HomeMy WebLinkAbout05/05/1987 MEMO TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: John K. Anderson, City Administrator
RE: Non-Agenda Informational Items
DATE: April 29, 1987
1. The City Council had asked that staff review the impact of
night racing at Canterbury Downs on the City. The 1987
schedule for Canterbury Downs has now been set and does not
include night racing. For this reason I am suggesting that
staff not spend time evaluating last fall's night racing.
If you want us t6 do the study please contact me.
2. St. Mark's Church has asked to block off 3rd Avenue East of
Scott Street for five days surrounding their Julifest on
July 25th and 26th. The Chief of Police has OK'd the
temporary street closing.
3. The motion made at the April 21st Council meeting regarding
submitting names for 13th Avenue stated that the names must
be submitted to the City by May 5th. Because of the short
amount of time allowed to submit names we have moved the
date back to May 27th.
4. Attached is a memo from Tom Brownell addressing the traffic
concerns Council discussed at its April 21st meeting on 3rd
and 4th Avenue and Eagle Creek Boulevard.
5. Attached is a copy of the letter that the attorney for the
Scott County Historical Society has served on the Murphy's
Landing Board. Rod Krass and I will be meeting with Joe
Ries and the County's attorney to discuss whether there is
an appropriate role for the County or City to play in this
matter. I hope to present our findings to City Council at
its May 5th meeting.
6. Attached is an article that LeRoy Houser clipped from the
Star and Tribune regarding the collapse of an apartment
building in Bridgeport, Connecticut.
7. Attached is an article regarding the crisis in metropolitan
road conditions that was in the Scott County Transportation
Coalition newsletter. Please read it carefully.
8. Attached is Senator Bob SchmitE 's response to our opposition
to the sale of wine in grocery stores.
9. Attached is the monthly calendar for the month of May.
10. At gched__ is—a::—memorandum from Judy Cox regarding the
--
---developers agreement auer's 4th Addition.
11. Attached is a nice thank you the Public Works crew received
from Scott Carver Economic Council for helping with their
move.
12. Attached is a corrected copy of the Program Costs by
Department as of April 23, 1987 (the copy provided in the
last non-agenda info items was in error) .
13. Attached are the minutes of the March 11, 1987 meeting of
the Industrial Commercial Commission.
14. Attached are the minutes of the March 26, 1987 meeting of
the Planning Commission.
15. Attached are the minutes of the April 9, 1987 meetings of
the Board of Adjustment and Appeals and Planning Commission.
16. Attached are the minutes of the April 16, 1987 meeting of
the Planning Commission.
17. Attached are the agendas for the May 7, 1987 meetings of the
Board of Adjustment and Appeals and Planning Commission.
18. Attached is an engineering project status report.
f JKA/jms
y
TO: Mayor, Councilmembers
FROM: Tom Brownell, Chief of Police
RE: Traffic Control
DATE: April 27, 1987
INTRODUCTION
Council on April 21, 1987, expressed concern regarding traffic
problems on West 3rd, West 4th Avenues and Eagle Creek Blvd.
relating to signing and patrolling.
BACKGROUND
I have reviewed the roadway signing, 4th Avenue and Eagle Creek
-Blvd. are adequate. Additional speed signs are being installed
on 3rd Avenue, east of Harrison Street. Eagle Creek is carrying
an additional amount of traffic due to the condition of CR 17
south.
The department has been patrolling First and Tenth Avenues as a
priority and in the future will reduce enforcement, shifting to
the roadways discussed in this memo.
s
CHRISTIAN AND GROSS
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
8609 LYNDALE AVENUE 50.
EDWARD M. CHRISTIAN MINNEAPOLI5. MINNESOTA 55420
LOREN GROSS
JAMES M. MEMPAMEN TELEPHONE 881-0895
CERTIFIED MAIL
RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED
April 22, 1987
TO: Minnesota Valley Restoration Project, Inc.
c/o Marjorie R. Henderson
President and Acting Director
2187 East Highway 101
Shakopee, MN 55379
Richard Mertz
Scott County Commissioner
8455 Lewis Street
Shakopee, MN 55379
✓Gloria Vierling
1461 County Road 79
Shakopee, MN 55379
Re: Murphy's Landing
We are writing this letter as attorney for the Scott
County Historical Society, fee owner of the land upon
which Murphy's Landing is located.
The Scott County Historical Society does hereby give
notice to the Minnesota Valley Restoration Project, Inc.
of termination of the tenancy at will under which Minne-
sota Valley Restoration Project, Inc. has been in poss-
ession of Murphy's Landing. The Scott County Historical
Society will retake possession of the premises as soon
as possible but not later than May 31, 1987.
In the meantime, you are. requested to cease any spending
of money for other than current operating expenses since
The Scott County Historical Society is having the property
posted pursuant to Minn. Stat. s514.06.
Marjorie R. Henderson
Richard Mertz
Gloria Vierling
April 22, 1987
Page 2
Since the Historical Society is the agency to whom funds
are given by the Scott County Board for distribution for
historical purposes, the Society does hereby request in
addition:
a. An accounting of funds which have been spent during
the current fiscal year.
b. A return of all allocated but unspent funds.
The retaking of the property will be subject to lessees'
interests in all existing leases. In addition, the Society
intends to honor employment contracts with Mariann Reid,
Wenzel Koenig, and Francie Westlund.
Your cooperation making the return amicable will be appre-
ciated.
Yo _o=sverytly,
Loren Gross
LG/ar
cc: Jackie Joslyn
Minneapolis Star and Tribune/ MoMay/April 27/7987 •. 9A
Collapse_ d building's
records examined
Hartford Courant 'You would need asoil-beating load 1
test to know,"he said.He said he did
Bridgeport Conn ""'-"" not find such a test in city records. I
`L'Ambiance' Plan; the apartmentTwo other cg,..consult.74r&,
d by the
building under construction that col---Courant also questioned the substitu-
lapsed-with-a death toll that could.. tionofcompacteditll.
.reach A. may have been-built on_ __ - :
A ,.ground .top. weak. to support_w the Ouzoonian, who reviewed the rec- , a
structure, according to a revieof bids at Bridgepon City Hall, said
oily records by the Hartford Courant"- that they be not show that proper
newspaperand two pngipeers.�,,,�_testing hen done that the size
building's
bes
_-- of the building's footiti ngs was in-
Design plans for the 13-story build- —tressed ll compensate for the coon-
ing called for "undisturbed rock'" to to� paN
tted . A second engineer hired
support the load of 7 was per square ..by. the newspaper,: Paul Cianci.ofJA!h'.7�nkg teat from Mimde-Earfool. Although the plans said that '.Hartford, said that any significant ,acompacted soil could be substituted, -change, such as an-increase to the swhmareyouwmflNfor{the geotechnical engineer for the size of the footings,should have been or your appolnhnenttodeyl
`project said Saturdaythathis work=filed with the city building official.
was based on the assumption that the - I - - _ CO�� NOWT
„.,. building would be constructed on'- Although there is no evidence that ._
_ bedrock. - _ - the composition of the ground con- Nond,.P day 95
tributed to the collapse,it is the latest Sannday by°°pomlment.
An engineer hired by the newspaper indication there were problems in the
said the records show that the build- development ofthe building,.
n Diego ing was being erected on a site com- - -- '-' ` `;=-
posed . /�(\
posed ofcompacted earth and broken Ouonian said Saturday that build- Miracle CAI. /I/�\V.
rock,the sort of fill that the engineer ing specifications on file were so ge- U6U
C
ruses said generally does not support more neric as 'Yo be sickening" In addi- E N T E R S
Ed—
than to 3 to 4 tons per square foot. titin,he found no design plans on file
for the concrete slabs that formed the 899
3-0117 -
in the Inadequate soil could cause the foot- Boors of the building or a sequence 545.3920
Id has Ings of the building to settle, increas- for how the slabs were to he erected.
A leasting stress on the structure, said An- - - 339-6243
park. [rang Ouzoonian, a principal in Investigations by federal, state and s'.omni
Sea _.Weidlinger Associates, a consulting beat agencies are underway to deter- 641-0515
hales engineering firm based in.New York mine the cause ofthe collapse. 770.873
- -City. Ouzoonian emphasized there is - - ruu.y ?.
no evidence that possible problems Since the collapse of the building 780.9162
-alez with the site caused Thursday's col- Thursday, rescuers have found 15 acted
lapse.But Ouzoonian said such prob- bodies. There are still 13 workers 251-5899
.. lems could have contributed to the unaccounted for. - --
collapse:. - "
7
Crisis In Metropolitan Road Condition
Is Imminent Without Proper Funding Levels
A recent article by Larry Lee,assistant city grips with one bona fide crisis.At the current lion,and l do,you should expect Minnesota's
manager of Bloomington,in the Citizen's rate of investment in the transportation in- public-policy community to be churn-
League publication,Minnesota Journal,cites fraslructure,only afew milesof new highways ing out studies, proposing innovative solu-
a number of important issues with regard to will be added by 2000;traffic congestion of tions and generally calling for new highway
infrastructure in this state. Scott County is existing metropolitan highway will double construction.MnDOT hastriedto explain the
not the only area with crucial transportation and the physical condition of road surfaces approaching crisis, but in other quarters I
problems,and all of us are competing for a and bridges will be very poor. have observed general disinterest. For
very small pot of money to fund these roads. I have collected a series of statements example:
Darryl Durgin, Director of Construction describing the nature and magnitude of 1.In 1986,MnDOT spentabout$123 million
Policy and Services for the Minnesota the problem: on major highway construction and recon-
Department of Transportation, explained 1. Richard Braun, former Commissioner struction.The"May-even"expenditure level
that manyworthy projects are competingfor of Transportation,calculated that at the cur- is probably three to four times that amount.
funding in the state's two-year construction rent funding level the Minnesota Depart- 2. To balance the 1986-87 budget, the
plan.Two of the Scott County Transportation mem of Transportation(MnDOT)will be able Legislature suspended transfer of $105
Coalition's priority projects,the Highway 169 to rebuild the Mates 12,120 miles of highway million in motor vehicle excise tax revenue
Minnesota River Crossing and the Highway every 135 years. This funding pace would from the general fund to the slate trunk
101 Shakopee bypass,are in the four-year place 1-94,1-35W and 1-494 in linefor recon- highway fund.That decision canceled about
work program, a list of projects which ex- structlon In the 2090x. $65 million in major construction and recon-
wed the anticipated funding but are in- 2.In her 1986 State of the Region address, struction projects.
cluded by order of importance in the hope Sandra Gardebring, former Metropolitan 3.Governor Rudy Perpich proposed in his
that the funding situation changes. Council chair,stated the metropolitan area 1988-89 budget that the transfer of an ad-
In the two-year work program are some has 25-year window of opportunity to repair ditional$225 million motor vehicle excise tax
other major projects in the area including a and replace its infrastructure. During this revenues be suspended. If that happens, k
$6.1 million project on Highway 5, several ti me the baby boom will experience its peak would cancel another$135 million in major
projects totaling almost$15 million for High- earning power and therefore governments construction and reconstruction projects
way 101,a$9 million project on Highway 212 can expect a one-time revenue surge which statewide.
from Cologne to Hwy.494.Highway 3 near she argued should be used to get our high- 4.The Metropolitan Council's 19876 legis-
494 will undergo a$12 million renovation,in ways,sewers and other public infrastructure lative agenda asks for money for regional
addition to Highways 13 and 55 in Mendota into good condition. parks, long-term care for the frail and el-
and Highway 280, which will receive $19 3. A MnDOT transportation system fore- derly,solid waste and transit. It is silent on
million in repairs. In the northern met- cast analysis shows that by 2000,capacities highway funding.
ropolitan area the major need is for High- of metropolitan freeways will increase 28 S.When the Triple Five Corporation pro-
way 10 in Anoka County. percent; during the same period vehicle posed to invest$500 million to$1 billion in
All ofthese projects and future work plans miles will increase 76 percent. Minnesota,MnDOTcould notfundthehigh-
have been developed with the assumption 4. The analysis concludes that met- way improvements necessary to support
that the Motor Vehicle Excise Tax would be ropol8an area highway congestion will nearly that investment until 1990,with construction
used to fund highway projects.The legisla- double in the next 15 years.In the category of to be completed some time after 1992.The
ture is currently struggling with alternative Service Level D average travel speeds are City of Bloomington had to seek special
plans for funding highway projects,but until about 45 miles an hour and freedom to legislation allowing it to advance$60 million
they come up with a method,funding for all maneuver in traffic is severely limited. The to MnDOT and take responsibility for the
of these projects is in jeopardy. metropolitan area had 21 miles of highway in highway design and rights of way so the
What follows is a reprint of the article by that category in 1972,60 miles in 1984 and necessary improvements to 1-494 and Hwy.
Lee. will have8l miles by2000.Levels E and Fare 77 could be completed in 1989.
With this metropolitan area's proliferation worse.Level E is operation at capacity.Any Because l work for the City of Bloomington,
of public-policy study organizations plan- disruption to the traffic stream causes stop- I'm most familiar with the need for expen-
ning agencies, I expect that most minor and-go,very-low-speedtraffic—atrafficjam. ditures to rebuild 1-35W and 1-494.The cost
issues—and certainly all major crises—have The metropolitan region had 24 miles of of the Bloomington portions of these pro-
been identified,subjected to a series of task Level E and F in 1972,72 miles in 1984 and is jests may be$400 to$600 mi Ilion—between
forces and studies and exposed in a five-part expected to have 125 miles in 2000. three and fivetimesthe entire 1986state ex-
series in one of the daily newspapers. 5.A typical project-development timeline
But in spite of Minnesolas "inquiring- prepared by MnDOT shows that a major
minds-want-to-knoW'reputation,l think that highway project initiated today won't open
planning agencies,policystudyorganizations for traffic until 1997. METRO ROADS Conlirned On Page
and the Legislature have failed to come to If you believe these five pieces of informs-
a
Bulk Rate
U.S.Postage
Scott county PAID
Transportation Coalition Shakopee,MN
ShakoPermit No.213
MN
P.O. Box 153
Shakopee, MN 55379
612-445-3242
John Anderson
City Administrator
129 Fast First Ave.
Shakopee, MN 55379
Scott County Transportation Coalition
Membership Categories & Fee Structure Scott County
CORPORATE INDIVIDUAL Transportation Coalition
Member: $ 100.00 $ 15.00
Sponsor: 500.00 100.00
Sustaining: 1000.00 500.00 scan County Board Townships Of.
CHARTER MEMBER: Any one-time payment of Any one-time payment of Of Commissimwrs Belle Plaine
$5000.00 or more. $1000.00 or more. Blakeley
Cines Ot Cedar Lake
Belle Plaine Credit River
METRO ROADS: Confirmed Flom Pa�g..e�$ Elko Helena
X09^ Jordan Jazkson
penditure on major reconstruction.This this- Highway Fund would receive$68 million in New Market Loufsvdle
match between available resource and needs 1988, growing to$162 million in 1992.The New Prague New Market
for highway construction is repeated in cities transfer formula also sends badly needed PriorSet.Lawrence
Savages Send Creek
through the metropolitan area and state. funds to county and city highway projects Shakopee Spring Lake
Neglecting the metropolitan area's trans- and transit.But excise lett transfer does not
portation infrastructure is tantamount to offer enough funding, at least for the ap- Chambers Of Industrial
neglecting the region's economic develop- parent needs of the metropolitan area.The commerce: Commissions:
mens. Companies consistently rank ac- Legislature and the Metropolitan Council Prior Lake Prior Lake
cessibility and transportation system quality (along with groups interested in publicpolicy Savage Shakopee
as their most important site-selection cri- IikeChambers of Commerceand the Citizens Shakopee
terion. Allowing congestion levels to in- League)should immediately studytranspor-
crease reduce competitiveness of our exist- tation infrastructure investment needs and Arrestions:
ing businesses acts as an increasing deter- recommend revenue sources to meet those Canterbury Downs Race Track
rent to new companies considering location needs. Little Six Bingo
here. The 10-year planning, design and con- Murphys Landing
Other states recaignizethat transportation struction period required for major highway Renaissance Festival
infrastructure is an important ingredient of projects compels action today for projects Valleyfah Family Amusement Park
growth and stability in the modern economy. needed in the late 1990s.if we do nothing in
For example, Tennessee Governor Alex- 1987 traffic congestion and highway con- Ex-of6cto Members:
ander pushed a$3.3 billion program for 288 dltions won't seem much worse 1n 1988 or Minnesota Department an Transportation
highway projects through the General 1989.But if Richard Braun and Sandra Gar- Hennepin County Department of
Assembly. clearing are right,we must act now to avoid Transportation
If the Legislature reinstates the motor being stuck with an outdated, inadequate Metropolitan Council
vehicle excise tax transfer, the State Trunk transportation system 10 years from now.
...................... Executive Cwnminee:
Mark stromwall,Scott County
Tired Of Driving Around The Bloomington Ferry Bridge? Commissioner,Chair
I'd like to help the effort toward better roads in the south metro area. Fred Corrigan.Attractions,vice-Chair
Brian Norris,Shakopee Chamber of
❑Please add my name to the mailing list. Commerce,Treasurer
❑Send me additional information on how I or my company can help. Lee Andren,Mayor,Prior Lake
Rod Hopp,Mayor.Savage
❑Enclosed is a tax-deductible contribution for$100 $50 $25 Tim Keane,industrial/Commercial
Brad Larson,Scott County Engineer
Name Phone Eldon Reinke,Mayor,Shakopee
Company Name Norbert Theis,Townships
Address Zip
Please make checks payable to Scott County Transportation Coalition.
4
by
ROBERT J. SCHMITZ
Senator 36th District
6730 Old Hwy. 169 Blvd.
Jordan, Minnesota 55352
Phone: 492-2182
Office:
235 State Capitol Senate
SG Paul,Minnesota 55155
Phone:296-7167
State of Minnesota
April 28, 1987
Mr. John Anderson
City of Shakopee
129 East First Avenue
Shakopee, Minnesota 55379
Dear John:
Thank you for contacting me stating your opposition to
allowing wine to be sold in grocery stores.
I share your concerns regarding the problems it would
create, specifically the sales to minors. The problem of
checking identification to prove whether the person making
the purchase is a minor or not could be very time-consuming.
I plan to vote against this bill when it comes before us for
a vote. At the present time the bill is being laid over for
interim study.
If you have further comments, please let me hear from you
again.
Sincerely,
i
R BERT J. SCHMITZ
State Senator -- District 36
RJS/st
RECEIVED
APR 29 M7
CITY OF SHAKOPEE
COMMITTEES • Chairman, Local and Urban Government• Rules and Administration• Transportation
Veterans • Taxes and Tax Laws • SUBCOMMITTEES• Property Taxes and Local Govemment Aids
COMMISSION:Legislative Commission to Review Administrative Rules
I
H
d
•i N Ifl N O�
H N N
N
Q
H
Q.
W
C
ro
q tn� E wHE
rya >1 04
HO •• WFr
0L U r
Nq' � ri ON N
Q
cn E 3 E
q a 0
W o Co
3 Uo 3m
U •• O ••
H � qr
N N N
U U U
X 70 ✓ 70
.,.{ O ..
UUr O .. ..1 O ..
UUr UUr
H
A .roiE � EwE r xro
us� a aAa o >. m
HHO � Ho w4 'uu
LL � v VSD WeD
r1 r1 N m
N
d
Q
z
5
m
l0
MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator
FROM: Judith S. Cox, City Clerk
RE: Hauer's 4th Addition - Developers Agreement
DATE: April 30, 1987
This is just an informational memo on the developers agreement
for Hauer's 4th Addition.
1. Because of the dedication of a lot for a tot lot, the park
dedication fee for each lot has been reduced from $250.00
to $222.50.
2. The developer desires to install all improvements, but wishes
to do so in stages. Because a performance bond or letter or
credit equal to 125% of estimated cost is required when the
developer does the improvements, the developer is asking the
City to install some improvements under Plan B. when the
developer is ready to make the improvements, he will ask
that the developers agreement be amended changing the
Plan "B" improvements to Plan "A" improvements. He is
asking that he have up to four years in some areas, but
expects it to be much sooner. The 13th Avenue improvements
are under the Plan "B" - city construct. Because the
developer has agreed with Mr. Hauer to absorb the cost of
13th Avenue improvements, the petition for the 13th Avenue
improvements includes the statement that any assessments
for 13th Avenue improvements will be spread against properties
lying north of and abutting 13th Avenue within Hauer's 4th
Addition.
3. Thedeveloper is electing to put up a performance bond rather
than a letter of credit.
JSC/jms
aado�pys •any y;OL
77yW AQ1,vwA .. -- 8 69L 'QMH
age2 Shakopee Valley News April 29,1967
in Brief
Community Action Agency moves Van Pool contract extended
Scott-Carver-Dakota Community Action Agency,Inc.will move from ifs'
Carver location on May 1 to new offices at 1257 Marschall Road(Co.Rd.17) - The Van Pool taking area residents into Minneapolis and St.Paul
in Shakopee(immediately south of the junior high school). day has been retained by the city with approval of an extension
- The Shakopee location is more central to the agency's service area which _ contract.
recently expanded to include Dakota County. The new facility will provide The one-year contract was approved by the city council at its in
additional office space,is handicap accessible,and will eventually house the of April 21.The contract,which would have expired April 15, r
ov
Scott-Carver Food Shelf. - - city with six vans,one serving as a backup.Each vehicle accomod:
The Community Action Agency sponsors volunteer projects such as Food passengers an the daily trip into the downtown metropolitan area.
Shelf, Eagle Creek Thrift Shop, Surplus Commodity Distribution and -- - Mayor Eldon Reinke expressed concern about people r
Holiday Project.Programs administered by the agency include Head Start, derstanding the council's actions. Although the establishment
WIC, Fuel Assistance, Weatherization, Congregate Dining and Home commuter system for the city is being explored through the Enerf
Delivered Meals. _ Transportation Committee, Reinke assured the council the van
Mary Sullivan,executive director of the Community Action Agency,said would continue to operate for the people of Shakopee.
she believes the new location will provdie better delivery of services to area _ "They are looking at setting up a commuter system and etiminatu
residents.This week she extended her appreciation to the manvolunteers van Pool for the community,' he said. "They should be look;
who have assisted in the move and said a special thank you was in order to establishing something above and beyond what is already being dor
the staff of the Shakopee Public Works Department who handled the moving want to make sure everyone is aware we are not cutting any prograr:
of the furniture and equipment.
Candidates Night is May 6 Hauer's 4th Addition approved
Final plat approval has been granted by the city council f
The League of Women Voters of Shakopee will sponsor "Schou) Board triangular-shaped piece of land located west of County Hood 16 and r
Candidates Night" an May 6.from 7:30 to 9 p.m. at the Shakopee Public of the proposed Highway 101169 bypass alignment.
Library,235 S.Lewis St. - The land, known as Hauer's Fourth Addition, was given app
The program will provide an opportunity for the public to meet and Provided a number of conditions are met.Conditions included desi:
luestion the four candidates who have filed for a position an the Shakopee driveways in the development to access an private roads and no:
school Board.Those candidates are:Joan Lynch,2225 E.Norton Dr.;Steven Avenue,and providing lots for park areas.Other conditions dealt wig..
Johnson,2134 Bridge Crossing; James J.O'Brien,437 East Shakopee Ave.; Proper installation of city services and construction of roadways.
ndSandra K.Frankhauser,13017 Johnson Memorial Dr.
The format for this year's Candidates Night will differ slightly from past
'andidates'forums. The program Will begin with an opening statement by Auction to dispose of surplus ge,
ach candidate, giving background information and opinions on issues
acing the Shakopee School District The statements Will be followed by a
cries of questions posed by the Shakopee League.The audience will then be The City of Shakopee and Soett County will conduct a joint pr
rvited to participate in the questioning.Written or verbal questions will be auction May 2 to dispose of property accumulated by the ctTypolice.
ecepted. - The property remains in the possession of the police when ov
The league of Women Valera is a non-partisan organization whose pur- - identification is not possible. City Code authorizes disposal of
-ase is to encourage informed_partiripation of all citizens in government. Property through a public sale. Items to be sold range from boys'
ne League does not support or oppose any party or candidate. - girls'bicycles to file cabinets to an Aitic Cat snowmobile.
�o Rd. 17 being completed Codes prevent massage busine!
Co..Rd. 17 between 12th Ave. and Co. Rd. 42 will be closed for the next Zoning conflicts resulted in denial of a conditional use permit for Sha
onth as construction crews complete the widening and overly resident Carol Cronkldte,who hoped to conduct therapeutic massage
gun Y Pro]eM home on Muhlenhardt Road.
After P spring. Cronkhite applied
.after posting mad closing signs at Monday, crews sorted working orlicense
for a conditional use permit (CUP) in N use,re-.
;e ive g also applied for a Bcense m order[o be registered as a masseuse,re:
y on the section of roadway that Was left unpaved last fail when ea- wader provisions of the city code.Her application then went to the pla
ssi ed wet conditions prevented further work.The dry,warm spring has commission for its review.
-owed the road to adequately dry out and pack down,which shouldnow In reviewing Croulthite's application,the commission submitted a cc
-)vide:good,solid base for the pavement,according to Brad Iarson,Scott the request to the city attorney,who discovered that granting the CUP
'ks well
as Paengineer. be a direct violation of city zoning.The therapeutic massage business,
:1S well as paving those sections not completed, shoulders e s also of a considered a business under provision of the city codes,is not allowe
red and a rival, third overlay will d, applied over the entire stretch of residential area. '
adway before the project is completed,hopefully by the end of May. , Had the council or planning commission felt it necessalto amend thi
Z D
C
n 'vr e v n o e 2 z
o m m m
2 K D ti > ti K H K K O D
r Oy_-
~
r 9 K
s r r a r v zm m
m
e a r I J
O
tlb00 + 00mtl
tlNNtlONNNNNNN brp00WYYyWW 0NN - '
'. r NW- 0yp-00PN\Yp- YN+OJNAWp- r -
Yp-0N
O r90 09D029D0 r OOOOr mO
m >Am KTOCranm r TO9rrm
2 CO2 SAm00Kn2 S<C90mz 2C2 K
T mom TmmO AOm mmzr+mOA m O
a ^TA
M. OCa ArnnzlA r DY+ A
D na z20 rza vrrmrs
r 1cr 9z2 r1r 99raror 9rm a "a
'2 O11r <mz z2 iaPromx iPa n o
a o_m 1 n> m e D a o m
s ms
A n mo i
z m i mom A zvz r
i y i msz m a
201 Z 0
1 = 1 ! m 0 1 9
1 O
n
9 a
m a
x
u me - m- J P tl J oo .nrn
NWOYm tlYOWbJO ONI+ pPN+NP NpON PP 9D Km
o OOOo -NOOOOOWONN-N meONOONON00 P0NN000 poe 0r Op
9
m m
: <
DO
n sm
_ vm 99
ro-Jw m
rcm
N z'' e- OPAON-Nmmro = � ue m m-bP�uAu aAA n 1
JJJePOJP-APp p-Y\ONWY - NP tlp- >O x
N . . . r. b00PmtlJ yN0-PNO\PNA �pyy\p0 Y A0 T
j -NW00mJ01NW-O PP0NOm0pe0 \PaOAJA �OpJ 0m y
e00 tlWNWobtloNONNtl bJNOJNOJNOP No-m.Y A
P mPON P - omNy Y ab b N a A `01
O \mPo j YO 0N0b ob N N + - ym
u u w u 'ma
m "r eer m000000ueemm. ea -
m NOpN NOeee0000000J -OOppoo000- 0000ep0 O-
N '0 Pop JJ ro J-b
yPp aNO-NOIP p � ye p-N PAYW Ypo 00
N "\0Pe
0
. . . . . e- p-WaOroNo -
JP PNo-PNOaPNY ApJJ\O N- NPP
.. ..
N 'N eON aYJWo.....MOP oJNerpOJ... Ne-mp0\KA 0o0 0r
Y- NON
91
N P a o AAPJONN P YWpP-JN e 0 'N 90
0 J JNaOJJp r JAOm N 9 D
- u pPWON-A J +N0P0 N n
occm
NNOm000 N ONNNO m m
z
e OOpp oeee.e00ppooe e000000ee00 OOOp000 e00 O
N �N N P PNpPWWO u O o
A aOOJ NeeeeoPPNatlAY -O0000W-JpY p0000tl -oN Z
1
,x1\o
•V
Z ntlNf-OOeoN FbO0eo0eN NN -M1ON M1--e0000tl nM m
d ¢ omftl nNNN h 'PP NONPPff d dd n
W F-.
o e e e o ee e0 e0 ee e
2 epee
y� oNNNOO Op N N- OO NON N
FNpwo
n ' ¢ mFa eb� m � mwO u mm NNfO mu m oa n
as
Y¢<
�mpmN PF- nnwmn"a-fN afrm NePe m-N NN. w;
1-n<dNa.YNan moNrNa-We NN -, f NobN d.Om NN. d�
m. nmb NN.mP -nnefnw fef Obm-c-bfmd f. m,
iv. am�vdnNvw- ��ma Nnf.o mm - of --- fa n
y r d
Ali fPoeem -amPeeW
o FOOeen FONfeoOf � -
S~m� � F O M1nOo f NpN O ap" Fl
0-'-0N0NPYn -OPnd-fN Oe FNbNONOPOrO-n PP� O'
_ Fm. nnf NONbNNP aNONNN-NO NN N-nnM1NOtldmNOf PP
W 0¢ OmNPFf- F' NePOf- -- fPNFleN n'f�pb0 O0" r'
L 06 -nmbtl-NNmn r- 0naf no PP ONFl�bO - OfN m
FW UJ fm�d nNdNn 00 N MfC 00 nnf -- - f
¢W J N r N fnnNn� -nf N-n Nd
WY V
OQ
2 >
Y0 ¢
0 W
m0 m NOOONeoNnN ONONOOreF NN NMeo000eoNe
Na
J0 PP b
NY 6¢ ^FOnN Nf0 m n OfN tltl nPbnPo OM1nnN -- F
Oh ZJ Nn-N NdNf NM1 f dfNo nemrNP 00m FF
NS
LU ¢
¢ 6
O J
WF ¢ Z Z 2
2> F 3F W
L LCL W �W V V Z OL V V
¢ [Wl Z O O Y V
¢OV m WZ 6 6 r W<m
O Or YnY J WWY L L 6mi-OY L L
¢ LLmVU 6 <¢
6 J N �WrJLL6
6 Zr26J6 YUr6 1 J JF 2i J J
W>r¢< 2m F < <JFr JW p <
rzFra <wr¢ ¢omWW¢OWWzFo ¢
WOSWUW JVW W W¢ w W
006VW2 FmV Z ZF»>202 Z Z
V7J<¢F <¢F W W62JDUOF W W
m6¢m0 VJW00 V mar�V000 V V
dnf tl00dnm -NnPm-dn - -NnfNbPO-Nnm -
FFM1M1_rPPPP m000PPPP N mPPPa. n n
p ��"�� p d FlFlMnnnnPPPPp R
? Z L
LL r V J
O t �
F J J V
L O
O J
m W m m
a zF : i
Ja < < a < Y
f Y
e r o z o
dl
z xF F w F
w
r W 6 > 6 ^6 O 6 J 6 m
O O O V O V O r O 4 G LL O -
2
¢ a
c m N a Fl n n
. . . . .. . . .. . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . _ . . .. _ . . . . . . .
. : . . . ._ .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
00 1
kkk
iii 3 Iz. 3 :
3 � ,i
+ P N Z
C_
i m i m m o
a < a
Z > r D
T O O O O K+
A n r m 1 S
o D D mn
i � z r m r z m
O H Z 12 N
m u
o m a \
r J
m
C
Z
O
NPNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNL\4a1aAe>AO P W - WYWWW
PNNNwNN1LYWWWNNO�++++Oe e N ONb00YYYYW
' 'N+ObwYN+OPNbJaNp+e+0i+000JN>+ OYN+wwPPYN ,
A- SOS�+<r-tiro1wS2COOa9P000291m 09<am9
- oDODYP>rOZKrD09Kmrf mO+-Ir>ar T T - y>DrCr
rJA£aYO1S+S CSmar922rD23KDw<DO Z Z 3nr3+>
r20ZT.S rm TT.3 TTmrKmMK ynmrn m m mmr0r2
D nJT mT m,+ DD£mmAAA2 A TT32' A A AKm00
A>SOJDaKAZ+«DKw DOa>-�2 rzzm > D � aK` ra
Z<Dc JOTTr <+r mfK>Drr f aDa Z.
