RE: Canterbury Estates Preliminary Plat DATE: April 16, 1987 Introduction: At their April 9, 1987 meeting the Planning Commission passed a motion recommending approval of the preliminary plat for the portion of Canterbury Estates from 13th Avenue north to llth Avenue with conditions. Background: Meritor Development Corporation has submitted a preliminary plat for approximately 163 acres located east of County Road #79 and south of 11th Avenue. The northern half of the site is zoned R-2, the southern half is zoned Ag. Meritor Development Corporation has submitted an application to rezone the southern 85 acres of the site from Ag to R-2 and R-3. The Planning Commission continued the hearing on the rezoning request to its May 7th meeting. Because the Planning Commission did not act on the rezoning it could only approve the portion of the preliminary plat located in the area currently zoned R-2. The hearing on the remainder of the preliminary plat was also continued until May 7, 1987. Recommended Conditions: The Planning Commission recommends approval of the preliminary plat for the portion of Canterbury Estates from 13th Avenue north to lith Avenue with the following conditions: 1. Streets must be named, side and rear setbacks must be shown and utility easements shown. 2. Land dedication for park purposes is required. 3. Either dedication or easements of 120' in width must be provided for the drainageway. 4. A plan for construction and maintenance of the open space and ponding areas must be approved by the City Engineer prior to final plat. 5. Street grades cannot exceed 5%. 6. R-o-w between Minnesota St. and Dakota St. must be vacated, the easements must be retained. 7. A permit must be obtained from the County Engineer for access onto County Road #79. 8. A sidewalk along 13th Ave. will be required. 9. Execution of a developers agreement for construction of required improvements: A. Street lighting to be installed in accordance with the requirements of the SPUC Manager. H. water system to be installed in accordance with the requirements of the SPUC Manager. C. sanitary sewer and storm sewer to be installed in accordance with the requirements of the design criteria and standard specifications of the City of Shakopee. D. Local streets and street signs within the plat shall be constructed in accordance with the requirements of the design criteria and standard specifications of the City of Shakopee. ' E. The developer agrees to reimburse the City for costs on 13th Ave. equivalent to the costs for a 36 residential street. Cost sharing to be determined by the City Engineer. 10. Approval of a title opinion by the City Attorney. 11. The developer shall provide a recordable agreement stating that not more than 10% of the plat within the R-2 zone will be developed into twin homes. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends amending condition #5 to allow Dakota and Minnesota Streets south of 11th Avenue to exceed the allowed maximum street grade of 58. The topography of the site and the need to maintain level street grades through intersections makes it very difficult for the developer to meet the 5% grade. In these two locations the street grades may not exceed 8%. Action Requested: Move to approve the preliminary plat for the portion of Canterbury Estates located from 13th Avenue north to 11th Avenue subject to the above conditions. r i 1 1 1 , I 1 J - - - I MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator FROM: Douglas K. Wise, City Planner RE: Hauers 4th Addition Final Plat DATE: April 16, 1987 Introduction- . At their April 9, 1987 meeting the Planning Commission passed a motion recommending approval of the final plat of Hauer's 4th Addition subject to conditions. Background: At its March 17, 1987 meeting the City Council approved the preliminary plat for Hauer's 4th Addition. The City Council in approving the preliminary plat required dedication of a park site in addition to a payment for park purposes. At it' s April 7, 1987 meeting the City Council passed a motion directing the developer to dedicate Lot 1, Block 6 to the City for park purposes. At the Planning Commission meeting the developer indicated he would prefer to dedicate Lot 23 or Lot 24 of Block 5. The developer felt these lots would be more centrally located to the demand for a tot lot. The Planning Commission is recommending Lot 24, Block 5 for the tot lot. Recommended Conditions: The Planning Commission recommends approval of the final plat for Hauer's 4th Addition subject to the following conditions: 1. Unneeded streets and easements must be vacated. 2. The developer must acquire all land to be dedicated as 13th Avenue or have the other property owner sign the plat. 3. No driveways may access directly onto 13th Avenue. 4. Lot 24, Block 5 will be deeded to the City for park purposes, payment in lieu of land dedication for park purposes will also be required. 5. A sidewalk along 13th Avenue will be required. 6. Execution of a developers agreement for construction of required improvements: A. Street lighting to be installed in accordance with the requirements of the SPUC Manager. B. Water system to be installed in accordance with the requirements of the SPUC Manager. C. Sanitary sewer and storm sewer to be installed in accordance with the requirements of the design criteria and standard specifications of the City of Shakopee. D. Local streets and street signs within the plat shall be constructed in accordance with the requirements of the design criteria and standard specifications of the City of Shakopee. E. The developer agrees to reimburse the City for costs of a normal 36 ' residential street from the western edge of the plat to a point 900' west of the intersections between Co. Rd. 16 and 13th Avenue for the construction of 13th Avenue. Cost sharing to be determined by City Engineer. 7. Approval of a title opinion by the City Attorney. 8. The developer shall provide a recordable agreement stating that not more than 108 of a plat will be developed into twin home. Action Requested: Move approval of Resolution No. 2717 granting final plat approval to Hauer' s 4th Addition subject to the above conditions. RESOLUTION NO. 2717 �b A Resolution Approving the Final Plat of Hauer's 4th Addition WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Shakopee did approve the Final Plat of Hauer' s 4th Addition on April 9, 1987 and has recommended its adoption; and WHEREAS, all notices of hearing have been duly sent and posted and all persons appearing at the hearing have been given an opportunity to be heard thereon; and WHEREAS, the City Council has been fully advised in all things. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA, that the Final Plat of Hauer' s 4th Addition, described as follows: See attached. be, and the same hereby is approved and adopted with the requirements that: 1. Unneeded streets and easements must be vacated. 2. The developer must acquire all land to be dedicated as 13th Avenue or have the other property owner sign the plat. 3. No driveways may access directly onto 13th Avenue. 4. Lot 24, Block 5 will be deeded to the City for park purposes, payment in lieu of land dedication for park purposes will also be required. 5. A sidewalk along 13th Avenue will be required. 6. Execution of a developers agreement for construction of required improvements: A. Street lighting to be installed in accordance with the requirements of the SPUC Manager. B. Water system to be installed in accordance with the requirements of the SPUC Manager. C. Sanitary sewer and storm sewer to be installed in accordance with the requirements of the design criteria and standard specifications of the City of Shakopee. D. Local streets and street signs within the plat shall be constructed in accordance with the requirements of the design criteria and standard specifications of the City of Shakopee. E. The developer agrees to reimburse the City for costs of a normal 36 ' residential street from the western edge of the plat to a point 900' west of the intersections between Co. Rd. 16 and 13th Avenue for the construction of 13th Avenue. Cost sharing to be determined by City Engineer. 7. Approval of a title opinion by the City Attorney. 8. The developer shall provide a recordable agreement stating that not more than 10% of a plat will be developed into twin home. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Mayor and City Clerk and the same are hereby authorized and directed to execute said approved Plat and Developer' s Agreement. 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 DESCPJPTION OF PARCEL i Outlot A, HAUER'S 3RD ADDITION, according to the plat on file in the office of the County Recorder in and for Scott County, Minnesota. �� Said parcel contains 10.916 acres more or less . Outlot B, HAUER' S 3RD ADDITION, according to the plat on file in the office of the County Recorder in and for Scott County, Minnesota. Said parcel contains 1 .073 acres more or less. TOGETHER WITH that part of 13th Avenue , vacated or to be vacated, lying within the Plat of HAUER' S 3RD ADDITION, according to the plat on file in the office of the County Recorder in and for Scott County, Minnesota. DESCRIPTION OF PARCEL 2 That part of the north 400.00 feet of the east 750.00 feet of the Northwest - Quarter of the Southeast Quarter of Section 8 , Township 115 , Range 22 Scott County, Minnesota which lies southerly of HAUER ' S 3RD ADDITION, according to the plat on file in the office of the County Recorder in and for Scott County, Minnesota. Said parcel contains 3. 675 acres more or less. DESCRIPTION OF PARCEL 3 That part of the Southeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter and of the Northeast Quarter of the Southeast Quarter of Section 8 , Township 115 , Range 22, Scott County, Minnesota lying Southerly of HAUER ' S 3RD ADDITION, according to the plat on file in the office of the Countv Recorder in and for Scott County, Minnesota , and lying Northwesterly of the following described line: Commencing at the intersection of the West line of said Northeast Quarter of the Southeast Quarter and the Southerly line of said HAUER'S 3RD ADDITION: thence South 0 degrees 13 minutes 30 seconds West , assumed bearing, along said West line , a distance of 211.90 feet to the point of beginning of the line to be described; thence North 70 degrees 50 minutes 09 seconds East, a distance of 258 . 75 feet; thence Northeasterly, a distance of 688 .30 feet along a tangential curse concave to the Northwest having a central angle of 40 degrees 32 minutes 35 seconds and a radius of 972. 72 feet ; thence North 30 degrees - 17 minutes 34 seconds East tangent to the last described curve, a distance of 50.00 feet to the most Easterly corner of said HAUER' S 3RD ADDITION and said line there .terminating. Containing 1 .802 acres more or less. PARCEL 4 The North 524 .0 feet of the West 416.0 feet of the East 1166 .0 feet of the Northwest Z of the Southeast i of Section 8 , Township 115 , Range 22, Scott County, Minnesota. i PARCEL 5 That part of the following described property: The East 23 .45 acres of the Northeast Quarter of the Southwest Quarter of Section 8 , Township 115 , Range 22 , Scott County, Minnesota, which lies southerly of HAUER' S 3RD ADDIIION as platted and on record in the office of the County Recorder, Scott County, Minnesota. Together with that part of the Northwest Quarter of the Southeast Quarter of Section 8 , Township 115 , Range 22, Scott County, Minnesota, which lies southerly of HAUER' S 3RD ADDITION. Except the North 524.00 feet of the West 416 .00 feet of the East 1166 .00 feet and also except the North 400 .00 feet of the East 750 . 00 feet of said Northwest Quarter of the Southeast Quarter of said Section 8 . Which lies Northerly of the following described line : Cornencing at the intersection of the East line of the Northwest Quarter of the Southeast Quarter of said Section 8 and the southerly line of HAUER' S 3RD ADDITION: thence South 0 degrees 13 minutes 30 seconds West, bearing assumed, along said East line, a distance of 211 . 90 feet to the point of beginning of the line to be described; thence South 70 de=gees 50 minutes 09 seconds West, a dist-ance of 189 .93 feet ; thence Westerly, a distance of 216 . 95 feet along a tangential. curve concave to thenorthhaving a central angle of 11 degrees 56 minutes 58 seconds and a radius of 1040.21 feet ; thence South 82 degrees 47 minutes 07 seconds West tangent to the last described curve , a distance of 1713 . 60 feet to the West line of the East 23 .45 acres of the Northeast Quarter of the �I Southwest Quarter of Section 8 and said line there terminating. ID( MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator FROM: Ken Ashfeld, City Engineer SUBJECT: Hauer' s 4th Addition Final Plat DATE: April 20, 1987 INTRODUCTION: This memo regards Hauer' s 4th Addition final plat approval (April 21 , 1987 Council meeting - agenda item 1OE ) , recommended conditions of plat approval and Resolution No. 2717• BACKGROUND: With the approval of Hauer' s 3rd Addition, the City participated in the cost of extra depth sanitary sewer and oversizing of the sewer. This extra depth and size was to accommodate development that isnowbeing proposed as Hauer' s 4th Addition and an additional area to the south and south east owned by Gene Hauer. The amount of this City participation is $27 , 290 . 60 . The developer of Hauer ' s 4th Addition, Dale Dahlke, has indicated that his agreement with Mr. Hauer for the purchase of property for the 3rd addition provides for the full payment of the $27,290.60 with the 4th Addition. Therefore, the City should require Mr. Dahlke to reimburse the City for extra depth costs in the amount of $27,290 .60 as a condition of approval of Hauer' s 4th Addition. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that Condition 6F be added to Resolution No. 2717 as follows: The developer agrees to reimburse the City an amount of $27,290 .60 for costs associated with the extra depth and size of the sanitary sewer serving Hauer' s 4th Addition. REQUESTED ACTION: - Add the following condition to Resolution No. 2717 : 6F. The developer agrees to reimburse the City an amount of $27,290.60 for costs associated with the extra depth and size of the sanitary sewer serving Hauer' s 4th Addition. KA/pmp 6F MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator FROM: Dennis K. Wise, City Planner RE: Code Change Regarding Therapeutic Massage DATE: April 16, 1987 Introduction: At their April 9, 1987 meeting the Planning Commission recommended that the City Code not be amended to allow therapeutic massage in R-1 and R-2 zones. Background- On November 18, 1986 Carol Cronkhite filed an application for a Conditional Use Permit to do therapeutic massage as a home occupation as provided for in Section 11.04, Subd. 6 the City Code. This was for property located at 2560 Muhlenhardt Road. On December 4, 1987 the Planning Commission granted the Conditional Use Permit and also directed that this matter be discussed by the City Council and City Attorney. On December 16, 1986 the City Attorney issued a written opinion indicating that the Planning Commission erred in granting the conditional use permit to Ms. Cronkhite because the subject property was not located in the "Shakopee General Commercial District". City Attorney further stated that the City Council would be prevented from acting favorably on the application because of the working in the City Code. On January 4, 1987 the Planning Commission then denied the conditional use permit to allow therapeutic massage as a home occupation for the property located at 2650 Muhlenhardt Road. The City Council then discussed this item at it' s meeting of January 6, 1987 and at the meeting of January 20, 1987. The items discussed by the City Council included: ( 1) Allowing therapeutic massage as a conditional use in the R-1 and R-2 zones by; ( 2) Defining therapeutic massage; ( 3) The question of requiring a background check by the Police Department before allowing someone to practice therapeutic massage as a home occupation; and (4) The need to add the definition of a home occupation in the licensing chapter of the City Code (Section 6.40 and 6.41) . On April 9 , 1987 the Planning Commission discussed amending the ordinance regarding therapeutic massage. The Planning Commission felt that amending the ordinance was not in the best interests of the City for the following reasons: 1. The City would be amending the ordinance for the primary benefit of one individual. 2. Therapeutic massage would be difficult to define and could open the door allowing undesirable businesses to come into the City under this provision. 3. Changing the ordinance could have a negative impact outweighing any positive impacts on the City. Action Requested: if the Council concurs with the Planning commission recommendation of the following is recommended: a. Deny the application of Carol Cronkhite for registration as a masseuse at 2560 Muhlenhardt Road. b. Approve refunding the $75.00 application fee for a conditional use permit for a home occupation to Carol Cronkhite, 2560 Muhlenhardt Road. If the City Council would like to proceed with amendments to the ordinance, the Council may initiate the changes by directing staff to draft the amendments and set a public hearing on the proposed changes. T J I✓i-MO TO: Shakopee Planning Commission PROM: Douglas K. Wise, City Planner RE: City Council Action on PUD Amendments DATE: April 10, 1987 introduction, At their March 26, 1987 meeting the Planning Commission recommended changes to Section 11. 40 of the City Code to the City Council. The City Council approved the recommended changes with the exception of condition three under the utilities section of the proposed amendments. The Council is requesting the Planning Commission select one of the two recommended wordings. i Alterna�ives• The Council identified the two following options regarding condition #3 : Option A is based on a Density criteria; Option B is based on a Performance Criteria. Option A: 3. The Planning Commission must require easements of adjoining open space for sewage treatment to supply at lease one acre of site area for each residence. Where soil conditions such as clay exist, the applicant may be required to use alternative systems such as mounds, double tanking, etc. Og`ion B: 3. The Planning Commission must require easements of as much adjoining open space for sewage treatment as may be required if the two septic areas can not be located on the building site. Where soil conditions such as clay exist, the applicant may be required to use alternative systems such as mounds, double tanking, etc. Staff Recommendation, The staff recormends Option B for the following reasons: 1. Whether a on site sewage treatment system will function properly is not determined by the size of the site, but by the soil conditions, topography, and water table. in some cases a 1/2 acre site may be more than sufficien_ and in other cases a 5 acre site will no` be sufficae_.=. - 2. Density -egu,;-rements should be dealt with in the density section of the ordinance not the utility section. - 3. The suitability of a site for on site sewage treatment should be based on performance standards not density. S. Option B far exceeds the current State and City requirements for on site treatment systems and provides more than needed "extra protection.". Action Required: A motion to City Council recommending wording to be included in the ordinance amending City Code Section 11.40. - p-OFA MEMO TO: Shakopee Planning Commission FROM: Douglas K. Wise, City ?fanner R': Shakopee Golf Course - P DAA: April 10, 1987 reliminary PUD Application Introduction, the On March 26, 1987 the Shakopee Planning Commission closed Public hearing on the preliminary PI7D plat. Because of the lateness of the hour action On the preliminary PUD plat was postponed until the April 16, 1987 meeting. Background- For background information please review the 2/27/87 and 3/20/67 memo 's regarding this project. Concerns- 1. Sewage Treatment Depending on whether the Planning Commission selects option A or option B will determine whether lot areas need to be enlarged and to what extent easements will be reauired. Based on the soils analvsis submitted by the developer lots 1 and 2aajacent to the entrance of road A, and lot 3 adjacent to road B will have to be eliminated unless the developer adequate treatment sican prove the fors have tes to meet the amended city code. 2. Water System The developer is proposing a central water system. it pas not yet been determined whether the system will be operated by SPUC or the Association. In either case the water system must meet the requirements o£ the Mn Dep- . cf ::_a-th regzrdin - 4 public water systems. 3 • Proposed Cul-De-Sac - The cul-de-sac cn the southern edge of the develcpment exceeds the existing cul-de-sac limit of 1000 fee- by 1900 feet. It is clear ` violation o'_ that this cul-de-sac is in t- C=tY Code. There are three opticns - --at the Planning Commission may want to consider in regard to this issue. E. Require the developer to shorten the cul-de- sac to comply with the planning ordinance. b. Request the developer to make this cul-de-sac a t_^_rough street. c. A'--low the cul-de-sac to exist in its present form with the condition that an emergency access trail be provided connecting the end of the cul-de-sac with the club house parking lot. 4. Open Space Requirement - A determination must be made as to whether the golf course area qualifies as open space. The city ordinance does not define ''open space" Generally, in relation to a PUD, open space is land owned and maintained by the association available for use by the residents of the PUD. The golf course will be privately owned and operated. Residents will have free use of the space when it is not required for golfing. They may use the land for golfing subject to certain conditions and/or fees required. The DNR in their review of the PUD has determined that the golf course does meet the open space requirements based on its availability to the residents. The amendments to the PUD ordinance require 20% open space or approximately 40 acres for this project. Staff Recommendation: The staff recommends approval of the preliminary PUD subject to the following conditions: 1. Submission of a sewer plan which contains an analysis of soils and design standards for each residential site and club house site which insures compliance with the city code for individual/private sewage treatment systems. 2. A plan for design and management of the water distribution System. 3 . Coun7y Road access permits will be required from Scott -_t} p--__ to sinal PUD approval. 4. Approval drcm the DNR on the use of the protected w=_=lands and O'Dowd lake should be submitted prier to the -issuance of any building permits. �. A street lighting plan should be included on the final PUD design map. - E , phasing _ =L= cevelcpme nt shou"Sd be prior to final approval. -_.age plan should be developed which identifies facilities to a__or,nodate overflow prior to final PUD approval. 8. Design characteristics of the emergency trail connecting the club house parking lot with the 2:00 ' cul-de-sac should be submitted prior to final PUD approval and must be capable of allowing year round access by emergency vehicles. 4. Streets must be named, setbacks and easements must be shown. 10. The number of entrances to County Road 77 shall be limited to three. 11. A fence shall be constructed between the tee for hole 8 and waters edge to prevent low flying balls from landing in the lake. 12. Execution of a Developer' s Agreement for the construction of the required improvements: A. Installation of a water system as approved by the City of Shakopee. B. Installation of a street lighting system as approved by the City of Shakopee. C. Storm water system as approved by the City of Shakopee. D, Streets and street signs to be constructed in accordance with the requirements of the Design Criteria and Standard Specifications of the City of Shakopee. E. In lieu of the park land dedication and/or fee, the developer shall provide a trail connecting Timber Trails Addition and O'Dowd Paris and payment in lieu of park dedication. Said trail should meet plans and specifications as approved by the City Engineer. Said trail should be completed prier to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy for the Golf Course Club House. 13 . Approval of a __tie Opinion by the City Attorney. 15. DNR approval of the following: a. The PuD plat. D. The environment assessment worksheet. C. The use of fertilizer, grading and landscaping within the lake watershed. d. Fencing between Hole 8 tee and Lakeshore. e. kingmake access. f. A.L-erat_p-: cf wetland areas. 15. The develcper shall _provide the City w_t_h a copy of covenants - r the PTD. These covenants ==so include the fcllowinc: a. DSR reszzictions On fertilizer use and lake testing b. Delineate the use of open space by residents of the ?IID. Clearly define any restrictions limiting the use of open space by residents. C. Liability insurance requirements, the City shall be named a coinsured for anv liability resulting from the play of golf over public land or water. Action Requested: Move to recommend to the City Council that the O'Dowd Lake Estates and Golf Club Preliminary PUD be approved subject to the above conditions. J � o � MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator FROM: Douglas K. Wise, City Planner RE: Amendment of PUD Ordinance Regarding Utilities DATE: April 20 ,1987 introduction: At their meeting on April 16, 1987 the Planning commission passed a motion recommending the wording of condition k3 regarding Utilities in a PUD. Background: Please refer to the memo' s included in the City Council meeting packets marked 10 g & h. Recommended Wording: The Planning Commission selected Option A retaining the one acre minimum site area. Wording was changed slightly to clarify the meaning. Following is the wording recommended by the Planning Commission: 3. The Planning Commission mast shall require easements of ad�o-itring- abutting/contiguous open space for sewage treatment to supply at least one acre of site area for each residence. Where soil conditions sxeh--as-e3a� eK st, dictate, the applicant may shall be required to use alternative systems such as mounas, double tanking, etc. MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator FROM: Douglas K. Wise, City Planner RE: PUD Code Change Regarding Utilities Preliminary PUD for O'Dowd Lake Estates and Golf Club DATE: April 16, 1987 Introduction: The Planning Commission will be acting on these items at their meeting on April 16, 1987. Background• Because the City Council packet is being distributed prior to Planning Commission action on these items no recommendation is included in this memo. Included for your information are copies of the memos sent to the Planning Commission. City Council members will receive a memo outlining the Planning Commission action prior to their meeting on April 21, 1987. 4f h MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator FROM: Douglas K. Wise, City Planner RE: Preliminary PUD For O'Dowd Lake Estates and Golf Club DATE: April 20, 1987 Introduction• At their meeting on April 16, 1987 the Planning Commission passed a motion to recommend approval of the Preliminary PUD for O'Dowd Lake Estates and Golf Club. Background: Please refer to the memo' s included in the City Council meeting packets marked #10 g & h. Recommended Conditions: The Planning Commission recommends approval of the Preliminary PUD for O'Dowd Lake Estates and Golf Club. Subject to the following conditions: 1. Submission of a sewer plan which contains an analysis of soils and design standards for each residential site and club house site which insures compliance with the city code for individual/private sewage treatment systems. 2. A plan for design and management of the water distribution system. The Plan shall also include water consumption estimates. 3. County Road access permits will be required from Scott County prior to final PUD approval. 4. Approval from the DNR on the use of the protected wetlands and O'Dowd Lake should be submitted prior to the issuance of any building permits. 5. A street lighting plan should be included on the final PUD design map. 6. A phasing plan for the residential development should be submitted prior to final PUD approval. 7. A drainage plan should be developed which identifies facilities to accommodate overflow prior to final PUD approval. 8. Design characteristics of the emergency trail connecting the club house parking lot with the 2400' cul-de-sac should be submitted prior to final PUD approval and must be capable of allowing year round access by emergency vehicles. 9. Streets must be named, setbacks and easements must be shown. 10. The number of entrances to County Road 77 shall be limited to three 11. R-fence-skaPP-be-eenstrueted-between-the-tee-for-hePe--B-and waters-edge--to-Pretlent-Pew-fPping-baPPs-frem-Parading-in-the Pake. A design review for hole #8 will be required. The design review shall be directed toward removal of any potential hazards. 12. Execution of a Developer' s Agreement for the construction of the required improvements: A. Installation of a water system as approved by the City of Shakopee. S. Installation of a street lighting system as approved by the City of Shakopee. C. Storm water system as approved by the City of Shakopee. D. Streets and street signs to be constructed in accordance with the requirements of the Design Criteria and Standard Specifications of the City of Shakopee. E. In lieu of the park land dedication and/or fee, the developer shall provide a trail connecting Timber Trails Addition and O'Dowd Park and payment in lieu of park dedication. Said trail should meet plans and specifications as approved by the City Engineer. Said trail should be completed prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy for the Golf Course Club House. The design specifications of the emergency access connecting the club house parking lot and the cul de-sac shall be approved by the City prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy for the club house. 13. Approval of a Title Opinion by the City Attorney. 14. DNR approval of the following: a. The PUD plat. b. The environment assessment worksheet. C. The use of fertilizer, - grading and landscaping within the lake watershed. d. Peneing-beteeeen--HePe-B--tee-and-Iaakeskore. The design for Hole #8. e. Docking and lake access. f. Alternation of wetland areas. 15. The developer shall provide the City with a copy of covenants for the PUD. These covenants must include the following: a. DNR restriction on fertilizer use and lake testing. b. Delineate the use of open space by residents of the PUD. Clearly define any restrictions limiting the use of open space by residents. C. Liability insurance requirements, the City shall be named a coinsured for any liability resulting from the plan or golf over public land or water. l � Il a� TO: Mayor, Councilmembers FROM: Tom Brownell, Chief of Police RE: Propane Conversion Units DATE: April 14, 1907 INTRODUCTION The department purchased three patrol vehicles which require conversion to propane. BACKGROUND These units were not budgeted due to the fact I was under the impression that the former mechanic kept the original equipment to convert the used vehicles back to gasoline. I now find that the equipment was not retained. Considering our investment in our storage facility and the current purchase price of propane, 26 cents per gallon, compared to the cost of unleaded fuel at 75 cents per gallon, it is financially responsible to continue the use of propane. The finance director indicates that funding exists within the departments current capitol equipment fund due to the purchase cost of the vehicles being less than estimated. RECOMMENDATION Purchase three propane conversion units to include installation at a cost of $3,270.00 from Propane Carburetion. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED Authorize the police department to purchase three propane conversion units to include installation at a cost of $3,270.00 from Propane Carburetion. Pm �Ib MEMO TO: Mayor and Council FROM: John K. Anderson, City Administrator RE: Providing Police Officers to Handle Traffic for Major Attractions in Shakopee DATE: April 14, 1987 INTRODUCTION: When the 1986 tourist season ended, Tom Brownell and I were contacted by Canterbury Downs to review alternative ways to provide police officers for handling traffic for major events for 1987. Since last fall staff has been meeting with Canterbury Downs to explore alternatives for providing traffic officers. After January 1st of 1987 the discussions began to focus on an alternative creating a separate nonprofit corporation. In April City staff met with Scott County staff who we learned had been independently discussing a similar alternative. We are now bringing the alternative before the respective elective bodies. BACKGROUND- The current procedures for obtaining police officers to work traffic for Canterbury Downs and for the Renaissance Festival are not uniform. The highway patrol charges $33. 00 per hour for a minimum of eight hours in 1986 to work the intersection of Highway 101 and County Road 18. The City of Shakopee charged $23. 00 per hour for a minimum of two hours to work traffic at the intersection of Highway 169 and 101 in 1986. The Scott County Sheriff' s Department charged $26.00 per hour for a minimum of 7 hours to work the intersections leading to the Renaissance Festival in 1986 . In a related but • separate service function the City of Shakopee allowed the Racetrack to contract with Shakopee Police Officers on an independent basis to work on-site at the Racetrack for $15. 00 per hour. Scott County has allowed Sheriff's Deputies to work on-site at the Renaissance Festival at a rate of $26.00 per hour. The City of Shakopee has had no formal contractural arrangement with the Racetrack, because our officers work directly for Canterbury as independent contractors. The Renaissance Festival contracts with Scott County for the services of the Sheriff' s Deputies. ALTERNATIVES- 1- Continue with the status cuo. This alternative is the lowest cost alternative for the Racetrack for on-site officers. However, it provides little or no workmans comp. or liability protection for the officer or the City. Canterbury Downs also pays two different rates for traffic control for Shakopee Police and Highway Patrol Officers. The cost of Highway Patrol Officers is high, particularly when they are paid for hours between the arrival and departure of vehicles during which there is no work done. The status quo creates a third differential in pay. City Officers working the intersection of Highway 169 and 101 and Sheriff's Deputies working Renaissance Festival intersections on the same Saturday and Sunday mornings are paid differently. Finally, some conflicts have arisen between Canterbury Downs and the Renaissance Festival about who pays for officers and when they are needed at the intersection of Highway 169 and 101. 2. Create a joint powers agreement between the jurisdictions providing licensed police officers to handle traffic and work on-site at the major attractions This alternative was discussed at length because the Chief of Security at Canterbury Downs, Tim Thompson, has experience with joint powers police agreements. It was determined that the operation of a formal joint powers agreement would beneficially increase coordination of scheduling and charges. However, this approach, by local units of government, would require that the major attractions pay for benefits including overtime for officers when they work more than 40 hours per week. This alternative does not permit officers to independently contract for services and thus reduce the cost and red tape involved in operating a normal local governmental operation for the officer, local government and major attractions. 3. Create a separate nonprofit corporation to employ licensed Police officers to handle traffic and on-site operations This alternative has received the most discussion since the City and County began meeting jointly on the subject. This alternative combines a number of the positive elements of alternative number 1 and number 2. It allows the major attractions to coordinate their activities through a separate nonprofit corporation (Sample Articles of Incorporation, By-laws and Independent Contractor Contract attached) . It would allow police officers from other jurisdictions to join the nonprofit corporation to enlarge the overall pool Of officers available to work major attractions. The separate corporation would provide an appropriate hourly rate and mix of additional benefits without having to meet all of the local government mandates. Currently our discussions are focusing on liability insurance and workers comp. insurance as the two additional benefits to be provided the officers under the nonprofit corporation. We are estimating that one million dollars in liability insurance would cost from $2, 000. 00 to $5, 000. 00, workman's comp. 8 1/48 of the hourly rate, that there would be $500. 00 annually in attorney's costs, and a wage paid the !I 'P✓ corporation' s treasurer for handling the necessary payroll procedures. In addition we are looking at a set of policies and procedures that would be followed by all officers and the major attractions. Finally, should an officer be required to use a police vehicle, we are looking at a per hour rate for vehicle usage. RECOMMENDATION• Those of us working on this issue are currently recommending alternative 43. We are aware that the final rate paid would be different than any of the current rates. We are expecting the rates to fall somewhere between the City' s $15. 00 per hour and the County' s $23 .00 per hour. With the new rate, attractions paying the slightly higher rate may be dissatisfied with the alternative. Similarly police officers (or deputies) receiving the slightly lower rate be dissatisfied with the alternative. Even with these potential implementation problems, we are still recommending alternative #3 for consideration by the Scott County Board and the Shakopee City Council. It provides an insurance buffer for the local governments involved, the officers themselves and the attractions at a cost that would be less then otherwise available. To work it also requires finding local licensed officers willing to operate the nonprofit corporation. Their names would replace those of Tom Brownell, Rod Krass and John Anderson on page #2 0£ the proposed Articles of Incorporation. ACTION REQUESTED: Direct the appropriate City officials to continue to work with Scott County and the major recreational attractions, and return with alternative #3, the nonprofit organization, in final form. JKA:cah lip ARTICLES OF INCORPORATION OF SCOTT COUNTY PUBLIC SAFETY OFFICER'S NETWORK, INC. The undersigned, for the purpose of forming a corporation pursuant to the provisions of the Minnesota Non-Profit Corporation Act, Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 317, adopt the following Articles of Incorporation: ARTICLE I - NAME The name of the corporation shall be: SCOTT COUNTY PUBLIC SAFETY OFFICER'S NETWORK, INC. ARTICLE II - REGISTERED OFFICE The registered office of the corporation in Minnesota shall be located i at: 327 South Marschall Road, Suite 300, Shakopee, Minnesota 55379. The registered Agent at the foregoing address shall be Phillip R. Kress. ARTICLE III - PURPOSE The purpose of the corporation shall be to enter into agreements with recreational and other entities and businesses for the purpose of arranging independent contractors to provide certain public safety related services. ARTICLE IV - PECUNIARY GAIN This corporation shall not afford pecuniary gain, incidently or other- wise, to its members. ARTICLE V - DURATION The duration of this corporation shall be perpetual. ARTICLE VI - INCORPORATOR The name and address of the incorporator, a natural person of full age, is: PHILLIP R. KRASS 327 SOUTH MARSCRALL ROAD, SUITE 300 P.O. BOX 216 SHAKOPEE, MN 55379 -1- ARTICLE VII - DIRECTORS The management and direction of the business and affairs of this corporation shall be vested in a Board of Directors. The number, qualifica- tions, term of office, method of election, powers, authority, and duties of the directors of this corporation, the time and place of their meetings, and such other other provisions with respect to them as are not inconsistent with the express provisions of these Articles of Incorporation shall be as specified in the Bylaws of this corporation. The name and addresses of the members of the first Board of Directors of this corporation are: Phillip R. Krass 327 South Marschall Road, Suite 300 P.O. Box 216 Shakopee, MN 55379 John K. Anderson 971 Swift Street Shakopee, MN 55379 Thomas Brownell 120 Eighth Avenue West Shakopee, MN 55379 The term of office of each such first member of the first Board of Directors shall be until the first annual meeting, or until such director's succesor shall have been elected or otherwise shall qualify. ARTICLE VIII - CAPITAL STOCK The corporation shall have no capital stock, either authorized or issued. IN WITNESS, the undersigned incorporator has executed these Articles of Incorporation on the _ day of March, 1987. Phillip R. Krass, Incorporator -2- BY-LAWS OF SCOTT COUNTY PUBLIC SAFETY OFFICER'S NETWORK, INC. ARTICLE I Offices and Corporate Seal 1.1) Registered Offices. The registered office of the corporation shall be in the City of Shakopee, County of Scott, State of Minnesota, and that of record with the Secretary of State. The corporation may have offices at such other places as the Board of Directors shall from time to time determine. 