'T mrZ0m09KT+ AwyD3 < mar>y0A >OD10< A
KOrmK1TAD0mDMn rAD mDwwmm9
3CI D D KaA2rT O -
' =<AJC IJ[rmKArO rmOZ CZ Om a J 2 2 KWZ£ a
' mOayOV rO1F32rDK<> DP w D D nD
r9 TZ.1. ->Z..3y O n ZNw \ n n 9 S
rr£mr 2A +DZ9y9m0 m mm \ m m m m +m
>DJr00 000TaA9a 3 30 O A r S S 2n
0KK ,;. 20 C DD T TD O < O m T 0J
K Tnr r0 w KO r+ 2 ya D O y Z 9r
21.02 mo a
a o D n nz
m >m c wo n `o i rw o
w
a A
a 3
ro N
C2 o0 rw
' pL+W 0WJ N +JNO+ N N +J Y o.N PV bJW ti0
PNPN+NOroNNVNNNOJN ayOJYVN bJ NNmAN OANPO AD Kw
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . wr
OeNe000NONNN000ONNONOmONONOON 00 00 +000OOeoeoN OP
w m
m m
A wK
< Z
DO
W
_ om o9
00 9>
N +N N +Wp r TA
tNJ a04 1 N +NOep N Y1+ pN P+ +mYJp bYN rn my
bN. . . . . . . . ..N O O N WP mb. . Na rN0r0+NJ f0 3
MNN>P- NWPOWC+�GPJ N+rewba 6W 77N N
+ \ONY A0 m
0H 2
YVWPbNNObNbbbNPPPboWblb+PAoeP PyeoJAwbPVb P Y
+ ro0NPP000YNbONOJOOProY+JOOrob 00 00 ONOWNWPVI
_ w oti
WW W w2
Y NN PP N JT
N J 0 NN wA
o.0000Voe 0m
Oe00e00eNOe00ee00eY00 000 O - + JJ b0000000000
1 Oi0
0000000 0000000 o bb eeeooe0000
N
N N+ +N _ 0 WN nK
>NJ Pm»A N .NOON pp JJ WW +OAC. bYN 00
N
bpVeANbNN+pONbObWP .O.P.Jro N> NN WLi+N0+0rNJ NH
yPJNNLP+i. POY b+OP JNN+0000>0>W NN +N+NYONW tiD
r b
NWOwbpN0+N000NPPP00W0b0+P>WOP 00 OJ\YbPYb
J+WpONPPJ00wNbbNeJYOPYY+J0+N0 ++ JK NWONOWNWPbA -
1 1
DK
9Y
0oY +WYYN4NYW A 9
owN AY+AeYLne gNNP O D
+00 P0P00aNYp JJtt
9
eNeeeoeNe VIN .NON m
O OOOOO00000eoe0000eee0ee0e00e 00 0o OOOOOoo00o0 9 O
_ _ m
N+ Y N NN a
wb+ bN+mO NN
_ _ u
beeeePoobeoemoowe.ueemue.lr a--v mm -- eobbboWe P i
y
C
J O
+ ro N 2 A
C
2
m i o m o m
w y D 9 a 9 a 9 m y
c r K m K m K 9
O K O H O J y
v m
mK
O A O �
K 1 D ti y J S O
O > > O > > m n y
s r Mmm r � r r y m
r r 2
m �
n a m
K r y
O .
I '� �J ' mOmPPPPPPPP
N NNN OmWYYYWNNN
_ NW- 0WN+0AYN-000J
' ' C O Krn - OJNA9999m
Z T - Arm yaZ-DD> O -
> Z x2 .OZAAAC
r m imm .mczsz s I
I a �9a a�aOOo mmm<
r z-r 9-mxmrora
s mn >xxa9mcoa a
' K a sx Kmm-Jnrno o '
ci 9a-zim29xr= a
n n c-a-K x
m «T icr o-z-z
m am cym9�y�a
zmz 9�yxnOn-
y xJ c smnoz
o -zazK 'a
c I zwzw o
A
'm a
N a 2
N--N 00 rn
+YJ+ ro 040eN- CZ - y0
Wub+ WOPNO +0P00A AD Km
♦ 00 Oo 0000 NVwOJ00000N0N0 Ow
w 9
m m
a wK
< x
DO
n sm
N 0 pw 9D
N aro-y r mA
W-N..Y.-O-NNm- rn mJ
amro PUNNobme+-roPub ao S
N WNN- oroNb+WJ aN
+ wJ Z
b o0
0. OVNN J000-.ONN\-ON0 w K
rymm no
>uu moK
u as _ mN N wx
NN -gym
me as NN io in N wa
N WW oWNo
P -- b0 y00y POOOOee00PNePe
N 0m Y
N YY W AW_J_ nr
N -LA0>WN+obmmYr 00
N NN lNl WNNO. .-y0ayu wy
>l Nro WNb- WYO-bO.ONJL--J yD
wr
vroi -- eu Pemm Wumm-eo mroineu'mmm
u DK
NN 0J -00- A
-00JNN O D
ONLAY >NNmW00 9 O
oNoo N NNONN000 m
0 00oe eeee Ooe00000000000 O
0 00 0o eoo0 e0000000000000
9
_ m
wN wN
N
+ m0 00 JJiN -0eoo0P00ANyJ> 2
K
Minutes
Industrial Commercial Commission
Shakopee, Minnesota March 11, 1987
MEMBERS PRESENT: Tim Keane
Don Koopman
James Plekkenpol
Jane DuBois
Bud Berens
MEMBERS ABSENT: Al Furrie, Chairman
Todd Schwartz
STAFF PRESENT: Barry Stock, Administrative Assistant
Election of Officers
Barry Stock asked for nominations for Chairperson.
Jim Plekkenpol nominated Tim Keane for the Chairperson position.
No further nominations were suggested.
Plekkenpol/DuBois moved to appoint Tim Keane as Chairperson for
the Shakopee Industrial Commercial Commission. Motion carried
unanimously.
Chairman Keane then requested nominations for Vice-Chairperson.
Chairman Keane nominated Jim Plekkenpol, Jane DuBois then
nominated Todd Schwartz, and Mr. Plekkenpol then nominated Al
Furrie for the Vice Chairperson position.
Koopman/Plekkenpol moved to appoint Al Furrie as Vice-Chairperson
to the Shakopee Industrial commercial Commission. Motion carried
unanimously.
Commissioner Keane then opened up the floor for nominations for
the Secretary position.
Mr. Plekkenpol nominated Jane DuBois for the Secretary position.
There being no further nominations, Plekkenpol/Koopman moved to
appoint Jane DuBois as Secretary for the Shakopee Industrial
Commercial Commission. Motion carried unanimously.
Minutes
Plekkenpol/Koopman moved to approve the minutes of February 11,
1987 meeting as kept. Motion carried unanimously.
Open House - Shakopee 87
Mr. Stock stated that Commission member Jim Plekkenpol has
suggested that the ICC sponsor an open house some time in the
near future to inform Shakopee residents of the many commissions
and community organizations that exist in Shakopee. The purpose
of the open house would be to heighten the awareness of the
people of Shakopee in regard to the many projects and activities
that are going on around them on a daily basis. The open house
would give residents the opportunity to speak with various
committee members on a face to face basis to answer questions in
regard to their organization. The ICC would send invitations to
the various committees, commissions and organizations to solicit
their attendance at this event.
Commissioner Plekkenpol then stated that this event would not
interfere with the Shakopee Showcase which is scheduled for the
last Monday in April. Mr. Plekkenpol stated that he thought it
was important to have this event as soon as possible. He also
stated that the Shakopee K.C. Hall would be available for a
8185. 00 rental fee. The consensus of the committee was that this
was a great idea and that they should pursue it in a timely
fashion. The committee also felt that this type of event would
allow people who are intimidated by a public setting to ask
questions in regard to certain projects on a more casual face to
face basis with the representatives of the various organizations
and committees.
Pat Dawson, Marketing Manager for Canterbury Downs arrived at the
meeting at 6:00 P.M.
Chairman Keane suggested that discussion on the ICC Open House be
continued following the racetrack' s presentation on the proposed
pari mutuel tax law amendment.
Canterbury Downs - Tax Law Amendment
Mr. Dawson stated that Canterbury Downs is seeking a reduction in
the State' s 6% Pari Mutual Tax. He stated that the tax of 6% is
on gross receipts taken in by the racetrack. Mr. Dawson stated
that a reduction in the gross tax is needed in order for the
racetrack to remain competitive with other racetracks in the
country. He expected that if no reduction in the pari mutuel tax
is granted by the legislature this year, it is likely that only
two states would have a pari mutuel tax greater than Minnesota's.
Commissioner DuBois questioned whether or not this tax had any
thing to do with the racetracks property taxes. Mr. Dawson
stated that property taxes were separate from the pari mutual
tax.
Chairman Keane then explained how tax increment financing worked
and the impact it had on the City of Shakopee as a result of the
racetrack.
Commissioner Koopman stated that currently two racetracks are
being discussed for location in Northern Minnesota. He
questioned what impact it would have on these tracks if the pari
mutuel tax is not reduced. Mr. Dawson stated that in his opinion
the developers proposing additional racetracks in Minnesota would
not pursue their plans if the pari mutuel tax is not reduced.
Mr. Stock questioned whether or not the state could support two
racetracks. Mr. Dawson stated that an additional racetrack in
Minnesota could operate profitably. He went on to state that
most States that have horse racing usually have two tracks. If a
track is built in Northern Minnesota, it will be a much smaller
facility. A track of this type would enhance the racing industry
in Minnesota and also provide a site for horses that do not meet
the standards for Canterbury Downs to race. The Northern
Minnesota racetrack facility would serve as a potential feeder
system for horses to develop and eventually race at Canterbury
and other racetracks throughout the country.
Chairman Keane stated that the question that he has most often
heard relates to the fact that Canterbury Downs knew of the pari
mutuel tax when they submitted their proposal and why they .didn' t
budget accordingly. Mr. Dawson stated that several things have
happened since 1983 that have hurt the original finance proforma
proposed by Canterbury. First, he stated that competition from j
other tracks is drawing more of the quality horses away from
Canterbury Downs. Another issue that has reduced the racetracks
ability to meet their original proforma has been the fact that
within the last five years, twenty-one states have reduced their
pari mutuel tax to a lower rate than Minnesota' s. This has
allowed those racetracks to funnel more money into their purses
and again attract more of the quality horses. Assuming a
reduction in the pari mutuel tax, Mr. Plekkenpol questioned if
there were any projections on how long it would take the State to
off set the taxes lost. Mr. Dawson stated that he was not aware
of any projections of this type but that the loss in taxes to the
State would be funneled back in to the horse racing industry. He
went on to state that if the horse industry prospers it can only
generate more tax revenue for the State of Minnesota.
Commission Plekkenpol stated that he agreed with Mr. Dawsons
comments and that there was quite a bit of spin off industry and
commercial activity being generated by the racetrack that would
not have other wise occurred had it not been for racetracks
existence.
Koopman/DuBois moved to approve Resolution #86-1 Supporting
Amendment to the Pari mutuel Tax Law. Motion carried
unanimously.
ICC Open House Cont.
Discussion then ensued on the ICC Day Open House. The possible
dates for the event were discussed by the committee. Pat Dawson
suggested that the ICC consider having the event on April 18,
1987 in conjunction with their annual warm-up day atthetrack.
He further stated that this year the racetrack is also planning
on having an Easter Egg Hunt for the younger children. Mr. Stock
questioned if the racetrack would be advertising Metropolitan
wide for this warm up day. Mr. Dawson stated that he planned on
only advertising in Scott County and expected less than 2,000
people to attend the event. Commissioner Plekkenpol thought that
it was a good idea to have the event at the racetrack but wanted
it to be made clear that the ICC was sponsoring the Open House
portion of the event. Mr. Dawson did not see a problem with
this. The consensus of the committee was that the racetrack
would be an excellent site for the event.
Chairman Keane suggested that given the lateness of the meeting
that the committee meet again next week to assign
responsibilities for the Open House. It was a consensus of the
committee to meet at 5: 00 P.M. on March 18th to continue
discussion of the Open House. Commission Keane then suggested
that some type of alert letter be mailed yet this week to the
various organizations and committees that we wish to invite to
the open house. Mr. Stock stated that he could obtain a list of
the various organizations and have a letter mailed by Friday the
13th. Chairman Keane stated that the primary goal of the
committee will be to identify methods of marketing the Open
House.
Mr. Stock briefly discussed the Star City Business Retention and
Expansion and the Labor Survey that were included as
informational items in the ICC agenda packet. Mr. Stock stated
that these two surveys would be incorporated into the final Star
City application and report.
Koopman/DuBois moved to adjourn the meeting at 7:45 P.M. Motion
carried unanimously.
Barry A. Stock
Recording Secretary
4
PROCEEDINGS OF THE SHAKOPEE PLANNING COMMISSION
REGULAR SESSION SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA MARCH 26, 1987
Chairwoman VanMaldeghem called the meeting to order at 8 :30 p.m.
with Comm. Czaja, Schmitt, Foudray, Rockne and Pomerenke present.
Comm. Johnson was absent. Also present were Douglas Wise, City
Planner; John K. Anderson, City Administrator; and Cncl. Clay.
Czaja/Pomerenke moved to approve the agenda as written. Motion
carried unanimously.
PUBLIC HEARING - Amendment to Shakopee City Code, Sections 11. 40;
Subd. 2c, Subd. 3, Subd. 4f and Subd. 7.
Czaja/Schmitt moved to open the pubic hearing to consider an
amendment to the Shakopee City Code, Sections 11.40; Subd. 2c,
Subd. 3; Subd. 4f and Subd. 7; to allow private sewer service
subject to City Council approval; to allow an increase in lot
densities above the standards of the zoning district most similar
in function to the proposed use and to permit mixed uses subject
to the City Council approval.; to clarify requirements for
administrative waivers. Motion carried unanimously.
Discussion ensued on Subd. 2c of the City Code regarding
utilities within the PUD.
Gary Laurent, 2415 Lakeview Dr. , introduces Mr. Mike Rutten,
Soils Engineering Consultant. Mike Rutten gave a brief slide
presentation relating to utilities and installation and proper
treatment of such sewage utilities. Comm. Czaja asked if there
was anything to prevent someone from putting in a sewage system
that is not up to code and what kind of inspections are preformed
by the City and County in regards to septic installations. The
City Planner said the City Building Inspector does inspect all
systems. A question was raised as to the average life expectancy
of a septic system. Mr. Rutten said that with the correct design
and proper treatment it could be expected to last a very long
time.
David Licht, President of Northwest Associated Consultants, said
that they support the entire regulation and that the benefits
that a PUD affords in an urban setting offers the same benefits
within a rural site. He said that in some cities they adopt a
regulation that all septic systems have to be pumped annually.
Discussion ensued on the size of the lot in regards to location
of septic systems.
Robert Schmitt, 14275 Marystown Road, said that if there isan
alternative to be taken that the City should consider it. He is
not in favor of amending the City Code because of the possible
abuse of a septic system. He said the City should not allow
advancements of their city without supplying it with City sewer
and water.
Planning Commission
March 26, 1987
Page -2-
Dennis Purcell, 2520 Marschall Road, expressed a concern of
people not taking care of their septic systems and the
possibility of sewage running out into the Lake O'Dowd area.
Tim Keane, 1244 Canterbury Rd. , said he strongly supports the
effort and direction of amending the Planned Unit Development
Ordinance and that the City does need an ordinance that provides
flexibility and control of mixed uses and mixed densities.
Jim Sorenson, 2585 Marschall Road, supports residential growth
but does have a concern in the variation of lot size. He
believes that a lot as small as one-half acre in size cannot
support self contained septic systems when clustered in any
density.
Pete Shutrup, 1444 Erin Ct. , Timber Trails, said that he does not
believe septic systems on a one-half acre lot in a clay base soil
will work.
Hugh Cramber, 8409 W. 97 1/2 Street, Bloomington, said he is
looking at one of the sites to build a home and if there is an
ordinance passed that requires annual pumping of septic systems
that it should work if the systems is not abused.
Don MCKush, 3691 Marshall Road, asked what would happen if
effluent got into the water table. Mr. Rutten replied that
pollution would occur.
Bill Dowl, 1420 Towline Ave. , said that the DNR told him that
they could only go down as far as the Jordan aquifer and if that
one becomes polluted there will be a problem getting the DNR to
let them go down any further.
Lance Sukoloff, 1424 wood Duck Trail, said that little has been
said about the correct installation of these septic tanks.
Mike Muellerr, Area hydrologist DNR, said he has been working
with the City of Shakopee and the developer on this project. He
said the DNR has issued a whole set of guidelines that dealt with
Planned Unit Developments. He said that most of the runoff from
that site is going away from Lake O'Dowd. He is most concerned
with where the runoff will be directed, where the perc tests will
show that there might be some cautionary features that must be
addressed.
Terry Forbord, 2103 Bridge Crossing, said he believes all
installers haveto be licensed and if the guidelines are followed
the system will work.
Planning Commission
March 26, 1987
Page -3-
Schmitt/Pomerenke moved that the ordinance be altered and that
the PUD project site shall be served by City sewer and water
services except in an R-1 and Shoreland Zone. Within the R-1 and
Shoreland Zone private water and sewer service may be allowed by
the City Council based on recommendation by the Planning
Commission subject to the following conditions:
1. Maximum deviation of land size density shall not exceed 20%
where septic systems will be used.
2. Each lot shall have two septic sites identified.
3. 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 mound type, double tanking, etc..
Motion carried with Comm. Foudray and Pomerenke opposed.
Czaja/Pomerenke moved for a 5 minute recess. Motion carried
unanimously.
Chairwoman VanMaldeghem called the meeting back to order at 10: 37
p.m.
Discussion ensued on Density, Subd. 4f. The City Planner said
that staff is proposing to change residential densities to be
increased from 10% to 25%. Comm. Czaja had a concern in allowing
lot sizes to be less than 2 acres, when sewer and water are not
present. Comm. Schmitt said when sewer and water is not
available the minimum density is 2 acres per lot. consensus of
the Commission was to go with 258 limit for residential density.
Mike Mueller, DNR, explained wy they allow variable density
increases. He said that the further development is moved away
from the lake, the higher the densities can be without affecting
the water quality of the lake.
Rick Smith, 1463 Lakeview Drive, said that the types of the areas
involved should also be looked at when considering this 25%
increase. The City Planner answered that each PUD will be dealt
with individually by the Planning commission and that this just
sets a maximum.
Schmitt/Rockne moved that the maximum density adjustment allowed
through the PUD Ordinance (Section 11. 40, Subd. 4f) shall not
exceed 25%. Motion carried with Czaja opposed.
Planning Commission
March 26, 1967
Page -4-
Discussion ensued on Mixed uses, Subd. 3, as related to a PUD.
The City Planner said the primary use of the PUD has to be
consistent with the primary use of the zone, but some mixing of
uses will be allowed.
Schmitt/Czaja moved to amend City Code Section 11. 40, Subd. 3 to
read as follows:
The Planning Commission recommends the following language be
deleted from City Code Section 11.40, Subd. 3 :
Subd. 3: Uses Permitted The use of P.U.D. conveys no right
to the use of land other than as permitted by the district
within which the PUD is applied. Uses permitted shall be
those specified for each zoning district. For uses
requiring a Conditional Use Permit and subject to the
eligibility requirements, the PUD procedure may be used in
lieu of the conditional use procedure.
The Planning Commission recommends the following language
be added to City Code Section 11.40, Subd 3 :
Subd. 3: Uses Permitted Uses permitted in a P.U.D. may
consist of one or a mixture of land uses clearly designated
by type on the approved final development plan. Mixed uses
shall be permitted as specified within the following zones.
In no case shall the following restrictions be exceeded.
The City reserves the right to place more restrictive
conditions on the mixture of uses within a P.U.D. in order
to ensure the following:
1. The public health, safety and welfare of the community.
2. The intent of the ordinance and the zone in which the
P.U.D. is located.
3. The prevention of conflicting land uses occurring
either within the P.U.D. or with the surrounding land
uses.
A. - Rural Residential (R-1)
1. Conditional and permitted uses within the R-1 District.
2. - Conditional and permitted uses within the R-2 District.
3. Within a residential P.U.D. at least 20% of the area
shall be usable open space. Such space shall not
include land devoted to streets, alleys, parking and
private yards.
Planning Commission
March 26, 1987
Page -5-
B. Urban Residential (R-2)
1. Conditional and permitted uses within the R-2 District.
2. Conditional and permitted uses within the R-3 District.
3 . Within a residential P.U.D. at least 20% of the area
shall be usable open space. Such space shall not
include land devoted to streets, alleys, parking and
private yards.
C. Medium Density Residential (R-3 )
1. Conditional and permitted uses within the R-3 District.
2. Conditional and permitted uses within the R-4 District.
3 . Within a residential P.U.D. at least 20% of the area
shall be usable open space. Such space shall not
include land devoted to streets, alleys, parking and
private yards.
D. Multi-Family Residential (R-4)
1. Conditional and permitted uses in the R-4 District.
2. Commercial uses permitted in the B-1 District which
serves the residential development not to exceed 15% of
the total project area.
3 . Within a residential P.U.D. at least 20% of the area
shall be usable open space. Such space shall not
include land devoted to streets, alleys, parking and
private yards.
E. Highway Business (B-1)
1. Conditional and permitted uses in the B-1 District.
2. Conditional and permitted uses allowed in the R-4
District not to exceed 25% of the total land and floor
space area.
F. Community Business (B-2)
1. Conditional and permitted uses in the B-2 District.
2. Conditional and permitted uses allowed in the R-4
District not to exceed 25% of the total land and floor
space area.
Planning Commission
March 26, 1987
Page -6-
G. Central Business (B-3 )
1. Conditional and permitted uses in the B-3 District.
H. Light Industry (I-1)
1. Conditional and permitted uses in the I-1 District.
I . Heavy Industry ( I-2 )
1. Conditional and permitted uses in the I-2 District.
J. Shoreland (S)
1. Conditional and permitted uses in the S District.
2. Conditional and permitted uses in the R-1 and R-2
Districts not to exceed 25% of the land and floor space
area.
3. within the Shoreland District at least 20% of the area
shall be usable open space. Such space shall not
include land devoted to streets, alleys, parking and
private yards.
K. Agriculture Preservation (Ag)
1. Conditional and permitted uses in the Ag District.
Terry Forbord, 2103 Bridge Crossing, asked what the purpose of a
PUD within the City of Shakopee was. The City Planner replied
that it is to allow developers more creativity and flexibility in
providing various types of development and better utilize the
land and provided by the regular system of platting and
development.
Motion carried with Pomerenke opposed.
Pomerenke/Schmitt moved to recommend to the City Council
amendment of City Code Section 11.40, Subd. 7 as follows:
4. ADMINISTRATIVE WAIVER
The following language shall be deleted from City code
Section 11. 40, Subd. 7B:
"The Administrator shall have the discretion to waive
project and area information and such other information as
Planning Commission
March 26, 1987
Page -7-
may be deemed in appropriate for remodeling, building expansion
and similar projects. "
The following language shall be added to City Code
Section 11. 90, Subd. 7 :
C. Administrative Waiver The Administrator shall have the
discretion to waive the Planned Unit Development (PUD)
approval process or information required for either adoption
of a PUD or amendment of an approved PUD when the following
conditions are met:
1. Properties located within a mandatory P.U.D. area.
Properties which have not previously gone through the
P.U.D. platting process will not be required to submit
a P.U.D. when it functions as an existing Agricultural
operation or when the following conditions are met:
a) The changes in building location or size do not
affect more than 10% of the site area and/or floor
space.
b) The changes in landscaping, parking & drive
arrangement, or site improvements do not affect
more than 10% of the site area.
c) The changes comply with all requirements placed on
the zone in which the property is located.
2. Properties for which a P.U.D. has been approved.
a) The changes in building location or size do not
affect more than 10% of the site area and/or floor
space, not to exceed . 10,000 sq. ft.
b) The changes in landscaping, parking & drive
arrangement, or site improvements do not affect
more than 10% of the site area, not to exceed
10,000 sq. ft. _
C) The changes comply with all requirements of the
zoning code and conditions attached to the
approval of the PUD.
d) The changes do not alter the overall design, uses,
or intent of the project.
Motion carried unanimously.
Planning Commission
March 26, 1987
Page -8-
Czaja/Schmitt moved to close the public hearing. Motion carried
unanimously.
Schmitt/Rockne moved that the Ordinance as amended in the public
hearing be favorably passed to the City Council. Motion carried
unanimously.
PUBLIC HEARING - Request for Preliminary Planned Unit
Development, Gary Laurent and Tom Haugen.
Schmitt/Czaja moved to open the public hearing to consider a
request for a Preliminary Planned Unit Development for a golf
course and residential development upon the property located
North of O'Dowd Lake Park, South of County Road 77, East of
County Road 79 and West of Timber Trails Addition. Motion
carried unanimously.
Schmitt/Rockne moved that all information and discussion which
has been supplied to this body and any discussion which may occur
regarding the economic viability of this golf course be stricken
from the record. Motion carried unanimously.
Gary Laurent said that two separate neighborhood meetings have
been held to help give a better understanding to the surrounding
neighborhood. There has been a substantial number of soil
borings on site, 34 test holes have been done on the site. Mr.
Mike Rutten reviewed the soils map from the Soil Conservation
Service. he said there are a few lots in question within the
proposed development that he would recommend not be built on.
Chairman Czaja asked how this now effects what was previously
discussed in density issue. The City Planner said that this does
comply with the density recommendations previously discussed, it
is within the 208 in the recommendation regarding utilities.
Discussion ensued on the intent of the motion regarding sewage
utilities. Gary Laurent said that the intent of the motion as it
was made was that there by a total of one acre between the lot
size and another identifiable area granted as easement for the
purpose of treating sewage. The developer will work with the
recommendations of the Soils Consulting Engineer and will bring
it back to Commission and Council for final approval.
Commissioner Schmitt asked what was meant by open space being
20%. The City Administrator said that within a PUD there has to
be open space provided for the residents within the PUD, the
question was whether a golf course could be considered the usable
open area.
Maggie Kline, 2522 Hauer Trail, said she is a realtor in the City
of Shakopee and she does not like to see people move out of
Planning Commission
March 26, 1987
Page -9-
Shakopee. She thinks this residential area will help enhance the
City in regards to upper level residential areas.
Don MCKush raised a concern of golfers hitting a ball over the
bay of Lake O'Dowd. He asked about the liability involved in
hitting balls over open water.
David Plekkenpol, 2433 CR-79, asked if the City really needs
another 18 hole golf course. The Commission could not answer
that because it is a market study regarding economic feasibility.
Robin Wolf, 1149 Jefferson, said she lives and works in Shakopee
and is in support of the proposed project.
Jim Sorenson, 2585 Marschall Road, said he thinks the golf course
and the housing along with it is beneficial to the City. He
would like to see a 100 foot setback from the lake shore. which
would enhance this project.
Chairwoman VanMaldeghem read a a letter received from Carol
Snedden and Paul Munch stating .their concern over the lots along
the lakeshore. They cannot see how they will support a drain
field and a resident. They also stated that drainage o
fertilizers off the golf course will pollute the lake.
Comm. Schmitt asked i there was a way to restructure hole number
7 and direct the golf traffic away from the residential area.
Discussion ensued on the trail going from hole number 7 down to
hole number 8 on the other side of Lake O'Dowd.
Mr. Mueller, DNR, reviewed the issues of concern and said they
are a little concerned over the factor of safety of golf balls
flying over the lake. They are proposing that a high fence be
put up by the 7th hole which would eliminate the low flying golf
balls across the water. He proposed there be a fertilizer band
along the shoreline properties. He discussed the possibility of
putting in a deep well. He does not feel the 99 unit development
is unreasonable. The DNR will not approve this project until
they are assured that perc tests are accurate and an
environmental assessment worksheet must also be done before it
can be approved.
A question was raised as to the boat capacity. Mr. Mueller
answered that the criteria will be one residence, one dock.
Comm. Czaja asked what impact docks might have on the lake. Mr.
Mueller said he did not see any concern over docks being on the
lake.
Planning Commission
March 26, 1987
Page -10-
Chairwoman VanMaldeghem asked if there was anyone from audience
who wished to address this issue. There was no response.
Schmitt/Pomerenke moved to close the public hearing. Motion
carried unanimously.
Czaja/Foudray moved to table this issue until the April 16,
meeting. Motion carried unanimously.
Schmitt/Czaja moved to adjourn. Motion carried unanimously.
Meeting adjourned at 2:00 a.m.
Douglas Wise
City Planner
Carol L. Schultz
Recording Secretary
PROCEEDINGS OF THE BOARD OF
ADJUSTMENTS AND APPEALS
Regular Session cbakopee, Minnesota March 26, 1987
Chairwemat VanMaldeghem called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m. with
Comm. Rockne, Foudray, Czaja, and Pomerenke present. Comm. Schmitt
arrived at 7:45 p.m. Comm. Johnson was absent. Also present were
John B. Anderson, City Administrator; Douglas Wise, City Planner; end
Cncl. Clay.
PUBLIC HEARING: Variance Resolution #484, Valleyfair.
Foudray/ Pomerenke moved to open the public hearing to consider a request
for a variance to increase the allowable signage of 100 square feet for
a free-standing sign in an I-2 zoning district by 312.5 square feet, in
order to replace the existing marquee with a new sign upon the property
located at One Valleyfair Drive. Motion carried unanimously.
The City Planner reviewed the request from Valleyfair to construct a 412.5
square foot free standing sign. The code allows a maximum of 100 square
feet of signage. The applicant is requesting a variance on the grounds
that a 100 square foot sign would be small compared to the scale of the
development, the moving or constructingofa-new sign is" a circumstance
beyond the control of the applicant since the marquee was condemned.
Walt Witmer, Vice President end General Manager of Valleyfair said that
the hardship was created by the City for condemning their present sign.
Discussion ensued on whether or not a variance request if feasible or
if staff should look at the possibility of changing the ordinance. Comm.
Czaja asked if there was a possibility to utilize the natural surroundings
of the area to make the sign more attractive. The question arose as to
the feasibility of moving the present marquee a little to the west. The
applicant said that it would thea be located on property owned by the
highway department.
Cncl. Clay said that compared to the mad frontage of the Valleyfair
property the square footage of this sign proposed is not.to significant.
Terry Forbord, 2103 Bridge Crossing, said he feels the current sign
ordinance is not pro-business in the City, end compared to the size of
Valleyfair the proposed sign is not too large and that the variance
should be granted. Chairwoman VanMaldeghem asked if there was anyone
else from the audience who wished to address this issue. There was
nonresponse.
Czaja/Foudray moved to close the public hearing. Motion carried unanimously.
Comm. Czaja moved to deny Resolution #484. Motion died because of lack
of second.
BAA
March 26, 1987
Page -2-
Comm. Pomerenke said that he would like to see some alternatives, such as
construction of a temporary sign until the construction of the service
road is completed. Barry Stock asked if the service road project could
be delayed for three moaths to give the City time to change the ordinance.
The City Administrator stated that the coat of a temporary sign and/or
moving of the present marquee could be fairly expensive and may not be
the answer.
Foudray/Pomerenke moved to grant Variance Resolution No. 484, on a
temporary basis for the 1987 season subject to review immediately after-
wards and subject to any changes that might be made in revision of our
sign ordinance, Chairwoman Van.Maldeghem said that conditions cannot
be put on a variance and motion is ruled out of order.
Czaja/Foudray moved to grant Variance Resolution No. 484, to grant
Valleyfair the sign variance of 312 square feet for their sign.
Concerns were expressed on setting a precedent to the present sign
ordinance. Motion fails with Comm, Czaja, Rockne„ Pomerenke, and
VanMaldeghem opposed.
Rockne/Pomerenke moved that if theapplicant should elect to build
a temporary sign, that the building permit fee for such atemporary
sign be waived. Motion carried with Comm, Czaja opposed - -
Czaja/Rockne moved to accept the Annual Report with addition of
Commissioners names and titles be included. Motion carried unanimously.
Rockne/Czaja moved to adjourn. Motion carried unanimously. Meeting
adjourned at 8:30 p.m.
Douglas Wise
City Planner
Carol L. Schultz
Recording Secretary
_ PROCEEDINGS OF THE SHAKOPEE PLPti:!ING COVRIUSS: ON -
- - REGULAR SESSION SHAK '?72, MINNESOTA APRIL 9, 1997
Chairwoman v..nMald.jg._e:n call,: the meeting to order. at 8:30 p.m.
witil cc=. merenk: , Foudray ,d Czaja present. Comm. Schmitt,
Johnson, an Roc:,ne %,ere absent_. Also present were Doug Wise,
C4.ty Dennis Kraft, Cos .Unity Deva;a_i .� D
_rector, a d .
.;,..,n K. City �C:Iin15`r��ar.
Cza :1:: - :_^d to ai)Pr ve the aBd w1:'1 ....: _.. of
.. - (' 1 F_:-enue ali jnmen1 ad ca r.; -> _._ Itati✓"
un-, ,r �d _ i-otion _a_ 'd
PtiBLIC HE. ING - P_eliminary orZ__ �,hts - 4th
Addition, W-_lt Muhlen`ardt. _
Czaja/Pomerenke moved to open the public hearing to consider the
- preliminary plat of Forizcn Heights 4th Addition lying on the
- - - -property -located south of County Road 16, north of CountyRoad
42, east of- Mihl�nhardt Road and west of Highway 13. - Motion -
carried unanimously.
The CityPlannersaid the information needed to consider this
plat wasnot.seceived .in time to be reviewed for this meeting.
_ Foudray/Pomerenke moved to continue the public hearing until- May -
7, 1987. Motion carried unanimously.
13TH AVENUE ALIGNMENT - - -
Discussion ensued on the 13th Ave. Alignment from County Road 16 .
to county Road 15. The City Council concurred that -bgputting --�!
some curves in the street could have a positive effect in slowing _
traffic down and could also . give more .variety to the street. -..
Comm. _Czaja had a-concernon--whether a curved street would .affect
the fire departments access. The City Planner said it should not
pose a - problem. The consensus was to keep the name of 13th _
Avenue and not change it. Cncl. Olay said the biggest concern of
the Council was -the cost. of curvature versus straight line.
Pomerenke/Foudray moved to accept Council' s recommendation for , -
the
orethe alignment of 13th Avenue. Motion carried unanimously.
_.. Czaja/Foudray moved. tocontinue. wit:i the present name of 13th--
Avenue.- Motion carried unanimously.