1.2) Corporate Seal. The corporation shall have no obligation to use or adopt a corporate seal. ARTICLE II Membership 2.1 Number of Members. Members of this corporation shall be those who apply for membership and are accepted by the Board of Directors. This cor- poration shall have a minimum of three directors and a maximum of eleven direc- tors, as designated and decided by the Board of Directors. The Board of Directors shall fill any vacancy which occurs as a result of an increase in the number of said Board. I 2.2) Meetings of Members. There shall be no required annual meeting of the regular or associate membership of this corporation; except as may other- wise be required by the Articles of Incorporation of this corporation or by statute governing this corporation. The affairs and business of this cor- poration shall be conducted by the Board of Directors as provided for elsewhere in these Bylaws. ARTICLE III Board of Directors 3.1) General Powers. The property, affairs, and business of this corporation shall be managed by the Board of Directors. 3.2) Qualifications and Term of Office. Each director shall be a natural person of full age, and shall serve until removed or resigns. 3.3) Voting Rights. Each director shall be entitled to one vote. No director may cast an absentee vote, but written proxies shall be permitted. 3.4) Organization. The Board of Directors shall elect a chairman and secretary. At each meeting of the Board of Directors, the Chairman of this cor- poration or, in his absence, any person whom the directors shall appoint by majority vote, shall preside. The Secretary of this corporation or, in his absence, any person whom the Chairman shall appoint, shall act as Secretary of the meeting and take all minutes. -1- 3.5) Resignation. Any director of this corporation may resign at any time by giving written notice to the Chairman or to the Secretary. A resigna- tion shall take effect at the time specified in such notice, unless otherwise stated therein. Acceptance of a resignation shall not be necessary to make it effective. 3.6) Vacancies. Any vacancy in the Board of Directors shall be filled by a vote of the Board of Directors then remaining. 3.7) place of Meetings. The Board of Directors may bold its meetings at such place or places within or without the State of Minnesota as it may from time to time determine by a majority vote. 3.8) Time of Regular Meetings. The Board of Directors may hold its meetings at such times as it may from time to time determine by majority vote of the members. 3.9) Annual Meetings. The annual meetings of the Board of Directors shall be held in April of each year for the purpose of electing officers and for the transaction of such other business as shall come before the meeting. Notice of such meeting shall be given as provided in Section 3.10 hereof for special meetings of the Board of Directors. 3.10) Notice of Special Meetings. Special meetings of the Board of Directors shall be held whenever called by the Chairman or by any two (2) of the other directors. Notice of each such special meeting shall be mailed to each director addressed to the director's residence or usual place of business, at least five (5) days before the day on which the meeting is to be held, or be delivered personally or by telephone not less than one day before the day on which the meeting is to be held. Each such notice shall state the time and place of the meetings, but need not state the purpose therefore, except as otherwise expressly provided in these Bylaws. 3.11) Notices Excused. Notice of any meeting of the Board of Directors need not be given to any director who shall be present at such meeting and any meeting of the directors shall be a legal meeting without any notice thereof having been given if all of the directors of this corporation shall be present or waive such notice in writing before, at, or after such meeting. 3.12) 4uorum; Manner of Acting. Except as otherwise provided by statute or by these Bylaws, a majority of the total number of directors shall be required to constitute a quorum for the transaction of business at any meeting. Unless otherwise provided in the Articles or Bylaws of this corporation, the acts of a majority of the directors present at any meeting at which a quorum is present shall be the acts of the Board of Directors. In the absence of a quorum, a majority of the directors present may adjourn any meeting from time to time until a quorum be present. Notice of any adjourned meeting need not be gven. ARTICLE IV Officers 4.1) Number. The officers of this corporation shall be as follows: Chairman, Executive Secretary, Secretary and Treasurer, and such other officers Of this corporation as the Board may designate. -2- 4.2) Election, Term of Office andQualifications. All officers shall be elected by a majority vote of the members of the Board of Directors and shall hold office until the next annual election of officers and until their suc- cessors shall have been duly elected and qualified or until their death, resignation or removal in the manner hereinafter provided. An officer may serve an unlimited number of consecutive or non-consecutive terms. 4.3) Resignations. Any officer may resign at any time by giving written notice to the Board of Directors, the Chairman or the Executive Director. Any such resignation shall take effect at the time specified therein or upon receipt if no time is specified. Unless otherwise specified in such resignation, the formal acceptance of such resignation shall not be necessary to make it effective. 4.4) Removal. Any officer may be removed either with or without cause by a vote of a majority of all the members of the Board of the Directors at any annual or special meeting called for the purpose and such purpose shall be stated in the notice or waiver of notice of such meeting, unless all of the directors of this corporation shall be present. 4.5) Vacancies. A vacancy in an office because of death, resignation, removal, or any other cause shall be filled by resolution of the members of the Board of Directors. 4.6) Duties of Officers. The duties of the officers of this cor- poration shall be as follows: 4.6.1) President. Shall preside at meetings of the Board of Directors; shall see that all orders and resolutions of the Board are carried into effect; and shall have general managerial responsibility and authority. 4.6.2) Executive Director. Shall implement the orders and reso- lutions of the Board and shall have the management of the business affairs of the corporation in assistance to the Chairman. The Executive Director shall have all the powers of the office of the Chairman in the event of a vacancy or incapacity in that office. 4.6.3) Secretary. Shall keep minutes of all proceedings of the Board of Directors and shall give proper notice of meetings of directors. 4.6.4) Treasurer. Shall keep accurate accounts of all monies, drafts, and checks in the name of and to the credit of the corporation in such banks and depositories as a majority of the whole Board of Directors shall designate from time to time. He shall have the power to endorse for deposit all notes, checks, and drafts received by the corporation. He shall disburse the funds of the corporation as ordered by the Board of Directors, taking proper vouchers therefor. He shall render to the Chairman and the directors, whenever required, an account of all his transactions as Treasurer. -3- ARTICLE V Executive Committee 5.1) Executive Committee. The Board of Directors of this corporation may designate two (2) or more of its members to constitute an Executive Committee. To the extent determined by the Board or said officers, the Executive Committee shall have the authority of the Board of Directors in the management of the business of this corporation between meetings of the full board. ARTICLE VI Fiscal Year 6.1) Fiscal Year. The fiscal year of the coporation shall begin on the first day of April and end on the last day of March in each year. ARTICLE VII Waiver of Notice 7.1) Whenever any notice is required to be given by these Bylaws of any of the laws of the State of Minnesota such notice may be waived in a writing signed by the person or persons entitled to such notice, whether before, at, or after the time stated therein or before, at, or after the meeting. ARTICLE VIII Authorization Without A Meeting 8.1) Any action that may be taken at a meeting of the Board of Directors or the Executive Committee may be taken without a meeting when authorized in writing signed by all of the directors or by all of the members of the Executive Committee, as the case may be. ARTICLE IX Amendments 9.1) Provisions of these Bylaws and the Articles of Incorporation may be altered, amended or revised at any regular or special meeting if approved by a majority of all the members of the Board of Directors present at such duly noticed meeting. Certification The undersigned officer of the Corporation hereby certifies that the foregoing is a true and correct copy of the Bylaws of the Corporation duly adopted by the Board of Directors the day of , 1987 and currently in effect. Dated: Secretary -4- CONTRACT FOR WORK DONE BY INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR THIS CONTRACT is made this _ day of 198_, by and between SCOTT COUNTY PUBLIC SAFETY OFFICER'S NETWORK, INC. , a corporation organized under the laws of the State of Minnesota with its principal office at the City of Shakopee, County of Scott, State of Minnesota, herein referred to as "Owner," and , of City of County of , State of Minnesota, herein referred to as "Contractor." R E C I T A L S 1. Owner owns and operates a business providing independent contrac- tors for various recreational and other businesses, which indepen- dent contractors are intended to provide services including traffic patrol, security, and other safety related services for the recreational enterprises and businesses involved. 2. Contractor agrees to perform these services for Owner under the terms and conditions as set forth in this Contract. IN CONSIDERATION of the mutual promises set forth herein, it is agreed by and between the Owner and Contractor as follows: A G R E E M E N T 1. Decription of Work. The work to be performed by Contractor inclu- des all services generally performed by Contractor in Contractor's usual line of business, including, but not limited to, the following: providing public safety, traffic patrol, security and other related professional services. 2. Payment. Owner will pay Contractor the total sum of Dollars ($ ) for work to be performed under this Contract from time to time as the various recreational enterprises -i- and other businesses may so request. 3. Relationship of Parties. The parties intend that an independent contractor/employer relationship will be created by this Contract. Owner is interested only in the results to be achieved, and the conduct and control of the work will lie solely with the Contractor. Contractor is not to be con- sidered an agent or employee of Owner for any purpose. It is understood that the Owner does not—agree to use Contractor exclusively. It is further understood that Contract is free to contract for similar services to be per- formed for other owners while under contract with Owner. The parties to this Contract agree that Contractor is a professional person, and not an employee, of Owner, nor entitled to any benefits normally provided employees. 4. Duration. Either party may cancel this Contract on one-day's written notice; otherwise the Contract shall remain in force for a term of five (5) years from the date hereof. 5. Representations. The Contractor represents that Contractor is fully qualified and licensed by the State of Minnesota to perform the services requested and acknowledges that Owner has no obligation to secure such license for Contractor. Dated at Shakopee, Minnesota, this _ day of 198 SCOTT COUNTY PUBLIC SAFETY OFFICER'S NETWORK, INC. By: Its President Independent Contractor -2- ll � TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator FROM: Gregg Voxland, Finance Director RE: Interfund Transfers DATE: April 14, 1987 Introduction The fund transfers shown below have been made as of 12/31/86 in accordance with past Council actions and past practice. Background The KMart Capital Project Fund has been closed and the remaining balance of $9,339.84 has been transferred into the Track Capital Project Fund. This is the remainder of the original KMart TIF bond proceeds. Council has previously transferred about $313,000 from the KMart fund to the Track fund. The Race Track Offsite Debt Service Rind has been closed and the remaining balance of $19,115.13 has been transferred into the 1986A TIF Refunding Debt Service Fund. This is in accordance with Council's action to refund the 1984 $2,490,000 bond issue. The 1974 Improvement Fund has been closed and the remaining balance split into two other funds. The cash on hand ($21,531.89) was transferred into the 1986A-81 Refunding fund. This is part of the cash that the new fund needs for debt service. At the time the refunding bonds were issued, it was discussed and approved that the new bonds would need about $77,000 in cash from other special assessment funds that had available cash on hand. The remaining balance of special assessments receivable of $133,014.64 was transferred into the Capital Improvement Fund in accordance with past practice. Alternatives 1. Approve transfers. 2. Do not approve transfers. 3. Modify transfers. Recommendation Alternative number 1. Actin Reauested Move to approve of the transfer of $9,339.84 from the Mart Capital Project Fund to the Track Capital Project Fund, $19,115.13 from the Track Offsite Debt Service Fund to the 1986A TIF Refunding Debt Service Fund, $21,531.89 from the 1974 Improvement Fund to the 1986A-81 Refunding Fund and $133,014.64 from the 1974 Improvement Fund to the Capital Improvement Fund, in order to close out old funds that are no longer needed. J ur NNNN N N N S 0 . yl o NNNNNNN o ooU N o00o O o e m 4 e OJIa J a NNN • tlPPPP N Y e a F ^ _ • • 00mm000 • i ' 2 4 I O 4 O > N N NNNUNNN N N\N N N UmN 'N N 1` 9 ymmmmmm y mmm m yy mm N � y m 1 3 m �l 4 N +Pb WI YY NNNa:ro J! _Y4 . mm P'mW M) mtl N� 4N'0 NN 'YY : roro' 04000Ptl0 YY NeNW m0 'O oP _ ee NN '' _ NN OMNOJONe 44 NO J: PP � J � •a • NN � W W D>DDDDD 4 >D D m CCCC W 3 K 9 4444444 = 00 m z � o- wwwwww z 00 nn n. o000 m m < 4444444 F 2 'n nnn T O m a p _ 3231 m mmmm Z y m O o T nnnnnnn mmm z zzz n T 0_00_0_ 0_00 D_ __O A 9444 O D y A F y S 3 ma nnn � ctrl y q Z O moo Wccc m 0 0 W zzz o- n z c n Z A9A D TImm a n u Z a 4 W nnn n 444'.4 n n nnn .. A 4 m y 4444444 4 mmm. m mm W.m m n m c _ oc mmmmmm a rr. c occ o v �rrrrrr D Wv '. T 'c 9',9 c Z i c mmmmmmm < .non: Tn '. r TTTTT m � nT r'r i y m0000000m '.a swl,m a m m zzzzzzz n m a W mmmmmmm y D s 1 i >ieeir a > 11 a a o N N YYYYYUY tl NNN N NN1N N Y = 0 NNNNNNro O 000 - NNN r O 4 N 1 1 1111111 1 ill.. : Iw ,'J p � w v m--4NUN -ro _�m' w aNaro u i _ N JWA4 aY_ �__ aNNN N N Z N a rou_MNYN '.N �m0 N - � i O T a O N m i 4 3 m T m a � iW m 1 e F s z z m m m m m w S „ ' d . S 11 IN IN wo f5 £€i [S �3 q . .AR.. 53f jr€ n.s 6 : Aia X39 4' ic S Ld..�tt L2i :2 P r'• "y K I:1lTy�' _ _ NNNN N NN N N N NN N N N Pn PP NN • • M P Y YJ F = yJMJ P • D > e P • N + Z O K O I O T ;NNN N NN W N N NN N N N NN F ObbP y y J m y y wY J J J JJ m JKJJ m j O C_ oe y 0 J 00 I 0aa Nro'. JJ 11 Wr I J4044 JNN Nry rvN yV J�'N NN' NW roro ONN eeee0 ee 0e0 ee NN N.N Imllay a OyJ r0a � • FEES • F FF 2 '. m Im DD OT '• O YDD 0000 mmmm Szm xr z 33 O 23 < mmmxm mIZI1Wa m ss wDi y 'm mm �. z3 o 'AA A OPyb T9 ' m 'n 00 '. CC y mm � w O mT A 00 S DDDD mm _ 0000 'UL m W n DD9D SS m 0 - S' Am ' p99A 00 O I < mA aboo 00 m ' m mmmm C 9W p O m mW n� O m 9m r OOOO = AC m OC O C O pC y CCCC OT Z 2 _ C9 M T9 9 r 3333 r mm r S jm • S mm 'm 2 z C < n ' 2222 I e ee e u e e • e o ee n I aaaa a as a a a + a: a a as o prymm O 00 O '. IIIO O ' 44Ur � U4 _ N J O • � ro 9 I y O N 0 3 J m 9 m D m O a m — p z F z s F F m 4 W w m w m w w i �fE! it W m m W W I Y V • W 6 i Y i • Y i i V pl < 0 6 W_ r i 0 N O i LL 'n e r d o i 0 N = P On n o n P n 1'1 PO d N d Pn OZ 3 d nN d d n P P P P m ♦P 1 I � OSI 2 r o a w O 6 66 6 I F M Y F JJ Qw IW- O OO O ¢ 6 Q ^ 6 U N0 W W W W R 6 6 V L V 6 I F 0 V, 0 W S LL U 6 r N W W r W W JJ y W V 6 O L J W W 0 � rii S. 0 00 J W 3 3 K F. 00 ^. 6 LL 2 C 6 UU G I. m K w m V LL Y T L SE L L L 2: O 6 6 CC ♦ ♦ PP �. nn • Q Oo • • NPY yl yl oNN 00ZZ NN NN NN Nv . le'In NN nn =N mm mb _ PN '. 3 O 1 W 0 00 0 0 0 0 0 O \ \ 0\0 Y N NN N N N WI N N N N NN 0 F e \\ \ \ eo O o O 00 6 00 O a O I Y O F 0 m V O Ool Y o� • O • O • O • o ♦ e ♦ o • o ♦ �� y V V y W I 1 1 V U < W i < W • i • i 6 W_ F W 0 N O I L O i F F P j N _ `1 O_ � ' X1 _11111 1 rP M MM NPF r lee a e tim. eole a 7- 777`1 e J wN nnn N - nM _N- _ NN r Fl�rr Fly u PP PPP wd NMN M nM MMnnMnn n" 11 11 T< TT P PP PPPPPPP P' IA ^n 11 1111111 I 6 Oe 00 0 o p0. OOF _ Ow OOoe00o e O 6 b 00¢ 'W Wi <6 WLLb > LL6 WWWWWWW C 1 M. J J r rh h 0 FC UV LLLLLL 6 6. _ nrSi rJirr���u '� 00 OOp 6 1. JJ. 6 LL p O JJ ¢¢6 J J. 00. J¢J 6 ¢¢ hhhhhrh 6. ^ 00 666 N 0' WW b1N 66 JJJOJJJ W 6 ¢ 0. y VU O 00 WWWWWWW L. U Vu y ¢¢ WWW I U ¢¢ VVVVVV W hF NNN Y W SS JJJV 000 V 00 »»»> 6% hFr LL ¢ Nb U J'J ¢¢¢¢¢¢¢ ¢ WW ?J? y UUU < WW WW00bW0 W p ¢¢ 6 U O VVU W h hF fff p Nb WWWWWWW r S ^^ 0.00 O V. V4 VUU O WW WWWWWWW Z. j LLLL J'JJ -W U H 6661666 Q 'O h FF- hhh VY OOp C h hh Fhr Y FF gMow 1 nrSi ¢¢¢ �.5 V UV UUU S JJ Y«6«« Wb ONbbbm� 0 On�M dw FF Oq.P OOop nan w. ewmo NNP OMPb PV � Mn NOP NPNP rF rPn "d NONNWNo 0 _ N: j nnP -NN wNNN= o W ',r m rF FFF F \0 000 000 0 00 0000000 `' � N NNN N N =1\I[ NNN N NN NNNNNNN N LL O e o OOo Oo poo000e p O h 2 V Y b M FF' 000 00 0. ^ U oa PPP P P PPPPPPP iFtl V Pp fP P P P Pv o ooe0ooe _ Oo Ooe p � NO Noo NN NNNNNNN N -------- --- - ------ -- ''eo n - N NNNNNNNN NNN N NNNNNN NN NNNN x m . N NNNNNNNN NNN N NNNNNN NN NNNN T J J YaPPPPPP YWY u • PPPCPP • WY • pOee • F = J • P • S K O K 0 O T OOe D ' e `ea`pr>ea pan >pa ea ea ed ea aea can e+ '`�� m s m NNNNNNNN NNN N NwNNNN NN NNwm F y0 0000 9 J JmJJJJJJ Ott m JJMJJ J JyJJ m 3 C m_ _ o 0uro�0aaOro V N b NWNe-- Oeb ObbN P _- NONPYroaroP 0oN NN 100NproNN POYJOVbWM p `� WVO Proro P b 0000a f0 • aNJJUPa ` Nod • o • 0bmb NNO • . 1 C Ou.ni rW.�Y�u m w WNW nyW 'y y14 on x cmmmmm mm aasa ' !• �K�`�K`� < KK c crrrrr xs Aaaa A xx Fzzz < 00000000 9 mmmmmm 9m %ma% i O TTTTTTTT % W T mmwWNm b TT rrrf O ppp M 322222 Da Illmmm A D DDDDDDD> FFF TMTTTM Aa DDDD y 00000000 f %mWWm% xx yZ22 n WmmwWm _ mmmmmmmmmmmm o-o- n non z mmmmmm mm cccccm o n> A Aa 999999 O 4 I m A 9 CCCCLCCC ... 3 .Wwmm% 'Wm mmm0 + oW J4J4W4rK "am o cccccc Acc rrfr J 999999 9 o o om m y .r..r..r.r wri r;.r mTm a crrrrr ',.ar ,.noon 3 ro-f rr r..r r x xxx 'T mmmmmm mm aaDY N m-Im-+ter-1-I o- a c Wwm%Wm 3w iziz n WmW M mmmm n T > .yyrJ A m Ww%m% coc r D p NepO=pee :00 a Oellll �� 02122 114 O 1 o u owuwi >i a aaaaaa a au uauuuudu uu ro '' %rororororo �°^' uuuu z N o OJpOeOJO 000 OpO0e0 NO 0000 J 1 Io1PlY� l 111 1 1111 IP Y00m 0 p a P �ro Pro b-N�mro00 u JJ a N N- royro_ N- -- - �- 1= 111 p III i iime�su� l Iil s waa-_ P u--- u b=ro-roromm YJJ a -mro-uro roro rommm < 9 o % m 4 m E Sd m � 3 9 2 9 t ^ A •y 8 9 s ' a j s 10 in x -- - - - -- - - - n - N N N N NN N N N NN N N N N S 0 0 0 0 00 m 0 0 00 0 0 m 0 n ♦ 1 U N ro oo O 0 J N a Y N F � O K I O O T o e e y i Oea a e s N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N F J J JY J J J JJ J J J m D x ' m JJ b- M JY WW b N0q WY NN as Nm `C y � J NJ aW NNVN. y a NN PP 00 N N JJ Uo 0m NNJ NN aJ NN WU Y 00 U Nm OJatl b� i • O • N mN • o • P, i0 ♦ b, • . O TTTTTTTT 2 0 O D> y a N DD y m S 0 y CCCCCCCC _ Z m 9 ZZ r > 0 ZZ K y 'a C > Z_Z___ DO_ O m O N. r 00000000 _ OJPN- '-O DD Z T m y O WYPPNa- D m D a =FF m m00 S A KIKKKKJK z o I 00000000 m z asssaasa r m A T - P s o rr,rrrrrr n oo z z i z x x n m z no n n m ' am:-onzJP a n m a nn a v z N v m 9 9Jzrzm T a a z ^ T a y . r'. y 0 �x m r oms N P y -la m a ry sc -1r z m m • rr m N m Pr: > m m a 9r�OA C S C 00 N y C^' C 0 y cz<m z o m co a mOZm O r y m 11<jl y y y 2 Ta OI o O O 00 u O O Ov o e N O ^ a Y tl ry N NN Y Y N NN W N r W 2 P r ea N P N 1 m O N 0 s J S m a m s m n s m m � F tl m mmm m m Om m �1 0 Otm O 00000 , 0Or 00000 000 rr N r r rr r w r N w rr �n r , rrrr rnr r�nrrrrr rrr � b'' FYF F F FY F W F' Y F W F F F YFFt FFFYFFFYFt FFF R S � iD�O�O � b NlD b O\ W W b mF V1 W WWWWWWWWWWWWWw WVI VI NNN N w r W N V f N 0 N W r O O NNN N N N N N N N N N N N N r Y D Y Y Y Y r r Y r r r O F T 000 O O Y O O O w r 0 0 N r r W W r W F N r Y r r F W r r Y w W O ro> 00 FO O N W O O 0 O O O r �D N vtr mN NW-�1 r�o NrW�w r r r 000 0 0 r O O O r r O Or r r rr N rr YY rr r rrr r Y NY :Y W 0OOFO00NW00 N00N W Y �N NWNFr-'�ON Vw�w N NY r mmm m m 0m m 0 0 m 0 00000000000000 000 O rrr r r r r r w r r w rr v� r rrr r r r r r . . rrrr rrr . rrr 0 00 r r 00000000000000 rrr > 000 0 0 00 0 0 0 0 0 00 0 0 00000000000000 000 p ro r r r r 0 00 r r r r r r r 0 r 4' 0000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 rrr n w 000 0 0 00 0 0 0 0 0 00 0 0 00000000000000 000 w IN r m 3 ViN w r o le p �n O w r O�F' N �wNp mmFWomi WDN\ 0 0N 0F 0 wwViWo O 0O Or �ON�VWQ 0- -f�' N�1N01 CO O OO O HFMHNOrrOO� r2r O O 0 0 H m i T S '_t'1 SI b p UJ 'b S U1 H Nr Ony 03 >O n 'Y OpO Oro rrr r+ r ro w N M ✓. ^1 p M ro w c+ n [J o W w x w ° r O N On K N C w S > 0 M r < S S N M O 0 y r 3 w 0 N 05G 3 N m < � M N NNN N N N N N N N N N N NN N NNNNNNNNNNNNNN NNN O W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W x N Vt VI VI V1 VI VI VI VI VI V1 N VI VI VI VI VI VIN VI V1 V1 VI VI V1 VI N VI N VI VI V1 VI ��� vii wW N m O i0 m �m m mwFm wFmmmww�mmFmmm mm Z O w+ 3 O 3 O n ww O W O fmD M I2G 0 m w M r S O w r M r 0 N r S N Z w < w N Ox [ N N w ro w n w x < w b F N N t• r N r n N w r o rn w r r r `p r 0 0 m 'F F O O r r F F N 0 0 p 0 0 0 0 w r � d n 00 0 v O O O N oS o O O w rwr m�nr c ro' � r� y z 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 O r rY C roll fnOSO H H t0-' a NSC O £ QD ❑ H 0 0 0 O G Y Y N r N D r� O B 3 Y m m w a G w N N 3 OW �n r 3 v O O O w O K N O w � C Z a m ro a Smww a K A w m N Y M M S d NO FwI.NiN mrn nO �n Or FY OO�n 00 �O N N N N O w W w S O < m [roil d � W N N a o n a n � o � o K a n x v+ r a r 3 Y�D r VI OW N r N N O N N O O W MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator FROM: Judith S. Cox, City Clerk RE: Application for Temporary 3.2 Beer License by Shakopee Jaycees DATE: April 21 , 1987 Introduction• The Shakopee Jaycees have made application for a temporary 3.2 beer license for May 2nd and 3rd. Background: The city attorney has reviewed the surety bond and certificate of insurance and they are in order. Alternatives: 1] Approve application 21 Deny application Recommendation: Alternative No. 1, approve application. Recommended Action_ Approve the application and grant an on-sale 3.2 beer license to the Shakopee Jaycees at Tahpah Park for May 2nd and May 3rd, 1987. j MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator FROM: Ken Ashfeld, City Engineer SUBJECT: T.H. 169 Mini-Bypass Project DATE: April 6, 1987 INTRODUCTION: Mr. Jack Brambilla has contacted me concerning his intentions to apply for a building permit to construct certain improvements adjacent to 1st Avenue and on his property located at 115 1st Avenue West. The purpose of this memo is to discuss the City' s position on further improvements to this block in light of the proposed mini-bypass. BACKGROUND: The City ' s transportation consultant , Barton-Aschman, in cooperation with an alternative evaluation committee , has completed the Project Path Report and Environmental Assessment for the project. In addition to the Do Nothing alternative, that report identified two workable alternative alignments for the bypass , Alternatives 7A and 13• Based upon responses from reviewing agencies and general discussion within the City, it appears likely, that upon further study, Alternative 7A will emerge as the preferred alternative . There has also been discussion amongst staff and Council of perhaps the possibility of modifying the alignment to lessen the impact on the Brambilla property by increasing the impact on the block that City Hall sits on. It is unknown at this point if that modification is workable and would require further study during the design phase. In any respect, it appears certain that the property that Mr. Brambilla proposes to improve would be impacted by the bypass project . Even if the property was not within a realignment, added width requirements for turn lanes and medians would result in an impact. It is my understanding that the City cannot deny a building 's permit to Mr. Brambilla if all codes and ordinances are met. It is also my understanding that once the Design Study Report is completed (approximately June , 1987) , the City can request authorization from the Federal Highway Administration to proceed with right-of-way acquisition. It has been suggested that the City take some action to keep communication lines open with Mr. Brambilla in an attempt to avoid added value to the property that will most likely be in the right-of-way acquisition boundaries. T.H. 169 Mini-Bypass April 6, 1987 Page 2 RECOMMENDATION: There are some definite unknowns at this point regarding the impact on the Brambilla property. The possibilities range from removal of a portion of the structure adjacent to 1st Avenue to complete displacement of the Brambilla business. I recommend that Council direct the City' s property acquisition committee and the City Engineer to determine as expediently as possible the necessary right-of-way needs and provide for an equitable agreement with Mr . Brambilla for the continued operation of his business until which time the property is needed for the project. REQUESTED ACTION: Move to direct the City' s property acquisition committee and the City Engineer to communicate to Mr. Jack Brambilla the City ' s intentions concerning right-of-way acquisition for the mini- bypass project, proposed time schedules for acquisition and develop proposals for acquisition. KA/pmp BYPASS LN ,_ Cd\ _ •..�� rte. Ic.,^_ � _ 1115551515 .._ T ALTERNATIVE 7A y ✓vwEN \Prv(P I 1 i FIGURE 5 ALTERNATIVE 13 flo MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator FROM: Ken Ashfeld, City Engineer /10— SUBJECT: Upper Valley Alignment Design DATE: April 1 , 1987 INTRODUCTION: On February 24, 1987, a public meeting was held concerning the Upper Valley Drainage Project. At the termination of that meeting , Council directed staff to solicit proposals from appraisers to conduct easement valuations . These easement valuations will be used to determine the most cost effective alignment alternative between C.R. 16 and 4th Avenue. BACKGROUND: Proposals were received from Shenehon and Associates and Patchin & Associates. It appears that nine appraisals will be needed . To accomplish this task, each appraiser proposed to develop a data base from which all appraisals will evolve . Patchin proposed a cost per parcel to be appraised, irregardless of size, and Shenehon proposed costs based upon parcel identity. Subsurface soils exploration will determine that certain appraisals may or may not need to be done. The proposal from Patchin & Associates is the lower cost proposal for the work that needs to be done. RECOMMENDATION: I recommend retaining Patchin & Associates for appraisal work associated with the Upper Valley Drainage Project. REQUESTED ACTION: Move to approve retaining Patchin & Associates , Inc . for appraisal work required on the Upper Valley Drainage Project 1987-5 . KA/pmp APPRAISALS 1 Peter J. ��, ' Patchin `�� & Associates, Inc. 9 x; cl ;v- Valuation Consultants MAR 2 619870- 14300 Nieollet Coun, Suite 240, Bumsville, Minnesota 55337 It � N March 25, 1987 City of Shakopee 129 East First Avenue Shakopee, Minnesota 55379 Attn: Ken Ashfeld City Engineer Re: Upper valley Drainage Project Dear Ken: After meeting with you on March 24, 1987, I have prepared an estimate of appraisal fees necessary for acquisition of storm sewer easements. It is my understanding that most Of this project would consist of 100 ' wide open channel type of storm drainage. It is further my understanding that there are several alternative routes for which easement appraisals could be made. Our fee would be as follows: Preparation of Data Base for Appraisals $ 1,500 Appraisal of Individual Parcels $ 300 each In this manner, you may add or subtract as many parcels as you find to be necessary. A parcel would constitute any contigious piece of land under a particular ownership, that has the same intended use. If you decide to proceed, please allow 6 weeks from date of your order to receipt of the completed appraisal reports. After delivery of the appraisal reports, if any additional appraiser time is required for negotiations, pre-trial conferences, testimony, and the like, our fees will be invoiced at the rate of $100. 00 per your for myself and $65.00 per hour for my associates. Thank you for considering our firm. Sincerely, PE7 P CHO ES, INC. eter J. 'tchin, MAI, ASA President s CD Shenehon b RECL�D & ASSOC1ateS, Inc. APR 919870" 9 Real Estate&Business Valuations 903 NUAW-st PUza Fast,Minneapolis,Minnesota x5402 2 6� 3;RJ April 8, 1987 Mr. Ken Ashfield City Engineer City of Shakopee 129 First Avenue East Shakopee, Minnesota 55379 RE: MARKET VALUE APPRAISAL FOR UTILITY EASEMENTS IN SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA Dear Ken: Pursuant to our recent meeting, we are pleased to conduct a easement valuations for the above mentioned property. The following is a breakdown of the fees for each individual parcel. The base data research cost is fixed at $2,500.00 for any or all of the parcels. Individual parcel costs are as follows: HATCH PARCEL: 1,000.00 WARNER PARCEL: 2,000.00 LENZMEIER PARCEL 1: 1,500.00 LENZMEIER PARCEL 2: 1,000.00 P.A.C.T. PARCEL: 1,500.00 ALL TEMPORARY EASEMENT PARCELS: 2,500.00 SCHERBER PARCEL: 1,500.00 PARROT PARCEL: 500.00 HAUER PARCELS 1, 2 & 3: 2,000.00 We handle our accounts on an hourly basis. My rate is $135.00 per hour and the associates range between $35.00 and $100.00 per hour. We find that the typical daily fee is approximately $800.00 when working on an assignment. We keep careful timesheets on each assignment and that information is available to you at the time of billing if you desire. if less time is expended than anticipated we will pass the savings onto you. We customarily provide three (3) copies of our report to the client; additional copies are available at our actual cost. Appraisal • Consultation • Feasibility• Market Research Mr. Ken Ashfield April 8, 1987 Page Two Our firm has an established tradition throughout the state of Minnesota and has a talented staff of appraisers with a wide variety of experience in the appraisal of utility easements. The three partners hold top credentials that are recognized in the real estate appraisal field. Enclosed you will find a copy of my qualifications along with a company brochure for your perusal. Thank you again for contacting us. We look forward to working with you on this assignment. If you have any questions, please feel free to call. Respectfully, SHEEN/EHONAND / ASSOCIATES, INC. Robert./Strachot, MAI, CRE President /lko MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator FROM: Ken Ash£eld, City Engineer RE: John Nelson Sanitary Sewer Service DATE: April 14, 1987 INTRODUCTION• At the time that the VIP interceptor sanitary sewer was constructed, properties that were capable of being served were assessed an interceptor charge and properties that abutted the sewer were assessed a lateral charge. John Nelson owned two lots (one built--upon)--that abutted the VIP. BACKGROUND: Due to the geographical nature of the property, Nelson paid the trunk charge but contested the lateral charge portion of the assessments to the two lots. An agreement (attached) was executed between Nelson and the City which stated that if the properties were ever connected to the sanitary sewer, payment equal to the original lateral assessment rate must be made. In 1984, Nelson connected his house to the VIP and made payment of $3, 149.57 to the City. At this time, a contract for deed holder on the--vacant lot wishes to connect to the sewer. As a condition of the lot sale, Nelson made another payment of $3, 229 . 84 for the lateral charge. When the original assessment was adopted, those properties receiving a lateral assessment absorbed a larger lateral cost since Nelson's front footage did not appear in the calculations. This action did not affect the lateral assessments to properties benefitting from the Hauer Trail lateral project. Now that the City has collected $6, 379. 31 above that of the project cost, does the City rebate a proportionate amount back to the properties abutting the VIP? If this is the case, the amount to be rebated would be $0. 4278 per lateral front foot. There would be no abatement to assessments resulting from the Hauer Trail project. For the most part, this abatement would affect undeveloped properties and would involve an undetermined amount of staff time to accomplish this, i.e. , various lateral assessments may be paid and the City would then need to draft checks for repayment in lieu of an abatement. The property that is proposed to be serviced is partially adjacent to about 20 ' of newly constructed street and 90 feet of 13 year old street. In 1986, Council adopted a 5 year no cut street policy. Consequently, the service trench was planned to cross Hauer Trail in the older portion of the street to a sewer line constructed with the Hauer' s 3rd Addition. RECOMMENDATION: I do not have a strong recommendation regarding an assessment abatement. From the perspective of City cost, I would prefer that the $6, 379.31 be placed in the sanitary sewer fund. ACTION REQUESTED: Direction to staff as to whether Council wishes to abate $6, 379.31 to properties assessed a lateral charge on the VIP project. KA:cah Attachment -- - - it WHEREAS, John R. Nelson and Melba Nelson, husband and wife, are the fee owners as joint tenants of the following land in St,t County, Minnesota, described as follows, to-wit: "- A tract of land Iving in the Northwest Quarter of Section 8, Township 115, Range 22, Scott County, Minnesota, described as follows: Commencing at the intersection of the East line of said Northwest Quarter and the Southerly boundary of County Road No. 16, distant 1354.4 feet South of the northeast corner thereof; chance South 20'03'20" West a distance 219.9 feet; thence South 39oD6' West a distance of 138.2 feet; tbence South 606 31' West a distance of 112.48 feet to the point of beginning; thence - continuing South 60° 31' West, a distance of 112.48 feet; thence South 170 13' 40" East s distance of 267.75 feet; thence South 890 51' East a distance of 41.28 feet; thence North 626 11' East, a distance of 71.52 feet to the intersection with a line that bears South 170 13'40" East from the point of beginning; thence North 176 13140" West, a distance of 289.25 feet to the point of beginning: excepting therefrom the Southerly 25 feet, containing 0.7 acres more or less, and WHEREAS, the Shakopee City Council determined that it is not now feasible for r the said Nelsons, parties of the first part, to hook up to the YIP interceptor in place and using the said interceptor as a lateral, and WBEREAS, an the 18th day of August, 1981, the Shakopee City Council adopted the following two motions, to-wit: _. MOTION "1 Leroux/Lebens moved that regarding the property of Joan Nelson the City finds that it is not feasible for Mr. Nelson to hook up to the PZ? interceptor using it as a - - lateral, and therefore will not charge him a lateral charge at this time. However, there are interceptor and trunk charges to the property and if he connects to the YIP o: if a lateral is constructed in another matter, he will than receive a lateral charge. Motion carried MOTION 22 Leroux/Lebens moved that staff be directed to draft recordable agreement with Mr. Nelson regarding payment of lateral assessments in the event of future connection. Motion carried unanimously. IT IS;`THI--KE'PORE AGREED BY AND BEfFEEN John R. Nelson and Melba Nelson, husband and wife, parties of the first part, and the City of Shakopee, a municipal corporation. party of the second part, as follows: The City pursuant to Council action delaved lev;ing lateral sever charges against said property above described until and if the property is connected to the PIP or if a lateral is later constructed and the property booked up thereto, in which case, the property above described will then be subject to the lateral charge or charges. 2. That in consideration of the action delaying levying lateral sewer charges i against said property above described the said parties of the First part covenant and agree with the City to pay a lateral sever charge upon the occurrence of any of the events anumberated in paragraph No. 1 hereof and also enumerated in Motion $1 as setout herein, and they Further Covenant and agree that this agreement will run With the land and also will bind the heirs and assigns of said parties of the first part - or the heirs and assigns of the survivor of saidparties-. IR TESTIMONY 47HEREOF, this agreement is executed by the parties of the, first part and by the party of the second part by the authority of the City Council and the Mayor and the City Clerk acknowledge this to be the £ree:•act and deed of said City all ee of this '-'� day of I � In the Presence of Juan E. Felson y/ ,Melba E. Nelson in the Presence of TEL CITY OF SNANOPE A IRW2CIPAL CORPOR9TI0 Mayor f: .,ipy;Clerk STATE OF ?fIF=zSOTA) as H CO=-Y OF SCOTT ) ( Ct An2tnisixatcr d The foregoing instrument was acknowle ge e£ore me this dap o.`.�m...o-u1, 195 . B^Jo'um R. Nelson and Melba E. Nelson, husband and cif. (signaturelof Person taking acknowiebgmen _ .. . . _ _ .. . . L�I'•+:.R e'-L� K£'3 - %r.�,.w.;--rye+^ (title or rank) S?ATE OF `._.^:ESOTTA) � 0.ty jPi _c =\ ye w � uatEA- n a.nur i K A VACAJLo7 owjW.0 3 `?-�s1 rJ E-L.so J _ L's—, o ,aro� { _N�LSo S v.�1kE�J VIP sTlo�j '17 _ MEMO TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: John K. Anderson, City Administrator RE: Lease Agreement between the City of Shakopee and the Shakopee Chamber of Commerce DATE: April 16, 1987 Introduction The Shakopee Chamber of Commerce made a presentation to the Shakopee City Council at its April 7, 1987 meeting outlining the Chamber's plans to construct a new Chamber office and tourist information center located in Memorial Park. The Chamber requested that the City consider leasing the required space to the Chamber for a 50 year period for $1.00. The City Council directed the appropriate City officials to draft the requested lease agreement. Proposed Lease The City Attorney and I met to discuss the proper formatting of a lease agreement between the City and the Chamber for a lease of City park land. The lease form agreed upon was the lease the City has with the Shakopee Hockey Association for the location of the hockey bubble on Lions Park property owned by the City of Shakopee. The proposed lease is similar in form and substance to the lease the City has with the Hockey Association. Alternatives 1. Approve the proposed lease as presented. 2. Amend the proposed lease agreement as appropriate after Council discussion. 3. Direct staff to come up with a new lease format. Recommendation The City Attorney and I recommend alternative No. 1 because we have been satisfactorily served by the lease the City has had with the Hockey Association. Action Requested Direct the appropriate City officials to enter into a lease with the Shakopee Chamber of Commerce for 50 years for the purpose of locating a Chamber office and tourism information center on certain property within Memorial Park for $1.00. JKA/jms LEASE AGREEMENT THIS INDENTURE, made this day of , 1987, by and betweeen the City of Shakopee, a Minnesota municipal corporation (hereinafter designated and referred to as "Lessor") , and Shakopee Chamber of Commerce, a Minnesota non-profit corporation (hereinafter designated and referred to as "Tenant") . WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, Lessor is the present owner of the fee title to the land located in the County of Scott, State of Minnesota, legally described on Exhibit A attached hereto and made a part hereof and the improvements to be constructed thereon (said land and improvements) being hereinafter (referred as"Premises" or 'Demised Premises") ; and, WHEREAS, Lessor desires to lease said Premises to Tenant, and Tenant desires to hire and take the Premises from Lessor. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants and agreements contained herein, and for further good and valuable consideration which each of the parties hereto acknowledge as adequate and sufficient, the parties hereto agree as follows: - ARTICLE I. DEMISING CLAUSE 1.1 Lessor, for and in consideration of the rents herein reserved, and the covenants and agreements herein contained on the part of the Tenant to be kept, observed and performed, does, by these presents, demise and lease to Tenant, and Tenant hereby hires and lets from Lessor, the Demised Premises, all in accordance with the terms, covenants and conditions herein set forth. 1.2 Tenant shall have and hold the Demised Premises, and all improvements now or hereafter constructed thereon as they shall be, as of the date hereof, without any liability or obligation on the part of Lessor to make any alterations, improvements or repairs of any kind on or about said Demised Premises for the term of the within Lease. Tenant agrees to maintain the Demised Premises and all parts thereof in good and sufficient state of repair. _ 1 _ ARTICLE II: TERM 2.1 The term of this Lease shall commence on the let day of 198-7— and 987and shall continue thereafter through and inclusive to 12:00 o,clock noon on the 30th day of 2037, unless sooner terminated as herein set forth. ARTICLE III. RENTAL 3.1 In consideration of the leasing, aforesaid, and provided said use assetforth in Article IV. continues, Tenant agrees to pay to Lessor_ at Shakopee City Hall, total rental in the .sum and amount of One and no/100 Dollars ($1.00). ARTICLE IV. _ USE 4.1 The Demised Premises shall be used for purposes of a convention _ bureau and tourist center and such other and similar uses and for such activities as may be lawfully carried on, in and about tF Demised Premises. Tenant shall not use or occupy the Demised Premises or knowingly permit the Demised Premises to be used or occupied contrary to any statute, rule, ordinance, requirement or regulation applicable thereto, or in any manner which would substantially diminish the value or usefulness of the Demised Premises or any part thereof. ARTICLE V. INSURANCE 5.1 The Tenant shall, at the Tenant's sole cost and expense, keep all buildings or structures erected upon the Demised Premises, and fixtures therein, to the damagebyefireaandt(b) suchfull othererisks,IDent Of aalue similarrorfagainst ( ) lossdissimilaranature,oas - .