'Czaja/Foudray moved to continue -with the present name-of 13th
Avenue and not change- it because. of the ability to locate ,the . - --
-. street.- _Motion carried unanimously- with Comm. Pomerenke opposed. --
- - Planning Commission
April 9, 1987
Page -2-
-aja/2omererke moved to close the public hea; _g on .:ac'-son
n.s i ecs Park. Motion carried unani-iously.
.. _ 'iCzaja -voce; for a to minutes ra_.ns. . ;'.e tier carried
,am ca' :
- �a �:_ -nom _=;:� � --o Cr_-.Ir ,,. . ' -
a u.__:. p
Cza;a/Pcmerenke moved to del-.v the final azproval of the PUD
ordirance amerdmen- :: until A-_ril lo', 1987. Motion carried
unanimously.
PUPLIC HEARING - R=n_Lrq recuest: Meritor Deveicpe�er.t
Pomer nk /_-c: -.ray moved to open the public hearing to cor-ider
the -azoning request to rezone approximately 85 acres of land
located cast of County Road 79 and South of 13th Avenue from Ag
to R-2 acid R-3. Motion carried un:-_nimousiy.
The Citv Planner said the applicant is requesting the rezoning of
approximately 85 acres currently zoned Ag to R-2 and R-3 . The
plan proposes urban residential development for this area and
projects extension of urban services to this area between 1985
and 1990. There is no commercial allowed in he R-3 zone. Ccmm. _
Pomerenke expressed a concern over the future bypass creating a
sliver of - land of "5 or 6 acres that could be land. locked. The
City Planner replied that the multi family development that is ,
proposed- would create a buffer between the highway and the
residential properties.
Larry Frank, Meritor Development, said the reason for the R-3
land was - to create a buffer. Comm. Czaja said since there is no
rezoning map included how can they handle this rezoning request.
Mel Fisher, '1075 S Market, stated he is against rezoning of area - -
because -he --will be -assessed for it, and also concern of low - -
income housing surrounding his home. _ - -
Wilfred Mahowald, corner of Prairie and 11th St., said he is
against the rezoning because of lower income housing. - "- -
--. .-. _ - -- -- - Planning Commission
A^ril 9, 19:;7
P" 3e -3-
Chairwoman Vanmald< 7 1 asked if t---rs was an7one else from the
audience who wishaa to address ..`.is iss e. There was no
Bosse.
__ .Cd t0 cCntiala -^e ic r`_ -in, on the
7, 1 - So .. C..] •,.. i > Can be
atm ,....1 79 ��.I t. (� . -..it ,e C �tl
-__.e City P:annar reviea;ed the nropos�d preliminary pla'c, half is -
zoned RR-2. The proposal is for 339 lots with open space areas.
Larry Frank, Meritor Development reviewed the site plan. He said
they closed 11th Avenue off so it is not a through street. A 4.8
acre park area was put in. Comm. Czaja asked where the access
would be to get into the park.
Sue Hoffineister, 1028 Dakota St. raised a concern over all the
people from the development going to Pearson School parking lot.
She said she is against the proposed plat.
wilfr-d Mahowald expressed concern on losing his privacy die to
the development.
Mel Fischer, 1075 Market, said the roads in the town now cannot
han_'-le all the traffic, why have another 700 cars eventually to
go no place. He asked if a traffic study has been done. The _
City Planner answered that the developer will have to do a
Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) which will include a
traffic study. -
Roger Schmieg, 1077 Minnesota Street, said he would just as soon
see 11th Avenue go through. As to .the development itself, he
feels it would be developed sooner or later and it will probably
be better now than later. : Heasked what the . price range of
houses in the area will . be. The developeransweredbetween
_._ $80,000 and $130,000. - -- --: -
: Patty Trutenow,'.1035 Dakota, asked if --there was a specific size
house, minimum square foot, proposed for this area. - She also
asked if any covenants have been set. The developer said the - -
covenants have not been set. The City Planner said that as far
as the size house, it would have to meet the requirements of the
- Planning Commission
April 9, 1937
Page -4-
__ -_e proposing to have 4 different bui_f _ each
-_ - Fac:-.��.
- . Street, had -
.� . _q i^_th Sr
- - will I
Cha' rwc-aan-Va.rdstdeghem as%ed if t�,=e aasc. c:"e else =.. vii Ile
ai:dierce -- who wished to address this iss_a. There--_was no
response. _
Czaa/Pomererke moved to continue the public hearing to May 7,
1987. M01",,pcarried a^>_ni-.curly.
Pcmerer_ke/Czaja moved to approve the preliminary plat fcr the
area from 13th Avenue -North to 11th Avenue subject to the
following conditions: -
1. Streets must be 'named, side and rear setbacks must he 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 drainage way. -
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 58. - --
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. - ` -
(S'
Punning Commission -
April 9, 1:97
_ _z _5-
9 . = ec - ._ _ .or construction of
the. , . . ..
of Shakcpee.
E. The developer aareas to re 4.-.i_ City for costs on
13th Ave. equivalent to u.e c '
. cts _.,r a 36 residential
street. Cost s;:aring to be .'-_carmined 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. -
PUB!""^_ HEARING - -Conditional Use Permit for open sales lot,
Will -am Bakken.
Pomerenke/Czaja moved to open the public hearing to consider an
application for Conditional Use .Permit to operate an open sales
lot upon- the properties located at 1266 E. .1st Avenue and 7380
Highway 101, both locations are in a B-1 zoning district. Motion
carried unanimously.
The City Planner said the site for 1266 E. First Avenue has been
r,:moved for consideration for the site. There will " be only
- - - access to the site for eastbound traffic. - - The zoning is - - - --
'appropriate and they will need a " peddlers license. _ . Comm. Czaja
asked about this setting a precedent for anyone being able to set -
up an open sales lot.
Bill Bakken, -applicant, "displayed what he will be - selling. They - _
will be sellingpicturesand they have sold them to some stores.
He said the owner of the land has given his permission and is _.
_ - - P1--n i-rg C^:,iy sign
Antii 9, 1987
Page -6-
_11,,.u; his _ -oe. T eS c;'
2 . A11 sa' and display area -must _ off public rig::t of
3 . No parking will be n7.lowed on the public right of way.
4. The permit crust be renewed annually. -
FAUT'RS 47H ADDI'TIC.' - FI_` -L PLAT
Discussion ensued on-the .Sinal _Plat of Hauers 4th Addition. The
City Planner reviewed the issue of par: dedication He said the - -
City Council was in favor off _Lot 1, Block 3, for a tot lot
location:- - - - - -
Dal.^ Dahlke, 1279 Limestone Dr. , said the people who live in the
- surrounding lots around the proposed tot lot do not wish it to be
a park because they have no children. - he feels that lot 23 or 24
- off Block 5 would be a better tot lot because it is located in
the middle._ Thisproposal was not given to the City Council. -
Czaja/Pomerenke moved� to approve the final plat of Hauer's 4th
. Addition subject to the following conditions:
1. Unneededstreets 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 .e-plat. _
3 . No driveways may access directly onto 13th Avenue. . -- -
4. Lot 24, Block 5 y will he deeded to the City for park -
purposes,
ark-purposes„ payment in lieu of land dedication for park .
purposes -will also be required.S. Asidewalk along 13th'Avenue will be. required. - �
-- - "- - Planning Commission
_ April 9, 1987
- - Page -7-
6. Ezecution - of a developersagree-. .-,z for ccnstructicn of
required
A. St_eet 1_ighti -:g to be accord
=_nce -- th-
_ _ .
in L
roc=i ._:—
_ desi _P criteria n ._... ,:.- L e Ci '�y
of Shako-ea. -
E. The developer agrees to reiMbursa 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,-,nty Roads 16 and 13th Avenue. Cost sharing
to be determined by City Engineer.
7. Approval of a title opinion by the City Attorney..
+ice
S . The developer shall provide a recordable agreement stating -_
that not more than 100 of a plat will be developed into twin
Motion carried unanimously.
THERAPEUTIC MASSAGE AMENDMENTS -
Discussion ensued on amending sections of the city code to allow _ -
therapeutic massage ,in R-1 and R-2 zones.
Czaja/Pomerenke move that Planning Commission recommend no action
_ .. in regards to amending Sections 6.40, 6.41 and 11.05 Subd. 10 of
the City Code. Motion carried unanimously. -
- - - ' Foudray/Czaja moved to approve the annual report. - Motion carried
unanimously.
Comm. Pomerenke excused himself and left at- 11:50 p.m. _.
Discussion " ensued on the possibility of getting things to the
- Planning Commission in time forreview before having to act upon
it. The City Administrator said staff can draft some guidelines `
i
Planning COM:issicn
April 9, 1981
Page -3-
s to t inns can better Le fed throc;h trs :stem to enable
pla:..ing cor.T scion have role t;:;._ for proper view.
mr, �,1 ad' . � .. ai.tr a-.. —.a l
_n .__ e _ ....1V•
yY) -
CIO-
PROCEEDINGS OF THE BOARD OF
ADJUSTMENTS AND APPEALS
REGULAR SESSION SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA APRIL 9, 1987
Chairwoman VanMaldeghem called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m.
with Comm. Czaja, Pomerenke and Foudray present. Comm. Schmitt,
Johnson and Rockne were absent. Also present were Douglas Wise,
City Planner; Dennis Kraft, Community Development Director; and
John K. Anderson, City Administrator.
Czaja/Pomerenke moved to approve the agenda with a correction on
Variance Resolution No. 481 not being a public hearing. Motion
carried unanimously.
Czaja/Foudray moved to approve the minutes of March 5, 1987, with
correction of Dennis Kraft not present at the meeting. Motion
carried unanimously.
The City Planner reviewed the proposal of Jack VanRemortel,
Backstretch R.V. Park, requesting variances to allow two area
identification signs, one sign to exceed the allowed height by 20
feet, and a second sign to be located within 5 feet of the front
property line and 1 foot off the ground upon the property located
at CR-89 and 13th Avenue. He reviewed the difference between
directional sign and entrance sign. The entrance sign proposed
exceeds 4 sq. feet. Comm. Czaja expressed concern over setting a
precedent in allowing this variance. Comm. Pomerenke felt that a
sign such as this should be visible from the road. Chairwoman
VanMaldeghem suggested that the applicant construct a temporary
sign until the amendments to the sign ordinance have been
completed. The City Planner said that exceptional circumstances
apply to the area, such as topography is unique in that the road
is higher than the site and also the visibility of the entrance
from the highway. The applicant said another reason for the sign
was to have a vacancy, no vacancy on it so people did not have to
turn off the highway to see if there was a vacancy. She also
said she talked to the State about a sign and there will be a
State sign put up on the intersection of County Road 89 and 101,
a small sign saying campground.
Foudray/Pomerenke moved to approve the Variance Resolution No.
481 based on determination that the entrance sign is not a
directional sign, but an identification sign to 1) allow the
highway 101 sign to exceed the height allowed by the sign
ordinance by 20 feet, 2) allow two signs instead of one and 3)
allow the total signage to exceed the code requirements by 36
square feet. Motion fails with Comm. Czaja and VanMaldeghem
opposed.
PUBLIC HEARING - Variance Resolution No. 486, Clete Link.
Czaja/Foudray moved to open the public hearing for a request for
a 22 foot variance from the required 50 feet front yard setback
BAA
April 9, 1987
Page -2-
construct a new dwelling at 1220 W 12th Avenue. Motion carried
unanimously.
Cit Planner reviewed the request for a variance from Clete Link
to construct a new home 28 feet from the lot line adjacent to
County Road 15. The required setback is 50 feet. Clete Link,
local builder, said that when he applied for the building permit
it was felt that he needed a two foot variance. He said it gets
to be a problem to design and market a house with only a 40 foot
frontage to work with.
Discussion ensued .on the possibility of making a L-shape house by
putting the garage in front. An L-shape home could fit and meet
all the setbacks required. The City Planner said that both the
City Engineer and the County Hwy. Engineer reviewed this proposal
and recommended denial. Chairwoman VanMaldeghem asked if there
was anyone from the audience who wished to address this issue.
There was no response.
Czaja/Foudray moved to close the public hearing. Motion carried
unanimously.
Czaja/Foudray moved to deny Variance Resolution No. 486, with
reasons being Mr. Link has the ability to change the design,
location and size of this house in order to comply with the
requirements of the code. Motion carried unanimously.
PUBLIC HEARING - Variance Resolution No. 485, Kenneth W. Russ
Czaja/Pomerenke moved to open the public hearing for a request
for a 4-foot variance from the required 10 foot side yard setback
to construct a three season porch and deck at 1142 Jefferson
Street. Motion carried unanimously.
The City Planner reviewed the applicant's proposal to construct a
121. x 16' 3-season porch on the side of his house leaving only 6 '
to the side lot line. The code requires a 10' setback from the
side lot line. The neighborhood was platted prior to the
adoption of the ordinance requiring a 10' setback. The home was
built with a patio door in this location so as a porch or deck
could be added on at a later date. Ken Russ, 1142 Jefferson,
said it would not be feasible for him to add a porch on the back
of his garage as he would need a variance there also. Alan
Bardasal, 1033 S. Main, said he recently built a 3-season porch
only 5 feet from the lot line. Chairwoman VanMaldeghem asked if
there was anyone else from the audience who to address this
issue. There was no response.
Czaja/Foudray moved to close the public hearing. Motion carried
unanimously.
HAA
April 9, 1987
Page -3-
Pomerenke/Foudray moved to offer Resolution No. 485 Granting a
Variable of 4 ' from the Required 10' Setback. Motion carried
with comm. Czaja opposed.
Pomerenke/Czaja moved to adjourn at 8: 30 p.m. Motion carried
unanimously.
Douglas Wise
City Planner
Carol Schultz
Recording Secretary
/G
PROCEEDINGS OF THE SHAKOPEE PLANNING COMMISSION
SPECIAL SESSION SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA APRIL 16, 1987
Chairwoman VanMaldeghem called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m.
with Comm. Foudray, Johnson, Czaja, Rockne and Schmitt present.
Also present were John K. Anderson, City Administrator; Douglas
Wise, City Planner; Dennis Kraft, Community Development Director;
Barry Stock, Administrative Assistant; and Steve Clay, Cncl. ;
Comm. Pomerenke was absent.
Czaja/Johnson moved to approve the agenda with addition of
discussion items: Additional staff assistance; Valley Fair
letter; ICC Day; and special session on May 21, 1987. Motion
carried unanimously.
Rockne/Foudray moved to approve the minutes of February 5, 1987.
Motion carried unanimously.
Czaja/Foudray moved to approve the minutes of February 12, 1987.
Motion carried unanimously.
Discussion ensued on Amendments to Section 11. 40 of the City
Code. The City Planner said that the City Council approve all
recommended changes by the Planning Commission with the exception
of condition three under the utilities section of the proposed
amendments. Thee wee two options considered, option A is based
on Density Criteria; Option B is based on Performance Criteria.
Staff recommends option B.
Comm. Czaja asked if the letter received from Al Frechette
explaining the groundwater problem in the whole Shakopee area
effects the Staffs view. The City Planner answered that it does
not because the letter is talking about water from a well system
that may be drawing out of the same aquifer as is being polluted
by the landfill. The use of septic systems on individual sites
have to deal with basically the groundwater and the capability of
the site itself in absorbing the effluent from the system.
The City Planner said the staffs recommendation requires two
sites, which is double the requirement of the code, and
construction must comply with the code standards. The sites are
selected based on soil boring, percolation tests, and examination
of the types of soil in the water table in that area.
Chairwoman VanMaldeghem said she has a problem with maintained
septic systems. She believes it would be difficult to control
it, and to convince property owners to properly maintain it.
Gary Laurent said he has a number of concerns on testimony that a
septic system can fail within a year. He stated the useful life
of a septic system, if properly maintained, can be the life of
the residence. He said he is in full agreement with having two
Planning Commission
April 16, 1987
Page -2-
septic system sites per lot. He also said he had met with Al
Frechette and that Mr. Frechette felt that the developer had gone
most of the way in meeting all of his concerns addressed in his
letter. Mr. Frechette 's intention of his letter was simply to
put the City on alert as to some of the problems that could
arise.
Mr. McKush addressed a few concerns on the 10 and 15 foot side
yard setbacks shown on Mr. Laurents illustration. Chairwoman
Vanmaldeghem said that the required 20 ' sideyard setbacks will
have to be maintained. Mr. MCRush had a concern of the shoreline
lots not having enough room for septic systems. The City Planner
said that in the shoreline district the building setback from a
county road is 75 feet from center line of the road and the
building setback from the lake is 100 feet, the septic systems
have to be 75 feet from the lake. Comm. Czaja had a concern with
the density being less than 1 acre and what would happen to the
groundwater and would there by groundwater contamination whether
it was 1 or 2 acres.
Schmitt/Czaja moved to recommend to City Council to adopt Option
A to read:
The Planning Commission shall require easement of
abutting/contiguous open space for sewage treatment to
supply at least one acre of site area for each residence.
Where soil conditions dictate, the applicant shall be
required to use alternative systems such as mounds, double
tanking, etc.
Roll Call: Ayes: Comm. Johnson, Schmitt, Rockne, Foudray,
Czaja, VanMaldeghem.
Noes: None
Motion carried.
Schmitt/Czaja moved that the Planning Commission recommend to the
City Council that it begin immediate work on the ordinance
designed for the purpose of licensing, inspecting and pumping of
septic systems. Motion carried unanimously.
Schmitt/Czaja moved for a 5 minute recess. Motion carried
unanimously.
Meeting was called back to order at 8:55 p.m.
Discussion ensued on the P.U.D. request for O'Dowd Lake Estates
and Golf Club. The Cit Planner said that the City does not have
a definition of open space. Gary Laurent, the developer,
addressed the concerns of Mr. Frechette in his letter to the
Planning Commission
April 16, 1987
Page -3-
City. He was concerned about the issue of water being pumped for
irrigation of the golf course and in regards to density off more
than 99 units. Mr. Frechette indicated to Gary Laurent that he
would address his concerns in the Environmental Assessment
Worksheet. chairwoman VanMaldeghem said she would like to have
an amended letter from Mr. Frechette indicating his concerns.
Discussion ensuedon the issue of open space, and whether the
golf course could be considered open space. Mr. Laurent said
open space provides a relief from continuation of residential
houses one on top of another.
Foudray/Schmitt moved the adoption of the Preliminary P.U.D.
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, consumption tables comparisons and estimated
consumption.
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.
Planning Commission
April 16, 1987
Page -4-
10. The number of entrances to County Road 77 shall be limited
to three.
11. 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.
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 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 off 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 'bv the City prior to
issuance of a certificated o£ 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
thee lake watershed.
d. The design for Hole #8.
e. Docking and lake access.
f. Alternation of wetland areas.
• 16
Planning Commission
April 16, 1987
Page -5-
15. The developer shall provide the City with a copy of
covenants for the PUD. These covenants must include the
following:
a. DNR restrictions 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
play of golf over public land or water.
Comm. Czaja read a definition of open space defining it as that
part of a countryside which has not been developed and which is
desirable for preservation in its natural state for ecological,
historical or recreational purposes. He said he has concern of
where children will play and how the homes will be separated from
the golf course. Mr. Haugen replied that there will be no fences
allowed.
Chairwoman VanMaldeghem asked if there was concern by NSP that
the maintenance shed is being put right below the power lines.
Mr. Laurent said they have no problem, since it will be closed to
the public.
Mr. MCRush raised a number of concerns on how many units will be
attached and unattached and he thought there was confusion on how
many homes will be built. The City Administrator suggested that
Mr. MCRush stop in at the City Hall and see the City Planner in
regards to his concerns.
Motion carried unanimously with amendments.
Czaja/Schmitt moved for a 5 minute recess. Motion carried
unanimously. -
Meeting called back to order at 10:55 p.m.
SCOTTLAND COMPANIES LATOUR PROPERTY
Zak Johnson, of the Scottland Company addressed the issue of
concerns and future plans for development of the latour property.
He said they are concerned about the development of 13th Avenue
at this time and the economic hardship it would place upon them
now. He also has a concern over what type of commercial property
would be appropriate in this area.
Planning Commission
April 16, 1987
Page -6-
STAFFING
Chairwoman VanMaldeghem stated that with all the items coming
before the Planning commission, revision of the sign ordinance,
and upcoming -revision of the septic system ordinance, staff is
greatly over worked.
Schmitt/Rockne moved that the Planning Commission recommend to
the City Council the hiring of additional Planning Staff. Motion
carried unanimously.
Schmitt/Czaja moved to adjourn. Motion carried unanimously.
Meeting adjourned at 11:30 p.m.
Douglas Wise
City Planner
Carol Schultz
Recording Secretaryy
/ 7
TENTATIVE AGENDA
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS AND APPEALS
Regular Session Shakopee, MN May 7, 1987
Chairwoman Van Maldeghem Presiding
1. Roll Call at 7:30 P.M.
2. Approval of Agenda
3 . Approval of March 26th and April 9th, 1987 Meeting Minutes.
4. 7: 30 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING: Request for a variance to build
an accessory building nearer the front lot line than the
principal building upon the property located at 2032
Eaglewood Circle.
Applicant: Wayne Ek
Action: Variance Resolution #488
5. Other Business
6. Adjourn
Douglas K. Wise
City Planner
/7
TENTATIVE AGENDA
PLANNING COMMISSION
Regular Session Shakopee, MN May 7, 1987
Chairwoman VanMaldeghem Presiding
1. Roll Call at 7:30 P.M.
2. Approval of Agenda
3. Approval of March 5th, March 26th, April 9th, and April
16th, 1987 Meeting Minutes. -
4. 7:40 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING CONTINUED: To consider the
preliminary plat of Horizon Heights 4th Addition lying on
the property located South of County- Road 16, North of
County Road 42, East of Muhlenhardt Road and West of Hwy.
13.
Applicant: Walt Muhlenhardt
Action: Recommendation to City Council
5. 7:50 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING CONTINUED: To consider the
rezoning request to rezone approximately 85 acres of land
located East of County Road 79 and South of llth Avenue from
Ag to R-2 and R-3.
Applicant: Meritor Development Corportion
Action: Recommendation to City Council
6. 8:00 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING CONTINUED: To consider the
preliminary plat of Canterbury Estates lying on the property
located East of County Road 79 and South of llth Avenue.
Applicant: Meritor Development Corporation
Action: Recommendation to City Council
7. 8:10 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING: To consider the preliminary
and final plat of Behringer's First Addition, 10.033 acres
lying West of County Road 83, East of the Racetrack and
South of the Valley Racquetball Club.
Applicant: Joan Behringer
Action: Recommendation to City Council
8. 8:20 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING: To consider the preliminary
plat of Heritage Place lying on the property located
Westerly of Hauer' s 3rd Addition, Southerly of J.E.J. 2nd
Addition and Hauer' s 2nd Addition.
Applicant: Heritage Development
Action: Recommendation to City Council
9. 8:30 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING: To consider the application
for a Conditional Use Permit for a home occupation for a
dance school and theatre in the barn located behind the
dwelling at 1830 Marschall Road.
Applicants: Theodore and Sharon Hinck
Action: Conditional Use Permit Resolution #489
10. Other Business
a. Conditional Use Permit Reviews
b.
11. Adjourn
Douglas Wise
City Planner
ig
'HERO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator
FROM: Ken Ashfeld, City EngineerAq—
SUBJECT: Project Status Report
DATE: May 1 , 1987
Attached is the project status report for the month of April .
Construction is proceeding on various projects that were carried
over from last year and work is progressing smoothly on the
Valley Park Drive North Project. We fully expect to have that
project completed in time for Valleyfair's opening.
We anticipate coming to Council for approval of a Parks
Improvement Project at their May 12, 1987 meeting. This project
includes a parking lot expansion at Tahpah Park, resurfacing of a
basketball court at Hiawatha Park and a trail expansion at Lion's
Park.
We anticipate the following projects will begin in the month of
May:
Hauer' s 4th Addition
T.H. 101 & C.R. 83 Signals
Parks Improvement Project
We are still awaiting Mn/DOT approval of plans and specs for the
following state aid projects:
10th Avenue Overlay
13th Avenue Reconstruction
l�
mv' nCi a ae � :
r'n•Qi syi ava vvr-- avv ate$: c vag i v
$_a� IN lei aea �e MR: �e� ae a�A a:
m Bm< Bega! m<I�A lei �m%t_i
• dam=; x - o $e s$� ue= i __ '
I i vm� a a
N n
-
' I I
I aD a
: u'
i
� i m
j i a i i i ev i
-- --i-- -- —i--------------
ani $ i
gi i
`1
------------------
------
----------------------gr-
i
ji i I i I
--------------------------------------------------
pi
i
i ! 'ai si
e i
i y
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ y1
1 I I
a 1 1 i
: :
1 m I 1 1 1 I i I R r,l i
------------------------------------------
I t I I i I I I
' : e
i I I I f
__ ___
------------------------------------
I
i 3� m1 i i i ; i i 1 gM e
i e '
i I
a •
m i i e
F
I I 1
i i 1 I i i 1 m
R
_____I_____'__________'______-•
'9_i
I : ;
:
'
i I v
1 s 1 i 1 I I I I S
;
i
PT
i I I 1 : : ____I_�el_
izi
i -mUS I %-_ mg - m gym= -
! --n - - �=�
�mm a� -gym mi gym- i
--.
_ 1 >_
;
i v -- 'a -
- - +
! 1 $ 1
! - - - --!--------
----'
!
-
Y ! - 8 j i
a - s
9S1
- - -i i ani i w i = v -snt! ;
e
; ; j -
RI
i a
- - - ----
At
I - _
-------- --- ----------------I------- �.
-
;
;
-
' - 1 P I ! - C -
� 1
' i
i
--i-=i-'-- ----i------- -
i REss im- S=m ! iE i i
;
j
I ! 1 --- ----- --- ---
v
-
1 EM
-
' 1 I I ! ❑ I C l e � ! � 1 :
1 i i I
;
; !
ii a__I____I v
I I � _ i ! D
i
-
-
I j
i I i
� i
i
_______�____•-____•_____
I '
I 1 1 I WA%!
-
1
i '91 1
-
-
_ 1
-
- --
w �-!
TENTATIVE AGENDA
REGULAR SESSION SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA MAY 5, 1987
Mayor Reinke presiding
11 Roll Call at 7:00 P.M.
21 Recess for H.R.A. meeting
31 Re-convene
41 Liaison Reports from Councilmembers
51 RECOGNITION BY CITY COUNCIL OF INTERESTED CITIZENS
61 Approval of Consent Business - (All items listed with an 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 21st and 28th, 1987
8] Communications: (Items noted forconsent will be received and filed)
a] George Muenchow, Dir-Shakopee Community Recreation re: flag pole
donation
b] Glenn Purdue, Suburban Rate Authority re: Suburban Rate Authority
Metropolitan Area Telephone Rate Design
c] Venn Peterson, Association of Metropolitan Municipalities re:
Legislative Report of Critical Items
d] Marcy Waritz, Metropolitan Council Member re: Council 's current
strategic planning process
ea 0-c .n QQcv1 /1v : line, 7 3 �- Qeoionn to
9] Public Hearings:
a] 7:30 P.M. - Appeal of Board of Adjustments and Appeals Denial
of A Variance from the Sign Ordinance for Valleyfair
b] 7:45 P.M. - Appeal of Board of Adjustments and Appeals Denial
of A Variance from the Sign Ordinance for the
Backstretch RV Park - S of RR tracks and E of CR-89
c] 8:00 P.M. - Vacation of Certain Easements and Right-of-Way Within
Hauer' s 3rd Addition - N of proposed 13th Avenue
d] 8:15 P.M. - Vacation of Austin Street South of Davis Court
10] Boards and Commissions: Planning Commission:
a] - City Planning Staff
b] City Code Regarding On-Site Sewage Treatment Systems
TENTATIVE AGENDA
May 5, 1987
Page -2-
11] Reports from Staff: [Council will take a 10 minute break around 9 :001
.a] Calender Parking Reviewal -
*b] Purchase of Used Investigative Vehicle
c] Killarney Hills and Market Street Feasibility Reports (bring
reports from 4/21 meeting items 12C and 12d)
d] Accepting Bid on Signalization at Hwy 101 and CR-83, Project 87-1
- Res. No. 2725 -
e] Approval of Bills in the Amount oY_$64,291.62 - -
If] T.H. 169 Mini-Bypass Project - bring llf from 4/21 agenda
*g] Sixth Avenue Sanitary Sewer Reconstruction
h] John Nelson Sanitary Sewer Service - bring llh from 4/21 agenda
*i] Addendum to Agreement Between the City of Shakopee and the Shakopee
Chamber of Commerce
j] Application from Damile, Inc. for Set-Up and On-Sale 3.2 Beer
License
*k] Reciprocal Fire Service Agreement Between Shakopee and Eden Prairie
*1] Interfund Transfers
*m] Revised Fire Service Agreement With Jackson Township
12] Resolutions and Ordinances:
*a] Res. No. 2724, Amending the 1987 Payplan
b] Ord. No. 214, Regulating Horse and Livery Service - bring 12b from
4/21 agenda
*c] Res. No. 2714, Authorizing Execution of Agreement Between the
City and the State for Federal Aid Highway Improvement
*d] Res. No. 2718, Accepting Work on 2nd Ave. Parking Lot Reconstruction
and Storm Sewer, 1985-4
*e] Res. No. 2721, A Resolution of Disclaimer
*f] Res. No. 2723, Requesting The State to Participate Financially
in the Upper Valley Basin Drainage Project
131 Other Business:
a] d6 ocL
bl
c]
i
14] Adjourn to Tuesday, May 12, 1987 at 7 :00 P .M.
John K. Anderson
City Administrator
-- SII
TENTATIVE AGENDA
HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY IN AND FOR THE
CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA
Special Meeting May 5, 1987
Chairperson Leroux presiding
1. Roll Call at 7:00 P.M.
2. Accept Special Call
3. Approval of Minutes of April 21, 1987
4. Amendment to the Shakopee Valley Square Contract
5. Other Business
6. Adjourn
Dennis R. Kraft
Executive Director
PROCEEDINGS OF THE HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AH'MORITY
SPECIAL MEETING SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA APRIL 21 , 1987
Chairman Leroux called the meeting to order at 7:02 p.m, with Comm. Lebens,
Vierling, Clay, and Wampach present. Also present were John K. Anderson,
City Administrator Doug Wise, City Planner; Dennis Kraft, Executive
Director; Kenneth Ashfeld, City Engineer; Judith S. Cox, City Clerk; Julius A.
Coller II, City Attorney; and Mayor Reinke.
Vierling/Lebens moved to accept the Special Call of the HRA. Motion carried
unanimously.
Vierling/wampach moved to approve the minutes of April 7, 1987. Motion
carried unanimously.
The Executive Director reviewed the Amendment to the Shakopee Valley Square
Contract for Private Development. He said the developer was unable to
obtain financing and the project did not go as scheduled last summer. At
this point in time, Mr. Wallace Bakken, has obtained financing._ The new
contract will delete the restaurant portion of the contract. The new
fair market value . will be $2,630,000. The new contract calls for a start
date of no later than July 1, 1987, and completion no later than December 31,
1987.
Comm. Wampach asked if Mr. Krass has reviewed this amendment since he was
involved with this from the beginning.
Wampach/Vierling moved to refer this back to Mr. Kress, Asst. City Attorney,
for review and return back to the HRA in 2 weeks. Motion carried
with Comm. Lebens opposed.
Clay/Vierling moved to adjourn at 7:20 p.m. Motion carried unanimously.
Dennis Kraft
Executive Director
Carol L. Schultz
Recording Secretary
Memo to:Shakopee HRA 1
From:Dennis R. Kraft,Executive Director
Subject:Shakopee Square Amended Development Agreement
This afternoon I was informed by Mr. Jake Manahan, legal counsel
for Mr. Wallace Bakken that the financing for the Shakopee Square
Project has not yet been obtained. When this item was originally
put on the HRA agenda in April it was assumed that financing was
imminent. In that this is not the case the amended contract is
being removed from the agenda at this time.
�y
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 30, 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.
This item was considered at the April 21, 1987 HRA meeting
and at that time it was requested that the Assistant City
Attorney review the amended contract. Mr. Krass has reviewed the
contract and found it to be acceptable.
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 $990,000. ) 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 seg. , 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 "Develcpment Ac.ee-
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 Acree-
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 HPLA Board of Commissioners on
, 1987 .
Adopted in session of the Shakopee
'Housing and Redevelopment au_hcri.y c: the City of Shakopee,
Minnesota, held this day of 1987 .
C nairnerson
Executive Director
Approved as to form this
day of 2.967 .
Attorney
_ 2 _
PROCEEDINGS OF THE SHAKOPEE CITY COUNCIL �7
ADJ. REG. SESSION SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA APRIL 21, -1987
Mayor Reinke called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. with Cncl.
Leroux, Vierling, Lebens, Clay, and Wampach present. Also
present were John K. Anderson, City Administrator; Dennis Kraft,
Community Development Director; Doug Wise, City Planner; Kenneth
Ashfeld, City Engineer; Judith S. Cox, City Clerk; and Julius A.
Coller II, City Attorney.
Wampach/Vierling moved to recess for HRA. Motion carried
unanimously.
Wampach/Clay moved to reconvene to City Council at 7:20 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. There was no
response.
Leroux/Clay moved to approve the consent business.
Roll Call: Ayes: Unanimous Noes: None Motion carried.
Leroux/Vierling moved to approve the minutes of April 14, 1987.
Motion carried with Cncl. Lebens abstaining.
Leroux/Clay moved- to receive and file the letter from Tom and
Maggie Klein stating their support for the golf course
development. (Approved under consent business)
Wampach/Vierling moved to receive and file the letter from G.
Larry Griffith, Dorsey & Whitney ref: Valleyfair request for a
variance from the sign ordinance. Motion carried unanimously.
Leroux/Lebens moved to receive and file the letter from James A.-
Terwedo, Scott County Attorney, regarding a public hearing
concerning the formation of a regional railroad authority within
Scott county. Motion carried unanimously.
Vierling/Leroux moved to extend the contract agreement with Van
Pool Services Inc. for one additional year. Motion carried
unanimously.
Leroux/wampach moved to approve the Van Pool Policy #20-
Probationary Period and Van Pool Policy #21 - Driver/Back-up
Responsibilities. (Doc. No. CC-135) . Motion carried
unanimously.
Leroux/Lebens moved to approve the alignment of 13th Avenue from
County Road 16 to County Road 15, as proposed. (Doc. No. CC-
135) . Motion carried unanimously.
City Council
April 21, 1987
Page -2-
Discussion ensued on renaming 13th Avenue. Cncl. Clay said in
view of the alignment as it goes there should be a new name to go
with it.
Clay/Leroux moved to create a contest for a new name of 13th
Avenue to go no later then May 5th, 1987. Motion carried with
Cncl. Lebens and Wampach opposed.
The Shakopee Valley News will print an article in their next
issue and the public will be invited to call or write to the City
with suggested names for the newly aligned 13th Avenue.
The City Planner reviewed the Canterbury Estates Preliminary
Plat. He said the Planning Commission approved the plat for the
portion of Canterbury Estates from 13th Avenue north to 11th
Avenue.
Mayor Reinke asked if Canterbury was a registered trade name.
The developer said he will check into it and if it is he will
change the name. Cncl. Leroux asked about land dedication for
park purposes. The City Planner said there will be two areas
dedicated for park purposes in the northern part of the plat
alone, a total of 15 acres of park land. Cncl. wampach asked
where the sidewalk along 13th Avenue will be located. The City
Planner replied that it will probably be the north side of 13th
Avenue and the abutting property owners will be responsible for
maintenance of the sidewalk. It was the feeling of the developer
that maintenance should be required by the City for the sidewalk
and not the abutting property owners.
Leroux/Clay moved to approve the preliminary plat of Canterbury
Estates with the 11 conditions as stated by the Planning
Commission in their minutes of April 9, 1987. Motion carried
unanimously.
The City Planner said the Planning Commission selected a new site
for the tot lot in Hauer' s 4th Addition. The developer said that
he believes Jasper Road will have more traffic than the road
where the new site has been selected and it is more centrally
located for the neighborhood.
The City Engineer said when Hauer's 3rd Addition was platted
there was an extra depth and oversizing of the sanitary sewer
that was put in to service the area to the south. At the time
the City reimbursed the developer of Hauer's 3rd for that cost
and now the cost should be repaid as a result of having that
availability on this particular plat.
Leroux/Vierling offered Resolution No. 2717, A Resolution
Approving the Final Plat of Mauer' s 4th Addition, with the
7
City Council
April 21, 1987
Page -3-
addition of condition 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 3rd
Addition.
Roll Call: Ayes: Unanimous Noes: None Motion carried.
Lergax/Lebens moved to deny the application of Carol Cronkhite
for registration as a masseuse at 2560 Muhlenhardt Road. Motion
carried unanimously.
Vierling/Leroux moved to approve the refunding of $75.00
application fee for a conditional use permit for a home
occupation to Carol Cronkhite, 2560 Muhlenhardt Road.
Roll Call: Ayes: Unanimous Noes: None Motion carried.
Clay/Vierling moved for a 15 minute recess. Motion carried
unanimously.
Wampach/Lebens moved to reconvene at 9:20 p.m. Motion carried
unanimously.
The City Planner reviewed the Amendment to Planned Unit
Development Ordinance Regarding Utilities. He said the Planning
Commission selected Option A retaining the one acre minimum site
area. Gary Laurent addressed the Council and showed some
transparencies regarding lot sizes in unsewered areas. He said
Option E would enable them to bring lots closer together and
concentrate them up to the excellent soils area. The issue of
future sewer and water services in the area - this will be a lot
easier to serve in the future for sewer and water and will be
less costly to people.
Leroux/Vierling moved to accept the decision of Planning
Commission for the utilities in a planned unit development: " The
Planning Commission shall require easements of
abutting/contiguous open space for sewage treatment to supply at
least one acre of site area for each residence. Where soil
conditions dictate, the applicant shall be required to use
alternative systems such as mounds, double tanking, etc." Motion
carried unanimously.
The City Planner reviewed the Preliminary PUD for O'Dowd lake
Estates and Golf Club.
Hill Dellwo, Louisville Township, is concerned with Al
Frechette's letter regarding the density and well issue, and also
the consequences with another high volume well.
Bob Schmitt, raised concern on the limestone and Jordan Aquifer,
there is always a chance of problems when you have high density
City Council
April 21, 1987
Page -4-
with septic systems and private wells. He had a concern with
wells running dry due to more wells drawing from the same
aquifer. Mayor Reinke said the whole proposed area is in a
different pressure zone than any other water system presently
with the City of Shakopee. He also said this particular area is
not to be served by sanitary sewer for a long period of time by
determination of the Metropolitan Council according to our
Comprehensive Development Plan.
Don MC&ush, said he feels we should live within the ordinance.
He reviewed several discrepancies of the proposed planned unit
development with the ordinance. He said he feels the developer
should go back to the drawing board and come up with a plan that
will work.
Clay/Leroux moved to approve the Preliminary Planned Unit
Development for O'Dowd Lake Estates and Golf Club, subject to the
it conditions as outlined in the Planning Commission minutes of
April 16, 1987. Discussion ensued on the long cul-de-sac and
the temporary emergency trail being able to meet the requirement.
Mayor Reinke said he feels it should be a city street and not an
emergency trail for school buses and fire and public works
vehicles. Gary Laurent said the people in the neighborhood are
very strongly opposed to have the cul-de-sac a thru street.
Leroux/Vierling moved to amend number 4 of the conditions to
"Approval from the DNR on the use of the protected wetlands and
O'Dowd Lake should be submitted prior to the final plan approval"
and amend number 12A to "installation of a water system as
approved by Shakopee Public Utilities Commission" . Motion
carried unanimously.
Leroux/Vierling moved that number 8 of the conditions be revised
to reflect that we will not accept the 2400 foot cul-de-sac and
will not accept anything over cul-de-sac length as stated in the
city ordinances and that the road on the southerly portion of the
planned unit development must connect through. Motion carried
with Cncl. Clay opposed.
Main motion carried as amended with Cncl. Wampach opposed.
Leroux/Clay moved to authorized the police department to purchase
three propane conversion units to include installation at a cost
of $3 ,270.00 from Propane Carburation. (approved under consent
items)
Clay/Leroux moved for a 5 minute recess. Motion carried
unanimously.
. . 7
City Council
April 21, 1987
Page -5-
Leroux/Clay moved to reconvene at 11:20 p.m. with Cncl. Wampach
absent. Motion carried unanimously.
Lebens/Vierling moved to 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. Motion carried unanimously.
Leroux/Wampach moved to approve the bills in the amount of
$313,960.32 including $51.84 for Ken Hanel on page 9.
Roll Call: Ayes: Unanimous Noes: None Motion carried.
Cncl. Wampach took his place.
Leroux/Clay moved to 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 per year, as drafted and corrected.
Roll Call: Ayes: Unanimous Noes: None Motion carried.
Vierling/Lebens moved to direct the appropriate City officials to
continue to work with Scott County and the major recreational
attractions, on creating a separate non-profit corporation to
employ licensed police officers to handle traffic and on-site
operations for major attractions in Shakopee and return with a
final form. Motion carried unanimously.
Leroux/Clay moved to approve the transfer of $9,339.84 from the
K-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.
(approved under consent business)
Commissioner Mertz explained that the County Board is asking for
help from the tax on tickets. He said they would like to relieve
the Scott County tax payers on a part of what they are paying.
Cncl. Leroux said the County wants to spend the money on county
roads and bridges, on routes that directly or indirectly carry
traffic from the major amusement facilities in Scott County.
Walt Wittmer said Valleyfair's position is that they feel Scott
County does need help with the road systems. He said they have
to get a broader base to spread the tax over, not just the
amusement attractions by imposing an admissions tax.
Leroux/Wampach moved to take a position at the legislature
stating that we agree with the County as to the need of a
City Council
April 21, 1987
Page -6-
financial tool to improve the roads in northern Scott County but
that we feel that it should be worked out over a longer period of
time for the next session so that we can better support and get a
broader base for the funding. Motion carried unanimously.
Clay/Leroux moved to approve retaining Patchin & Associates, Inc.
for appraisal work required on the Upper Valley Drainage Project
1987-5.
Roll Call: Ayes: Unanimous Noes: None Motion carried.
Leroux/Vierling offered Resolution No. 2715, A Resolution
Receiving a Report and Calling a Hearing on Improvement Killarney
Hills Street Improvements Project No. 1987-6, and calling for a
public hearing on May 12, 1987, at 7:00 p.m. Motion carried
unanimously.
Vierling/Lebens offered Resolution No. 2716, A Resolution
Receiving a Report and Calling a Hearing on Market Street
Improvements from 2nd Avenue to 4th Avenue, project No. 1987-7and
moved its adoption, public hearing to be held May 12, 1987, at
7:00 p.m. Motion carried unanimously.
Leroux/Clay moved to contact our State Legislators expressing our
opposition to the expansion of wine sales to grocery stores.
(Approved under consent business)
Leroux/Clay moved to write a letter to U.S. Senator and
Representative telling them the value of Land and Water
Conservation Funding in meeting future recreational needs, and
let them know of our support for outdoor funding. (Approved
under consent business)
Leroux/Clay moved to write a letter to Representative William
Frenzel, opposing the expansion of medicare requirements to all
city employees who are not yet subject to medicare taxes.
(Approved under consent business)
Leroux/Clay offered Resolution No. 2719, A Resolution Requesting
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, and moved its adoption. (Approved under consent
business)
Leroux/Clay moved to offer Resolution No. 2711, A Resolution
Authorizing the Disposal of Unclaimed and Surplus Property, and
moved its adoption. (Motion approved under consent business)
Leroux/Lebens moved to adjourn to Tuesday, April 28, 1987 at 6:30
p.m. Motion carried unanimously. Meeting adjourned at 12:30
a.m.
Carol L. Schultz Judith S. Cox
Recording Secretary City Clerk
7
PROCEEDINGS OF THE SHAKOPEE CITY COUNCIL
ADJ.REG.SESSION SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA APRIL 28, 1987
Council met with City department heads at 6:30 p.m. Present were
Mayor Reinke, Cncl. Vierling, Clay and Wampach. Cncl. Leroux was
at the legislature and arrived around 8:00 p.m. Cncl. Lebens was
absent. Also present were John K. Anderson, City Administrator;
Ken Ashfeld, City Engineer; Tom Brownell, Chief of Police; Julius
A. Coller II, City Attorney; Judith S. Cox, City Clerk; LeRoy
Houser, Building Official; Jim Karkanen, Public Works
Superintendent; Dennis Kraft, Community Development Director; and
Gregg Voxland, Finance Director.
The City's 1987 strategic planning worksession continued with
Councilmembers and City staff participating.
Cncl. Leroux reported on the days activities at the legislature
regarding the proposed legislation on imposing an admissions tax
on amusement facilities within Scott County. Discussion
followed.
Vierling/Clay moved to adjourn at 9:58 p.m. Motion carried
unanimously.
Judith S. Cox
City Clerk
Recording Secretary
129 Levee Drive
Shakopee, Minnesota 55379
Phone 445-2742
Community Education • Parks • Recreation • Adult Education
Memo To: John Anderson, City Administrator
From George F. Muenchow, Dir. Shakopee Community Recreation
Subject: Flag Pole Donation
Date April 29, 1987
Thanks to the combined efforts of Shakopee American Legion Post #2,
V.F.W. Post #4046, Knights of Columbus Council #1685, and St. Mary's
Cemetery Association a beautiful re—conditioned Flag Pole has been
installed at Tahpah Park and now is ready for appropriate usage. A
new flag has also been included with this generous gift.
A COOPERATIVE EFFORT OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE AND SCHOOL DISTRICT 720 SINCE 1954
LeFevere
Lefler
Kennedy RECEIVE
O'Brien& APR Z 9 j
Dra%7
d
P-icwi.m� CIN OF SHAKOPFF
—
.
2000 Find Bank Place West April 24, 1987
Minneapolis
Minnesota 55402
Telephone 181213330543
Telecopler(612)3334 To: SRA Member City Managers
Clayton L.LeFevere
Herber P. Lefler Re: Suburban Rate Authority-Metropolitan Area Telephone
J. Dennis O'Brien Rate Design
John E.Drawn
Dowd J. Kermedy
John S. Dean Dear City Managers:
Glenn E. Purdue
Richard J.Schieffer The Minnesota Public Utilities Commission recently
Charles L. LeFevere
Heinen P. Lefler 111 ordered that a contested case proceeding be initiated
James J.Thomson,Jr. addressing issues of importance to SRA members regarding
ThomasR.Gar
Doyle Nolen Y P P the Twin Cit metropolitan area telephone rate structure
Brian F.Rice and the possible expansion of its local calling area.
John G. Kressel You should have already received a notice of this pro-
LorraineJameM.stro g ceedin from Northwestern Bell. The notice was sent b
James M.Slrommen g Y
Ronald H.Bavy Bell in a letter dated April 17, 1987. We have apprised
William P.Jordan the SRA Board of Directors of this proceeding and the
Kun J. Enckson Board has authorized the SRA to intervene.
William R.Skellerud
Rodney D.Anderson
Corrine A. Heise Some of the issues of particular interest to SRA members
David D. Beaudoin are:
Paul E. Rasmussen
Steven M.Tellen
1. Whether the present metropolitan calling area should
be expanded. (Petitions from Zimmerman, Prescott,
Waconia, Belle Plaine, North Branch, Lindstrom, New
Prague, Cambridge, Hudson and Houlton have been
received by the Commission) .
2. Whether the metropolitan Tier System of local tele-
phone rates adequately serves the needs of the area.
3. Whether there are natural communities of interest
within the metro area.
These and other issues will be addressed by the Commis-
sion over a period of at least several months, if not
years. A Commission order in this case will affect the
long term telephone rates charged all residents and
businesses in your city.
Your opinions on these issues, (particularly on number 1)
are necessary for the SRA Board to formulate is posi-
SRA Member City Managers
April 27, 1987
Page 2
tions. A map of the local calling area, which is perhaps
the largest in the country, is enclosed. Expansion of
the local calling area would result in additional
expense to all Twin City ratepayers. In the past, SRA
has advocated a flat rate so that all who share equally
in telephone access would do so at the same price, at
least until convincing cost information for another rate
design is developed.
Because this proceeding is in its preliminary stages, we
are still in the process of identifying issues and
evaluating the ramifications of positions that the SRA
could take on each. We will be asking for your opinion
and insight regarding the telephone rate structure and
calling area of the Twin City Metropolitan Area. No
canvassing mechanism has been settled upon at this time.
This proceeding represents an important opportunity for
the SRA to influence far-reaching policy decisions made
by the Commission on telephone rate design. Should you
have any questions regarding this matter, please do not
hesitate to contact James Strommen or me.
Very truly yours,
LeFEVERE, LEFLER, KENNEDY,
ON AND
Glenn E. Purdue,
Counsel to the SRA
Enclosures
cc: SRA Directors
4/0060ltO1 .h37
Northwestern Bell EXHIBIT A
letrapolitan Calling Area
a
C0.mbridgC.
fl0r+4% SMALL
C
A
ppp
B I Zimmerman rc..,l
c t'[-
o II cKi5Qgo
B 4.u.0 a. pwf
Noo[R..0
F a
V rp[fi lLLf
3 FI n.cX.n ss.Yo.auRYrc
wpY eo.,
� Retells "�� n
� Y nuf Yxrt
f luYwfR YR
K osuo 1"f
[Y YR nllY.Tfll
RD spD as
L RYYn reRYNRop rRo` cur ,SfJOsepLlj
cmm
M YYR[f L4� °'
nY. NRwo �'� NRRAI.v
N M1r].L IM pLM1RD IFYX D 11X AWr
.' 0 R YiM .1GX
Ya„lo Y Hodson,
WR[vppp
Pn • Null. nu a.rX fY{R YMRfT ✓WM
NarRuus
ki O f¢flsgR �rX nu
x:r
wcrwu rRYYrt nul.rt w.Y cep n. conYGf
WQLOR14 swl. uawrp RYR. cRwG
j LXYs.. .YRY[.n[,� .... ` Pres Coit
.✓Lf
U [p yyLll Y.[cYD1M
MYM YM
V-- luf IY[1NIDN
W O yX
X
`8¢Ils P! uR..GroY
QinG!
_ ar a+srcu -
Z BM108,M5 YC➢/plpen.NC
N4:w Pfnyvt� arowo�Dc+nw,ye
—� �--�
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19
6c-
association of BULLETIN
metropolitan
municipalities RECEIVED
APR ?9 1987
April 27, 1987
CITY OF SHAhCPEE i
TO: AMM Member Cities
FROM: Vern Peterso)(! Executive Director
Roger Peters ap Director of Legislative Affairs
Re: LEGISLATIVE REPORT OF CRITICAL ITEMS
1 . FISCAL DISPARTIY UPDATE
The AMM Fiscal Disparity bill (HF 1125/SF 1134) has not had any
further hearings since passing out of House Metropolitan Affairs
Property Tax Subcommittee several weeks ago. The full committee
chair, Rep. Tom Osthoff, St. Paul has been trying various ideas
to moderate the loss from current law to AMM position for his
city. At this time the form of that relief is unknown, however,
we understand that he will attempt to schedule- a hearing this
week. The Senate author has been waiting for the policy bill
deadlines to pass (April 28 is the final policy bill hearing data
cutoff) before scheduling a Tax Committee hearing on the AMM
bill. There has, also, been some hesitancy on the part of the
Senate to hear the bill until the House has acted more
affirmatively. We should know within the week where we stand or
if we stand at all in either house. If the bill does not
progress this session, there will be an interim study by the
legislature for 1988 consideration.
2. TAX BILL PROPOSAL
The initial 'shot' fired by the House Tax Committee in the House
version of the Omnibus Tax Bill held LGA level for 1988 but
allowed a 3% levy increase for 1988 only on that amount levied in
1987. This was amended in committee to exclude bonded debt and
pension. If adopted this severe limit would have excluded the
LGA distribution from increase and excluded both loss of Federal
Revenue Sharing and city growth from additional levy. Also,
included was a 6% sales tax on city commodity spending including
legal services which in most cases exceeded the amount that could
be derived from the 3% levy increase.
-1-
183 university avenue east,st. paul, minnesota 55101 (612) 227-5600 i
After heavy lobbying by the various city representatives
significant changes were made. However, as the old saying goes
' there's good news and bad news: '
BAD NEWS. The tax bill going to the House floor (HF 529)
includes a 1 .6% out in 1987 LGA that cannot be recovered through
levy. 1988 LGA is out an additional 1 .6% but the total 3.2
percent cut is recoverable through property tax at the option of
the city. The 1988 homestead credit payments to all local units
is frozen at the 1987 level and cannot be recovered by direct
levy. Homeowners will receive the credit but local payments will
not be made in full if they exceed 1987. This amounts to an
estimated $10 million spread among the three entities, cities,
counties, and schools.
GOOD NEWS? The 6% sales tax on local government expenditures
and legal services has been eliminated from the House Bill. The
strict 3% limit has been replaced by the current levy limit law
at 3%• This does allow base increases for loss of Revenue
Sharing and growth and maintains special levies outside the
limit. The 3% is less than current law levy by about 2 to 4
tenths of a percent. It also applies to all cities not just
those over 5,000 population.
Lobbying to reduce or eliminate 1987 LGA losses will continue as
will effforts to modify the 1988 homestead credit reduction. The
suggested strategy is to push all cuts to 1988 in such a way as
to permit cities to make up the loss through property tax levy.
The Senate bill is being constructed this week. At this time it
appears it will contain the 6% sales tax extension to local
units of government, possible cuts in local aids and the strict
3% levy limit on 1987 levy only.
There is a great deal of pressure being put on Legislators by
various business groups to reduce or out State Income and Sales
Tax rates. Any further reductions would likely increase the
pressure for additional cuts in LGA and Homesated Credit payments
to local units of government.
IS WE WOULD URGE YOU TO CONTACT YOUR LEGISLATORS (BOTH
r'C' tlw REPRESENTATIVES AND SENATORS) TO LET THEM KNOW YOUR FEELINGS
1� ABOUT THE IMPACT THESE CUTS AND REDUCTIONS WOULD HAVE ON YOUR
CITY FINANCES AND SERVICES. IT IS IMPORTANT THAT THE
LEGISLATORS HEAR FROM CITY OFFICIALS AND NOT JUST FROM THOSE
INTERESTS WHO ARE ADVOCATING ADDITIONAL CUTS IN LOCAL AIDS.
-2-
3. TRANSIT - TRANSPORTATION FUNDING
It appears virtually certain at this point in time, that the MVET
Funds will be retained in the State's General Fund as
recommended by Governor Perpich. Neither the Governor nor MNDOT
has come forward with an alternative funding proposal, as yet,
and the outlook for adequate funding for transit - transportation
needs is bleak. Consequently, many needed highway projects will
not be funded and MNDOT and the counties may use "cost
avoidance" techniques such as not maintaining frontage roads
or providing maintenance for state or county highways which are
also city streets. This may force cities as a practical matter
to provide these services at city cost. Several bills have been
introduced (SF 1373, SF 1503, HF 1554, HF 1555) which in
combination would increase the gasoline tax by 4 cents, add a 6%
sales tax on petroleum products at the wholesale level, increase
the vehicle license tax and double all driver related permits and
licenses fees, etc. but no bills have passed out of committee as
of this date. The AMM Transportation Committee met on April
22nd, to review and assess the before listed bills and while
the committee is not endorsing a specific bill; it reaffirmes
its strong support for adequate funding for transit and
transportation needs.
THE COMMITTEE ASKS THAT YOU ALSO MAKE YOUR CONCERNS ABOUT
ADEQUATE FUNDING FOR TRANSIT AND TRANSPORTATION PURPOSES KNOWN TO
YOUR LEGISLATORS ASAP.
4. ANNUAL MEETING REMINDER - MAY 28
As noted in the AMM Bulletin of March 27th. , the AMM Annual
Meeting will be held the evening of Thursday, Ma28 at the
Robert Lee Restaurant in New Bri hto . We look for r this Eo be
another in eves ing evening which will get underway about 5:30
P.M. with a Social Hour hosted by Miller Schroeder Financial,
Inc. A meeting notice with all the specific details will be
mailed in about 10E days but mark your calendar now if you
have not already done so.
DISTRIBUTION NOTE:
This bulletin was mailed individually to member Mayors,
Managers/Administrators, and Designated Delegates. Please
distribute copies to others in your city as you deem appropriate.
Should you have questions about these or other Legislative
matters, please do not hesitate to call us at the office.
(227-5600) .
-3-
� t �04Metropolitan��il
300 Metro Square Building
IWIIIIII a Seventh and Robert Streets
RECEIVED .� St. Paul, Minnesota 55101
Telephone (612) 291-6359
AMN L
i CITY OF SHAKOPEE
April 10, 1967
TO: LOCAL OFFICIALS IN METROPOLITAN COUNCIL DISTRICT 14
The Metropolitan Council would like your help. We'd like to invite your
organization to participate in the Council's current strategic planning
process, an effort to develop a broadly shared vision for the future of the
Twin Cities Region. We intend to open a dialogue that will bring together the
ideas of many citizens of the region, including local governments, business,
labor, nonprofit organizations, civic groups and groups with special needs.
The enclosed invitation explains our aims and lists a number of potential, long-
range concerns for the region the Council has identified. We hope you'll take
the time to give us feedback on the list of concerns. We need to know whether
you think these concerns are important future regional issues, whether our
focus is sharp enough, and whether we may have missed some important areas
altogether.
To obtain your ideas, I am available to meet with you in April or May. Please
call Guy Peterson of the Council staff, at 291-6527, to make arrangements. If
you prefer, you can communicate with us by completing the enclosed short
questionnaire and returning it to the Council in the postage-paid envelope that
is also enclosed.
Sincerely,
� �
�n
Marcy J. War tz
Council Member
District 14
Enclosures
An Equal OpW,W.ity Employer
THE METROPOLITAN COUNCIL NEEDS YOUR IDEAS--PLEASE CONTACT US
We would like to talk with a Council member about our ideas.
We would like to present some ideas at a Council committee meeting.
We would be interested in attending a meeting somewhere in our area to
talk about these issues.
We would like to be placed on your strategic planning mailing list.
Name Phone Number -- Work
Organization
Home
Address
MN,
We think the five most important issues facing the region are:
1)
?)
3)
4)
5)
WB073A, PROM
Metropolitan Council of the Twin Cities Area p
300 Metro Square gilding, 7th and Robert Streets
St. Paul, Minnesota 55101 Tel. 612 291-6359/TDD 291-0904
March 27, 1987
TO- Metropolitan Area Local Officials and Citizens
FROM: Steve Keefe, Metropolitan Council Chair
SUBJECT: An Invitation to Participate in Planning for the Region's Future
Decisions about our physical systems and human services are being made right
now that will shape the region we live in by the year 2000 and beyond. When we
make these decisions--about water quality, transit, long-term care, housing--we
are affecting our future. Solving today's problems requires that we have a
better idea of where we're going in order to know what we should do now.
As a result, the Metropolitan Council has stepped up its strategic planning
work this year. Our aim is to develop, with your help, a broadly shared vision
of the region's future, and to use it as a framework for making today's
decisions without precluding our future options. This "vision" doesn't mean a
planned city of the future or anything like that. It's not to plan how people
will live their lives, but to keep our options open and be prepared for
different contingencies. This approach has kept us strong and versatile in the
past.
To work, a regional vision must be shared broadly. It must reflect what many
different segments of our population want. If our aim is to ensure that the
government services people want are there in the next 20 to 30 years, we need
to know now what kinds of lives we'll want to be living then.
An important part of the Council's work over the next few years will be to
work with others in the region to discover and present various possibilities
and options. What kinds of jobs will be needed? What kinds of lifestyles will
people want? What kind of education? We plan to work with many citizens of
the region, including local governments, business, labor, nonprofit
organizations, civic groups and groups with special needs. As we develop a
shared concept of just what it is that people want for the region, we can make
decisions aimed at creating it.
At a strategic planning retreat earlier this month, the Council raised a number
of potential long-range concerns for the region. The list is broad, covering
everything from our prized quality of life--especially as it affects the
region's human resources--to financial resources for the infrastructure, to
preparing for another energy crisis. We hope you and your organization will
take time to give the Council feedback on this initial list of concerns
identified at the retreat (which are not in any special order):
-2-
1. Quality of life, especially as it affects the region's human resources.
Seen as one of the region's greatest assets now and into the future.
Possible areas of focus:
- Health services.
- Services to older people.
- Arts offerings, services and programs.
- Effective delivery of human services, including less fragmentation
among services, clearer access points, and coordination with physical
systems; e.g. , low-income housing and transportation.
- Increased family expectations for schools and pressure for schools to
assume new roles.
2. Vitality of the regional economy.
Possible areas of focus:
- Implications of service sector-oriented economy.
- Productivity issues, especially in view of demographic trends.
- Coping with global economic competition.
- Anticipating the impacts of technology.
3• A more systematic, long-range look into social ills.
Passible areas of focus:
- Analysis of the cost effectiveness of various integrating strategies
for dealing with social ills considering the effects of all government
systems from education and training to income maintenance to health
care to economic development.
- Approaches to cost control based on problem prevention.
Y. Fiscal planning to pay for long-term infrastructure before baby boomers
reach retirement age.
Possible areas of focus:
- Financial resources for infrastructure may be more available during
next 20 years than after 2010.
- Need to promote maintenance vs. expansion given likely slowdown in
regional development.
- Helping communities plan more integrated, long-range strategies to
address infrastructu� issues.
5. Water management (ground and surface water).
Possible areas of focus:
- Nonpoint sources of pollution (e.g.$ urban runoff, agricultural
runoff): how much is the public willing to pay?
- Impact on the Twin Cities of potential water shortages in the
southwest.
- Issues associated with federal water quality permits and possible
impacts on development.
-3-
Groundwater pollution from solid waste disposal, including impacts
beyond the metro area.
- Jurisdictional issues among public agencies in water management.
Effect of cultural values in the way different age groups use water
(e.g., for lawns, showers).
6. Affordable housing.
Possible areas of focus:
- Evaluate what works and what doesn't (e.g., Section 8 subsidized
housing voucher program).
- Monitoring of housing programs, such as private sector compliance with
federal requirements for tenants with lower incomes.
- Affordability for "working poor" with incomes dust above subsidy
levels.
- Changing housing demand and market conditions related to demographics
and other factors.
7. Long-term care costs for the baby-boom population.
Possible areas of focus:
- Fiscal planning, given future large elderly population.
- New strategies to reduce future demands on long-term care system.
8. Transportation.
Possible areas of focus:
- Attitudes regarding tolerable levels of congestion and the costs to
reduce that congestion.
- What are the real development and life style goals the transportation
system must achieve?
- What impact congestion has on the achieving of those goals.
- Impact in the Twin Cities of increased energy costs in event of a
shortage.
- Importance of international travel via the airport.
- Alternative technology solutions to transportation issues; e.g.,
substituting telecommunications for transportation.
9. Coming energy crisis.
Possible areas of focus: '
- Anticipating when and how large an energy crisis the region may face.
Contingency planning, especially related to regional systems.
- Impacts on development; i.e., current development decisions do not
include consideration for a potential energy shortage.
- Impacts on suburbs.
10. Job retraining.
Possible areas of focus:
- What works/what doesn't.
- Who's providing retraining in public and private sectors, and how much
of need is being met? Coordination? Overlap?
-4-
Special issues related to disadvantaged populations.
- Concept of investment in human capital.
What will the need be over the next 20 years?
11. Disintegration of communities.
Possible areas of focus:
- Who is moving in and out of the cities, and how are the moves related
to changes in household formation?
- Impacts of transiency and the resulting breakdown of informal support
systems for elderly, children. Possible demands for increased formal
services to compensate.
- Impacts of magnet schools and busing.
- Growing scarcity of volunteers due to transiency, two-worker families,
single-parent families.
- When will central city problems show up in first-ring suburbs?
12. Segregation of people in communities. Possible areas of focus:
- Elderly housing.
- Concentration of minorities in certain neighborhoods.
- Concentration of low-income populations.
13• Strategic planning. Possible areas of focus:
- Long-term viability of the region.
- Value differences among generations and their impacts on people's
attitudes and behaviors; e.g. , different demands for services.
- Urban design issues; e.g., planning for reuse of buildings, designing
facilities for an older population (especially in inner-ring suburbs),
designing transportation as well as buildings for extreme climate,
changes in development patterns to reflect different economic/energy
conditions.
- Anticipating technological change and its impacts, such as new
telecommunications technology.
Other items discussed at the retreat and possibly related to one or more of the
above concerns include:
- Heroic medical care. -
- AIDS.
- Twin Cities issues in relation to the rural crisis.
- Creating/maintaining a stable tax base.
- Governmental financing incentives and disincentives to solve public policy
problems.
- Concerns about solid waste policy direction given undeveloped parts of
system such as recycling and composting.
DC2392
POADMI
Action
Alert from t�e
183 University Ave. E., St. Paul, MN 55101-2 52 6 (612) 227-5600
DATE: May 4, 1987
T0: Mayors, Managers, Clerks
FROM: Stan C. Peskar (=3r
SUBJECT: Pre 73 Retirees Assessment
Call your representative and senator to object to any employing unit assessment
to fund the lump sum payments to PERA members who retired prior to 1973 (the
year of change to the high five).
Each year for the last ten these retirees with generally lower benefits have
received a 13th check funded by a state general fund appropriation. Last year
the 13th check was $19 multiplied by years of service. This year the proposal
is $25 per year of service.
The governor's budget contained six million dollars from the general fund to pay
a $25/year benefit to pre 73 teachers and members of the Minneapolis Employees
Retirement fund. The governor recommended taking the necessary funds for other
local and state pre 73ers from the better funded PERA and MSRS active fund. The
Legislative Commission on Pensions and Retirement rejected that approach as
unfair and damaging to the funds and likely to cause anxiety among retirees and
public employees as to the safety of their funds.
The House State Departments division of the appropriations committee being -
desperate to come up with funding for programs to which the house has committed,
has revived the governor's proposal with a bizarre twist. It has adopted language
authorizing the PERA Board to impose an employer additional contribution of up
to .155 of salary of PERA general fund members and .06% of salary applied to
payroll of police and fire fund members. A similar employer change is
authorized in the state retirement plan.
The legislation again penalizes those funds which were most prudent and
conservative in their expenditures, benefits and funding. It mandates increased
city expenditures (just under 1 million dollars per year) and is likely to
continue this annual cost for the forseeable future, for a program that buys no
local services and the size of which is entirely determined by the legislature
and governor.
Z7,
MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator
FROM: Douglas K. Wise, City Planner
RE: Valleyfair Appeal for Sign Variance
DATE: May 1, 1987
introduction•
At their March 26, 1987 meeting the Board of Adjustment and
Appeals denied a variance to allow Valleyfair to construct a sign
312.5 square feet larger than the 100 square feet allowed by City
Code in an I-2 zone.