- are or shall be customarily coveredwithrespect to buildings or structures similar in construction, general location, use and occupancy; including, but without limiting the generality of the foregoing, windstorm, hail, explosion, vandalism, riot and civil commotion, damage from vehicles and smoke damage and . such other coverage as may be deemed necessary by the Lessor, providing such additional coverage is obtainable and provided such additional coverage is such as is customarily covered with respect to buildings and structures similar in construction, general location, use and occupancy as are, or shall be, onlimittor,on the Demised Premises. These insurance provisions shall in no way modify any of theobligations of the Tenant under any of the terms or provisidas of this Lease.- _. 2 - 5.2 The Tenant shall also, at the Tenant's sole cost and expense, but for the mutual benefit of the Lessor and the Tenant, maintain (a) general public liability insurance against claims for personal injury, death or property damage occurring upon, in, or about the Demised Premises and on, in or about the adjoining lands, streets and passageways, such insurance to afford protection to the limit of not less than the maximum amount for which claim may be made against a municipality, which at the time this Lease is entered into is Two Hundred Thousand and no/1D0 Dollars ($200,000.00) per person and Six ndred Thousand end O incident. Should that amount be changed byDt the legislaturers ($600p0the per will Provide insurance affording protection to the Lessor Should by Court action the limitations on amo is the new amounts. t may be against a municipality be removed, the Tenant -in such amountsmOfe noreoverinsurance should the&B the sLessor determinetime that itin its best interest time is bwritten notice require. require Tenant to Provide insurance over and above the amounts hereinbefore set forth, the Lessor shall give Tenaut written notice thereof and the Tenant Shall provide proof of such additional insurance within thirty (30) days of said written notice. 5.3 All policies of insurahce relating shll to fire, windstorm and similar coverage aname the Lessor as the co-insured. 5.4 All policies of insurance shall be written in companies satisfactory to the Lessor and shall be written in such form and shall be distributed in such companies as shall be reasons Lessor. Said policies shall bly acceptable to the Paid" by be ae'_ivered to the Lessor endorsed 'premium the company or agency issuia ther evidence satisfactory to the Lessor that he same or accompanied b not less than ten (10) nays prior ro the are ration premiums thereon havebeenpaid, f any belnotified siada pitiagab at''aiz also containlanguageowhereby hthe en current shall Y insurer of any cancellation of said policy. 5.5 The Tenant shall iascra the contents of any building or - structure occupied by the Tenants against loss or damage by fire, windstorm o other casualty for such amount as Tenant may as re as eaan agrees t t such policy shall contain a waiver of subrogation clause en to the Lessor. The Tenant waives, releases and discharges Lessor for all claims or demands whatsoever which Tenant may have damage to the destruction oor acquire in the future, arising out of Of Teaavt's contents occasioned by fire or extended coverage risk whether cues claim or demand may arise because of the negligence of the Lessor, its agevts or employees or toherwise, and Tenant agrees to look to insurance coverage v:_y a the event of such loss. VI. L_TIES 6-1 water, electrieit .is,£e greed that Tenant will a furnished to electricity ' gas, Pay for all charges for r emi g power, sewer or other utilities ll interruption of such nt ses. , se ices se ceptaforrisks causes upon within theireasonable control of Lessor. The revs and this Lease aha `ad other obligations hereunder shall ll act retnivate es a 11 not abate, interru tion of said ur 'it result of unavailability or p -- ies. 3 - _ t ,� ARTICLE VII. — REPAIRS 7.1 The Tenant covenants throughout the terms of this Lease and any - renewal terms, at the Tenant's sole cost and expense, to take good care of the Demised Premises, including the buildings and improvements now or at any time erected thereon, the equipment, fixtures, motors and machinery thereof, the sidewalks, curbs, roadways, parking areas and fences, and to keep the same in good order and condition, and shall promptly, at the Tenant's own cost and expense, make all necessary repairs, interior and exterior, structural maintenance, ordinary as well as extraordinary, foreseen as well as unforeseen, including specifically, but not by way of limitation, all repairs made necessary by the use made by Tenant of the Premises. When used in this provision, the term "repairs" shall include replacements or renewals when necessary, and all such repairs made by the Tenant shall be equal in quality and class to the original work. The Tenant shall keep and maintain all . . portions of the Demises Premises and the sidewalks adjoining-she same in a clean and orderly condition, free of accumulation of dirt, rubbish, snow and ice. ARTICLE VIII. M1PLIANCE WITH LAWS 8.1 ' The Tenant covenants through the term of this Lease, at the Tenant's sole cost and expense, promptly to comply with all. laws and ordinances and the orders, rules, regulations and requirements of all federal, state and municipal governments and appropriate departments, commissions, boards and officers thereof, and the orders, rules and regulations of the Board of Fire Undery iters where the Demised Premises are situated, or any other body now or hereafter constituted exercising similar functions, foreseen or unforeseen, ordinary as well as extraordinary, which may be applicable to- the Demised Premises, the fixtures thereof and the sidewalks and curbs, if any, adjoining the Demised Premises or the use or manner of use of the Demised Premises. The Tenant will likewise observe and comply with the requirements Of all policies of public liability, fire and all other policies of insurance at any time in force with respect to the building and improvements on the Demised Premises and the equipment thereof. ARTICLE IR. MECHANICS LIENS 9.1 The Tenant shall not suffer or permit any mechanics liens to be filed against the Demises Premises or any part thereof by reason of any work, labor, services or materials supplied or claimed to have been supplied to the Tenant. - 4 - ARTICLE S. INTENT OF PARTIES 10.1 It being the intention and purpose of the respective parties hereto that all costs or expenses of whatever character or kind, general and special, ordinary and extraordinary, foreseen or unforeseen, and of every kind and nature whatsoever that may be necessary in or about the operation of the Demised Premises, shall be paid by the Tenant. 10.2 The Tenant covenants and agrees that if it sh611 at any time fail to pay any costs, as defined above, or take out, pay for, maintain or deliver any of the insurance policies above provided for, or shall fail to make any payment or perform any other act on its part to be made or performed as in this Lease provided, then the Lessor may, but shall not be obligated so _ . . to do, and without notice to or demand upon the Tenant and without waiving or releasing the Tenant from any obligations of the Tenant in this Lease contained, pay any such imposition, effect any such insurance coverage and pay premiums therefor, and may make any other payment or perform any other act on the part of the Tenant to be made and performed as in this Lease provided, in such manner and to such extent as the Lessor may deem desirable, and in exercising any such right to pay necessary and incidental costs and expenses, employ counsel and incur and pay reasonable attorneys fees. All sums so paid by the Lessor and all necessary and incidental costs and expenses in connection with the performance of any such act by the Lessor shall be payable to the Lessor on demand, together with interest thereon at the lessor rate of twelve (12:) percent per annum or the maximum permitted by law from the date of making of such expenditure by Lessor. ARTICLE RI. DEFAULTS OF TENANT 1-1.1 If, during the intial term of this Lease or any renewal term- (a) the Tenant shall fail to continue the use of the Demised Premises, or (b) make an assignment for the benefit of creditors, or (c) a voluntary petition be filed by the Tenant under any law having for its purpose the adjudication of the Tenant a bankrupt, or (d) a receiver be appointed for the property of the Tenant by reason of.insolvency of the Tenant, the occurrence of any such contingency shall be deemed a breach of the Lease and this Lease shall, ioso facto upon the happening of any of said contingencies be terminated and the same shall expire as fully and completely as if the day of the happening of such contingency were the date herein specifically fixed for the expiration of the initial term or any renewal term, and the Tenant will then quit and surrender the Demised Premises to the Lessor, but the Tenant shall remain liable as hereinafter provided. 5 _ 11.2 If, during the initial term of this Lease or any renewal term (a) the Tenant shall make default in fulfilling any of the covenants of this Lease or (b) the Demised Premises shall be left vacant or deserted for a period of thirty (30) days or (c) this Lease shall be signed or transferred in any manger, the Lessor may give to the Tenant notice of any default or of a happening of any contingencies in this paragraph referred to, and if at the expiration of thirty (30) days after the service of such notice, the default or contingency upon which said default was based shall continue to exist, when the case of a default or contingency which cannot with due diligence be cured within a period of thirty (30) days, if the Tenant fails to proceed promptly after the service of such notice and with all due diligence to cure the same and thereafter to prosecute the curing of such default with all due diligence (it being intended that in connection with a default not susceptible of being cured with due diligence within thirty (30) days the time within which Tenant is to cure the same shall be extended for said period as may-be necessary to complete the same with all due diligence) , the Lessor, at its option,—may terminate this Lease and upon such termination the Tenant shall quit and surrender the Demised Premises to the Lessor, but the Tenant shall remain liable as hereinafter provided. 11.3 The specified remedies to which the Lessor may resort under the terms of this Lease are accumulative and are not intended to be exclusive of any other remedies or means of redress to which the Lessor may be lawfully entitled in case of a breach or threatened breach by the Tenant of any provisions of this Lease. The failure of the Lessor to insist in any one or more cases upon the strict performance of any of the covenants of this Lease or to exercise any option herein contained shall not be construed as a waiver or relinquishment for the future of such covenant or option. In addition to the other remedies in this Lease provided, the Lessor shall be entitled to the restraint by injunction of the violation, or attempted or threatened violation, of any of the covenants, conditions or provisions of this Lease. ARTICLE XII. ASSI(NMENT. - 12.1 The Tenant shall not assign this Lease, either in whole or in part, nor sublet or mortgage the leasehold interest of Tenant or any part or parts thereof, without prior written consent of the Lessor, which consent will be given, if at all, only to an assignment of this Lease to a non-profit corporation or entity. This condition shall not prevent the Tenant from leasing space within the Demised Premises on an hourly or similar basis for purposes connected with rhe use of the Demised Premises(as n ice facility:" ARTICLE XIII. SIVS 13.1 Tenant may erect such signs as it may deem desirable, as long as said signs do not violate the laws of the municipality in which the Demised Premises is situated. 6 - ARTICLE XIV. MISCELIANEDUS 14.1 The Tenant covenants not to do or suffer any caste or damage, disfigurement or injury to any building or improvement now or hereafter on the Demised Premises, or the fixtures and equipment thereof. 14.2 The Tenant agrees to permit the Lessor, or its authorized representatives to enter upon the Demised Premises at all reasonable times for the purpose of inspecting the same and making necessary repairs to any facility on the Demised Premises which the Lessor maintains or operates. 14.3 The Tenant hereby agrees to indemnify and save harmless the lessor against and from any and all claims by or on behalf of any person or persons or firm or firms, arising from the conduct or management of or from any work or thing whatsoever done in or about the Demised Premises. Tenant further acknowledges that no representation, express or implied, has been made by lessor as to the suitablility of the Demised Premises to be used by the Tenant. 14.4 All notices, demands and requests which may or are required to be given by either party to the other shall be in writing. All notices, demands and requests by the Lessor to the Tenant shall be mailed by United States Hail, postage prepaid, addressed to the Tenant at the Demised Premises. All notices, demands and requests by the Tenant to the Lessor shall be sent by United States Mail, postage prepaid, addressed to the Lessor, at Shakopee City Rall, Shakopee, Minnesota. 14.5 The Tenant, .in the use and occupancy of the Demised Premises and in the conduct of any business therein, shall comply with the requirements of all laws, orders, ordinances, rules and regulations of the federal, state, county and municipal authorities. The Tenant covenants that it will not use or permit to•be used any part of the Demised Premises for any dangerous, noxious or offensive trade or business and will neither cause nor suffer any nuisance in, at or on the Demised Premises. 14.6 The Tenant shall, upon termination of this Lease, for any reason whatsoever, surrender to the Lessor the buildings, structures, fixtures and building equipment upon the Demised Premises, together with all additions, alterations and replacements hereof. 14.7 The covenants and agreements herein contained shall bind and inure to the benefit of the Lessor, its successors and assigns, and the Tenant and its permitted successors and assigns. 14.8 If any term or provision of this Lease shall to any extent be held invalid or unenforceable, the remaining terms and provisions of this Lease shall not be effected thereby, but each term and provision of this Lease shall be valid and enforced to the fullest extent permitted by law. This Lease shall be construed and enforced in accordance with the laws of the State of Minnesota. ARTICLE XV. RENMWAL 15.1 This Lease may be extended for additional five (5) year periods according to the same terms and conditions by written mutual agreement of the parties hereto. 7 _ ARTICLE XVI WAIVER OF MECHANICS LIEN 16.1 Before commencing any improvement to the Premises, or allowing any materials, labor or services to be supplied for improvement to the Premises., the Tenant shall providetheLessor with mechanic lien waivers properly executed by all suppliers of labor and/or materials. Failure of the Tenant to provide said waiversshall constitute a breach of this Lease Agreement and shall entitle the Lessor to any and all remedies hereinbefore set forth, ARTICLE XVII NOTICE 17.1 During the term of this Lease and any extension thereof, Tenant shall cause to be posted in a conspicuous place on the Premfses, and in a manner clearly visible to the public, a notice stating that the. Lessor, the CityofShakopee, is not responsible for the cost of any labor, materials or supplies provided for use or improvement of the Premises.. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, each of the parties hereto has caused this Lease to be duly executed as of the day and year first above written. CITY OF SHAKOPEE By. _. Eldon Reinke, Mayor By John Anderson, City Administrator By Judith S, Cox, City Clerk SHAKOPEE CHAMBER OF COMMERCE By Its President This Instrument drafted by: Julius A. Coller, II By 211 West First Avenue Its Secretary Shakopee, Minnesota 55379 Approved as to form this 14 day of � , 1987 City Att ney —t1�— _ 8 - STATE OF MINNESOTA) ) as COUNTY OF SCOTT ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of 1987, by Eldon Reinke, John Anderson and Judith S. Cox, respectively the Mayor, the City Administrator and the City Clerk of the City of Shakopee, a Minnesota municipal corporation on behalf of the corporation. Notary Public STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) as COUNTY OF SCOTT ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of , 1987, by and respectively the President and the Secretary of Shakopee Chamber of Commerce, a Minnesota non-profit corporation, on behalf of the corporation. Notary Public - 9 - 1/o SCOTT COUNTY }t[ BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS . COURTHOUSE 109 j SHAKOPEE, MN.55379.1362 (612)937-6100 WM.KONIARSKI,District 1,Chairman JOHN F.CASEY,District 5,vice Chairman DALLAS BOHNSACK,District 2 R.E.MERTZ,District 3 MARK H.STROMWALL,District 4 The Scott County Board of Commissioners, meeting as the Committee of the Whole, today approved the following language as a concept on which to base a Memorandum of Understanding with the City of Shakopee: 1. Funds raised by the proposed admissions tax on major amusement facilities located in the City of Shakopee shall be spend on county roads and bridges on routes which directly or indirectly carry traffic to and from the major amusement facilities in Scott County, further defined as those projects listed on Attachment A. 2. The County shall continue to fund its five Year Road and Bridge � Improvement Program based upon county road improvements required throughout the County, including Shakopee. The intent of this provision is that the City of Shakopee's allocation of projects in the five-year program shall not be adversely affected bythe raising of funds through an admission tax, but nothing in this provision shall limit the acceleration or deceleration of the five-year program on a county-wide basis by the Board of Commissioners. April 21, 1987 BR:jm An Equal Oppo mitt'Employer ATTACHMENT A I" a SCOTT COUNTY HIGHWAY PROJECTS POTENTIAL, NON-PROGRAMMED HIGHWAY IMPROVEMENTS PROPOSED FOR FUNDING BY ADMISSIONS TAX (AS PER S.F. 1014 AND H.F. 1219) LOCATION/ ESTIMATED PRIORITY ROAD DESCRIPTION COST --------- --------- --------------------------- ------------ Medium 16 CSAH 17 Signal $60,000 (Shakopee) High 16 CSAH 17 to CR 83 $1,500,000 4 lane urban (2.2 mi.) (Shakopee) Medium 16 CR 83 to CR 89 (3.5 mi.) $1,500,000 Reconstruct 2 lane with shoulders (Shakopee) Medium 21/89 CSAH 42 to TH 101 Bypass $1,500,000 4 lane (2.75 miles) (Prior Lake/Shakopee) Medium 21 CR83 to CSAH 42 $1,000,000 4 lane Urban (1.5 mi.) (Prior Lake) High 18 Bloomington Ferry Bridge (Included below) Design Cost (Shakopee) High 18 Bloomington Ferry Bridge $9,700,000 Construction Cost to (Shakopee) $26,000,000 Medium 42 CSAH 21 (N.Jct.) to Boone $750,000 4 lane divided (1 mile) (Prior Lake) Low 42 CSAH 21 (S) to CSAH 21 (N) $1,200,000 4 lane divided (1.5 mi) (Prior Lake) Low 42 CSAH 17 to CSAH 21 $1,500,000 4 lane (3 miles) (Shakopee/Prior Lake) Medium 27 CSAH 16 to TH 13 $600,000 2 lane (1 mile) (Savage) Low 27 CSAH 44 to CSAH 16 $1,500,000 2 lane reconstruct (3.5 mi) (Savage) Medium 78 TH 41 to CR 69 - $250,000 2 lane (.75 mile) ------------ (Jackson) $21,060,000 to TOTAL $37,360,000 4-14-87 BR:jm ��cey�air FamilyAmusement R3Rk One Valleyfair Drive, Shakopee, MN 55379 (612) 445-7600 RESPONSE TO COUNTY BOARD POSITION PAPER 1. Unless legislation is specific as to amount and purpose, these are subject to discretion of Board which could use revenues for any purpose to which county road and bridge fund is applied. 2 . Admissions tax revenues will be applied to county roads and bridges, not to other county services. Question becomes: how can visitors pay fair share of cost of maintaining county roads and bridges? 