Backaround•
The attached information provides a background for the
appeal. Included are:
1. Staff report to BAA
2. Letter of Appeal
3. Minutes of the March 26, 1987 Meeting
4. Drawing of sign and location map. 1
5. Letters from Dorsey & Whitney, and Krass & Monroe
Action Reouested:
Offer Variance Resolution of the City Council No. CC-484 and.
move for approval or denial..
MEMO TO: Board of Adjustments and Appeals
FROM: Douglas K. Wise, City Planner
RE: Valley fair Sign Variance Request
DATE: March 20, 1987
Introduction•
Additional right-of-way along Highway #101 is being acquired
by the City for the purpose of installing a frontage road
adjacent to Valleyfair. The acquisition will require Valleyfair
to either relocate their present sign or construct a new sign
further back from the road. Valleyfair is located in an I-2
Zone. Valleyfair is requesting a variance to allow construction
of a 412. 5 square foot free standing sign. The code allows a
maximum of 100 square feet of signage.
Considerations:
1. Valleyfair has also requested a message board for the sign,
the staff felt that because message boards are not allowed
in an I-2 zone, this would be defined as a use variance
which is not allowed by State Law.
2. The moving or constructing of a new sign is a circumstance
beyond the control of the applicant, the size of the new
sign is not.
3. A 100 square foot sign would be small compared to the scale
of the development.
4. The present marque could be interpreted as being either
larger or smaller than the proposed sign depending on
whether the entire marque is treated as a sign or only the
wording on the sign.
Staff Recommendation:
This was a very difficult recommendation for staff to make.
The staff does feel that a 100 square foot sign is to small for
Valleyfair. However, in evaluating the variance request against
the criteria for granting variances listed in the code we must
recommend against granting the variance (Resolution #484) for the
following reasons:
1. Circumstances beyond the applicants control do not force
them to construct a sign larger than 100 square feet.
2. Other Businesses in the I-2 zone have complied with the 100
square foot maximum and granting a variance could "confer on
the applicant a- special privilege that is denied by this
chapter to owners of other lands, structures or buildings in
the same district." -
9 a-
The staff feels that Valleyfair should be entitled to a
larger sign, however, we feel that the proper course of action ,
should be a change in the ordinance not the granting of
variances. We are in the process of preparing some suggested
changes , which will be presented to the Planning commission at
their May meeting.
Unless other evidence is presented to the Board by the
applicant or citizens attending the public hearing, we feel the
only reason justifying a variance would be that a 100 square foot
sign would be difficult to see and result in a potential traffic
safety problem on Highway #101.
If the Board decides not to accept the staff recommendation
the Board must address criteria 45 which reads:
"The variance requested is the minimum variance which would
alleviate the hardship".
PRO-=IA-.S OF TILT' BOARD OF
ADJBSTMMTS AND APPEA:S
Regular Session Shakopee, Minnesota March 26, 1987
Chairwoma5 VanMaldeghem called the meeting toorder at 7:30 p.m. with
Comm. Rockne, Foudray, Czaja, and Pomerenke present, Comm, Schmitt -
arrived at 7:45 p.m. Coma. Johnson was absent. Also present were
John R. Anderson, City Administrator; Douglas Wise, City Planner; and
COOL Clay. _
PUBLIC FEARING: Variance Resolution AIB4, Valleyfair.
Foudray/ Pomerenke moved to open the public hearing to consider a request
for a variance to increase the allowable signage of 100 square feet for
a free-standing sign in an I-2 zoning district by 312.5 square feet, in
order to replace the existing marquee with a new sign upon the property
located at One Valleyfair Drive. Motion carried unanimously.
The City Planner reviewed the request from Valleyfair to construct a 412,5
square foot free standing sign. The code allows a ma:;..... of 100 square -
feet of signage. Tne applicant is requesting a variance on the grounds
that a 100 square foot sign would be small compared to the scale of the
development, the moving or constructing- of anew sign is a circumstance
beyond the control of the applicant since the marquee was condemned. -
Walt Witmer, Vice president and General Manager of Valleyfair said that
the hardship was created by the City for condemning their present sign, -
Discussion ensued on whether or not a variance request if feasible or
if staff should look at the possibility of changing the ordinance. Comm.
Czaja asked if there was a possibility to utilize the natural surroundings
of the area to make the sign more attractive. Tae question arose as to
the feasibility of moving the present marquee a little to the west. The
applicant said that it would then be located on property owned by the
highway departzment.
COOL Clay said that compared to the road frontage of the Valleyfair
property the square footage of this sign proposed is not.to significant.
Te.-=y Forbord, 2103 Bridge Crossing, said he feels the current sign
ordinance is not pro-business in the City, and compared to the size of
Valleyfaix the proposed sign is not too large and that the variance
should be granted. Chairwoman VanMaldeghem asked if there was anyone
else from the audience who wished to address this issue. There was
nonresponse.
Czaja/Poudray moved to close the public hearing. Motion carried unanimously.
Comm, Czaia moved to deny Resolution Aso, Motion died because of lack
Of second.
BAA
March 26, 1987 / Ltd
Page _2_ /
Comm. Pnmerenke said that he would like to see some alternatives, such as
construction of a temporary sign until the construction of the service
road is completed. Barry Stock asked if the service mad project could
be delayed for three moaths to give the City time to change the ordinance.
The City Administrator stated that the cost of a temporary sign and/or
moving of the present marquee could be fairly expensive and may not be
the answer. -
lhnudray/Pomerenke moved to grant Variance Resolution Ro. 484, on a
temporary basis for the 1987 season subject to review immediately after-
wards and subject to any changes that might be made in revision of our
sign ordinance. Chairwoman VanMaldeghem said that conditions cannot
be put on a variance and motion is ruled out of order.
Czaja/Fbudray moved to grant Variance Resolution No. 484, to grant .
Valleyfair the sign variance of 312 square feet for their sign.
Concema were expressed on setting a precedent to the present sign
ordinance. .. Motion fails with Comm. Czaja, Rockne„ Pomerenke, and
VanMaldeghem opposed. - - - - -
Rockne/Pomerenke moved that if the applicant should elect to build ---
a temporary sign, that the building permi.t.`ee for such a temporary
sign be waived. Motion carried with Comm. Czaja opposed- -
Czaja/Rockne moved to accept the Annual Report with addition of
Commissioners names and titles be included. Motion carried unanimously.
Rockne/Czaja moved to adjourn. Motion carried unanimously. Meeting
adjourned at 8:30 p.m.
Douglas Wise
City Planner
Carol L. Schultz
Recording Secretary
„o y l.M:s .Cad ✓+'+,:_-`•^.. -^'c T- _ — .r I
l) Ilk
� ; ILI
� 1�"
i
t
- �
I � Ul�L�
� �Y ����
w ��
��
i
I
.ywy
�w %i
�L_ q 4Vr/� I ��
'mob :/
I
C ��y /O� i
i
� � I I
'�4w�
I
o� I _
i M
+� e� JP
v. i
Family Amusement Paak
One Valleyfair Drive,Shakopee,MN 55379
(612)445-7600
April 1, 1987
The City of Shakopee
Attention: John Anderson, City Administrator
129 First Avenue East
Shakopee, Minnesota 55379
Re: Valleyfair Sign Ordinance Variance
Gentlemen:
On Thursday, March 26, 1987, the Shakopee Board of Adjustmentdenied
Valleyfai.r's request for a variance to the Shakopee Sign Ordinance.
Pursuant to Section 11.04 Subdivision 5B.3. of the Shakopee Zoning
Ordinance, the undersigned hereby formally appeals such decision of the
Board of Adjustment to the City Council . Will you please schedule a
public hearing at the next available date so that this matter can be
heard by the City Council .
Sily,
Walter R. Wittmer
Vice President/General Manager
WRW:dw
DORs£Y & WHITNEY
2200 PIRST a XK PLACE EAST
seat wT�vL MINTW£ POLIS, MIAT'ESOTA 55402 , n nrrzesvrz tensa
_ xe.mnz��l�.eeooa � (6l2)04D-2600
On ne oNet eeNa aminrv0 TLLLC �'-O60a auvNozo xortww'�awm
o.mx W rLvcovTAA Is1Y I3°o-ease 1°aela¢-YeoY
eOCaHETLe.MMN[H04 deem - ar0
lemiwads a TA s�rnm�'ome
a arx czNT... urL Tw.ca o e°.w
sTYve[i�xnaezme mlw G. LARRY GRIPPITB, P. A.
IaL^ieef-ewT ¢f uTl LTRCY
1612)340-2747 nl
O� O �1 e°e 1)0.606
vwTLTe.llR%Circa ealW
IBN IaT>-oiYu
e. aaT. o April 7, 1987
w w6 Yaaa Ye lulu-ea-He-eO
City Council Q 9pR��Fij� O
The City of Shakopee F
Attention: John Anderson, City Administrator B
129 First Avenue East
Shakopee, Minnesota 55379
ryf
Re: Application of Valleyfair for OAS
Variance to City Sign Ordinance F
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 sian to replace the marauee which is being destroyed
in connection with the reconstruction of the entryway and related
condemnation vroceedina. The Board of Adjustment denied the
variance request primarily, if not exclusively, because it was
worried that by granting the variance to Vallevfair 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, 1967 . 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 Vallevfair' s reauest would not in anyway establish preceaent
which would be either legally enforceable or psychologically
significant.
Do85EY & W$ITWEY
City Council-Shakopee Page 2
4/7/67
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 oncoming 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.
Ve�/yI /t�7Muly yours q
A.
G. Larry if.
GLG:kh
cc: Walter R. Wittmer
Phillip R. Krass
i
RECEII'Ep
LAW OMCFS
APR 16 1987 G/
KRASS MO
CITY OF SyAKOpEE CHARTERED
Phillip R. Krays
Dense:L. Monroe
Barry K.Meyer Manorial Road Bairns s Center
Trevor R. Walden 327 Marscheil Read
Elbabeth B.Mclsughlin P.O.Eva 216
Bryan Huber
Susan L. Shak..Minnesota 55379
L.Estill
Dyne M. Carlson - Telephone a455080
Kent A.Orison,CPA - April 15, 1987
City Council of Shakopee
Attention: John Anderson
129 First Avenue East
Shakopee, MN 55379
RE: Valley air 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 Valleyfairrs
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. 4462.357 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 wbere the strict enforcement of that ordinance
would cause undue hardship because of circumstances unions 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. McQuillan, .
Municipal Corporations 3d, 425.160 (1983 d 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 pis 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. Rolasek v. Villiage of Medina
226 R.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 trours,
; S?�0r
TSRED
PRR:pw:jl
MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator
FROM: Douglas K. Wise, City Planner
RE: Backstretch R.V. Park Appeal for Sign variance
DATE: May 1, 1987
Introduction•
At their April 9, 1987 meeting the Board of Adjustment and
Appeals denied a variance to allow Backstretch R.V. Park to (1)
exceed the height allowed by the sign ordinance by 201 , (2) allow
two signs instead of one, and (3) allow the total signage to
exceed the code requirements by 36 square feet.
Background•
The attached information provides a background for the
appeal. Included are:
1. Staff reports to BAA from 2/27 & 4/2
2. Letter of appeal and attachments
3. Minutes from 3/5 & 4/9 meetings.
Action Requested:
Offer Variance Resolution of the City Council No. CC-481 and
move for approval or denial.
#y
MEMO TO: Shakopee Planning Commission
FROM: Douglas K. Wise, City Planner
RE: Backstretch RV Park Variance Request
DATE: February 27, 1987
APPLICABLE REGULATIONS: SEc. 4.30, Subd. 4, E.
INTRODUCTION:
Mr. Jack VanRemortel is constructing an RV park and campground
on the east end of Shakopee adjacent to Highway #101 and 13th
Avenue. Mr. vanRemortel is requesting the following variances
from the sign ordinance:
1. To allow two signs instead of one. One sign would be on
Highway #101, the second at the entrance to the park on 13th
Avenue.
2. To allow the first sign (on Highway #101) to exceed the
� . height limit by 20 feet.
3. To allow the second sign (on 13th Ave. ) to be within 5 feet
of the street r-o-w instead of the required 10.' setback.
4. To allow the second sign (on 13th Ave. ) to be one foot off
the ground instead of the required 5 ' .
5. To allow the total sign area to exceed the 75 square foot
maximum by 36 square feet.
The RV park is located in an I-1 Zone.
CONSIDERATION:
Traffic to the park will primarily be arriving on Highway #101
and will be required to exit on 13th Avenue to enter the park.
The topography of the area changes with the park being at a lower
elevation than Highway #101. Vegetation, screening and use of
the park will make the entrance difficult to see from the
highway.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION.
The staff recommends that the following variances be granted:
1. That Backstretch R.V. Park be allowed two signs instead of
one. One to be located adjacent to Highway #101 and one to
be located at the entrance to the park on 13th Avenue.
2. That the Highway #101 sign be allowed to exceed the height
restriction by not more than 20 feet.
3. That the maximum signage area allowed be increased to 111
square feet.
The staff recommends against granting variances for the setback
and height of the sign on 13th Avenue.
MEMO TO: Shakopee Board of Adjustment and Appeals
FROM: Douglas K. Wise, City Planner
RE: Variance Request for Backstretch RV Park
DATE: April 2, 1987
INTRODUCTION•
At the March 3, 1987 Board of Adjustment and Appeals meeting the
public hearing on the request of Jack VanRemortel for two
separate signs and variances for height, setback and square
footage of the signs was continued until the April 9th meeting.
The unresolved issues included (1) whether the second sign could
be considered a directional sign and (2) required setbacks for
the second sign. (Please see 2/27/87 memo for further
information) .
BACKGROUND•
After further review of the ordinance and discussion the staff
has come to the following conclusions:
1. The sign ordinance does allow one identification sign and
one directional sign. In order for the entrance sign to
qualify as a directional sign it must meet the following
definition: "A sign erected on private property for the
purpose of directing vehicular and pedestrian traffic to
public facilities or functions" . The code also states:
"Directional signs shall bear no advertising and shall not
exceed 4 square feet in area" . The entrance sign proposed
by the applicant is 36 square feet. Directional signs are
not considered part of the 75 square feet of signage
allowed.
2. Free standing signs which are lower than 10 feet to the
bottom of the sign must be set back 10 feet from the
property line. The 5 foot minimum height is not required.
The applicant has stated to staff verbally that they will
comply with the 10 foot setback requirement.
ALTERNATIVES•
1. The Board of Adjustment and Appeals can find that the
entrance sign does qualify as a directional sign and
therefore the following variances would be required:
A. A variance allowing the Highway #101 sign to exceed the
height allowed by the sign ordinance by 20 feet.
B. A variance allowing the directional sign to exceed the
allowed square footage by 32 square feet.
2. Determine that the entrance sign is not a directional sign,
but an identification sign and grant the following variances:
A. A variance allowing the Highway #101 sign to exceed the
height allowed by the sign ordinance by 20 feet.
B. Allow two signs instead of one.
C. Allow the total signage to exceed the code requirements
by 36 square feet.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
The staff recommends approval of variance Resolution #481 based
on Alternative # 2 above.
DRW:cah
Attachment
April 14 1987 -
RECEIVED
APR 15
Mr. John Anderson
City Administrator CITY OF SHAKOPEE'
City of Shakopee
129 East First Avenue
Shakopee, MN 55379
Re: Backstretch RV Park & Campground
B&A Project 886-43
Mr. Anderson:
On behalf of Jack Van Remortel of Backstretch RV Park and
Campground, we wish to appeal to the Shakopee City Council the
sign variance decision that was made by the Board of Appeals and
Adjustments on April 9, 1987.
We are seeking this variance from the sign ordinance because we
believe that the topography and size (19.3 acres) of the project
site cause an undue hardship. We are requesting the following:
1. Allow the major ID sign adiacent to Highway 101 to exceed
the height limit by 20 feet. This sign is internally lit
with a "No" Vacancy light. (See Attachment A. )
Traffic to the RV park will primarily be arriving on Highway
101 and will have to turn off of Highway 101 onto 13th
Avenue to enter the park. The topography of the site is 20
feet below the level of the Highway (see Attachment B) .
Quality signing from Highway 101 is critical to project site
identification and can mitigate traffic problems by reducing
excessive trips resulting from reduction of lost motorists
and from motorists having to pull off of Highway 8101 to
check on site availability. Recreational vehicles are large
in size and slow to merge on and off a fast moving highway.
From a safety standpoint, it is important that motorists can
d clearly see the proposed sign and do not have to slow down
on the highway to see if there is a "vacancy" or "no
y vacancy" light on.
k' The proposed sign will not be distractive to residents of
the RV park since the sign is located in the NE corner of
the property away from the RV park sites.
d
o i
m �
7901 Flying Cloud Drive, Eden Prairie, Minnesota 55344 ❑ (612) 941-1660
Mr. John Anderson -2- April 14, 1987
2. Allow two signs instead of one for Backstretch RV Park and
Campground. One would be located adjacent to Highway 101
and the second at the entrance to the park on 13th Avenue.
As a result of having two signs, the maximum signage area
allowed would need to be increased from 75 square feet to
111 square feet, a 36 square foot increase.
An entrance sign is essential to identify the project site
from 13th Avenue and to guide motorists to the entrance
drive. Vegetation, screening, and topography of the park
will make the entrance difficult to see from Highway #101.
(See Attachment C.)
The entrance sign is an attractive, low, sand-blasted wood
sign similar to the one attached (Attachment D) . The sign
will be located 10 feet back from the property line, and the
weathered wood is designed to blend into the surrounding
area and provide an attractive "front door" to the RV park.
It is important to the success of this project as well as the
safety of Shakopee RV visitors that the sign variance be granted.
Thank you for your consideration.
BRADER & ASSOCIATES LTD.
O�[n[�, Behalf of Backstretch
��RV Park & Campground
Diane J. Klausner
Graduate Landscape Architect
_ Z
W
ti a
RV PARK ;&
0
p N
.a
CAMPGROUND
iNO. VACANCY y7 n rN
�.Firrr� F w, _..� — —e Ku klu.l "Flo" l�lllrfu cl.rnl�
✓K-t;wllLG .i/>r.-OF�JI:. WJ= ill t144rF X Fr-pliW
� IJILIrI_IWll1. Gii'�N'rlicS L'K. I:ICI.IlY_
"'� � R41on-.Wlrtu}c?_rl/.iFl orflcl�
�1
T' 1!
:
ljl F a.irr-
- ul,o 1w,- Jrr 1=1:-
i
Lrygr Y _ _
1
J },
ol0 4 q' :]tr� aJry�of-T '
I '
l
' � srno I'il ✓n IG. pVa.
AJ'lWu. . C/. vw 19.1 Arlfs }J== r r
..^Oi I '. _ V130 Y. Leaf- %e% Lio
�1 Els'.iaTiorJ a sr-..1 -_-- n
,.
k,'!=0-o" --4
ATTACHMENT A
W {� GWmlc ti`eK% }l_1[II +-/ ;[akli o• Rwi9pu 9 zR�i e'+ Thls drmW^sbMe PMM-*IYof
�� 'ems n..:,csuni4r,wln o�,+,e,, '• , r < .., L"VIIICIIQIIIS�V 1:1
+=r a1G1 IVCC
c, 312 Nks lake Street
'� 4Nmin A�mal Pare Mil�pdiz MN SSd08
N Scare ��._, - trzaza�rzvl
\` ® 4
1 T74
^\1 �� \\� / / 1
7 ,37( 35, 4 41 - 1 .
T t TTDTS %
;TT*.
TT4
1 ,
I
x I /
Y
77
mp
J 1\h A
w X 3 �• � f.11 I 7 ?� ..�"i
/ I
/ ® A
!® 131
'Yr'auer ssociates t nc. , TOPOGRAPHIC RELATIONBHIPI 1
1901 NN O O`v ,Etle RAirie,Mi .M 55344 BETWEEN HIGHWAY 101 6 SIGNAGE FOp' hal4leA`,
RACKSTRFTCH RV PARK R CAMPfpoIING RAA ena-a�
c I
s' . -•,. fit . `- --
3t3 = ff°`
3 33�•ae-
EY � aBle?
F i F ��I'ryI•Z - 1 v
wm
€ p P
� _•_ � I 'E'� /��� �/Pay E
Poo
l •I �� 6►F' (3�9 '�F R
t
3nm II���: 6'a� �•9 ��x
0
0
m
/r,
a - _
• s•
4 - � • r . � .
\ � 2
_ 2 « m )
@ � f
: « $
. $
PROCEEDINGS OF THE BOARD OF
ADJUSTMENTS AND APPEALS
REGULAR SESSION SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA MARCH 5, 1987
Chairwoman VanMaldeghem called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m. with Comm.
Schmitt, Czaja, Rockne, Pomerenke, Johnson and Foudray present. Also present
were Doug Wise, City Planner; Dennis Kraft, Executive Director; Barry Stock,
Administrative Assistant; and John K. Anderson, City Administrator.
The agenda was approved as written.
Czaja/Rockne moved to approve the minutes of February 5, 1987. Motion carried
unanimously.
PUBLIC HEARING - Backstretch R.V. Park
Czaja/Foudray moved to open the public hearing for a request for variances to
allow the following: (1) two area identifications signs, (2) one sign to
exceed the allowed height by 20 feet, (3) a second sign to be located within
5 feet of the front property line and (4) the second sign to be only 1 foot
off the ground upon the property located at County Road 89 and 13th Avenue.
Motion carried unanimously.
The City Planner said that Mr. Jack VanRemortel is constructing on RV Park and
campground on the east end of Shakopee adjacent to Highway 101 and 13th Avenue
and is requesting a variance from the sign ordinance. It is located in an I-1,
light industrial zone. The request is for a sign on the property adjacent to
the highway righ-of-way which will be higher than the allowed 20 feet, the
second sign will be located at the entrance on 13th Avenue and locate the sign
closer to the right-of-way and lower than required by the sign ordinance.
Diane Klossner, representing Mr. VanRemortel, asked for clarification on the
ordinance stating that no free standing sign lower than 10 feet to the bottom
of the sign shall be located within 10 feet of the lot line.
The City Planner said the signage that is allowed by the ordinance is one sign
75 square feet. The City Planner said the signage that is allowed by the ordinance
is one sign 75 sqare feet. The applicant has requested a second sign containing
36 square feet. Comm. Rockne said that it should be stated that neither sign
should be more than 75 square feet. Comm. Schmitt said that the ordinance
provides for directional signs, and that if the applicant can perform to
dimensions for treating the second sign as a directional sign then the
Commission will deal only with the heiFbth, depth and placement of the sign.
Discussion ensued on whether of not a hardship has been proved. Comm.
CzaJa said he does not believe a hardship exists_„ Chairwoman-VanMaldeghem-
asked if there was anyone from the audience who wished to address this issue.
There was no response.
Foudray/Schmitt moved to close the public hearing. Motion carried unanimously
i
: s, 29x7
veri^i-a im chculo ve or, aieteer or n
-;r?.,._-La ^s'L .. -_-- be Umi, r_=. . of !,a .'s__. c.. _i _-__ M=_s,L :-See_
o^^ t';, grcioc.
.,_. -.. .. table .. carne..
107 71anner
Darel ' S&Vtz
Reccra'-o �c s1etFTj'
PROCEEDINGS OF THE BOARD OF
ADJUSTMENTS AND APPEALS
REGULAR SESSION SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA APRIL 9, 1987
Chairwoman VanMaldeghem called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m.
with Comm. Czaja, Pomerenke and Foudray present. Comm. Schmitt,
Johnson and Rockne were absent. Also present were Douglas Wise,
City Planner; Dennis Kraft, Community Development Director; and
John K. Anderson, City Administrator.
Czaja/Pomerenke moved to approve the agenda with a correction on
Variance Resolution No. 481 not being a public hearing. Motion
carried unanimously.
Czaja/Foudray moved to approve the minutes of March 5, 1987, with
correction of Dennis Kraft not present at the meeting. Motion
carried unanimously.
F
City Planner reviewed the proposal o£ Jack VanRemortel,kstretch R.V. Park, requesting variances to allow two areantification signs, one sign to exceed the allowed height by 20t, and a second sign to be located within 5 feet of the front
perty line and 1 foot off the ground upon the property located
CR-89 and 13th Avenue. He reviewed the difference between
directional sign and entrance sign. The entrance sign proposed
exceeds 4 sq. feet. Comm. Czaja expressed concern over setting a
precedent in allowing this variance. Comm. Pomerenke felt that a
sign such as this should be visible from the road. Chairwoman
VanMaldeghem suggested that the applicant construct a temporary
sign until the amendments to the sign ordinance have been
completed. The City Planner said that exceptional circumstances
apply to the area, such as topography is unique in that the road
is higher than the site and also the visibility of the entrance
from the highway. The applicant said another reason for the sign
was to have a vacancy, no vacancy on it so people did not have to
turn off the highway to see if there was a vacancy. She also
said she talked to the State about a sign and there will be a
State sign put up on the intersection of County Road 89 and 101,
a small sign saying campground.
Foudray/Pomerenke moved to approve the Variance Resolution No.
481 based on determination that the entrance sign is not a
directional sign, but an identification sign to 1) allow the
highway 101 sign to exceed the height allowed by the sign
ordinance by 20 feet, 2) allow two signs instead of one and 3)
allow the total signage to exceed the code requirements by 36
square feet. Motion fails with Comm. Czaja and VanMaldeghem
opposed.
PUBLIC HEARING - Variance Resolution No. 486, Clete Link.
Czaja/Foudray moved to open the public hearing for a request for
a 22 foot variance from the required 50 feet front yard setback
9c.
MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator
FROM: Judith S. Cox, City Clerk CY-..
RE: Vacation of Certain Easements and Right-of-Way
Within Hauer' s 3rd Addition
DATE: April 29, 1987
Introduction
At a previous meeting, Council set a public hearing date for May
5, 1987 to consider the vacation of:
1. 13th Avenue in its entirety,
2. Onyx Drive in its entirety,
3. That part of Limestone Drive lying southeasterly of the
southwesterly extension of the northwesterly line of Lot 11,
Block 3,
4. The utility and drainage easements within Lot 8, Block 2 and
Lot 11, Block 3.
Background
The vacations described above are necessary for the platting of
Hauer's 4th Addition. 13th Avenue is being relocated to the
South. Onyx Drive is being relocated and what was Onyx Drive
will become Jasper Road and will extend further to the South.
The curvature of Limestone Drive at its intersection with Onyx
Drive is being straightened out. The vacation of the southerly
100 feet of Limestone Drive is being replatted in the Hauer' s 4th
Addition. The utility and drainage easements within Lot 8, Block
2 and Lot 11, Block 3 , Hauer' s 3rd Addition are being replatted
and will be contained in the Hauer' s 4th Addition. This is due
to the fact that the two lots become larger and it is desirable
to move the drainage and utility easement to the outer parameters
of the newly created lots. -
There are no objections to the proposed vacations by staff or by
Utilities because the necessary easements and right-of-ways are
being rededicated in the plat of Hauer's 4th Addition.
It is crucial that the resolution of vacation be adopted and be
recorded at the time that the final plat of Hauer's 4th Addition
is ready for recording. Therefore, staff is recommending that
the resolution of vacation not be adopted by Council until the
final plat is properly signed by the developer as well as the
developers agreement and the petition for the Plan B public
improvements, and filed with the City. In addition, all the
conditions of the final approval must be met. The developer is
attempting to comply with all these conditions and if they are
met by the time of the public hearing, Council may wish to adopt
the vacating resolution. -
Alternatives
After the public hearing is held: -
1. Adopt Resolution No. 2720, vacating easements and right-of-
way.
2. Do not adopt Resolution No. 2720.
3. Table Resolution No. 2720.
Recommendation
If all conditions of the plat approval are met and if all
documents are properly signed and recorded with the City, staff
recommends alternative No. 1, adopt Resolution No. 2720. If all
the conditions of the plat approval are not met or if any of the
documents needed are not signed and recorded with the City, staff
recommends alternative No. 3, table Resolution No. 2720.
JSC/jms
RESOLUTION NO. 2720 G
A RESOLUTION VACATING CERTAIN EASEMENTS AND
RIGHT-OF-WAY WITHIN THE PLAT OF HAUER'S 3RD ADDITION
AS HEREIN DESCRIBED
WHEREAS, the City Council has given approval to the plat of
Hauer's 4th Addition, and
WHEREAS, the plat of Hauer's 4th Addition realigns some
public right-of-way and easements within the plat of Hauer' s 3rd
Addition, and
WHEREAS, it has been made to appear to the Shakopee City
Council that all that property hereinafter described no longer
serves any public interest or use, and
WHEREAS, a public hearing to consider said vacations was
held in the Council Chambers of the City Hall in the City of
Shakopee at 8:00 p.m. on the 5th day of May, 1987, and
WHEREAS, two weeks published notice have been given in the
Shakopee Valley News and posted notice has been given by posting
such notice on the bulletin board on the main floor of the Scott
County Courthouse, on the bulletin board in the Shakopee City
Hall and on the bulletin board at the First National Bank of
Shakopee, and
WHEREAS, all persons desiring to be heard on the matter were
heard at the public hearing in the Council Chambers in the City
of Shakopee.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA:
1. That it finds and determines that the vacation hereinafter
described is in the public interest and serves no further
public need,
2. That the following streets and easements within the plat of
Hauer' s 3rd Addition be and the same are herein vacated
a. 13th Avenue in its entirety
b. Onyx Drive in its entirety
C. That part of Limestone Drive lying southeasterly of
the southwesterly extension of the northwesterly line
of Lot 11, Block 3
d. The utility and drainage easements within Lot 8, Block
2 and Lot 11, Block 3.
Resolution No. 2720
Page Two
3. After the adoption of the resolution, the City Clerk shall
file certified copies hereof with the County Auditor and
County Recorder of Scott County.
Adopted in Regular Session of the City Council of the City
of Shakopee, Minnesota, held this 5th day of May, 1987.
Mayor of the City of Shakopee
ATTEST:
City Clerk
Approved as to form this
day of 1987.
City Attorney
9j
MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator
FROM: Judith S. Cox, City Clerk
RE: Vacation of Austin Street South Davis Court
DATE: April 30, 1987
Introduction
At a previous meeting, Council set a public hearing for May 5,
1987 to consider the vacation of Austin Street lying south of
Davis Court.
Background
Mr. Jim Hauer has submitted a petition to the City Council
requesting their consideration of the vacation of Austin Street
lying south of Davis Court.
Both Shakopee Public Utilities and Minnegasco would like an
easement retained if Austin Street is vacated; which is City
policy. The City Planner recommends approval of the vacation,
and makes the following comments: 1) the City has received a
preliminary plat for the area to the south, they are not
proposing the extension of Austin Street, 2) the vacation of
Austin Street would not landlock any property - the street is not
necessary to serve any property, 3) the utility easements must be
kept - a 12" watermain is in the street.
The City Engineer recommends that various actions occur as a
condition of the vacation of the street. See attached memo.
Proper notice pursuant to law has been made. Both abutting
property owners, Mr. DuBois and Mr. Hauer, have been provided
copies of this memo.
Alternatives
1. Vacate street.
2. Deny request for vacation of street.
Recommenation
Conduct public hearing and thereafter direct staff whether or not
to prepare the appropriate resolution vacating the street for
Council consideration at the next Council meeting.
JSC/jms
"s 4
o g
3
h 5 S
s Qy
z
h 2 5
vLILL5 4
6
7 g
Z 8 10
II 1 �3 4
A�
. D
PARK
PARK I 3e Q ' Y' g /
1 2 3 I t
4 l
5 6
Ir, 7
6
IC
6
I
13;
4
MEMO TO: Judith S. Cox, City Clerk
FROM: Ken Ashfeld, City Engineer
SUBJECT: Austin Street Vacation, JEJ Addition
DATE: April 20, 1987
I have reviewed the request for vacation of Austin Street south
of 11th Avenue as submitted by Mr. Jim Hauer. At the time that
Mr. Hauer submitted the request, I indicated to him that I would
be recommending to Council that various actions occur as a
condition of the vacation. I submit those recommendations as
follows:
1 . That portion of 11th Avenue to be vacated be removed
and restored in turf consisting of but not
limited to the following work:
a. Curb & gutter removal
b. Bituminous removal
c. Remove catch basins and leads (2)
d. Aggregate base removal
e. Placing of topsoil
f. Seeding of restored area
2. The intersection of 11th Avenue and Austin Street be
reconstructed to accommodate new drainage
-
patterns and street grades consisting of but
not limited to the following work ( see
attached plan) :
a. Construct new LP catch basin and lead
b. Construct new curb & gutter line
C. Restore bituminous pavement
3. All work to be done at the direction of the Engineering
Department.
4. A bond in the amount of 125% of the attached estimated
cost be provide by the vacation petitioner.
KA/pmp
AUSTIN
ITEM UNITS UNIT PRICE AMOUNT
1 . Remove Catch Basins 2 Ea. $ 150.00 $ 300.00
2. Remove 12" RCP 90 L.F. $ 7.00 $ 630.00
3. Remove Curb 335 L.F. $ 2.50 $ 837.50
4. Remove Pavement &
Base 705 S.Y. $ 1 .50 $1 ,057 .50
5. Install C. P. Catch
Basins 1 Ea. $1 ,200.00 $1 ,200.00
6 . 12" RCP 58 L.F. $ 30.00 $1 ,740.00
7 . CL-5 76 Ton $ 7.00 $ 532.00
8. 2341 Bit. Patching 22 Ton $ 50.00 $1 . 100.00
$7 , 397 .00
9. Restoration
(Topsoil & Seed) 0 .2 Ac. $4,000.00 $ 800.00
$8 , 197 .00
11 T AVE.
L...:.:......:......:..:......a............... ..... .. ".
6" WA7 ERMA Ncr
i F
W 3
W
p ;Z
4 _ 3 mra .
-_ - - Q - i 1 33 .. ..
w
w {
" w - F+. . Ow 1
¢
W:
f
. .......................................
> F v to
yr a AUSTIN _N
F 311r:9 > a
F
w >
I r
3` I U Irl IN •8S a � = M
DAVISvi
777v-
. . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . .
1
................................
COURT �I . . . . . . . . . .
w
v z I Wm
NF- I xo WIfti
cr
CDZ
¢. Lu
1- - 11 Ix atn
I1N : ' • . :
v' . ;
W c, r IX.
2Ja � W HSN.
: : : iii € € € : '• € : ii ? : : : : : iii : :
wt- :......................:.......................:..........
s ai,w
- MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator
FROM: Douglas K. Wise, City Planner
RE: City Planning Staff
DATE: April 30, 1987
INTRODUCTION:
__. At their _. April 16, :_ 1987 - meeting the Planning Commission
passed a motion recommending the City Council authorize the .
- hiring of additional planning staff. - -- - - - -
- BACKGROUND•
The Planning Commission previously recommended hiring an
additional staff person in the planning department. The City
Council approved funding for additional planning staff in the
1987 budget. The City Council has not yet approved filling the
-. _. Planner I position.
- - - -- - -- The work load now being placed on the Planning Commission
and planning staff is such that planning staff does not have the
- ---- - - time to undertake needed studies and updating of the City's
Comprehensive Plan and Zoning and Development Ordinances.
Current staff is working overtime just to. keep up with the
existing work load. - -
Presently, the Community Development staff is spending an
appreciable amount of time dealing with day to day planning
problems. This includes a number of subdivision plats that need
to be reviewed, zoning ordinance amendments, PUD' s, collector and
arterial street alignments and other day to day development
related activities. Also, at this time, the sign ordinance is
being amended as is the PUD ordinance. There is work currently
being done on the environmental assessment worksheet for the
O'Dowd Estates Planned Unit Development. In this particular
project the City is the responsible governmental unit (RGU) and
will be required to analyze and draft a response to the 25 or 30
agencies and individuals that will potentially respond to this
EAW. Following that a determination will be made whether an
Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) will be needed.
It is anticipated that the staff will be dealing with two
- -- additional EAW in the near future (the Starwood Music Center and
the Meritor Development) .
It is also anticipated that the levels of activity for both
conditional use permits and variances will be accelerating this
summer.
Projects which need to be undertaken in the near future
include an updating of the sign ordinance (this effects such
businesses as Valleyfair and their sign request) , the need for a
new septic system ordinance, the need to update the comprehensive
i
plan (the plan has not been amended for the past 7 or 8 years and
some of the census data is of 1970 origin, as well as a
comprehensive update of the transportation system for the City) .
The zoning ordinance should be given a thorough overall. At
this time the provisions of the ordinance are not consist with
contemporary development policies (as is evidenced by the
difficulty and time involved with the O'Dowd Lake Estates Planned
Unit Development) .
At this time very little work is being done on the
Metropolitan level and documents such as the "Metropolitan
Development and Investment Framework" must be evaluated and the
City's plans must be compared to this document.
It is also the time when the City will consider to doing a
community needs survey for the possible submission of a Small
Cities Development Program Application under the Community
Development Block Grant Program.
The Southwest Planning Coalition is another group the City
needs to be coordinating it' s activities with however present
work load does not allow this to happen.
As the mini by-pass project moves forward into it' s next
phase it appears as though the department will be heavily
involved in the acquisition of properties and the relocation of
tenants and owners.
The Star City' s project is nearing completion at this time,
however once it is completed there are certain activities which
must be undertaken on a continuous basis in order to maintain the
Star City designation. This is a program that is of particular
interest to the ICC.
As construction starts in the Downtown Revitalization
Program monitoring and coordination activities will take place on
the streetscape program. A revolving loan program needs to be
set up in conjunction with the commercial rehabilitation
activities that have been discussed for several years. Also,
likely to be done in conjunction with this, will be some sort of
downtown design review function, as downtown rehabilitation and
improvement efforts accelerate.
ALTERNATIVES:
The four major courses of action which could be pursued at
this time include (1) hiring a Planner I as budgeted for 1987;
( 2) hiring an intern for an interim period of time; ( 3) hiring a
consultant to do various specific tasks or (9) do nothing.
Following is a brief discussion of the major elements of each of
the forementioned options.
!D a-
Hiring a Planner I as Budgeted
If this option is pursued much of the workload previously
described will be able to be addressed in a more expeditious
manner. This will enable the various planning projects and
ordinances to be updated as required. The hiring of an
additional staff person will also result in the flexibility of
_ . being able to move people from one project to another as demand
dictates. This probably represents the most efficient use of
time and money in that an entry level planner will not be paid at
the rate that one would pay a consultant and there would be
additional benefits accruing as this person obtains additional
experience with the organization. This will also allow some of
the less complicated tasks. currently being done by the City
Planner to be shifted to this staff person and will allow the
City Planner to handle more tasks.
It is possible to hire a Planner I for a specific period of
' time such as 12 months and to make it clear at the outset that if
sufficient work is not available at the end of the one year
period the job would terminate. If this option were to be
followed it would have some of the advantages of entering into a
contract with a consultant in terms of not having a continuing
obligation for a staff person if the work load does not dictate.
Hiring an Intern
The major option of hiring an intern is that the financial
impact is very minimal. In conjunction with that we can expect a
lower level of productivity than one would receive by either
hiring a full time planner or consultant. As this person would
become more familiar with the City's system additional knowledge
would be obtained. At such time as the person left this would
then be lost. The hiring of an intern will require more time for
supervision and training than in hiring an entry level planner I.
Also an intern will not be able to deal with the more complex
issues.
Hiring a Consultant
The major advantage of hiring a consultant is that at such
time as the task is completed the consultant will no longer be
around. The hiring of a consultant will not allow - the
flexibility of shifting tasks from one staff member to another as
the work load dictates. Also hiring a consultant cost more money
per hour than any of the other options herein discussed. This is
particularly relevant in that a consultant must not only be paid
for his or her services but also expects a profit to be made as a
part of the transaction. A consultant will not relieve the City
Planner of some of more simple tasks now being carried out and
will be of no help in dealing with the public when the walk in
traffic or telephone traffic increases. A consultant also would
not have the indepth understanding of local zoning and
development issues unique to Shakopee.
Do Nothing Option
In terms of the amount of money expanded at the out set this
is the least costly option. However there are other significant
expenses that will result if this option is followed. Desirable
projects will continue not to be completed on time and long term
issues will not be addressed. The City will be in a position of
reacting to short term issues as they happen rather than getting
ahead of the problems and providing guidance prior to the time
things happen. Also the Planning Commission will not be provided
with the level of assistance that they desire and development
projects that they are dealing with will continue to run the risk
of being delayed for periods of time. In summary, if this option
is followed the overall development environment will suffer in
Shakopee.
As indicated, there are several ways of attempting to deal
with the problem. Hopefully the above discussion will provide
some guidance in confronting this situation.
STAFF RECOMM-TDATION:
It is recommended that alternative #1 (filling Planner I
position) above be pursued and that the Council give
authorization to hire an entry level planner.
ACTION REOUESTED:
Authorize filling the Planner I position as budgeted in
1987.
fob
MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator
FROM: Douglas K. Wise, City Planner
RE: City Code Regarding Onsite Sewage Treatment Systems
DATE: April 30, 1987
Introduction-
The Planning Commission at their meeting on April 16, 1987
passed a motion recommending the City Council begin immediate
work on an ordinance designed for the purpose of licensing,
inspecting and pumping of septic systems.
Background:
Based on data and discussion presented during the Planning
Commission' s study of changes in the PUD ordinance, the
Commission determined that changes should be made to City Codes
regulating the design, installation and maintenance of septic
systems. The Planning Commission recommends that work begin as
soon as possible on the study of these ordinances. The
Commission feels that ongoing inspection and maintenance of
existing . systems is an area in which our codes should be
strengthened.
Recommended Action:
The City Council should approve a motion directing staff to
begin a review and study of the City' s codes regarding septic
systems. Based on the results of the study recommendations for
changes in the City Code should be presented to the Planning
Commission and City Council.
CITY Or SRAKOPLL
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
MEMO
-__- TO: John Anderson `-- City Administrator
-- FROM: Jim Karkanen - Public Works-
-
-- Tom Brownell - Police -
SUBJECT: Calender Parking Reviewal ---
DATE: April 30, .1987
INTRODUCTION:
-- Because of the abnormal lack of snowfall this past winter season, it is our
understanding that several Council members have requested a reviewal of the winter . ..
=parking restrictions, whichareused to facilitate snow removal operations, and provide
- "- a method to keep snowbirds and abandoned vehicles from being parked on the streets,
especially during snow removal operations. -
BACKGROUND:
Calender parking restrictions were initiated in 1964, but were virtually impossible
to enforce because they-could only be implemented by a public announcement on the
- local radio station. For obvious reasons, this system did not work, and could not be
enforced, and was virtually ignored by the public, and the involved departmental agencies.
-The current calender parking ordinance, # 107' Section 9.50 was formally adopted
_.. October 19, 1982, and was used the winter season of 1982-83, at which time we received
- - 74.4" of snow. This ordinance was reviewed by the Public Works and Police departments
- after the inaugeral season, and this report was submitted to Council for their comments
-- =
on May 12th, 1983. . It was recommended that we continue using the parking restrictions
in succeeding years, but a year-around ban was suggested for the CBD area from 2 AM
---- until 6 AM. The CBD parking restriction was continued because the Police department
could moreeasilyidentify "suspicious" vehicles parked downtown, and the Public Works
department could conduct sweeping, cleaning and maintenance activities early in the
morning, before the parking spaces are occupied. This also encouraged the downtown
_ - residents to use the parking lots overnight. This recommendation was adopted and
implemented for the 1984-85 winter season. The parking restrictions also allowed for
----tagging or towing an abandoned vehicle after 24 hours instead of the privious allowed
48 hours. -
Several hardship exemptions were granted by the Council on an individual basis,
_. after being prsented to the Council. Notably, the Central Elementary School block was
exempted after 7 AM, in order for the teachers to be able to park their vehicles -
before school started, and before the parking ban was officially over at 8 AM. This
exemption was granted on November 15th, 1982.
REVIEWAL:
Calender parking is in effect from November 15th until April 1st from 12 midnight
until 8 AM. If you live on an even side of the street, you may park on that side
of thestreeton the even calender days. Odd calender days will permit parking on the
odd numbered side of the street. Abandoned cars can now be removed within 24 hours,
which helps to keep open streets for traffic and pedestrian safety, to keep open fire
lanes, snowbird problems, and to answer neighborhood complaints, as well as aid the _
`. snow removal operation.
The alternate parking plan definitely is a vital part of our snow removal program
_ . ' because it gives our plows more curbline to work with, and provides for an easier
.. clean-up operation after the initial plow has been completed. Even with many
1r• �
vehicles parking on the street after a plow operation has been initiated, these vehicles
will move the following day, and we can clean up early the following morning. The
calender parking schedule assures us that these snowbirds will move. Both sides of
__-the street are plowed during the major plow operation, irregardless of the calender
parking odd/even day.-
---- - Prior to the start of the parking restrictions in November, reminders are issued
_ as "stuffer" in the monthly SPUC utility bills, notices are placed in the local news-
papers, 5 large (24" X 3611) signs are erected at the major entrances to Shakopee,
- and 40 large (18" X24") neighborhood reminder signs are put up in strategic - --
---._.entrances to each neighborhood or subdivision area and major arterial feeder street,
—to remind residents of the parking- restrictions. - This also serves as a reminder to
-
—visitors to these neighborhoods of the parking restrictions. - The Police department
will issue only warning notices to violators for the first several weeks until everyone
becomes accustomed to the restrictions,-then will begin issuing the citations for
violations. Even if there is no snow, the citations should be issued in order for the
ordinance to be effective. If there is a cessation of enforcement during dry
periods, it would be impossible for the public to respect the ordinance when it is---. -
- needed. -- -
- - - - We should really appreciate the mild winter which we have just experienced in
- regard to fuel savings, overtime saved, accidents avoided, road chemicals. not being
_ applied, and equipment not being depreciated by excessive wear and tear, although .-
`:`_ several storms had just missed our area by some 50 miles on several occasions. - _- --- --
Because of the mild winter, we wouldn't suggest selling some of our snowplow
equipment, nor nor should we ignore. our snowplow ordinance, except for some modifications
-which we would like to suggest.
ALTERNATIVE METHODS USED: --
---_ -'. Some of our neighboring communities have various other parking restrictions:
1. Continual ban on street parking during the winter season, and/or_ a year long
ban on parking at all times.
2. Ban on street parking at 2 or 3 inches of snow, until snow has been cleared to
the curbline. This does create some confusion, as to who measures the snow-
depth, where it is measured, what would be the official depth because the snow
depth in our community can vary depending on the location. In the event of a
prolonged snowstorm, our policy is to plow with the storm, and if a street has
been plowed in its first phase (to the curbline),- cars will move in and hinder the -
succeeding plow operations at the same location after further accumulation.
3. Minneapolis and St. Paul declare their snow emergencies, but by the time they
have declared their upcoming operation, we have probably finished our plowing,
- and are in the process of cleaning up. We wouldn't want our plow operation to
be comparable to their operation. - -
4. The City of Duluth restricts parking on an odd or even side of the street for the
entire year. They will then change to the other Bide of the street for the next year
Every Community seems to have a parking restriction program, proving that it is considered
essential to have parking control to provide for an effective snow control program.
RECOMMENDATION:
We would like to suggest changing the hours of the parking restrictions in order
to accomodate neighborhood "visitors" who don't leave by midnight. Our suggestion
would be to change the hours of the ordinance to be in effect from 2 AM until 6 AM,
- . which would also accomodate some business and educational instituitions, such as the
_ local schools, churches, etc. . These hours would also be in line with the parking
restrictions in the downtown area, which should also remain from 2 AM until 6 AM.
If �
Snow Removal Payroll Seasonal
Program Cost Hours Snowfall
-1980 $10,825 1,336 21.1" - - (80-81)
- 1981-- - - 10,903 - -- 1,117 95.0" (81-82)
1982 23,104 -- =- 2,144 74.4" ( 82-83 )
1983 34,081 3 ,126 98.6" (83-84)
- - -- 1984 19,759 1,742 72.7" (84-85)
-- 1985 30,225 . 2,418 69.5" (85-86)
-1986 - 21,138 - 1,774 17.4" to date ( 86-87)
I
5 9.so
SEC. 9.50. PARTING DURING STREET MAINTENANCE AND PARKING
BETWEEN NOVEMBER 15 AND APRIL 1.
Subd. 1. There shall be no parking on any City street,
alley or public parking lot when all or any of said street, alley
_ or public parkin: lot is designated and/or posted fo: maintenance
work by proper City officials or employees.
_ - Subd. 2. Between November 15 and April 1 , inclusive,
parking is prohibited on the west and south sides of streets or
avenues on odd numbered days for the day beginning at 12:01 o'clock
A.K. and until B:00 o'clock A.K.; and on the east and north side of
streets or avenues on the even numbered days for the day beginning
at 12: 01 o 'clock. A.K. and until 8 : O0 o' clock A.D:.
Source : Ordinance No. 107 , 4th Series
Effective Date: 10-28-62
Subd. 3. Parking Hours in the Central Business District.
There shall be no parking on the following streets in the Central
Business District between 2:00 o'clock A.M. and 6:OD o'clock A.M...
to-wit: Second Avenue , First Avenue and Levee Drive between
Sommerville and Fuller Street and Lewis Street, Holmes Street and
Fuller Street between Second Avenue and Levee Drive.
Source : Ordinance No. 171, 4th Series
Effective Date: 7-4-85
Subd. 4. No snow shall be removed from private property
and subsequently deposited on public right-o£-way such as, but not
limited to, streets and allevs.
Subd. 5. Upon showing of undue hardship in individual
cases, the Council may grant modification or exemption from the
above upon notifying the City Engineer, the Street Department and
the Police Department.
Source : Ordinance No. 107 , 4th Series
Effective Date: 10-28-82
Section.
Subd. 6. It is unlawful - to park in violation of this.
Source : Ordinance No. 127 , 4th Series
Effective Date: 8-4-83
(Sections 9.51 through 9.98 , inclusive , reserved for future
expansion. )
-214-
TO: Mayor, Councilmembers
FROM: Tom Brownell, Chief of Police
RE: -- Snow Removal Parking Ordinance
DATE: - April 3, 1987
INTRODUCTION
Council review of calendar parking ordinance.
BACKGROUND
Calendar parking between November 15 until April 1, between the
hours of midnight and 8 :00 a.m. , has been in effect since 1982.
Approximately 5,500 citations have been issued during the five
-:.- year. period.... Forthree years the fine was $5.00, during the past . _
two years the court increased parking violations to $10.00. The
City does not regulate the fee schedule for fines.
The purpose of the calendar parking ordinance was to reduce fuel
and labor costs. Our inability to plow streets to the curb line
also prevented sufficient roadway width for fire vehicles to
access some areas near apartment buildings.
Assuming we average 1,100 citations a year, the revenue received
would be $11,000, if all fines were collected.
From 1982 to January 1987, the police department enforced the
ordinance when time permitted. During January of 1987, the City
employed a person to enforce calendar parking for five nights per
week, five hours per night. _
The full term of enforcement, November to April, requires a
salary cost of approximately $4,000 plus vehicle,
administrative/clerical, court clerical, city attorney costs.
MOTOR VEHICLE PARKING ORDINANCE
The City of Shakopee will Implement calendar parking annually,from
November 15 until April 1 to tactlltate3nowTemoyal - - - -
Residents are permitted to park vehicles on the even side of the street on
even calendar days; and on the odd side of the street on odd calendar
days. The parking restriction will be enforced between the hours of mid-
night and 6:00 ■ m.
No vehicle parking is permitted in the Central Business District between
the hours of 2:00 a.m. and 6,00 a.m. -- _
No vehicle may be left upon any streetfora continuous period in excess
of 24 hours al any time and will.be towed at owners expense.
`-Direct lnpuiresio'—` " —' '-Thank you for your cooperation.
Shakopee Police Dept. _. - John K. Anderson
. 445-6666,- City Administrator_,
Memo To: John Y. Anderson, City Adminintrntnr
_-.- From: Jim karkanen, Public Works Dept. - - - -
Tom Brownell, Police-Dept -
Subject : Winter Calendar Parking Revicwal and Prnposed P.,rkint:
.: ._ .. Regulations to CIID._-.--
Date: _ May 12, 1983
Bar kcround
-- - - The Police Department and the Public Works Department would both like to express
their appreciation to Administration and the Common Council for their support of
the newly implemented Calendar Parking ordinance designed to regulate residential -
parking during the winter months.- Thv past winter was very- difficult to fully
assess the effects of the parking regulation because the majority of the snowfalls.
we received were not of the normal variety, but it did. give us enough exposure to.
see some merit in this type of parking regulation. We. realize that there was
-
constituental pressure to theCouncilmembers for exceptions or repeal of the -- -
ordinance, and we would like them to know that we do appreciate Lheir continued
support of the ordinance.
The 2 a.m. [c 6 a.m. parking ban in the Central Business District during the
winter months has shown that a continuance of this ban could benefit our depart-
ments for the following reasons:
1 . The Police Dept. has found that "suspicious" vehicles are easier to identify
in the CBD when no vehicles are permitted to park in this area between' 2 and 6 a.m.
2. The downtown apartment residents get into the habit of using the city
parking lots for overnight parking when it is mandatory all year. There seems to be
_. a Nigh turnover- rate-for these-apartments,-and-it is -easier-to-get them used to the
Idea of using the lots when it is posted all the time. _
3. The Public Works Dept. has found that street maintenance and sweeper
- - operations have to be conducted very early in the morning before traffic starts
using these streets, and it is very helpful to have the curbs clear of parked _vehicles
during these. operations. If the -sweeper has todrive-around parked vehicles, this
involves some handwork to clean the curb, and when the vehicles leaves the area, it
leaves an area that must be reswept later.
The CBD area affected by this parking ban is identified as:
2nd Ave.. lst Ave.. and larvee Drive helwren Somnmrvill St . and Fuller St. . Fuller.
'- - Ilmlmes. and Lewis Lctwcen Luvuc lirlve and 2nd Ave.. Sommervlllc St. between 1st
- and 2nd Ave. (No restriction is needed North of 1st Ave. on Sommerville).
- -' It must be noted that the proposed parking restrictions may cause some problems at
McGovern's Garage on Sommerville, and in front of the hotel. on 2nd Ave.
. . Alternatives
I . Refer Ordinance 5107 to City Attorney for modif icatnon t
restrictions- in- the CRP an a year round has!,. - - `o extend parking
_ a._ Exception - Sommerville north of. lst Ave. -_ _ - -
- 2. ' Allow Ord.. 0107 to remain "as is". with parking ban in CHI) from Nov. 15th
to April 1st only. -
3. Remove 111 parking restriction in CRI).
_ _ . . Recommendation -
_ lllernativo 1 and I1: --Rrfe3 Itrd. 11107 in Clly Allurnry fur mod if lent loll to ban -
--.-- - - parking in CSD area un a year round hams. ']'his arca is identified as: -
2nd Ave. , 1st Ave., and Levee Drive between Sommerville St. and Fuller St.
- - -
Fuller,- Holmes and Lewis, and Sommerville Streets .
-- (Exempting Sommerville between Levee Dr. and2nd Ave.
erville St . north of 1st Ave.) `be -
Jl::mmr
t FROM: CITY OF SHAKOPEE
T(' or. t f e, lr( . Aar
tL37 %\
�� _ Gn-T^.E ° :,31 S"
I
DATE
1,1 ran:+ _. - -.:sur% tjl ci r.:' (a: i four de: 1; ]
W E:'' .'z .nee ren lLtav!_ i ^OC :i :Ui ar Lr', / :(,U a .r:. ^J�', Yl_'.1. -
a % orj: Letee-Lr. :0.'• a.n:. and 6:00 ¢, .r:.
ri \':;ey - ever FE .inj' fr available.- /.J:! CE have a_kcd 'ha _
Yi :''ert nc: bi-el E -!.,(,V 7 <. '_ an:; the CS ., hC.J rlCt 3'e S._OVIf' _
u .... LLI- __.l_ C.i , Lfc-ild t6Ey ].leag. park v!,erc w- c_tv ha& }•JOVE_.
:�- V(\" heTi-Pen 7:0-0 nrd
j'2 r' 7 F.rCL T : :'1traJ Eienentary L_hoo] when =i] vl OlatiO . L!• +1.,:
,Fe\. Y(rter
DATE BY
r
c4G0MJ
DETACH AND TILE FOR FOLLOW—UP
Io: John K . An Administrator
_ Pgo;.7: . ` Jim harkanen/Superinten6ent of Public Works -
' gg: - Plowing ordinance -
-
DATE:L-: - - February 7 1 , 1982
, -----Introduction
- lht -mc Crunol i tail- area has ,lust recently been subjected to several
abnormal snowfalls which point out the inadequacies in our current
ordinance relating to weather emergencies and parking restrictions.
Background
_ .. The original ordinance, adopted in 1964, was "watered down" from the
.- After much debate , the ordinance
original proposal to council .
allowed calendar parking when a -weather emergency was declared onthe .
localradio. station.- This ordinance proved to be veryineffective as -
=-=- writtenl,_The current ordinance, Sec. 9.50,-. Subd. 4-B, uses virtually the same
-===—language and is very difficult to understand or enforce, thus making
it practically ineffective. The Police Department , through the years ,
has been very cooperative in removing "snowbirds", but can only use
the 45 hour abandoned vehicle portion of the ordinance . This snowbird_
policy does not help the snowplows at the time of. snowfalls. During
normal (2"-5") snowfalls , the Public Works Dept . can normally conduct
efficient plow operation working around the parked cars , realizing that
they will have to return the next day to clean_ up. The cleanupoperation
is considered a routine normal operationbecausethe trucks will also
apply more sand/salt mixture where needed concurrently with the snowbird
- -
cleanup operation. when a vehicle has not been removed after 48 hours,
the Police Dept . then enforces the 48 hour abandoned vehicle portion
of the ordinance by tagging and towing the vehicle. - - -
It is common practice with many vehicle owners to deliberately park
their vehicle in front of their neighbor' s property, or nark their
vehic a= r f rhgir driveway so the plow won' t leave a.window
- rte 1 th r driveway to be shoveled. These problem vehicles are
eventual y move an e p oc� urn for the cleanup operation.
It must be noted that most property owners and vehicle owners are very
- cooperative and usuallyunderstand the "necessary evils" of a snow plow
operation. There will always be , however, the exceptions to good neigh-
borhood courtesies and understanding.
Some of the larger apartment complexes . cor..pel their tenants to park
their vehicles on the streett -while they clean their own parking lots .
This problem can be dealt with on an individual basis with the apartment
complex managers- Such as: 1 ) doing only one half of their lots on
one day , then move the cars and plow the remainder of the lot later;
2 ) allow the tenants to move on the street only after permission has
been granted after the street has been plowed completely; 3) or permit
Kai i-ow"
.'�
8..�"1. . :w
' .'
, M
h street" parking on only one side of the street . . This howeve; creates
..n problera_ for the neighborhood, as well as- crcaii ng further driving
hazards. _ _ - - -
- Alternatives - - -
.� 1 . . Calendar Parking -. (even address(,d parking allowed on even calendar
- - days _only) -(odd addressed parking allowed on odd calendar days only ) -
_
_.. Allow calendar parking for the winter season ( idov. 15 to- April 1 )
this should be enforceddailyto encourage vehicles to be parked
Off the street . It should be suggested that the calendar parking
_- day should begin at 8:00 a .m. daily. This restriction would be
more practical if it was in effect only between midnight and 8:03
-- a .m. This would allow daytime parking on either side of the street .
_There will be some negative reaction to daily enforcement.
Ui Saclv:mtages - -
A. Somevehicleswill need .tank heaters plugged in nightly
this would prove to be very difficultif the vehicle is -
_-. :. parked across the street. -
B. Some streets may not allow parking across the street because
-�-' — =- of-physical obstructions or situations . - -'
C. The vehicles will still be parked on both sides of the street
during the day. This problem can be rechoned with knowing
that the vehicle will be eventually moved. -
Advantages to calendar parking enforced during the winter season -
Nov. 15 to April 1
A. If the populace knows that the parking restriction is to be .
enforced daily, provisions will certainly be made for "storing"
vehicles that are not used daily. The vehicle owner will find
"off street" parking somehow, or realize. that the vehicle
must be moved daily. -
B. This method of parking will be enforced between midnight and
8:00 a.m. , the Police Dept. will issue tags, thus generating
some source of revenue for their efforts. Towing should only
be enforced during emergencies. This decision can be con-
sidered a departmental policy decision. - -
2. Allow calendar parking as currently written and currently enforced .
It must be noted that we have been able to tolerate these conditions
- under "normal" snowfalls, but the public won't respond to calendar
parking when it ' s "declared" in effect .
3. Enforce calendar parking all year. This does not help thesweeping
oneration because we normally sweep. during daytime hours. This -
will help keep derelict cars off the street , but so will ab
vehicle enforcement . andoned
t
A. - Lnforce -calendar- parking 24 hours per day. . This would create -
many inconveniences during the day. _ .(Virtually unenforceable ) .
B. Allow original calendarparking ordinance to remainineffect ,
however, change the 48 hour abandoned vehicle policy to 24
- _ hours. If a vehicle is considered abandoned after 24 hours ,
- - . the Police Dept.. - could get it moved none -quickly.
-5. Plow east-west and north-southstreets on separate days . This - -
. _ would mandate two- day plow_.schedule, making. it not very practical ,. .
— --
because we can plow the entire community in one working shift . - -
"'�" - Also, this plowing operation would require a public "declaration"
by the local media.- - -
-. . - b. - Prohibit all residential parking:
- A.7 during the winter season (Nov. 15 to April l ) -
- -- --- B. - upon declaration of City officials-" `- - -
- -
C. only when snow depth necessitates- a plow operation
- _ D. prohibit residential parking on the street all year
E. --emergencies only, again by official declaration - - ..
-- 7 . - Allowon street parking ononeside only for entirewinterseason.
Recommendation -
Allow calendar parking for the winter season (Nov. 15 to April 1 )
enforceable from midnight to 8:00 a.m. The calendar dayshould begin
at 8 :00 a .m. -
There will be some exceptions, I 'm sure, because of unforeseen cir-
cumstances that may have to be dealt on an individual basis . This
method, however, is not advisable unless absolutely necessary.
Reduce the 48 hour abandoned vehicle restriction to 24 hours . This
will create a quicker turnover of abandoned and derelict vehicles off
the street and will move these vehicles sooner. It will also generate
some revenue for the Police Dept .
Comments
The Public Works Dept, has somewhat resigned itself to the fact that
- parked cars and snowbirds are an occupational stigma that we have to .
- ,-- . contend with. The Police Dept. realizes thatthecurrent calendar
- parking is virtually unenforceable because the populace is never
officially informed when the parking ban is in effect . It must be
' very. clear to the public that a parking ban can be enforced without
_ exceptions whenever in effect. If the public realizes that they can' t
- park on the street for extended periods of time, they will make arrange-
ments for off street parking.
The Public Works .Dept: . does have a snowplow system in effect which is
virtually unchanged for each snow removal operation. Most homeowners
have a general idea when the plows normally will clean their street.
Most arterial streets are plowed with priority, while the outlying -
additions are generally done last . The prior) ty system is somewhat
1ate(vto vehicle usage and emergency access as well as ADTC (average
Ydailytraffic count ) . The plows routes are assigned to the vehicles
--_--with--.a minimizing of driving from one. location tothenext route.
--- -__]t-must be mentioned thatall snow emergencies are somewhat different ,
__-__depending on timing, . duration of snowfall , density, depth and wind
- -
--direction, -also which day of the week - weekend b, of- course , are. the .
-- i❑ )st difficult .
_7he actual wording in the current City Code Sec . 9.50, Subd. 4-Bis _.
--- - very confusing since recodification.-- The calendar. parking wording
- can be made cabier to understand by telling the public when they
can park, rather when they cannot park on the street .
I feel that we can live with our current ordinance, for the duration .
ofthis season, hoping that we will experience only normal snowfalls.
7he new ordinance would heineffect for the-- 1992-1983 snow season:.
l.Ov1,e��
A
TO: Mayor, Councilmembers
FROM: Tom Brownell, Chief of Police
RE: Purchase of Used Investigation vehicle
DATE: April 28, 1987
INTRODUCTION
Council authorized $7,700.00 in capital equipment funding to
replace a vehicle used for investigative activity.
BACKGROUND
The department obtained three quotations for the purchase of a
used vehicle.
1. Bob's Transfer: 1985 AMC Eagle, 32,000 miles, $4,500.
2. Budget Rent-A-Car: 1985 AMC Eagle, 45,000 miles, $5,000.
3 . Wheels, Inc. : 1985 Olds Ciera, 50,000 miles, $5,175.
RECOMMENDATION
Purchase a 1985 AMC Eagle from Bob' s Transfer at a cost of
$4,500 . Loan value is $6,800.
COUNCIL ACTION REOUESTED
Authorize staff to purchase a 1985 AMC Eagle from Bob' s Transfer
at a cost of $4,500.
MINNEAPOLIS
NORTHSTAR
NORTH STAR AUTO AUCTION, INC. A Subsidiary of Anglo American Auto Auctions Inc.
April 22, 1987
City of Shakopee
Shakopee, MN
Bids summitted for Polices Department to buy survelliance car:
1. Bobs Transfer: 1985 AMC Eagle 2CCCK3556FB704339 Miles: 32,000 $4,500.
2. Budget Rent A Car: 1985 AMC Eagle 2CCCK3850FB707216 Miles: 45,000 $5,000.
3. Wheels Inc: 1985 Olds Ciera 1G3AJ19EOFD358884 Miles: 50,000 $5,175.
Sin ely�, /
arty Aman
Northstar Auto Auction
Shakopee, MN
P.O. Box 257 • Shakopee, Minnesota 55379 0 612/445-5544
//c�
MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator
i4
FROM: Ken Ashfeld, City Engineer ial
SUBJECT: Killarney Hills and MarketStreet
Feasibility Reports
DATE: April 29, 1987
INTRODUCTION A BACKGROUND:
For their April 21 , 1987 meeting , Council was provided
feasibility reports for Killarney Hills and Market Street with
their agenda packets. At that meeting, Council called for public
hearings on the projects but due to the late hour, failed to
discuss the contents of the reports. Accompanying each report
was a staff memo summarizing the estimated costs, assessments and
concerns of the assessments. If Council wishes to discuss any
portions of the reports prior to the May 12 , 1987 public
hearings, I would welcome questions at the May 5, 1987 Council
meeting.
REQUESTED ACTION:
Questions and comments from Council regarding the Killarney Hills
and/or Market Street feasibility reports.
KA/pmp
REPORTS
11j
MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator
FROM: Ken Ashfeld, City EngineeIr—
SUBJECT: Intersection Improvements,
/,T'.,H. 101 & C.R. 83
Signalization Project
DATE: May 1 , 1987
INTRODUCTION:
The City has finally received plan approval, the signal agreement
and construction permit for the signalization work at T.H . 101
and C.R. 83. Engineering is now prepared to proceed with project
construction.