3. If purpose is to provide sufficient highway system, tax should be based on number of cars using system, not number of people. Flat tax on each car brought in by major amusement facilities can be imposed by placing tax on parking cost. 4. Other county costs are superfluous to this discussion in that admissions tax would be applied only to roads. (Of course, this tax could free up other revenues to be applied to county services. ) "Total burden" of facilities offset by benefit to county. Proposed legislation applies only to roads and bridges in area; should be applied to vehicles, not individuals. 6 . I£ tax appliedear vehicle, and in addition a broad-based supplemental sales tax were imposed on liquor, food, and lodging, total revenues could be as great or greater as revenues estimated from admissions tax. 7. If the Board's purpose and intent in using the tax revenues are stated only in County Board resolution without statutorial limits, purpose and intent are in sole discretion of Board and can change at its whim. - How does Board define "directly or indirectly"? 8 . Only four entities at the most are taxed: no other tax like this exists. E.g. , tax on admissions at Metrodome or Met Center were for their own benefit. Beret three or four private entities taxed for general benefit of county. April 20, 1987 � l Page 2 - If admissions tax were to be upheld, it should be applied against all amusement facilities of 2,000 design capacity or more in order to spread the burden. - Why not include County Fair? 9. A homeowner in Scott County uses county roads much more than patron at amusement facility; thus it is fair that the homeowner pay more. - Homeowner in $75,000 house will have other family members also using roads, so 300day should be divided by number of car trips using roads. - Patrons often come several to a car, so It/day should be increased by number of cars using roads. - Homeowners use roads to go to and from work, shopping, entertainment, visiting, church, etc. Patrons go to amusement facility, go home. - Considering greater use of roads by Scott County residents over visitors on daily and individual basis, amounts paid to county road and bridge fund not so out of proportion. - Where does figure of 1C come from? 10. No other legislation has been introduced to produce revenues from other sources. - "Fair share of the cost" would be based on vehicle use. Also would include hospitality industry throughout county that benefits from all recreational facilities. - If Board is determined to focus on recreational facilities, it should include all recreational facilities in County. 11. Again, not talking about county services in general, but roads and bridges specifically. Therefore, any tax should be imposed per vehicle, or be a broader-based tax imposed on individuals and industries that benefit across the board by existence of amusement facilities. 12. Question asks why amusement facilities should pay taxes: amusement facilities themselves pay taxes just as homeowners do. Is tax on facilities, then, or on patrons? Supposedly on latter, should be fairly imposed according to use of roads by patrons. (4) Congestion on Scott County' s entire road system is not due to amusement facilities in northern part of county. If entire road system is to be benefitted, entire county should be taxed. April 20, 1987 Page 3 13 . (1) "Volume of highway users" - implies imposition of per vehicle tax. (2) Even if tax were applied equally to all businesses subject to tax, imposition of tax only on three or four businesses is not equitable. Therefore, the tax to be levied is not levied in equitable manner. Tax should be imposed on all businesses that benefit from existence of Valleyfair, Canterbury Downs , and Renaissance Festival. (a) Patrons tend to view initial cost of admission with greater particularity than amounts spent once inside. (Greater revenues from liquor/food taxes. ) (b) Travel cost is relatively small when there are several people in vehicle, as is usually the case, especially for Valleyfair and Renaissance Festival. (c) Recent price increases in admission charges did not consider another increase because of new tax. If fees recently increased, it would be difficult to increase again to cover cost of tax, leaving the amusement facility to pay tax from its own revenues. So not taxing patron but facility. - It is our understanding that complaints come from property owners regarding roads, not patrons of facilities. If so, it is wishful thinking to say patronage will increase because of improved roads. During construction, traffic would be much worse and might discourage patrons. (3) Canterbury Downs does not charge admission for people under age 18 . In addition, general admission is much lower than Valleyfair. Therefore, overall burden on family attending is considerably less. At Valleyfair, every child over age 3 would have to pay 250 tax - how many of these have driven their own cars into Scott County? (4) Impcse supplementary sales tax where revenues go to county. - County keeps referring to its costs relating to amusement facilities. It ignores fact that it has encouraged these industries to come in to the county in order to increase its tax base, to provide jobs, to increase spending in the county, to increase its population. County should not penalize industries for providing these benefits. - State sales tax plus local taxes together are relevant to encouraging businesses to come to and stay in Minnesota. April 20, 1987 I � Page 4 14 . The Board is focused on only two possibilities: property tax and admissions tax. But there are other alternatives which would be fairer and would provide higher revenues: - Parking tax imposed on each vehicle at recreational facilities with design capacity of greater than or equal to 2,000. - Supplementary sales tax imposed throughout county on gross receipts from all retail on-sales of intoxicating liquor and fermented malt beverages when sold at licensed on-sale liquor establishments and liquor stores located within the county; on gross receipts from furnishing for consideration of lodging and related services for period of less than 30 days at a hotel, motel, rooming house, tourist court, or trailer camp located within the county; and on the gross receipts from the retail sale of food and beverages not subject to the liquor tax by a restaurant or place of refreshment located within the county. Look at property tax: Homeowners pay taxes reduced by homestead credit. Commercial property owners pay higher rate of tax, not reduced by any such credit. Thus, in proportion, amusement facilities pay higher taxes than homeowners. MEMO TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: John K. Anderson, City Administrator RE: Proposed Scott County Admission Tax DATE: April 16, 1987 Introduction The Shakopee City Council and Scott County Board held a joint meeting on Tuesday, April 14, 1987 to discuss their differenting views on the proposed Scott County admissions tax. As a result of those discussions a committee was appointed consisting of Councilmembers Leroux and Wampach, Commissioners Koniarski and Mertz, and staff from both organizations. The committee was instructed to meet and determine if consensus could be achieved by Tuesday, April 21st. Results of Committee Meeting The committee met at 3:00 p.m. on Wesnesday, April 15th with all parties present. Walt Wittmer from Valleyfair also attended the meeting. After considering the number of alternatives discussed at the joint meeting the committee arrived at a mutually agreed upon proposal to take to the full bodies. The proposal included three elements: 1. That 70% of the admissions tax collected on facilities in the City of Shakopee would be spent on county roads in the corporate limits of Shakopee, or on mutually agreed upon roadways within the City or County. 2. That 308 of the -proceeds from the admissions tax would be used by the County on county roads directly or indirectly serving all major recreational facilities in the County paying the tax. 3. That the County would continue to fund its 5 Year Road and Bridge Improvement Program based upon county road improvements required throughout the County including Shakopee. The committee then discussed the possibility of the City passing a resolution supporting the admissions tax, based upon the elements listed above. Alternatives The committee is recommending that City Council consider separate action on a resolution supporting the admissions tax and upon an agreement between the City and the County for the disposition of the proceeds from the tax. Alternatives regarding a resolution supporting an admissions tax: 1. Approve draft Resolution No. 2718 supporting the County' s efforts to obtain authority to levy an admissions tax beginning in 1988 (S.F. No. 1014 introduced by Senator Schmitz attached) . 2. Amend the proposed Resolution of support and then act on the resolution. 3. Approve the resolution to form and then act upon it after an agreement is formally obtained between the City and the County. The timing on this particular alternative may cause the County and Senator Schmitz, author of the bill, some difficulty because they need to schedule hearings. 4. Decline to pass a resolution supporting the admissions tax. If Councilmembers are philosophically opposed to the admissions tax, opposed to it as proposed in Senate File No. 1014, or opposed it to because of the impact it may have on our major recreational facilities Council may wish to vote against the resolution. Alternative Agreement Language Between the City and the County for the Disposition of the Tax: 5. Approve the proposed draft agreement for submission to the Scott County Board for final adoption on April 28th (draft agreement attached) . They will have a committee reviewing the draft agreement April 21st and I will report on their action Tuesday evening. 6. Amend the language in the proposed draft and then approve it for County Board action as outlined in alternative No. 5 above. Other alternatives discussed were: Mutual use of existing tax increment financing dollars available to the City for county road improvements; sharing the admissions tax at a different percentage rate; allocating the admissions tax based upon a specified number of miles radius from each facility from paying the tax; and limiting the expenditure of tax proceeds to the taxing jurisdication within which the major attraction operated. Because the - County may have additional facilities paying the tax in other jurisdictions there was considerable discussion about these alternatives. The intent of the recommended alternative was to provide a flexible approach that might or might not be used by other jurisdictions. 7. Discard the concept of a separate agreement and include the proposed restrictive language or language similar to it in Senate File No. 1014. Again this alternative was discussed, but the committee felt that restrictive language and sunset clauses would come back to haunt both the City of Shakopee and Scott County. Recommendation It is the recommendation of the committee that the City Council approve resolution No. 2718 supporting the County's efforts to obtain authority to levy an admissions tax (alternative No. 1) . The committee also recommends that the Council approve the draft agreement between the City and the County for submission to the County Board at their committee meeting on April 21st (alternative No. 5) . Action Requested 1. Approval of Resolution No. 2718 supporting Scott County' s efforts to obtain legislative authority to levy an admissions tax as proposed in Senate File No. 1014 introduced by Senator Schmitz. 2. Authorize the appropriate City officials to submit the proposed agreement between Scott County and the City of Shakopee to the Scott County Board for the disposition of admission taxes collected on facilities in the City of Shakopee. JKA/jms 03-17-87 - [REVISOR 1 XY"4S 87-2383 Senator Schmitz introduced-- S. F. No. 1014 Referred to the Committee on Taxes and Tax Laws 1 A bill for an act 2 relating to taxation; authorizing Scott county to 3 impose a tax on admissions to major amusement 4 facilities; providing for expenditure of the proceeds 5 of the tax. 6 7 HE 'IT ENACTED BY TEE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA: 8 Section 1. [SCOTT COUNTY; ADMISSIONS TAX. ] 9 Subdivision 1. [IMPOSITION. ] The board of commissioners of 10 Scott countv may by ordinance impose a tax on admissions t 11 major amusement facilities in the county. In this section 12 "major amusement facility" means a place of amusement that has 13 been constructed with a capacity of 10,000 persons or more or 14 that was the site of an event that had-a paid attendance of 15 10,000 persons or more on anv day durino the Drecedinc 12-month 16 period, extent a place of amusement owned by the Scott county 17 acricultural society. 18 Subd. 2. [RATE. ] The tax shall be imposed at a rate not to 19 exceed 25 cents per paid admission. The board of commissioners 20 may by ordinance chance the rate, subiect to the limitation in 21 this subdivision. The tax imposed under this section is not 22 subject to the restrictions in Minnesota Statutes, sectio 23 240.15. 24 Subd. 3. [COLLECTION. ] The commissioner cf revenue may 25 enter into acreemects with the county to provide for the 03-17-87 (REVISOR ] /MS 87-2383 1 collection of the tax by the state on behalf of the county. The 2 commissioner may charge the county a reasonable fee for its 3 collection from the proceeds of the tax. The tax shall be 4 subject to the same interest, penalties, and enforcement 5 provisions as the tax imposed under Minnesota Statutes, chapter 6 297A, including the confidentialitv recuirements of Minnesota 7 Statutes, section 297A.43. 8 Subd. 4. [USE OF PROCEEDS. 1 Money received by Scott county 9 from the tax imposed under this act shall be paid into the 10 county road and bridge fund and used for the purposes of that . it fund. 12 Sec. 2. (EFFECTIVE DATE. ] 13 Section 1 is effective the day following final enactment. RESOLUTION NO. 2718 A RESOLUTION SUPPORTING SCOTT COUNTY'S REQUEST FOR AUTHORITY TO TAX ADMISSIONS TO MAJOR AMUSEMENT FACILITIES IN SCOTT COUNTY WHEREAS, the major amusement facilities and recreational attractions located in Scott County will draw more than 3 .5 million visitors to the County in 1987; and WHEREAS, on a daily basis the number of such visitors frequently is greater than the resident population of the county, thereby exerting a significant demand on County Transportation Services; and WHEREAS, the source of funds for County Transportation Services is the property tax, which was increased 36% in 1987 for the County Road and Bridge Levy; and WHEREAS, additional programmed and potential highway improvements in this area may cost in excess of $26 million; and WHEREAS, even though all of the aforementioned projects do not directly benefit the amusement facilites, these costs are indicative of County costs for providing an adequate road and bridge system in the area; and WHEREAS, a tax paid on admissions to major attractions would raise additional revenue from non-local taxpayers who require County Transportation Services. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the Shakopee City Council in and for its resident Scott County taxpayers hereby requests the Legislature of the State of Minnesota to grant Scott County authority to tax admissions to major recreational attractions within the County for the improvement of the transportation system on routes which directly or indirectly carry traffic to and from the major amusement facilities in Scott County. 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: Approved as to form this City Clerk day of 1987. City Attorney ADMISSIONS TAX AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE AND THE COUNTY OF SCOTT THIS AGREEMENT is made and entered into by and between the City of Shakopee and the County of Scott, State of Minnesota, this day of - 1987. WHEREAS, the City of Shakopee wishes to enter into an agreement with the County of Scott to provide for the equitable disposition of amusement tax proceeds collected by Scott County on attractions paying said tax within the corporate limits of Shakopee; and WHEREAS, it is the wish of said County to cooperate with said City to provide for a fair and equitable distribution of said admission tax collected on facilities within the City of Shakopee. NOW THEREFORE IN CONSIDERATION OF THE MUTUAL COVENANTS HEREIN CONTAINED IT IS AGREED AS FOLLOWS: 1. That the City of Shakopee which lies within the County of Scott and constitutes a separate taxing jurisdiction, shall have 70% of the admissions tax collected by the County on facilities within the corporate limits of Shakopee rebated to the City of Shakopee for expenditures on county roads within the corporate limits or other roadways as mutually agreed upon by both parties. 2. That the County of Scott shall retain 308 of the admissions tax collected from facilities within the corporate limits of the City of Shakopee to be expended as the County sees fit on any county road either directly or indirectly servicing any or all such facilities taxed within Scott County. 3 . That the County of Scott will continue to fund its County Road and Bridge Five Year Capital Improvement Program for improvements to county roads throughout Scott County including the City of Shakopee, without altering the County's procedures for managing said Five Year Capital Improvement Program for County Roads and Bridges. 4. That the County shall transfer said 70% admissions tax to the City of Shakopee within 15 days of receipt of said admission tax. 5. That in consideration of this agreement, the City of Shakopee hereby agrees to pass a resolution endorsing the efforts of the County of Scott to seek legislative authority from the State of Minnesota to levy an admissions tax beginning in 1988 at a rate of 25 cents per admission. And, that any alterations to the rate and implementation date of said proposed admission tax be presented to the City of Shakopee before it is presented to the State Legislature for action. 6. That termination of this agreement by either party shall be made by written notice no less than 120 days prior to October 10th of the chosen year of termination. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties haveexecuted this agreement this day of , 7. For City of Shakopee In presence of: By: Mayor By: City Administrator By: City Clerk For County of Scott In presence of: By: County Board Chair Approved as to form: Scott County Attorney Action Alert 4- WINE IN GROCERY STORE BILL MOVES TO HOUSE FLOOR On Monday, April 6, H.F. 1342 (Scheid, Osthoff, Jacobs, Bennett , Quinn) was heard andap ssed by the House Regulated Industries Committee. The bill would require a statutory or home rule charter city in the metropolitan area, including those with municipal liquor stores, to issue off-sale wine licenses to general food stores, and broadens the statutory definition of wine to include wine coolers. The maximum fee for a license would be $100.00 and the hours of sale would be legally (but obviously not practically) limited to the hours of sale for exclusive liquor stores. The League has policy opposing the expansion of wine sales to j grocery stores. While the competitive concerns of cities with - municipal liquor are obvious, the enforcement problems caused by minors' regular presence in stores both as patrons and check-outI clerks; large grocery bags which might or might not contain illegally purchased wine; and hours of operation commonly being 24 hours are equally significant. The bill will now be considered by the full House, perhaps as early as Tuesday of this week. The Senate will likely hold a committee hearing in its Commerce Committee within two weeks on the Senate Companion, S.F. 1302 (Wegscheid, Merriam, Kroening, Anderson) . Action Recommended Move to contact our State Legislators expressing our opposition to the expansion of wine sales to grocery stores. Lj .M1 /J ' STATE OF MINNESOTA Ovmce or THE L,eVlEYavr Gol7:auox MARLENEJOHNSON ST. PAUL 55155 APR 1987 I.IEIII'EKRNI"GOVERNOR Crry o~SygkOa�E April 3, 1987 Dear Friend, As chair of the Commission on Minnesota Outdoors, I am writing to encourage your support for the Land and Water - - -- --- Conservation Fund program (LWCF) . This program, scheduled to sunset in 1989, has made possible much of the recreation development in Minnesota. Since 1963, LWCF has provided $56 million to Minnesota for acquisition and development of recreational lands and facilities. Communities have been primary beneficiaries of LWCF dollars: $27 million from LWCF has been directed to local governments, and these funds have been multiplied with state matching grants for local recreation projects. Clearly, LWCF has provided needed outdoor oppor- tunities and stimulated state investment in outdoor recreation. However, many needs remain to be met. Each year, Minnesota is able to fund only 10 percent of the applications for LWCF and state matching grants. The Commission on Minnesotans Outdoors and the President' s Commission on American Outdoors have emphasized the need for continued federal financing for outdoor recreation. The Commission on Minnesotans Outdoors has recommended that the Land and Water Conservation Fund be continued beyond 1989. Your letter to your D.S. senator and representative ��-;� will help see that funding is continued. Tell them about the value of LWCF in meeting future recreational needs. Let your state legislators know of your support for outdoor recreation funding, too. By joining others in urging long-term commitment to recreation, you can help ensure that all Minnesotans will have access to the outdoor opportunities which we value so highly. Warm regards, MARLENE JOHNSON MJ/RH:pr AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER _ ^1�r 0 � .