BACKGROUND:
INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT
To facilitate construction of this project as soon as possible
for the 1987 tourist season, the City received bids on this
project in advance of final Mn/DOT approval of the plans and
specifications. The plans submitted to Mn/DOT called for a
system similar to the signals at Valley Park Drive. The project
consultant, Barton-Aschman, felt that if any changes were
required, they would be minor in nature.
The procedure followed by the City was successful in expediting
the process to this point. Apparently, Mn/DOT plan approval did
not progress as smoothly. As a result, a change to the plan was
required by Mn/DOT as spelled out in the April 30, 1987
correspondence from Barton-Aschman. As stated in the letter, an
engineer ' s estimate of the changes was completed prior to
requesting the change order costs from the low bidder , Egan-
McKay . That was to assist staff in reviewing an alternative
course of action to the change order, that being a rejection of
all bids and reletting the project. The engineer' s estimate for
the changed work was $4,656.00. Egan-McKay agreed to the changed
work at a cost of $4,263.78. This cost would be in addition to
the original bid of $92,210.39.
Since the original bid cannot be awarded without concurrent
approval of Change Order No. 1 , the attached Resolution No. 2725
would provide for both actions concurrently. An alternative
course of action would be to reject all bids and relet the
project . This alternative action would delay the project
approximately 7 weeks.
Based upon the excellent price of the original bid ($92,210.39
versus the engineer' s estimate of $108,000) and the acceptable
costs of Change Order No. 1 , I highly recommend adoption of
Resolution No. 2725.
Signalization Project
May 1 , 1987
Page 2
CONSULTANT SERVICES FOR PROJECT MANAGEMENT
Barton-Aschman submitted a proposal of engineering services for
project administration. Their submittal was categorized into
Category A - Roadway and Signing Construction; and Category B-
Traffic Signal Installation. I recommend that Barton-Aschman be
retained for Category B items at an estimated cost of $4,655.00
and only Category A, Item 1 .2 at an estimated cost of $1 ,400.00.
Engineering will provide construction inspection and project
management.
SIGNAL AGREEMENT
Prior to construction, the signal agreement between Mn/DOT and
the City must be executed. That agreement should be in our
possession before the May 5 , 1987 meeting. This should be a
standard agreement similar to existing agreements between the
City and Mn/DOT for other signals . If the agreement is
appropriate, I recommend approval of the agreement at the May 5,
1987 meeting in order for the project to proceed.
REQUESTED ACTIONS:
1 . Offer Resolution No. 2725 , A Resolution Accepting Bid on
Intersection Improvements to Trunk Highway 101 and County
Road 83, Project 1987-1 , and move its adoption.
2. Move to authorize the appropriate City Officials to execute
a consultant services agreement with Barton-Aschman
Associates for an amount not to exceed $6,055.00.
3. Move to authorize the appropriate City Officials to execute
the signal agreement with the Minnesota Department of
Transportation for the signalization of the intersection of
Trunk Highway 101 and County Road 83.
KA/pmp
SIGNALS
[ IJ
Barton-Aschman Associates, Inc.
1610 South Sixth Street Minneapolis, Minnesota 55454 612-332-0421
April 30, 2.987
Mr. Ren Ashfeld
City Engineer
City of Shakopee
129 E. First Avenue
Shakopee, Minnesota 55379
Ile: Intersection Improvements, State Trunk Highway 101 and County Read 83,
City Project Number 87-1
Dear Mr. Ashfeld:
Enclosed for your review and approval are two copies of the change order
number 1 in the amount of $4,263.78 to the contract with Eagan, McKay for
the project referenced above. Change order number 1 is necessary to modify
the signal design as per comments received from Mr= subsequent to the bid
opening. The modifications are incorporated on plan sheets 6A and 7A and
include the addition of five handholes, three 6' x 6' loop detectors, 110
I.F. of 4" R.S.C., 110 L.F. of 1-1/4" R.S.C., and two type 10B signal
brackets in lieu of a type 20C signal bracket. The changes to the signal
design that are incorporated in change order number 1 were necessary to
receive MnDOT approval of the plans and specifications. We recommend
approval of change order number 1. An engineer's estimate of the cost of
the change order is shown on the attached sheet I£ you have any questions
regarding this please contact me or Dave Warzala.
Sincerely,
feokl l�'
ie�=wth W. Horns, P.E.
Associate
RA&i:kro
O
CHANGE ORDER
Intersection Improvements at
Change Order No. : 1 Project. Name: S.T.H.101 and C.R.83 (87-1)
Date: ' May 5, 1987 Co:rtract
Original Contract Amount is 92,210.39
Change Order(s) No. 0 thru No. y^ -0-
Total Funds Encumbered Prior Lo Change Order $ 92,210.39 _
Description of Work to be (Added/Deleted):
Modifications to signal design as per comments received from MnDOT subsequent to
bid opening. The modified signal design is shown on plan sheets 6A and 7A, and
includes the addition of 5 handholes, 3-6'x6' loop detectors, 110 L.F. of 4" R.S.C.,
110 L.F. of 1 1/4" R.S.C., and 2-type 10B signal brackets in lieu of a type 20C
bracket.
The above described work shall be incorporated in the Contract, referenced above;
under the same conditions specified in the oririnal Contract as amended unlezn
otherwise specified herein. Any work not so specified shall be performed in accordance
with the Standard Specifications adopted by the City of Shakopee, Minnesota.
The amount of the Contract shall be (increasedXbgO7{3XXX; by $ 4,263.78
The number of calendar days for completion shall be (increased/decreased) by 0
Original Contract Amount $ 92,210.39
Change Order(s) No. 1 thru _ $ 4,.263.78.
Total Funds Encumbered $ 96,474.17
Completion Date: 30 working days
The undersigned Contractor hereby agrees to perforp '
the work specified in this Change Order in accordance
with the specifications, conditions and prices
specified herein.
Rh•V1EwED:
C acto Egan, McKay Shakopee Public Utilities Com;aission
By: —�
Title: V. h?
Date: S'— S _ S7 Manager Date
APPROVID AND R• OtrAfEND
C y Engin r Date ..
APPROVED: City of Shakopee
By:
Mayor Date
APProved as to form this day of
City Administrator Date 19
City Clerk Date
Citv Atte-,!-v
f� d
MERSECTION MROVEMWM
S= TRCR7 HIGHWAY 101
AT CDLRM ROAD 83
SHAROPEE, M2RMSOTA
PM7E(.T NO. 87-1
ST'ATB= OF CHANGE ORDER =S - D4G=Z S E=IATE
Unit
Item Unit Quantity prim Totals
Add:
Hardhole Each 5 $ 500.00 $2,500.00
6' X 6' Detector Imp Fach 3 250.00 750.00
4" R.S.C. L.F. 80 20.00 1,600.00
4" R.S.C. L.F. 27 20.00 540.00
1 1/4" R.S.C. L.F. 80 5.00 400.00
Type 10B Each 2 950.00 1,900.00
2/(S #14 L.F. 320 0.50 160.00
Delete-
3 1/2" R.S.C. L.F. 80 15.00 - 1,200.00
Type 20C Fach 1 1,725.00 - 1,725.00
2/CS #14 L.F. 538 0.50 - 269.00
TOTAL E9iTW= CEWM ORDER NST = $4,656.00
Barton-Aschman Associates, Inc.
1610 South Sixth Street Minneapolis, Minnesota 55454
612-332-0421
April 22, 1987
Mr. Fan Ashfeld
City Engineer
City of Shakopee
129 East First Avenue
Shakopee, Minnesota 55
Re: Construction Phase services for State Trunk Highway 101 and County Rand
83 intersection improvements (City Project No. 87-1) in Shakopee,
Minnesota
Dear Mr. Ashfeld:
Barton-ASchman Associates, Inc. is Pleased to provide you with this proposal
for construction phase services associated with the above subject project.
Based on our discussions, we have divided our services into two categories
for your consideration. These are Category A, roadway and signing
construction and Category B, traffic signal installation.
Our Proposed work tasks for each category are as follows:
1.0 Category A Roadway and Signing Construction
1.1 Conduct Pre-construction meeting.
1.2 Provide all construction staking and layout for all turn lane
construction, signing and Pavement marking.
1.3 Provide daily on-site inspection as needed to maintain conformance with
the plans and specifications.
1.4 Review all pay quantities submitted by the contractor in his payment
request.
1.5 Assist the city in processing change orders if required.
1.6 Provide all testing of subgrade, aggregate base and bituminous
surfacing necessary to achieve density requirements outlined in the
specifications.
16
4(j,
Barton-Aschman Associates, Inc.
April 22, 1987
Page 2
1.7 Coordinate construction work with MnDCJr in accordance with the permit
for work conducted within state right-of-way.
1.8 Provide a final inspection of the project for certificate of
completion.
2.0 Category B Traffic Signal Installation
2.1 Cmxh=t pre-construction meeting.
2.2 Field stake pole, handhole, and loop detector locations.
2.3 Coordinate installation with MnDOT and the Chicago Northwestern
Transportation Company.
2.4 Provide daily onsite inspection as needed to maintain conformance with
the plans and specifications.
2.5 Review all shop drawings.
2.6 Review contractors requests for payment.
2.7 Assist city in processing change orders if required.
2.8 Provide a final inspection of the signal system for inclusion in the
certificate of completion.
2.9 Provide reproducible as-built drawings as required by the state.
We propose to provide the above services at a cost not to exceed $10,675.
The category breakdown is as follows:
Category A - Roadway and Signing Construction - $6,020
Category B - Traffic signal Installation - $4,655
The above estimate is based on our standard hourly rates for staff personnel
and includes reimbursement for direct expenses at cost times 1.0.
Barton-Aschman has retained the services of Braun Engineering Testing and
valley Engineering to provide testing and surveying services, respectively.
Should this proposal meet with the city's approval, we are prepared to
initiate work immediately pending the city's receipt of the signal agreement
drafted by MnDOr and notice to proceed to the contractor.
Barton-Aschman Associates, Inc.
April 22, 1987
Page 3
If you have any questions con r� this Proposal, please do not hesitate
to contact our offices. We deeply appreciate a d enjoy the opportunity to
serve the City of Shakopee.
idDavid B. Wa
Senior Assodlate
i J . MAlan
ohn CG�
Vice President and Its
NntractiM officer
DEW/JCM:kro
ACCEPM AND APPRWM BY:
Signature
typed Name
AUMCRIZATICN 7U E Ma=
AGREMEM FUR:
I.L3tE
RESOLUTION N0. 2725
A Resolution Accepting Bid On
Intersection Improvements
Trunk Highway 101 and County Road 83
Project 1987-1
WHEREAS, pursuant to an advertisement for bids for the
1987-1 Intersection Improvements to T.H. 101 and C. R. 83 , bids
were received, opened and tabulated according to law, and the
following bids were received complying with the advertisement:
Egan-McKay Electrical Contractors $92,210.39
Collins Electrical $94,658.75
AND WHEREAS, it appears that Egan-McKay Electrical
Contractors, 7100 Medicine Lake Road, Mpls. , MN 55427 is the
lowest responsible bidder.
AND WHEREAS, a change order is necessary to facilitate final
plan approval by the Minnesota Department of Transportation and
that change order must be approved concurrent with bid
acceptance.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA:
1 . The Mayor and City Clerk are hereby authorized and
directed to enter into a contract with Egan-McKay Electrical
Contractors , in the name of the City of Shakopeefor the
improvement of 1987-1 Intersection Improvements by Signal
Improvements, according to the plans and specifications therefore
approved by the City Council and on file in the office of the
City Clerk.
2. The Mayor and City Clerk are further authorized to
execute Change Order No. 1 to the contract documents which
reflects the changed work necessary to facilitate Minnesota
Department of Transportation approval of the project.
3. The City Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to
return forthwith to .all bidders the deposits madewiththeir
bids, except that the deposits of the successful bidderandthe
next lowest bidder shall be retained until a contract has been
signed.
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
I a N • ro f m N N N f \ P I Y F r�
a l I I I o
I 1 O O O ' O I O o000 a !
as a y m
1 1 rl Irm Im , rr , rri -Pr +IJ Imm '
r r
m rr VV I PrP NN ' WY yM y
I NN NN
NNt mm i le rr JJ am I Ne
mOI JM 1 P IO NN I � :mNWN 1 M.
a 1
I • • l a t j' � j I
i 1 I 1 I
c ' n n noon .m. o ', iN
x at m mmm m F '' m m
zzzz
Fi m m „ a xxzx n > m v
a , z r v aaa saa n z
m '�, v . .a. x
-1 m n I mmmm z m s
I I I
y
alow9 m
M. m 'L, m a 1^ mOCC
m
r I m 3 D m T O
r _
Iz
0
c
a '. ! t m � mrororo ro w :
1wr1 • � N INA YI N i N N ''I bNOO 1 0 . o y
1 A V 41 r 4 a \ lroNro u N
yl,
n
a m
T` F yFj m m m m m m m
m N
f
N m m m N m i m m m m m
W V Y V U Y V Y y
Y m i i •. • •
i W I ` I : it � • � � f i
h i I
e i I I I I 111 I
a-
1 1 1 I p e e n n h
n N N vai : n I d I
V PP i f j n nn ry O I dd
6 j 00 P i � M1h O 1 OF
r d i N u 1 F O
Z M LLLL
mm : 6 6 F O J 66 W NN
M1
m
Vy
_ y J
w 00 W 0 W WO x W NW
> ¢¢ J o h w
. JJ J )C 00 O 1 KK
PPP NN O • • Wm i • e i
0m FF PP NN - 0m Fp� FPa
ee o oe F
1 mnN __ xm M1m ee Pm NYm m oo � .
01 NO 10
I NN F FF NN nF� mm bb m4N
J
d Nm m P N m F FF F M1 FF
NN N d N N \
P aP P n p n n pP P P � wP
V __ i
I I I O K
e e lea ea ae Oa a ar a ; a se ni K w
ro u ; � � NNroN ro ro � ', roN ; n ro m am x
• m m � m mmmm m mmm ! a m mm a
m
r
t � z
P
YM � � \eN JJ AJA
PP aPPP ww p y00I a1 � Nro W
w0J mw JW1
� it Ie
�• I i i i ', t � j I I I I
c < . i< cccc m � ww m w w iwm i
a iD aI ! zzzz z nl cc ; K ! y x nn
z r r . ....•. s TN a : m s oKK0
r rr YyKK a mm �' m S z
M :m : n0o0o0n0 1 m
K : ' o
r K '� nl aaaa am . m _ m z KK e
m DZ.z 0 m A N T 3 K K A
m 9 KtiKK O D
9 N r7
,
rr DD 3 n KK 2
< m AS m
i t mmmm o m o
n 'I avaa v o i v cc m
i
a
C 9I 01 mmmm
. rrrr C 0 OC ' C DD
O '. m . 0000 O C A %X
r T '. nnn0 9 ll n 3
r T Pm
.K. r m aaaaa m m mm n m m
m i < . y �;r zzzz
Y Y • ro NNNN N Y roN : N N 0 •O C
y YiU. UO No ' N m NN J
lel 1 I � II 1 1 1 II
1-
r
I 0
an
m
n
i i i i i m
n n n
w w w w m m m w m Y
P a m
� V U
W 1 1
Y
W <
to n i n P
I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1nn1
O N NnNbF_n_N N i N ! 1 e =1 n ! Wn I N
n e ' nj
Or m 1' e e01 OOOOooe ul i 1 i 1 1 j 1 e 1 e e e I 1
2 N n nnnnnnnnnnn 1 n
S n NI nnnnnnnnnnn W n W n n e WI
O e e PPPPeeePPee e I P e e e e I 0 p e I f l
V I. 1 1 I 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Ti
I
z I i Ff FFf FFFFF Fi i
m I FI
...........
.
. JDOSSSSJJ a
u z asaamma m
O y JJJJJJJJJJJ � Y F w n rwiy JI
_ W WWWWWWWWWW „ Ji F o 'I n Y J ' J = .
W D <6<Q«<6<Q6 3 W m O 6 p 6 2 6
F ¢ O ¢¢¢¢¢ ¢¢¢¢ O J J D J O O Q
¢FFFFfF¢ W O b 6 6 m W a
w
o c I U u
¢
a V T O
VZ Z
s
O J ¢ ¢m¢¢¢¢ 3 \ O 6 6 a
O 0 O
mm�JJ333m0»»7 6
mm0000 J 2 Q O 6 JI WI W Y
> XI WWWWWWWWWWW
F O ' FFFFF F_Y_YF
a 0 y F
W WI VVVVpU y ' < I O W F 3 r
' 3 % V V A K V U V U C Z 6 0 m J N
NPNNNNNNNNNP nn NN NW NN Oo P' nN bo
NN NPNNdWNNNWNP FF WN n
Ntl MNnnnnnnnnnF eP 00 a0 PP NN nn 00 bb NN
'f'• _ o e e
PnPn PP b NN
p I I I
p I
W M1 M1 FFM1FFFFFFFF F F F F F
m 0 m0m00mamm00 mm m 0 m D ': m 0 . 0 .
6 N ' N NNNNNryNNNNd W �, ry N N N N W W W '.
2 W \
ooeee\\\\ \\\ \ \ \ \ \ \ \
m F a 00\\ \000P
T O_
UY ooee00000e0 ry0 : O N m
W b ... 00PmmwmmPPP p a a a 0 ml.
P U
F O
I I I f 1 I
m
3
I
I I I I I � aro=lromm � P
I e W aPe I
I � I � ro uwoim I
I I I
ti C_C_CC_C_C_
' r 000000 m
I a
tiytiytiy
i i
DDDDar m
A
I WWWOyW I
Hm'(O Am
9p-
OLTLr2 m_
3Z1P9
I i I OTWLyr m
AC Z
I n 1 m
i I I tii r .
1 1 ti
I 1 1 1 i 1 Ir
I Z
N
' I
I I I 1 I N m
z
N N
jm o o m m ro, 0 0 0 !-
W N NN
O d
8 o i,l 0 0 o w w r 0 0
O Pf �y
O N O O O r r F+ O Y
0 o w g o o w w r g
D o r o o r r w
mOJWrO '] Y W 0 0 D7 Y 0 0 0 0
V I F r Y r z R
I I I I I d r r Y r r r Y Y r r
Y �aJ ro 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0
O N O r Y Y r r Y r Y Y Y n ro
m K M B m > 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 � W
g = Y I V O
N 9
m 3
� ry O W Y N F O � N O �1 C
ro m o m o $ c o 0 0 5'
0
0a
c
z
H
N
�p r ro
� H 71 fn C'I O Fi R1 CJ ro n p �
NIPMFO�O b 3 0 G w 0 cSt O Nm m�r
7 m a m
min m o rn R t- ro w m M
- Y� oNoo
< m S
m m % m
w 3
N Y
N N N N N N N N N N t7
N N N N N N N N NN ^
r O z
0
H
N 3 O S
M 3 M R' ym S 3 0 M R at
o a O b
0 n 0 `� N
m
N G U) m H
R m
M m
m e
� F
�O F r IJ 3
O `*
• O W O 0 0 0
r 0 N 0 m 0 F 0 0 0
p
m N 0 0 N 0 @ M 8 0 'NN
rO, 0 0 O O H M O O M D\
O O 1 M H 0 H W( N H O\ N 0
Y
U
> N N
m F d d
N m O O
b U] X X
U d
0 !OE
A
G
V X G m
$ FC O d y d Y
U V W 0 F W V O O Z U (q
+. (�
m O H U CI C O m b [y W oU
O
Z
00 0 H H H O H N M M M
MM MMMMMM M M M M M MM M MMM � .y � .y»
U MMMMMMMM M M M M M MM M MMM M M M MMM
N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N
� y
a m >
NUm] E
E G
W WC O U U k N U e+M C( -i ti� B
U W b' ♦a U m F O U O
N Q 1 O 1 D\ 0
>
ym. m 0 Hm W W U N `c h L t q N N Ly W E C1. q N H N H m
W F F YwhODO U U w ON N
m E XO
Q m C d d 0 b d 7 3 0 0 % E S " E E E E E E E C
C
C X 4 0 � a• m F m W d 7 W N N U W W m O
a
U)
F
Z
0
U min wN0NO�M v� O O H O ppN m y m0 0 0 .7 � N. N
UQ O [— N u�O.YN .? O O N O c00 �O M W t O O M NMM C '^�
O O m O 1 N M O N � O M NO I-- C\
0 0 0 H N 0 H H 1 �p O 1 v� �p v�t—�O [— �O �. ti O N O �.
.? M 0 H H m m M N N 0 G
E N U
Q N N t— H
^ b v N m
C > C 7
H z o ,. F
W F ai F
aF
H E A 0
U W H 3
LE. W SO.
Mm uF CQm o >, u
00 000000 0 0 0 0 0 00 O 000 0 0 0 000 O v c �O m
Q 00 000000 H 0 H 0 H H 0 0 000 0 0 0 0 00 F U 5HH W U] d W
00 000000 0 0 0 0 0 SO O 000 0 0 0 0 0 0 Z
H 0 0 0 H H H 0 H H H 0 H 0 H H H 0 H 0 H H H H H
H H H
V mm OO OOl0O N m m H m m m mmm m m m 00 [— W^ OHIO f�mm
O HNH0 0 0 O > 8888Im0 000H 0 8 8 i
0 3
1O8ti \ YO\1�N .OoY\ . 8MHo MNHm0808o00
HOOOON NNN NHH0pOpM
mO mm �NyMNN H OTmOOM
H 0 0 H 0 H M HM .Y Y �n 0 0 0 H H R H H 0 H H 0 M
mm 0 00000 N m m 0 m m 0 m mmm m m m 00 [—
//9
MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator
FROM: Ray Ruuska, Engineering Coordinator
SUBJECT: 6th Avenue Sanitary Sewer Reconstruction
DATE: April 30, 1987
INTRODUCTION:
The Engineering Department proposes to begin development of plans
and specifications for the reconstruction of the sanitary sewer
on 6th Avenue from Monroe to Adams and Adams from 6th Avenue to
5th Avenue.
BACKGROUND:
The above mentioned project is listed in the Capital Improvement
Program because of periodic overloading of this system.
ACTION REQUESTED:
A motion to authorize preliminary survey work to align the Husman
Addition and the replat of Notermann Addition and provide center
line control points by the City ' s consultant, Orr-Schelen-
Mayeron & Associates, at a cost not to exceed $1 ,400.00 to paid
out of the Sewer Fund. -
A motion to authorize plans and specifications for reconstruction
of the 6th Avenue Sanitary Sewer from Monroe Street to Adams
Street and Adams Street from 6th Avenue to 5th Avenue.
RR/pmp
6THAVE
'MEMO TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: John K. Anderson, City Administrator
RE: Addendum to Agreement Between the City of Shakopee
and the Shakopee Chamber of Commerce
DATE: April 29, 1987
Introduction
The Shakopee City Council, at its regular April 7, 1987 meeting,
passed a motion directing staff to draft an amendment to the
agreement between the City and the Shakopee Chamber of Commerce
establishing a Visitors Information Center/Convention Bureau
funded by the hotel/motel tax.
Background
The proposed amendment will change the ownership of the Visitor
Information Center/Convention Bureau building from City ownership
to Chamber of Commerce ownership. The Chamber proposed this
change because Chamber ownership would be preferable to City
ownership of the facility. This change enables the Chamber to
move the facility sometime in the future should it wish to
relocate it once the new By-Pass is constructed.
Alternatives
1. Approve the amendment as drafted by the City Attorney.
2. Modify the language of the proposed amendment submitted by
the City Attorney.
Recommendation
Staff recommends alternative No. I. Plans for the Chamber office
are moving forward and it is quite possible that the facility can
be constructed in time to serve the major portion of the 1987
tourist season. This schedule would be damaged if the Council
chose not to amend the agreement as proposed.
Action Requested
Approve addendum and authorize appropriate City Officials to
execute the addendum dated May 5, 1987 to the agreement between
the Chamber of Commerce and the City dated November 4, 1986
regarding the construction and ownership of the Visitors
Information Center/Convention Bureau facility.
JKA/jms
ADDENDUM TO AGREEMENT OF NOVEMBER 4, 1986
WHEREAS, An Agreement between the City of Shakopee, a municipal corporation,
and the Shakopee Area Chamber of Commerce was made and etnered into on November 4,
1986, which among other things provided that the City of Shakopee shall be the
owner of a Visitor Information Center/Convention Bureau to be built in accordance
with said Agreement and granting to the Shakopee Area Chamber of Commerce the right
to move the building to an alternate site should the need arise; and
WHEREAS, As .the result of subsequent developments, it has been determined
that the Shakopee Area Chamber of Commerce will build and own the Visitor's Informa-
tion Center/Convention Bureay,it is necessary to amend said Agreement of November 4,
1986.
THEREFORE, THIS AMENDMENT TO THAT CERTAIN AGREEMENT Between the City of
Shakopee, a municipal corporation, and the Shakopee Area Chamber of Commerce dated
November 4, 1986 is made and entered into as of the date hereinafter set forth as
follows:
In consideration of One Dollar and other good and valuable consideration and
mutual agreements, which both parties agree is sufficient,
IT IS MUTUALLY AGREED By and between the parties hereto that Subdivison (i) :
Paragraph 3 .entitled "Duties of Chamber Under This Agreement" is hereby stricken and
in lieu thereof a new subdivision (i) is inserted as follows:
(i) It is further agreed that the Shakopee Area Chamber of Commerce will
build and own the Visitor's Information Center/Convention Bureau referred to insaid
agreement of November 4, 1986 and may subsequently move said building to an alternate
site mutually agreeable, should the need arise, and the Shakopee Area Chamber of
Commerce convenants and agrees that it will do all things to be done in accordance
with said agreement of November 4, 1986, this Amendment thereto and the Lease Agree-
ment between the City of Shakopee and the Shakopee Area Chamber of Commerce dated
the day of 1987.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, Each of the parties hereto have caused this Agreement
to be duly executed as of this day of ' ' , 1987.
CITY OF SHAKOPEE, A MUNICIPAL CORPORATION
This instrument drafted by By
Julius A. Coller,II Its Mayor
211 West First Avenue
Shakopee, Minnesota 55379 By - - -
Its City Administrator
By
Its City Clerk
SHAKOPEE AREA CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
By
Its President
By
Its Secretary
STATE OF MINNESOTA )
SS
COUNTY OF SCOTT )
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of _, 1987
by Eldon Reinke, its Mayor, John Anderson, its City Administrator and Judith S. Cox,
its City Clerk of the City of Shakopee, a Municipal Corporation of the State of
Minnesota.
Signature of Person Taking Acknowledgment
STATE OF MINNESOTA )
) SS
COUNTY OF SCOTT )
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of 1987
by , its President and by - its Secretary
of the Shakopee Area Chamber of Commerce, a Minnesota corporation.
Signature of Person Taking Acknowledgment
Prepared and approved as to form this 21st day of April, 1987.
MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator
FROM: Judith S. Cox, City Clerk
RE: Application from Damile, Inc. for Set-up and 3.2
Beer License
DATE: May 5, 1987
Introduction and Background:
The insurance and surety bond have been received and okayed by
the City Attorney. The applications are now in order.
Recommended Action:
1) Approve the application and grant a set-up license to
Damile, Inc. at 2400 East Fourth Avenue beginning May 6,
1987.
2) Approve the application and grant an On-Sale Non-
Intoxicating Malt Liquor License to Damile, Inc. at 2400
East Fourth Avenue beginning May 6, 1987.
JSC/pss
Ik-
MEMO TO: John R. Anderson, City Administrator
FROM: Judith S. Cox, City Clerk
RE: Application from Damile, nc. for Set-Up License and
On-Sale 3.2 Beer License
DATE: April 29, 1987
Introduction
The City has received application from Damile, Inc. for an On-
Sale 3.2 Beer License and for a Set-Up License at 2400 East 4th
Avenue (formerly Shenandoah Ballroom) .
Background
The application for the Set-Up License is in order and Council
may act on it at this time.
The application for the On-Sale 3.2 Beer License is not in order
at this time, an updated memo will be on the Council table May
5th.
JSC/jms
City of Shakopee lI r
POLICE DEPARTMENT
N n F S p � r n'9Yasti.._
Y N 1—��
476 Soalh Gorman Sae£t-=fM1+ SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA 55379Gie' '4�-X%_ � ; Tel. 445.6666 =- -
y� p LAY.
�r ,
'5379
TO: Mayor, Councilmembers
FROM: Tom Brownell, Chief of Police
RE: Damile, Inc. - 3.2 Beer License
DATE: May 4, 1987
INTRODUCTION
Damile, Inc. , Eugene David Mielke, President, and John Arthur
Lenberg, Vice President, have applied to the City of Shakopee for
a 3.2 beer license for a business known as The Inside Track at
Shenandoah, 2400 4th Ave. East, Shakopee, Minnesota,
phone/445-9551.
BACKGROUND
Applicant information identifies the licensees to be; Eugene David
Mielke and John Arthur Lenberg III. An appropriate investigation
was conducted by the Shakopee Police Department. No information
was developed which would indicate the denial of a license would
be appropriate.
RECOMMENDATION
Based solely on the facts provided during the course of the police
investigation, and not having knowledge of other factors which may
be considered, I recommend issuing a 3. 2 beer license to applicant
known as Damile, Inc.
_/O S£2 CL JO �2nFe-t
MEMO TO: Mayor and City Council II h�
FROM: John K. Anderson, City Administrator
RE: Reciprocal Fire Service Agreement Between Shakopee
and Eden Prairie
DATE: May 1, 1987
Introduction
Joe Ries has been working with the Fire Department officials in
Eden Prairie to establish a Reciprocal Fire Service Agreement
between the two cities. The agreement is similar to other
reciprocal fire service agreements (with neighboring
communities) .
Background
One of the key reasons that Eden Prairie is interested in a
reciprocal fire service agreement with Shakopee is that Shakopee
can assist them in serving some of the southern most parts of
their community. The attached draft agreement has been approved
by the City of Eden Prairie. The draft has one addition that the
City of Eden Prairie has been notified about verbally. That is
paragraph No. 5 on page 3. Eden Prairie has stated they will
accept this addition to the original draft.
Alternatives
1. Approve the reciprocal fire service agreement with Eden
Prairie as drafted. Again, the agreement is similar to the
agreements we have with other adjacent communities.
2. Modify the agreement as drafted.
3. Reject the proposed reciprocal fire service agreement with
the City of Eden Prairie.
Recommendation
City staff recommends alternative No. 1. The City has entered in
to numerous reciprocal fire service agreements (mutual aid
agreements) to provide maximum protection. to Shakopee Citizens
and the citizens of the reciprocating cities. Eden Prairie is
the largest neighboring community to Shakopee and would be an
excellent addition to the cities included in our mutual aid
agreements.
Action Requested
Authorize the appropriate City officials to enter into the
Reciprocal Fire Service Agreement with the City of Eden Prairie
dated May 5, 1987.
JKA/jms
RECIPROCAL FIRE SERVICE AGREEMENT
THIS AGREEMENT made by and between the municipalities of
Eden Prairie, and Shakopee, said parties being municipal
corporations of the State of Minnesota, WITNESSETH:
WHEREAS, the said municipalities desire to make available
to each other their respective fire-fighting equipment and
personnel in the case of emergencies, and each of said munici-
palities has legal authority to send its fire-fighting equipment
and personnel into other communities.
NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS MUTUALLY AGREED AS FOLLOWS:
1 . If one or more fires occur within the limits of either
of the above municipalities, or within the limits of any
territory in which either of said municipalities has contracted
to furnish fire-fighting equipment and personnel, and the fire-
fighting equipment or personnel of either of the municipalities
executing this contract is, in the judgment of the chief of
its fire department or in his absence his assistant or deputy
in charge of its fire department, insufficient to control or
extinguish the fire or fires, an "emergency" shall exist for
the purpose of this agreement.
2. I£ an emergency arises, any of the persons who are
entitled by paragraph 1 above to determine an emergency may
call upon the fire department of the other municipality for
- assistance. If all the fire-fighting equipment and personnel
of one municipality is engaged in fighting fire, the chief or
other commanding officer of the fire department of the other
Page -2-
municipality, is authorized to send equipment and personnel
to the empty fire station to be available for call if required
for any fire. It is the intention of the parties by this
agreement to cooperate in the event of an emergency by making
available necessary fire-fighting equipment and personnel from
the nearest fire station and during such an emergency to
re-arrange fire-fighting equipment of the parties so as to make
the remaining equipment and personnel available for use in the
event other fires shall occur anywhere .throughout the territory
of these municipalities.
3. Upon receipt of a call for assistance as set forth
in paragraph 2, the fire department of the parties hereto shall
promptly dispatch at least one fire truck with the usual number
i
of personnel to assist in fighting the fire which has, caused
the emergency or to render stand-by service as the case may
be, provided that the fire department of neither of said parties
shall be obligated to send its fire equipment or personnel
beyond its boundaries if to do so would leave such municipality
without any fire equipment or personnel available within its
limits for service at any fire which might subsequently arise
therein. In extreme emergencies, however, every effort will
be made to re-distribute fire-fighting equipment and personnel
so as to make it available for any additional fires which might
arise during the emergency.
4. The fire-fighting equipment and personnel of any fire
department assisting the fire department of the other munici-
Page -3-
pality in an emergency will immediately upon arrival at thescene of the
emergency be under the command of the officer in charge of the municipality
within whose boundaries the emergency is situated.
5. No charge will be made by either party forassistancerendered to
another party under this agreement, except, for the cost of all fire eating..
uishing materials used in said call, -
6. Each party shall maintain insurance covering:
A. Workman's Compensationandthe coverage of said
policy shall extend to protect said firemen of
said parties when engaged in the performance
of duties under this agreement outside the
boundaryof the party whose fire department he
is a member, and
B. Damage or injury caused by negligent operation of its
fire department vehicles tothe extent of-not less than
property liability, and not less
than personal injury liability,
the coverage of such policies extending to accidents
which may occur while the said party's fire department
is engaged in the performance of duties under this
agreement outside the boundaries of said party. .
7. No party to this agreement nor any officer or employee of
any party shall be liable to any other party or to the person on
account of failure of any party to this agreement to furnish
Page -4-
its fire-fighting equipment or personnel in response to a call
for assistance from the other municipality.
8. No liability shall be incurred by the party who shall
have summoned assistance under this agreement for damage to,
or destruction of, fire-fighting equipment of the party rendering
such assistance unless such damage or destruction shall be caused
by negligent or malicious conduct of any officer or employee
of the municipalities which have summoned such assistance.
9. Either party hereto may withdraw from this agreement
by thirty (30) days written notice to the other.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the said municipalites have caused
this agreement to be signed in their respective corporate names
by their respective duly authorized officers by authority of
their respective governing bodies as of this day of
198_
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
BY:
Its Mayor
BY•
Its City Manager
CITY OF SHAKOPEE
BY•
Its Mayor
BY:
Its City Administrator
BY:
Its City Clerk
TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator
FROM: Gregg Voxland, Finance Director
RE: Interfund Transfers
DATE: April 30, 1987
Introduction
Request Council approval of the below listed interfund transfers which
were made in fiscal year 1986 pursuant to council action for refunding the 1981
Improvement Bonds.
Background
The 1981 Improvement Fund had significant green acre assessment and it
- became apparent that it would not have the cash to make the debt service
payments required. In addition, the bonds carried a high interest rate.
Council refunded the bonds to provide the needed cash and to lower the interest
rate. About $41,000 in interest costs were saved by the refunding.
Resolution No. 2664 authorized the sale of the refunding bonds and
provided for the transfer from other funds to the refunding debt service fund
of up to $90,000 in support of the refunding bonds. Currently I have
transferred $19,592.37. The other transfers ($246,040.90, $363,974.86 and
$18,172.88) are to move the assets of the refunded bonds debt service fund into
the new debt service fund.
Alternatives
1. Approve transfers in 1986.
2. Approve transfers in 1987.
Recommendation
Alternative No. 1.
Action Requested
Move to approve of the transfer of $19,529.37 from the 1972 Improvement
Fund to the 1986A-81 Refunding Fund, $246,040.90 from the 1981 Improvement Fund
to the 1986A-81 Fund and to move deferred assessments in the amount of
$363,974.86 and developers deposits in the amount of $18,172.88 from the 1981
Fund to the 1986A-81 Fund.
// Nl
TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator
FROM: Gregg Voxland, Finance Director
RE: Revised Fire Service Agreement With Jackson Township
DATE: April 30, 1987
Introduction
Attached is a revised fire service agreement with the Township of Jackson.
This document stems from a desire of Jackson's to change the billing method for
fire calls.
Background
As a result of previous meetings, phone calls and a Council memo, the
attached document contains the following changes from the existing fire service
contract.
The "standby fee" provision remains unchanged, but the hourly billing for
fire calls is dropped. Instead, a flat fee (call out fee) for the year will be
billed to the township along with the standby fee. The call out fee will be
calculated by multiplying the average number of hours of service per year
provided to Jackson over the previous three years times the fire dept hourly
call rate. The payment schedule for the fees is changed from September of the
current year and March of the following year, to July and December of the
current year.
This memo and a copy of the agreement is being sent to Jackson. They have
a regular meeting set for May 19, at which time it is expected that they would
act on the agreement.
The revised agreement will save city staff time by eliminating the
billings for each call. January 1, 1987 will be the effective date of the new
agreement with credit given on the agreement billing for any hourly bills for
1987 for which the City has received payment.
Alternatives
1. Status Quo.
2. Adopt new agreement.
Recommendation
Alternative #2.
Action Recuested
Move to authorize the proper city officials to execute a revised Fire
Service Agreement with the Township of Jackson.
FIRE SERVICE AGREEMENT
THIS AGREEMENT Made and entered into this _ day of 19
by and between the City of Shakopee, a Municipal Corporation in Scott County,
Minnesota, and the Township of Jackson, a governmental subdivision in Scott
County, Minnesota, lying adjacent to the City of Shakopee.
WHEREAS, The said Township deems it advisable to have available for the
benefit of the residents of the said Township, services of the Fire Department
of the City of Shakopee, and the electors of said Township have, pursuant to
law, provided a fund for the establishment of such service, and
WHEREAS, The City of Shakopee, by appropriate action, authorized its Mayor
and its City Administrator to enter into a contract with the said Township of
Jackson, for the purpose of furnishing such fire service.
NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS MUTUALLY AGREED BY AND BETWEEN THE SAID CITY OF
SHAKOPEE AND THE SAID TOWNSHIP OF Jackson, That, for a period of time as
thereinafter set out, the Fire Department of the City of Shakopee will answer
any and all fire calls for any area within said Township and will respond to
such calls, unless otherwise engaged or unless prevented by reasons or causes
beyond control of the City and its Fire Department, with suitable fire-fighting
apparatus manned by at least three members of the Shakopee Fire Department who
will render all assistance possible in the saving and preservation of life and
property within said Township during the life of this contract.
In consideration of said services, the Township of Jackson agrees to pay a
stand-by fee to the City of Shakopee for such services each year during the
life of this contract. The stand-by fee for the year starting January 1, 1987
will be $7,044.00. For subsequent years, the stand-by fee shall be Jackson
Township's proportionate share of the costs of operating the City of Shakopee's
Fire Department for that calendar year. Such costs will include the costs
included in the City of Shakopee's General Fund Budget (less any salaries to be
paid for actual fire calls (does not include officers salaries) and less any
expenses for motor fuels and lubricants) and the Debt Service costs related to
the Fire Department. The stand-by fee will be determined on the basis of each
participating governmental unit's assessed valuation, including mobile homes,
before the fiscal disparities contribution and before tax increment
adjustments. The stand-by fee for each unit shall be that unit's percentage
share times the total costs as described above. For the year starting January
1, 1987, the total costs shall be the costs contained in the approved 1987
General Fund Budget for the City of Shakopee and the approved 1986/1987 tax
levy for the Fire Department debt service. The assessed value shall be the
1986/1987 assessed value as determined by the Scott County Auditor. The stand-
by fee for each year will be adjusted to reflect actual costs of operation for
the prior year. For subsequent years, the appropriate budget year, levy and
assessed value will be used in determining the stand-by fee.
As further and additional consideration, the Township of Jackson will also
pay to the City of Shakopee a call out fee which shall be determined by
multiplying the Fire Department hourly billing rate times the average number of
fire call hours of service provided to the Township of Jackson over the
previous three years. Each call is a minimum of one hour and the length of the
call increases in one hour increments. The hourly billing rate for 1987 shall
be $185.00 per hour and is designed to recover the variable cost of fuel and
hourly wages. The hourly rate is subject to future adjustment by the City of
Shakopee.
The Township of Jackson will pay the total fee in two equal installments.
For the year starting January 1, 1987, the payments will be due on July 1, 1987
and December 1, 1987. The total fee for each subsequent year will be
determined in February by the City of Shakopee's Treasurer and notice of the
total fee will be mailed to the Township of Jackson, along with a copy of the
City's Fire Department Budget.
IT IS MUTUALLY UNDERSTOOD AND AGREED, HOWEVER, Between the parties hereto
that at times, weather and road conditions through the various seasons of the
year can and will interfere with the rendering of such service, and the
Department could also be previously engaged, and in which event failure to
furnish the service herein agreed shall not be taken to be a breach of this
agreement, nor shall the City be liable on account thereof.
IT IS FURTHER AGREED THAT, as a further consideration for this agreement,
the Township of Jackson for itself and its inhabitants will defend and hold the
City of Shakopee harmless from any and all claims, actions or causes of action
that might or could arise by virtue of the terms of this agreement and any
failure, omission or malfunction hereunder.
IT IS FURTHER MUTUALLY AGREED, by and between the parties hereto that this
contract shall continue to be in force and effect unless either party serves
the other party with a written notice stating the reason for cancellation six
months prior to time the cancellation is to become effective.
IN TESTIMONY WHEREOF, the City of Shakopee has caused this instrument to
be executed by its Mayor and its Administrator by action of the City Council of
the City of Shakopee; and the Township of Jackson has caused this instrument to
be executed by authority of its Township Board by its Chairman and its Clerk.
In the Presence of CITY OF SHAKOPEE, A MUNICIPAL CORP.
by
Mayor
by
City Administrator
by
City Clerk
(SEAL)
In the Presence of: TOWNSHIP OF JACKSON
by
Chairman
by
Clerk
Memo To: John K. Anderson, City Administrator
12, ov
From: Marilyn M. Remer, Personnel Coordinator
Re: 1987 Payplan Amendment Resolution No. 2724
Date: April 30, 1987
Introduction
The 1987 Payplan includes the wage schedule for the position of Deputy
Police Chief as a result of Comparable Worth Implementation.
Background
Previously the Deputy Police Chief has been included in the Sergeant's Pay
Agreement. Previous discussion allowed that the wage schedule for the
Deputy Police Chief position be established as a part of the 1987 Non-Union
Payplan but that the employee would continue to retain full Police Union
benefits. This clarification of wage and benefits needs to be added to the
1987 Payplan Footnotes.
Alternatives
1. Amend Payplan to clarify wage 6 benefits for the Deputy Police Chief
position.
2. Leave Payplan as adopted.
Action Reouested
Offer Resolution No. 2724, a Resolution amending Resolution No. 2665 adopted
the 1987 Payplan.
it
RESOLUTION NO. 2724
A RESOLUTION AMENDING RESOLUTION NO. 2665 ADOPTING THE 1987 PAYPLAN
WHEREAS, the Shakopee City Council did pass Resolution No. 2665 adopting the
1987 Payplan, and
WHEREAS, subsequent events and circumstances make it desirable to amend said
Payplan.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Shakopee,
Minnesota, that the 1987 Payplan is hereby amended as follows:
The last page containing the footnotes for the 1987 Payplan is hereby
deleted and replaced with the attached page.
Adopted in session of the City Council of the City of
Shakopee, Minnesota, held this day of May, 1987.
Mayor of the City of Shakopee
ATTEST:
City Clerk
Approved as to form this
day of May, 1987.
City Attorney
1987 Payplan Footnotes
City Administrator - receives 38 increase 1/1/87 and moves to top step on
anniversary date.
Finance Director - receives 3% increase 1/1/87 and moves to top step on
anniversary date.
Police Chief - receives 38 increase 1/1/87 and moves to top step on anniversary
date.
City Engineer - receives 39 increase 1/1/87 and moves to Step 5 on anniversary
date.
City Clerk - receives 38 increase 1/1/87 and moves to Step 5 on anniversary
date.
Asst. Building Inspector - receives 38 increase 1/1/87 and moves to top step
on anniversary date and receiving Class I Certification.
Tech II - receives 38 increase 1/1/87 and no step increase until salary does
not exceed appropriate step.
Deputy Police Chief - Wage schedule is determined by 1987 Payplan but position
is "grandfathered" to retain full Police Union benefits. Receives 38 increase
1/1/87 (top step).
The City Administrator, Asst. Bldg. Inspector, Custodians and Deputy Police
Chief positions were not on the 1986 Payplan based on the Stanton Survey prior
to Comparable Worth analysis and implementation.
l _
MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator
FROM: Ken Ashfeld, City Engineer}fig.
SUBJECT: 10th Avenue; Nonencroachmeent Agreement
DATE: April 29, 1987
INTRODUCTION BACKGROUND:
The attached Nonencroachment Agreement between the City of
Shakopee and the Minnesota Department of Transportation must be
executed to facilitate the expenditure of federal aid funds on
the 10th Avenue resurfacing project. The attached Resolution No.
2714 authorizes the execution of that agreement.
RECOMMENDATION:
Adopt Resolution No. 2714.
REQUESTED ACTION:
Offer Resolution No. 2714, A Resolution Authorizing The Execution
Of An Agreement Between The City Of Shakopee And State For
Federal Aid Highway Improvement and move its adoption.
KA/pmp
RES2714
,. ePAESOr4
O Z
Minnesota Department of Transportation
Transportation Building, St.Paul,MN 55155
ti
rOF TRPLoS
March 31, 1987 S 1 qua 612-296-9872
Ken Ashfeld
Shakopee City Engineer ' b g�,Gv� 9
129 East 1st Avenue a X19
Shakopee, Minnesota 55379
In reply refer to: "`✓F� ~.
Nonencroachment Agreement
City of Shakopee
Scott County
Dear Mr. Ashfeld:
We are enclosing two copies of a Nonencroachment Agreement which must be
executed between the State of Minnesota and the City of Shakopee before an award
of a federal aid contract can be made.
This Agreement, when properly executed by all parties, is intended to cover all
federal aid projects constructed within the corporate limits of the City of
Shakopee. It is submitted at this time because S.P. 166-105-10, Minnesota
Project No. M 5060(1), is being scheduled for a letting in the near future.
Please arrange for the execution of the agreement by the Mayor and City Clerk.
It will be necessary that the City Council pass a resolution authorizing the
signatures of the Mayor and City Clerk to this Nonencroachment Agreement.
Please return both copies of the agreement with certified resolutions. We will
return one fully executed agreement for your files.
Sincerely,
John D. Petrich
State Aid Urban Programming Engineer
Enclosures: (2)
Nonencroachment Agreement
cc:
William Crawford-C.E.Weichselbaum, Dist. 5
File - 420
JDP:jmm
An Equal Opaarmnn,Employer
RESOLUTION NO. 2714 I ��
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION OF AN AGREEMENT
BETWEEN THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE AND STATE FOR FEDERAL
AID HIGHWAY IMPROVEMENT
BE IT RESOLVED, that the City of Shakopee as a condition of the receipt of
Federal funds for the construction, reconstruction or imporvement of any Federal
Aid Street or Highway within the City enter into an agreement with the State, a
copy of which is attached hereto and made a part hereof.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Mayor and City Clerk be and they hereby
are authorized to execute said Agreement for and on behalf of the City.
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
Apprzved `as,, to form this day of
1987.
City Att#t
ney
Mn/DOT 30721A (12-79)
AGREEMENT BETWEEN MUNICIPALITY AND
STATE FOR FEDERAL-AID HIGHWAY IMPROVEMENT
THIS AGREEMENT made by the City of Shakopee
Minnesota, hereinafter called the "Municipality" with the State of Minn-
esota, hereinafter called the "State", WITNESSETH:
WHEREAS, the United States Government, through the Federal
Highway Administration of the U. S. Department of Transportation does
apportion Federal funds for the construction, reconstruction and improve-
ment of highway projects on approved systems of public roads, and
WHEREAS, said approved systems within the limits of a Munici-
pality are now or may be eligible for the participation of these Federal
funds in their improvement or construction, and
WHEREAS, the Federal Highway Administration as a condition to
the use of Federal funds on approved Federal Aid Projects requires the
agreement of the Municipality to control road signs, traffic control de-
vices, advertising signs, miscellaneous installations, speed and parking.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE Municipality in consideration of the ex-
penditure and use of Federal funds for the construction, reconstruction
or improvement of any Federal Aid Street or Highway within the limits of
the Municipality agrees with the State as follows:
(1) No signs, traffic control devices or other protective de-
vices shall be erected on any Federal-Aid project within the Municipality
limits except as shall conform with the current Manual on Uniform Traffic
Control Devices for Streets and Highways of the State of Minnesota.
-(2) All right-of-way within the limits of the Municipality on
any Federal-Aid project shall be held and maintained inviolate as a pub-
- 1 -
lic highway and no posters, billboards, roadside stands, curb pumps, curb JZ'
service devices or other private installations other than utilities of
Public interest and no signs, other than traffic control or protective de-
ices shall be permitted within the right-of-way limits of the projects.
The Municipality will with respect to such items as are within its juris-
diction which may be or cause an obstruction or interfere with. the free
flow of traffic or which may be or cause a hazard to traffic, or which
may vitiate the usefulness of the project, shall remove or cause removal
of the same at the request of either the State or the Federal Highway
Administrator.
(3) The speed limits on any Federal-Aid project shall be not
less than 30 miles per hour.
(4) The Municipality shall by ordinance and continued enforce-
ment prohibit all types of parking except parallel parking on any project
financed in whole or in part with Federal funds. The City agrees that
the State may enforce the provision by an action for specific performance,
mandamus, or other appropriate remedy and by withholding any funds due the
Municipality in possession of the State.
Dated this day of 1907
CITY OF SHAKOPEE
RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL BY
Mayor
Attest:
State Aid Engineer Data City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM AND EXECUTION STATE OF MINNESOTA
By
Commissioner of Transportation
DATE DATE
(Submit in Duplicate) - 2 - (SEAL)
MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator I�
FROM: Ray Ruuska, Engineering Coordinator / d
SUBJECT: 2nd Avenue Parking Lot Reconstruction,
Project No. 1985-4
DATE: April 29, 1987 _
INTRODUCTION:
Council action is required for a resolution accepting work and
making final payment on the 2nd Avenue Parking Lot Reconstruction
project.
BACKGROUND:
All of the work for this project has been completed in accordance
with the contract documents.
The Certificate of Completion is attached.
ACTION REQUESTED:
Offer Resolution No . 2718, A Resolution Accepting Work on 2nd
Avenue Parking Lot Reconstruction and Storm Sewer, Project No .
1985-4 and move its adoption.
RR/pmp
RES
CERTIFICATE OF COMPLETION
CONTRACT NO. : 1985-4 DATE: April 15, 1987
PROJECT DESCRIPTION : 2nd Avenue Parking Lot Reconstruction
Storm sewer and Supplemental Contracts
1 and 2.
CONTRACTOR: Valley Paving, Inc.
8800 13th Ave. E.
Shakopee, MN "55379
ORIGINAL CONTRACT AMOUNT . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 124,185.40
QUANTITY CHANGE AMOUNT . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 736.29
FYXgmygER NO, No•THRU NO. _ AMOUNT , . . $ $ 7 0.00
supplemental ContractNo. 2 14,217.00
FINAL CONTRACT AMOUNT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 147,844.79
LESS PREVIOUS PAYMENTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 147,105.57
FINAL PAYMENT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 739.22
I, hereby certify that the above described work was inspected
under my direct supervision and that, to the best of my belief and
knowledge, I find that the same has been fully completed in all
respects according to the contract, together with any modifications
approved by City Council . I, therefore, recommend above specified
final payment be made to the above named Contractor,
Professio l Engineer
RESOLUTION NO. 2718
A Resolution Accepting Work On The
2nd Avenue Parking Lot Reconstruction
And Storm Sewer
Project No. 1985-4
WHEREAS, pursuant to a written contract signed with the City
of Shakopee on September 17, 1987, Valley Paving, Inc. , 8800 13th
Avenue East, Shakopee, MN 55379 has satisfactorily completed the.
2nd Avenue Parking Lot Reconstruction, in accordance with such
contract.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA that the work completed under said
contract is hereby accepted and approved; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the City Clerk and Mayor are
hereby directed to issue a proper order for the final payment on
such contract in the amount of $ 739.22, taking the contractor' s
receipt in full.
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:
I
City Clerk
Approved as to form this
day of , 19 _.
City Attorney
MEMO TO: John R. Anderson, City Administrator
FROM: Judith S. Cox, City Clerk ll�/
RE: Resolution of Disclaimer V
DATE: April 29, 1987
Introduction
I have received a request to sign a Certificate of Non-Use for
Prairie Street lying North of Bluff Avenue. Prairie Street is
not now open and it appears that it has never been opened. The
City cannot go through the statutory vacation proceedings because
there is no street to vacate.
I have checked with Shakopee Public Utilities and there are no
utilities within Prairie Street North of Bluff Avenue.
Mr. Coller has prepared the attached Resolution of Disclaimer for
Council' s consideration. After adoption of the resolution the
Certificate of Non-Use may be executed.
Alternatives
1. Adopted the Resolution of Disclaimer.
2. Do not adopt the Resolution of Disclaimer.
Recommendation
Alternative No. 1, adopt the Resolution of Disclaimer.
Action Recommended
Offer Resolution No. 2721, A Resolution of Disclaimer, and move
its adoption.
JSC/jms
RECEIVED
APR 2 7 1967 ALTON LAW OFFICES
VALLEY PROFESSIONAL BUILDING
287 MARSCHALL ROAD
CITY OF SLI.4KOPEE P.O. BOX 282
SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA SS379
612-4157470
Formerly Manahau &Tucker
BRIAN D. ALTON John M. Manahau, of Counsel
MARY S. ALTON
April 23, 1987
Judy Cox
Shakopee City Clerk
129 1st Avenue East
Shakopee, MN 55379
Re: Non-Use of Prairie Street
r
Dear Judy:
Enclosed please find the Certificate of Non-Use Jake Manahan
drafted . I met with Mr. Coller yesterday and , as you can see, he
has endorsed it.
Please let me know what our next move is.
\� Sincerely,
\ ALTON LAW OFFICES
Mary S,,Alton
MSA/ds
Enclosure
CERTIFICATE
The undersigned hereby certifies, on behalf of the City of
Shakopee, as follows:
1.) That she is familiar with the following described property,
hereinafter referred to as the "subject property";
Starting at the Southeast corner of Lot 6, Block 17, East
Shakopee, according to the recorded plat thereof on file
and of record in the office of the County Recorder in and
for Scott County, Minnesota; thence East 60 feet parallel
to the North line of Bluff Street to the Southwest corner
of Lot 1, Block 23, East Shakopee, thence North along the
West line of Lot 1, Block 23, a distance of 110 feet;
thence West to the northeast corner of Lot 6, Block 17,
East Shakopee, thence along the east line of said Lot 6,
to the place of beginning.
2. ) That the subject property is located within the plat of East
Shakopee, which is recorded in the office of the Scott County
Recorder, dated December 13, 1856.
3.) That there is no evidence that the subject property was ever
used as a public roadway, it being understood that the subject
property is a part of Prairie Street as set forth in said plat.
4.) That the City of Shakopee does not now claim any public
interest in the above-described property for street or roadway
purposes.
Dated:
City Clerk
Approved as to form:
r�
City Attorne
Drafted by: ��
John M. Manahan
Attorney License 67088
Attorney at Law
287 Marschall Road
Skakopee, MN 55379
,
i
t� 1
1 1 1
Vic OWO"
i
s _ 9 ° 9 o,_L_J L f�l L_9o_y t_j
i
It _
°;9 r3°,i—sl Ir
O I0
n II
RESOLUTION NO. 2721 /-Ai
RESOLUTION OF DISCLAIMER
WHEREAS, the following described property is located in the Plat of East
Shakopee, Scott County, Minnesota, which plat has been on file and of record in
the office of the Scott County Recorder and the predecessor office of the Register
of Deeds of Scott County for more than 100 years last past, and
WHEREAS,saidple£delineates a street north of Bluff Street and described as
follows:
Starting at the Southeast corner of Lot 6, Block 17, East Shakopee,
according to the recorded plat thereof on file and of record in the
office of the County Recorder in and for Scott County, Minnesota; i
thence EAst 60 feet parallel to the North line of Spring Street to I
the Southwest corner of Lot 1, Block 23, East Shakopee, thence North
along the West line of Lot 1, Block 23, a distance of 110 feet;
thence West to the northeast corner of Lot 6, Block 17, East
Shakopee, thence along the east line of said Lot 6, to the place of
beginning, and
WHEREAS, said street is not now open and there is no evidence that the subject
property was ever used as a public roadway and is not now so used.
THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED. BY THE Shakopee City Council that the City of Shakopee
does not now claim any public interest in the above described property for street
or roadway purposes and is not now using the same for said purpose.
Passed in session of the Shakopee City Council held this
day of 198
Mayor
ATTEST:
City Clerk
Prepared and approved as to form this
3rdof December, 1986.
2L� a441
Ju A. Collar, II
Sha opee City Attorney
MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator
FROM: Ken Ashfeld, City Engineer
SUBJECT: Upper Valley Drainage Project
DATE: April 29, 1987
INTRODUCTION:
The City of Shakopee is requesting Mn/DOT to participate
financially inthecost of the Upper Valley Drainage Project
based upon benefit to the T.H. 101 Shakopee Basin Project.
Attached is Resolution No. 2723 which formally makes that
request.
BACKGROUND:
There has been considerable discussion between the City and
Mn/DOT on this project. Attached is a letter from Bill Crawrofd,
District Engineer, concurring with our claim of benefit to Mn/DOT
and indicating their willingness to participate. Bill needs a
resolution of Council to program the project in their Special
Agreements Program. That resolution is attached for Council
consideration.
From our discussion with MN/Dot staff, it appears that this
Cooperative Construction Project could delay construction for a
couple of additional months while cooperative agreements are
drafted and executed. The urgency of the Upper Valley Project is
such that the need to begin construction immediately is not
necessary. State law does not provide for us to construct the
project now and gain reimbursement from Mn/DDT when they build
the bypass. Therefore , I recommend cooperating with Mn/DOT
through their Special Agreements Program. Hopefully the Upper
Valley Project will be under construction by late fall, 1987:
Alternatives:
1 . Adopt Resolution No. 2723 , and work toward a cooperative
project with Mn/Dot.
2. Do not adopt Resolution No. 2723 and do not work toward a
cooperative project with Mn/DOT.
REQUESTED ACTION:
Offer Resolution No. 2723, A Resolution Requesting The State Of
Minnesota To Participate Financially In The Upper Valley Basin
Drainage Project, and move its adoption.
KA/pmp
COOP
��NN�r4 Minnesota
�° yo Department of Transportation
District 5
2055 No. Lilac OF TPpaZ�x Golden Valley, Minnesota 55422
(612)593- 8403
April 10, 1987
Mr. Ken Ashfeld, P.E.
City Engineer
City of Shakopee
129 East First Avenue
Shakopee, MH 55379-1376
HE: Storm Drainage Facilities for T.H. 169/101 Bypass
S.P. 7005-42 (T.H. 101)
Dear Mr. Ashfeld:
This letter is in response to your letter to me dated December 29, 1986, and
the followup meeting you had with Ellen Gavlinski and Tim Johnson of my staff
on March 20, 1987.
Since the Shakopee Bypass is listed in our construction program (first stage
scheduled for letting on November 18, 1988), we agree to your request that
Mn/DDT participate financially in the development of the proposed drainage
improvement. We agree that the proposed improvement will benefit our highway
development. We understand that Mn/DOT's share is approximately $172,600
based upon your preliminary calculations. We further understand that the
total cost of your project is approximately $3.6 million and that you would
like to start construction as early as this fall.
Please obtain a resolution from the City Council indicating the City's
intention to make certain improvements and requesting State cost participation
in the City project. The resolution should state the type and limits of the
desired improvement and other pertinent details. When we receive the
resolution, we will request programming of our share of the project from our
Program Management Division for placement in our Special Agreements Program.
You asked that we outline a basic procedure for all this to happen. Attached
is a copy of pages 34 to 40 of our Mn/DOT Policy and Procedures for
Cooperative Construction Projects with Municipalities. I believe this should
answer most of your questions. Contact persons at Mn/DOT are as follows:
1) Chuck Weicbselbaum, District State Aid Engineer, Telephone: 593-8408.
He will handle the administrative aspects of this project for Mn/DOT.
2) Ellen Gavlinski, District Hydraulics Engineer, Telephone: 593-8504.
She will handle hydraulic design questions, review the completed design,
and assist in the calculations of the cost sharing percentages.
An Equal Opportunity Employer
.®rssc
Mr. Ken Ashfeld
April 10, 1987
Page Two
3) Tim Johnson, District Final Design Engineer, Telephone: 593-8503.
He is the Final Design Project Manager for the Shakopee Bypass and will
help in the coordination of the City and State projects for full
compatibility.
If you have any further questions, please contact Chuck Weichselbaum.
Sincerely,
ord' P.E.
District Engineer �..
Attacbmeut '
AD
co
J J Q
¢ Z ¢ v
Fr
LU I r r ¢ a } <
i C3 J J m J J W ¢ O Z'
Qr r J Y Q Z f�
i Z I H 0 y W Q 4 C ¢.
y r > J } X N
O ¢ a w ¢ ¢ >L
i
p W
co
LU
O O O Z
O O
_
�~ LL, N m m m o m N m u co
j
EL
of
i
7
i.
O /
\�
EXHIBIT A
RESOLUTION NO. 2T23 Y—
A
Resolution Requesting the State of Minnesota
To Participate Financially in the
Upper Valley Basin Drainage Project
WHEREAS ; the City of Shakopee has identified various
drainage basins; as indicated in the attached Exhibit A, that
requires certain storm sewer improvements; and
WHEREAS; the City intends to provide for storm sewer
improvements to the Upper Valley Basin during the 1987-1988
construction season at an estimated cost of $3.0 million; and
WHEREAS; the proposed storm sewer improvements will benefit
and assist in the drainage of the T.N. 101 Shakopee Bypass
scheduled for construction from 1989 to 1992,
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BT THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
SHAKOPEE , MINNESOTA that the Minnesota Department of
Transportation and the State of Minnesota is hereby requested to
participate financially in the Upper Valley Basin Drainage
Project.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the estimate of the State
participation is $172,600 but that the final participation amount
will be determined by hydraulic analysis approved by the City of
Shakopee and the Department of Transportation.
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 _
/3�
MEMO To: Mayor and City Council
FROM: Judith S. Cox, City Clerk Cf--- -
RE: 250 Admissions Tax
DATE: May 1, 1987
John Leroux called this afternoon and asked that I advise council-
members that it appears that the 250 admission tax will be introduced
in the House of Representatives on Wednesday morning. This information
comes from Walt Wittmer and his lobbyist. _
I£ you have any questions, call John Leroux.
j
Draft
April 27, 1987
1. Funds raised by the proposed admissions tax on major
amusement facilities shall be spent 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 Atach�ment A.
`Nc„.y) ,
2. The first priority for use of the admission tax shall be to
match funding from Hennepin County and/or State of Minnesota
for design, engineering and construction of the Bloomington
Ferry Bridge Project and related interchanges Von the Scott
County side. 4;./- , /�yV4
3. The County shall continue to fund its Five Year Road and
Bridge Improvement Program based upon county road
improvements required throughout the County.
4. The intent of this provision is that the allocation of
projects in the five-year program shall not be adversely
affected by the 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.
l3 �
MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator
FROM: Douglas K. Wise, City Planner
RE: Stan Pint Building Permit Application
DATE: May 5, 1987
Introduction•
Mr. Stan Pint has applied for a building permit to construct
a house on Lot 8, Block 2, Hauer' s 3rd Addition. Because the
site is affected by the vacation of 13th Avenue in Hauer's 3rd
Addition, and dedication of Onyx Drive in Hauer's 4th Addition, I
cannot issue the permit without special authorization from the
City Council.
Background•
Mr. Pint' s lot abuts the previously platted 13th Avenue in
Hauer' s 3rd Addition which is being vacated to allow replatting
of the street known as Onyx Drive in Hauer's 4th Addition. In
the old plat 13th Avenue had a 80 foot right-of-way and required
a 40 foot setback because it was designated a collector street.
With approval of Hauer' s 4th Addition the right-of-way will be 60
feet requiring a 30 foot setback. This change provides an
additional 20 feet of buildable area to the lot. Mr. Pint wishes
to construct his house in conformance to the new setbacks.
Because the vacation has not been approved and filed with the
County and Hauer' s 4th Addition has not yet been filed, I can not
issue the building permit.
Alternatives-
1. Require Mr. Pint to wait until the vacation of 13th Ave. has
been approved and filed with the County and until Hauer's
4th Addition has been filed with the County before issuing
the permit.
2. Authorize City staff to issue the building permit requiring
the applicant to sign a waiver indicating that he will
conform to all City Codes should the street vacation and
plat not be filed.
Action Requested:
If the City Council decides to follow alternative 1 no
action is required. If the City Council selects alternative 2 a
motion authorizing City staff to issue the permit upon signing of
a waiver agreement is required.
PETERS, PRICE & SAMSON
LAND SURVEYORS, LTD.
12400 PRINCETON AVENUE SOUTH. SAVAGE, MINNESOTA 55378. 612890-9201
Cerf fIcate Of Survey For STAN BRINKHAUS
Gs�.v p
152,
H,
Y t
\ aL
mIZ50o
s J
z \ oor I TD2
-3��
1 30
3a1�� oivvx oRzvE�4,. o
N 89',T9',y0'W -
Stw.99 Tep C31eck and T,p B.M. (NY�,,,T)
Bearings are assumed 991. 1 Denotes existing elevation -
Denotes iron monument '19c.D Denotes proposed elevation
PROPERTY DESCRIPTION
La 7 7
SCOTT COUNTY, MINNESOTA.
WO Nsr"candy mat INS k a true aw eorrect rwraeantatm of a wrwy of the oo Moat es of Me afore oascrtoe0 ww.ane of Me loc 1=of all
wil ,tqs ma,r . at,(1 all vm, •r,c(paCnmanls.X any, from w.Yio ww.
AawrwyWDyualn%_yyol tB_ S.
Wi Sota LL rt&& No.