®.eos lJ U F—�`— This note from George Muenchow explains how this program works. George and I recommend extending the program. The LWCF has been one of the major reasons for a lot of park development for many years. The philosophy of this program is to take funds from diminishing natural resources (leases of off shore oil extraction) and transfering these monies to the acquisition and development of parks throughout the country. Shakopee has benefitted from some of these funds. In recent years even though the money from these leases has continued to come in, authorization has not been granted to spend it. In my opinion the program should be continued. Statistics show that most people recreate near their home and local governments need help to provide these facilities. A word of encourage— ment to our Congressmen would be in order. G.F.M. I I I F-1 Federal update - Action Alert CONGRESS CONSIDERS EXTENSION OF MANDATORY MEDICARE TAX City officials must act quickly to inform Minnesota' s House and Senate members of opposition to proposals to extend Medicare • coverage requirements to all city employees who are not yet subject to Medicare taxes. The House Ways and Means Committee may take up extension of the Medicare tax to fund proposed catastrophic illness insurance. Legislation (HR 1280) that would provide for such a health-care program has been under consideration in the House Ways and Means Subcommittee on Health. Although the provision calling for the extension of Medicare taxes is not currently under discussion, it is likely that such funding will be considered once the bill reaches the full committee. The League has sent a letter opposing the expansion of medicare requi ements to Representative William Frenzel CD- innesota , who is a senior member of the House Ways an eansommi ee, as we 1 7 as to other members of the Minnesota conzressiona a egation. we urge cities to do likewise. It is important to remind federal ✓��U lawmakers that the 1 Congress agree o phase in man a ory Medicare coverage Tor city ed (after 3/31/ employees would be subject o Medicare payroll deductions and employe con ri u ions Y. It can reasonably be argued that individuals eligible for Medicare during retirement should be expected to pay into the program prior to that time. But it is unreasonable to insist that cities bear the cost of such coverage for all employees, including part-time and seasonal personnel, election judges (earning more than $100 annually) , and all elected city officials not now subject to the tax. All these must be covered, according to Medicare tax proposals under consideration, regardless of the fact that they may already be subject to such tax payments at their other (private) places of employment. Another serious difficulty the expansion of the Medicare coverage mandate poses is the fact that the resulting personnel cost increases occur during the current (city) budget year, making it necessary for cities to determine how to fund additional expenditures with limited local revenues. Take the opportunity to meet with U.S. House and Senate members during the upcoming April ( 11-18) recess to make them aware of your city' ss concerns. Send comments directly to them in Washington to i r-t inform them about the impact such changes would have on your city. It is also important to mention the extent to which city expenditures have increased largely or solely as a result of recent federal mandates such as imposition of federal fair labor standards, restrictions on tax-exempt financing, increased federal tax and deposit requirements, and so on. r i MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator FROM: Ken Rshfel d, City Engineer y7T.— SUBJECT: Speed Limit Studies on CountyState Aid Highway 17 DATE: March 221, 1986 INTRODUCTION: Planning Commission has requested City Council to petition for 30 mile per hour speed limit signs on County State Aid Highway 17 between 1st Avenue and 10th Avenue. BACKGROUND: In discussing previous speed studies conducted by Scott County with Brad Larson, Scott County Engineer, it appears advantageous to the City of Shakopee to request the study over two separate segments of roadway, one being from 1st to 4th Avenue and the other from 4th to 10th Avenue. The rationale for the separation is that traffic characteristics may be quite different between the two, thus resulting in more appropriate signing. Resolution No. 2534 will accomplish the action requested by the Planning Commission. REQUESTED ACTION: Move for the adoption of Resolution 2719 , A Resolution Re- questing Scott County to Request the Minnesota Department of Transportation to Conduct a Speed Study and Determine Safe Speed Limits on County State Aid Highway 17 between T.H. 101 and 10th Avenue. KA/pmp RES APRIL 16, 19E7 COUNCIL DELAYED ACTION ON THIS SPEED STUDY REQUEST UNTIL THE SIGNAL LIGHTS AT 4TH AVENUE AND CSAH 17 WERE INSTALLED. THOSE LIGHTS ARE NOW OPERABLE. STAFF REQUESTS ADOPTION OF RESOLUTION NO. 2719 AT THIS TIME. MEMO TO: John R. Anderson, City Administrator FROM: Judi Simac, City Planner RE: Planning Commission Recommendation regarding CSAR 17 speed limits DATE: March 7, 1986 Background: At their March 6, 1986 meeting the Planning Commission approved a motion to recommend to the City Council that the City should petition for the installation and enforcement of thirty mile per hour speed limits, between First Avenue and Tenth Avenue, along CSAR 17. Action Requested: Motion to accept the Planning Commission recommendation. tw RESOLUTION NO. 2719 A Resolution Requesting Scott County to Request Minnesota Department of Transportation to Conduct a Speed Study and Determine Safe Speed Limits on County State Aid Highway 17 Between T.H. 101 and 10th Avenue WHEREAS, Scott County State Aid Highway (CSAH) Number 17 (Marschall Road) are included in the Scott County Highway System; and WHEREAS, this road is heavily traveled by vehicular and bicycle traffic; and WHEREAS, a considerable amount of development has occurred along this road which creates considerable pedestrian traffic; and WHEREAS, the City of Shakopee and the general public share a common concern for the safety of those people using the road; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that Scott County request the Minnesota Department of Transportation to conduct a study for the purpose of determining the proper safe speed limits for the following roadway segments in Scott County: A. CSAH 17 from T.A. 101 to 4th Avenue B. CSAH 17 from 4th Avenue to 10th Avenue Adopted in session of the City Council of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota, held this day of , 19 Mavor of the City of Shakopee ATTEST: City Clerk Approved as to form this day of 19 City Attorney JULIUS A. COLLER. II J iesn a+o a ATTORNEY AT LAW mz-.s rz�n 1.31 A-Ul SHAROPEE. MI MESO] 55329 April 15, 1987 Mrs. Judith S. Cos, City Clerk Shakopee City Hall 129 East First Avenue Shakopee, Minnesota 55379 Dear Judy: Enclosed is the proposed Ordinance covering horse and carriage livery service in the City of Shakopee. You will note that I did not sign the "prepared and approved as to form" provision for the simple reason that I do not feel that it is proper to include the provision relative to the Minnesota Class C Driver's license and for that reason I donot approve of the form. Respectfully submitted, KY Julius A. Collar, II Shakopee City Attorney JAC/nh Enc. Action Recommended 1. Remove Ordinance No. 214 (Regulating Horse and Livery Service) from the table. 2. Approve Ordinance No. 214, An Ordinance of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota, Amending Shakopee City Code, Chapter 6 entitled "Other Business Regulations and Licensing" by Adding Section 6.22B thereto entitled "Horse and Carriage Livery Service" and Adopting by Reference Shakopee City Code Chapter 1 and Section 6.99, which among other things contain penalty provisions. ORDINANCE NO. 214 Fourth Series An Ordinance of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota, Amending Shakopee City Code, Chapter 6 entitled "Other Business Regulations and Licensing" by Adding Section 6.22E thereto entitled "Horse and Carriage Livery Service" and Adopting by Reference Shakopee City Code Chapter 1 and Section 6.99 , which among other things contain penalty provisions. THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA, ORDAINS: SECTION I: New Section Added to Chapter 6 of Shakopee City Code Section 6.22 B Horse and Carriage Livery Service Subd. 1. Section of code applicable. All persour firms and corporations operating a Horse and Carriage Livery Service, within the city limits shall comply with this Section and all other appropriate sections of the City Code. Subd. 2.Definition. Horse and Carriage Livery Service shall be defined as a horse drawn, four wheel carriage for hire, which shall be driven by the owner or his designated driver for the recreational transportation of the public. Subd. 3. Permit required. Permits for the operation of Horse and Carriage Livery vehicles shall be issued by the directive of the City Council by the City Clerk, annually, and shall expire on December 31st of each year. Each permit so issued shall only be issued and/or renewed on the payment of an annual fee as prescribed by resolution and upon proof of general liability insurance, in the minimum amount of Three Hundred Thousand Dollars ($300,000.00). Routes authorized to be traveled and preset tour routes planned by owner shall accompany the permit. There may be attached such other restrictions and limitations to thepermit as is deemed appropriate for the protection of public health and welfare. Subd. 4. Vehicle operation. All vehicle shall be operated in a manner so as to assure the safety of passengers and animals and in accordance with all appropriate federal and state laws and local ordinances. The driver of such vehicle shall hold a current Minnesota Class C driver's license. Each vehicle authorized to be operated on the streets of this city shall be kept in good mechanical and running condition. Each vehicle shall display a two digit identification number conspiciously on the right side of the carriage which shall be the same comber assigned to the vehicle by authorizing permit. Subd. 5. Driver of vehicle. The driver of such vehicle shall be at least 18 years of age andpossess normal good health, eye sight and bearing. Subd. 6. Maintenance of animals. Prior to being employed each horse shall be .inspected and certified as fit for the type of workload anticipated. This inspection shall beperformed by a licensed veterinarian, and the certification shall be filed with the City Clerk. Reinspection and recertification shall be performed as needed, not to exceed One Hundred Twenty (120) calendar day intervals. All records of such inspections and certifications shall be maintained by the owner and available for review by the appropriate authorities. Horses stabled within the city limits shall be exercised as required to maintain health and fitness. Subd. 7. Sanitation. Each horse employed under this ordinance while on the street' shall be diapered with an appropriate and sanitary contraption, designed specifically for this purpose. In the event of a mishap it shall be the responsibility of the driver/owner to immediately remove or otherwise clean the street, sidewalk, or property in the general area of the mishap. Subd. 8. City Streets Any permits : issued hereunder may be recalled if the City Council determines that the surface of the city streets traveled by the livery service is being impaired by the horses' hoofs. Subd. 9. -Hours of operation. No Horse and Carriage Livery service shall be conducted after sunset and before 8:00 A.M. No Horse and Carriage Livery service shall be conducted between the hours of 4:00 P.M. and 6:00 P.M. on weekdays. The horse, carriage and its driver must be 'off the street' and absent from all loading zones during these times. Subd. 10. Loading zones. The Council may designatre and authorize specific locations on public streets as horse and carriage loading zones. The owner may negotiate with individaul property owners for loading zones on private property which information shall be filed with the City Clerk. Subd. 11. Rates The rate structure shall be posted on the carriage clearly and visible to entering and seated passengers. Drivers shall clearly explain rates to passengers before commencing ride. Subd. 12. Operation of certain vehicles prohibited in certain areas. No horse drawn carriage or any vehicle engaged commercially in carrying or trans- porting passengers drawn by any type of animal or animals may travel on any street or public thoroughfare in the City of Shakopee north of Tenth Avenue extending and east of Marschall Road. Subd. 13. Penalty. Failure to comply with: this ordinance's:provision by the owner may result in suspension of permit in addition to any other penalty. SECTION II: Adopted by reference The general provisions and definitions applicable to the entire City Code including penalty provisions of Chapter 1 and Section 6.99 entitled "Violation a Misdemeanor " are hereby adopted in their entirety by reference as though repeated verbatim herein. SECTION III: When in force and effect After the adoption 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. 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 15th day of April, 1987. G MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator FROM: Ken Ashfeld, City Engineer7a SUBJECT: Killarney Hills Feasibilit//y����R''"eport Resolution No. 2715 Calling for a Public Hearing DATE: April 15, 1987 INTRODUCTION: Council ordered a feasibility study of street improvements to streets within Killarney Hills Addition. That study is complete and the report is attached. Also attached for Council consideration is Resolution No. 2715 calling for a public hearing on the proposed improvements. BACKGROUND: When investigating the subsurface soils, it was discovered that the existing roadway was constructed without any type of base construction and that the bituminous surface is very thin. Engineering researched the original project engineers to ascertain the history of the original street construction project. It was indicated that the inplace surface was placed as an erosion control effort and the there were no plans and specifications for the project. Based upon this information and the condition of the inplace pavement, it is the opinion of Engineering that there is no salvage value of the pavement. Consequently, the estimated costs in the feasibility report reflect removal of the inplace pavement. Referring to the estimated assessments within the report, note that the assessments are relatively high. This is due to the following factors: 1. Costs resulting from removal of the inplce pavement. 2. Size of the abutting lots. 3. The large park area that results in low assessable footage for the costs to be spread over. From the sketch entitled "Assessment Calculations" , note that the park area does have assessable footage, as well as, two other lots owned by the City. Those City costs are as follows: Park $40,417.83 Lot 8 $ 6,006.06 Lot 11 $ 9,846.00 Killarney Hills April 15, 1987 Page 2 The City came by ownership of Lots 8 and 11 by the Metropolitan Council loan program for preserving highway right-of-ways. By placing assessments on these lots, Mn/DOT's cost responsibility when purchasing these properties for the bypass will increase. My first reaction to the estimated assessments is that the property owners will be opposed to the project. My second reaction is whether the benefit to the properties equal or exceed the assessment as required by law. The City should consider doing one of the following: 1. Hold the public hearing, order the project, let bids and hold the assessment hearing prior to actual construction. If the assessments are contested within the 30 day period allowed by law, then appraisals will need to be done to assure the feasibility of the project. 2. Have appraisals completed prior to the public hearing to ascertain the feasibility of the project. 3 . Reduce the design standards in an effort to decrease the project cost. The project is certainly not being "gold plated" and a reduction of design standards would result in high maintenance costs in the future. 4. Discontinue consideration of the project and continue to maintain the streets in their current state. RECOMMENDATION: I recommend that the City hold the public hearing on the proposed improvements. If my initial reaction is correct, a decision can then be made , as to whether costs should be expended on plan development and hearing costs as discussed in action 1 or appraisal costs as discussed in action 2. Note also that the date of the hearing has been left blank on the attached Resolution No. 2715. Council should decide if they wish to hold an off-night hearing (May 12) or hold the hearing at a regular scheduled meeting (May 19) . REQUESTED ACTION: 1. Set a date for the public hearing. 2. Offer Resolution No. 2715, A Resolution Receiving a Report and Calling a Hearing on Killarney Hills Street Improvement, Project No. 1987-6 and move its adoption. KA/pmp KILLARNEY RESOLUTION NO. 2715 A Resolution Receiving A Report And Calling A Hearing On Improvement Killarney Hills Street Improvements Project No. 1987-6 WHEREAS, pursuant to Resolution No. 2652 the City Council adopted December 2, 1986, a report has been prepared by Ken Ashfeld, City Engineer, with reference to the improvements of the Roadways within Killarney Hills Addition by street construction, and this report was received by the Council on April 21, 1987. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA: 1. The Council will consider the improvement of roadway improvements within Killarney Hills Addition in accordance with the report and the assessment of abutting and benefitted property for all or a portion of the cost of the improvements pursuant to Minnesota Statutes Chapter 429 at an estimated total cost of the improvement of 8171,949.00. - 2. A public hearing shall be held on such proposed improvements on the day of , 19 , at P.M. , or thereafter, in the Council Chambers of Cizy Hall, at 129 East 1st Avenue and the Clerk shall give mailed and published notice of such hearing and improvement as required by law. 3. The work of this project is hereby designated as part of the 1987-6 Public Improvement Program. Adopted in session of the City Council of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota, held this day of 19_ Mayor of the City of Shakopee ATTEST: City Clerk Approved as to form this day of 19 City Attorney FEASIBILITY REPORT FOR STREET IMPROVEMENTS IN KILLARNEY HILLS ADDITION SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA PREPARED BY RAY RUUSKA ENGINEERING COORDINATOR CITY OF SHAKOPEE I hereby certify that this plan, specification, or report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Registered Professional Enoineer under the laws of the State of Minnesota. /� Date / Reaistration No. 16185 APRIL 1987 TABLE OF CONTENTS Description Page No. Feasibility Report Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 Background . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 Scope . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 Proposed Improvements 1 Estimated Costs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 Assessment Procedure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 Assessments . : . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 Appendix Cost Estimates . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-5 Drawings Figures 1 and 2 FEASIBILITY REPORT FOR STREET IMPROVEMENTS IN KILLARNEY HILLS ADDITION SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA INTRODUCTION City Council of the City of Shakopee ordered the preparation of a Feasibility Report by Resolution No. 2652 on December 2, 1986 for the improvement of property in the Killarney Hills Addition by street construction. BACKGROUND On November 4 , 1986 , City Council directed staff to begin proceedings for a Council initiated 429 assessment project for street improvements in the subject area. SCOPE All streets in the subject area are non-conforming to City of Shakopee street standards. PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS The proposed improvements consist of a 7 ton , 36 foot urban section with concrete curb and gutter, bituminous surfacing, and storm sewer improvements. A map of the proposed improvements is in the appendix. 1 ESTIMATED COSTS Cost calculated based upon the following major work items. Removal of inplace surface Excavation & construction of new aggregate base Concrete curb & gutter to control runoff Storm Sewer Paving The estimated costs of the proposed improvements are detailed in the appendix and summarized as follows: Street construction $125,053.80 101 Contingency Cost $ 12.505.38 $137,559. 18 251 Engr. , Legal , Fiscal Cost $ 34. 389.80 PROJECT COST $171 ,948.98 ASSESSMENT PROCEDURE The City of Shakopee has two basic street construction program policies ; 1 ) New Construction, and 2) Rehabilitation. This report recommends use of new construction assessment procedures for street improvement in the subject area . Although most of Tyrone Drive and Sharon Parkway to the east of Tyrone Drive are surfaced with bituminous, it is of varying thickness and was placed directly on existing subsoils, thus, having no salvage value. The engineering firm which set grades for the above mentioned streets has stated that the original bituminous construction in 1973 was planned to be a temporary improvement designed to mitigate erosion problems on Tyrone Drive. The recommended assessment procedure is based on the "City of Shakopee' s Policy of Reassessment, " which states, "The design and construction of public improvement projects must be a weighing process of the desired service life of any improvement to the expected cost of construction to attain that service life , standards differing from these shall , therefore , require a different service life. " In as much as the original construction was considered temporary in 1973 and is now 14 years old, its service life should now be considered expired. 2 ESTIMATED ASSESSMENTS The Killarney Hills Subdivision was platted with lots of varying sizes and with a 3 .44 acre City Park fronting on both Tyrone Drive and Sharon Parkway. These factors complicate selection of the assessment method to be used. Front foot assessments are inequitable because of odd shaped lots. Per lot assessments are inequitable because more cost is borne by lot owners due to the large City Park. The adjusted front foot method is therefore recommended as the most equitable. A tabulation of estimated assessments for each lot is in the appendix. Assessment calculations are based on Section A) 2. on page 16 of the City of Shakopee Assessment policy. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS Continued maintenance of roadways in Killarney Hills will be increasingly more expensive and should not be considered a solution to deteriorating roadways. Sharon Parkway to the west of Tyrone Drive has no existing street structure at all and has homes built along its right-of-way . This report recommends construction of new streets in Killarney Hills pending appraised property benefit equal to those estimated assessments shown in the appendix. APPENDIX KILLARNEY HILLS STREET CONSTRUCTION COST ESTIMATE ITEM UNIT QUANTITY UNIT PRICE TOTAL 1 . Remove Pavement S.Y. 5,000 $1 .30 $ 6,500.00 2. Common Excavation C.Y. 3,500 $5.50 $ 19,250.00 3. Aggregate Base C1-5 TON 4,000 $6.40 $ 25,600.00 4 . Concrete Curb/Gutter L.F. 4,670 $5.50 $ 25,685.00 5. Bituminous Near Course TON 1 ,100 $23.00 $ 25,300.00 6. Sodding S.Y. 5,000 $ 2.00 $ 10,000.00 7. 12m RCP L.F. 356 $27.30 $ 9,718.80 8. Catch Basins EA. 3 $1 ,000.00 $ 3,000.00 SUBTOTAL $125,053.80 101 Construction Contingency $ 12.505.38 $137,559.18 25% Engr. , Legal, h Fiscal Costs $ 34.389.80 STREET PROJECT COST $171 ,948.98 4 TABULATION OF ESTIMATED ASSESSMENTS ADJUSTED FRONT LOT t BLOCK I FOOTAGE ASSESSMENT (City) Park 1 821 $40,417.83 (City) 8 1 122 $ 6,006 .06 9 1 120 $ 5,907.60 10 1 147 $ 7,236.81 (City) 11 1 200 $ 9 ,846 .00 1 2 150 $ 7,384.50 2 2 180 $ 8,861 .40 3 2 190 $ 9,353.70 4 2 129 $ 6,350.67 5 2 161 $ 7,926.03 6 2 112 $ 5,513.76 1 3 146 $ 7, 187 .58 2 3 91 $ 4,479 .93 3 3 99 $ 4,873.77 1 4 164 $ 8.073.72 2 4 122 $ 6,006.06 3 4 169 $ 8,319.87 4 4 211 $10,387 .53 5 4 159 $ 7,827 .57 TOTAL 3 ,493 F.F. TOTAL COST $171 ,948.98 TOTAL CITY COST $56 ,269 . 89 $171 .948.98 = $49.23/F.F. 3 ,493 TYPICAL LOT ASSESSMENT = $7,236.81 (AVERAGE LOT = 147 FEET) COST COMPARISON AFF METHOD = $7,236.81 PER LOT = $ 9 ,049.95 PROPOSED STREET CONSTRUCTION ^^ t4G,-e2 "l 66-/ µBW. ,�� 01% I7.gp r\ 0 'b",go t' �?i\ z�•16 Lip �.�o \ Sc e��� r_,l XS'>•dj o a:a� 24 2Jsos �yN;'�'/S'�o0 = ,i • o � e6 4'0 =ry` .ia�';'�m `, S2 Zo`W. 9, l., P.S.� �'li, 4, d53g� N 1 a l� �• .T JC 17 r. 4 v ! > �. C S t): O %K � 0'•+L/ 9• atj �/. F' / 2 ! �s i s� a •'e.� r a � t°r� f "-1 w �"rr � t'txj\, .4 ytl I '- �C � \�. ti?' _ y L �`, ✓` '..\RN`cam 6S �^�O l�S�SI:zB. w, =,yam tl°p ! '�•,. /�/ r o 4� s � �3�:. , ctl��� ✓inti � . � ..�/ 1;650. 40.0, Cis4'c I I / • 'fie moi" _ � Nr'•./�� =�" >Sr rmm m : I`\ a ?• r! \Jv 65.6 `a• �� I °�' 0. 7 0, i - 71, ' ." 4, yl� ° po 3 v /py4r i P j N'r .w•. m � './ 154.0_ �t '. �' Yt�y .J _ 8,5w.0 160.0 ASSESSMENT CALCULATIONS SHADED AREAS OMITTED is d MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator FROM: Ken Ashfeld, City Engineer SUBJECT: Market Street Feasibility Report DATE: April 17, 1987 INTRODUCTION: Council ordered a feasibility study of street improvements to Market Street between 2nd Avenue and 4th Avenue. That study has been completed and the report is attached. BACKGROUND: Since Market Street is a Municipal State Aid Street, there are estimated costs associated with the local system and estimated costs for the functional classification (extra width and strength) . Based upon the abutting lot layouts and the City' s assessment policy, a few of the assessments are rather high for the corner lots. The average estimated assessment is $7,600.00 per lot if 100% of the local street cost is assessed. The report recommends that an appraisal of the benefit be done and that the appraised benefit be assessed up to a maximum of the cost associated with a local facility. The remaining cost would be a state aid cost. This method would provide for assessments in accordance with City policy and not in violation of state law. These appraisals can be obtained prior to devloping the assessment role or prior to ordering of the project if Council is concerned with the merits of the project if the appraised benefit is considerable less than the local cost assessment calculations. Note that the attached Resolution No. 2716 calls for a public hearing but does not call for a specific date. Council should decide if they wish to hold the public hearing on an off-meeting night (May 12) or at a regular scheduled meeting (May 19) . RECOMMENDATION: Adopt Resolution No. 2716 after selecting a desired hearing date. REQUESTED ACTION: 1. Establish a hearing date. 2. Offer Resolution No. 2716, A Resolution Receiving a Report and Calling a Hearing on Market Street Improvements from 2nd Avenue to 4th Avenue, Project No. 1987-7 and move its adoption. KA/pmP MARKET i RESOLUTION NO. 2716 A Resolution Receiving A Report And Calling A Hearing On Improvement to Market Street from 2nd Avenue to 4th Avenue Project No. 1987-7 WHEREAS, pursuant to Resolution No. 2654 0£ the City Council adopted December 2, 1986, a report has been prepared by Ken Ashfeld, City Engineer, with reference to Street Improvements to Market Street between 2nd Avenue to 4th Avenue, and this report was received by the Council on April 21, 1987. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA: 1. The Council will consider the street improvements in accordance with the report and the assessment of abutting and benefitted property for all or a portion of the cost of the improvements pursuant to Minnesota Statutes Chapter 429 at an estimated total cost of the improvement of $87, 958. 07. 2. A public hearing shall be held on such proposed improvements on the day of 29 at P.M. , or thereafter, in the Council Chambers of City Hall, at 129 East 1st Avenue and the Clerk shall give mailed and published notice of such hearing and improvement as required by law. 3. The work of this project is hereby designated as part of the 1987-7 Public Improvement Program. Adopted in session of the City_ Council of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota, held this day or i9 Mayor of the City of Srakopee ATTEST_": City Clerk Approved as to form this day of 2.9 City Attorney FEASIBILITY REPORT FOR STREET IMPROVEMENTS IN MARKET STREET FROM 2ND AVENUE TO 4TH AVENUE SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA PREPARED BY RAY RUUSKA ENGINEERING COORDINATOR CITY OF SHAKOPEE I hereby certify that this plan, specification, or report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Registered Professional Enoineerruunnd/er the laws of the J'State of Minnesota. i Date _y—��ia �87 Registration No. 16185 APRIL 1987 TABLE OF CONTENTS Description Page No. Feasibility Report Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 Background . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 Scope . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 Sanitary Sewer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 Street Design Alternatives. . . . . . . . . . . . 2 Proposed Improvements. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 Estimated Costs. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 Assessment Procedures. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 Assessed Cost Funding . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 SanitarySewer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 Appendix Cost Estimates . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5-7 Drawings pA- FEASIBILITY REPORT FOR STREET IMPROVEMENTS IN MARKET STREET FROM 2ND AVENUE TO 4TH AVENUE SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA INTRODUCTION City Council of the City of Shakopee ordered the preparation of a Feasibility Report by Resolution No. 2654 on December 2, 1986 for the improvement of property in the East Shakopee Plat by street construction on Market Street between Second Avenue and Fourth Avenue. BACKGROUND A petition for public improvements by street construction was received by the City of Shakopee and dated November 3, 1986. The petition requests street improvements to Market Street from 2nd Avenue to 4th Avenue in 1987. SCOPE STREET The segment of Market Street under study currently consists of a graveled surface of varying widths non-conforming to roadway standards of the City of Shakopee. The subgrade material consists of a poorly graded sand with an area identified to have organic soils in the upper (3) three feet. Those organic soils would require removal during street construction. Two different roadway sections, local street and state-aid street, are offered as alternatives. STORM SEWER The existing Market Street storm sewer provides for drainage of the study area with only minimal improvements needed by catch basin installations included in the Market Street roadway construction. 1 SANITARY SEWER A sanitary sewer extension is recommended at 3rd Avenue and Market Street to eliminate a private sewer service connected to 3rd Avenue and located under the proposed Market Street curb line to mid block between 3rd Avenue and 4th Avenue. A sketch of the proposed and existing sanitary sewer is in the appendix. STREET DESIGN ALTERNATIVES Market Street from 1st Avenue to 10th Avenue is designated as Municipal State Aid Route 103 and Federal Aid Route 5066. The segment from 1st Avenue to 4th Avenue is listed on the Capital Improvement Program to be constructed in 1987-1988. Pursuant to current route designations, it is recommended that the study area be constructed to State-Aid Standards or 44 feet wide and a 9-ton design. A cost comparison to construct a 36' local street is included in this report. PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS The proposed improvements consist of a 9 ton, 44 foot urban section with concrete curb and gutter, bituminous surfacing, sidewalk on the east side of the street, limited storm sewer improvements, and an extension of sanitary sewer. The above improvements are consistent with Market Street' s M.S.A.S. and FAU route designation. An FAU map of Market Street is as shown in the appendix. ESTIMATED COSTS The estimated costs of the proposed improvements are detailed in the appendix and summarized as follows: 44 ' Collector Street Street Construction $57,910.65 10% Contingency Cost $ 5 ,791.07 $63,701.72 258 Engr. , Legal, Fiscal Cost $15,925.43 44 ' Street Project Cost $79,627.15 2 ALTERNATE 36' LOCAL STREET Street Construction $53 ,877.70 - 10% Contingency Cost $ 5,387.77 $59,265.47 25% Engr. , Legal, Fiscal Cost $14 ,816.36 36 ' Street Project Cost $74,081.83 SANITARY SEWER Sanitary Sewer Construction $ 6,058.85 10% Contingency Cost $ 605.89 $6,664.74 25% Engr. , Legal, Fiscal Cast $ 1 ,666.18 Sanitary Sewer Cost $ 8,330.92 ASSESSMENT PROCEDURE The City of Shakopee has basically two street construction program policies; 1) new construction, and 2) rehabilitation. The two policies are somewhat similar in structure. The policy for new construction allows for the assessed cost to be spread over front footage, area, or by lot. The rehabilitation policy introduces the zone assessment concept whereas non-fronting properties that benefit from an improvement is assessed. The test for a proper and legal special assessment is such that the assessment is fair, consistent, and is not in excess of the increased property value. Figure 1 indicates the study area as addressed in this report. The study area is zoned residential. The following are alternatives for assessng the proposed assessed cost of the improvement. Alternative 1. Assess all cost of a local 36' street to abutting properties and use state aid funding for remaining costs of building a 44 ' street. Alternative 2. Use state-aid funding to build a 44 ' street and assess abutting properties according to appraised benefit value up to a maximum of costs associated with a local facility. This report recommends Alternative 2 which assesses abutting 3 ASSESSED COST AND FUNDING The required street width to provide a local facility is 36 feet as established by Shakopee Design Criteria. The street width required by state aid standards is 44 feet based upon projected trafficc volumes. The assessment policy states that the cost difference due to funcional classification becomes a City cost. The policy states that this City cost be reimbursed by state aid. The amount of the street cost attributable to the local facility (36 feet) is estimated at 958 of the project cost. The storm sewer proposed for this project is for the specific benefit of the street and does not provide a drainage basin wide improvement. That is to say that without a proposed street improvement, the storm sewer would not be proposed. Since facility size and cost is dependent upon runoff, and the runoff rate is dependent upon the amount of hard cover, it is proposed that the amount of the storm sewer cost attributable to the local facility be also considered 958 of the project cost. Based upon the aforestated policy application to the estimated project costs, the following is a breakdown of cost sharing: Assessed Cost 958 $75,645.79 City Cost 58 $ 3 ,981.36 $79,627. 15 SANITARY SEWER The City Attorney has stated that it may be difficult to assess the cost of sanitary sewer. It is recommended to include sanitary sewer in the benefit appraisals. 4 APPENDIX DYARKET STREET 36' STREET 1. Remove C&G 204 L.F. 1.95 $ 397.80 2. Remove Sidewalk 295 L.F. 0.50 $ 147.50 3. Remove Pavement 611 S.Y. 1.30 $ 794.30 4. Remove CB 1 EA. 225.00 $ 225. 00 5. Adj . Castings 6 EA. 160.00 $ 960.00 6. Common Excavation 1025 C.Y. 5. 00 $ 5,125.00 7. Subgrade Excavation 533 C.Y. 5.50 $ 2,931.50 8. C1-5 1110 TON 6.40 $ 7,104.00 9. 2341 Bit. wear 396 TON 23.50 $ 9,306.00 10. C&G 8618 1472 L.F. 5.00 $ 7,360.00 11. 4" Conc. Sidewalk 3360 S.F. 1.60 $ 5,376.00 12. 6" Conc. Driveway 1635 S.F. 2.30 $ 3 ,760.30 13. Sodding 2171 S.Y. 2.30 $ 4,993 .30 14. 12" RCP 90 L.F. 27. 30 $ 2,457.00 15. CB' s 3 EA. 980.00 $ 2,940. 00 SUBTOTAL $53,877.70 10% Construction Contingency $59$ 5 ,387 .77 ,265.47 25% Engr. , Legal, and Fiscal Costs $14,816. 36 36 ' Street Project Cost $74,081. 83 5 MARKET STREET 44 ' STREET 1. Remove C&G 77 L.F. 1.95 $ 150.15 2. Remove Sidewalk 295 L.F. 0.50 $ 147.50 3. Remove Pavement 611 S.Y. 1.30 $ 794.30 4. Remove CB 1 EA. 225.00 $ 225.00 5. Adj . Castings 6 EA. 160.00 $ 960.00 6. Common Excavation 1250 C.Y. 5.00 $ 6,250.00 7. Subgrade Excavation 650 C.Y. 5.50 $ 3,575.00 8. C1-5 1110 TON 6.40 $ 7,104. 00 9. 2331 Bit. Base 312 TON 22.60 $ 7,051.20 10. 2341 Bit. Wear 312 TON 23.50 $ 7,332.00 11. C&G B618 1309 L.F. 5.00 $ 6,545. 00 12. 4" Cone. Sidewalk 3360 S.F. 1.60 $ 5,376.00 13. 6" Cone. Driveway 1308 S.F. 2. 30 $ 3 ,008.40 14. Sodding 1737 S.Y. 2.30 $ 3,995. 10 15. 12" RCP 90 L.F. 27.30 $ 2,457. 00 16. CB' s 3 EA. 980.00 $ 2,940.00 SUBTOTAL $57,910.65 10% Construction Contingency $ 5,791.07 $63,701.72 258 Engr. , Legal and Fiscal Costs $15 , 925. 43 44' Street Project Cost $79,627.15 6 MARKET STREET SANITARY SEWER 1. 6" EHCIP 40 L.F. - 20.70 $ 828.00 2. 6" Wye 1 EA. 77.85 $ 77. 85 3. Conn. To Exist. SVC Line 1 EA. 140.00 $ 140.00 4. 8" PVC 0/8 170 L.F. 22.40 $3,808. 00 5. Manhole 1 EA. 1,205.00 $1,205.00 SUBTOTAL $6,058.85 10% Construction Contingency $ 605.89 $6,664.74 25% Engr. , Legal, and Fiscal Costs $1 ,666.18 Total Sanitary Sewer $8,330.92 II i 7 FIG 1 eF SURVEYED BYW. H . SI'ODDER BENEFITTED PROPERTIES LSX . w' 98 Ll ' r . tin/r000Ii///n/r•. .nrh ����°ibD aS4G3C�Q4 �•. FORST IL SS'P JL�IT - - i 1 . !�e.,r,. ,yk�::,:- •„- '=b;auo•.v MARKET STREET Vv a1 a ,.e wnw CARVERC p�,-SC5TT ... „"Co �w lja tc nz�w x c zzw 63 w JQ 6 FAU ROUTE 103 � o arj^ �,A .. 1 ' , ul _> IC- I O `G F E EXIST. SANITARY SEWER -oma ,- 3th AVE. I I PROPOSED SANITARY LATERAL W/ NEW SERVICE TO PROP. LINE i D � T m ' EXIST. PRIVATE cf) SAN. SVC. '--I N 4th AVE . City of Shakopee ]a pJ F POLICE DEPARTMENT - i •� 476 Soeth Gm. Street SHAKOPEE, MM4NESOTA 55379 Tel. 445-6666 [ TO: Mayor, Councilmembers FROM: Tom Brownell, Chief of Police RE: Unclaimed/Surplus Property Auction DATE: April 9, 1987 INTRODUCTION City Code 2. 70 authprizes the disposal of unclaimed/surplus property. The police department accumulates stolen property which remains unclaimed due to a lack of owner identification and requires a public sale for disposal. The City also has items which are no longer serviceable nor of use to other city departments through transfer. All proceeds, less costs, are credited to the general fund. BACKGROUND On May 2, 1987, the City of Shakopee and Scott County will conduct a joint public auction. Upon adoption of a resolution, a description of the unclaimed property will be published as public notice in an effort to . return property to the legal owner prior to the sale. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED Offer Resolution No. 2711, A Resolution Authorizing the Disposal of Unclaimed and Surplus Property, and moved its adoption. r7- s._... n_ RESOLUTION NO. 2711 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE DISPOSAL OF UNCLAIMED AND SURPLUS PROPERTY WHEREAS, the Shakopee Police Department of the City of Shakopee has had property in its possession for more than sixty ( 60) days, which property remains unclaimed by the owner; and WHEREAS, the City of Shakopee desires to dispose of said property and additional items declared surplus property. NOW, THEREFORE, HE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota, hereby declares the attached list of Unclaimed Property, dated April 9, 1987 describing certain property abandoned and/or surplus property and that the appropriate City officials are hereby authorized and directed to dispose of said property pursuant to Section 2.70, Subd. 2, of the Shakopee City Code. 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. t' City Attorney Unclaimed and Surplus Property April 9, 1987 make Style Color Boys/Girls Serial BMX Iverson Green Girls 0000677 Hawthorne Mont. Wards Green Girls Schwinn Red Boys Frame Front Whe=1 Huffy Champion Blue Boys HC4861242 Columbia Dream Machine Red/Cream Boys 00840351 Huffy Omni 10 Blue Girls 08063326853 BMX Nitro Black/White Boys Fire Star Red Boys 4302 Huffy G Gray Boys HC8385083 Huffy Challenger Blue Boys HC66327GF Huffy Trans AM Red Boys HC261475 Frame Only Schwin Blue Boys Falcon Gold Boys Holiday Prospector White Boys HC5875867 Free Spirit Yellow Boys 502473270 Huffy Contestant Brown Boys HA189090 World Traveler Yellow Boys Unknown White Boys Schwinn Traveler Red Boys Murray Red Boys 30757815 Huffy Silver Boys HC4613667 Unknown Red Boys Galaxy Red Boys Snowmobile Artic Cat 340 Black 4015650 Lic./EV511 City I.D./0234 Yamaha 3 wheel 225 ATV 8 Steelmaster 4" x 6" x 16" file cabinets